Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:

“condemns all instances of corruption, anti-competitive behaviour, breaches of ethics legislation, breaches of the Companies Acts, and all other forms of white-collar crime;

recognises the need for a robust system of public standards legislation and enforcement to prevent wrongdoing on the part of elected and public officials;

notes:

— the significant programme of reforms introduced by the Government to protect whistleblowers, reform lobbying and increase transparency and oversight, which includes the Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 2012, the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015, and the Freedom of Information Act 2014;

— the major overhaul and reform of companies legislation introduced by the Companies Act 2014;

— and approves of the reform of competition and consumer protection regulation by the amalgamation of the Competition Authority and the National Consumer Agency into the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission;

— the significant improvement to legislation enabling investigation and prosecution of white-collar crime occasioned by the Criminal Justice Act 2011;

— the further legislative improvements in regard to the prevention and prosecution of unethical and corrupt behaviour, including measures recommended by the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments (Mahon Tribunal), including those to be introduced by the forthcoming Public Sector Standards Bill and the Criminal Justice (Corruption) Bill; and

— the reform of planning legislation undertaken by the Government to implement the recommendations of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments (Mahon Tribunal) including the forthcoming Planning and Development (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2015 which is to be published shortly;

recognises and strongly supports:

— the work of the Garda Síochána and the Criminal Assets Bureau in tackling and investigating white-collar crime; and

— the work of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement;

acknowledges the close cooperation between the Garda Síochána and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and the significant success in terms of recent convictions for white-collar offences;

recognises and strongly supports the work of a range of other specialised bodies who are charged with the investigation of elected and public officials and commercial activities including the Standards in Public Office Commission, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, and the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission; acknowledges the vital independence of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in bringing prosecutions for complex white-collar offences;

recognises that the Government is strongly committed to ensuring that the necessary measures are in place to effectively combat corruption and recognises the significant investment in Garda resources through investment in information communications technology, vehicles, buildings and most importantly through renewed recruitment which will see 600 new trainee Gardaí enter the Garda College in 2016;

further notes:

— that Ireland is a party to a number of inter-governmental conventions which set international standards in the fight against bribery and corruption;

— that Ireland is subject to ongoing external evaluation of the effectiveness of its anticorruption measures under a number of international evaluation mechanisms including the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions, the Implementation Review Group of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the European Union Anti-Corruption Report;

— the significant work done and currently being undertaken by various Commissions of Investigation; and

— the engagement by the Taoiseach with opposition leaders to seek a consensus on how best to address certain challenges that have arisen in relation to a Commission of Investigation; and

supports the Government’s programme of legislation and reform to improve standards in public office and the private corporate sector, tackle corruption, anti-competitive behaviour and all forms of white-collar crime.”

There is not a state in the world, not even the most open democracy, that has succeeded in fully eliminating the greed, self-service and corruption of those few who abuse political office for their own gratification or enrichment. Last night's "RTE Investigates" programme highlighted how the greed and self-service of a few in public office persists in our democracy. I stress that it is only a few. The vast majority of our elected representatives, whether in this building or in council chambers nationwide, are in it for the right reasons. Their service to their communities, to the State and to the public good must not be allowed to be tarnished by the carry-on of the few. This carry-on is absolutely unacceptable. It is disgusting and it will not be tolerated.

Let us not forget that corruption is not a victimless crime. Families whose homes are flooded because a corrupt vote resulted in housing being built on a rezoned floodplain are victims. Residents of areas left years without basic community facilities because a planned town centre was shelved in favour of a privately-developed shopping centre are victims. The question before this House is about how we prevent such future victimisation and how we tackle corruption.

This Government recognises the need for robust systems of regulation, for effective enforcement of such systems and for effective sanctions when people transgress. Since taking office in 2011, the scale and pace of reform in terms of overhauling the regulation of the financial services sector, the corporate sector and the public sector has been far beyond the efforts of any previous Government. We have seen the enactment of the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013; the Companies Act 2014; the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012; the Ombudsman (Amendment) Act 2012; the Protected Disclosures Act 2014; the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015; and the Freedom of Information Act 2014, to mention some of the key Acts. In the area of criminal law, the Criminal Justice Act 2011 has provided the Garda Síochána with innovative tools for the investigation of white-collar crime. While much has been done, I would like to point to three Bills due for publication shortly, which will implement various recommendations of the Mahon tribunal and from the Standards in Public Office Commission, namely, the public sector standards Bill, the planning and development (amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2015 and the criminal justice (corruption) Bill.

I will say more on each of these Bills in turn but first I would like to touch on some of the issues raised in last night's "RTE Investigates" programme.

The Garda Síochána is examining the programme to see if any action is required on its part. One of the key issues addressed in last night's programme was that of preplanning application consultations. Section 247 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 sets out comprehensive procedures for such consultations, which the Act specifically states should not in any way prejudice the final decision of the planning authority and require that records must be kept. Furthermore, it is already a criminal offence for a member or an official of a planning authority to take or seek any favour, benefit or payment, direct or indirect, in connection with any such consultation.

Following Government consideration of the final Mahon tribunal report, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government published a general scheme of a Bill on 12 January 2015 to provide for the establishment of the office of the planning regulator, OPR. Establishment of the OPR will ensure that there is full public scrutiny and democratic accountability over the significant power to overturn the decisions of local authorities as regards the forward planning and zoning of their areas. It will also ensure that zoning decisions will continue to be scrutinised but in a new and independent manner, separate from the Minister's Department, where that function currently resides. The proposed detailed Bill to underpin the establishment of the new independent office of the planning regulator is intended to be submitted to Government next week for approval of publication.

Turning to the new ethics framework, the proposed public sector standards Bill is a commitment in the Statement of Government Priorities 2014-2016 and is required to give effect to the recommendations of the Mahon and Moriarty tribunal reports relating to regulation of conflicts of interest. Conflicts of interest are currently regulated at national level by the Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 and the Standards in Public Office Act 2001, and at local level by the Local Government Act 2001. The effectiveness of the current system in identifying and addressing potential conflicts of interest raises concerns, as by the RTE investigation programme. The proposals in the General Scheme of the Public Sector Standards Bill are for a comprehensive and far-reaching reform, consolidation and modernisation of the current ethics framework, streamlining provisions at local and national level and ensuring greater consistency in ethics legislation across the public sector.

The proposed Bill provides for the following reforms: the Standards in Public Office Commission be replaced by a single, dedicated public sector standards commissioner and deputy commissioner, with increased powers and who will implement improved complaints and investigations procedures; the commissioner will have stronger powers of sanction and enforcement in a range of contraventions as well as a broader role in the provision of advice and guidance; all public officials will have to disclose as a matter of routine actual and potential conflicts of interest that arise in the context of the performance of their duties; significant extension of the personal and material scope of disclosures for public officials in line with the Mahon tribunal report recommendations, with common definitions applying at both national and local levels; a graduated approach will apply, with the declarations of interests of politicians and senior officials being made to the commissioner and published; statutory prohibitions on the use of insider information, on the seeking by public officials of benefits, including gifts and favours, to further their private interests, and on local elected representatives from dealing professionally with land in certain circumstances; and standards of integrity will apply to all public officials which will be used to provide a framework for codes of standards and behaviour of public officials.

The proposed corruption Bill will clarify and strengthen the law criminalising corruption and replace the seven overlapping Prevention of Corruption Acts dating back to 1889. Penalties of up to ten years imprisonment and unlimited fines are envisaged for persons convicted on indictment. In addition, the courts are to be given new powers to remove certain public officials from office.

The recommendations of the Mahon tribunal report have been taken into account in provisions to be contained in the Bill, including a new offence of making payments knowingly or recklessly to a third party who intends to use them as bribes; and a new offence for public officials who use confidential information to corruptly obtain an advantage. It is intended to enhance the ability of the Director of Public Prosecutions to bring prosecutions by providing for the presumption of corruption where a person with an interest in the functions being discharged by a public official makes a payment to the official or a close relative, for example, where an applicant for planning permission makes a payment to a planning official; a public official fails to declare interests as required by ethics legislation; and a public official accepts a gift in breach of ethics codes. Suspected bribes can be seized and forfeited under current legislation. These provisions will be strengthened by allowing courts to order the forfeiture of assets equal to the value of any bribe given or received.

The proposed Bill will give better effect to our international obligations under the UN Convention against Corruption, the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption and the OECD Convention Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. It also contains an innovative provision outlawing intimidation with the intention of influencing a person to do an act in relation to his or her job or office. The Bill will be published shortly.

In their motion, Deputies Catherine Murphy, Donnelly and Shortall propose the establishment of an anti-corruption agency. It would also be granted wide powers, including those of investigation, compulsion of testimony and prosecution. I appreciate that the Deputies are motivated by a concern to enhance the way in which a broad range of wrongdoing is addressed but in proposing the merger of such a broad range of regulatory and enforcement bodies I believe they are overlooking the complexity of what is involved. In particular, it is not clear how the amalgamation of a wide range of agencies with widely varying functions would, of itself, enhance the capacity of the State to fight corruption.

Let us look, for example, at the areas of competition and corporate enforcement.

The Competition Authority no longer exists by that name. The main mission of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission is to make markets work for both consumers and businesses. This entails a wide range of functions from advocacy and information functions to enforcement and investigations to merger determinations. The majority of these do not fall within the realm of corruption, and I am advised that the proposal to include the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission in a broad anti-corruption agency would not be appropriate and could be detrimental to consumers' interests.

There is inter agency co-ordination in appropriate areas, and on appropriate tasks. The Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation works closely with other bodies with relevant enforcement functions, including the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, the Central Bank, the Revenue Commissioners, and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. A detective sergeant is seconded to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, and a detective inspector, two detective sergeants, two detective gardaí and a garda are seconded to the ODCE. The success of this co-operation is evident in recent convictions for breaches of the Companies Acts. In his letter of 4 December to Opposition leaders, the Taoiseach noted that he had asked his officials to assess how the regulatory, investigatory and enforcement framework can be improved.

Deputies have referred to the challenges arising regarding the Cregan commission of investigation. The interim report and the issues it raises have been subjected to detailed consideration by officials in the Attorney General's office. There also have been consultations with the commission to explore possible solutions to the issues raised. Following consideration by the Government last week, the Taoiseach wrote to the Opposition parties on 4 December setting out possible options for proceeding with the work, while also identifying some legal and financial risks that need to be considered. The Government has made clear its wish to ensure an effective and timely investigation of these matters of public concern, and believes it would be beneficial to secure the greatest possible degree of consensus across the Oireachtas on the optimum approach. The Taoiseach, therefore, intends to meet with the leaders of the Opposition this week to explore these options in greater depth.

I share the concerns expressed by Deputies regarding what we saw on "RTE Investigates" last night. There should be no place in Irish politics at local or national level for anyone who seeks to turn what is, for most of us, an opportunity to serve the public interest into a venal, self-serving, money-grabbing, corrupt practice. The Government has done much to reform the legislative and regulatory landscape. There is more to be done, and the coming weeks will see publication of further key reforms in the area of planning, public standards and corruption law. We will continue to work to ensure that we have better laws, better enforcement and a renewed culture of propriety that will leave no hiding place for those who would betray the public trust. It is in all our interests, on every side of the House, to ensure the public has confidence in what we are doing.

See this speech in context