Constitutional basis for Ministers not members of the Oireachtas

coylemj · 19-05-2020 1:15pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

A retiring PM absolutely does advise the monarch who to send for - normally.

If the PM is resigning because he has lost an election, he will advise the monarch to send for the victorious leader of the opposition.

If the PM is resigning because he has lost or stood down from the party leadership, he will advise the monarch to send for his successor as party leader.

In both cases, the monarch has no real choice but to comply. But note that, also, in both cases, the PM has no real choice about what advice to give.

The UK Institute for Government describes the various scenarios and talks about a document called the 'Cabinet Manual'. There is no mention of an automatic process whereby the outgoing PM advises the queen on who to call.

On the contrary, it says that the PM may be asked for advice on who can form a government but if advice is given in that scenario, it is advice with a lowercase 'a' i.e. it's informal advice which the queen is not bound to act on.....

The Cabinet Manual emphasises that the Queen should be kept out of politics and that ensuring she is able to appoint a successor is a role that "falls especially on the incumbent Prime Minister", who may also be asked to advise her on who is best placed to be appointed. It is advice with a lower-case a.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/appointment-prime-ministers

Caquas · 19-05-2020 3:13pm

moon2 wrote: »

Let's be accurate with our phrasing here, you're referring to our elected officials who continue to fill their constitutional role, as expected, while the new government is being formed.

I’m being perfectly accurate but your phrase ”elected officials” is a confusing misnomer. Who elected them? This government was elected by the previous Dail (remember how Leo couldn’t wait to ditch Enda and then Leo emerged as the winner of FG’s weird process although Simon was “the people’s champion”. Sin scéal eile)

The current crew are continuing to act as Ministers although they were obliged to resign because the Taoiseach was defeated (in fact, trounced) when he sought re-election. Two of the Ministers don’t even have a mandate from their own constituents.

All this is perfectly constitutional but it is a blot on our democracy and the responsibility rests with the 160 T.D.s we elected on 7 February. Remember when politicians used to boast about their first 100 days? This Dail has managed almost nothing in that time and it is now reduced to a pure talking shop until they elect a Taoiseach.

Annasopra · 19-05-2020 3:15pm

Theres no issue.

The current situation is constitutional..

Caquas · 19-05-2020 3:32pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, I'm just interested in accuracy. The fact that they are deemed to have resigned doesn't mean that they have resigned. In fact it means the opposite; if they had resigned there would be no need to "deem" them to have resigned. Plus, their resignation, whether deemed or actual, was not in any way an indication that the Dail had lost confidence in them. The Dail has expressed no view on that, and their resignation has nothing to do with it. They have resigned because, however competent or admired they may be, they ride on the Taoiseach's coattails, and he failed to secure election as Taoiseach.

Saying that they resigned because they lost the confidence of Dail Eireann is not only inaccurate; it also gives the impression that their resignation is in some way a reflection on their own performance as Ministers and that there continuance in office pending a replacement is the more undesirable for that reason. This is, of course, entirely false.

The Dail, as we agree, can bring this situation to an end by electing a Taoiseach. Currently, the person with the best prospects of being elected is, ironically, Varadkar.

I find this nonsense troubling because I suspect some Ministers are thinking along these lines i.e. that they didn’t really resign and therefore their position as Ministers is unchanged.

There is no legal or practical difference between a Minister who resigned and one who is “deemed” to have resigned. If any T.D. argues this point, just remind her/him that they were only “deemed” to be elected. The difference now arises from the express provision of an Bunreacht dealing with this exact situation i.e. where the Taoiseach is obliged to resign because he lost the confidence of the Dail. In that case, the Taoiseach and the Ministers must resign but “shall continue to carry on their duties until their successors shall have been appointed.”

So they can’t walk away until their successors are appointed. Nothing strange in that idea, many office holders resign but fulfil their legal duties until a replacement is appointed. The problem is with our democracy i.e. this crew lost their democratic mandate and they should behave accordingly e.g. try to have political support for their decisions and make clear that their decisions are not binding on their elected successors.

The problem is hugely exacerbated by the pandemic and the absence of a functioning legislature.

Victor · 19-05-2020 3:59pm

Caquas wrote: »

Now we have unelected Ministers

As with many other countries, ministers are appointed, not elected.

Caquas wrote: »

He would have to go to the Aras first and Michael D could become the first President to refuse to dissolve the Dail.

I refer you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24th_Government_of_Ireland

coylemj · 19-05-2020 4:32pm

Caquas wrote: »

The problem is with our democracy i.e. this crew lost their democratic mandate and they should behave accordingly e.g. try to have political support for their decisions and make clear that their decisions are not binding on their elected successors.

This problem can arise in almost any democracy where the executive is appointed directly or indirectly by the parliament.

You say that 'this crew lost their democratic mandate and they should behave accordingly'. I believe that is precisely what they are doing - they have made it clear that that will not make any major policy decisions and are simply keeping the wheels of Govt. moving.

We need ministers to appoint the likes of senior Gardai and to make assorted regulations concerning parking, fisheries etc. You may not like the fact that we have 'unelected ministers' but the fact is that we are stuck with what we have until they are replaced..

You know that the current situation is perfectly within the constitution so can you spare us the continual outbursts of outrage. Put a lid on it!

Talking of 'unelected ministers' ...... let's discuss how Michelle O'Neill became leader of SF in the NI Assembly - who voted for her to be deputy prime minister of NI?

Caquas · 19-05-2020 4:47pm

Victor wrote: »

As with many other countries, ministers are appointed, not elected.

I refer you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24th_Government_of_Ireland

Some countries have strict division between the legislature and the executive (e.g. US and Sweden) but we have the opposite i.e. our Ministers must be members of the Oireachtas (in practice, they are TDs with, I think, just two Senators in our entire history) and they are elected by the Dail on the Taoiseach’s nomination. That’s our democracy but now, for the first time and in the middle of an unprecedented crisis, we have this crew who were voted out by the people three months ago.

The demise of the FF/Lab government in 1994 was a unique and little understood moment in our history but it has no bearing on this discussion. Albert Reynolds never asked Mary Robinson to dissolve the Dail so she had no option.

And yes, for the umpteenth time, I know it is constitutional. There are many deplorable things that are still constitutional.

Podge_irl · 19-05-2020 5:14pm

Caquas wrote: »

And yes, for the umpteenth time, I know it is constitutional. There are many deplorable things that are still constitutional.

I do not understand why it is "deplorable" but beyond that what is the alternative? A time limit before new elections would a) not change the fundamental issue of the previous government still being the govt and b)would create, in this current scenario, many more problems than it would solve.

Belgium has gone years without a new govt in the past, Israel had three elections to try and form one. It took the Dutch almost 7 months after their last election to form a government.

Victor · 19-05-2020 5:59pm

Caquas wrote: »

The demise of the FF/Lab government in 1994 was a unique and little understood moment in our history but it has no bearing on this discussion. Albert Reynolds never asked Mary Robinson to dissolve the Dail so she had no option.

Didn't FF put pressure on the president to allow them form a government, despite not having the support of the Dáil?

Caquas · 19-05-2020 6:16pm

coylemj wrote: »

This problem can arise in almost any democracy where the executive is appointed directly or indirectly by the parliament.

You say that 'this crew lost their democratic mandate and they should behave accordingly'. I believe that is precisely what they are doing - they have made it clear that that will not make any major policy decisions and are simply keeping the wheels of Govt. moving.

We need ministers to appoint the likes of senior Gardai and to make assorted regulations concerning parking, fisheries etc. You may not like the fact that we have 'unelected ministers' but the fact is that we are stuck with what we have until they are replaced..

You know that the current situation is perfectly within the constitution so can you spare us the continual outbursts of outrage. Put a lid on it!

Talking of 'unelected ministers' ...... let's discuss how Michelle O'Neill became leader of SF in the NI Assembly - who voted for her to be deputy prime minister of NI?

Outrage? I simply state the facts however unpalatable to you. Put a lid on it? What are you doing on a chat board?

When have Ministers

made it clear that that will not make any major policy decisions and are simply keeping the wheels of Govt. moving.

Parking regulations and appointing Gardai? They shut down the whole country 10 weeks ago! Yes, it was essential at the time and it had democratic support but they’re still in office and now they are making complex and divisive choices about reopening, often without any legal basis for enforcement. The Leaving Cert is in chaos. We can buy flowers but not floral curtains.

How long do you think this can go on? Six months? A year max.? Then you agree with me but you are more complacent.

Or would you accept this regime indefinitely? Then you’re not a democrat. Fortunately, the absence of the Seanad will stymie them soon.

Michelle O’Neill as DFM? The structures in N.I. are necessary in a society which is so divided that the normal rules of democracy can’t operate. Do you think we can be compared to that or is this pure whataboutery?

Podge_irl · 19-05-2020 6:31pm

Caquas wrote: »

Or would you accept this regime indefinitely?

What's your alternative?

There is nothing stopping opposition electing a different Taoiseach and an election in the current scenario is more or less impossible.

landofthetree · 19-05-2020 6:35pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

What's your alternative?

There is nothing stopping opposition electing a different Taoiseach and an election in the current scenario is more or less impossible.

125 TD were elected who ran on a platform to remove FG from office. FF SF Lab SD Greens PBP sol etc all said they would kick FG out.

But now they are afraid of responsibility.

StackSteevens · 19-05-2020 6:41pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

There is nothing stopping opposition electing a different Taoiseach and an election in the current scenario is more or less impossible.

Also, my understanding is that Leo would need the President's permission to go the country and there's nothing (other than precedent!) to stop the President from saying something long winded along the following lines:

"Sorry Taoiseach, but I'm not allowing you to dissolve the Dáil until that nice lady from Cabra had been given a proper opportunity to cobble together a government with the Greens, the Soc Dems, Labour, the republican wing of Fianna Fail and the left wing TDs. "

coylemj · 19-05-2020 7:49pm

Victor wrote: »

Didn't FF put pressure on the president to allow them form a government, despite not having the support of the Dáil?

In 1994, when Dick Spring pulled out of the coalition with Albert Reynolds?

The only discretion allowed to the president is to refuse a request for a dissolution of the Dáil to a Taoiseach who has lost his majority.

In 1994, it wasn't a case of FF asking the president to 'allow' them to form a (minority) Government because with FG and Labour voting against them, they wouldn't have been able to pass a budget or survive a motion of no confidence. So going it alone was never an option.

With the breakdown of his coalition with Labour, Reynolds had to go to the Áras to resign and then he had two options....

1. Ask for a dissolution and call a general election. This did not happen but had it, the president could have refused.

2. Go back to the Dáil and inform the Ceann Comhairle that he had resigned. This did happen and the Dáil subsequently elected John Bruton as Taoiseach and head of the so-called rainbow coalition.

Podge_irl · 19-05-2020 8:09pm

StackSteevens wrote: »

Also, my understanding is that Leo would need the President's permission to go the country and there's nothing (other than precedent!) to stop the President from saying something long winded along the following lines:

"Sorry Taoiseach, but I'm not allowing you to dissolve the Dáil until that nice lady from Cabra had been given a proper opportunity to cobble together a government with the Greens, the Soc Dems, Labour, the republican wing of Fianna Fail and the left wing TDs. "

Any reasonable argument that she hasn't been given a proper opportunity so far? I guess the president could suggest that more time is needed (particularly given the current situation) but then Varadkar isn't going to go to the Aras given the current situation either.

An election currently can't be run and the make up of the Dail isn't about to change. So we are stuck with what we have - plenty of countries have taken longer to form governments.

StackSteevens · 19-05-2020 8:14pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

Any reasonable argument that she hasn't been given a proper opportunity so far? I guess the president could suggest that more time is needed (particularly given the current situation) but then Varadkar isn't going to go to the Aras given the current situation either.

The poor woman was laid up with the the plague for a month so her brain was addled. Mickey Dee is a very kindly old codger and couldn't possibly refuse her the opportunity to try again - especially if she selects her "A" negotiating team, this time. Maybe David Cullinane and his pals could lead the delegation!

coylemj · 19-05-2020 8:42pm

StackSteevens wrote: »

Also, my understanding is that Leo would need the President's permission to go the country and there's nothing (other than precedent!) to stop the President from saying something long winded along the following lines:

Michael D would simply inform Leo that he was refusing the request. Giving a reason would be legally ill advised because when you have the 'absolute discretion' to do something, you don't give a reason when you exercise the power.

StackSteevens · 19-05-2020 8:47pm

coylemj wrote: »

Michael D would simply inform Leo that he was refusing the request. Giving a reason would be legally ill advised because when you have the 'absolute discretion' to do something, you don't give a reason when you exercise the power.

I assume that you mean "could" rather than "would"! Because Michael D is a man who rarely uses one word when he can use fifty!

coylemj · 19-05-2020 11:15pm

StackSteevens wrote: »

I assume that you mean "could" rather than "would"! Because Michael D is a man who rarely uses one word when he can use fifty!

+1 you got me there!

Peregrinus · 20-05-2020 1:54am

Obviously the present situation is unsatisfactory. Drama-queening it by claiming that the current ministers have resigned because they have lost the confidence of the Dail doesn't help matters, however. So what would?

Some have suggested a fixed time limit for forming a government, after which a new election should be constitutionally required, but this has three problems:

1. A fresh election won't necessarily solve the problem. Case in point: Israel.

2. Such a rule could conceivably make matters worse; a party which hopes to improve its position in a new election now has an incentive to impede the formation of a government.

3. The rule also presents an opportunity to populist and alt-right movements who have an interest in presenting parlamentary democracy as "broken" and, therefore, an interest in breaking it. They, too, would be motivated to impede the formation of any government, and then to present the ensuing election as an imposition on the people.

Caquas · 20-05-2020 9:44am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Obviously the present situation is unsatisfactory. Drama-queening it by claiming that the current ministers have resigned because they have lost the confidence of the Dail doesn't help matters, however. So what would?

Some have suggested a fixed time limit for forming a government, after which a new election should be constitutionally required.....

At least some of us recognise the problem but I agree that there is no easy solution. As you say, forcing early elections could exacerbate matters. It would be an admission of failure and the next Dáil may be even more divided.

The only durable solution is the election of a Taoiseach and a Cabinet by the Dáil. Until then, there should be a structured system of coordination between the Dail and the Government to ensure broad political support for major policy decisions. We have never needed such a system before but it wouldn't be difficult to arrange if the Dail got its act together and formed Committees. Yesterday saw the first meeting of any Committee of the new Dail, a COVD-19 special committee which questioned HSE officials, not Minister Harris. Nonetheless, there was (as the IT puts it so meekly)

a collective sense that at last some political accountability was finally being injected into this emergency.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/inaugural-covid-19-dáil-committee-hearing-a-hurried-affair-1.4257550

I think the current impasse will be a recurring problem for our political system due to the hollowing-out of our traditional parties and the rise of independents. And SF aren’t going away either, ya know. Until we face up to the problem, we will have a huge democratic deficit in this country.

Peregrinus · 20-05-2020 10:02am

We've been through a version of this before, when we transitioned from single-party majority governments being the norm (which they were, up unil the 1980s) to a new norm of a governments dominated by one large party, but needing support from others either in the form of a coalition or support from outside government. It was an awkward transition with a number of cherished nostrums having to be abandoned ("Fianna Fail doesn't do coalitions"), but it didn't take that long. Policitians may be divided by ideology and interest, but they all consider government important and not having a government to be a bad thing. Plus, they all want to be in government and they realise pretty quickly that, if there isn't a government, nobody gets to be in government.

So, basically, political culture adapts to political realities. If the new norm is that no party is large enough to be the dominant party in government, then political culture will adapt to allow the formation of multi-party governments. They are fairly standard in other European countries; there is is no reason to suppose that they are beyond us. It's unfortunate that we have to embark on the transition at a time when we also have to respond to a pandemic, but we are where we are.

Caquas · 20-05-2020 10:50pm

I agree this is part of an historical process and things will work out eventually but I am not so sanguine about the outcome.

For most of our independent history, FF dominated with a mix of republicanism and social programmes. FG were the alternative (with Labour and others), first on the right-wing then as social liberals . Now, our two “major” parties are so reduced that their “grand coalition” is far short of a majority and they are floundering around trying to form a workable coalition.

What principles guide these negotiations? None, judging by the shopping list they touted to potential coalition partners. They'd do business with anyone except the largest party and that anathema is not based on SF policies. The likely result is a government where the Green tail will wag the FF/FG dog and we will pay for Green policies although only one in fourteen voters gave them a first preference.

I used to think Aesop’s fable about the goose that laid the golden egg was too absurd to be credible. How could any farmer be so stupid? I now see this fable played out endlessly in real life as blind greed destroys the sources of wealth.

Victor · 21-05-2020 12:00am

Of course, a FF-FG-SF coalition would also be unhealthy, as they could win every vote. The official opposition would be the party with the coldest feet.

Caquas · 23-05-2020 9:10am

We will be in legal limbo for another month with no legislature to pass emergency laws.

Micheál told Tubridy last night to expect a deal in early June. Then the parties have to consult their socially-distanced members. The Greens might have a leadership contest (ironic if Éamon is the only leader to face a leadership challenge!). The earliest we can have an elected government is 16 June but a lot can go wrong in the next few weeks. Then the new Taoiseach has to appoint 11 Senators. I expect scheduled August sittings of the Oireachtas, a first in our history.

We all laughed at that pub in Donegal delivering pints in clingfilm until the Gardai stepped in.
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/20-pints-guinness-seized-garda-22047697

Turns out the Gardai have no power to stop it.

Pubs throughout the Republic will now be able to operate during the Covid-19 lockdown, subject to certain restrictions, because of a “lack of clarity” in the liquor licensing laws.
...

As long as drinks, including poured pints, are paid for on a licensed premises they can be delivered to customers.

[URL="Pubs can deliver pints to their customers again following legal advice via The Irish Times https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/pubs-can-deliver-pints-to-their-customers-again-following-legal-advice-1.4260451"]Pubs can deliver pints to their customers again following legal advice via The Irish Times https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/pubs-can-deliver-pints-to-their-customers-again-following-legal-advice-1.4260451[/URL]

What this really means is that we don’t have laws designed for this pandemic and we can’t pass laws because there’s no Seanad. Our lawmakers haven’t even elected a government.

If the Gardai can’t stop pubs delivering pints, how can they enforce 14 days house arrest for every visitor to our shores? One-third of visitors didn’t even bother filling in the form so that can be made obligatory but that’s just paper.

The list will get longer as we try to ease this lockdown. What law prevents a homewares store from opening when Woodies and B&Q are open? Golfers over 5 km. ?

Peregrinus · 26-05-2020 1:16am

The fact that the regulations already made don't ban, e.g., home delivery of pints doesn't mean that there is no power for ministers to make regulations banning the home delivery of pints. The present parliamentary impasse doesn't mean that no laws can be passed; only that primary legislation can't be passed.

L1011 · 26-05-2020 7:55am

I don't think there is any legislative desire to ban it anyway. It's no different to being delivered cooked food

Caquas · 30-05-2020 3:00pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

The fact that the regulations already made don't ban, e.g., home delivery of pints doesn't mean that there is no power for ministers to make regulations banning the home delivery of pints. The present parliamentary impasse doesn't mean that no laws can be passed; only that primary legislation can't be passed.

As negotiations for government formation are underway, I doubt the current Ministers will abuse their powers to make subsidiary regulations. They know that our courts have stepped in regularly to prevent such Ministerial abuses in the past. Not only will the courts stop Ministers making regulations which go beyond the scope of the primary legislation, the courts will stop the Oireachtas from delegating such powers to the Ministers i.e. when primary legislation expressly gave a Minister sweeping scope to make secondary legislation, the courts have quashed such regulations as unconstitutional (because we are a democracy and the Oireachtas has a monopoly on legislation).

Selling take-away pints is the least of it. Does any Minister imagine he/she, at the stroke of a pen, can force everyone entering this country to self-isolate? People are now obliged to fill in a form giving their address. That is a good example of the Minister for Justice fulfilling his responsibility to manage our border. But no Minister has the power to impose 14 days of isolation on a broad class of people (e.g. visitors to our shores). That's not just my opinion - no one seriously claims this Government has such powers, they just ignore the problem and hope it gets fixed soon.

Until we get an elected Taoiseach, Leo will be like the Wizard of Oz, busily turning the dials to project an image of omnipotence while hoping no one will draw back the curtain. He is safe for the moment because the media believe the parties will sort it out soon, which may work out but many's the slip...

Damian F · 30-05-2020 7:24pm

It is mad seeing senior and Junior ministers who ceased been TDs 4 months ago in the dail carrying on business as usual, some of these Junior ministers didn't even stand for reelection.

Victor · 30-05-2020 7:56pm

Damian F wrote: »

It is mad seeing senior and Junior ministers who ceased been TDs 4 months ago in the dail carrying on business as usual, some of these Junior ministers didn't even stand for reelection.

Well, nobody has decided to remove them and replace them.

Caquas · 30-05-2020 9:07pm

Victor wrote: »

Well, nobody has decide to remove them and replace them.

That is exactly my complaint. We elected a new Dail 16 weeks ago but they still haven't elected a Taoiseach so we're stuck with the crew we voted out.

We have never had such an interregnum and the Ministers who resigned in February are still leading us through an unprecedented crisis (when they're not hiding behind medical experts). The government were right to act quickly in March - what a pity they didn't shut down flights to northern Italy earlier - but this is the June Bank Holiday and they are making a pig's ear of relaxing the restrictions. Just look at our beaches this weekend. Hardware v. homeware, no Leaving Cert. , 14 days isolation after you take the airport bus to Cork or Galway (but not Belfast?). The Taoiseach has to leave the Dail chamber after two hours.

The Minister for Social Protection, who now represents no one, has just got the Dáil to approve (without a vote!) a Revised Estimate for the Department of Social Protection of over €28 billion. Ah shure, make it Thirty Billion, Regina, and I'll stand the next round when the Dail Bar re-opens!

Because it's all borrowed money - imagine the commotion if she realised her political career was over and had the honesty to ask our TDs to increase taxes or cut spending elsewhere to pay for this largesse! After all the hassle she had over some unpaid creditors, she'd have the pleasure of asking her opponents who they expected for pay for their generosity with public funds.

Caquas · 12-04-2021 6:28pm

Caquas wrote: »

That is exactly my complaint. We elected a new Dail 16 weeks ago but they still haven't elected a Taoiseach so we're stuck with the crew we voted out.

We have never had such an interregnum and the Ministers who resigned in February are still leading us through an unprecedented crisis (when they're not hiding behind medical experts). The government were right to act quickly in March - what a pity they didn't shut down flights to northern Italy earlier - but this is the June Bank Holiday and they are making a pig's ear of relaxing the restrictions. Just look at our beaches this weekend. Hardware v. homeware, no Leaving Cert. , 14 days isolation after you take the airport bus to Cork or Galway (but not Belfast?). The Taoiseach has to leave the Dail chamber after two hours.

The Minister for Social Protection, who now represents no one, has just got the Dáil to approve (without a vote!) a Revised Estimate for the Department of Social Protection of over €28 billion. Ah shure, make it Thirty Billion, Regina, and I'll stand the next round when the Dail Bar re-opens!

Because it's all borrowed money - imagine the commotion if she realised her political career was over and had the honesty to ask our TDs to increase taxes or cut spending elsewhere to pay for this largesse! After all the hassle she had over some unpaid creditors, she'd have the pleasure of asking her opponents who they expected for pay for their generosity with public funds.

I see constitutional experts have weighed in on these issues. In short, it seems that the acting Government had full legal authority but the Senate could not operate because an acting Taoiseach cannot appoint Senators.

My point was that the “acting Government” lacked political authority because it lost the general election. Imagine if FG were not in government now - every day we would hear the government blaming the “acting Government” for mishandling the pandemic last year and FG would be shouting “I told you so” every time the current government put a foot wrong.

We squeaked past the problem last year (though I still expect some speculative legal challenges to legislation passed during that period). This problem will recur because our political system is fractured- the two traditional parties of government are trapped in a loveless marriage unless SF becomes an acceptable coalition partner.

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=202110105020064070025094098001127000020086089012039042073006092074073101073068068088018007127038053121097001082072078005006098042071071006015065127073100094007021019008017043123031107085075001002007126000002099092080004093126118125005021023069007117096&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE

Legal glitches raised by delay in forming current government ‘need to be resolved’ https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/legal-glitches-raised-by-delay-in-forming-current-government-need-to-be-resolved-40278753.html

Constitutional basis for Ministers not members of the Oireachtas

Comments