Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

No, but it does issue the call and provides recommendations to the Minister from the pool of applicants. Each new vacancy requires new recommendations from JAAB, so there is still that pool. If I, as Minister, request a new JAAB for a new vacancy that arises, it is good practice. That is what we are trying to continue here by proposing names for a specific vacancy. For example, if someone with a particular expertise in court is promoted or retires, we want to be able to fill that need in commercial court, family court or whatever the case may be.

It is important that we have new lists or recommendations. Section 43(1) requires a person wishing to be considered to make an application to the commission. Section 42(3) states that the commission shall issue this invitation when the Minister has requested the commission to make recommendations or when the commission anticipates a vacancy in judicial office. This allows the commission, if it wishes, to operate annual calls in the same manner that JAAB does currently, meaning that it would not have to go back to the very start and organise competitions and interview processes each time. Whether it wants to issue an invitation at the start of the year for applications to, for example, the office of High Court justice will be a matter for the commission to decide. One could reasonably anticipate that there would be a vacancy in the High Court at some point during the year and that the Minister might seek to have a number of names put forward. What we are applying in this provision is the same logic that applies to JAAB. JAAB might decide not to do it that way, but it is often the case that it issues a call on an annual basis. People apply to it and JAAB has their applications to work through if the Minister seeks names or if a vacancy arises. That is what is provided for in the Bill in order that there will not be the lengthy time the Senator mentioned.

I agree with the Senator regarding someone having to start the process again for each vacancy that arises. There could be a situation where I brought to the Cabinet three names for three different courts, with two of those being elevations, only for other vacancies to have to be filled suddenly. To have to start the whole process again would delay matters, particularly when our Judiciary is already under significant pressure. While I agree with the Senator fully, it is set out in sections 42(3) and 43(1) that the commission shall issue an invitation or can, like JAAB, organise competitions in advance of particular vacancies arising, allowing for an annual call or invitation when interviews would take place. It is a lengthier process, but the premise of the Bill is that, irrespective of whether it is for a lower or higher court or whether someone is a sitting judge, barrister or solicitor, everyone must go through the same process of being interviewed and setting out his or her skills, education and professional route to that point. One court’s management, workload and requisite skill set is different than another court’s. The Senator will appreciate that different courts require different skill sets and types of individual. What we have in the Bill allows for what he is trying to set out.