Paul Bradford (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and, like other Members, the legislation before us. It is impressive to learn that approximately 80,000 complaints have been handled by the Ombudsman since the office was put in place in the 1980s. The first Ombudsman, Mr. Michael Mills, set a very positive agenda for his office, and the outstanding work has been followed through right up to the current Ombudsman. We wish her well in her role.

I have listened with interest to what my colleagues have said, and we fully support every agency coming within the remit of the Ombudsman. I will not give a list of other agencies for which a case could be made for inclusion but the list could be expanded.

Maybe the challenge to the Minister, in his role as Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, is that if we had what I would call modern and good politics in this country, some of the questions to which answers cannot be given, some of the documents which lie hidden forever and some of the issues which we have tried to brush under the carpet, would have light shone on them and we would not go to the Ombudsman's office but would deal directly with these issues in this House, in the Dáil or directly with the Departments to get answers.

Ireland has been a very secretive society. It has almost been a curse on the nation for generations. We are now dealing with some of the aftermath of that by way of the children's rights referendum and the Magdalene laundries which was debated in the other House last night. That sad endless tale will continue for some time. Many of those problems stem from our culture of secrecy. We must move beyond that and the Ombudsman's office has played a very positive role in opening doors which would otherwise be closed and that work must continue.

The Minister and Members of both Houses must attempt to genuinely reform politics in order that every Member of the Oireachtas is almost a mini-Ombudsman to whom constituents can go and seek information and that when we make inquiries to Ministers, answers are given. It is a disgrace that Members of this House cannot ask Ministers parliamentary questions, although I know that is not the Minister's fault. I often wonder how advantageous it is to ask Ministers parliamentary questions because of the quality of the answers. I was a Member of Dáil Éireann for ten or 12 years and different Ministers and different Governments, including Governments in which my party was involved, gave the same answers - generally minimalist in terms of information. It is part of the culture that one tells the Deputy, the Senator and the public as little as possible. We must move beyond that mindset. That is crucial to the concept of reforming democracy.

When the Minister brings proposals before us on the reform of politics, openness and transparency must be at the core of them. I recall when the rainbow Government was formed, the then Taoiseach, John Bruton, said on his first day in office - it was aspirational and he may not have reached the targets he set for himself through no fault of his own - he would like to govern behind a pane of glass. Everybody laughed because we thought that was kind of nonsensical. What Minister or Taoiseach would actually be transparent given the mentality we had that government must be secretive? That is an aspiration to which we should all aspire, namely, to govern and to conduct politics behind a pane of glass. That is what reform of politics is about.

I read a document recently about the reform of the Oireachtas which said that once a month, the Dáil sat on a Friday for approximately two hours, with no parliamentary questions, votes or otherwise. That is what passes in the Republic of Ireland as the reform of politics. As a long serving Member of the Oireachtas, the Minister knows we must go well beyond that if we want to give some credit to the word "reform". I look forward to him coming to the House to debate the reform of politics into the future because that is very much part of the opening up of government and the lifting of veils of secrecy. If that is done, the Office of the Ombudsman may not have to deal with the thousands of queries each year which stem from the lack of information.

Notwithstanding the great work being done by the Ombudsman, which is the last resource of many people, and the fact that much to the satisfaction of Oireachtas Members who make representations on behalf of constitutions, almost 50% of complaints are dealt with satisfactorily, I want to highlight a special report by the Ombudsman. I think there have been three special reports in the history of the State. The Minister would not be the one with particular responsibility for this but it is an Ombudsman's issue. The special report was on the sad and tragic saga of the lost at sea. It was debated at length in both Houses and at the committee. Who sits on what chairs has changed in the Dáil and in the Seanad but the subject matter and the lost at sea report have not gone away. I express my disappointment and my failure to understand why no progress has been made to date on implementing the request of the Ombudsman in regard to the lost at sea report. If reform, fairness, new politics and sincerity in politics are to mean anything and when the Ombudsman presents a special report to the Oireachtas with recommendations and the parties now in government rightly support that report, we must act on it if the Office of the Ombudsman is to have any credibility. Will the Minister take that request, which I know will be shared by many Members in both Houses, to the highest levels of government, that is, that the O'Reilly special report to the Oireachtas on the lost at sea tragedy be acted on?