Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I concur with Senator Fitzgerald on the point she made about the House not sitting last week. The Leader and I have had several disagreements on the matter, but I do not intend to go into the details again. It reflected badly on the Seanad. However, it begs the question of where we stand on Seanad reform. For a variety of reasons, what has happened in the past two weeks has raised more questions about the viability and necessity of having the Seanad. It seems we are playing straight into the hands of our detractors. Where do we stand on the promises we have received three or four times during the past two years that there will be a Bill on Seanad reform? When are we likely to see it?

I refer to a question raised by Dr. Michael Somers, head of the NTMA. I am not going to raise the political issue of who is responsible for what, but I do want to refer to the Ministers and Secretaries Act, 1924. Many of us have suspected for years, but it has now been stated civil servants work to present reports that will reflect well on Ministers. This has not only happened in the past ten years; it has happened with all Governments along the way. I seek a discussion on that point. On three or four occasions recently I have raised the issue of the impact and influence of senior civil servants on all aspects of the public sector and the work of government. This is a serious issue. If we are not getting clear viewpoints, guidelines and reports because they are being doctored and edited to reflect well on the political head of the Department, they are worth nothing to us. A major issue for us to discuss in a non-political way is the putting in place of proper procedures to stop that from happening.

One of the issues with which we need to deal is a paper trail and a trail of decision making. Over the weekend Michael Somers said people no longer write things down in the Department of Finance but lift the telephone and tell people what to do. There is no record there. That is an unacceptable method of decision making. There should be a hierarchical trail of decision making in order for us to recognise everybody's input into every decision. Unless we get that, we will walk ourselves into more trouble.

I have said a couple of times that one of the problems with new Ministers is that they walk into a Department about which they know very little and are overwhelmed by senior civil servants who take control of the running of the Department — perhaps for the good, or maybe not. I would like a clear distinction between the role of the civil servants and the role of their political masters and to ensure decision making is open, clear, dependable, examinable, subject to stress-testing and done with the best interest of the citizens at the heart of it. I would like a discussion on the Ministers and Secretaries Act 1924 and the amendments to it.