Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Senators who participated on Second Stage of the Bill. The points made in the course of the debate were put forward in a manner that was meant to be constructive and reasonable. There is no doubt there is quite a level of interest in the Bill because of the importance of these roles in ensuring the smooth and effective administration of business in both Houses of the Oireachtas. The level of interest is also not surprising when one considers the very long interval since the method of appointing the Clerks and Clerk Assistants of the Houses was set down in legislation in 1959. An enormous degree of change has occurred since then in Irish society and in Irish public administration and, certainly, in the business of both Houses of the Oireachtas. The pace of business in the Oireachtas was more sedate then, as I have been informed, although there was plenty of tension and competition, I am sure, between political parties and groupings then, just as there is now. It is fair to say that the degree of involvement by the State in the economic and social affairs of the country has grown significantly since then, with a corresponding need for more legislation and, in many instances, legislation that is much more complex than in years gone by. In line with such changes, the role of senior administrators in the Houses of the Oireachtas Service, most notably the Clerk of the Dáil, has altered to a remarkable degree. Formerly, the main duties of the Clerk were directly connected with the day-to-day business of the House, which is perhaps what Senator Jim Walsh was alluding to. A detailed knowledge of parliamentary procedure was absolutely essential. Not that such a knowledge is unnecessary now - far from it - but the growth in the number of staff in the Houses of the Oireachtas and the establishment with effect from the beginning of 2004 of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission has changed the position in a more radical fashion.

In the course of my statement to the House at the commencement of the debate, I mentioned the extensive list of duties that are placed under the responsibility of the Clerk of the Dáil under the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission legislation. It is fair to say that such duties are primarily managerial in nature, quite different from the duties related to the daily operation of the Chamber itself. In addition, I referred to how the onset of an initiative such as the Civil Service Renewal Plan has placed very great responsibilities on Secretaries General in pushing reform and modernisation in their areas of responsibility. This wide area will form a major element of the responsibilities of the Clerk of the Dáil, and he or she, as the case may be, will be expected to display considerable powers of initiative, reliability and managerial talent, as well interpersonal skills, in dealing with a sizeable workforce and more than 200 parliamentarians. The incoming Clerk of the Dáil will be assisted in his or her duties by other officers of the House and by the very significant number of senior officials working in the committees system.

I wish to give my own thoughts on some of the comments made. I do not agree with the comments, but I accept some of the practical challenges that Senator Darragh O'Brien very eloquently outlined. I tried to include this in my opening statement. The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission is effectively the board of directors for the day-to-day running of the Houses of the Oireachtas, and the Clerk of the Dáil is also the chief executive. The idea that a board would have a chief executive in situfor an infinite amount of time and would have no say whatsoever in the length of that tenure seems rather peculiar. Six terms at senior level are quite normal in the public service, as we see with Secretaries General. There was the issue of security of tenure. It is entirely up to the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission to decide the length of tenure, but why prescribe that in legislation? Why not give parliamentarians in a democracy the ability to decide that length of tenure in an open and fair competition? It is common practice to have fixed terms at this level.

People have said we need people of experience. I could not agree more. I have seen at first hand, as we all have, the important role carried out by these very senior officials, but the TLAC process in relation to the Clerk of the Dáil will obviously produce people in line with the criteria set out by the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission.One thing this Bill does not do was alluded to by Senator Mooney, who referred to the concern about politicisation in any way, shape or form. I would argue that the Bill depoliticises the process. One has to remember that the current situation is that the Taoiseach of the day has a role in the appointment of the Clerk of the Dáil. The Bill will remove such involvement from the Taoiseach or Executive of the day in the appointment and will instead place it with the Legislature. It is enhancing the power of the Legislature.

On the TLAC system to which Senator O'Brien referred, it will only apply to the Clerk of the Dáil. This is about democracy in action and empowering the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas to decide the skillset that is needed and the length of time involved. I accept the very practical difficulties, outlined by Senator O'Brien, regarding somebody being appointed for a certain amount of time, but I also trust my colleagues in both Houses to address those issues, as well as the Ceann Comhairle of the day to guide people on that. We are the people's representatives and are trusted with passing budgets and laws, as well as with running the country. I have great confidence in the collective ability of people to get this right.

I and my officials will relay Senator O'Brien's concerns to my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Howlin-----