Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will let the tangential point stand. I thank Senator Norris and thank the other Senators for their contributions.

The amendment relates to the definition in respect of the academic member of the board. As I suggested in my earlier comments, Members felt the need, understandably, to wander to other sections to have a more holistic conversation; I get that. The amendment relates to whether we should define "academic member" in the legislation. Considering that the Bill being put forward by the Government establishes a competency-based board that does not distinguish on the basis of academic or non-academic experience and expertise, I am not in a position to define "academic member" in the Bill. Senators can disagree with that position but they will understand that that is the logic in my not being in a position to accept the amendment.

The powers invested in the Minister are not new. The Minister of the day already appoints the board of an t-údarás. I go back to our pre-legislative scrutiny and the significant time some Members of this House, some Members of the other House, stakeholders and others spent at committee meetings and the like. We have tried in this legislation to do something that was not done in the 1971 Act but is done in this Bill, that is, to begin to detail what certain competencies might look like. To give one example, Deputy Ó Snodaigh, to whom I openly give credit for this, was of the view that we needed to be clearer in respect of the Irish language. We made an amendment on Committee Stage to spell that out. We can debate whether we have got it right or got it wrong, but I want Senators to understand the process we have gone through. As for section 16(2)(a)(ii), we are endeavouring to do something the 1971 Act did not do, which is, rather than granting unfettered power, to begin to outline the competency set a Minister shall consider.

I will make a point that I think is fair. Anybody in politics longer than a week understands that appointments to boards by Ministers are heavily scrutinised, and rightly so. I could give the House many examples of board appointments and other appointments that have not gone very well. We all know about them. Anybody who suggests that board appointments are not scrutinised within an inch of their lives on the floors of this House and of the other House, in the national media, quite rightly, and in Oireachtas committees, is being slightly, if not accidentally, disingenuous. The PAS is used by the Government for the appointment of people to State agencies and has been used for the HEA board. We have been extremely fortunate with the calibre of people we have attracted to the HEA board. This is not intentional, but I am very proud of that and I strongly reject any negative assertion about what I call the USI seat, that is, the student representative seat, on the HEA board. We have had a proud tradition, started by the current Taoiseach, of USI presidents generally representing people on the board. I am sorry; I should have referred to Senator Hoey. She was that person on the HEA board. That has worked really well. All we are doing now is spelling out that long-standing practice and precedent in legislation, which seems like an appropriate thing to do.We are also doing something which I believe was referred to by Senator McDowell - and I am probably disappointed that there has not been more reference to it - which is to spell out the importance of trying to get a gender balance on the board of the Higher Education Authority, with a specific reference to 40%.

When people ask about this group or that group, I ask about gender equality, which is spelled out very clearly in this Bill.

There is a little bit in some of the comments, and I am going to just call it out, of wanting to diminish the Minister's role, whoever he or she is. There is a great amount of talk about autonomy, freedom and all of this, but what about democracy as well? I got elected, received a seal of office from the President of Ireland, and I am appointed to serve in Cabinet. There is a role for the Minister and for a Government Department and we should not be shy nor are we going to in any way suggest that the Minister exercising that role or function is anyway dirty or inappropriate.