Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

63. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for an update on his new proposed legislation on super junior Ministers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5054/25]

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This question follows our discussions last night on the Minister's proposed legislation on super junior Ministers and on increasing their number. Will the Minister give an update on that? The legislation was railroaded through last night and the same thing looks set to be done today in the Seanad.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. We had an extensive discussion on this yesterday evening. The purpose of the Ministers and Secretaries and Ministerial, Parliamentary, Judicial and Court Offices (Amendment) Bill 2025 is to give effect to the decision by Government to increase the maximum number of Ministers of State from 20 to 23. This number has remained unchanged for the past 18 years, since 2007, when it increased from 17 to 20. The Bill also reflects the increased numbers of Ministers of State attending Cabinet, which is being extended to four. At the moment, a maximum of three Ministers of State may receive the allowance for attending Cabinet.

The draft of that Bill was published on Thursday, 6 February. A number of proposed amendments were received by Friday, 7 February. As the Deputy will be aware, we discussed the amendments in the Dáil yesterday evening and the Bill is due to be debated in the Seanad at - I think - 12.15 p.m. today. That is the update.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I said last night and will say again that the Bill was railroaded through the Dáil yesterday. It was, again, jobs for the boys, and mercs and perks. What sickens me is the fact we are always told that things cannot be done overnight but things can be done overnight when it means certain people get more perks, money and all of that. When we see the types of crises we have and the type of waste of public money that the previous Government, and this Government, have engaged in, it is absolutely outrageous.

We were very clear last night we are totally opposed to this Bill. We will make that very clear again today in the Seanad. Out of interest, what legal advice did the Minister get on this? Did he seek independent legal advice on this? We know there are two cases before the High Court at the moment. What legal advice did the Minister get and what did it state?

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Attorney General provides all of the legal advice to the Government and is leading the defence of the specific cases raised by the Deputy. The Government is defending the particular cases so that matter will evolve in the courts.

As I said yesterday, we can consider a number of other jurisdictions, such as Finland, where there are 19 Ministries, with a minister or secretary of state underpinning each, or New Zealand, where there are 20 ministers and ministers of state. Many jurisdictions of similar size and similar population to Ireland have a similar number of Ministers of State. This is to reflect three specific roles and responsibilities that are being prioritised. There is a Minister of State for the marine. We heard from Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher about the importance of that specific role in fishing communities. It was welcomed by Sinn Féin's spokesperson on finance. Deputy Farrell has not identified what role she would remove in order to introduce that Minister of State. Perhaps she can enlighten the House about what Minister of State she would drop to allow for a Minister of State for the marine, which she has welcomed.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think the Minister answered my question from last night when I asked which super junior Minister would be impacted by the legislation. If only three were being allowed, which super junior Minister was not getting the full whack money if he or she was the fourth super junior Minister? Maybe the Minister can enlighten us on that. He is missing the point here. He is talking about what is happening in other countries. We can agree or disagree on that. We can have that argument. The point here is that if the Minister believes so strongly that this needs to happen, why does he not ask the people? The Constitution is clear about Cabinet confidentiality, the 15 Ministers in Cabinet and all that. If the Minister feels that strongly about it and really believes it, then he should go to the people and ask them. Why is the Government making this decision and railroading it through the Dáil? We have two cases going forward. The prudent thing to do would be to see what comes out of them before bringing this legislation through the Dáil.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The legislation that is currently progressing through the Oireachtas is distinct and different from the specific constitutional questions that are the subject of the two judicial review cases before the High Court. They are being fully defended by the Attorney General. The practice and procedure over many decades has been the attendance at Cabinet of Ministers of State. The constitutionality of that continued practice is being fully defended by the Government and the Attorney General. The legislation that is before us is distinct from that. It relates to additional Ministers of State with new areas of priority and new responsibilities. Sinn Féin's election manifesto reflects the appointment of extra Ministers of State with additional areas of responsibility and priority. It would be interesting to see which Minister of State Sinn Féin would remove in order to allow for the appointment of the Ministers of State it has suggested appointing, because it has not been clear on that and did not refer to any reduction in the number of Ministers of State in its manifesto or which ones it would drop to allow for the those it suggests should be appointed, which it is entitled to do. In that context, it would be interesting to see which Ministers of State Deputy Farrell would remove.