A situation whereby Dáil representatives feel excluded from parliamentary politics is not sustainable, writes Muiris Mac Carthaigh
The ongoing confrontations in the Dáil - including those between the Ceann Comhairle and Labour Party leader Pat Rabbitte over opposition leaders' rights under Dáil standing orders - raise an issue which, though technical, is of fundamental importance to our system of democratic politics.
To the casual observer, the difference between leaders' questions, questions on the order of business and priority questions is perplexing, yet the importance of these procedures cannot be overestimated. The most valuable commodity in any parliament is time, and much of parliamentary politics in western Europe is concerned with controlling the parliamentary agenda.
When compared to other EU legislatures, the executive in Ireland has traditionally maintained a significant advantage over the opposition in deciding what will constitute parliamentary business. Even in the House of Commons, itself regarded as the embodiment of "winner takes all" politics, the parliamentary opposition is afforded considerable opportunity for raising issues of concern.
Take, for example, the 13 Fridays in the year when time is set aside for debate on legislation by non-government members (Private Members' Bills), or the 20 days annually when that House is controlled by the two main opposition parties. By contrast, only three hours a week are made available under Dáil standing orders for opposition business, and it is not unusual for this time to be used by the government as needs require.
Indeed, the passing of legislation introduced by non-government members is an extremely rare occurrence in the Oireachtas. In such an environment, it is hardly surprising that members on the opposition benches (and sometimes even government back benches) give voice to their frustrations.
The 171 rules and procedures which govern the work of Dáil Éireann have been amended by successive governments since independence in a manner that has steadily reduced the opposition's ability to shape the parliamentary agenda.
The initiative allowed them in legislative matters, the questioning of ministers, or deliberation over matters of public concern have been increasingly circumscribed by governments eager to implement their policies.
One major exception to this was the addition in 2001 to standing orders of a practice whereby opposition leaders were allowed to raise matters of "topical public importance" on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. However, the determination of whether any issue is indeed of topical public importance is the responsibility of the Ceann Comhairle.
It is his duty to see that parliamentary affairs are expedited as efficiently as possible and so a Ceann Comhairle may be reluctant to allow many interruptions to the planned agenda.
For Irish governments, Dáil standing orders relative to public business exist to protect their right to govern in an otherwise tempestuous political environment, and they do not relish the prospect of concessions and the loss of control they might represent.
For their part, opposition parties are particularly sensitive to the interpretation of these rules that appear to strengthen the advantages they confer on government, and which in their opinion conspire to seriously inhibit their democratic duty of inquiring into the work of the executive. Tensions inevitably arise at these precious opportunities to interrogate and potentially embarrass governments within an otherwise tightly controlled parliamentary timetable.
The Labour Party has a long tradition of calling for reform of standing orders, and as far back as 1968 published a set of proposals calling for "greater facilitation of private members in the business of the Dáil".
Fine Gael took up the mantle of parliamentary change in 1980 with its publication Reform of the Dáil and John Bruton's reforms (including an experimental committee system) were groundbreaking if somewhat short of the original Fine Gael proposals. Subsequent proposals concerning reform of Dáil procedures by Fine Gael in 1990 and 2000, and by the Labour Party in 2002, have met with little success.
The scramble by non-government parties for speaking and questioning rights has become even more acute with the introduction of several smaller parties to the Chamber.
In the final analysis, incumbent governments in the Dáil see little point in introducing amendments to parliamentary procedures which might hinder their capacity to pursue their parliamentary work programme. Opposition parties tend to castigate ministers for guillotining debate or adopting a minimalist approach to answering parliamentary questions; yet such practices become very attractive when opposition frontbenchers suddenly find themselves as ministers of complex and large government departments.
However, a situation whereby elected representatives feel that they are excluded from participation in parliamentary politics is unsustainable. Of course, most decisions on matters of public policy are not made in the Dáil, yet the public questioning of government by elected representatives is fundamental to the deliberative process which endows legitimacy on the decisions taken by government. Indeed, the failure to link the issues before various tribunals of inquiry and committee investigations of recent years to ineffective parliamentary procedures and mechanisms of parliamentary oversight has meant that prescribed remedies have arguably not dealt with root causes.
The Constitution (under Article 28.4.1) demands that the government "shall be responsible to Dáil Éireann", and it is essential that mechanisms are in place that allow TDs effectively to inquire into the work of the public administration, as well as other matters of public concern.
After all, Dáil standing orders are there to ensure that the contribution of the House to issues of public policy is maximised, and not to grant one side of the Chamber privilege over the other.
Dr Muiris Mac Carthaigh is author of Accountability in Irish Parliamentary Politics, published by the Institute of Public Administration