The Government’s system for answering parliamentary questions is “closing in upon itself” in order to protect against elected representatives asking “awkward questions,” a TD has said.
It comes after last week’s revelation that there is concern some Government Ministers are failing to answer parliamentary questions adequately. There are two main categories of parliamentary question. They are either asked of the Taoiseach or a Minister for reply in person in the House, known as oral questions, or questions submitted where a Member of the Dáil seeks a written answer.
It emerged on Friday that the Clerk of the Dáil has written to the secretaries general across Government warning them that substantive answers must be provided to questions asked by TDs. The concerns, expressed to Taoiseach Micheál Martin and top civil servants in Government departments, came as Departments were informed that PQs must be answered in a timely manner, with the Clerk flagging “late replies.”
Ceann Comhairle Verona Murphy has received 65 complaints from TDs on this issue, with several elected representatives complaining that their questions were not being adequately answered.
Offaly TD Carol Nolan told Gript: “PQ’s are an essential tool not just for representing constituent concerns but also a platform through which the kind of forensic investigation of government and departmental policy takes place.
“However, I have noticed, along with many other members, that the replies are quite often copy and paste stock replies that often do not even refer to the specific issues raised. There is a tendency also to refer PQs on to state agencies, who rarely reply unless vigorously pursued.
“The same is true of the HSE where almost every issue is now deemed ‘operational’ and therefore under the remit of the HSE; even where questions are asked of policy formulation. The criteria for ruling PQs out of order or under which they are deemed disallowed are absurdly subjective.
“I recall one specific PQ that I submitted seeing updated information on costs provided to private solicitors or legal reps engaged in Free Legal Aid for immigration applications.
“The Minister wrote back saying the information was ‘commercially sensitive’ when in fact the same minister had provided the information with no question of sensitivity the year before! There is a clear sense that the system is closing in upon itself to protect against ‘awkward questions’ of the kind that I ask. You would be as well asking the Man in the Moon for granularity of detail in some replies than asking some departments,” Deputy Nolan added.
Standing Order 55 means that Government Ministers must answer “each and every request for information.” Mr Finnegan, in his correspondence with secretaries-general across the Government, stressed that questions were a “key mechanism of parliamentary accountability,” adding that a refusal to substantiate a reply “does not fulfill that accountability requirement.”
On three occasions, Ceann Comhairle Verona Murphy has formally compelled members of the Government to provide more detailed answers, and it is understood that Murphy herself has formally raised the issue with the Taoiseach.
For priority questions, a member has to give a notice period of three days, whilst a notice period of four days is required for ordinary oral questions. Four days notice must be given when submitting a question for the Taoiseach, whilst written questions need a notice period of three days. Questions must meet certain criteria, and may be disallowed if they do not.