Seanad debates

Tuesday, 21 June 2005

Civil Service Regulation (Amendment) Bill 2004: Second Stage.

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Martin ManserghMartin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

The problem with the law — and the law was involved in the case discussed by Mr. Murphy — is that it is possible to argue that practically any position can be questioned legally or constitutionally in a court of law. Is the Government to be reduced to a state of total paralysis by fear that this or that might not be legal or constitutional?

Yes, there was a failure and I do not propose to go over the debate again. It was a relatively technical matter and there was an obligation on civil servants not merely to bring it to the attention of Ministers but to ensure that Ministers took note. This assumes that the civil servants themselves fully understood the implications. The possible €2 billion compensation arises from a decision of the Supreme Court. In my understanding, the view was taken that given the country's healthy financial state, it could afford the arrears. This implies that if the Supreme Court had been obliged to judge the matter in, for example, 1987, it might have taken a different view regarding arrears.

I will conclude with two or three minor points. Performance-related awards have many superficial attractions. The problem is how to guarantee fairness. I am afraid I come from the old school in the Civil Service whereby if one did one's job and did it well, one won the esteem of one's peers and did not look for some reward. I do not really go along with the idea that everything needs incentives.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.