Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No.4:

In page 10, in line 23, after “(c).” to insert the following:

“(14) That within three years of the passing of this Act, the Minister shall produce a report which evaluates the impact of administrative

sanctions and the Commission’s capacity to impose this regime.”.”.

This amendment seeks to assure ourselves that this section will be meaningful. I raised it on Report Stage. The amendment to section 22 makes breaches of the cooling off provision and the anti-avoidance clause relevant contraventions. It will certainly enhance the effectiveness of the regime, I do not think there is any doubt about that and I recognise that. However, rather than treating these relevant contraventions in the same way as those which are already in place, the Bill would create a new regime of administrative sanctions.

The idea of administrative sanctions does raise some eyebrows. I am particularly concerned about the designation of breaches of the cooling-off provisions as civil offences. I wonder why that is the case. It hugely weakens this provision. During pre-legislative scrutiny, both SIPO and Transparency International Ireland expressed doubts about SIPO's ability to impose these sanctions. As the Bill digest outlined, a regulator needs both legal power and capacity to enforce provisions. SIPO currently does not have the resources to carry out this function, especially when the Bill precludes any member of staff other than commissioners from imposing financial sanctions. I did raise that particular part on Second Stage on the limited resources and the fact that it has to be a commissioner who pursues the action. It is for all those reasons.

We all want to get this right. We all want a tighter regime and to address the very lose current situation covering lobbyists for lots of different reasons. This legislation has been in the pipeline for a very long time, we have waited quite a long time for it, so it is important that we make it as strong and as right as we possibly can. However, there are serious doubts about this provision. For that reason, I propose that within three years of the passing of the Act the Minister shall produce a report which evaluates the impact of the administrative sanctions and the commission's capacity to impose this regime.

The Minister is providing for a new regime which sounds good but it does not seem to be as strong as it needs to be. SIPO has said that very clearly, as has Transparency International Ireland. There are concerns about that aspect of it. There is also the concern which I already raised about the commissioner having the capacity to impose the regime. There are big doubts about the efficacy of this provision. It is really important that it actually works. There are weaknesses inherent in what the Minister proposes to do. He is going to go ahead with it. The least we can expect if we are serious about putting in place a tighter regime is to review the operation of this section in three years. I say three years because hopefully this will not occur on a very regular basis, they will be isolated incidents, but it is critically important that when those situations arise we have legislation that is fit for purpose and is effective in deterring the kind of behaviour that we want to deter.

I think it is a reasonable approach where after three years we would actually see how this is operating, especially given the concerns that have been expressed about it. I would ask the Minister in a reasonable way to be reasonable in his response and to consider accepting the amendment.

See this speech in context