Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach is no Elvis; he might be more Daniel O'Donnell. I congratulate the Taoiseach on his term in office. His many years experience as a parliamentarian have stood to him. He has been courteous and balanced, generally speaking, and has maximised, in an understated way, the art of the political announcement. I doubt there was ever a Taoiseach who was as successful at creating photo opportunities and making announcements. In fact, there were many announcements made by the Government that never got the next stage, except for when the next stage was the re-announcement of projects, such as the MRI scanner in Wexford, the 96-bed ward for Wexford General Hospital or a new university campus for Wexford. I presume the new Taoiseach will announce all of those projects again when he comes back into office.

In saying that, I do not doubt the Taoiseach's commitment to public service and the office of An Taoiseach, nor do I doubt his sincerity. However, one thing that surprised me about him was his commitment to process rather than the delivery of projects, which is the hallmark of his Government. Many worthwhile projects are caught in political processes which collapses their delivery.

One other thing that struck me was how the Taoiseach responded to the adverse findings by the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, in respect of a senior public official. Instead of giving teeth to that finding and ensuring accountability, the Taoiseach's Government undermined SIPO by appointing that public servant to a State board, he having had a most damning finding made against him. In light of the revelations today in the European Parliament as regards the scandal of breaches in ethics and standards, and having listened to the response of the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, does the Taoiseach agree that it is now time for him to do the following? Will he give a commitment when Tánaiste that he will overhaul our standards in public office legislation to enable it to give effect to findings, ensuring he can in future stand over best practice in both standards and ethics in public office and, where they are proven to be breached, ensure rigorous, meaningful accountability? In this area of public administration we need transparency in the process to produce an effective regime, not an internal job developed by people who will be subject to the new ethics regime and who have a vested interest in limiting independent oversight. We need accountability in the public service and the Civil Service, and now is that time.

See this speech in context