Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House and I commend him on this legislation. As the Minister stated, it is one of a suite of measures produced by the Government as part of a focused programme of political reforms, including changes to the legislation governing freedom of information and the protection of whistleblowers. The reforming zeal of the Minister is well accepted throughout the House.

As parliamentarians we have all been subjected to lobbying by various interest groups to differing degrees. Having listened to the contributions today - the Minister is smiling himself - it is clear we are going to have many more visitations when this gets going. In any event, lobbying is part of a functioning democracy. I imagine many laws, regulations and policy initiatives have been improved as a consequence of direct representations made by groups and individuals.

There is a recognition across the political spectrum and, I trust, within the Civil Service that no politician or official has a monopoly of wisdom or experience on any particular area of policy or legislation. It is important, therefore, that the views of those who are directly impacted by initiatives emanating from the political system are adequately heard. Of course at the end of the day it is a matter for politicians and officials to make up their own minds on the relevant laws or policies being considered but usually our consideration of matters is improved following engagement with external groups and individuals as well as our own experience.

It is important to be clear about what this legislation is trying to achieve. The Bill aims to increase the level of transparency and visibility around who is seeking to influence a particular decision by a designated public official, whether that person is a Minister, a Member of the Oireachtas or a designated official. It is not directed at restricting the inputs to Government but rather letting the public see who is making representations in particular areas. This is a notable and worthwhile objective.

The legislation has been motivated by a general political desire to enhance openness and transparency in political and public life. However, it has also been born out of instances where so-called lobbyists effectively acted as bagmen for clients. It is important to distinguish proper lobbying activities by organisations and individuals from attempts to bribe, corrupt or compromise politicians or public officials. Such actions are illegal, repugnant to all and should be distinguished from genuine open and objective engagement between vested interests and the body politic.

As with any new and innovative legislation that seeks to regulate or govern some aspects of human behaviour, I suspect that this legislation will need revisiting - the Minister has admitted as much - to assess whether it is achieving its objectives after a period. The Minister has committed to reviewing the operations of the Act after an initial period of 12 months, which I welcome.

Having read the detail of the Bill I have great sympathy for the Minister, his officials and the Parliamentary Counsel for trying to develop a regime that accurately captures the range of activities that constitute lobbying while trying to differentiate other activities that could constitute lobbying but which are accepted either because they involve communication between public authorities or agencies or because they are a normal part of the industrial relations process.

While I appreciate the Minister's commitment to review the legislation to iron out any problems that emerge once it is enacted, it strikes me that there are certain areas where the Bill could benefit from additional clarity. Given the complexity of this area and the fact that this is a new regulatory structure, it is important that those covered by the new regime are clear as to its scope and recognise the obligations imposed on them, whether they are the lobbyists, clients or the relevant regulatory agency, which is the Standards in Public Office Commission in this case.

Some aspects of the proposed legislation could benefit from further clarity. Section 5 defines a circumstance where a person carries out lobbying activities and broadly or directly links it to the person managing, directing or making communications on behalf of another. I wonder whether that definition is wide enough. It strikes me that there could be situations in which an organisation falls within the scope of the definition but the lobbyists who advise do not.

In my political life I have been contacted on a range of issues by many companies and organisations which have lobbied about specific matters. In some instances these organisations are clearly being advised by lobbyists, as the Minister said himself. However, since the contact has been managed directly I have no visibility over whether a lobbyist is acting for them in providing lobbying advice rather than managing, making or directing the lobbying activity. As I read it, in that scenario section 5 would not apply and a lobbyist who advises a client but does not direct, manage or make the lobbying activity would not be deemed to be involved in carrying out lobbying activities. This seems a strange set of affairs and contrary to what we are trying to achieve.