Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all Members from across the House for their contributions. It was a broad-ranging and well-informed debate on an important Bill. While it is intrinsically a simple Bill, it is hard to balance - this was implicit in virtually every contribution - the proper right of every citizen, organisation and company to have its view heard and its impact and assessment valued by law makers and the Executive, which is very important, with an experience in which some people had the inside track. We use euphemisms such as "the Galway tent" to refer to the way in which the powerful could bend the ear of policy makers and have policy formulation crafted to their own interest.

I have been working on this area for some time as part of a suite of reform measures. It has been two years since the initial announcement and its presentation to the House but, as I indicated in my opening remarks yesterday, we have had a huge amount of consultation, formal discussion papers and a formal seminar follow-up to ensure that genuine lobbying organisations that have expressed concerns, including the IFA, can be accommodated and given to understand that they have nothing to fear in genuinely pursuing the interests of their members, which is their right. Ordinary citizens should be fully protected in their right to have their voices heard about public policy, and it is about doing this in a transparent and open way. The main goal is to establish a register of lobbying to make information available to the public on the identities of those seeking to influence public policy as well as to provide a framework for holding those engaged in such lobbying accountable for the manner in which they conduct that lobbying. No one should have any fear - and the IFA, the trade union movement, or IBEC would not have a difficulty - about being publicly identified as lobbyists. If we have that in a robust, transparent way, we might restore the tarnished view of lobbyists that many Members of the House have expressed.

I will comment on some of the observations made by Members during the course of the debate. I will have careful regard to all the views expressed and hope we will have a robust discussion on Committee Stage in due course. On behalf of Fianna Fáil, Deputy Fleming made a general comment relating to State board appointments. Many comments were made by various Deputies on that issue. It is not intrinsically part of the lobbying Bill, but timing is everything. I am very pleased that I secured agreement yesterday on a comprehensive revised model for appointments to State boards. One might say it was handy that I had a prepared brief on the matter, but I have had that for some time. Opportunity is a great thing and I felt we could have consensus about its presentation yesterday. I was very glad to be asked to do that by the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste.

Within a number of weeks, I will present the overarching set of guidelines for appointments to State boards to the Government for approval. I say honestly that it will be a fundamental change for the good which will be manifest over time. It will encourage many people who would not have considered putting themselves forward for State boards to go to stateboards.ie, look at the panoply of State boards which are available, the criteria expected for each board, say "I could do that," and send in their curricula vitae to be independently assessed by the Commission for Public Service Appointments. I disagree with those who say the ultimate decisions should not be made by elected Ministers as, whatever else we are, we are accountable to the people here. I will probably be murdered for saying so, but we often appoint judges or others who are supposed to be above reproach but who are accountable to nobody. If Ministers make mistakes, they are hauled over the coals here at least and held to account, which is as it should be.

Deputy Fleming referred also in his contribution to social contacts. That was a point made by others in the course of the debate today. Any contact which falls within the scope of the legislation that constitutes lobbying is covered, whether it takes place at the Galway races or, to be comprehensive, the Wexford Opera Festival. It would be captured.

As regards the public servants who come within the scope of the Bill, as raised by a number of Members, I will have discretion as to the timing of the application to persons beyond those listed. In the first instance, those captured will be Secretaries General and assistant secretaries. It is my intention to include principal officers and assistant principal officers in due course. This will be done by way of regulation. I will have regard to the strong views expressed by a number of Members that it should happen sooner rather than later. Deputy Catherine Murphy referred to what we used to call county managers but are now chief executive officers of county councils. They will be captured from the outset by the legislation.

Deputies Fleming, McDonald and Kyne raised the issue of the cut-off point for small businesses. The issue resonated in comments made by a number of Deputies this afternoon. I said in my opening Second Stage speech that I did not have a fixed view on the matter. Listening to the views of those I have discussed it with over the last number of months, I did not want to put a burden of registration and thrice-annual reporting on small companies. Some people think it is not onerous, but it is a burden. Some of these are one-man operations - for example, a local painter and his son seeking to make an approach in respect of a new grants system for household repairs. If people feel the way I have designed it to cover companies employing more than ten people is not tight enough, I will consider some of the suggestions made by perhaps looking at company turnover. It is something we will examine between now and Committee Stage, when I will, again, welcome robust debate.

Deputy McDonald commented on the period between reviews in the legislation. The legislation will be reviewed within a year of enactment and every five years thereafter. Deputy McDonald accepted the initial annual review but felt it should be every three years thereafter. I have an open mind on the matter as long as we have sufficient evidence and a robust body of information to review in the timeframe provided for.

Deputy McDonald referred also to the exemption applied to communications between public officials. If everything had to be captured, the sheer volume of communication between public officials would risk overloading the register. I am working diligently to ensure that other transparency mechanisms capture this sort of thing, including the very wide extension of the freedom of information provisions. I look forward, hopefully, to concluding the legislative phase of the freedom of information legislation tomorrow in the Seanad. If we pass it in the other House, that should be law. It will go a long way to addressing the concerns raised by the Deputy.

Deputy Finian McGrath gave us some examples of what he termed "good" and "bad" lobbying. The aim of the Bill is to secure transparency in all areas of lobbying. We could all instance examples of what we would classify as "good" and "bad" lobbying. Deputy Ross raised the issue of judicial appointments. The Department of Justice and Equality is finalising a report on the consultation process recently undertaken on the system of judicial appointments. I have my own strong views on the matter. I was a member of the Government which initially put forward the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board system as an improvement, but we can go further. It is something we can look at.

Deputy Wallace raised concerns about the influence of big business on Government decision making. The intention of the Bill is to assist in informing the public about who is contacting whom about what.

That is what we need to know, and that will give reassurance to people.

Deputy Connaughton talked about the importance of a good fit between the legislation and the political culture. I agree that is an important point, underpinned by the experience of similar legislation in other jurisdictions, and I am keen to hear the practical experience of Members regarding that. We have had a good debate about those matters.

I acknowledge Deputy Kenny's view that this Bill represents an important step in rebuilding public trust, which no doubt every Member of the House would agree has been sundered in recent years. A number of Deputies, including Deputy Ó Cuív, touched on the cooling off period; other Deputies touched upon that earlier. Deputies were right to say that in the original proposals I put forward and agreed in the programme for Government the cooling off period was two years. I am trying to achieve a balance in terms of what is reasonable. I listened to Deputy Fleming yesterday who suggested that there is nothing inherently bad with a senior official in, say, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine working in an export company that will advance Irish exports and bringing his or her expertise to bear. Having consulted a good deal and having regard to people's constitutional rights to work, and trying to obviate the need to pay any compensation to people for limiting their employability in legislation, which is another point that might have arisen should we have gone too far in this regard, it is a better process to hand it over to an independent, robust and trusted body like the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPOC, for it to make the evaluation whether the proposed work is a real conflict of interest. In my judgment that is the way it would be best to go.

To deal with some of the points made this afternoon, I thank Deputy Costello for his warm welcome for this legislation, and that of other Deputies. He laid out the history of lobbying and our unfortunate experience. He also raised the issue of concern about limiting the legislation to impact on companies with greater than ten employees, and I will have regard to that.

Deputy Eoghan Murphy again referenced the current controversy about board appointments and welcomed the new regime, which I am glad Government approved yesterday. The Deputy posed a question to me that I will reflect further on, namely, whether there should be an obligation on those who are lobbied to ask the question: are you a lobbyist and for whom do you work. I will reflect further on whether that is a valid question, but I do not want to put in a legal obligation on every Deputy in the House that every time somebody approaches them they have to say, "Stop. Are you a lobbyist?", and if they do not ask the question that somehow they are in breach of legislation. That would not be welcomed by Members of the House. The better way of proceeding is what I have set out, which is the requirement on those who wish to lobby to register on a public platform.

Deputy Alan Farrell rightly identified the complexity of the issues before us and that are being addressed in this legislation, and spoke about the American experience. For clarity, he said there should be no limitation to those who are lobbying in regard to land zoning, and I can give that assurance. Anybody who is lobbying in regard to the zoning of land is fully registerable under these provisions.

Deputy Healy gave his standard revision of history relating to my party and the broken promises malarkey. My then party leader, the former Tánaiste, went on the "Late Late Show" in advance of the last election and said we would not be reversing the 2011 budget. We said that publicly in advance of the election. That is just for history. I know people-----

See this speech in context