Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail)

Not all of the statutory functions being transferred to him are listed. There is no comprehensive list of what he can do. We do not know what is contained in the delegation orders, as they will be signed after the enanctment of the legislation.

The amendment seeks to let the public know, by way of this document, how the new Minister will do things differently. The process would be transparent and there would be accountability. The public would know what the Minister had to do and could judge him accordingly, as could the Oireachtas. It has nothing to do with the provision of economic data, which is a separate matter. Rather, it has to do with what the Minister claims he will do. We want change.

The two Government parties agreed in the programme for Government that they would split the Department of Finance. There was a row over personnel, but that did not matter. They wondered how they could split the Department. They published a Bill, then realised they had forgotten about this aspect and that they needed to make changes. The Bill was substantially altered on Committee Stage in the Dáil. It was supposed to be debated in the Seanad for two days, but that was shortened to one. This is not reform, change or how matters should be handled. The Government is still refusing to tell us exactly what the Minister will do. It refers to how he might or should do something and states it is great and new, but it will not accept a simple amendment. The website could contain something like a site map of the Minister's Department. Most business and departmental websites contain "About Us" and "What We Do" sections. That is all we are seeking. It is a simple matter, but there is no change, of which we want to see more evidence. The Minister says he will do something, but he would be better off acting with statutory power, whereby the Houses could tell him what they wanted him to do and legislate to ensure he did this.

Transparency is all we are seeking. It is a reasonable request and everyone seems to agree it is a great idea. The previous Government, for all its faults and failings, used to accept reasonable amendments from the Opposition when they were well considered, well argued and genuinely meant to improve legislation. It is difficult to believe the Opposition cannot be treated in the same way. I stand to be corrected, but did I understand the Minister of State correctly when she stated the Estimates process would not be changed? As that is not what was promised, she might be able to clarify the matter. If everything is going to be as it was - an Estimates process followed by a budget in December - there will be no change in the fundamental function of the Minister, yet he promised it would be changed substantially. When it is the Minister of State's turn, she might discuss this matter again.