Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

212. To ask the Minister for Education and Skills the protected disclosures policy and procedures in place for employees in the further education sector prior to enactment of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014; and the Higher Education Authority's role in the oversight and implementation of such disclosures prior to 2014. [31164/18]

John Halligan (Waterford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Reflecting their respective roles and responsibilities in relation to the governance and oversight of the higher education sector, my Department and the Higher Education Authority (HEA) have consistently sought to treat information received regarding possible wrongdoing very seriously, both prior to and subsequent to the enactment of the Protected Disclosures Act in July 2014. In particular disclosures of what could potentially comprise relevant information under the Protected Disclosures Act made to my Department or the HEA have been dealt with in accordance with the legislative framework provided by the Act and procedures consistent with the guidance for public bodies issued by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform under section 21 of the Act. The Protected Disclosures Act itself has retrospective effect to the extent that redress can be sought by a worker in respect of penalisation for making a protected disclosure made before the legislation was commenced where the penalisation was subsequent to or ongoing from that date.

Prior to the enactment of the Protected Disclosures Act, the HEA wrote to all institutions under its aegis in May 2014 advising that the higher education sector should not wait until the legislation is enacted but should put in place a process where a person may give information on a confidential basis to a specified person who can act as an intermediary in the investigation of any allegations into misconduct or mis-governance in a higher education institution. As far as the policy in place in the higher education sector prior to the Protected Disclosures Act for dealing with disclosures of potential wrongdoing is concerned, the codes of governance in place since 2012 in the higher education sector contained a provision that governing bodies should put in place procedures for confidential disclosure or good faith reporting whereby employees may, in confidence, raise concerns about possible irregularities in financial reporting or other matters and for ensuring meaningful follow-up of matters raised in this way. This approach was in turn based on the provisions of the 2009 code of practice for the governance of State bodies. The oversight and implementation of any disclosures received by the HEA prior to Protected Disclosures Act coming into effect, would have depended on the specific circumstances of each individual case. I understand that concerns raised with the HEA would have been assessed to seek to determine the most appropriate course of action based on the information received. This could have potentially involved, for example, further contact with the individual raising the concern to obtain more information or the making of a request to the relevant higher education institution for a response to the issues raised in order for the HEA to consider the matter and next steps further.