Dáil Éireann
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol. 956 Thursday, No. 2 29 June 2017 DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DÁIL ÉIREANN TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised) Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed) 2 29/06/2017M01600Message from Select Committee 26 29/06/2017M01800Leaders’ Questions 27 29/06/2017P03200Questions on Promised Legislation 34 29/06/2017R02000Neighbour Disputes (Vegetation) Bill 2017: First Stage 39 29/06/2017S00800Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed) 40 29/06/2017EE00150Visit of Council of Europe Delegation 66 29/06/2017EE00250Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed) 66 29/06/2017EE00400Topical Issue Matters ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������67 29/06/2017JJ00100Ceisteanna - Questions 68 29/06/2017JJ00200Priority Questions 68 29/06/2017JJ00250Departmental Programmes 68 29/06/2017KK00800Brexit Issues 71 29/06/2017LL00350Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement Legal Cases 73 29/06/2017MM00375IDA Ireland Site Visits 75 29/06/2017NN00750Other Questions 78 29/06/2017NN00800Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement 78 29/06/2017OO00300Legislative Programme 80 29/06/2017OO01100Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy 81 29/06/2017PP00600IDA Ireland Data 84 29/06/2017QQ00400Enterprise Support Schemes 86 29/06/2017RR00400Departmental Budgets 88 29/06/2017SS01000Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest: Statements ������������������������������������������������������������������������91 29/06/2017DDD01900Messages from Select Committees ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 115 29/06/2017DDD02100Topical Issue Debate 115 29/06/2017DDD02200School Accommodation 115 29/06/2017EEE01000Military Aircraft 118 29/06/2017FFF00500Bank Branch Closures 120 29/06/2017HHH01100Protection of Employees (Collective Redundancies) Bill 2017: Second Stage [Private Members] 124 29/06/2017PPP00300Protection of Employees (Collective Redundancies) Bill 2017: Referral to Select Committee 141 DÁIL ÉIREANN Déardaoin, 29 Meitheamh 2017 Thursday, 29 June 2017 Chuaigh an Leas-Cheann Comhairle i gceannas ar 10 am Paidir. Prayer. Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed) Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time” 29/06/2017A00300An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Fianna Fáil was in possession I call Deputy James Browne 29/06/2017A00400Deputy James Browne: I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill There are three branches of Government - the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary The regulations, structures and functions of these principal organs of Government are fundamental to the protec- tion of our democracy and the rights of the people who live within that democracy The Con- stitution was carefully crafted to regulate the relationship between these institutions by setting out the balance of power between them It does this by means of the separation of powers The doctrine of the separation of powers operates by putting in place a degree of independence be- tween the parties whereby a system of checks and balances can operate The three institutions are to work as a counterweight to each other Any erosion of the separation of powers or those checks and balances must be fiercely resisted. Erosion of the separation of powers can occur by the encroachment of one arm of the State on the other It can also occur when one arm of the State attempts to undermine another arm of the State To return to the Government’s proposed Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017, I have carefully read it and it is clearly a flawed Bill. It fails the test of the separation of powers, both legally and philosophically, and in doing so it undermines all three institutions of our State and, consequently, the protections in place for our citizens and non-citizens The consequences for the public may be profound and long term Why do I say this? First, there is the politics It was obviously cobbled together in haste to keep the Minister, Deputy Ross, on side with the Government The legislation is clearly ill-considered and poorly constructed It reminds me of a farm animal put together by a committee It is a hodgepodge of compromise between Fine Gael and the Minister, Deputy Ross, with more than a nod to Sinn Féin to ensure its support We know the Minister, Deputy Ross, has long displayed a resentment towards the Judiciary and has been only too willing to cast aspersions on the highest judges in the land He has regu- 2 29 June 2017 larly sought to undermine their credibility and reputations One only has to read the record of his statements in both houses of the Oireachtas to know that I want to examine a number of those statements On the Seanad Order of Business on 15 February 2006, the following ex- change was recorded involving the then Senator Ross: Senator Ross: Senator Jim Walsh raised the matter of the Judiciary on which Senators Norris and O’Toole and I tabled a motion some time ago I refer to political appointments to the Judiciary and seek a debate on ending political appointments thereto Senator Lydon: Certainly not Senator Ross: For so long, one party has put its own people in power and then another party has appointed its people to the Supreme Court Senator Wilson: That is not correct Senator Feeney: Five High Court judges were appointed and they had nothing to do with our party Senator Ross: Occasionally a dummy is appointed to fool people. I wish to finish with- out interruption In the Bar Library people predict the outcome of Supreme Court decisions on the basis of party affiliation. This was both a slur on those appointments and a slur on the Supreme Court judges During the debate on confidence in the Taoiseach on 16 June 2010, the then Senator Ross stated: If one talks to people in the Law Library, they will say, “That one is yours or that is theirs” They identify judges in private conversation and when they talk about Supreme Court judgments, they can say which way they will go according to the political colour of the judges That is not only wholly incorrect but, again, is a slur on judges in the Supreme Court In the Seanad on 28 February 2007, at a time when the then Senator Ross wanted this House or committees to scrutinise judges, he stated: I seek a debate on No 21, motions Nos 8 and 9, so that we can discuss in a calm way the possibility of making appointments to semi-State bodies and the Judiciary subject to the scrutiny of the House Unfortunately, the Independent Members have never had an oppor- tunity to make such appointments That last sentence is the important one There, we are getting to the nub of the motiva- tion for this Bill For the Minister, Deputy Ross, this is an issue about power, in particular the Minister’s lack of power, as he sees it There is clearly resentment and a bitterness towards the Judiciary It is one of the oldest issues in the book The Minister, Deputy Ross, now seeks to have the Government bring forward legislation that will seek to put in people he claims are independent or ordinary people to appoint the judges He consistently refers to them as being ordinary people The Minister, Deputy Ross, obviously circulates in more rarefied positions than I do. Where I come from in Wexford, ordi- nary people are mechanics, electricians and people who work in supermarkets The Minister, Deputy Ross, seems to consider ordinary people to be those in the establishment, such as people who work in funds, accountants and stockbrokers These are not ordinary people; these are 3 Dáil Éireann people who have their own vested interests As a result of the demands of the Minister, Deputy Ross, we find ourselves discussing the Bill for three days. We are approaching the end of the session and there are crises in mental health and waiting lists for medical appointments while thousands of people are homeless, yet none of these issues is given priority by the Minister or the Government Why is there no mental health legislation before the House? Why has des- perately needed legislation such as the child care Bill, which seeks to