Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The amendments relate to gender balance, membership of the board and tenure. Senator Higgins proposes a set of amendments to section 47 which concerns the membership of the data governance board. The section provides for the appointment of members and the chairperson by the Minister, and the terms and conditions of appointments of the board members. Amendment No. 22b proposes an equal number of male and female members be appointed to the board. In practical terms, I cannot accept this amendment as worded because it would make it impossible to have an uneven number of members on the board, and I think people will accept that. However, I fully appreciate and support the principle of gender balance that the Senator is promoting here. It is a matter of Government policy that there be at least 40% representation of each gender on State boards and all boards, including the data governance board. As the parent Department, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is in compliance with that, and this matter was addressed this afternoon in the Dáil. The data governance board must comply with that requirement. Accordingly, while I do not see an amendment in this regard as essential, since it is already Government policy, I am willing to make provision to reaffirm the 40% target for gender representation on the board. I will make that proposal on Report Stage.

Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 concern the criteria for appointing members to the data governance board. As is clear from section 47 (6) of the Bill, which permits appointment of ex officioand external members, it is my intention that the board will have a mixture of both. The guidelines on appointments to State boards already set out the role of the PAS in selecting external members of boards, and these will apply to the data governance board. Ex officio appointments are not normally made via the PAS process, and I see no need to provide for it here.I do not propose to accept amendment No. 23 primarily because the ex officio members will be, by and large, public servants, some of whom will be public servants from my Department who may have been involved in the drafting of this Bill. To require those who are in place as a support in terms of their ex officionon-voting role on a board to apply for membership would be contradictory, bearing in mind the design and purpose of the Bill, and I do not believe that was the intent of the amendment.

On amendment No. 24 regarding the balance of external and ex officiomembers of the board and the skills that the members should have, it is my view that to allow for the greatest flexibility we should not be specific at this time in terms of the composition of the board and its expertise. It makes sense to work out the job specifications and specialist expertise required in consultation with the chairperson following enactment of the Bill. It also makes sense to wait and see how the board is operating in practice before making any changes that may be required. Accordingly, I do not believe this amendment is necessary at this time. However, it may be that there is need for greater transparency vis-à-vismy intentions in this respect and I will reflect further on the matter between now and Report Stage, particularly in the context of what Senator Higgins had to say in her contribution.

Amendment No. 24a proposes the time limits to be set in terms of the office of board members. While this is a reasonable proposal in respect of external members, it could be restrictive were it to apply to ex officiomembers. To reiterate a point I made earlier, we could end up with the people who we want on the board, the non-ex officiomembers, being kicked off the board. I do not think this would be in anybody's interests, and nor do I believe it was the intention of what is proposed. Many ex officiomembers will hold a position on the board by virtue of their skills and expertise, their place within the public service and their position within the organisation. Accordingly, I believe that more flexibility is needed in respect of the term of office for ex officiomembers. Nevertheless, I note the Senator's point and I will reflect further on the matter between now and Report Stage, particularly in respect of the non-ex officiomembers.