Diarmuid Wilson (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

-----not the interview room of this quango we are proposing to appoint.

If we substitute the word "judge" with "teacher" of, say, English or geography, the process is that a vacancy arises, it is advertised, people apply, they are shortlisted under the criteria, they are interviewed and then a panel is formed for a period of time. It goes back to what Senator Bacik alluded to in her amendment. On that panel, a number of suitably qualified people are adjudged by the interviewers to be worthy of appointment are put in order of choice at positions one, two, three and on to ten or 11. As vacancies arise within a set period of time, be that six months, eight months or 12 months, they are taken in order of merit from that panel. After the set period of time, the panel ceases to exist and a new panel is formed.

What is wrong with that in regard to the appointment of judges? What is not transparent about that? It makes eminent sense to me and it is logical. The only reason I can think of not to do that is if somebody wants somebody else appointed who may not have got through the process, and they keep advertising until that person gets through. That is the logic, as far as I can see it. The most transparent way of dealing with this is to advertise, shortlist, interview and form a panel for a set period of time. If that set period of time is three months, six months, nine months or 12 months, so be it, but it is more transparent if we do it that way.