Annie Hoey (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 20:

In page 13, to delete line 18 and substitute the following: “(a) commerce, finance, administration, public service, civil society or trade unions,”.

I am speaking on behalf of Senators Higgins and Ruane, neither of whom can be here today. I have been tasked with their job.

I understand the argument that things need to be kept broad and that this does not preclude X, Y or Z. In reality, however, what we have found that does not always necessarily translate in lots of different ways unless something is prescribed. I find this argument, which has been made repeatedly by different Government Ministers in respect of different Bill, interesting. They argue that people are not prevented from doing something and without wishing to drag the discussion on to a different Bill, I will cite the example of a county councillor who applied to join the board of a governing body. The body responded that there was no reason to appoint the councillor to the board, despite the fact that individual had applied through the regular process, because there was no longer any such stipulation in the legislation, even though, in theory, councillors were not precluded from applying. I am not convinced of the argument that not precluding people from applying means that people may apply.

Senator Higgins has given me a note on amendment No. 20. The amendment seeks to delete section 13(4)(a), which provides that the objective that "the lay members will, having regard to the functions of the Commission, amongst them possess knowledge of, and experience, qualifications, training or expertise" in "business, finance or public service". My understanding is that this amendment would replace the subsection with a broader provision that among the lay members of the commission there will be expertise in commerce, finance, administration, public service, civil society or trade unions. A broader range of expertise being sought among the lay membership would be welcome and would go a way to ensuring that the commission is broadly representative of society at large.

Amendment No. 21 seeks to delete the reference to business and finance and refers to the expertise in corporate governance which would already cover the expertise that would seem appropriate for the lay membership of the commission.

Amendment No. 22 would provide that one of the areas for inclusion in relevant expertise sought by the PAS for lay membership of the commission would be relevant areas of academic research, including the law or social policy. This would ensure there would be a guarantee of academic expertise in relevant areas on the commission.

Amendment No. 23 seeks to provide that one of the areas for inclusion in relevant expertise sought by the PAS for lay membership of the commission would be the environment, sustainable development and environmental law. It is important that there be appropriate expertise in this area given that there is a large volume of cases being heard on questions of environmental law and a growing body of case law in this area. Furthermore, there are significant international agreements and domestic legislation in operation in the State, such as the Paris Agreement and the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. It would be welcome for expertise in such areas to be included as expertise being sought by the PAS.

Amendment No. 24 would provide that one of the areas for inclusion in relevant expertise sought by the PAS for lay membership of the commission would be expertise in international law and international agreements or conventions to which the State is a party. This is complementary to previous amendments which cite specific areas of international law, such as climate or disability law. Therefore, a broader range of expertise would be welcome.

Amendment No. 25 would amend section 13(4)(d) by including the phrase "and promotion" in the language regarding expertise sought for the lay membership in the area of the protection of human of rights and equality. The protection and promotion of human rights are two different but complementary sets of expertise. It would be welcome for both areas of expertise to be included in the lay membership of the commission.