Super junior ministers ‘acting as a collective authority in Cabinet meetings'
The High Court is hearing a challenge by Sinn Fein TD Pa Daly about the attendance of super junior ministers at Cabinet meetings.
Also attending court on Monday was Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald and Donegal TD Pearse Doherty.
Mr Daly argues that Article 28 of the Constitution of Ireland limits the number of government members to 15.
Sinn Féin are here today to challenge Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael blatant stroke politics. We believe they are playing fast and loose with the Constitution to grease the wheels of their grubby deal with Michael Lowry and load the Cabinet with so-called 'Super Junior' Ministers. Pa… pic.twitter.com/JYTGyWUzGJ
— Mary Lou McDonald (@MaryLouMcDonald) July 7, 2025
The super junior ministers appointed include Fine Gael's Hildegarde Naughton, as well as Independents Sean Canney and Noel Grealish.
Fianna Fail's Mary Butler is also a minister of state attending Cabinet.
Senior government ministers are appointed by the President of Ireland on the advice of the taoiseach of the day, and with the approval of the Dail.
Super junior ministers are appointed by the government on the nomination of the taoiseach.
Feichin McDonagh SC told the three judges that the legal basis of their appointment was exactly the same as the other ministers of state who do not attend Cabinet.
He said he has queried with the respondents about what exactly is a minister of state who regularly attends government meetings.
'One would have thought following exchange of meetings there might be some consensus, but there does not appear to be a consensus,' Mr McDonagh said.
He told the court it was not possible to address the issues unless the court knows what is a super minister.
'The designation of super junior by taoiseach was in some way an exercise of executive power of the state,' he added.
He said it is suggested in the respondent's affidavit that there is an office called minister of state who regularly attends government, which Mr McDonagh said does not exist.
He added that a decision to pay an allowance to super juniors does not change that position.
'Four super juniors now get an allowance and we challenge the provisions in that legislation to allow that,' he added.
'There is minister of state who is told by Taoiseach they can regularly attend government (meetings) and if they come into that category they get 16,000 euro a year.
'But it is not an office, not enacted under the constitution and there is no underpinning to suggest that the office is being created.'
He also queried the meaning behind the words under Article 4.1, in which it states that the Government shall meet and act as a collective authority.
'What does collective authority do? They meet and with the others (ministers) they collectively act. Who is acting collectively? It is the government along with the super junior ministers,' Mr McDonagh added.
'There will be government decisions taken and government acting collectively.
'In that scenario there are extra individuals who are there present in the counsel of chamber. They are taking a full role in the formulation and formation of government policy, thereby acting as a collective authority and there is no dispute between the parties as to that being what is happening.
'The government is formulating policy and taking countless decisions and undoubtedly purporting to act as a collective authority.
'You cannot unscramble that egg. If you have government meeting with super juniors speaking to perspective government decisions and a consensus is arrived at, that decision is no less than a government decision than one that has been voted on.
'That decision is arrived at following a process of mixing yolks to getting into scramble egg and that cannot be unscrambled.'
Earlier, Ms McDonald said the Government has broken the rules.
Speaking outside court, Ms McDonald said: 'This is a challenge to a government who we believe have played fast and loose with the Constitution in a bid to secure a grubby deal with Michael Lowry and to retain office, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, we believe are acting in defiance of the Constitution.
'There are four so called super junior ministers who attend cabinet. The Constitution, in our view, is very clear. The Cabinet amounts to 15 members, and we believe that the government is breaking the rules.
'They've broken the rules because at all costs, Micheal Martin and Simon Harris wish to remain in government, so they cut this deal, as you know, with Michael Lowry, and we are here now to challenge that action and to seek clarity.'
Mr Daly brought the constitutional challenge against the Government in the High Court regarding the appointment of super junior ministers.
The case challenges what Mr Daly says is a 'deeply problematic and unconstitutional practice that has taken root in recent decades'.
He said: 'The attendance and participation of so-called 'super junior' ministers at meetings of the Government.
'This case is a constitutional challenge aimed at protecting the integrity of our system of government under Bunreacht na hEireann with which Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Lowry-led Independents are playing fast and loose.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
22 minutes ago
- Leader Live
King speaks of UK and France's deepening co-operation amid ‘profound challenges'
In a speech marking President Emmanuel Macron's three-day state visit to the UK, Charles highlighted a summit between Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and the French leader when commentators expect the issue of small boats to be top of the agenda. The King also spoke of the growing environmental threat where the 'very future of our planet hangs in the balance' and the UK and France have a 'critical role to play'. Charles's comments were made at a Windsor Castle state banquet where Sir Mick Jagger and fiancee Melanie Hamrick were among the guests alongside Sir Elton John and husband David Furnish and actress Dame Kristin Scott Thomas. The King told the guests, who included the Queen, the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Prime Minister and senior members of the Cabinet: 'Monsieur le President, the summit that you and the Prime Minister will hold in London this week will deepen our alliance and broaden our partnership still further. 'Our armed forces will co-operate even more closely across the world, including to support Ukraine, as we join together in leading a Coalition of the Willing in defence of liberty and freedom from oppression; in other words, in defence of our shared values.' He went on to say: 'Our security services and police will go further still to protect us against the profound challenges of terrorism, organised crime, cyber attacks and of course irregular migration across the English Channel. 'And our businesses will innovate together, generating growth, trade and investment for our economies and across the world.' Earlier in a speech to MPs and peers, Mr Macron promised to deliver on measures to cut the number of migrants crossing the English Channel, describing the issue as a 'burden' to both countries. He told the gathering in Parliament: 'France and the UK have a shared responsibility to address irregular migration with humanity, solidarity and fairness.' Decisions at Thursday's UK-France summit will 'respond to our aims for co-operation and tangible results on these major issues'. In his speech Charles described the UK's closest continental neighbour as 'one of our strongest allies' and said in the face of 'complex threats' France and Britain 'must help to lead the way'. There were lighter moments, with the King joking about the popular French cartoon character Asterix the Gaul's incomprehension about Britons' love of tea with a splash of milk, and how dinner guests had drunk 'English sparkling wine made by a French Champagne house'. And he described the 'perfect combinations' of French and British – Monet's paintings of London fog and Thierry Henry, a former French striker with London football club Arsenal, scoring at Highbury. The French president even winked at the King when Charles mentioned the cultural ties between the UK and France and how a Frenchman, William the Conqueror, began building Windsor Castle more than 900 years ago and his son William has made Windsor his home. The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh and the Princess Royal and her husband Vice Admiral Sir Tim Laurence were also among the guests, as were former England goalkeeper Mary Earps, who now plays for Paris Saint-Germain, authors Joanne Harris and Sebastian Faulks and sculptor Sir Antony Gormley.
Leader Live
23 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.
Glasgow Times
36 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.
