I wish to raise with the Taoiseach the behaviour of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, in relation to a number of key issues. His remarks on the Judiciary have been unacceptable. He is utilising his position as a Minister to undermine and attack the judicial pillar in a politically populist way. In short, he does not have respect for the judicial pillar which is so central to our democracy. He has made very inaccurate comments about the Judiciary and the attitude of judges to the reform of the judicial sector. The Chief Justice had to come out publicly and make the point that the Judiciary had been seeking reform of the appointment of judges based on merit for quite some time, including by way of making a submission in 2014 and joining in a European declaration in 2012. The Minister, Deputy Ross, has been very cavalier, untruthful and disingenuous on the judges. It may play well, but it is not right for a Minister to use his ministerial platform to engage in such behaviour.

Added to above is the failure to fill up to 34 vacancies on State boards under his remit as Minister. These include the Road Safety Authority, Irish Rail, Dublin Bus, the Dublin Airport Authority, Transport Infrastructure Ireland, Fáilte Ireland and Sport Ireland, all of which are operating with depleted numbers simply because the Minister is refusing to appoint people. He has made various ridiculous comments to the effect that he cannot be expected to make decisions with so many names coming at him. I put it to the Taoiseach that there is a system in place on foot of the last Government's reforms, which is called the Public Appointments Service. It selects people to go forward for nomination by respective Ministers.

There are two vacancies in the Road Safety Authority, which is a very important authority. In the past decade we have made great progress in improving road safety, irrespective of who appointed who to boards. The authority needs more resources and so on and can make even further progress.

Ministers cannot go on solo runs on their own. The Minister has a responsibility under the collective Cabinet responsibility system to operate the rules as they currently apply, either in the appointment of judges or people to State boards. No Minister can set himself or herself up as a mini dictator and say no judges will be appointed unless he or she gets his or her way and that no one will be appointed to State boards within his or her remit unless he or she gets his or her way on the issue of reform. There are areas in which no one else has sought additional reform at this time.

Has the Taoiseach called in the Minister to inform him of his ministerial responsibilities? I am serious about this. The Minister needs to be spoken to because, in keeping within the principle of collective Cabinet responsibility, he has to operate the legal frameworks as they apply in the appointment of judges and the filling of vacant State board positions until they are changed. Will the Taoiseach speak to him about these issues? Does he think the Minister is right in his approach so far in the appointment of judges and his failure to fill vacancies on State boards?

I answered this question last week. The Constitution is very clear on the appointment of judges and members of the Judiciary. I made the point that the comments of the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, on judges and the oath they took were personal and did not reflect the view of the Government. I spoke to him about the matter.

The programme for Government 2016, as the Deputy knows, contains a commitment to significant reform of the judicial appointments process to make it transparent, fair and credible. The Department of Justice and Equality has undertaken extensive work on a judicial appointments Bill, including seeking all necessary legal advice. Serious changes are involved, underpinning the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, including the appointment of a lay chairperson, having a lay majority and a limitation of the number of candidates for posts to be filled by the Government. The Bill involves complex legal and constitutional questions on which detailed advice is necessary in order to proceed to finalising the general scheme of a new judicial appointments commission Bill. As the House is aware, the drafting, publication and enactment of the Bill cannot be completed overnight, especially in the current political context. It is the intention of the Tánaiste to submit legislative proposals to the Government in the next couple of weeks. Second Stage of a Private Members' Bill was passed on 26 October. The Bill was not opposed on the basis that the Tánaiste would very shortly bring forward a Government Bill on the matter.

Attention has been drawn to the increasing backlog in the new Court of Appeal and the stated requirement for additional judges to be available to the court. There is a preference in government for no further appointments being made until the new legislation is in place. There are existing vacancies in the courts and undoubtedly there will be more in the future. The requirements of the administration of justice will, of course, be taken into account by the Government on a continuous basis. There is no doubt that there is a necessity to legislate as quickly as possible for a judicial council and the Government is prioritising the Bill for publication in this session. It is firmly of the view that it is necessary to put in place a structure to deal with the allegations of judicial misconduct which fall below the level of what might warrant invoking Article 35.4 of the Constitution. It is also firmly of the view that it is necessary to provide a platform for the promotion of excellence and high standards of conduct by judges. As well as providing for the establishment of a judicial council and board that will promote excellence and high standards of conduct by judges, the proposed Bill will aim to provide a means by which allegations of judicial misconduct may be investigated by a judicial conduct committee. That model will provide for lay membership of the judicial conduct committee which will be an important and key element of the Bill.

On having a register of interests, an issue to which the Deputy has referred, the proposed judicial council Bill will provide for the establishment of a judicial conduct committee which will consider all of these matters. The Bill is expected to be published very shortly and the Minister will bring it before the House.

The Taoiseach did not mention in his reply the vacancies to State boards.

I will come to that in my supplementary answer. The boss man is here.

I asked the Taoiseach a basic question on vacancies to State boards, which was if he had spoken to the Minister about them, but he flatly ignored the question and refused to reply to it. On judicial appointments, the Taoiseach has announced a new departure today. In the past he said there was no such edict in terms of appointing judges, or failing to appoint judges. It seems the Taoiseach met the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, on the matter and the Taoiseach blinked, because he is now using new language to the effect that the Government has a preference now that it would not appoint any new judges until the new legislation is enacted in a couple of months' time. It is the combined behaviour of the Minister, Deputy Ross, including what he has said about the Judiciary, that I put to the Taoiseach. We have the separation of powers, but the Minister has in a cavalier way gone out to undermine it and the Taoiseach knows it. The Minister is doing it because he thinks it is popular and a nice message, but he is a Minister and he should not be doing it. The Legislature owes some respect to the judicial pillar and vice versa.

Deputy Martin's time is up.

Does the Taoiseach agree with the Minister's refusal to appoint people to State boards, including the Road Safety Authority and the others I mentioned? Has the Taoiseach spoken to the Minister on the need and his obligation to do so? Has the Taoiseach spoken to him about his collective Cabinet responsibility and how he should appoint people in accordance with the framework that has been laid down by the Government?

Jobs for the boys.

There is no blinking here. I answered Deputy Martin's questions on this before. There is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, but the Chief Justice has not requested it be filled. There is no vacancy on the Court of Appeal. I think there are two or three vacancies between the Circuit Court and the District Court.

There are three at Circuit Court level.

That is true. Obviously-----

Obviously they will not be filled.

Obviously, the preference of Government is to proceed with the Judicial Council Bill. Deputy Martin mentioned State boards. What happens now is that people apply online to the Public Appointments Service. Ministers of the day do not know who applies.

We know that.

They might encourage a few people.

The purpose of the Public Appointments Service is to determine if people are qualified and eligible to serve on particular boards. It is important for Deputy Martin to bear in mind that the Minister sets down the criteria required by him or her for service on those State boards so that the Public Appointments Service can see whether the applicants meet those criteria.

He should be able to pick a person.

I do not need to realise that. It is the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, who needs to realise it.

Long before Deputy Martin's time, it was a matter of just filling lists as they were received.

There are 36 vacancies that are not being filled.

It was normally done during the intermediate stage-----

Deal with the issue of the Minister, Deputy Ross.

-----between a Government going out and a Government coming in. In any event, I understand that the Minister, Deputy Ross, is now looking at the issue of the number of applicants who have been deemed to be eligible and qualified for the different State boards under his remit. The conditions and criteria for those are set down by individual Ministers. That is where the authority lies to set out the criteria and qualifications that are necessary.

Will the Taoiseach explain why they have not been filled?