by Kevin O’Farrell of Remuneration, Industrial Relations, and Pensions Division

Famous at last [Image courtesy of Pi Communications]

Studying English literature in university, I had tried to believe, with Shelley, that poets were ‘the true legislators of the world’; having become a civil servant, I know the truth is far less romantic…

Shortly after I joined the Department last year as an Administrative Officer in the Remuneration, Industrial Relations and Pensions Division, the talks which led to the Lansdowne Road Agreement commenced and quickly concluded. The terms agreed between the Government and the unions would mean that the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest suite of legislation would need to be amended. That summer, we were set the task of preparing that Bill.

Up to then just another acronym to me, FEMPI now revealed itself to be five very confusing Acts, each of which tended to further complicate its predecessors through amendments; a sort of legislative Russian doll. It was a relief however to at least be working on a Bill which would partially restore, rather than reduce, the pay and pensions of public servants.

My first meeting with experienced colleagues about FEMPI ’15 was something of a baptism of fire. Several of those attending were chief architects of the edifice we were aiming to scale down and there were many complex points made about certain sections and sentences that meant nothing to me then, but which I could probably recite by heart now. At the end of the meeting I was tasked with transforming several A4 pages of bewildered scribbles – my so called notes – into a draft Heads of Bill.

The Heads of Bill lists each of the sections of the Bill, states what they are to do (e.g. Amend section X of Act Y), and then states the rationale for this and its desired outcome, as well as flagging any potential issues in terms of either enactment or repercussions. It is essentially the plan for the Act and thus there were several long discussions and many edits before we had a document to submit to the Office of the Attorney General. (The Government having already given its approval for the Bill to be drafted, a necessary step.)

Our first meetings with our neighbours on Merrion Street were with one of the Advisory Counsel (the AG’s has two parts, reflecting its dual functions), who gave their opinion on the constitutionality of what the Bill aimed to accomplish and on the legal validity and efficacy of the means employed (e.g. a desired outcome might be better achieved through a different amendment than the one suggested). The advice offered was learned and succinct and a great aid in helping us refine the Heads. That being done, we were passed over to the other half of the AG’s: the Office of Parliamentary Counsel; the drafters who actually write the Bill, translating ordinary English with its multifarious imprecisions into a clipped, formal legalese, hard and clear as glass. We had extended correspondence and consultation with the drafters – I now appreciate that other people aside from writers and scholars care deeply about syntax and the precise placement of punctuation – and ultimately a text agreeable to both parties was produced.

This brought us to the last, and for me the most interesting, leg of our legislative journey: getting the Government’s final approval, followed by the enactment of the Bill. As neither I nor my immediate managers had any previous experience of the terrain we were entering, there was a lot of improvisation and many frantic phone calls, but thankfully we stumbled across the line somehow, Explanatory Memorandum in one hand and Memo to Government in the other. Help was never too far away, in the form of more experienced colleagues, and the staff in the Minister’s Office, Taoiseach’s and the Oireachtas were always happy (or at least, willing) to advise. In its second last meeting before the Budget, the Minister secured the agreement of the Government to publish the Bill.

Though the Bill would travel on through its several stages, with stops at a Dáil Committee, the Seanad and Áras an Uachtaráin before being signed into law, my own highlight was the first night in the Dáil chamber. To sit beside Minister Howlin in the section for Officials known as ‘the bull pen’ as he delivered the Second Stage speech I had written, setting out the Bill and the rationale behind it, was a memorable and exciting experience. After all, these words would be recorded for posterity, before being echoed by his colleagues and vociferously condemned from the Opposition benches. Viewing figures may have been low as the debate rumbled on into the night, but I was at the hub of our democratic system nevertheless.

The nature of the FEMPI legislation meant that the period between the conception of the Bill and its passage into law was unusually short, more a sprint than a marathon, but I still learnt a great deal in that time – far more than can be conveyed here – and hope many such opportunities will arise during my career.