Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the introduction of the legislation, which has been a long time coming. The legislation comes on the back of decades of political corruption and cronyism. Members in the Dáil and beyond are familiar with the corruption scandals of the 1990s to 2000s that exposed corrupt practices. In summary, the legislation is designed to rebuild trust in the political system. It is welcome and necessary. It is unfortunate that, at a time when we discuss this landmark legislation, it is against a backdrop of some of the most outrageous displays of stroke politics. As recently as today in the Dáil Chamber, we heard the Taoiseach give an incoherent and garbled account of communication and decision-making between his political party, his decisions as leader of Fine Gael, and his communication with a fellow member of Cabinet, Deputy Heather Humphreys. The Taoiseach has acknowledged responsibility for some wrongdoing but he has, as yet, fallen short of identifying the sequence of events and what he is apologising for. In discussing the legislation, it is not a platform for us to focus on the issue but it is important that in dealing with legislation such as this, we understand the depth of the malaise and the lack of public confidence in individual politicians or political parties but also in the political process and system. It is a serious state of affairs and we must be sure the legislation goes substantially along the way to address some of the issues.

I am glad there is a review provision after 12 months. I am concerned about the five-year period thereafter. It is rather long and perhaps we will revisit this aspect on Committee Stage. I may suggest a three-year period but we can debate the matter. I share the concerns raised in respect of designated persons. There is a difference between an outside organisation or group lobbying a public official and the internal communications of public officials.

I accept that these are qualitatively different things. None the less, if this legislation fails to capture the lobbying that does happen between public officials of one sort or another, be they of high rank in the Civil Service or at ministerial rank, we leave a very big and gaping hole in the legislation. The events of the past week or more involving the Taoiseach's interaction with the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on the matter of the appointment to the board of IMMA clearly reflect the need for transparency and for a light to be shone on those interactions. I do not propose that this would intrude on matters of Cabinet confidentiality but the Minister must consider and have an open mind on Committee Stage. I do not believe that the Minister, no more than I, wishes to see, much less preside over, a situation where lobbying can occur in that manner and can have such a negative consequence in terms of public confidence and public perception.

I am interested to see the meaning of this transparency code referred to in section 5 and what it might look like. I know it is not proposed to incorporate the transparency code within the primary legislation but I suggest that we could have a very useful and, I hope, fruitful conversation on Committee Stage on that concept and what form and shape it might take.

This time of the year is very busy for lobbyists. The budget will be announced in a fortnight and Oireachtas Members have spent a lot of time in recent weeks attending briefings on the budget and considering budgetary submissions from various organisations, companies and charities. Given the very great and often crippling effect that budgetary decisions can have on individuals and families, it is very important that all interest groups have equal access to policy-makers. We need to redress the imbalance between those organisations that have the resources to fund slick public relations campaigns and those that do not enjoy such a level of resources. We must ensure, inasmuch as is possible, that equal access is afforded to groups that are broadly representative of society and not just of large commercial interests. We must make space for and acknowledge smaller community group lobbies and charities.

The Minister referred to the consultation process. I welcome that the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform undertook this process with interested parties as part of the drafting process. It was very important that we had access to a range of opinion and expertise on the subjects of lobbying and advocacy. I acknowledge the work carried out within this process by organisations, individuals and community groups who took part in that consultation process and by the Department and its officials. It is disappointing that we have had to wait so long for the Bill to reach Second Stage. It perhaps reflects that this matter was low on the list of priorities for political reform for the Fine Gael and Labour Government.

The Minister will recall that Fine Gael promised to implement sweeping political reform under the now fabled banner of the democratic revolution. This week has shown us that it is business as usual in so far as stroke politics and jobs for the boys are concerned. It is sobering to see how little has changed since the arrival of the new Government and the scant regard that Fine Gael and, it seems, the Labour Party, have in real terms for the project of political reform. No matter how many political scandals are exposed and investigated in this State, lessons are not learned and the cycle continues. On a note of optimism, the debate, consideration and passage of this legislation, as amended, will mark something of a sea change in that attitude within what I will call the political class.

The intention of regulating lobbyists is to level the playing field in order that all stakeholders have equal access to decision-makers in matters of policy-making or in the drafting of legislation. The worst outcome for this legislation would be that groups would be excluded from its remit. It is important that regulation does not present any barriers to small groups or to citizens accessing representatives or policy-makers.

I draw the Minister's attention to section 5 and the fact registered charities are not mentioned. The Minister will be aware that charities are entitled to tax exemption if registered with the Revenue Commissioners. Under Revenue guidelines, an organisation that engages in lobbying cannot be registered as a charity. I hope that at the more interactive forum of Committee Stage we can tease out this matter and have a discussion about lobbying and advocacy and the role of charity groups and protections for such groups within that system. We cannot leave a situation where charities engaging in advocacy might lose their status as registered charities due to any lack of clarity in the Bill.

I am pleased to note that the register proposed is to be made available online, public and free of charge. This is the correct course of action. I am also pleased that a range of information to do with various types of lobbying will also be available in the online register. It is very important that the most comprehensive information possible is available to the public. This might entail amendments to the Freedom of Information Act if meetings and other activities which are currently available for public scrutiny are to be included in the register. We will need a discussion on and some clarification of this part of the legislation.

I am pleased to note specific protection for normal citizens in their interactions with public representatives in the matters of their private affairs has been included in the list of exemptions. There are a few questionable inclusions in this section. While I appreciate the positive sentiments behind the exclusion of communications by employers with ten or fewer employees, it might be prudent to redefine this subsection to include the annual turnover of companies. The Minister might be open to a discussion and an amendment along these lines.

See this speech in context