Super-junior Ministers are treated “identically” to senior Ministers at Government meetings and can influence decision-making, former cabinet member Shane Ross has told the High Court.
Mr Ross, who served as minister for transport, tourism and sport from 2016 to 2020, on Wednesday gave evidence at the hearing of People Before Profit-Solidarity TD Paul Murphy’s High Court action challenging the attendance of super-junior Ministers at Cabinet meetings.
Cross-examinating Mr Ross, Attorney General Rossa Fanning suggested Mr Ross breached a constitutional obligation to respect cabinet confidentiality by publishing a book with accounts of discussions at cabinet meetings. Mr Ross denied any illegality, and said the book pertained to political matters of public interest.
“I thought it was justifiable, there was plenty of precedent for it,” he said.
READ MORE
Mr Murphy’s case alleges super-junior Ministers’ presence at Cabinet breaches this Cabinet confidentiality provision and several other sections of the Constitution.
Mr Murphy wants an injunction restraining super-juniors from going to Government meetings.
“Ministers of State attending Cabinet”, or super-junior Ministers, are appointed by the Government on the nomination of the Taoiseach. They participate at Government meetings but do not vote.
Senior government ministers are appointed by the president of Ireland on the advice of the taoiseach and with the prior approval of Dáil Éireann.
Mr Fanning is leading the State’s defence.
The hearing of Mr Murphy’s case immediately followed the conclusion of submissions in a similar case brought by Sinn Féin TD Pa Daly.
Mr Ross told the court super-junior ministers were treated “identically” to senior ministers in the context of cabinet meetings during his tenure in government.
Giving evidence, he agreed they were never “curtailed” from participating by virtue of their “nominally lower status”.
On one occasion, Finian McGrath, a super-junior minister between 2016 and 2020, “changed the government’s mind” on a specific cabinet decision after threatening to resign, Mr Ross said.
Put to him by Mr Fanning that there is a difference between having political influence and being a member of government, and that many people can exercise political influence, Mr Ross said being present at cabinet is “not just a matter of political influence”.
Super-juniors’ presence at meetings gives them a “special influence” over legislation, Mr Ross said. “I saw it; they have a much greater influence than other ministers of state.”
Taking to the witness box, Mr Murphy said super-junior Ministers are acting as de facto members of Government but are not accountable to or approved by the Dáil.
Similar to Mr Daly’s case, Mr Murphy’s case points to article 28 of the Constitution, which limits the number of Government members to 15, including the Taoiseach, and provides that they meet and act as a collective authority.
Mr Murphy’s senior counsel, John Rogers, said there is “no law whatsoever to say that a minister of state is permitted to be in the government”.
He said the Taoiseach and the Government have “usurped a power they don’t have” to bring strangers – in a constitutional sense – into the Government room.
Mr Rogers submitted that a “democratic principle” underpins the process by which deputies are nominated to Government by the Taoiseach and approved by the Dáil.
Counsel submitted that super-juniors attend participate in Government deliberations and decisions without any process of approval in the Dáil – unlike the 15 members of Government.
The case, sitting before three High Court judges, continues.
