Dáil debates

Thursday, 10 September 2020

Ministers and Ministers of State (Successors) Bill: Second Stage [Private Members]

 

5:55 pm

Photo of Gary GannonGary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I intend to be brief. This is a very welcome Bill that has provoked the appropriate conversation and debate on the urgency required when we have a potential transition of Government. Urgency is what has been absent, which has probably motivated the Bill. At the very beginning of the Thirty-second Dáil and Thirty-third Dáil, there was an absence of urgency that continued for several months. There was posturing, political game-playing and people making political statements to take shots at their rivals and tell us all of the reasons we could not work together. What we needed was a degree of leadership. This was particularly prevalent during the Thirty-third Dáil, after the electorate had gone out with an enormous sense of urgency prior to Covid-19, when the issues were the hospital crisis, an absence of childcare and all of the issues we faced on the doors. People throughout Ireland went out in their droves to vote for change, which almost seems like a cliché now. That excitement brought new voters into the public sphere. People voted for the first time and thought it would make a difference and that the make-up of the next Dáil would reflect the urgency and change for which they voted. What materialised was a little frustrating. It was in no way untoward constitutionally but voters who were eager to see their votes represented in Dáil Éireann could not understand why the same Ministers were in the same place. That is absolutely fine.

The Bill is interesting. I agree with Deputy Tóibín that there is no reason it could not progress to Committee Stage when Deputies could have further debate on the concerns they have. When Deputy Tóibín wrote the Bill he understood the constitutional position which has been raised by the Government. That is why we bring forward legislation.

I acknowledge that the 150 days it took us to form a Government has implications, including societal implications as people lose confidence in the political system, which is quite dangerous. It has become almost the norm that we have brinksmanship. The only thing that should happen after an election is that political parties should get around the table and decide whether they can agree on forms of taxation and how it is spent and on policy. If we can deliver on that, it should be the basis on which a Government is formed. In the absence of this, what happened after the most recent two elections is that people engaged in posturing. They fundamentally agreed on everything but there was political posturing, which has been to the detriment of public will and probably the public interest. This conversation is definitely worth having. I would like to see the Bill progressing to Committee Stage and, as such, I will support it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.