Mr. Bobby O'Connell:

I wish to refer to section 5 of the Bill on categories of public official. We are concerned about local authority members being classified as a category A public official.

We note that there is a proposal in section 5 for local authority members to be classified as category A public officials along with Oireachtas Members, special advisers, chairpersons and CEOs of public bodies, and those on remuneration at deputy secretary level and above in the public sector.

Category A public officials will also have the highest level of obligations under the Bill. Category B public officials are classified as those on remuneration between principal officer level and deputy secretary in the public sector, and will also include a member of the board of a public body, excluding the chairperson. Category C public officials will be classified as being all other public officials. We would question the requirement to class our members as category A public officials and place them in the same category and level as Oireachtas Members and CEOs of public bodies given the powers, responsibilities and resources available that our members have at local level. We contend that local authority members should be equated with members of a board of a public body. Therefore, we suggest that local authority members should be classed as category B public officials at most.

An additional implication for being classified as category A public officials is the obligation to submit all declarations to the Commissioner of their interests during the relevant declaration period. If our members were re-classified as category B public officials, which we are now, the requirement would be to submit all declarations to the relevant public body as is the current requirement under the various Ethics and Local Government Act.

Section 8 refers to private declarable interests. We have concerns about private declarations and income from an employment. Both the AILG and LAMA have grave concerns about some of the proposals about the private declarations in section 8 of the draft Bill on declarable interests. For instance, while we accept and understand the requirement to make a public declaration on a member's employment, profession, business and directorship status, we absolutely fail to understand the reasoning one needs to make a private declaration about the amount of his or her remuneration, particularly a PAYE employment.

We would argue that if an elected member has a conflict of interest on a local authority as a result of his or her employment, the amount of their remuneration is irrelevant as the conflict of interest already exists by virtue of their employment and they should recuse themselves from the matter in their role as an elected member. We would also contend that the requirement to declare a member’s private income from an employment, trade or profession would be a data protection issue.

Section 8 concerns private declarations and declarations of assets. Again, under section 8 of the draft Bill, both associations have grave concerns in relation to the proposed requirement for category A officials to make a private declaration of liabilities and assets over €50,000, excluding pensions or a charge on the family home. We feel that this is an excessive requirement and indeed a potential invasion of privacy for our members, particularly on financial assets over €50,000 that they will now be requested to declare. For example, we fail to see the reasoning whereby an elected member who is left financial assets of over €50,000 in a family will, due to a bereavement, has to declare it even in a private capacity and why such an example like this would affect their role as an elected member.

Section 8 also relates to private declarable interests, private declarations and the declaration of gifts not connected to official function. Both associations question the requirement for category A officials to make a private declaration on receipt of gifts and travel of between €200 and €600, received from a person not related, when it is not connected to a function in our member's capacity as an elected member. Again, our members feel these instances may be of a personal nature and if it is unconnected to their capacity and function as an elected member, there should be no requirement for a declaration. We would contend that declarations in general should only be required where the gift or travel is received where it is connected to a function and we welcome the provision in the draft Bill under section 11 of the requirement and obligation for public officials to refuse such gifts in the first instance and notify the commissioner of same.