Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank my colleague for enabling me to comment on this very important legislation. The Bill is important for a number of reasons. The purpose of the exercise is to protect the general public and to restore public confidence in the public service in general. That is not for one moment to suggest that everybody who works in the public sector is in some way corrupt or susceptible to corruption, but it is necessary that people are protected whether they are public representatives or public officials.

Like other speakers in the House, I am one of those people who have had the pleasure and privilege of working with various public officials through the years who were the essence of good conduct and who ensured that the right decisions were made in the public interest. They were scrupulous in the way they applied their decisions. As time went by perhaps one or two people failed to observe the rules. I refer to both public officials and public representatives. That does not mean, however, that everybody is corrupt. There is a grave danger that we would go down the road of presuming that is the situation. That does a great deal of damage to the morale of those involved in serving the public, which is a very honourable profession whether it be as a public representative or public official. In many cases the suggestion nowadays is that everybody is corrupt. It is true that every aspect of society has been challenged in one way or another in the past 20 years. Every sector has fallen by the wayside in some shape or form but there are still a number of people who get on the hobby-horse and point the finger of accusation at someone else. Perhaps they themselves are not in a position to do that all the time either, yet the position remains that in order to generate public confidence in public service in general it is essential that we have strict rules and guidelines and that we do our utmost to adhere to them.

Conflicts of interest are important and we do not attach enough importance to the issue. How many times have we known people to speak in a particular fashion on a subject, knowing well that they might have a conflict of interest, but it is not of such a nature that it requires compliance with legislation? The Bill before the House will enable people to be reassured that they are doing the right thing, which is equally important. Down through the years I and everyone else have across countless cases where people spoke as if they had no interest at all in a subject but on closer examination it was found that they did have an interest but that only came to light afterwards, which is the sad part. We must ensure that the standards are adequate to protect public representatives, public officials and the general public.

To move away from a natural presumption that they are all, in some way, incapable of doing their job, corrupt, about to become corrupt or have been corrupt in the past, it is essential that where there is a deliberate attempt to pervert the course of natural justice or the course of business or there is a serious breach of conflict of interest, there is retribution and action taken in the courts to ensure it does not happen again. From time to time, I have seen individuals, who were subsequently accused and found to be guilty, accuse other individuals in public. It is a very demanding area and it is very difficult to be perfect but we can try to provide sufficient legislation and protection to ensure that society is the beneficiary in the long run.

I do not want to go on too long, because I do not have much time left, but I will say another thing. The Minister very correctly brought in legislation on lobbying which was badly needed and which I am sure will stand the test of time. One should remember that lobbying takes various forms. When I was a member of a different body and was sitting around a table and expected to make a decision, I always felt it would be awful if somebody sitting around the table had a vested interest. Some people might make a decision on the basis that it is the right thing to do whereas somebody else might make it on the basis that it is the thing to do because he or she has an interest, which is where the conflict arises. It is also worth remembering that to lobby people to the extent that an incentive is offered is a criminal offence and has been for a long time. There is a tendency to overlook that. If I go to a public official or representative and suggest that it would be beneficial to him or her to follow a particular route, I am guilty of a criminal offence. We cannot allow that as it undermines our entire society. It is up to us to ensure that is how we apply this in the business we are in. Comments have been made about a recent television programme which showed a certain level of "perceived corruption", and I use the phrase advisedly there. It should also be noted that some of the public representatives interviewed clearly indicated that what was being attempted was a criminal offence and in breach of the law. We did not see that because it was not shown. When the public comes to a conclusion on issues of this nature and does not see something like that, I can understand how it comes to the conclusion it comes to if it believes everybody is corrupt. Not everybody is corrupt. Sadly, those who follow the rules very often feel that their views are not heard at all, their efforts are not recognised or they are not doing the right thing.

The other matter is public appointments. Much heat has been generated on that subject. From listening to some members of the Opposition, I wonder has it now come to the stage at which future Governments will have to appoint somebody from the Opposition in order to comply with the regulations as some people see them. It is a serious issue because if that is the case, the presumption is that Government is always crooked and the Opposition is always pristine.

In a small country everybody knows everybody and, sadly, from time to time, we have situations in which the finger of accusation can be pointed at people who are eminently capable of doing a particular job. They are above reproach, can do the job and would be entitled to do it in the ordinary course of events but if it comes to pass that they know somebody in government, they will not qualify. That is a rather peculiar way of going about things. It is not the application of equal treatment. In my time in public life, I have had dealings with many people who were appointed by Governments in various ways and I have always found them to be honourable, straightforward and, as far as I was concerned, honest.

I will finish with a particular bugbear of mine. In a previous Dáil, I was encouraged to leave the House on a regular basis - more so than anybody else in the history of the House, unless we go back for a very long time.

See this speech in context