Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Not surprisingly, head 6 states that the external oversight body shall be independent in the performance of its functions subject to the Act. Is Professor MacCraith satisfied as to the independence of the body in the context of what has already been prepared and drafted? I note that under head 8, a provision that there shall be a chair and six, Professor MacCraith has commented on a proposed change to allow for a minimum of seven and a maximum of nine. I do not know what the average is but a chair and six would appear to be somewhat tight having regard to the fact that one of the six is the Secretary General of the Department. I do not wish to impugn in any way the position of the Secretary General but it would seem to be potentially conflicting if one of the five ordinary members of a body that is keen to establish its independence is the Secretary General of the Department. It is hugely important that independence be established. Professor MacCraith mentioned independence and autonomy. Is he satisfied that there is no potential compromise or conflict about having ex officio the Secretary General of the Department? In this regard, I look across other Departments and look, for example, at oversight bodies such as GSOC and the Policing Authority with different powers, structure and form. It would be unconscionable to suggest the Secretary General of the Department of Justice would be a member of GSOC. I do not think it would be acceptable if the Secretary General of the Department of Justice was a member of the Policing Authority. Is Professor MacCraith satisfied as to the independence, particularly having regard to a rather narrow focus and structure with a chair and six? If there was a chair and more than six, which Professor MacCraith mentioned in his submission, what further membership might be appropriate in these circumstances? What is on Professor MacCraith's mind in terms of an extra member? Professor MacCraith stressed the need for autonomy. Has the current board envisaged or even contemplated any restriction under the current proposal?