Catherine Noone (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, and thank Senator Quinn for drafting this legislation. The Government has pursued a wide-ranging political reform programme aimed at delivering open government underpinned by a transparent, efficient and effective public sector, which is vital to rebuild trust in government and the institutions of the State. Notwithstanding his criticisms of aspects of the Government's performance, I welcome Senator Cullinane's acknowledgment of the efforts that have been made in this regard. Reforms are set to include an overhaul of the ethics legislation aimed at supporting and promoting ethical conduct and creating an environment in which ethical issues and conflicts of interest are managed effectively and corrupt and unethical conduct is severely discouraged. It is important, now more than ever, that we continue this work of reforming politics to bring about transparency, accountability and honesty. At the same time, we must work to reform the public sector in the same way, bringing to the fore the principles of accountability and honesty. I commend Senator Quinn on crafting the Bill with that intention in mind.

The legislation proposes to bring an end to the practice of paying those who serve on the boards of public bodies and similar entities. This seems like a fair move in many cases, as long as reasonable expenses are paid to persons who are out of pocket. However, there are some boards where such an arrangement may not be practical due to the large workload and frequent meetings. Additional provision should be made to accommodate that reality.

The Bill requires that the employment of a person by a public body be conditional on his or her filing a declaration with the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO. Aside from the additional administrative work for the commission, I see no reason to oppose this reasonable proposal. In addition, the Bill requires that the payment of expenses to persons who serve on the boards of public bodies must likewise be conditional upon their filing a declaration with SIPO. Again, this imposes an additional administrative burden but should pose no real difficulties. It is my understanding that the list of bodies coming within the purview of the Bill would include commercial State companies, non-commercial State bodies and profit organisations in receipt of public funding and having public service-type pension schemes.

Although I agree with some aspects of the Bill, it must be acknowledged that reform in this sector is already under way. The current arrangements in regard to the payment of fees to board members has seen a significant reduction in such fees in the period since 2009, with current payments averaging at €18,788 for board chairmen and €10,421 for board members. In the case of public servants who are members of State boards, the one person, one salary rule applies. In other words, fees are not payable to these individuals in respect of their board membership. In addition, since 2012, formal provision has existed to allow board members the option of waiving their fee payment. Many have chosen to do so, forgoing personal gain in the interest of the State.

I agree, however, with Senator Sheahan's observation that we do not want a situation where board membership is dependent on a person's wealth or personal circumstances such that it would become a somewhat elitist activity. I suggested during the debate on the referendum to abolish the Seanad that membership of the House should be voluntary. That debate is over, but I do take the point that such prescriptions have the potential to result in elitism and, in some cases, a Dublin-centric bias. The retention of fees would enable the State to continue to access a wider pool of candidates for State board appointments, including those with valuable private sector expertise. I echo the comments made by Senators Sheahan and Hayden in this regard. The proposal in the Bill to abolish the fee payment represents a major departure from current practice and has the potential over time to have an adverse impact on the economic profile of persons available for such appointments. Moreover, there are legal constraints applying to the withdrawal of fees from certain board members, including, for instance, worker directors appointed under the Worker Participation (State Enterprises) Acts.

That said, certain aspects of the proposals contained in this Bill should be given close consideration in the context of drawing up a legislative programme. I applaud Senator Quinn for his efforts in bringing them forward.