Skip to main content
Normal View

Proposed Legislation

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 20 February 2018

Tuesday, 20 February 2018

Questions (6, 7, 8, 9)

Brendan Howlin

Question:

6. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach the legislation under preparation or planned in his Department. [6883/18]

View answer

Joan Burton

Question:

7. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Taoiseach the legislation under preparation by his Department. [7295/18]

View answer

Mary Lou McDonald

Question:

8. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach the status of Bills under preparation in his Department. [8335/18]

View answer

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

9. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will report on legislation under preparation in his Department. [8432/18]

View answer

Oral answers (6 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 9, inclusive, together.

My Department has responsibility for the National Economic and Social Council, NESC. The NESC’s statutory basis is as a body under the framework of the National Economic and Social Development Office Act 2006. That framework is no longer necessary and the Government has agreed that it should be dissolved and the NESC itself placed on a statutory footing. Work is under way to prepare the heads of this Bill, and it is the only legislation being prepared in my Department.

The absence of specific legislation does not impede the NESC as regards carrying out its mandate. NESC's role is to analyse and provide advice on strategic policy matters relevant to Ireland's economic, social, environmental and sustainable development.

I see on the legislative programme that the only Bill in the Taoiseach's Department is the national economic and social development office (amendment) Bill to dissolve, as the Taoiseach said, the National Economic and Social Development Office, NESCO, and place the National Economic and Social Council, NESC, on a statutory footing. In terms of strategic thinking on Brexit as matters become very serious indeed, is there any legislative response envisaged by the Department? Has the Taoiseach's Department done any preparatory work on any legislation in the event of a hard Brexit? Has any consideration been given to what might be required from his Department regarding that very major issue?

First, as part of the announcements on the national planning framework and the national plan this week, the Taoiseach mentioned the development of a new quango, which I believe is to be called something like the planning and infrastructure agency. I understand that possibly will come under the remit of the Department of the Minister, Deputy Murphy. In the context of a whole-of-Government approach to issues, why would that not be associated with the Taoiseach's Department given that he has set so much store on strategic communications across Government and that it is a whole-of-Government issue?

Second, for a long time the NESC has been a social partnership organisation with views being elicited from employers, trade unions, academics and researchers. The Taoiseach may not be a fan of social partnership but at this stage in the country's development, does he agree that in developing legislation for NESC, in the context of the 2040 plan, it would make a good deal of sense to have a resourced social partnership structure which would draw in views? I have concerns that, as far as I can see, there is no reference in the plan to inner city and inner town areas which may see particular concentration of social disadvantage, for instance, many children from those areas not going on to college or apprenticeships. In the context of the ambitious plans for 2040, surely the NESC should be in a position to provide research and information about how we provide plans in our cities, towns and smaller villages where there are pockets of deep deprivation that would allow progress to be made in the context of the plan.

Gabhaim buíochas arís leis an Taoiseach as ucht a fhreagra. As he has confirmed, the legislative programme published in January lists just this one Bill sponsored by him and currently under preparation. As others have said, the purpose of the now omnipresent national economic and social development office (amendment) Bill, which has been listed as part of the Government legislative programme since 2013 and has been talked about since then Deputy Brian Cowen served as Taoiseach, is to abolish the National Economic and Social Development Office and to place the NESC on a statutory footing. When will the Bill be finally introduced? I know the NESC was effectively moribund for a time but I am also aware that the Taoiseach opened up a process recently for independent appointments to the council and that a work programme is in place.

Has there been interest in or progress on appointments? When does the Taoiseach expect the process to be completed?

As for the work programme, I agree that challenges relating to deprivation, disadvantage and poverty are of huge concern in inner city and urban, but also rural settings. We should not miss the last. I also believe the phenomenon of precarious work must be tackled and weighed. Finally, the work programme must address environmental protection and climate change which, to be frank, the Government, as with its predecessors, does not have a handle on and in respect of which it has failed to demonstrate any credible ambition. Those jump out as three key context issues and then there is, of course, Brexit and all that is unfolding around us.

I am aware of the legislation under consideration by the Taoiseach's Department. In relation to previous correspondence, however, it may be important for the Taoiseach to consider legislating for the strategic communications unit, or SCU, and consider the statutory underpinning of it. He says it is important to communicate what the Government does and he talks about roads and so on, but thus far, all the communication has been party political with Ministers front and centre. One analyst in the news media described it as "Pyongyang on the Garavogue", which was an insightful observation. All of the videos I have seen thus far are of Ministers and it is not actually hard information for the public. It says we are going to do roads and schools in 2024 to 2030. However, the real information people want through TII on a major road project like the N28 is not glossy brochures, it is the number of CPOs along the route, as well as information about the alignment and direction of the route. It is the same with the Macroom bypass, any motorway project or the A5. The real public information, which is hard to get from time to time and which is not provided by the strategic communications unit, is how a project affects residential amenity and the community. That is hard information the Government should be providing to the public transparently and openly without any political context. It is about hard, objectively-sourced information.

I put it genuinely to the Taoiseach that there is a real danger in what is happening here and I do not think he gets it. There is a muddying of the waters and an overlap between strictly Government information and political communication and information. This is an ongoing thing with various programmes and it runs a real risk of corrupting the democratic process over time. We must look at that and set down very clear parameters. I ask the Taoiseach and the Secretary General of his Department to consider a legislative underpinning for this setting out clear parameters as to how Government, as distinct from party political, communications should work. Following the McKenna judgment on referenda, I recall the rigid demarcation early on in Lisbon 1 and 2 that had to be followed as to what Departments could spend money on and do and what political parties could do. We observed that very rigidly to ensure there was no crossover which could contaminate the outcome of a referendum campaign. We saw that in the children's referendum when the courts found that errors were made in the Government's approach. It is a serious issue notwithstanding all the hilarity about billboards and the films. It merits consideration and I ask the Taoiseach to look at a legislative underpinning for the way in which the unit goes about its operations.

As a serious point, that is all covered by the Civil Service code of conduct. The Deputy can be assured that there will be no party political work and no involvement in any electoral matters or referendums which would bring us into conflict with the McKenna judgment.

As to legislation on NESC, the heads of a Bill will be brought forward but it is not a legislative priority for Government at present. The National Economic and Social Development Office, NESDO, was initially created under the National Economic and Social Development Act 2006 as a body corporate with three constituent parts, the NESC, the National Economic and Social Forum, NESF, and the National Centre for Partnership Performance, NCPP. The NESF and the NCPP were dissolved by order leaving the council as the only remaining body. Consequently, the framework of the 2006 Act is no longer necessary. As I stated in my reply, the absence of specific legislation does not impede the NESC in carrying out its mandate. Some time was taken to reflect on the role and working methods of the council following the end of the term of the previous council in 2016. This included consultation with outgoing members. There have been a number of changes aimed at making the council more effective. For example, the current council, which was appointed in May 2017, has fewer plenary meetings to allow more focused in-depth discussion of issues under consideration through working groups and committees. While council representation continues to include the various sectors, its overall membership has been reduced from 34 to 28 to ensure more efficient meetings while capturing a broad range of views. It is appropriate to allow these decisions to bed down in advance of finalising any legislative proposals.

Members are appointed under the Act and the National Economic and Social Council (Alteration of Composition) Order 2010. Each of the following sectors nominate representatives to the council in accordance with the legislation: business and employer interests, ICTU, farming and agricultural interests, community and voluntary sector and the environmental sector. The new council has three nominees per sector. The legislation also provides for six public servants to be appointed, which appointments have been made, and between seven and eight independent members, of whom three have been appointed. In October 2017, I made three appointments to the council on the basis of nominations received from farming representatives. The other members of the council were appointed by the previous Taoiseach in May 2017. I plan to make four further appointments to the council following the conclusion of an open process which is currently being conducted by the Public Appointments Service.

As to legislation which may be required from my Department in the event of a hard Brexit, we do not envisage any legislation being required of my office. However, it may the case that legislation would be required of other Departments, most notably the Departments of Finance and Justice and Equality. The new agency which Deputy Burton asked about will be under the auspices of the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. As the Department deals largely with housing, planning and development, that is the right home for the agency. It is intended that the body will acquire State land, bring it together and develop it, mainly for housing, but also, perhaps, for mixed use. We have seen similar models in the past with the redevelopment agencies in Limerick, Ballymun and the docklands, the last of which initially worked well and before it went very bad. Something based on that model would not sit appropriately in my Department and is best placed in the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government.

The modern iteration of social partnership involves consulting with and involving unions, employers and their representatives in major economic decisions and decisions which affect the labour market. That is very much alive and something which is done through a number of mechanisms. The Labour Employer Economic Forum, or LEEF, meets this week and I will chair the meeting. The meeting will be on Brexit and Project Ireland 2040 and will get input from unions and employers in respect of the latter. I am very heartened by the support of IBEC, Chambers Ireland and the IFA for Project Ireland 2040 and am very pleased that they came out so quickly in support of it. There was, I suppose, a mixed welcome from some of the trade union groups. For example, the INMO nursing union is very supportive of the health element of the plan. We are also able to engage with the social partners through the national economic dialogue, which occurs in the run up to the budgetary cycle. That has been very useful in helping us to frame the budget. There is also a social inclusion forum, which is a wider forum used to consult social partners.

Top
Share