Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We have all been lobbied. Some lobbyists are more beneficial to the State than others, but who are we to judge? The Bill has been significantly watered down from what was originally promised after lobbying from many good organisations, and I do not want to disrespect them. In respect of the cooling-off period for officials, we are concerned about the grade of the civil servant. Principal officers should be subject to this. Deputies are at the same level as principal officers and Senators are at the same level as assistant principals, so if it is being applied to Members of the Dáil and Seanad, as it should be, there is no reason it should not be applied immediately to principal officers or assistant principals. The average principal officer has far more power than a Member of Dáil Éireann. They are very important people. We respect the work they do and we would like any lobbying that goes on with them to be registered in the same way as is the case with us and with Members of Dáil Éireann.

We acknowledge the reforms the Minister has put forward. He has done a great deal. I have said that to him publicly and privately. We must also look at the Government's overall record. It is not personal to the Minister but there was lobbying by the tobacco companies last year and the year before. Even if that were registered, it would be completely wrong. It did not happen under the previous Administration and rarely happens in western democracies. That was very unfortunate. I hope that this will not be a precedent and that tobacco industry lobbyists will not have free access to the Department of Health and other Departments once they are registered. That was found out through other means. I am worried that we would normalise it.

There have been sales involving Bord Gáis, the national lottery and Irish Water, and there have been all kinds of public concerns about who is influencing whom in regard to them. It would have been better to have had this legislation in place already. Fianna Fáil in opposition in January 2012 did put forward legislation, which the Minister has acknowledged today, and both he and the Labour Party had also done so in the past. That is to be acknowledged.

We would not necessarily agree with the blanket two-year cooling-off period being reduced to a year, as has been proposed here. I have already referred to the relevant grades of civil servant.

My party is also concerned about contacts the Taoiseach may have had at Davos because that type of contact would not be registerable. I ask the Minister to explain the reason sovereign states are exempted from the Bill. Is this standard practice in other countries? Members of the Oireachtas are regularly lobbied by certain sovereign states. One particular country comes to mind in that regard. The country in question is very friendly towards Members, presumably because it hopes its lobbying will further its interests. I do not see any harm in making information available where this type of lobbying occurs or Members' have an interest in particular countries. I ask if the Minister can justify the exemption. I would be interested to hear if it standard practice in other countries.

Let us hope the legislation works. I have called previously for the publication on the Internet of an open public register of all persons who regularly visit Leinster House. The Minister indicated last week that such a decision would be a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas. The Bill will go some way towards achieving this objective in the sense that general information about the lobbying of Members will be available. However, it would show complete openness and transparency if all guests and visitors, perhaps with the exception of school visitors, were required to register as having visited Leinster House. I do not see any problem with that proposal and it is one that should be discussed and considered. Too many people, some of whom are members of voluntary organisations, have open access to the House. This has always been a matter of concern. I do not know whether such access is a good or bad thing but some of the lobbying and advice can be a little overbearing, for example, when we are asked if we can meet lobbyists in our offices. The Oireachtas authorities should examine this issue, if only from a security perspective.

The Fianna Fáil Party supports the Bill on which we will propose amendments on Committee Stage. It is about time the legislation was passed. I thank the Minister for introducing it and look forward to having a proper register in place. My only fear is that the establishment of a regulatory system for lobbyists may lead to the industry mushrooming in size, with the result that Members will receive letters and requests for meetings morning, noon and night. Members and civil servants will have to start refusing such requests, unless those making them are ordinary citizens. We should be willing to refuse to meet the types of lobbyists covered by the Bill and I have done so a number of times. I suspect that lobbying will increase significantly once the Bill is passed. As such, it will be necessary to review the operation of the legislation at some point.

I concur with the Minister that much of the lobbying that occurs is good. Members need to know what the farming organisations or groups such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul are thinking. We also need to know what the Government is being told by tobacco companies, major industries and party officials acting in their capacity as lobbyists. Officials from Fine Gael rather than the Labour Party have done this recently. Let us hope the Bill goes some way towards achieving that objective. Its passing will almost complete the Minister's reform programme. The House has dealt with a number of significant Bills he has introduced and I hope they will result in change.