Dan Boyle (Green Party)

I thank the Members who contributed and the Minister of State for his contribution. That 11 Members contributed to this debate in the limited time for Private Members' business shows the degree of interest in the subject. I and Senator de Búrca are grateful that such an interest is taken.

Some contributions misunderstood the spirit in which the motion was tabled in pointing out our role as a party in government. It would have been easy for Senator de Búrca and I to be very prescriptive and to divide the House on a particular basis. It would have been churlish of me to point out that I was the first Member of the Oireachtas to publish legislation in this area with the Appointments to Public Bodies Bill in the other House. We wished to point out that a process is ongoing and will come to a conclusion very soon. It is in the interests of this House to inform that process. Several speakers referred to the important role this House can play. One of the purposes of the debate is to work with the Seanad reform group to make specific proposals on how a reformed Seanad may operate in this way in future.

Several methods have been suggested for providing greater scrutiny in the public appointment process and while those alternatives are out there and in need of further scrutiny, a vote would not be of service. I ask that the amendment be withdrawn on that basis. Rather than inform the wider process, it seeks to put forward the singular view of a particular party, which does not help initially, however valid many of the ideas in the amendment might be. I make that appeal before the House is asked to divide on the matter.