Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge that this section copies section 21 of the Health Act 2004, as I understand it. However, I do not agree with the provision and I am not sure it has been invoked up to now. I would hope that it would not be invoked under any circumstances because I believe an Oireachtas committee can make its own determination as to what is or is not sub judice. This option for the director general should not be included. It would be reforming if this were removed in its entirety to allow the director general to be answerable to the Oireachtas. I would hope the procedure of going to the High Court would not be invoked. It has not been up to now under the old Act and this is very similar to that provision. There is merit to Senator Barrett's point on the sub judice rule, which has not been noticed up to now. Credit is due to the Senator for spotting it and his amendment should be supported.

I would go further and oppose the entire section which is not good and should be changed. It should not be left the way it is for the sake of it. As we saw yesterday, there certainly was disagreement between Members and officials as to what could and could not be discussed. The Member was not looking for the officials to go into policy. Although they responded that they were precluded from talking about policy, I do not believe they were being questioned about policy but about the operation of the health budget.

I disagree with the Senator on Government policy. It is not the function of public servants to advocate policy one way or another when it has not already been decided. It is a matter for Ministers and for Oireachtas Members and I would be happy for that to continue. That would place an intolerable burden on public servants who are supposed to be and are neutral. They would not want that burden. The Minister and the Government should be accountable for policy and not public servants.