Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would have thought that if we are going to quit the JAAB process on the grounds that it was unsatisfactory, especially in respect of handling large numbers of applications and sending large numbers of recommendations to the Government, and if one is going to whittle down 120 applications to be a District Court judge ultimately to three, why is it that some outside body will enable the commission to bring it down to the top 15 candidates that one should consider and that the balance are not really worth a second look? I find that really repugnant as a notion. At least the JAAB did not do that. At least for all our ignorance of the people whose forms we were looking at, we did not say that an official in the Courts Service put that into a different tray and said we need not bother with that application. That never happened and does not happen under the present situation.

Who are these consultants; the person or the adviser who will do this work? Much more importantly, the Minister has gone to great trouble to say how the advisers and consultants will be appointed but the independent Public Appointments Service does not seem to be given a statutory role in determining who should or should not be an adviser. The commission is left at large as to who it wants to be an adviser.

I ask myself what kind of judgments could we have in mind? Could it be a psychologist who would have a quick interview with people and would say that as the person looks to be barking mad, do not bother with him or her? Could it be said that the practice the person describes in the application form is so small and narrow that the person does not deserve a second thought either? Could it be the advisers are recruitment agency managers who have their own criteria as to who measures up and who does not, even at what is called the preliminary stage? The interesting thing is not merely that there should be advice on the preliminary stage but that there should be an evaluation or an assessment of the applicant's suitability.How can a person who is not a member of the commission carry out an evaluation or an assessment of an applicant's suitability for appointment to assist the commission? Again, are we talking about psychology? Is this person, adviser or consultant to say the commission does not have sufficient diversity and there are too many women or too many men on this occasion, so it will knock out a pile of people on an arbitrary basis? Will the adviser or consultant say the commission needs to have people geographically spread around the country to show diversity? Will he or she need to say, as Senator Ruane suggested, that an applicant's social and economic background should come into play, that the commission needs a diverse group of people and that only people who can show they have had it hard or come from a disadvantaged background should get a leg up in the process? Who will decide all this, and why can it not be done by staff of the commission, if it must be done by anyone? I remember when I was Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. In the Minister's office there was a special box into which the letters with writing up the side of them in multicoloured biro went for further consideration during lunchtime by my private office staff.