1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the appointments made by him since May 2008 to the State boards or other agencies under his aegis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30235/10]

2 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he will list the appointments made by him to State boards or agencies since his election as Taoiseach; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35868/10]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

The information requested by the Deputies relating to appointments made by me to State boards and agencies since May 2008 is contained in a schedule that I propose to circulate with the Official Report.

In respect of the National Economic and Social Development Office, on 1 April 2010 an order was made under section 34 of the National Economic and Social Development Office Act 2006, which dissolved the National Economic and Social Forum and the National Centre for Partnership and Performance. These bodies have now been absorbed into the National Economic and Social Council.

This question relates to appointments made by the Taoiseach to State boards or other agencies. The Green Party, however, has taken this practice to a new level with the appointment of persons associated with them, party members or those who have lost their seats, to the Private Residential Tenancies Board, the Disability Authority, An Foras Orgánach, the Film Classification Office and the National Transport Authority. These appointments were made in keeping with the sentiment of the previous Taoiseach that appointments were made on the basis of friendship rather than merit.

The former Taoiseach and the Taoiseach have made the point that it is difficult to get people to serve on State boards. I make the general observation that in the case of one appointment to the board of the national children's hospital, when the former chairman brought issues that were of concern to him to the attention of the Minister, he was asked to resign on the basis that the board was not authorised to look at those issues. It is increasingly difficult to get good people to serve on State boards when situations like this might arise. Would the Taoiseach comment on that? The best people who want to serve on these boards are getting a message that does not augur well if we want people of quality to offer public service.

Specific inquiries about appointments were not contemplated. This is a catch-all question.

I knew the Ceann Comhairle would say that and I addressed it in the first part of my supplementary.

Yes but it is unreasonable to expect the Taoiseach to have answers ready for specific inquiries about particular appointments or resignations.

It is a valid question about service to the State.

There are many good people available for public service. I do not accept the quality of people has deteriorated, it has improved and more people are making themselves available for service. If we are appointing people to State boards they must do their job to the best of their ability but I do not accept that it is difficult to find people who will do public service, that is not my impression.

It might not be the Taiseach's impression but there is now a situation where a person of considerable status accepted a difficult position and while doing the job to the best of his ability, he brought issues of concern to the notice of his Minister and was subsequently asked to resign.

The Deputy must pursue this through a different channel.

What message does that send out to other people of status, integrity and ability who might want to assist the State by giving of their experience to a State board? If they bring issues of concern to the Minister involved, they may be asked to resign. That is not the message we want to send out.

I do not want to go through the list of our absent friends from the House, but it is incredible and was done strictly on the basis of party political membership or friendship, as distinct from any ability the people involved might have. The Government must address this. Fine Gael proposed that for people to be appointed to the more important State boards, they should appear before the relevant Oireachtas committee to indicate their ability to fill the post.

Fine Gael will introduce this proposition in Government so that people can state in public their qualifications and what it is they have to offer State boards as distinct from how the Taoiseach's predecessor did it, appointing people on the basis of friendship. I am concerned by the message sent out when a chairman of a board who brings to the notice of his Minister issues of serious concern about value for money, waste and so on is asked to resign as a consequence.

I do not think that is a proper characterisation of that particular situation. I do not want to go over it again; it is not within the remit of the questions. I was asked what were my appointments under my Department and I have set out that information. The purpose of parliamentary questions is to obtain information.

The situation clearly is that there was a remit as far as the Minister was concerned regarding the building of a hospital on a site. As I understand it, the former chairman subsequently looked at another site. That was outside the remit of the board. If there is a difference of opinion like that, what happens is the person resigns and another appointment is made. It does not take away from the board.

He was asked to resign.

From time to time, that can occur where there is a difference of opinion, but the purpose of the board is to implement Government policy. Government policy is to proceed with the building of a hospital on that site as a result of a lot of independent reports that were conducted and is in line with world trends where paediatric hospitals are built on the same sites as or adjacent to adult hospitals.

Some of those trends have been found to be incorrect.

Twenty-four of the last 25 that have been built worldwide have been that way.

There is €600 million involved.

As I said yesterday to Deputy Gilmore, the funding arrangements are the same now as they were when the project was first announced. There is no change in that.

Except the Government is spending €100 million digging a hole for a carpark.

I am sorry, but I will not get into it. If Deputy Kenny has a line question for the Minister for Health and Children for further detail, that is the place to put it.

She never answers questions.

Of course she answers questions. She answers any question that is put to her.

We wait six weeks for answers from the dysfunctional HSE.

Either we are going to have a serious discussion or we are not.

The revised programme for Government, which was published last year, states by way of a Government commitment:

We will introduce on a legislative basis a more open and transparent system for appointments to public bodies. The legislation will outline a procedure for the publication of all vacancies likely to occur, invite applications from the general public and from the responses. . .

I advise the Deputy that this is Question Time.

I am only reading from my notes. To continue, it states:

. . .create a panel of suitable persons for consideration of appointment. The legislation will also specify numbers of persons to be appointed by a Minister. . .

The Labour Party would be inclined to support such legislation were it introduced in the House by the Government. I have been looking through the legislative programme, which contains 91 Bills, but I cannot see this legislation anywhere on the programme. At what stage of preparation is the legislation and when are we likely to see it? If it is in the programme for Government, I presume this approach to the making of public appointments is Government policy. Why is the Government not implementing such an arrangement?

The period between the dissolution of a Dáil and the formation of a subsequent Government has tended to be a busy time for the appointment of people to State bodies.

I recall the fall of Deputy Gilmore's Government.

Will the Taoiseach give a commitment that no appointments will be made to State bodies after the Dáil is dissolved until the formation of a new Government?

The only commitment I would like to give Deputy Gilmore in that regard is that we will certainly not repeat something that happened on the demise of a Government in which he was a Minister of State. It purported to appoint people to health boards on dates when I was the Minister for Health and Children. We had a situation in which there was an effort made by an outgoing Government to appoint people to——

The Government has plenty practice of doing that.

——health boards in respect of vacancies which——

There is no chance of that happening again. The health boards are gone.

It is an interesting principle.

It has never been proven.

They were approved by a Government of which Deputy Gilmore was a member.

That is irrelevant. The Taoiseach should look to his own Government. Will he answer?

I will of course.

He has had plenty of time.

I am answering. I can give the commitment that that will certainly not happen.

The Government will not appoint anyone to any board.

No. An effort will be made——

The Government will not appoint any more people. Is that a promise?

I had to listen in silence.

Deputies, unless we can have some order in the House, the speaker cannot be heard.

Do they not hate this stuff?

I hate it, too.

Deputy Gilmore did it. He was a member of a Government that approved appointments to boards in respect of vacancies that arose during the time of a subsequent Government.

Not necessarily.

That was as good a trick as I ever came across. Members of Deputy Gilmore's party took up or sought to take up positions on that basis.

The current Government is the one that will be making the appointments.

Those members threatened legal proceedings afterwards in public commentary, that they would go to the highest court in the land to protect their reputations.

The Taoiseach is making me cry.

I never got a civil bill about it, but it was an interesting bit of bluster that went on at the time from members of Deputy Gilmore's party——

That is something with which Government Members are familiar.

——or the party of which he was about to become a member, to go back over his school day recollections just to make sure we got it right.

The Taoiseach can get it right the next time.

The point is that vacancies arise and need to be filled. The continuity of boards requires it. The one commitment I will give unequivocally is that I will not try that trick.

That leaves a wide scope. The Government often did it.

Let us try the questions again. First, what has happened to the legislation promised in the programme for Government? Has it been dropped entirely? Will there be legislation on public appointments? Second, why is the Government not implementing this policy if it is Government policy? Third, I asked for a commitment from the Taoiseach that no appointments of any kind would be made from the date on which the Dáil dissolves until the election of a new Government.

Regarding the first matter, I am sorry for getting distracted for a moment.

It was not for the first time.

The Taoiseach is easily distracted.

I just wanted to put it on the record because I know it was important. There is only so much mock indignation one can take. Regarding the first point, these are commitments in the programme for Government and must be progressed during the tenure of the Government. I am sure that will be done. Second, it would constitute Government policy to implement that legislation. It is a commitment in the programme. Third, regarding vacancies that arise during the tenures of Governments, I would expect them to be dealt with in the appropriate way, where people with the requisite qualifications would be appointed. If Deputy Gilmore has any specific issue in mind, such as I recalled in the case I have just mentioned, I will take it up.

A final, short supplemental question. I have a number of other people offering.

The Taoiseach stated the legislation was being progressed. Which Minister has responsibility for introducing the legislation to the House?

It is a matter of course, since it is a commitment in the programme for Government. The matter will be progressed.

"Would be".

"Will be". I cannot give the Deputy the details about where it is at, but I can come back to him on the matter.

Which Minister has responsibility?

I would have to check for the Deputy, but I would presume it is the Minister for Finance or the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

It is more than two years since the abuses among executives and board members of FÁS were exposed, yet the same appointments regime is in place despite repeated calls by this Deputy and others over many years for a system to which Deputy Gilmore has referred in the context of the new revised programme for Government, which comes under the heading "Enhancing Our Democracy and Public Services". That is exactly the set of arguments I had been putting year on year, so I welcome its inclusion. Apart from the points already alluded to, it also indicates appropriate appointments via Oireachtas committees. Committees would have the potential to nominate to a panel for consideration for appointment to various boards, which is something I would also welcome.

The critical point is the drafting of the promised legislation. The Taoiseach is very vague and uncertain this morning. Has he any idea whether the drafting of that Bill has even commenced? Is it only an aspiration in the revised programme or is it a serious intent? In general, appointments to boards happen in groupings at different times. Can we be certain that before the next tranche of appointments is proceeded with this legislation will be in place and we will be able to access the best, most available and willing among our citizenry to offer of their services to State boards into the future? That is the critical point. Is the legislation being drafted in order that it can be passed through the Houses, where the Taoiseach can anticipate little, if any, opposition? That will depend on the detail but concerning the principle I indicate my support and I expect the other Opposition voices will do likewise. Would the Taoiseach be prepared to ensure the legislation is in situ before a further tranche of appointees to State boards is made?

As I said, these questions relate to appointments I have made to agencies or boards under my own aegis and I provided that information. I am now being asked about the position of particular legislation. If a question has been drafted I can deal with it. However, regardless of the drafting of a question, when supplementary questions are raised I will get the information and forward it to the Deputies asking the questions.

This is not a national issue. Approximately €350 million is paid out in allowances to private landlords or their tenants. I understand that last year the Government decided to transfer responsibility from the HSE to the Department of Social Protection in respect of this payment but this is being held up by an industrial dispute internal to the Department.

I do not believe this matter is contemplated in this group of questions.

It is about legislation. If the Ceann Comhairle bears with me, every Member in the House will be interested and I shall take only 20 seconds.

When that transfer is made will the Taoiseach legislate to ensure that the code of behaviour which applies to the behaviour of tenants will apply also to this scheme? There is a code of behaviour that applies to local authority tenants but not to the tenants of private landlords who receive public moneys. Will the Taoiseach legislate to correct that?

The Deputy should table a parliamentary question to the line Minister.

I did so but did not receive a proper answer. Why does the Ceann Comhairle think I am asking the question?

I understand a review of the residential tenancies board is taking place to which I believe that situation applies. A review of relevant legislation may be able to accommodate the amendment the Deputy suggests, if it is required.

What is expected of appointees to State boards? In the event of an appointed member having a strong opinion that a procedure is not in the interest of the public or of taxpayers, what is expected? Is the person expected to resign or is he or she fired? Is there a standard procedure in those circumstances?

If there is a person on a board who is not happy with Government policy he or she has the option to resign from the board and a replacement can be found. The purpose, as is usual in this instance, is to implement the policy of the Government and if, for any reason, good, bad or indifferent, a person has a different point of view he or she has that option. The option is not such that where persons find themselves in opposition the Government is expected to change the policy to accommodate them.

I have a quick supplementary question.

It must be very quick.

This is fundamental to the question of appointments. I will be very brief. On the appointment of a chairman or a board member, is it made clear to the appointees that they must adhere at all times to Government policy, regardless?

In regard to agencies and boards appointed there is a relationship with the line Department which usually sets the overall policy framework. The operational responsibilities of providing the service, if that is what the agency does, or of the making of commercial decisions in a commercial semi-State body, for example, are made by the actual company. If there are major strategic issues they wish to address these are addressed by the board and the chairman of the board will inform the Minister accordingly and presumably ensure that anything being contemplated would be broadly in line with overall Government objectives. That is the slight difference between such a company and a private company.

The shenanigans, as I term them, at FÁS were referred to. Earlier this year I asked the Taoiseach whether any progress was being made on the request from the Committee of Public Accounts to strengthen its role by looking at the situation vis-à-vis the Data Protection Act.

The Deputy is broadening the range of the two questions.

Every other Member has had a question answered. Why is the Ceann Comhairle picking on me?

I know but it is inappropriate.

My question is reasonable. We asked the Government——

It must be asked at a reasonable time by submitting a parliamentary question to the line Minister. It might be more appropriate.

They do not answer.

There are many other delays, a Cheann Comhairle. I am merely asking a reasonable question that I believe to be relevant.