Pa Daly: Why Sinn Féin is challenging the Government on super junior ministers
The case challenges what I believe is a deeply problematic and unconstitutional practice that has taken root in recent decades - the attendance and participation of so-called super junior ministers at meetings of the Government.
This case is a constitutional challenge aimed at protecting the integrity of our system of government under Bunreacht na hÉireann with which Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Lowry-led Independents are playing fast and loose.
The Constitution is clear. Article 28.1 states that 'the Government shall consist of not more than 15 members'. That is not a guideline, a suggestion, or an ideal. To me, this is a legal limit on the number who may be part of the Government.
The practice of allowing super junior ministers to attend Cabinet meetings, contribute to discussions and access all Cabinet documentation, amounts, in effect, to treating them as full members of Cabinet. That is, in our view, in clear breach of the Constitution.
While super junior ministers do not have a formal vote at Cabinet, that argument is largely academic. As former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar himself acknowledged earlier this year, votes at Cabinet happen rarely, if at all.
What matters is that super junior ministers are regularly present, bring memos for decision, and are deeply involved in the executive decision-making process. They are treated, in all meaningful respects, as equals to Cabinet ministers, without being bound by the same legal framework and without the constitutional permission to operate in that role.
This, we will argue, undermines the core principles of collective Cabinet responsibility and Cabinet confidentiality. The Constitution guarantees that the Government speaks with one voice and that its internal workings are conducted within a protected, confidential framework.
This is necessary to ensure stability, coherence, and accountability. When individuals who are not legally members of the Government are present, that principle is eroded. Cabinet confidentiality is diluted, and the chain of collective responsibility becomes blurred.
Let's be clear, this is not a historical anomaly. The attendance of a Minister of State at Cabinet first occurred in 1994 under the Rainbow Coalition. Every government since has perpetuated this arrangement.
But that doesn't make it right - nor does it make it legal, but we believe that it is time for the courts to adjudicate on the issue. We have reached a point now where four super junior ministers of State are incentivised, via public funds, to operate as Cabinet members in all but name.
I believe that this is incompatible with the Constitution. It effectively uses taxpayer money to encourage a practice that breaches the constitutional limits placed on the composition and function of Government. That should concern every citizen, regardless of party or politics.
We are told this is a matter of practicality or political expediency. We're told it helps the government run more smoothly or allows for more inclusive voices at the table.
Who is running the Government?
But when Michael Lowry TD - someone who brokered a deal between Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and the Regional Independent Group - states publicly that super juniors 'will sit at the Cabinet table, have access to all Cabinet papers, contribute at Cabinet, and attend all leaders' meetings,' we must ask - who is really running the Government?
This arrangement isn't about good governance. It's about maintaining power through political horse-trading. It is about doing deals behind closed doors and bending constitutional norms to fit political convenience.
It is now time to get clarity from the courts on the constitutionality of the issue. The Constitution must mean what it says. If we allow these lines to be blurred, we invite further erosion of the democratic checks and balances that are essential to our system of government and to our democracy.
This case is not about party politics. It is not about those who currently serve as super junior ministers. But the constitutionality of their role at Cabinet I believe must be clarified.
A culture has developed where constitutional boundaries can be bent by political deal-making. The cost is the loss of public trust in politics and the weakening of our democratic institutions.
This case is about reasserting the rule of law, reaffirming the authority of Bunreacht na hÉireann, and ensuring that the Government operates as the Constitution demands. Anything less would be a disservice to the people of Ireland.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
2 hours ago
- RTÉ News
EU to publish expanded list of US tariff countermeasures
Tánaiste Simon Harris has said the European Commission will later publish an expanded list of tariff countermeasures which the EU would consider introducing should an agreement with the US not be reached. Speaking after a meeting with the new US ambassador to Ireland Ed Walsh, he said the Government would analyse the list once it was published. "Tariffs always hurt. Tariffs are never good. So there's time between now and 1 August to arrive at the very least, at a framework deal, a declaration that can deescalate this situation, provide certainty for businesses, protect jobs and investment," he said. Mr Harris, who described the new ambassador as a close contact and friend of US President Donald Trump, said that Ireland and the EU now has to prepare for all situations. The Tánaiste said: "He (Mr Trump) is negotiating in the way he wishes to. It's not the way we'd like to do it. "We prefer to do things like sitting around the table, thrashing out the detail and then getting to a good place. "I think we were very close to that last week of having at least a short framework agreement to calm things down. "It's incredible that that didn't get over the line, but I still remain confident it can happen in the days ahead." His meeting with Mr Walsh at the Department of Foreign Affairs was described as constructive and substantive. Mr Harris also raised the issue of stricter guidelines around the future issuing of J1 visas which will examine students online content. "I was making the point that we live in a country where young people have very, very strong views.... and they've every right to express their views. Freedom of speech matters," he added. Harris says there is landing zone for tariffs agreement Earlier, Mr Harris said he believes there is a landing zone for an agreement in principle that could be reached with the US on tariffs in advance of the imposition of higher rates on 1 August. Mr Harris said an agreement in principle on trade and tariffs would avoid the imposition of the higher tariffs referenced in Mr Trump's high stakes letter to the European Commission President over the weekend. His remarks come as European Commissioner Michael McGrath said that in the event of 30% tariffs being introduced by the US, the European Union's response will be "firm, quick and robust". Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, Mr McGrath, who is the Commissioner responsible for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, said that the EU remains in a process of intense negotiations with the US. He added that he believes that progress had been made over the course of the talks, as they work towards the revised deadline of 1 August. "We are particularly conscious of the need, insofar as possible, to remove uncertainty for businesses, because we know how damaging that is to international trade, to the prospects and the investment decisions of companies," Mr McGrath said. "Tariffs are ultimately paid for by somebody along the supply chain, most likely by the end consumer, and tariffs are also damaging to workers because they undermine the viability of companies," he added. Mr McGrath described the trade relationship between the EU and US as "mutually beneficial, supporting millions of jobs on both sides of the Atlantic". "We are negotiating very professionally, in good faith, and we are seeking the best possible deal for European companies because we recognise the importance of trade peace, the importance of stability and of certainty around terms of trade," he said. Mr McGrath said that the EU and the US need to work together to tackle issues surrounding global trade and added that the EU stands ready to intensify dialogue. "But let me be clear, in the event of that not being successful and of the 30% tariff threat that was issued by President Trump coming to pass in two and a half weeks' time, then the European response will be firm, it will be quick, and it will be robust," he said. Mr McGrath said that the EU has been preparing for a range of different scenarios and stressed the importance of unity on behalf of all of the member states. He said: "There are two different sets of packages of countermeasures that amount to the imposition of tariffs of exports from the US into the EU of over €90 billion; we do not wish for that to come to pass. "We have a range of instruments and tools, the EU is in a strong position, and these negotiations are ongoing, and we're doing everything we possibly can to get a good outcome for European companies." Regarding whether the EU might be willing to relax the rules on the regulation of big tech companies as a compromise, Mr McGrath said that the rules are not part of the trade negotiations. "As an EU, we have to uphold our own autonomy and integrity and our right to set our own rules - those rules apply not just to big US tech companies, but also to Chinese companies and indeed to European companies as well," he said. Mr McGrath said that there have been discussions with the US administration surrounding the terms of trade. "We have been generous in our offers, we have put forward proposals around zero for zero tariffs for a whole range of different goods," he said. The European Commissioner said: "The EU is a world leader in international trade ... the US relationship is critically important, we want to continue to invest in it and support it. "But we were we are also getting our own house in order by ensuring we diversify our trade relationships, improve the competitiveness of the European economy and break down the remaining barriers in the single market." He described it as "vital", in addition to the track which the EU is already taking to get "the best deal we can with the US". Countermeasures 'ready to be used' EU spokesperson on Trade Olof Gill said Mr Trump's surprise announcement threatening the tripling of tariffs does not "substantially change" the EU's approach. He said the bloc was given advance warning by the US Administration that it would be making the move. "Different parties use different approaches in negotiations - carrot and stick is a standard approach, I suppose you could interpret this 30% threat as the American stick," he said. "We also have a stick on the EU side and that is the substantial rounds of countermeasures we've been preparing," he added. Mr Gill said such measures are "on the table and they're ready to be used if we need them". However, he said the EU is focusing on negotiations, rather than taking a more aggressive approach. "For the moment, we need to really focus on getting an agreed solution over the line," he said. Speaking on RTÉ's Today with Claire Byrne, Mr Gill said: "We were very close to doing so last week, we believe such an agreement is within reach, and I think you'll see that the alternative ... is ready to go. "We don't need to do anything more in that sense, if and when we need to deploy it, we can deploy it, but we don't feel we're at that stage just yet." The EU spokesperson said countermeasures are not a priority for the EU and described tariffs as a "terrible idea". "We believe we should be doing everything we can to avoid this and that's going to continue to be our approach," he added. Mr Gill said Mr Trump's tariff threats should be taken seriously, adding "the repercussions are perfectly serious".
Irish Post
4 hours ago
- Irish Post
Ireland's neutrality increasingly under the spotlight
AS NATO defence spending dramatically ramps up, especially because of Russia's war in Ukraine, Ireland's long-standing stance of military neutrality is coming under more scrutiny. The Irish government says it doesn't want to join NATO, but recent events have made people think more seriously about whether neutrality is still viable in a world that has seen many, including usually non-combative countries like Germany and those in Scandinavia, dramatically increase defence spending. Ireland is very important strategically because of its position in the North Atlantic and is a hub for underwater cables that carry much of the world's internet traffic and money transfers. There have been genuine threats in recent years of Russian submarines working near these cables, raising concerns about possible sabotage or spying. Russian military planes have also been entering Irish airspace in recent years and often don't alert civilian aviation authorities on the ground. Ireland doesn't have any fighter jets or the ability to keep secure its vast maritime territory, so it relies largely on NATO countries, especially Britain, to keep an eye on its skies and waters. Some EU officials have criticised this reliance, saying that Ireland is getting NATO's protection without contributing itself. Irish politicians have said again and again that they want to stay neutral, but other EU and NATO countries have said they would favour Ireland joining the alliance in the future. The president of Lithuania was eager and vocal in a recent interview with The Times about the concept of Ireland joining NATO one day: he said that democratic countries confront similar threats and that a bigger alliance makes it harder for destabilising forces to get in. Even while there is pressure from outside, there is still a lot of reluctance to joining NATO. Former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar recently stressed how much it will cost Ireland to meet NATO's defence budget commitments. He said that to reach a 5% GDP target, Ireland would have to spend more on defence than it does on health right now. This could mean that money would have to be taken away from other public services. Varadkar, who used to advocate more defence spending through European cooperation structures, said that joining NATO would be too expensive and that he's 'never been so glad' Ireland is not in the alliance. However, the 5% target is really a 3.5% target, as the remaining 1.5% can be spent on practically anything from infrastructure to healthcare. President Michael D. Higgins has also spoken out against the world's growing arms race. He criticised the funding of new weapons, saying that it takes attention and resources away from other important global problems, including poverty, environmental damage and social inequity. Ireland spends only around 0.27% of its GDP on defence, very far beneath NATO or other western nation's standards. Although Ireland has a 'Memorandum of Understanding' with Britain (non-binding), critics say that if Ireland wants to keep getting the security help it gets from NATO partners, it may need to do more to help with collective defence or at least change what it means to be neutral. While many still value neutrality as a cornerstone of Ireland's identity, others believe the time has come for a more pragmatic approach. See More: Defence, Michael D Higgins, NATO, Russia, Russia-Ukraine War
Extra.ie
4 hours ago
- Extra.ie
National History Museum still showing no sign of life 3 years later
The Government is unable to provide a start date for refurbishment works on the historic National History Museum – despite more than €1m having been spent on consultants since the project was given the green light more than three years ago. And museum and Department of Arts and Culture officials are set to face a grilling from the Dáil spending watchdog over what has been described as the 'funereal' pace of the refurbishment works. The National History Museum (NHM), located beside the Taoiseach's offices on Merrion Street, is a much-cherished part of Dublin's cultural identity. However, it has faced a series of temporary closures to allow for refreshment works to the dilapidated building over the past 15 years. The Government is unable to provide a start date for refurbishment works on the historic National History Museum. Pic: BOULENGER Xavier/Shutterstock In 2010 the museum was forced to close its upper galleries because they were deemed to be unsafe for visitors to access. Ten years later, it was temporarily shut again to facilitate the removal of whale skeletons suspended from the roof, and the packing and removal of 20,000-plus specimens. The museum – popularly known as the 'Dead Zoo' – reopened in 2022, but only the ground floor was accessible to members of the public. On September 1 last year, the NHM was shut again for an extensive refurbishment to enable the full decant of specimens. More than €1m has been spent on consultants since the project was given the green light more than three years ago. Pic: BOULENGER Xavier/Shutterstock But no date has been provided for when the NHM will be able to reopen amid growing political concerns over the length and the cost of the works. In January 2023, then Arts and Culture Minister Catherine Martin approved the commencement of the design phase for the refurbishment. However, the Arts and Culture Department has confirmed the works are still only at the 'pre-tender-project design, planning and procurement strategy phase'. In response to parliamentary queries from Social Democrat TD Aidan Farrelly, the department now headed up by Minister Patrick O'Donovan confirmed €1.07m has been spent on the project since December 2022. The slow rate of progress has accelerated concerns within Government that the revamp could turn into what one Coalition source described as another 'Metro style project; something that lasts for years, never gets started, and the bill just keeps going up.' Minister Patrick O'Donovan. Pic: Leah Farrell/ Of the €1.07m costs since December 2022, €735,316 was spent on 'external consultants and contractors'. The largest single bill among the 30-plus companies who invoiced the department for work during the preliminary stage was for €282,900, which was paid to 'the tourism company' T/A Sherwood & Associates for 'Project Coordination Service'. Another company, O'Kennedy Fundraising Services Limited, was paid €89,579.37. In his parliamentary question, Deputy Farrelly sought an update on the NHM refurbishment and the date when it is 'expected to reopen'. He also asked Minister O'Donovan if he or his officials had been made aware of any 'issues, difficulties, challenges or areas of concern' relating to the works. But three and a half years later, the Minister was unable to provide a completion or even a commencement date. Mr O'Donovan said: 'The development of a complex project such as this is based on a thorough business case process, a detailed design and the input of specialist expertise. This means the redevelopment of the museum is taking place in line within the framework of the Infrastructure Guidelines, set out by the Department of Public Expenditure.' The National History Museum (NHM), located beside the Taoiseach's offices on Merrion Street, is a much-cherished part of Dublin's cultural identity. Pic: BOULENGER Xavier/Shutterstock The Minister noted the department, together with the OPW and National Museum of Ireland, 'have an agreed structure for the institutional oversight, governance and operational arrangements for the redevelopment programme.' However, the Kildare North TD and member of the Dáil spending watchdog was not impressed with the pace of the museum refurbishment works and he told the Irish Mail on Sunday: 'I will be referring this to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) for scrutiny.' The OPW has found itself in the public spotlight over a series of overspending controversies including the €336,000 allocated for a Dáil bicycle shed; €1.4m spent on a security 'hut' at Government Buildings, and €490,000 of taxpayers' money on a 70m wall outside the Workplace Relations Commission headquarters. Mr Farrelly added: 'What we don't want is a repeat of the bicycle shed and the wall. There are serious question marks over the capacity of certain organisations to deliver. The PAC and the project is an opportunity for the OPW and the Department to prove they have learnt their lessons.' The MoS sought details of the total spending on works at the NHM since it was forced to close its upper galleries back in 2010, but the OPW and the department were unable to provide an overall figures. An OPW spokesperson would only say: 'The Natural History Museum refurbishment project is currently in the initial project design phase. Last year architects Fitzgerald Kavanagh & Partners were appointed to lead the integrated design team. An extensive and comprehensive decant of the collection was required in advance of any investigative works.
