SIPO nomination and judge appointment
The Taoiseach defended the SIPO nominations and said the Supreme Court appointment followed the constitutional process and a JAAB recommendation. He rejected claims that the House should question the Minister on the selection and said such a move would breach the separation of powers.
The motion regarding greyhound racing is a simple referral to the committee and a debate will of course be accommodated once the matter comes back from the committee to the House. A debate will be facilitated on that issue.
As regards the nomination to SIPO, the Government is nominating Mr. Justice Garrett Sheehan and Ms Geraldine Feeney to fill two vacancies which arose in the commission in February, namely, those of chair and of an ordinary member. Notwithstanding that there has been some controversy surrounding the National Association of General Practitioners, the nomination of former Senator Feeney is being made in line with the requirements of the legislation, as is that of Mr. Justice Sheehan. Both candidates bring experience and skills which will benefit the operation of the commission. As set out in section 2(2)(b)(v) of the Standards in Public Office Act 2001, one of the ordinary members of the commission must be a former Member of a House of the Oireachtas. Former Senator Feeney served in the Seanad between 2002 and 2011 and was seen as a competent person who acted with integrity at all times. I regret some of the comments that have been made in respect of the former Senator. They are not merited.
Comment on this
People are not debarred from serving on a commission of that kind just because of one particular issue at one particular time. She is eligible and has experience as a public representative. I think people who served with her in the Seanad would accept her fairness, integrity and her experience of regulatory affairs, which will be an asset to the commission. She registered as a lobbyist, along with other former Members of this House who have done the same.
Comment on this
What about the activity on 21 March?
Comment on this
On the selection of Mr. Justice Woulfe, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB, recommended that he was suitable for appointment.
There was a selection process held by the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB, and chaired by the Chief Justice. It included the Presidents of the Four Courts, in addition to representatives of the Law Society, the Bar Council and lay members. It recommended that Mr. Justice Séamus Woulfe was suitable for appointment by the Government.
Comment on this
There is a parallel process-----
Comment on this
There is a clear process for the appointment of a judge by the Government set out in the Constitution and in law. The process has been fully complied with in this case. Only one name-----
Comment on this
On 9 March, JAAB met and decided to recommend Séamus Woulfe as being suitable for appointment to the Supreme Court.
Comment on this
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Tuesday's business be agreed to."
Do you agree with this result?