I move:
That Dáil Éireann calls on the Government to restore political confidence in the independence and impartiality of the Independent Radio and Television Commission, damaged by the recent revelations of political party fund-raising, by relieving the current chairman of his responsibilities; requests the Government to immediately review the system of programme managers so as to properly define their role, in view of the substantial State funding incurred in this regard; and calls on the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, in view of the adverse implications for the principle of ethics in public office, to resign, particularly in view of his inability or unwillingness to fully understand the consequences of this matter.
I move this motion in an attempt to restore some public confidence in the Independent Radio and Television Commission and in the political system generally. Both have been damaged by the activities of, and statements from, the chairman of the commission and his political master, the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, over the last number of days. The fact that the Government has not tabled an amendment to my motion is unprecedented and indicates the disarray of the three parties in Government in dealing with this issue. Even in the darkest hours of previous administrations, at times of crisis there was always somebody in the ranks who could cobble together a retort on an occasion like this. If the Government cannot agree on this issue, it does not augur well for its future.
In my motion we seek the immediate removal from office of the chairman of the Independent Radio and Television Commission who has clearly failed to meet the standards required by the holder of that office by involving himself in a partisan way in the political system, and the immediate resignation of the Minister who has supported such activity and has failed to comprehend the seriousness of the situation.
What we have in this case is the chairman of the State body responsible for allocating radio and television broadcasting licences fundraising for the re-election of the Minister in charge of broadcasting. How can the public believe that Mr. Stockes is acting independently while being politically involved with the Minister? The system has to be fair and it has to be seen to be fair.
The actions of Mr. Stokes in the past few weeks and earlier are obviously imcompatible with his chairmanship of the Independent Radio and Television Commission. It should be remembered that the Independent Radio and Television Commission is not an ordinary State board. The legislation setting up the commission distinguishes it from the majority of other State boards as its responsibilities involve the granting of broadcasting licences. It is for that reason that Fianna Fáil appointed Mr. Justice Henchy as the first chairman of the commission in 1988. We wanted to ensure that the chairman was independdent and was seen to be independent.
If Mr. Justice Henchy had acted in the same way as Mr. Stokes there would have been a similar breach of standards. Would even asking Mr. Justice Henchy to participate actively in a fundraising political event be considered acceptable by the Minister? Surely the answer must be no. This should give the Minister pause for thought.
I want to make it clear that nobody believes it is wrong for a director of a State body to maintain his or her friendship with the Minister. Nor do I suggest that a person should be disqualified from a State board because of their involvement with a political party. As I have already said, the Independent Radio and Television Commission is not the normal type of statutory body to which the Government makes appointments. Unlike statutory corporations such as CIE or Bord na Móna, the Independent Radio and Television Commission is given responsibility to select persons who wish to provide broadcasting services in the State. In addition, the Independent Radio and Television Commission regulates the service provided by such persons. In blunt terms, licences issued by the Independent Radio and Television Commission have a huge commercial value.
It is well established in Irish law that an administrative body created by statute, such as the Independent Radio and Television Commission, is obliged to act in accordance with natural and constitutional justice. This requires the body to be even-handed and fair in all its dealings and also to be seen to be even handed.
The applications of these principles to the Independent Radio and Television Commission was up held by the High Court and the Supreme Court in the case brought by the TV3 consortium two years ago. In that case the Independent Radio and Television Commission had failed to give TV3 notice of its intention to withdraw a previoius decision to allocate to this company a national television franchise. There is, therefore, a legal onus cast on the Independent Radio and Television Commission, and in particular its chairman, to ensure that the requirements of natural and constitutional justice are met. A doubt and a shadow is now cast over the manner in which the Independent Radio and Television Commission carries out, or may have carried out, its functions.
Natural justice is explained by Hogan and Morgan in their book Administrative Law as follows:
The best way of explaining constitutional justice is to begin with natural justice, which consists of two fundamental procedural rules, namely: that the decision-maker must not be biased; and, secondly, that anyone who may be adversely affected by a decision should not be condemned unheard; rather he should have the best possible chance to put his side of the case.
Does bias raise its head here? That bias which should be a concern of the Minister is emphasised by a court case taken against the Independent Radio and Television Commission by Dublin and County Broadcasting in 1989. In his judgment Mr. Justice Murphy stated:
If it is shown that there is on the facts circumstances which would lead a right minded person to conclude that there is a real likelihood of bias, that would be sufficient to invalidate the proceedings of the tribunal.
This is the territory into which the Independent Radio and Television Commission may be descending. It should never be there. A statutory body is established to carry out its functions without fear or favour in a fair and even-handed manner. Recent events call that into question.
I repeat that the Independent Radio and Television Commission is not just any old statutory body. It is at the frontiers of technology. It is dealing with the brave new world of services in radio and television that have a commercial value. It is not dissimilar to An Bord Pleanála, the planning appeals board, and the functions it discharges under the Local Government Acts. It is not a body which should descend into the party political fund raising area.
For reasons I have given earlier, the principles of natural and constitutional justice apply to statutory bodies such as the Independent Radio and Television Commission. There can be no doubt whatsoever about that application as there have been judgements of the courts establishing this fact.
The rules of natural and constitutional justice, which include rules preventing bias, should have served as a warning of the ill-advised actions of the chairman of the commmission. Are there no standards left in public life? What will the chairman of the Independent Radio and Television Commission be asked to do next?
The latest political fund raising endeavours by Mr. Stokes were not his only display of political partisanship. Through his magazine, Hot Press, he has heaped vitriolic abuse on politicians from other political parties, but never on the Minister, Deputy Higgins, and the Labour Party.