David Norris (Independent)

I thank the Senator. I would be concerned if there was a question of a block interest. The Senator probably corrected the matter after I had spoken on the last occasion. To my mind, if we have individual volunteers making up the board, they have a very important contribution to make. However, if there are people sitting on multiple boards simply to represent particular interests, I have less respect for them as - to use that horrible word - stakeholders.

While consultation is generally positive, I am a believer in ministerial responsibility. If, however, an amendment to change a couple of words were tabled, he might consider it because, as matters stand, the Bill appears almost to confer the power of veto on particular groups. In circumstances where the Minister was incapable of achieving agreement with the representatives of the patrons, recognised school management organisations and any recognised trade union or staff association representing teachers, etc., the amendment seems to suggest that failure to secure such an agreement would preclude him or her from taking the action he or she would wish to take. Again, I could be wrong but that is what appears to be the intention.

I respectfully ask the Minister to consider a slight alteration to the amendment tabled by my two colleagues so that it would read "the Minister after consultation with and having sought the agreement of". I do not believe it is necessary to obtain agreement. Engaging in consultation and seeking agreement are good. During a fractious career - and perhaps to the surprise of some colleagues in this House - I have come to be regarded as something of an alpha male within certain organisations. I have always sought that decisions be made and, if a majority existed, that they be rushed through. It was actually female members of the various organisations to which I refer who were able to demonstrate that if, after careful discussion, it is possible to persuade everyone to one's point of view, then decisions will be copper-fastened and people will not continually try to reopen the debate on dead issues.

I suggest that the amendment would be acceptable if the term "having sought" were included. The only difficulty which might arise could be practical in nature. Will the Minister indicate both the number of bodies involved and how many of them would have to be consulted? Would it be possible to delegate responsibility to someone in order that he or she might engage in the relevant discussions on his behalf? There are such serious matters arising in respect of education - from primary all the way through to post-third level - that it would not be possible for the Minister spend all his time involved in consultations with boards of management. Perhaps the amendment could be tinkered with before Report Stage. In that context, the Government's advisers might be in a position to come up with a suggestion which would not tie the Minister into being obliged to hold endless meetings with boards of management but which would still ensure consultation took place and attempts would be made to secure agreement. The Minister should not be obliged to comply with a requirement to reach agreement with every interest group.