Dáil debates

Tuesday, 24 November 2020

Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020: Second Stage [Private Members]

 

9:10 pm

Photo of Mairead FarrellMairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Tá mé an-sásta an Bille seo a chur os comhair na Dála. Tá an Bille fíorthábhachtach don trédhearcacht agus chun a chinntiú go bhfuil an Dáil ag obair ar son na ndaoine. I am delighted to move what is my first Bill in the Dáil alongside my colleague, Deputy Doherty.

The topic of public standards goes to the heart of a well-functioning democratic system. The corollary of this is that poor public standards lead to a poorly functioning democratic system. Recent months alone have shown the need for increased regulation of lobbying. The Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, has long been calling for this and urgent action is needed. I hope to have cross-party support because I believe that the enacting of this legislation would be the sensible thing to do. In fact, it would be the commonsensical thing to do.

I am disappointed that the Government's amendment seeks a further review, this time of section 22, in what seems to be a case of the Government pushing the Bill I am presenting down the road. There was a review in 2016 and another in 2019. We do not need another. We need action. This is not rocket science. It is a clear and straightforward way of dealing with a problem that we as politicians face. It is time that the Dáil called "Stop" on the revolving door between political life and lobbying activities. That revolving door may have served the self-interest of some former Ministers, but it has not served the public's interest. A revolving door between politics and the lobbying industry is corrosive to democracy and undermines the public's confidence that our political system is responsive to people's needs rather than those of unelected vested interest groups. This Bill would change that.

When reviews of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 took place, SIPO, the body that ensures standards in public office, made recommendations to strengthen its hand when dealing with breaches of the Act. Our Bill would implement 13 of the 22 recommendations made by SIPO to the Government in 2019. Some of them would broaden the scope of the Act, some would make definitional changes and some would enact new provisions. The Bill would increase from one to two years the length of the so-called cooling off period that Ministers, Ministers of State, special advisers and high-ranking civil servants must wait before moving from office to the lobbying sector. This increase would simply be following best practice. People have said that this would interfere with people's right to work, but the Bill contains a provision allowing SIPO to waive or shorten the cooling off period if it believed a strong enough case had been made. The Bill would also allow SIPO to investigate and sanction breaches of the cooling off period. What is the point in having such a period if it does not need to be adhered to? Surely the commonsensical thing to do is legislate to close this loophole.

The Bill would give SIPO the power to investigate and sanction a person or body that is a lobbyist that avoids his, her or its obligations under the Act. A simple and straightforward way of stopping people from trying to avoid the requirements of the legislation would be to have an anti-avoidance provision. It would make sense and is what is contained in the Bill. The Bill outlines clearly that a designated public official must cut off contact with a person who has failed to comply with the registration of lobbying activities. Not only that, but the official would need to inform SIPO in writing. If SIPO became aware of a non-compliant person or body, it could tell a designated public official that he or she must cease all communication with that entity. It would be for SIPO to decide for how long that would apply. This is a clear and straightforward way of dealing with breaches of the Act.

The Bill would require compliance with the code of conduct by people carrying out lobbying activities whereas the Act only requires them to have regard to it. Importantly, SIPO would have the power to conduct inquiries into reported breaches.

The Bill is urgently needed in the interests of accountability and transparency. There is no point in suggesting that we must wait for another review and take another look at the issue in a number of months' time. Let us bring the Bill to Committee Stage, have a thorough discussion on it, finally give SIPO the powers it has been calling for since 2016 and work together to shut the door between government and vested interests.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.