Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is difficult to know exactly how the system works, but the Government makes the appointment and does not know why people are or are not on the shortlist or why people have been removed from the shortlist. It seems to me it would be far fairer if, in January or February Mr. A or Ms A has been recommended to the Government but then the Government gets a different shortlist in March or April, it should be able to inquire about Mr. A or Ms A who was recommended in January. The Government should be able to consider those people and ask whether they have fallen off the edge because someone is better. Is that the inference we are to draw? Is the Government to be left totally in the dark over why the list has changed and why a given person has gone off it?

The other point is that were a barrister or solicitor to be short-listed by way of recommendation to the Government for appointment to one of the superior courts, it would be a tremendous accolade of itself. Then, to be told two months after being recommended that he or she has to start again, is to be compared with other people and may not in fact make it second time around is bad practice. I wonder how many times this could arise. Practising judges do not have hours and hours to attend interviews, fill out forms and keep making applications. What about a judge of the High Court who – I will not use the word "ambitious" – is willing to serve on either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court? How many times does that judge have to apply? If on some occasions that person is told he or she is on the shortlist but at other times is told he or she is not, what is the judge left to wonder about himself or herself? It would be far better to say that if a candidate makes the grade and has been recommended, that candidate stands recommended unless there is some reason why he or she should not stand recommended. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider his view on this. It makes this a cumbersome procedure. Will the Minister inform the House of the view his Department takes on the length of a vacancy in the High Court that arises by reason of resignation or death? How long would that process take from beginning to end under this new system? Does the Minister envisage it would take two, three or six months? How long does the Minister believe the commission will take to go through all the interviews and processes in place? One problem with this new quango that we are creating in this statute is that it is probably going to delay judicial appointments significantly.

As Senator Norris said earlier, some good appointments have been made recently without any of this process of individual candidates having to be interviewed, short-listed and so on. The system is working fine. Since we were last debating this Bill, I was looking at American television in the form of CNN and a phrase used in a completely different context struck me, as I thought it apt for this Bill. The phrase was that this was "a solution looking for a problem". There is no problem. We can make perfectly good appointments without all of this. No newspaper is asking why a given person was appointed. No one is saying there is patronage or that, to use the language of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, this is cronyism. No one says that.