User:Jnestorius/Technical Group

In Dáil Éireann, the Technical Group is a group of Teachtaí Dála (TDs), comprising independents and members of small parties, which the standing orders for public business treat in a manner similar to the opposition parliamentary parties. There is at most one technical group in the Dáil; it exists purely to maximise its members' access to the machinery of the legislature; it does not imply any co-ordination of policy or similarity of outlook. In Seanad Éireann, the analogous group is usually called the independent group.

Operation

2010 SOs

The relevant provision in the Dáil is section 1(b) of standing order 116 of the standing orders relating to public business. SO 116(1), last amended in 2002, reads in part:

a group shall mean—

(a) any Party which had not less than seven members elected to the Dáil at the previous General Election or which, if it had less than seven, attained the number of seven members as a result of a subsequent bye-election, or

(b) a majority of the members of the Dáil who are not members of a group as defined in paragraph (1) (a), being not less than seven in number, who request formal recognition as a group in writing to the Ceann Comhairle: Provided that such request shall be signed by all such members. The Ceann Comhairle shall grant formal recognition as a group to such members as soon as possible thereafter.

Within SO 116, the groups defined in subsection 1 are referred to in:

• section 4: each group can have only one private member's bill before the Dáil at a time.
• section 5: each group in rotation has the right to either move a motion or proceed with a stage of its private member's bill.

The Technical Group is last in the order of rotation between groups, both in SO116(5) and in the other standing orders make reference to the groups:

• Leaders’ Questions (SO 27): the Leader of each group can ask the Taoiseach one question on Tuesdays and Wednesdays
• Priority Questions (SO 39): five questions per day to ministers, from each group in rotation
  • In practice, the strict rotation between groups implied by SO 39 is overridden by a motion which allocates questions proportional to the size of each group. Such a motion is made at the beginning of each Dáil session, and whenever the number of recognised groups changes.
• Divisions (SO 69): the voting time in divisions is shorter (two minutes rather than four) if the TD calling for the division does not belong to a group.
  • This difference is moot in practice, because no formal division is called unless ten members demand one.
• Select Committees (SO 92(2)): the substitute for an absent Committee member is nominated by that member's group
  • When Mildred Fox was absent in 1996 from a meeting the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy, she tried to nominate fellow-independent Tony Gregory as a substitute. Neither was a member of group — there was no Technical Group at the time — so Gregory was unable to participate fully in the meeting.
• Second reading of a bill (SO 121): each group nominates a spokesperson
  • In 1991 the Leas-Ceann Comhairle stated "the Chair has always striven as far as possible to accommodate one Independent Deputy on every Second Stage debate".
  • It is common for the default provisions of SO 121 to be overridden by a special motion when a particular bill is introduced.

2016 SOs

The May 2016 SOs are:

143. Groups

(1) A group is a body of members in Opposition who may avail of the rights provided for in these Standing Orders for groups.

(2) The minimum number of members required to be recognised as a group is five.

(3) Where members of a registered political party are elected to the Dáil, those elected members are referred to in these Standing Orders as a "party", and such a party is automatically recognised as a group where it has five members or more.

(4) A body of members which includes any combination of the following categories of members‒

(a) members of a party with five members or more,

(b) members of a party with fewer than five members,

(c) non-party members,

may also be recognised as a group, and shall be referred to as a technical group.

(5) A group may not include‒

(i) a party which contains a Minister or Minister of State;

(ii) a member who is a Minister or Minister of State;

(iii) some of the members of a party but not the others.

(6) A member of a technical group may not also be a member of another technical group.

(7) There is no limit on the number of groups which may be recognised in a Dáil.

143A. Rights of groups: members may not benefit “on the double”

(1) Groups have the rights assigned to them in these Standing Orders in relation to‒

(i) Leaders’ Questions,

(ii) Questions nominated for priority,

(iii) private members' business,

(iv) the opening speeches on the motion for the second reading of a Bill,

(v) the right to make a brief statement opposing a proposal on the Order of Business, and

(vi) such other rights as may be provided for groups in these Standing Orders.

(2) A party which is automatically recognised as a group, and which has joined with other members to form a technical group, may only avail of those rights arising from its membership of a technical group.

143B. Recognition of groups: writing to the Ceann Comhairle

(1) A party with five members or more is automatically recognised as a group, and need not write to the Ceann Comhairle for recognition.

(2) Members who seek to be recognised as a technical group shall send a request in writing to the Ceann Comhairle, signed by each of the members making the request.

143C. Joining a group

The addition of a member to a technical group is recognised where the coordinator of the technical group and the new member sign a notification in writing to the Ceann Comhairle to that effect.

143D. Cessation of membership of a group

(1) A member ceases to be a member of a group where the Ceann Comhairle is satisfied that the member has severed all connections with the group.

(2) Where a member leaves a party and joins another, he or she is considered part of his or her new political party for group purposes, provided that his or her membership is in compliance with the rules contained in these Standing Orders relating to membership of groups.

143E. Cessation of group status

(1) A technical group shall cease to be recognised as a group where any and all of the remaining members of the group sign a notification in writing to the Ceann Comhairle to that effect.

(2) Any group (including a technical group) ceases to be recognised as a group where the Ceann Comhairle is satisfied that its number has fallen below five. In such a case, the Ceann Comhairle shall write to the group to that effect.

(3) Where the number of a former group (including a technical group) has fallen below five as a result of a casual vacancy or vacancies in the Dáil, the former group shall not lose its rights until the result of any consequential bye-election is known.

(4) Where a former group wishes to be recognised again as a group, all of its former members shall sign a notification in writing to the Ceann Comhairle. Provided that where group status was lost as a result of a casual vacancy, the written notification need only be sent to the Ceann Comhairle in the case of a technical group. Where the former group consists only of a single party, and the new member is elected to that party, it is not necessary to send the written notification. Provided always and in any case that a group shall not be recognised where its membership is not in compliance with the rules set out in these Standing Orders relating to the membership of groups.

143F. Presentation of Bills and moving of motions by members of groups

(1) Each group shall have the right to nominate a member of the group to present a Bill provided that there is not before the Dáil another Bill presented by a member nominated by the group.

(2) Each group shall have the right in rotation to nominate a member of the group either to move a motion standing in his or her name or to proceed with a Stage of a Bill in the Dáil.

(3) The order in which the right under paragraph (2) may be exercised by the various groups shall be determined on the basis of the numbers of members in the groups, a larger group having precedence over a smaller one. In the case of an equality of numbers, precedence shall be determined by lot. Provided that a group which consists only of a single party shall have precedence over a technical group.

Consequences of SOs

While the Technical Group has a nominal leader, this precedence is notional. For example, in a debate on nuclear safety on 5 April 2006, there were 15 minutes allocated to each of Fine Gael, Labour, and the Technical Group in response to a statement from the government. The government's allocation was shared by junior minister Dick Roche and minister Dermot Ahern; Fine Gael and Labour's allocations were filled by one speaker each (Fergus O'Dowd and Emmet Stagg); while the Technical Group's allocation was shared by Ciaran Cuffe with Finian McGrath, Tony Gregory, and Arthur Morgan.

TDs who are not members of a recognised group rely on the generosity of group members sharing part of their allocation of time or resources. For example, in 1990, when there was no recognised Technical Group, independent Tom Foxe was able to speak during the second reading of a bill when Emmet Stagg of the Labour Party acceded to a request from Leas-Ceann Comhairle Jim Tunney to share his party's time.

Many other Dáil facilities and procedures operate, by convention or otherwise, without reference to the standing orders for public business. For example, the Public Accounts Committee has its own Orders of Reference; that relating to membership states:

The Committee shall consist of twelve members, none of whom shall be a member of the Government or a Minister of State, and four of whom shall constitute a quorum. The Committee and any sub Committee which it may appoint shall be constituted so as to be impartially representative of the Dáil.

A 1994 motion to establish a temporary subcommittee of the Select Committee on Legislation and Security specified the number of members of each party to be included, including parties not then recognised as groups. The subcommittee also included Tony Gregory "for the Independent group", despite this not being called for in the motion.

The Technical Group has a nominal whip, who attends the weekly meeting where Opposition whips discuss the next week's business with the government's chief whip, and then briefs the other group members. When Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke addressed the Dáil in 1987, he was escorted by the leaders of all five parliamentary parties, of which only three were recognised groups. However, when Hawke's successor Paul Keating addressed the Dáil in 1993, Proinsias De Rossa was among the escort "representing the Technical Group".

Quote:

Parties with at least seven members are recognized as a parliamentary group. Deputies who are not members of a parliamentary group (i.e., independents and members of small parties) can form a technical group, which requires that at least seven deputies request to be formally recognized as a group (Article 120, Dail ´ Eireann Standing Orders, 2011). The requirements for being recognized as a group have changed over time, which makes it difficult to determine the exact speaking right of each deputy under the Standing Orders at that time. Further, it is not uncommon for speakers to share their speaking time with other members, which means the likelihood to speak is determined by more than procedural rules.

History

Originally, the statutory basis and standing orders of the Dáil treated TDs as individuals rather than as members of parties. Parties were first given statutory recognition by Part III of the Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices Act, 1938, which paid allowances to Oireachtas party leaders. The 1938 Act paid an allowance to a second opposition party only if the party had at least seven TDs, a limit which would be reused in subsequent rules. Until the 1963 Electoral Act, candidates' names appeared on the ballot paper with no party identification. In the early years of the Dáil, indepedendents were sometimes collectively described as "the Independent Party". Basil Chubb wrote in 1957:

In the House they [independents] have a recognised status and, though they may be by no means agreed, they are treated for procedural purposes as though they are a party group.

These practices operated by convention and consensus. The concept underlying the modern Technical Group was introduced to Dáil standing orders (as number 89) in 1962, on the recommendation of the Committee on Procedures and Privileges (CPP). Their report said:

The Committee considered the order in which Private Members’ motions are taken. The present procedure is that motions are taken in the order in which notice is given of them. As there is no limit on the number of motions Members may set down some Members could, if they wished, monopolise for a considerable period the time devoted to motions in Private Members’ time.

The initial impetus was to curb the activism of Noel Browne and Jack McQuillan, who constituted the National Progressive Democrats, and who had raised motions and questions far in excess of other TDs. In the 1962 provision, the technical group comprised all TDs not members of a parliamentary party group of at least seven TDs. James Dillon denied it was unfair to independents, stating:

the purpose of this amendment of the Standing Orders is to ensure that even though Fine Gael puts down 100 motions on the Paper, even though Fianna Fáil puts down 100 motions on the Paper, even though the Labour Party puts down 100 motions on the Paper, every fourth motion debated in this House must come from the Independent benches and there is left to us no power to prevent the Independent benches being called every fourth motion.

In 1971, an Informal Committee on the Reform of Dáil Procedure was established, which whose December 1972 report made numerous recommendations.

• Without having read the informal Cttee's report, I interpreted the subsequent CPP report as stating the earlier report's recommendation No.26 related to the definition of parliamentary groups. The Committee of Procedure and Privilege agreed with this recommendation and drafted an amendment to standing orders setting a minimum of seven members for the technical group, which came into effect later that year.
• Having subsequently read the informal cttee's report, I can't find any reference to changing the definition of a group, although there is a recommendation that group privileges be extended from raising motions to introducing bills. The references are: detail paragraphs 48-49 (p.18); summary points 25-26 (p.22); and appendix 9, SO 86 (p.73).
• Re-reading the CPP report in the light of the informal cttee report, I see that, although it was recommendation #26 that spurred the CPP to reconsider the definition of "group", the decision to specify a minimum size was something it came up with off its own bat.
• Possibly 1974 CPP report is relevant.

In 1985, the priority questions system was introduced, with equality among Opposition groups. Tomás Mac Giolla, one of two Workers' Party TDs, pointed out that the only Opposition group at the time was Fianna Fáil. (On the other hand, in 1984 the Worker's Party introduced a Private Members' Bill; is this still possible for non-group TDs or have standing orders changed in this regard?) Minister of state Seán Barrett responded:

All the Deputy has to do is persuade others who are Independents in the House to join with him into a group of seven, as is done in many other parliaments, and they can get the rights appertaining to groups of seven and over to deal with Private Members' time and questions in priority time. That is all.

In 1986, after five TDs had switched from various parties to the newly formed Progressive Democrats, the Ceann Comhairle Thomas J. Fitzpatrick made a ruling:

The Deputy started by asking what the required number of Deputies to constitute a party was. There is no fixed number. The one thing that has always been abundantly clear is that one [single Deputy] does not. ... I considered whether four Deputies led by Deputy O'Malley and known as the Progressive Democrats are a party for the purposes of Standing Order No. 38. There is no definition in Standing Orders for a party. It is not defined any place in Standing Orders. I then had a look at Standing Order No. 85 which deals with priorities in moving private Members' motions and Bills and starts off by saying: "For the purpose of this Standing Order ..." therefore that is not relevant to what we are considering now. I then went to Standing Order No. 38 which is the relevant Standing Order here. ... I gave great thought and consideration to this. Standing Order No. 38 reads:

A member of the Government who has given prior notice to the Ceann Comhairle may make a statement in the House on any matter. No debate shall be permitted on any such statement but further statements may be allowed at the discretion of the Ceann Comhairle from a spokesman nominated by a Party in Opposition.

As I have stated, I cannot get a definition anywhere in Standing Orders for a party. I therefore came to the conclusion that each case must stand on its own set of facts. I looked at the four members led by Deputy O'Malley and from what is widely known about them I clearly came to the conclusion that they are, first, a party and, secondly, in opposition.

Later, Barrett said:

It is open to those Members who are not members of a party with more than seven Members to form themselves into a group and avail of the rights which exist under Standing Orders for a group consisting of more than seven Members of the Dáil. That is open to The Workers' Party, to the Progressive Democrats and to the Independents.

After the 1989 election, priority questions were allocated proportional to the size of each Opposition group, Fine Gael, Labour, and the Workers' Party. Roger Garland, the sole Green Party TD, complained:

I find when it comes to Priority Questions and Private Members' Bills, if I am here for the next five years I will not have a single Priority Question, a single motion or a single Bill. I think that a gross negation of the democratic principles of this House.

In early 1992, six of the seven Workers' Party TDs left to form Democratic Left; the priority questions rota was amended to exclude the Workers' Party, leaving only Fine Gael and Labour. This superseded the standing orders adopted in December 1990 in accordance with a recommendation of the committee on procedures and privileges, which had been opposed by the Workers' Party, whose right to a priority question had been withdrawn "about six months" before that (actually 27 March). That rota in turn dated from November 1989; it was in the preceding 25th Dáil that PMQs and PM business were first allocated proportionately to party strength, although committee positions had earlier been allocated on that basis.

On 5 December 1992, after leaders paid tribute to the retiring Ceann Comharile on behalf of their parties, Neil Blaney spoke "On behalf of the neglected five on the back benches".

The description "technical group" was first used in the European Parliament in 1979 by the Technical Group of Independents, a grouping of right-wing nationalists who combined to maximize their collective entitlement to facilities and influence. Similar groups and names existed until a 2001 ruling by the Parliament's Constitutional Committee prohibiting heterogeneous groups. The first Dáil "Technical Group" to use the name was in the 27th Dáil, after the 1992 election; it comprised four Democratic Left TDs, one Green Party TD, and three independents. The standing orders relating to the rotation between opposition groups of private members time and priority questions were amended on a temporary basis in February 1993 to include the Technical Group alongside Fine Gael and the Progressive Democrats. After the change of government at the end of 1994, the rotation was amended in January 1995, with just Fianna Fáil and the PDs, and no Technical Group. February exchange:

Trevor Sargent:it appears that no one in the Technical Group was consulted about item No. 3, the motion regarding the parliamentary questions rota. I ask you, a Cheann Comhairle, to address this issue which is one of many on which the Technical Group is being frozen out and kept in the dark, where possible.

Ceann Comhairle (Seán Treacy): I think the Deputy and the Deputies concerned will appreciate that the position has altered somewhat in respect of the matter of group status.

15 October, 1996,

After the 1997 election, there were 18 TDs eligible for membership of a technical group, meaning a minimum of ten were required to form it. Three PDs and four independents supported the minority Fianna Fáil–PD government, and the four TDs from Democratic Left (DL) refused to form a group including either Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, Sinn Féin's first sitting TD, or Michael Lowry, a disgraced former minister. Instead, DL reached an arrangement with the recognised party groups to be granted use of some of their facilities. The remaining seven TDs were too few to form a Technical Group; even after DL merged with Labour in 1999, they did not constitute a majority of the 14 remaining eligible TDs.

10 July 1997:

Séamus Brennan: I want to give an undertaking to Democratic Left, the Green Party and others in the House that the Independent position on this committee [CPP] is being filled by Deputy Gregory merely to enable it to commence its work. As soon as procedures are agreed to receive a nominee from those groups and the Independents, the position will be filled in that way. [...] The Deputy is aware that substantial negotiations must take place regarding the mechanism by which we receive a nominee of the Independent groups. I understand that substantial discussions must take place about the number of technical groups that may be available and other related matters. ... A proper procedure to fill that Independent position will be put in place as soon as is practical, possibly on the next occasion on which the Dáil meets.

Eamon Gilmore: The Minister of State referred to Independent Members of the House. I am not an Independent Member but a member of a political party. ... [The CPP] cannot be impartially representative of the Dáil if one of the parties is not represented. I also understand that on the last occasion a party represented in this House comprised of four Members it was represented on the committee. Will the Minister of State indicate how I, as a member of a party, may be represented on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, given its wide remit and its importance for the rights and privileges of Members?

Séamus Brennan: As of now, I have received no notification of a technical group of seven Members, although I have an indication of a proposal from Deputy Rabbitte to amend the Standing Orders and make six the minimum membership of such a group.

9 October 1997 (SO 106),

a majority of the Members of the Dáil who are not members of a group as defined in paragraph (1)(a), being not less than seven in number, who request formal recognition as a group in writing to the Ceann Comhairle: Provided that such request shall be signed by all such members. The Ceann Comhairle shall grant formal recognition as a group to such members as soon as possible thereafter.

"Since 1997, Standing Orders have provided increased incentives for TDs to be part of parliamentary groups of not fewer than seven members, in order to achieve better participation in debates and questions". 13 November 1997:

in respect of the First Report of the Standing sub-Committee on Dáil Reform on Establishment of Committees in the 28th Dáil (T. 295) and with effect from 13 November 1997 ... (b) the amendments and additions to the Standing Orders of Dáil Éireann relative to Public Business set out in Appendix 2 to the Report are hereby agreed to

The amendments refer to "group" as in SO 106, but don't seem to modify SO 106 at all; SO 84:

(2) In the absence of a member nominated to serve on a Select or Special Committee, a substitute may be nominated to take part in the proceedings in accordance with the following provisions of this paragraph and shall be entitled to vote in the absent member's stead and to move motions and amendments in his or her own name:

(a) where the absent member is a member of a Government party, that party may nominate a substitute from any Government party,

(b) where the absent member is a member of an Opposition party or group (within the meaning of Standing Order 106), that party or group may nominate a substitute from any Opposition party or group,

(c) where the absent member is not a member of a party or group (within the meaning of Standing Order 106), that member may nominate another member who is not a member of a party or group.

For the purposes of these Standing Orders, a party shall mean any party which had not less than two members elected to the Dáil at the previous General Election or which, if it had less than two, attained that number as a result of a subsequent bye-election. A party shall cease to be a party within the meaning of this Standing Order for any period in which its membership falls below two members.

"In 2002 he [Tony Gregory] was the Whip of the Independent group of Deputies in the Dáil and he was the brains behind and a major broker in the formation of the Technical Group." (Finian McGrath)

24 October 2002 (SO 114):

Provided that a party which is a group under paragraph (1)(a) shall have precedence over a group recognised under paragraph (1)(b)

Proviso also applied to: SO26A (priority questions); SO38 (???); SO119 (???)

17 November 2002 (sic; no sittings that day, but 19 Nov 2002 modifies Standing Order 38 for group rota for Priority Qs)

In the 29th Dáil, the Technical Group comprised 22 TDs: six Green Party, five Sinn Féin, one Socialist Party, and ten independents. There were 25 eligible TDs, meaning a minimum of 13 were required for a technical group. With 3 independents backing the government, neither the remaining 11 indepedendents not the 11 small-party TDs had the numbers for a bare majority, so a larger, more disparate, group combined both elements. The Green Party was at pains to downplay the technical link to Sinn Féin, with Dan Boyle writing "it exists as a perception that can be spun, albeit unfairly."

The 22-member technical group was bigger than Labour's Dáil group of 21 TDs, and so had a higher priority in the order of Dáil business. Labour agreed a deal with the government to amend standing orders to reverse this: in return for Labour's allowing the Taoiseach to be absent from Thursday morning questions, the government agreed to give every party group priority over the technical group.

Tony Gregory, July 2003:

The Taoiseach said at the end of his reply that I am invited to the Whips' meetings each week. Perhaps the Taoiseach will clarify for the record that I attend the Whips' meetings each week as Whip of the 22-member Technical Group and I am there as of right. I am invited in the same way as Deputy Durkan or Deputy Stagg is invited – under Standing Orders. It has nothing to do with anything else.

One of the few statutory instruments referring to the Technical Group was S.I. No. 430/2004, which modified S.I. No. 736/2003. The 2003 instrument allocated secretarial staff for each parliamentary party, including those with fewer than seven members, but not for independent TDs. The 2004 instrument specified that some of the staff allocated to the Socialist Party, Sinn Féin, and Green Party would be shared by all members of the Technical Group; it also specified that the PDs' allocation would be shared with "Independent Members who are not members of the Technical Group", in effect those who supported the government.

15 Feb 2007, Ceann Comhairle to Joe Higgins:

Sinn Féin as a party can contribute, but there is no provision for members of the Technical Group.

3 July 2007 (SO116):

No diff on defn, but defines rota

For most of the duration of the 30th Dáil, there was no Technical Group. After the 2007 general election, 8 of its previous 22 members lost their seats, the Green Party entered government, and three of the four remaining independents left the group when agreeing to give confidence and supply support to the government. This left only five TDs (four Sinn Féin plus Tony Gregory), below the minimum threshold of seven. Subsequent by-elections and party defections have fuelled speculation about the recreation of the Technical Group. In December 2010, after Sinn Féin's Pearse Doherty's won the Donegal South West by-election, a technical group was recognised, and introduced to the Priority Questions rota. However, once the six Green Party TDs left government in January 2011, the Technical Group was derecognised as it no longer included a majority of the relevant TDs.

In the 31st Dáil, the Technical Group comprises 16 TDs: 11 independents and five from the United Left Alliance (two Socialist Party, two People Before Profit Alliance and one Workers and Unemployed Action Group ). The Group's nominated leader, deputy leader, and substitute leader are Joe Higgins, Finian McGrath and Shane Ross, with Catherine Murphy and Maureen O'Sullivan as chief and assistant whip. The Group sits between Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin on the opposition benches in the Dáil chamber. Thirteen members of the Technical Group vote against Enda Kenny as Taoiseach, two voted in favour, and one abstained. The three independent TDs who opted not to join the Group voted for Kenny; one of them, Michael Lowry, denied this was a quid pro quo for parliamentary resources from the government, and claimed that future reform of Dáil procedures would ensure he had adequate access.

There is no procedure to expel members from the group. When group members Mick Wallace and Ming Flanagan were involved in personal controversies in 2012 and 2013, some members called for them to resign from it to avoid tarnishing other members' reputations; others dissociated themselves from the controversial members and emphasised the group's technical nature. The group did table a Dáil motion in relation to the Irish European Fiscal Compact referendum, 2012 and presented a common viewpoint on the issue.

Several ex-Fine Gael TDs applied to join the technical group in September 2014. In October 2014, the Ceann Comhairle decided their application was sufficient to make them members, despite the group's previous members not having agreed or being notified of the decision. They disputed the Ceann Comhairle's interpretation of the group eligibility criteria. The Ceann Comhairle also undertook to give speaking time to technical group members outside those agreed by its leaders if he felt they were being frozen out.

"Others"

In September 2013, an informal group called the Reform Alliance was formed by five TDs and two Senators who had been expelled from Fine Gael for voting against the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013. Reform Alliance members requested a change to standing orders to allow it speaking rights. While some ministers suggested the TDs could join the Technical group, other commentators argued they were ineligible as they had been elected for a recognised party. There was also speculation about a realignment excluding the more left-wing members of the pre-existing technical group and instead combining its other members with the Reform Alliance and other ex-government TDs.

The Ceann Comhairle, Seán Barrett, changed the procedure for allocation of time during debates on government business: in each round after the initial round of group spokespersons, a new slot for "others" is to be added after those of recognised groups. Opposition groups were critical of the decision, which would in effect reduce their allocations; some suggested Brady, formerly of Fine Gael, was breaching the neutrality expected of the Ceann Comhairle. No rights for "others" apply to time and resources subject to standing orders, including leader's questions, private members time, and committee membership.

2016

Catherine Murphy said in 2016, "I acted as the Whip for the Technical Group on the last occasion and noted the arrangement then was a constant source of problems. The Minister needs to be able to telephone one person and not 15 or 16 to impart information."

The 2016 general election produced an unusually fragmented Dáil with a large number of independents. A sub-committee on Dáil reform was established on 10 March at the 32nd Dáil's first meeting, whose interim report of 5 April 2016 addressed groups thus:

The sub-Committee decided to amend the following rules in relation to groups by:

i. reducing the size of a group to a minimum of 5 members and

ii. permitting more than one technical group to be formed.

Rotas and speaking rights will continue to be determined on a proportional basis.

Louise O'Reilly (Sinn Féin) in the debate on the report: The draft report on Dáil reform acknowledges the precedence of parties over groups in recognition of the fact that each group of Deputies representing a political party went before the electorate with a set of ideologies and a particular political philosophy. Groups that are formed after general elections come together for technical reasons. If there were other reasons for the existence of such a group, its members would join or form a political party. Unless and until we know the exact composition of such Dáil groups, we cannot know how the pro rata time distribution will work. I emphasise that regardless of how many groups are formed, the sub-committee's commitment to the precedent of parties over groups must be respected and reflected when time is allocated for critical set-pieces such as Leaders' Questions every time we meet here. Independents later in same debate disagreed.

The SOs changed in 2016, after which:

• "technical group" became an official label
• the minimum number of TDs was reduced to 5
• it was permitted for parties of size greater than 5 to participate in such a group,
• more than one group at a time was allowed.

The recognised groups were:

Group	Size	Members	31 May 2016 order of business motion	31 May 2016 standing committee motion
Independents4Change	7	Catherine Connolly, Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Tommy Broughan, Joan Collins, Thomas Pringle, Maureen O'Sullivan	Independents4Change	Independents4Change
Rural Alliance	6	Noel Grealish, Michael Healy-Rae, Danny Healy-Rae, Mattie McGrath, Michael Collins. Michael Harty	"technical group 1"	"the Rural Alliance group"
Social Democrats–Green Party	5	Stephen Donnelly, Catherine Murphy, Róisín Shortall, Eamon Ryan, Catherine Martin	"technical group 2"	"the Social Democrats—Green Party group"

Is AAA-PBP now a technical group again? Bardon says "[sc. two TDs joining I4C group] has angered TDs in the People before Profit-Anti Austerity Alliance and Labour. Their addition means this technical group, which already consists of Clare Daly, Mick Wallace, Thomas Broughan and Joan Collins, has seven members. It will supersede the PBP-AAA for speaking time and Leader’s Questions. But parties always precede technical groups, and Labour at least is definitely a party, so it seems Bardon is just mistaken (her report is from 1 June so it's not based on an early draft of the SOs in which party priority was absent). The latest register of parties still has AAA-PBP and not PBP (though yes Socialist). A Dáil motion has the following order:

Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin, the Labour Party, Independents4Change, the Anti-Austerity Alliance—People Before Profit, the Rural Alliance group and the Social Democrats—Green Party group

which may or may not be significant.

Stephen Donnelly left the Social Democrats in September 2016 but said he would remain in the technical group for speaking rights.

List

This table assumes that the technical group was automatic prior to the 1997 change (hereinafter "The Change") in which the SO was amended from "all others" to "a majority of others, who submit a list to the CC". This assumption tallies with James Dillon's 1962 comment. OTOH, it does not tally with Seán Barrett's 1985 and 1986 comments, which imply that a technical group must be expressly constituted rather than arising by default. Perhaps The Change was made to make it easier to effect such express constitution, by eliminating the ability of a single eligible TD to veto the formation of a group by refusing to join it. If The Change was a recommendation of the CPP, the relevant report should explain its reasoning. Hopefully this report is accessible somewhere. But if Dillon 1962 and Barrett 1985 are both correct, then there must have been a change between 1962 and 1985 from automatic-group to explicit-group; if so, when was this? Perhaps in 1974, when the minimum-size of seven was introduced.

Dates	Dáil	Technical group	Government	Opposition party groups	Government- supporting Ind	Other non-group TDs
1962–5	17th	CnaT (2) NPD (2) CnaP (1) Ind ()	FF (70)	FG (47) Labour (15)		N/A
1965–9	18th	CnaP (1) Ind ()	FF (72)	FG (47) Labour (21)		N/A
1969–73	19th	Ind (1)	FF (74)	FG (50) Labour (18)	None	N/A
1973–74	20th	Ind (2)	FG (54) Labour (19)	FF (68)	None	N/A
1974–77	20th	None	FG (54) Labour (19)	FF (68)	None	Ind (2)
1977–81	21st	None	FF (84)	FG (43) Labour (16)	None	Ind (4)
1981–82	22nd	None	FG (65) Labour (15)	FF (77)		Anti H-Block (2) SFWP (1) SLP (1) Ind ()
Feb–Nov 1982	23rd	None	FF (81)	FG (63) Labour (15)	Ind (2)	SFWP (3) DSP (1)
1982–86	24th	None	FG (70) Labour (16)	FF (75)	None	WP (2) Ind (2)
1986–87	24th	None	FG (69) Labour (16)	FF (71)	None	PD (5) WP (2) Ind (2)
1987–89	25th	None	FF (81)	FG (50) PD (14) Labour (12)	None	WP (4) DSP (1) Ind (3)
1989–92	26th	None	FF (77) PD (6)	FG (55) Labour (15) WP (7)	None	Green (1) DSP (1) Ind (3)
Feb–Aug 1992	26th	None	FF (77) PD (6)	FG (55) Labour (16)	None	DL (6) WP (1) Green (1) Ind (3)
1992–94	27th	DL (4) Green (1) Ind (4)	FF (68) Labour (33)	FG (45) PD (10)	None
1994–97	27th	None	FG (45) Labour (33) DL (6)	FF (67) PD (9)	None	Green (1) Ind (4)
1997–99	28th	None	FF (77) PD (4)	FG (54) Labour (17)	Ind (3)	DL (4) Green (2) SF (1) Socialist (1) Ind (3)
1999–2002	28th	None	FF (77) PD (4)	FG (54) Labour (21)	Ind (3)	Green (2) SF (1) Socialist (1) Ind (3)
2002–2007	29th	Green (6) Sinn Féin (5) Socialist (1) Ind (10)	FF (81) PD (8)	FG (31) Labour (20)	Ind (3)	None
2007–2010	30th	None	FF (77) Green (6) PD/Ind (2)	FG (51) Labour (20)	Ind (3)	SF (4) Ind (2)
Dec 2010–Jan 2011	30th	SF (5) Ind (2)	FF (71) Green (6) Ind (1)	FG (51) Labour (20)	Ind (4)	None
Jan–Feb 2011	30th	None	FF (71) Ind (1)	FG (51) Labour (20)	Ind (4)	Green (6) SF (5) Ind (2)
Mar 2011–	31st	ULA (5: Socialist 2, PBPA 2, WUAG 1) Ind 11	FG (75) Labour (37)	FF (20) SF (14)	None	Ind (3)

Seanad

Prior to 2016, the single equivalent of the Dáil technical group was called the "independent group". In the Seanad, the corresponding definition is in SO 115(4):

A group shall be a group so recognised by the Cathaoirleach and consisting of not less than five Senators.

In 2016, there are two such groups, the "Independent Group" and the "Civil Engagement group". (Sometimes misspelled "Civic Engagement Group") I guess there is no need for amendment to standing orders as there was never a restriction to one technical group.

This definition was added after a recommendation of in a 1979 report by the Seanad CPP:

The Committee gave consideration to the definition of “group” in relation to the presentation procedure. In Dáil Standing Orders it is defined by reference to Parties of not less than seven members. All members being not less than seven in number who are not members of parties constitute a single group. It is, of course, recognised that the majority of Senators have Party affiliations. Seanad Standing Orders and other official documents do not, however, contain reference to Party and the Committee sees no advantage in changing the formal position. It proposes to define a group as being one so recognised by the Cathaoirleach and consisting of not less than five Senators. It is to be expected that the Cathaoirleach would accord recognition under this definition to the four obvious groups comprising the present Seanad.

October 1983:

Brendan Ryan: The Leader of Fianna Fáil in the House was informed, I understand, in some detail about the necessity for and the urgency of this Bill. I have not been so informed. However, I accept the word of the Leader of the House that it is a matter of great urgency but I would point out that when there are matters which are of an emergency nature which require urgent consideration, there is an Independent group in this House and that they deserve and are entitled to be consulted and informed of the reasons for any emergency legislation being brought before us.

Professor Dooge: In view of what Senator Ryan has said, I should like to explain to the House what I did this morning. I consulted with three people this morning on this matter. I consulted with Senator Lanigan, the Leader of the Opposition; I consulted with Senator Ferris who is the Leader of the Labour Party in this House, and I consulted with Senator Catherine McGuinness who is the representative of the Independent group on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I thought she would be the appropriate person to discuss it with and having sought her for some time I managed to discuss it with her as soon as she came to the House.

David Norris in 2016:

Some 30 years ago I initiated the first Independent Group with my colleague, former Senator Joe O'Toole. We were entirely university Members at that stage. After the last election I tried to put together a larger group because there were so many Independents but Senator Alice-Mary Higgins and Senator Lynn Ruane, with some others, formed a separate group. We then had a meeting. I was elected leader and given the foreign affairs portfolio. Senator McDowell introduced two new members and suggested that since they were new members we should re-run the election. This we did today, and I put myself forward again. Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell got six votes, I got two and Senator Craughwell got one. I regarded this as a vote of no confidence.

Brendan Ryan in November 1997:

Those of us who work as a technical group on the Independent benches do not have a leader, we have a representative on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges who can make whatever agreements he chooses. We are not bound by such agreements unless consulted prior to their conclusion. [...] The Independent Senators know how to work together without being supine to each other. We see no need to genuflect to the leader in the way members of political parties do. We are capable of conducting our affairs with a reasonable level of debate and dissent without the need to impose disciplinary Whips on each other.

A 2002 ruling of the Cathaoirleach, Rory Kiely:

under Standing Order 32, the Chair has sole discretion in calling a Senator to speak. His choice of speaker is influenced by the numerical strength of the relevant Senator's group. The Independent group and Labour group each has five Members. In the absence of any direction in Standing Orders, I called Senator O'Toole to speak on the basis of the seniority of the Independent group which has been in existence since 1987.

Where did members of parties other than FF–FG–Lab fit in? Were they lumped into the Independent group? Were PD and Green senators lumped in with FF?

After 2011, 8 of 11 Taoiseach's nominees "agreed to form a separate Independent group".

In 2016, David Norris resigned from the Independent group after losing a leadership vote to Marie-Louise O'Donnell, who was supported by Michael McDowell.

Allowance

Independent senators and TDs are entitled to an allowance which in the case of party members is paid to the party.

Unread sources

Q1:

To qualify as a 'technical group' in the Dáil requires seven members; the main resources accruing from such a status includes additional speaking ...

Q2:

Together, the two smallest parliamentary parties and 12 Independents established an eclectic 'technical group' in order to maximise their speaking rights in parliament. ...

Q3 [1992-94]:

Although it established a Technical Group with independent TDs to secure greater speaking rights and privileges in the Dail, the election was a

Q4 [2011-12]:

There was early and widespread political support from all of the political parties, but one week before the referendum the Dáil Technical Group came out ...

Outside Ireland

Background on groups

Brief survey of "PPGs" by Hazan, mentioning minimum size, restrictions on changing, and rights of group, and "for these ... reasons, ... small parties ... are sometimes grouped together". Crowther and Olson 2002 discusses how small parties demand representation on all committees in Norway, Sweden, and post-Communist Europe; no mention of technical group as compromise.

Variety of mixed groups

In some cases all non-aligned are automatically in the mixed group; in others some may be "non-aligned" — is this by their choice or by being frozen out by the other Mixed Group members? "En Italia y en España quienes no se inscriban en uno quedan incorporados al Grupo Mixto; en Francia y en la República Federal Alemana no, pero carecen de toda influericia en los trabajos parlamentarios." In 1981, if a legislator left a group in the Spanish Congress they were automatically enrolled in the Grupo Mixto, whereas in the Spanish or Italian Senate they had three days to join another group to avoid that fate. Torres del Moral points out the tactical possibility of having legislators formally members of the Grupo Mixto while practically members of a different group.

History of mixed groups

First was in Italy in 1920 [zzz not sure about this: Sáiz Arnaiz seems to say that but cites Torres del Moral who doesn't seem to]; in 1988 was also in Spain and Greece.

By country

• Spain : Grupo Mixto. Title III of provisional parliament rules of July 1931 specified parliamentary groups; paragraph 4 was to the effect that "la Mesa podría considerar como formando grupo, en concepto de indefinidos o independientes, a todos los que no se hubieran adscrito a uno ni desearan incorporarse a un sector afín".
• Italy: Gruppo Misto. After the 1919 election by proportional representation, the 1900 Chamber of Deputies system of assigning of legislators onto committees by lottery was modified by introducing groups which would nominate by secret ballot. A group needed at least 20 members, with other deputies automatically assigned to the Ufficio misto. Gaetano Salvemini was opposed to the idea as compromising deputies' independence and vulnerable to being commandeered by a conspiracy of fake independents. From 1948 to 1993, only a few residual independents were in the mixed group. The 1994 election abandoned PR and prevented legislators switching groups or forming new groups; any leaving their original group would automatically be assigned to the mixed group,[zzz that might not be true; I got it from Annecker but somewhere in Pergolani suggested automatic assignment applied earlier.] which ballooned in size. To add structure to this "Tower of Babel", the Chamber in 1997 recognised of "components" (componente) within the mixed group subject to a minimum of 10 members, reduced to 3 members in certain cases, including groups representing linguistic minorities. This was criticised as going against the 1990s general trend away from PR to a two-party system. The Senate regulations do not recognise components within the mixed group, but they exist in practice. The mixed group has much the same rights as the other parliamentary groups; however, it does not receive public party funding, although some of its components may.
• French Senate: RASNAG. Godbout and Foucault "find in our data several PPGs that were formed between smaller electoral parties that do not really share a common ideology. These alliances, or 'technical groups', are generally constituted in order to reach the minimal threshold to obtain the benefits of being recognized as an official parliamentary group in the legislature"; instances RCV (Radical, Citizen and Green) in 1997 and GDR (Democratic and Republican Left group) in 2002 [? recte 2007?].
• Canadian Senate: Independent Senators Group
• Germany: Distinguishes "Fraktion" from "Gruppe", in that former is bigger and has more rights, but it seems that the latter is also restricted to a common viewpoint, if not necessarily a single party. There is also Ausschussgemeinschaft at local level, which is a technical group of councillors to reach the threshold for nomination to the council's committees. "A deputy who is not a member of a Fraktion is reduced to almost complete powerlessness".
• Denmark: minimum PPG size is 1, but independents are not treated as one-member PPGs and do not form a technical group. They get a larger individual allowance to make up for the lack of PPG per-capita allowance, but at the discretion of the presidium.

References

Sources

Ireland

• "Dáil Éireann Standing Orders Relative to Public Business Together With Oireachtas Library Rules 2007" (PDF). Oireachtas. 2007. Retrieved 20 October 2010.
• "Modifications currently in effect to 2007 Edition of Dáil Standing Orders from 7 July 2010" (MS Word). Oireachtas. 2010. Retrieved 20 October 2010.
• MacCarthaigh, Muiris (2005). Accountability in Irish parliamentary politics. Institute of Public Administration. ISBN 9781904541318. Retrieved 22 October 2010.

Elsewhere

• Annecker, Edoardo (2017). "4.4 Le componenti politiche del gruppo misto" (PDF). Il Rapporto Tra Gruppo Parlamentare E Partito Politico; Lo Sviluppo Storico Dei Gruppi, L'Evoluzione Del Rapporto Con I Partiti E Le Prospettive Di Modifica Dei Regolamenti Parlamentari (Thesis) (in Italian). Rome: LUISS. pp. 78–84. Retrieved 4 April 2018.
• Torres del Moral, Antonio (Spring 1981). "Los grupos parlamentarios". Revista de Derecho Político (9: EL PARLAMENTO Y SUS REGLAMENTOS): 21–66. Retrieved 3 April 2018.

To integrate

• "[Dáil] Committee on Procedure and Privileges". Committee Reports. Oireachtas.
• "Seanad". Committee Reports. Oireachtas.

Citations

Category:Dáil Éireann