Dáil debates

Tuesday, 24 November 2020

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

 

10:30 pm

Photo of Ossian SmythOssian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Mairéad Farrell for introducing what is her first piece of legislation. I hope it is the first of many. I also thank all the other Deputies who contributed to the debate.

The Bill before us provides for the amendment of six sections of the 27 sections of the Act. They are section 5 on the meaning of carrying on lobbying activities, section 11 on the details to be supplied by applications for inclusion on the register, section 16 on the code of conduct, section 18 on the relevant contraventions, section 22 on restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist, and section 25 on reports by the commission. The Bill also proposes the introduction of a new section to the Bill on the duties of designated public officials, DPOs.

I will address section 22, restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist, first. Under section 22 of the Act, specific categories of DPOs, entitled relevant DPOs, are subject to a one-year cooling-off period during which they cannot engage in lobbying activities in specific circumstances or be employed by or provide services to a person carrying on lobbying activities in specific circumstances. The relevant DPOs covered by section 22 are Ministers of the Government and Ministers of State; a special adviser appointed under section 11 of the Public Service Management Act 1997; the grades of Secretary General, second secretary, deputy secretary, assistant secretary or director level in the Civil Service, together with equivalent professional and technical grades; and the posts of chief executive, assistant chief executive and director of service in local authorities. In respect of others who are defined as DPOs under the Act but are not covered by this section 22 provision, that is, TDs, Senators, MEPs and local authority members, the one-year cooling-off period does not apply to them.

The cooling-off period applies for a full one year unless the relevant DPO applies to the Standards in Public Office Commission for consent to waive or reduce their cooling-off period. At the time, this approach was considered to represent a proportionate response to deal with the matter case by case rather than placing a mandatory blanket prohibition on relevant DPOs taking up particular roles which could be open to legal challenge by a person, for example, moving from a relevant DPO post in the public sector to a specific post in the private sector.

The approach taken, as mentioned by the Minister, also sought to ensure that the measures would not have the unintended impact of deterring participation in politics or in public service roles, particularly those in positions of short to medium-term duration. It is a responsibility of the relevant DPO to seek consent from Standards in Public Office Commission to waive or reduce his or her cooling-off period prior to taking up an offer of employment or to provide relevant services in circumstances where such employment or services may be or may be perceived to be encompassed by section 22. The commission may decide to give consent unconditionally or give consent with conditions attached. The commission may also refuse to give consent for all or part of the cooling-off period. A relevant DPO who is unhappy with the decision of the commission may appeal.

The Bill being discussed is proposing a number of amendments relating to section 22. It proposes, first, to make a contravention of section 22(1) of the Act relating to the cooling-off provision a relevant contravention under section 18 of the Act; second, to extend the cooling-off period from one to two years; and, third, to extend the scope of section 22 to include public bodies and DPOs with whom a person may have had significant involvement, influence or contacts. Such proposals raise complex issues. For example, as noted by the Minister in his opening statement, any potential legislative amendment to provide for sanction for breaches of section 22 has to factor into account issues such as the rights of a person to work and the proportionality of both any limitations and any sanctions that may be imposed. Longer cooling-off periods also raise issues around people's right to earn a living, proportionality and so on.

Some other non-section 22 related proposed amendments in the Bill before us also give rise to complex issues. For example, the proposed amendment to section 5 relating to representative bodies provides that any business representative bodies or coalitions of business interests, irrespective of the number or status of employees, are within the scope of the Act where one or more of the members of the body or coalition would be within the scope if they were acting themselves. The Bill also provides that members of the body or coalition should be required to be named on returns to support increased transparency. At present, while representative bodies with one employee are captured by the regulation of lobbying legislation, where the representative body has no employees it is not required to register. The purpose of this exemption for no employees is to allow for small local groups such as a residents association to discuss local issues with a DPO without the requirement to register. It would be difficult to carve out these other sectoral representative bodies or coalitions without inadvertently bringing smaller local groups into the requirement to register.

Other proposed amendments in the Bill before us, such as in regard to section 11, may be capable of implementation on an administrative basis by the Standards in Public Office Commission. As referenced earlier by the Minister, the Taoiseach indicated in the House in late September of this year that a review of section 22 of the Act was to be undertaken by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. This work is under way. In addition to consultations with the Office of the Attorney General, the review will include the following: consultation with and consideration of the views of the Standards in Public Office Commission; review of recent Private Members' Bills published regarding the matter, including the Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020 being discussed and the issues raised by Members; and reflection on relevant proposals made in public submission to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in the context of either the first 2017 or the second 2020 strategy reviews of the Act.

As noted by the Minister in his opening statement, given the substantial overlap between the Bill and the previous recommendations of the Standards in Public Office Commission to the two statutory reviews of the Act, he has decided to extend the remit of the review currently under way regarding section 22 of the Act to give renewed consideration to the range of issues raised in the Bill and all the contributions of Members here this evening. The proposed time-limited amendment of nine months to the motion that the Bill be read a Second Time will provide the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform with a sufficient period to complete this extended review, which, as has been outlined, requires the consideration of complex issues.

The Minister has stated his commitment to acting on the matter and, once the review is complete, to bringing forward proposals to the Government and then to the House. The Minister and I are therefore seeking an amendment that the Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020 be deemed to be read a Second Time this day nine months to allow for, in the context of the operation of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015, consideration of the SIPO recommendations for reform and the provisions of this and other Private Members' legislation in this area. The Minister and I oppose the completion of Second Stage should amendment No. 1 not be accepted.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.