Seanad debates

Wednesday, 20 November 2013

Protected Disclosures Bill 2013: Report and Final Stages

 

11:55 am

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Each of amendments Nos. 2,3 and 19 propose a detailed oversight role for the operation of the legislation to be given to me as Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. I will address each of the amendments. As I indicated in our discussions on Committee Stage, I believe strongly that it is important to revisit the legislation periodically to see whether it is working. However, we need to have sufficient data at the time to make a reasoned and sound evaluation.

As Senator Byrne has acknowledged, this legislation will not be the norm. It will cover a variety of different circumstances and a variety of different workplaces. I do not believe there will be a great throng of cases to be reviewed. We must consider due process as well because people have to go through the labour relations machinery when it comes to these things. It would be problematic to have within a year or two years a completed process. That is my judgement on it and that is why, having thought on it good deal, we will have a better snapshot of these processes after five years. One can imagine that it would be traumatic enough for the whistleblowers who had to resort to this and, if so, they may well be in the middle of a process 12 months or two years from now.

A new procedure has been adopted by the Oireachtas relating to post-enactment review of legislation. Whatever the case, this legislation, once it is enacted, will be subject to the new Oireachtas procedures. As Minister, I will be obliged to report to the House on the operation of the Bill in 12 months' time. Under the new procedures, 12 months following the enactment of a Bill, except for the Finance Bill and the Appropriation Bill, the relevant Minister must lay a report before the Dáil which reviews the functioning of the Act. I am unsure whether there are similar guidelines in this House, but, if not, it should be before both Houses. Committees are empowered, including the committee referenced by Senator Zappone, to require the Minister to attend a committee meeting to discuss the report. That will happen in any event in all legislation as a matter of course from now on.

We are going to have a rather more tentative reporting of whether everything is in place, whether the Labour Relations Commission guidelines have been circulated properly, whether everyone is aware of them, what the mechanisms are for promulgation by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and employers organisations and whether each line Department got its code of conduct and so on. That will be more structural and functional. What I envisage in my review after five years is far more content focused. It will relate to how the legislation is working. The structure may be in place but the question will be whether it is effective in doing the job that we intend it to do.

There will be a duality of analysis. The review, post 12 months, will be required under the Oireachtas procedures and this will meet some of the requirements of the Deputies' amendments. Then, the five-year proper root-and-branch analysis which I propose to be carried out by my Department will meet the longer term more in-depth analysis that should be carried out as well.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.