Opposition plans for Dáil reform

The Dáil sub-committee on Dáil reform rarely meets, there are no minutes of its meetings and its last report was in 1997. Frustrated with lack of change and participation, Fine Gael and Labour have unveiled a short programme of reforms to 'make the Dáil more effective'. Muiris MacCarthaigh assesses their proposals

Fine Gael and the Labour Party have long traditions of publishing proposals for parliamentary reform – the Labour Party did so in 1968, 1975 and 2003, and Fine Gael in 1980, 1990 and 2000 – reflecting the fact that as the parties most frequently in opposition, they have the most to gain from reforming parliamentary procedures which currently give the Government strong control of the agenda in the 'winner takes all' Dáil environment.

While short on specifics, the ten-point plan reflects the common ground to be found between substantial publications on parliamentary reform by both parties in recent years. In September 2000, Fine Gael published "A Democratic Revolution", in which it severely criticised the inability of the Dáil to scrutinise government, complaining that "the difference between the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch has been fudged and obscured resulting in essentially political questions being referred to the Judicial Branch in either Courts or Tribunal for resolution." The party's proposed reforms at that time included better resourcing and recognition of the rights of the opposition, provision for the expulsion of deputies who breach ethical guidelines, and provision for the initiation of a parliamentary inquiry. In light of the DIRT inquiry's work, the party also called for greater financial independence for the Oireachtas, which has since occurred with the establishment of the Oireachtas Commission.

In October 2003, the Labour Party also produced a comprehensive package for Dáil reform. Titled "Putting our House in Order", the proposals called for a complete redrafting of Dáil standing orders and even considered the relationship of civil servants with the Houses of the Oireachtas. While many of the proposals mirrored those of Fine Gael, new ideas were also unveiled, most notably a new Committee of Investigations, Oversight and Petitions whose role would involve the initiation of investigations into matters of public concern.

Unsurprisingly, this new ten-point programme suggests reform of the 'usual suspects' that have long been used by opposition parties to berate governments which they accuse of not being "accountable". Longer sitting days, shorter recesses, more question time for Ministers and the Taoiseach, more time for the opposition to control the House and new mechanisms for raising issues of topical concern are called for. The programme also proposes that Dáil standing orders be amended in order to "place an obligation on ministers to ensure that questions are answered properly and fully". While there is certainly merit to examining the role of parliamentary questions in the governing process, it is unlikely that parliamentary oppositions will ever be fully satisfied with the responses received to questions, given the adversarial nature of the parliamentary game.

As in the past, these proposals for parliamentary reform have not caught the public's attention and the apparently obscure nature of Dáil business will continue to confuse even the interested observer. One might be forgiven for not knowing that there is actually a permanent Dáil sub-committee charged with the issue of Dáil reform. In July 1995, following a commitment in the Rainbow Coalition's programme for government to engage in Oireachtas reform, a Sub-Committee of the Dáil Committee on Procedure and Privileges was appointed to consider the issue of Dáil reform. The work of this Sub-Committee reached a high watermark with the recommendations of its first report in 1996. However, while the sub-committee is now a permanent feature of the Oireachtas and must be re-established by new governments, it has not produced a report since 1997 and the frequency of meetings has declined considerably since 2002. As of 2006, it has not made further progress in terms of restructuring standing orders in the Dáil, and establishment of the Oireachtas Commission aside, the impetus for parliamentary reform has slipped substantially.

The last substantial debate on Dáil reform took place almost two years ago in February 2004, when the Government stated that it was considering several changes to the parliamentary timetable included extending the sitting hours during the Dáil week, a weekly opportunity for committee chairmen to address the Dáil, and an hour per week to be made available for debate on committee reports. It was also proposed that the adjournment debate be replaced with a form of 'commencement' debate, to take place in the mornings and to allow discussion of topical issues. However, to date there has only been progress with respect to a dedicated TV channel and live webcast for parliamentary proceedings. The Sub-Committee on Dáil Reform meets sporadically (allegedly at any rate – no minutes of such meetings are published) but has made little progress on its remit.

Incumbent governments tend not to favour conceding elements of their agenda-setting advantage to the opposition. However, the last time Fine Gael and the Labour Party were in government, substantial progress was made on parliamentary reform and demonstrated a recognition by those parties that they needed to alter the 'rules of the game' to facilitate non-government members in parliamentary affairs. Whether the recent proposals by both parties will be acted on in the event of their accession to power in 2007 remains to be seen. While the adversarial nature of Irish parliamentary politics seems to militate against such an event, experience elsewhere demonstrates that a more active and co-operative parliamentary environment would be to everyone's benefit.

Dr Muiris MacCarthaigh is a research officer with the IPA, and author of the recently published Accountability in Irish Parliamentary Politics