The Fianna Fáil party has endured weeks of controversy surrounding two Ministers and their property interests, tenancies and Dáil declarations.
After it emerged that Longford-Westmeath TD Robert Troy was in receipt of RAS payments at a time when he was discussing funding for the scheme in the Dáil, and that Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly was seeking tax changes for accidental landlords while describing himself as an accidental landlord, questions were asked about whether they should have made their interests clear during their contributions in the chamber. Mr Donnelly has said he would never have benefited from the changes he was calling for, but questions have been asked around what the exact rules are for politicians and what ethics codes they are bound by. Here is the situation.
Are there specific ethics laws and, if so, what do they say?
There are a range of different pieces of legislation that deal with ethics in public office but the two most relevant for these purposes are the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001. Politicians are expected, and obliged, to comply with these laws. The laws set out the rules for the disclosure of interests by politicians. This includes declarations in relation to property, contracts, income and gifts.
But do they say anything about declaring your interests in the Dáil during debates?
They do. If a politician wants to speak or vote in proceedings in the Dáil or in a committee, and if they know they have a material interest in the subject and have not declared it their annual statement of interests, then the following applies: if the TD wants to speak they must make a declaration of the interest before or during the course of their speech. If they want to vote (but won’t be speaking) then they have to make the declaration in writing and give to the clerk of the Dáil before voting. In guidelines, it is clarified that a material interest would be defined as something where the outcome of the debate could give a significant benefit to the TD, or on the flip side, could result in a significant loss, liability, penalty, forfeiture, punishment, or other disadvantage.
Is there a grey area? What if a politician is just not sure that these rules apply to them?
There is no grey area — but there are ways and means for a TD to check if they are uncertain. For example, they can seek advice from the Committee of Members’ Interests. Politicians are told to look for any advice as soon as possible before a Dáil or Seanad debate and that the committee will resolve to get back to them as quickly as possible. Even then, if they can’t do that in time or if the committee cannot get back in time, then they can tell the clerk they have sought the advice, take part in the debate or vote, and later give that advice to the clerk.
Does this just apply to their own interests?
No, the law says it is either them or a connected person.
Are there different or extra rules for Ministers and office holders in terms of ethics?
Separate guidelines have been published by the Standards in Public Office Commission for Ministers and their advisers. Ministers, when they take office, are given an extra code of conduct. This is because, as Sipo say, Ministers are expected to observe “the highest standards of ethical behaviour”. But in terms of disclosures, the rules are the same.
So, what might the law tell us about controversies around Robert Troy and Stephen Donnelly?
In the case of Mr Donnelly, he has declared every year that he is a landlord, so the law would suggest he has not fallen foul of what was required of him. Mr Troy similarly listed residential income. However, given the increased scrutiny around the links between politicians and property — all framed against the background of the housing crisis — members of Committee of Members’ Interests have privately expressed a willingness to look again at what kind of detail politicians should be asked to give. There appears to be growing momentum to ask politicians to detail whether they have any contracts such as RAS or HAP, or perhaps greater detail about their property interests. There is, however, no meeting set to discuss this yet or any concrete proposals.
