Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We read today that the presidents of the five courts have written to the Taoiseach and the Government, articulating their view that the proposed Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017, the Bill of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, has severe implications for the administration of justice in this country. We also hear that the Government nearly collapsed last week and that the rushing through of the legislation is to meet the demands of the Minister, Deputy Ross, who wants to ram the Bill through before the summer recess, without amendment.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not true. There is loads of time.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He also wants to get this through to support the Government.

This is a very serious issue which should be above party politics in many respects. This is one arm of the governing edifice imposing a new system upon a coequal arm, namely, the Judiciary. The views of the members of the Judiciary should be known. The people should not be denied the views of the latter on such a central issue that goes to the heart of the separation of powers and the administration of justice in this country.

The motivation behind the legislation is wrong. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, has for some time portrayed the members of the Judiciary as some sort of self-serving, egotistical insiders who wait for Buggins' turn - as he wrote in a letter published in today's edition of The Irish Times- to get their positions. This is very damaging commentary on all members of the Judiciary. The Minister recently stated that it is not good enough to have judges making decisions on the basis of choosing their favourite ones. That is the wrong motivation for legislation as profound as this.

Members need to be cautious, irrespective of the numbers in the House and who can leverage the most power and get their way. This is a very serious issue that demands deeper consideration than appears to be the case. There has been no compelling rationale put forward as to how the Bill championed by the Minister, Deputy Ross, is superior to every other alternative. Fianna Fáil has put forward legislation in this area and favours reform, as does everybody, including the Judiciary. We believe the Chief Justice should be the chairperson of any judicial appointments commission. I agree with the retired Supreme Court judge, Ms Catherine McGuinness, who has said that this Bill is a kick in the teeth for the Chief Justice because it undermines her position in such a manner. The under-representation of judges is equally unacceptable. For only three of the 13 proposed members of the commission to be the people who know best in terms of the talents and abilities of those seeking appointment - having assessed and watched them in the courts - is unacceptable.

Will the Taoiseach publish the letter he received from the presidents of the courts? Is the Government open to serious amendment of the legislation it is bringing forward? Is it determined to maintain the under-representation of judges and to undermine the status of the Chief Justice? Will the Bill, as the presidents of the courts are saying, undermine the administration of justice in this country?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will have to take advice as to whether I can publish that letter. There is no objection to the proposed legislation in the letter that has not already been flagged or appeared in the newspapers. There was a meeting some months ago involving the Chief Justice, the Taoiseach at the time and the Tánaiste, Deputy Fitzgerald, to discuss the Government proposals. There has been engagement with the Judiciary, both in terms of meetings and this letter, to hear their views on this legislation.

The Judiciary has served us very well and I have immense respect for our judges and also for the separation of powers in this State. The time has come to reform the way in which judges are selected. It needs to be more transparent and independent. It is important to explain what will happen if this legislation is enacted. The President will continue to appoint judges as per the Constitution. The President will appoint judges on the nomination of the Government.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach should not bring the President into this.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Those things will not change. They are in the Constitution. This legislation is about the process by which three names are put to the Government. The judicial appointments will put three names to the Government. From those three names, the Government will choose a judge. The legislation will also prevent canvassing. It will require that merit be the criterion for the appointment of judges. The judicial appointments commission will have a lay majority and a lay chairperson and everyone applying for appointment will have to apply to it, including sitting judges seeking promotion. Having a lay chairperson is not unusual and is the case in England and Scotland, where there is an equal number of legal and lay members. It is also the modern way by which people are appointed to senior positions in public office. If one takes the example of Secretaries General, who are the most senior people in Departments, while it may have been different in the past, in recent years they have been selected through the top level appointments committee, TLAC, which is not chaired by a civil servant and the majority of members of which are not civil servants.

In the old days, civil servants may have selected Secretaries General from among themselves. In the modern world of selecting people to appointments, it does not happen that way. If, for example, in the private sector, a new CEO is being appointed to a company, that appointment is not made by a committee of CEOs. The board of the company will usually set up a sub-committee and non-executive directors, who are often in a majority, will select the new CEO. When hospital consultants, for example, brain surgeons, cardiac surgeons and geriatricians, are selected in HSE hospitals, the chairman of the interview board comes from the Public Appointments Service and is not a doctor. It may be different in voluntary hospitals. These reforms are really bringing us into the modern world by providing transparency, greater independence and having more lay people involved in selecting people for key public office.

Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ask the Minister for Justice and Equality what he thinks.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Empty phrases like "the modern way" mean absolutely nothing. There has been no compelling rationale for the changes. Deep down we know that the vast majority of Fine Gael Deputies do not agree with this Bill because it is being forced through because of the leverage of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, in the same way the DUP leveraged £1 billion from its talks with the Conservative Party. At least the £1 billion will help the people of Northern Ireland. This Bill that Deputy Ross is leveraging because of the unique position he finds himself in will damage the separation of powers and the Judiciary and will undermine the administration of justice. That is our view. In particular, the relegating of the status of the Chief Justice is inconsistent with the Chief Justice's constitutional position in leading the Judiciary. The under-representation of judges, who are uniquely placed to assess the candidates who are going to come forward for application, makes no sense whatsoever. From any perspective there should be a reasonable space allowed for genuine interrogation of this Bill. There has been no compelling rationale other than the Minister's demonising and undermining of the Judiciary for the past two years. That is what he has done in his relentless commentary. He does not talk about the Bill being modern. He talks about getting rid of insiders and of people choosing their own candidates, which I believe is very damaging to the Judiciary-----

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is afraid of reform.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is about Stepaside Garda station.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----who called for reform of the judicial appointments system years ago, before anyone else. It is no way to present a Bill. It is presented in a controversial and negative way, and it undermines the judicial arm of this State.

We had more than 30 years of paramilitary violence and our constitutional democracy and the various arms of our State survived and were sustained, including the judicial arm. It weathered all that, and the Taoiseach should not succumb to placating the Minister, Deputy Ross, on such a fundamental issue that goes to the heart of how we organise our affairs in this society.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have immense respect for the current Chief Justice, whom I have known since I was a teenager, and also the office of the Chief Justice. It is not the case in either England or Scotland that the chief justice in those jurisdictions chairs their judicial appointments committee, so I do not see that as a denigration of anyone's office. It is very much the precedent in our neighbouring jurisdictions that the chief justice does not chair the similar committee.

The rationale behind the Bill is threefold. We want these appointments to be less political in the future, we want them to be more transparent, and we do not want any profession to be self-regulating or self-appointing. We have moved away from self-regulating and self-appointing professions a long time ago. When Fianna Fáil was last in Government, the decision was made to remove the medical majority on the Medical Council. I know it is not the same thing because the Medical Council does not hire doctors, but it can strike them off. The Medical Council, through reform brought in when Fianna Fáil was last in office, does not have a medical majority. There is a similar rationale behind that. No profession should be self-regulating or self-appointing. That is why there is a lay majority now on the professional regulator for almost every profession. This is the trend in policy, the trend in modernity and the trend in terms of reform.

I want to point out that this legislation is not Independent Alliance legislation or Fine Gael legislation.

It is Government legislation. It is in the programme for Government, as is the commitment to a lay chairperson and as is the commitment to a lay majority. It was a programme for Government supported by the Independent Alliance and ratified by my party at our special conference in Athlone. It has been our position for at least a year. I have no intention of rushing this Bill through. There should be plenty of time for open debate and for amendments.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Taoiseach open to amendments?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are a few behind the Taoiseach who think he should get out picking the Cabinet.