Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 18 Apr 2002

Vol. 169 No. 19

Order of Business. - Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Éireann: Motion.

Mr. Cassidy

I move:

That Seanad Éireann adopts the following code of conduct for Members of Seanad Éireann other than office holders:

Preamble

The Members of Seanad Éireann other than office holders (referred to hereafter as ‘Members') recognise that it is in their individual and collective interest to foster and sustain public confidence and trust in their integrity as individuals and in Seanad Éireann as an institution. To this end, Members should at all times be guided by the public good and ensure that their actions and decisions are taken in the best interests of the public.

The Members of Seanad Éireann have adopted this code of conduct pursuant to Article 15.10 of the Constitution and in accordance with section 10 of the Standards in Public Office Act, 2001, the purpose of which is to guide Members in the discharge of their obligations in a manner which is consistent with the proper performance of the functions of the Office of Member of Seanad Éireann.

Code

1. Members must, in good faith, strive to maintain the trust placed in them, and exercise the influence gained from their public office to advance the public interest.

2. Members must conduct themselves in accordance with the provisions and spirit of the code of conduct and ensure that their conduct does not bring the integrity of their office or the Seanad into disrepute.

3. (i) Members have a particular obligation to behave in a manner which is consistent with the proper performance of the functions of the Office of Member of Seanad Éireann and with the maintenance of confidence in such performance by the general public.

(ii) Members must interact with authorities involved with public administration and the enforcement of the law in a manner which is consistent with their roles as public representatives and legislators.

4. (i) A conflict of interest exists where a Member participates in or makes a decision in the execution of his or her office knowing that it will improperly and dishonestly further his or her private financial interest or another person's private financial interest directly or indirectly.

(ii) A conflict of interest does not exist where the Member or other person benefits only as a member of the general public or a broad class of persons.

5. (i) Members must base their conduct on a consideration of the public interest and are individually responsible for avoiding conflicts of interest.

(ii) Members must endeavour to arrange their private financial affairs to prevent such conflicts of interest arising and must take all reasonable steps to resolve any such conflict quickly and in a manner which is in the best interests of the public.

6. Members may not solicit, accept or receive any financial benefit or profit in exchange for promoting, or voting on, a Bill, a motion for a resolution or order or any question put to the Seanad or to any of its committees.

7. Members must fulfil conscientiously the requirements of the Seanad and of the law in respect of the Ethics in Public Office Acts and, to assist them in so doing, should familiarize themselves with the relevant legislation and guidelines published from time to time by the Select Committee on Members' Interests and the Standards in Public Office Commission as appropriate.

8. (i)Members must not accept a gift that may pose a conflict of interest or which might interfere with the honest and impartial exercise of their official duties.

(ii) Members may accept incidental gifts and customary hospitality.

9. In performing their official duties, Members must apply public resources prudently and only for the purposes for which they are intended.

10. Members must not use official information which is not in the public domain, or information obtained in confidence in the course of their official duties, for personal gain or the personal gain of others.

11. Members must co-operate with all tribunals of inquiry and other bodies inquiring into matters of public importance established by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The Committee on Members' interests has placed this code of conduct before the House for its approval. The House is required under section 10 of the Standards in Public Offices Act, 2001, to adopt a code of conduct on which the committee has been working for months and, in so doing, circulated a draft code to all Members and sought their views on its content. As required by the Act of 2001, the committee also consulted the Standards in Public Office Commission. Members are well aware of the background to the demands from the public for a code of conduct and ethics in public office to be legislated for. The Act of 2001 clearly provides that the code should act as a guide to Members. It is on this basis that the committee brings this proposal before the House today.

It may be asked why the code does not attach penalties for breaches – the Act does not provide for the imposition of penalties for breaches of the code, but breaches would likely come within the ambit of section 4 of the Act in relation to specified acts which provides for an investigation and the attachment of penalties. The relevance of the code is that it can be used to establish the expected standards of conduct and integrity for Members of Seanad Éireann. It is important that Members know what is expected and required of them and that their actions are transparent and in the interests of the general public, not themselves. The code should strengthen public confidence in the membership of the Seanad and the institution itself.

The Committee on Members' Interests is small but hardworking. I pay tribute to the Cathaoirleach, Senator Mullooly, who, as we all know, is a fair minded man and brought that quality to the committee with his knowledge of procedure and wealth of common sense. I also thank the clerk to the committee who worked hard to ensure everything was brought before it and for assisting the Cathaoirleach and committee members to bring the code to where it is today. I commend the motion to the House.

Mr. Manning

I recommend the adoption of the report to the House. It is an appropriate response to what we were required to do under the legislation. I expect this is the way most Members behave without the report. There is nothing in it which is exceptional. It merely states explicitly what we expect of ourselves and each other. I commend the report to the House. Its value is that it will be a guideline and lay down reasonably precise definitions which will be of use in future.

Mr. Quinn

I am impressed by the report and the proposal. I did not believe there was a need for it, but having read it, I realise there probably is a need to put this down in writing, if only to ensure it is clear.

Section 8(i) is interesting. It states:

Members must not accept a gift that may pose a conflict of interest or which might interfere with the honest and impartial exercise of their official duties.

That is logical and I would have assumed it would have always been recognised as such. However, a difficulty was probably recognised and that has been resolved by section 8(ii) which states: "Members may accept incidental gifts and customary hospitality."

The code of conduct is written in a sensible and logical fashion. It has given new Members and those of us who have been in the Seanad for some time guidelines by which to work. I am sure most of us work within them, but it answers some of the questions asked. I congratulate the committee for putting it together.

Mr. Ryan

I welcome the code of conduct. This has been a traumatic time for Members between declarations of interest and freedom of information requests on expenses and such matters. As most Members, including me, have found, the world did not come to an end nor did the sky fall in when our expenses were published. As one would expect, the media has become bored with the subject and although I am given to understand the routine request for Members' expenses is made every six months, they have found there is nothing in it worth publicising.

We do not cater for our interests that well. For example, my travelling expenses when going to Switzerland were regarded as an expense payable to me and were treated as a cash benefit to me when in fact I never saw most of it. That is the way we operate and it is open and transparent. I would have expected a journalist of rudimentary intelligence to have noticed that fact at least and not to have included it as part of our expenses. The transparency aspect has served us very well, as will this code of conduct.

If these rules had been in place when I was first elected to the House, I suspect I would have been in breach of them. They state: "Members may not solicit, accept or receive any financial benefit or profit in exchange for promoting . a Bill.". I was assisted financially largely by the Simon Community when I was first elected to the House. In return for its support, the first action I took was to introduce a Bill on homelessness. Clearly, I would have been in breach of the rules.

Mr. O'Toole

That is not true.

Mr. Ryan

The Senator should read the rules. I do not believe they could be written differently. We have all learned that rules that are correct can have unexpected consequences. These are the rules we have now. We should bear in mind the possibility that anomalies will arise and we should deal with them honestly when they do. The vast majority of us have nothing to be ashamed of. As the media discovered, the expenses issue was a nine day wonder which has been largely forgotten.

Mr. O'Toole

Having spent a great deal of time on this with Senator Manning, Senator Cassidy, the Cathaoirleach, the Clerk and others, it is good to see it come to fruition. While I agree with the comments made, we need to place this in context. These are the procedures. They do not deal with what happens if someone breaches them. That is the next step and is covered elsewhere in the legislation. It is an equally important matter which we must examine. The role of the committee was to get the guidelines correct.

Senator Ryan's interpretation is incorrect. There is nothing wrong with a Member taking a line on behalf of a group which may choose to support him or her. A breach would occur where a person requests a Member to do something for him or her in return for payment or support. That would be unethical. There is nothing unethical about a Member having coinciding principles or objectives with a group. There is a clear distinction and there is no doubt about that.

This issue is more important for the Seanad than the Dáil because it is a vocational Chamber and is expected to have Members who reflect the views of the people who nominate them. They are elected to put forward those views and they are required by the Constitution to have an interest in and knowledge of their area. It would be in order for Senator Ryan to have an interest in and knowledge of his area of interest and to put forward issues and make arguments on that basis, much as I may do on the issue of education, trade unionism, etc, or much as I may bring forward legislation or amendments to it, as we all have done, on the basis of a certain view. In my case, like Senator Ryan, I have put forward legislation which has advanced the objectives of the Irish National Teachers Organisation and it has consistently supported me legally and correctly through its political fund. These issues do not create difficulty.

There is nothing in the code of conduct which will prevent Members from adequately, correctly, properly and energetically progressing and advancing the viewpoint or supporting the objectives of groups in society. There is nothing wrong with that and that is the way it can work. The best example of where it can go wrong is the Hamilton case in the United Kingdom where a Member of Parliament charged people for raising issues in the House of Commons or accepted money for doing so. In Senator Ryan's case, he has had a long and consistent commitment to the same issue as the Simon Community and a link could never be made between the two.

There are a number of important issues. We are required to ensure that we do not create a conflict of interest. This a proactive imperative in the code of conduct. It states:

Members must endeavour to arrange their private financial affairs to prevent such conflicts of interest arising and must take all reasonable steps to resolve any such conflict quickly and in a manner which is in the best interests of the public.

It is not just a matter of being found out. It is a matter of how we conduct our business. Similarly, the Preamble states:

The Members . recognise that it is in their individual and collective interest to foster and sustain public confidence and trust in their integrity as individuals and in Seanad Éireann as an institution. To this end, Members should at all times be guided by the public good and ensure that their actions and decisions are taken in the best interests of the public.

Those are two strong requirements of and imperatives on Members to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner. It is not just a matter of sitting back and adopting a laissez-faire attitude. There is a requirement on Members to seek to ensure that they represent interests clearly and properly.

Although I know there is no chance that this will get two syllables in tomorrow's papers, I would like the public to see this as the Seanad putting forward a form of self-regulation and placing requirements and imperatives on Members to conduct themselves in a manner which wins and maintains the trust and confidence of the public.

The first question that will be asked by a committee which has to interpret it is what has been done in a proactive way. The second question will be whether any action of a Member is in breach of the code. One can be negligent or in breach of the guidelines, either by the omission of some action one should have taken or the commission of some action one should not have taken. This code of conduct moves the matter forward very strongly.

I thank the Cathaoirleach for the personal commitment he has shown to the development and evolution of this new set of guidelines for Members of the House. It would be very useful if each Member received a copy as soon as it is passed by the House, which I am sure is the intention. This will be a legal requirement as the legal advisers of any future Member would no doubt ask if it was brought to the notice of every Member. When a new House is elected, the code should be brought to the attention of new Members as a matter of priority.

I concur with the points made this morning by Senator Norris regarding Deputy Molloy who is a man who acted honourably and made a mistake. An important element of the guidelines is that they recognise mistakes and allow people to recover from theirs quickly before issues get out of hand. In addressing this issue we need to ensure we have set ourselves on the right track to improve the image of politics, politicians and public representatives in general.

Question put and agreed to.