Government to go soft on TDs who break rules

Even before the McCracken tribunal reported on the irregular financial affairs of Charles Haughey and Michael Lowry nearly two…

Even before the McCracken tribunal reported on the irregular financial affairs of Charles Haughey and Michael Lowry nearly two years ago, Fianna Fail was campaigning for higher standards in public life.

A submission to the McCracken tribunal by the party advocated the introduction of tax clearance certificates for all Oireachtas members, as a condition for membership of the Dail or Seanad.

The proposal followed the lines of legislation, introduced some years ago by Bertie Ahern, that required companies tendering for State business to have their tax affairs in order. Unless you had a tax cert., you didn't get State contracts.

The legislation caused a ferocious outcry from the commercial sector at the time. But the then minister stuck to his guns and, as a result, tax compliance within the business sector improved dramatically.

READ MORE

What was sauce for the commercial goose, however, stuck in the craw of the political gander. And a determined revolt by elected representatives from the major parties is now almost certain to neuter the proposal. A convoluted political waltz has led to this. At first, in response to the Haughey and Lowry disclosures, the Government undertook to engage in draconian reform.

The Taoiseach told the Dail: "To ensure principles of good public service are rigidly adhered to, neither I, nor the Government I lead, will shirk from taking any decisions necessary on foot of the tribunal report . . . the undertaking given by the Coalition parties to implement the recommendations of the McCracken tribunal will be honoured quickly. We may indeed go beyond them."

Mr Justice McCracken had argued that unless harsh sanctions were imposed for breaches of the Ethics Act and the Electoral Act, they would not have the desired effect.

Making a false declaration should, the report stated, become a criminal offence and not be dealt with by the Oireachtas. And persons found guilty of an offence under the Ethics in Public Office Act should be banned, on a permanent or temporary basis, from holding membership of the Oireachtas.

In addition, it recommended the introduction of tax clearance certificates as a necessary qualification for membership of the Dail and Seanad.

From there it was all downhill. The Coalition Government deliberated long and hard on what might be done. And when, a year later, it produced proposals for a Standards in Public Office Bill, it did so in a discussion document which set out the various steps in a pro and con framework.

Even more, it referred the matter to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service for further consideration. Its report was finally circulated yesterday. Even as the Joint Committee began to dilute the Government's proposals, a parallel assault on reform was conducted within the Fianna Fail Parliamentary Party. A code of ethics proposed by Mr Ahern and the party's national executive, which contained the hated tax clearance certificate requirement, was rejected. Revolting backbenchers would agree only to a form of words that required them to confirm their tax affairs were in order, or that they were "in negotiation" with the Revenue Commissioners. The new formula is expected to be adopted next week.

Back at the Joint Committee, members accepted the principle that the tax affairs of elected representatives should be in order, if only to give good example to the electorate. But they balked at the idea of a certificate. All that should be required, they said, was for members to confirm that "to the best of their knowledge they were fulfilling their obligations under the tax code".

And they rejected the notion that TDs and Senators might be removed from office for tax and related offences. Such an approach, they held was "constitutionally unsound".

In their defence, they quoted the present, bizarre situation, where there is no prohibition on murderers, rapists and fraudsters being members of the Oireachtas, provided they are not serving a term of imprisonment greater than six months. Rather than address that situation, in terms of reforming legislation, they used it as a cloak to guard against other changes.

Of all the institutions in the State, the Oireachtas must be most keenly aware of the pitfalls of relying on self-regulation by professional bodies. But it faithfully repeated the pattern it condemns elsewhere by watering down proposals for reform.

Having filleted the Government's document - as its format had invited - the Joint Committee went on to compound the offence by proposing a regulatory body which has neither the appetite nor the ability to fulfil the functions identified. The Government's plan for a Standards in Public Office Commission - a beefed-up version of the present Commission - which would have a mandate akin to that of a permanent tribunal of inquiry, was enthusiastically endorsed.

But, last December, the existing Commission told the Joint Committee it had "serious reservations" about its capacity "to undertake a major investigation". It pointed out that all members of the Commission were part-time, with full-time duties to perform in their other capacities. And it observed that "none of the present members has appropriate practical legal experience."

A revamped Commission is now set to become the public's watchdog on the Oireachtas and its members. It would seem the succession of scandals that have shaken Leinster House and brought politics into disrepute have taught our elected representatives nothing.