Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

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

I am pleased to have the opportunity to present this Bill to the House. Communication, dialogue and engagement are central to a well-functioning democracy and are critical drivers of trust. The Government needs to be open to outside interests and ideas. Lobbying is an essential element of the democratic process. Individuals and organisations legitimately and reasonably want to influence decisions that may affect them. In turn, the Government needs access to the knowledge and views that lobbying can bring. Lobbying provides decision-makers with valuable insights, information, policy perspectives, identification of various policy options and debate on those options. This role is critical, given the complexity of public policy and Government decision-making and the wider impact of government.

The extent of lobbying activity is a good measure of an engaged citizenry. However, openness and transparency on public policy formulation, development and decision-making are central to effective public governance. It is crucial that lobbying activity be open to public scrutiny. That scrutiny is part of the desirable checks and balances that help to ensure that any attempt to seek to exert undue or improper influence on the conduct of policy formulation and development, political decision-making, and preparation and implementing of legislation is discouraged.

The Bill will amend the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 in order to build on the current strong legislative foundation and further strengthen Ireland's lobbying laws, thus ensuring that the regulation of lobbying framework remains up to date and fit for purpose. The Act is viewed internationally as an example of best practice by already regulated systems and those introducing similar laws. By bolstering our regulation of lobbying regime even further, the Bill will ensure that the regime continues to deliver on the objectives set for it. I will take this opportunity to acknowledge and commend Deputy Howlin on his work in this regard and on introducing the original legislation in 2015, which was groundbreaking for its time. The Bill's goal will be to improve the operation and functionality of the lobbying register, strengthen the existing legislation and its enforcement, and make failure to comply with the post-term employment restrictions set out in section 22 of the Act a relevant contravention under the Act.

To date, two statutory reviews have taken place under the 2015 Act - one in 2017 and another in 2019. In September 2020, I commenced a further review that would examine the operation of the Act, in particular the area that dealt with post-term employment as a lobbyist. This comprehensive review of the entire Act was concluded in May 2021. This is a complex policy area and a detailed review was necessary to assess properly the policy, legal and practical implications of the issues raised. In addition to consultations with the Office of the Attorney General, the review included an assessment of the current operation of key provisions of the Act, consultation with, and consideration of, the views of the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, an overview of lobbying regulation in other jurisdictions, and consideration of options to address concerns raised and the policy, legal and practical implications of different responses. The core consideration was to examine how the existing solid legislative foundation could be enhanced most effectively and efficiently, strengthening weaknesses that had been identified. On foot of the review, a number of recommendations were brought forward for legislative change.

The key elements of reform in this Bill will allow for the following changes to be made to the Act: to extend the time period between statutory reviews from three to five years to allow for the impacts of any policy or legislative change to become clear; to bring certain business groupings with no employees within the scope of the Act and require that members of such groups be named on lobbying returns to ensure the groups do not avoid the requirement to register; to extend the Act's scope to include non-remunerated officeholders to capture all relevant lobbying activity; to provide for an exemption from registration for communications made by political parties to their members who are designated public officials, DPOs, only in their capacity as members of their respective parties; to introduce legislative provisions to improve the operation of the lobbying register; to introduce a new "relevant contravention" in the Act, covering the taking of any action by a person that has the intended purpose of avoiding the obligations to register or submit lobbying returns to the commission; and to amend the Act to make failure to comply with the cooling-off provisions of section 22 of the Act a relevant contravention under the Act. In this regard, a system of administrative sanctions operated by SIPO will be introduced. This system will involve minor or major sanctions. The sanctions proposed include a caution or reprimand, a monetary penalty of up to €25,000 and a prohibition from lobbying of up to two years. They set out clear timelines in the Act for the processing of section 22 applications made to SIPO by former relevant DPOs.

In terms of the development of the Bill, I thank the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach for its careful consideration of the general scheme of the Bill during pre-legislative scrutiny.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell and other members of the committee made thoughtful contributions during that process. I welcome their input into the development of the Bill. While broadly supportive of the measures proposed in the general scheme, the committee made seven recommendations, which my Department has considered in detail. Four of those recommendations require clarifications and a commitment to ensure sufficient capacity to implement any changes, which has been communicated to the committee. The remaining recommendations, if adopted, would give rise to significant legal and policy issues and I have responded to the committee directly on them. I thank the members again for their very thorough and comprehensive report, which clearly reflects the strong engagement and interest they have in this topic. Should the Bill be successful on Second Stage, I look forward to engaging in detail with colleagues from the committee in regard to any amendments they wish to put forward on the next Stage.

I will briefly go through each section of the Bill, outlining its content and purpose. As this is amending legislation, some sections need to be read in conjunction with the principal Act. A number of sections are also technical in nature. If any Member feels a technical briefing on the Bill would be helpful, I will make my officials available to assist in this regard.

Section 1 identifies the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 as the principal Act being amended.

Section 2 provides for an amendment to allow for the period between statutory reviews of the Act to be extended from three to five years.

Section 3 amends the provisions relating to regulations made under the Act, consequent on further amendments allowing SIPO to make regulations.

Section 4 provides for an extension of the definition of lobbying in regard to the development or zoning of land, certain informal business groups, non-remunerated office holders and communications made by a political party to its members.

Section 5 inserts a definition of "company" into the Act.

Section 6 provides for a prohibition on registered persons from lobbying where they have notified the commission that they have ceased to carry on lobbying activities.

Section 7 amends the provisions dealing with certain details to be supplied by applicants who wish to be included on the lobbying register, including, for example, that persons applying for registration must give the name of every person who is a member of an informal business group.

Section 8 amends the provisions relating to the returns made by registered persons.

Section 9 makes amendments regarding relevant contraventions by introducing new relevant contraventions for certain persons. These contraventions are carrying on lobbying activities while one's registration has been marked as having ceased; taking any action with the purpose of avoiding one's obligations concerning registration or the making of returns, that is, the anti-avoidance clause; and, where required, failing to apply to SIPO for consent to take up a specific employment or position in certain circumstances during the 12-month cooling-off period subsequent to leaving a position as a relevant DPO.

Section 10 amends provisions dealing with offences to provide, in effect, that contravening section 22 of the Act, while a relevant contravention, will not be a criminal offence.

Section 11 provides for a consequential amendment relating to the serving of fixed-payment notices.

Section 12 strengthens provisions relating to post-term employment as a lobbyist. It also establishes how applications for consent are to be dealt with by the commission and provides for obligations for public service bodies.

Section 13 provides for the introduction of a system of administrative sanctions to be administered by SIPO relating to breaches of restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist and the avoidance or circumvention of a person's obligations to register and submit returns.

Section 14 sets out the matters to be considered by the commission in determining the amount of any financial sanction to be imposed under the new system of administrative sanctions that relates to breaches of restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist and-or the new anti-avoidance clause. Such matters include those relating to the need to ensure any sanction imposed is appropriate and proportionate to the contravention concerned and will act as a sufficient incentive to ensure any like contravention will not occur in the future, the gravity and duration of the contravention concerned, the extent of any failure by the person to co-operate with the investigation concerning that person, and the repeated occurrence of the contravention concerned by the person.

Section 15 provides for the payment of any financial sanction imposed under the new system of administrative sanctions.

Section 16 provides for the appeals mechanism to the Circuit Court relating to decisions of SIPO to impose a minor or major sanction under the new system of administrative sanctions relating to breaches of restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist and-or the new anti-avoidance clause. A decision of the Circuit Court may be appealed to the High Court on a point of law only.

Section 17 provides that where a person does not appeal a major sanction, the commission must apply to the Circuit Court for confirmation of the decision to impose the major sanction concerned.

Section 18 details that SIPO must publish a code for the conduct of investigations under section 19 of the Act and for the conduct of proceedings before the commission relating to the new system of administrative sanctions for breaches of restrictions on post-term employment as a lobbyist and-or the new anti-avoidance clause.

Section 19 provides for the serving of notices required to be given to a person in regard to a former relevant DPO's application for consent to take up employment or a position during the 12-month cooling-off period or concerning the procedures governing the imposition of administrative sanctions.

Section 20 is a technical amendment required to update a legislative reference.

Section 21 deals with the delegation of functions by the commission.

Section 22 amends the Schedule to the Act, which lists those bodies that are not public service bodies due to changes made to the harbours legislation.

Section 23 sets out the Short Title of the Bill and provides the commencement arrangements for the Bill.

I put the House on notice that I anticipate bringing forward a number of technical amendments on Committee Stage. I am happy to expand on any of the provisions currently in the Bill during the course of this debate if Deputies wish to raise any particular issues. We will have an opportunity to go into much more detail on Committee Stage when we examine the Bill section by section. I look forward to hearing the contributions of Deputies during this debate and I hope the House will support the passage of the Bill and assist in securing its early enactment. I commend the Bill to the House.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. It is welcome that we are discussing the regulation of lobbying. We need to be realistic about this. People's faith in the public and political system is at an all-time low. That is because of the behaviour of certain people. When people look at this Chamber and the debates that take place here, even though numbers of them voted for every one of us, they do not feel they have the same level of influence on their locally elected politicians as certain specific interests may have. It is important for us as elected representatives to realise that. It does not mean everybody in this Chamber is engaged in any kind of activity or anything like that. The point is that if this is the perception out there, then it is something we need to face head on and tackle.

Two years ago, my colleague, Deputy Doherty, and I brought forward the Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020, which would have done much of what SIPO had asked to be enacted. I was only elected a few months at that point and a number of scandals had already hit that totally eroded people's trust and confidence in public and political life. While I welcome this discussion and the fact the Minister is moving on the issue, I am bitterly disappointed that when my colleagues and I brought forward our Bill two years ago, in September 2020, instead of supporting it, the Government decided to kick the can down the road. It is not good enough that we are only now discussing the issue.

Sometimes, when we look at how things work in other countries, we may think to ourselves that at least we are not as bad as they are at this moment in time. We can all bring such a comparison to mind today. However, when we look at the issue of lobbying in this country, my concern is that it is only going to get worse, not only in terms of the public perception but also in respect of the influence certain vested interests have. The Legislature is supposed to agree and enact legislation that is of benefit to the vast majority of people. It is not there to facilitate certain key interests. We must bear this in mind when looking at the great issues of the day.

At this moment in time, people are really suffering because the legislation has not been there to benefit the majority of people. A lot of the time, that is the actual crux of the issue for me.

I look forward to engaging on this particular legislation at committee level. I must say it has been very good that we have been able to engage constructively with the Minister at committee level. The Minister has taken on a lot of the different suggestions that we have made over a period of time. I hope to see that, and I am sure that I will see it, with this particular legislation.

There are a number of issues I want raise in particular. One of them is the cooling-off period, which caused one of the many scandals that we have seen in lobbying. It is definitely one of the main rules with which we can close that revolving door. It is there to prevent former insiders from being able to trade on their influence. As we know, under the current rules, there is no sanction for breaching the one-year cooling-off period. I believe the current period of one year is too short. It is clear from international best practice that a two-year period is seen as being absolutely crucial. We know that SIPO has called for a such a period of time. When we had a discussion on lobbying previously within our own committee, that is what the experts recommended. It is also what the report of the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach recommended. It is also exactly what the Bill I brought forward two years ago would have done. It is an issue we can discuss further on Committee Stage. We will thrash it out. However, I think it is unfortunate that at this point the Bill will not extend that period to two years.

We are finally going to see a breach of the cooling-off period being made an offence. I absolutely welcome that. I must say it is startling that it was not there initially. I just do not understand how it could have happened that a breach of that period was not made an offence. I cannot understand that, especially given that SIPO has told us time and again that it needs to happen. There has been failure to act for years. It is good that it is going to be included in the legislation, but how it got to this point is beyond me. What is the point in having a cooling-off period if there is no sanction for disregarding it? Under the Sinn Féin Bill, a breach of the cooling-off period would have been a criminal offence. That is exactly what SIPO recommended. Unfortunately, the Government has gone for a lesser sanction in the form of a civil sanction. We will discuss that on Committee Stage, and I look forward to that discussion. To be honest, my fear is that it is not a strong enough deterrent. That is my concern at this point. We know that under the legislation, certain people will be granted special exemptions from the cooling-off period. I am concerned that the Government is not going to require the names of those who are granted special exemptions to this cooling-off period to be made public. They should be made public so that it is very clear to people exactly who has been granted special exemptions. I must say I am not sure why that is not being done. We know that SIPO has been allowed to publish these details in the same way that we know that the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach has also called for it, and my own Bill has provided for it. It is really crucial. It is definitely something that I would ask the Minister to look at. I think that could be good.

One of the things I have never understood since being elected to this House is how previous Members are permitted special access all the time. It is something I just cannot comprehend. It means that if I were to lose my seat overnight, and I am sure Deputies would be devastated if that happened, I would still have access. I think it is outrageous that former Members can become lobbyists and have access. At the end of the day, there is a particular reason we talk about the corridors of power. It is something we definitely need to look at. We know that the report of the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach specifically recommended that this be removed. It is something that needs to be looked at. To be honest, I think if people were aware of it, they would really be astonished.

I also want to mention the Government's decision to extend the review period from three to five years. The Minister mentioned it in his speech. He might even pick up on it later or we can discuss it again at committee level. The review period is being changed from three to five years. My concern in relation to that is that lobbying activities and tactics change all the time. A few years ago, nobody knew that there would be such a thing as the Internet. We know the confusion and difficulties that can cause. I think we need a shorter review period so that we can move with the times. That is where my concern is in relation to that. We need to be agile to move with the times. Things can change very quickly in this area. It seems to me that if we are extending the review period, we are making it less reactive than it could be.

I hate using the phrase because it is so overused, but I think this is a missed opportunity. I believe the Minister fully understands the issues that have been noted with regard to the Regulation of Lobbying Act for a long time. He is clearly willing to make amendments to strengthen it, but this Bill really does not go far enough. There is a lot of work to be done on Committee Stage to strengthen it. The committee will come together and it will be done. We debated the Sinn Féin Bill on lobbying. I think that was a stronger Bill and it would have been better if that Bill had been enacted, particularly given that it was two years ago and so many different things have happened since then. We could have done with a strengthened lobbying Bill.

In conclusion, my core point is that we need to make this Bill as strong as possible so that we can restore confidence in public and political life and, crucially, make sure all the decisions that are made at every level within this Chamber are made for the benefit of the vast majority of people. We must ensure no one can say at any point that decisions were made just for a few because certain people had certain access and were able to use that access to influence decision-making. We are here for the vast majority of people. We need to recognise that and we need to have a lobbying Bill that is as strong as possible to ensure that remains the case.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The point Deputy Farrell made is the reason we are here and we are dealing with the whole issue of lobbying. In fairness, the Minister spoke about the necessity for openness and transparency. We have to do absolutely everything we can from the point of view of delivering that as it relates to politics, political operations and parliamentary operations for that matter. We often talk about the revolving door in politics, big business and lobbying in general. We have all known and dealt with certain instances where it has actually happened. I think there is a feeling out there that some people are more connected. I accept Deputy Farrell's point about looking across the water. There is chaos there currently, but we have also heard stories of people having absolute access to the top end of government. It seems to have ended in chaos. That is not even a strong enough word for it. We definitely do not need to be going in any way in that direction, so we have to provide whatever protections we can. European Commission Vice President Věra Jourová was actually in this House last week to attend meetings of the Joint Committee on Justice and the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs.

Steps need to be taken throughout the EU, particularly by countries that are wildly in breach of the rule of law, best practice and what we would perceive as common decency. There is, therefore, also a necessity for the rest of us to adhere to our obligations under the rule of law. One of the issues is that we need to deal with these particular issues because there is a revolving door. We need to make sure proper protections and mechanisms to ensure that we do not have that a free flow between politics, big business and lobbying.

Much of what is in this Bill is welcome. I do not think anyone will have a major difficulty with the registration of all members of business groups. I welcome the fact that there is a sanction for those who are in breach of the cooling-off period. I agree with Deputy Farrell, and the legislation she looked to introduce. An awful lot of the best practice we are told about talks about a two-year cooling-off period as more applicable. The fact is that we are talking about a €25,000 sanction, which is not nothing. On Committee Stage, we may have to deal with the fact that it may not be enough. We must examine that. It is a civil sanction and perhaps it would be better for it to be a criminal sanction. All of that needs to be talked out because we must ensure that even if we are late to the game, we put our best play in force from here on in. That is necessary. I support an approach whereby anyone found to be in breach of these rules would be prohibited from lobbying for at least two years.

We must ensure that where somebody is given a special exemption from the cooling-off period, that should be made public. That fits into the idea of openness and transparency. If such an exemption is allowed, that information should be freely available and open. If there is a reason for such an exemption, there is nothing to hide.

The privilege of access to the House for former Oireachtas Members has been mentioned. That could create difficulty if I were to lose my seat and my parking space in Dublin. I am sure the people of County Louth would find that difficult to get over. In fairness, there are serious issues in that regard. We accept that the job all of us do is privileged. The Minister has an even more privileged position. It is necessary that we provide protections for people. In some cases, there is a perception that some people do not have the same powers as others and lack that level of connectivity. In some cases, there is also the reality. Whatever we have to do to stop that must be done. That is what we are asking for. Most decent people want fairness. They want politicians to get on with politics. They have no difficulty, and none of us have, with businesses lobbying. They have a right to do that. However, we need to ensure it is all done within a fair system. There has been enormous unfairness to many people over many years so we need those protections. We also need to consider the review period and the length of time involved. It does not make sense.

I accept, as I do in respect of every piece of legislation and system that is put in place, there will always be a need for further amendments and review. I hope we will be able to work with the Minister to put a best practice system in place.