I extend a céad míle fáilte and a welcome the teachers and students from St. John's National School, Ballybrack, who are here as guests of Senator Barry Ward, a very active Member of the Seanad. We hope they enjoy their day in Leinster House and shake the hands of many of the politicians here. Maybe it is their future.
Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2022: Second Stage
Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Particularly the ones from Dún Laoghaire.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth, and his officials.
I thank the House for inviting me here. I welcome the students from Ballybrack. I am not sure whether this is the most exciting debate of the day.
Lobbying is an essential element of a well-functioning and mature democracy. The institutions of Government need to hear from varying interests in order to make well informed and grounded decisions balancing wider societal needs against the needs, expectations and experiences of varying interests across the economic and social spectrum.
The aim of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 is not to restrict this flow of perspectives feeding into policymaking but rather to bring about significantly greater transparency around this process. There is a strong public interest in identifying who is lobbying whom about what. The Act is specifically designed to achieve this goal through the establishment of a web-based registration system of lobbying activity. Currently, there are about 2,500 organisations and individuals registered on the online lobbying register with nearly 75,000 returns available for examination by the public. This Bill before the House today will amend the existing Act in order to build on the current strong legislative foundation and further strengthen Ireland’s lobbying laws, thus ensuring that the regulation of lobbying framework remains up to date and fit for purpose.
To date, three statutory reviews have taken place under the 2015 Act. The first was in 2017, another in 2019 and the most recent was in 2020. The recommendations of the 2020 review informed the reforms which are being introduced in this Bill. These include bringing certain business groupings with no employees within the scope of the Act and requiring that members of each group be named on lobbying returns to ensure the groups do not avoid the requirement to register; extending the Act’s scope to include non-remunerated officeholders in order to capture all relevant lobbying activity; introducing legislative provisions to improve the operation of the online lobbying regulator; introducing a new relevant contravention in the Act covering the taking of any action by a person that has the intended purpose of avoiding the obligations to either register or submit lobbying returns to the commission; and amending the Act to make failure to comply with the cooling-off provisions of the Act a relevant contravention. A system of administrative sanctions, operated by the commission, will be introduced in this regard. This system will involve minor or major sanctions. The sanctions proposed include a caution or reprimand, a monetary penalty of up to €25,000 and a prohibition from lobbying of up to two years.
In regard to the development of the Bill, I would like to thank the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach for its careful consideration of the general scheme of this Bill in pre-legislative scrutiny. The committee, while broadly supportive of the measures proposed in the general scheme, made seven recommendations. These were considered in detail. Four of these recommendations required clarification and a commitment to ensure sufficient capacity to implement any changes, which have been provided to the committee.
The remaining recommendations, if adopted, would give rise to significant legal and policy issues and I have responded to the committee directly on these.
I would like to now turn to the Bill before us and briefly go through each section. If any Member feels that a technical briefing on the Bill would be helpful, I will make my officials available to assist in this regard. Section 1 identifies the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 as the principal Act being amended. Section 2 provides for an amendment to allow for the period between statutory reviews of the Act to be extended from three to five years. Section 3 amends the provisions relating to regulations made under the Act, allowing the commission to make regulations. Section 4 provides for an extension to the definition of lobbying in relation to the development or zoning of land, certain informal business groups, non-remunerated office holders and communications made by a political party to its members. Section 5 inserts a definition of "company" into the Act.
Section 6 provides for a prohibition on registered persons from lobbying where they have notified the commission that they have ceased to carry on lobbying activities. Section 7 amends the provisions dealing with certain details to be supplied by applicants who wish to be included on the lobbying register, including, for example, that persons applying for registration must give the name of every person who is a member of an informal business group. Section 8 amends the provisions relating to the returns to be made by a registered person.
Section 9 makes amendments regarding relevant contraventions by introducing new relevant contraventions for certain persons, namely, carrying on lobbying activities while one’s registration has been marked as having ceased; taking any action with the purpose of avoiding one’s obligations concerning registration or the making of returns, which is the anti-avoidance clause; and where required, failing to apply to the commission for consent to take up a specific employment or position in certain circumstances during the 12-month cooling-off period subsequent to leaving a position as a relevant designated public official, DPO.
Section 10 amends provisions dealing with offences, so that it provides, in effect, that contravening section 22 of the Act, while a relevant contravention, will not be a criminal offence. Section 11 amends section 21 of the Act so that the section clearly provides that the commission can serve fixed payment notices for the late filing of lobbying returns electronically. Section 12 strengthens provisions relating to post-term employment as a lobbyist. It also establishes how applications for consent are to be dealt with by the commission, and it provides for obligations for public service bodies.
Section 13 provides for the introduction of a new system of administrative sanctions to be administered by the commission relating to breaches of post-term employment restrictions and the avoidance of a person’s obligations to register and submit returns. Section 14 sets out the matters to be considered by the commission in determining the amount of any financial sanction to be imposed under the new system of administrative sanctions. Section 15 provides for the payment of any financial sanction imposed under the new system of administrative sanctions.
Section 16 provides for the appeals mechanism to the Circuit Court relating to decisions of the commission to impose a sanction under the new system of administrative sanctions. Section 17 provides that where a person does not appeal a major sanction, the commission must apply to the Circuit Court for confirmation of the decision to impose the major sanction concerned. Section 18 details that the commission must publish a code for the conduct of investigations and for the conduct of proceedings before the commission relating to the new system of administrative sanctions. Section 19 provides for the electronic serving of notices.
Section 20 is a technical amendment required to update a legislative reference. Section 21 amends section 25 of the Act to provide that the commissions must include information on any decisions made on relevant contraventions and any administrative sanctions imposed in its annual report. Section 22 deals with the delegation of functions by the commission. Section 23 amends the Schedule to the Act, which lists those bodies that are not public service bodies due to changes made to the harbours legislation. Section 24 sets out the short title of the Bill and provides the commencement arrangements for the Bill.
I look forward to hearing the contributions of Senators during this debate and I hope the House will support the passage of the Bill.
The Minister of State is very welcome here to discuss this all-important Bill. I am representing my colleague, Senator Seán Kyne, who had another commitment today. On his behalf, I would like to say that Fine Gael will be supporting the Bill.
The Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2022 is about strengthening the Bill that is already in existence. While we have gone a long way, this will go further in making sure that all the correct procedures are put in place. It is really important in terms of transparency as well as in terms of Senators, Deputies and the Government being transparent and in the context of meetings with companies and so on and making sure it is made clear. This Bill clearly defines it and sets down the criteria that need to be met.
As stated, it is not about restricting the flow of perspectives feeding into policymaking, but rather bringing about significant and greater transparency around the process. That is something I believe these changes will do. When we are accountable to the public, it is very important that everything is clear, concise and set down. For companies, this legislation provides clear guidelines as to what they have to follow.
This started off some time ago and this Bill amends the 2015 legislation. Quite a few changes are being brought in, but for the better. I commend the Bill to the House.
I will be brief. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, to the House. This is very welcome legislation. It has been a long time coming, and some political parties have dragged their heels for a hell of a long time. There have been many commitments, but we are now seeing it done, ultimately under the Minister of State's remit. I welcome it and I thank the Minister of State for how he has laid it out, in very simple terms.
I would like to take the Minister of State up on the invitation he has extended for a more technical briefing. That is important. On behalf of the Independent Group of Senators, I will be in touch with the Minister of State's office to set up a brief engagement with our group in the Seanad. However, I am supportive of it. It is important.
I am a great supporter of pre-legislative scrutiny in this House. It is one of the few places where we get that real buy-in cross-party. My colleague, Senator Seery Kearney, and I are involved in other pre-legislative scrutiny at the moment, so we are hopping between the two. However, there is a lot of effort put into the pre-legislative scrutiny. One of the great things is that one can then equip one's self with the final document and bring it to the House to debate it when one is tabling amendments to the legislation or seeking the rationale of a Minister who rejects them.
On the pre-legislative scrutiny report, the Minister of State identified a number of proposals in it that were not acceptable to his Department for various reasons, whether legal or financial, or due to subsequent consequences or follow-through. I respect that, and that has been teased out. However, I would like to understand the rationale behind that. I do not sit on that committee.
At the end of the day, the Minister of State's Government party members sit on that committee. They have made recommendations, and not all of them have been accepted, so we need to tease it out. It is not enough to keep coming in here and to say we agree with everything. This is a debating Chamber; this is a revising Chamber. This is where we conduct our business in a public forum, where the public can see what is going on.
I thank the Minister of State. I am broadly supportive of all of this. It is welcome and long overdue, but I would like to take up the Minister of State's invitation to have a briefing with our group and to have some explanation of the detailed rationale as to why some recommendations in the pre-legislative scrutiny report were not considered appropriate to be included in this Bill.
The Minister of State is very welcome to the House. I am speaking on behalf of my colleague, Senator Aidan Davitt, who is unable to attend due to a personal issue. It is my pleasure to speak today and to welcome the Second Stage debate of the Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2022 in Seanad Éireann. Fianna Fáil very much welcomes and supports this Bill which will pave the way for strengthening Ireland's lobbying laws. It is a complex policy area, and I commend and congratulate those involved in bringing this reforming Bill to this important stage. This includes those involved in the reviews, the Private Members' Bills, the Government officials and those who participated in the pre-legislative scrutiny.
As we all know, lobbying plays a very important role in our democracy, allowing individuals and organisations to advance their interests and raise their concerns with elected officials and Government agencies.
However, it has become increasingly evident that the current regulations governing lobbying do not adequately address the potential risks this practice poses to our democratic processes. The lobbying industry is growing in size and influence. Without proper checks and balances, lobbying can lead to undue influence on the part of wealthy or well-connected interests at the expense of the public good.
As the Minister of State indicated, to date, two statutory reviews have taken place under the 2015 Act, one in 2017 and the other in 2019. In September 2020, the Minister, Deputy Michael McGrath, commenced a further review to examine the operation of the Act in respect of the area of post-term employment as a lobbyist. This comprehensive review of the entire Act was concluded in May 2021.
This is a complex policy area, and a detailed review was necessary in order to properly assess the policy, legal and practical implications of the issues raised. In addition to consultations with the Office of the Attorney General, the review included: an assessment of the current operation of key provisions in the Act; consultation with, and consideration of the view of, the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO; an overview of lobbying regulations in other jurisdictions; and a consideration of options to address concerns raised and of the policy, legal and practical implications of different responses. The core consideration was to examine how the existing solid legislative foundation could be enhanced most effectively and efficiently, strengthening identified weaknesses. On foot of the review, a number of recommendations relating to legislative change were brought forward.
This Bill is a crucial step towards stronger and more transparent regulation of this industry. It seeks to address the consequences of unregulated lobbying, providing more transparency in how lobbyists operate, and to increase accountability for those who engage in such practices. The Bill will increase transparency by introducing the mandatory registration of third-party lobbyists and increasing the amount of information that must be disclosed about their activities. It will also require all lobbyists to disclose not just the topics they are interested in, but the precise objectives they seek to achieve through their lobbying activities. Moreover, the Bill will limit the potential for conflicts of interest by introducing a cooling-off period during which senior public officials who have left government cannot lobby their former colleagues. This provision will ensure that the roles and responsibilities of public office remain inviolate, thereby serving the public interest and safeguarding the integrity of the democratic process.
This Bill is a significant step towards achieving greater transparency and accountability in the lobbying industry. There is no doubt but that the proposed measures will strengthen our democracy by limiting the potential for undue influence, ensuring that the interests of the public are always at the forefront of policy-making. It is very important, now more than ever, to ensure that unregulated and unethical lobbying practices are a thing of the past. We should all embrace this Bill. Other Members of the House have clearly articulated that. It is a tool for better governance and manifests our commitment to the democratic principles we all hold dear. I commend the Bill to the House and am very glad to have spoken on it today.
Before I invite the next Senator to speak, I welcome the students from St. Benildus College, Sandyford.
The Minister of State is, as always, very welcome to the Chamber. He stated that the Bill is a further strengthening of the existing laws. He also stated that transparency is key and, with frank candour, accepted that lobbying is a part of the greater workings of the democratic system. Lobbying can sometimes be misunderstood and misrepresented as something untoward but, of course, once it is done properly and in a transparent way, it is part of the framework of organised society and decision-making. However, I emphasise, as did the Minister of State, that it has to be done properly, transparently and with accountability. This is the third review, and a further extension is envisaged in this legislation to capture more. There is nothing to fear in strengthening the protections. It is only something good and positive that people will understand more and have greater faith and confidence in and that will safeguard against unacceptable behaviour.
It is early stages yet but I believe it is envisaged that the next review will take place after five years rather than three. Perhaps we can tease out on Committee Stage why that was done. Lobbying is a bit like the Constitution in that it is a living thing. You have to be able to adapt with flexibility and agility. I remain unconvinced about the five years but I am sure the draftspeople had reasons for that. We can flesh it out at a later date.
The other big section in the Bill relates to administrative sanctions. They are permissible, but one has to be very careful in respect of administrative sanctions, which could have a big impact on one's livelihood depending on whether the sanction imposed is a major one. They have to be used in accordance with natural justice and can never overstep or oust the jurisdiction of the courts. I appreciate that there can be an oral hearing, which is a good thing, and that evidence may be taken under oath. I would like to see the wording changed so that evidence shall be taken under oath or affirmation. Again, this is a matter for Committee Stage but, in the explanatory memorandum, it states, "A person cannot be the subject of both an administrative sanction and a criminal penalty for a contravention under the anti-avoidance provisions", which is interesting. Never the twain shall meet. An administrative sanction and a sanction of the courts are distinctly different. Perhaps it is just relevant to this very limited and restricted area but Mr. Justice Frank Clarke gave a Supreme Court decision in a case involving Gerard Killally in which I acted. There was a criminal sanction in respect of a bankruptcy matter and the question was whether that would prevent an official assignee from applying an administrative sanction away from the courts. In that instance, the Supreme Court held that both can coexist. I notice that in this specific section - and I know this is a discrete point that is appropriate to Committee Stage - it does not seem possible for both to coexist. Perhaps we could get an explanation as to why it is not possible under this very limited section, which I note only applies to anti-avoidance provisions, on Committee Stage.
I also welcome the fact that the Minister of State has said that a code for administrative sanctions is to be published. That is very important and I look forward to reading it because, if these things are not done properly, it is a recipe for matters ending up in litigation in the High Court. No one wants that. It is unnecessary and can be avoided if things are done properly and fairly.
Once again, the Green Party supports this latest strengthening, this latest brick in building the structure of a modern regulatory response to lobbying that has at its heart transparency and fairness, once we strike that balance. I fully concur with the Minister of State's remarks in opening this Second Stage debate. He can be assured of the support of the Green Party grouping as this progresses through the House. We will keep an eye on it. I look forward to engaging in the debate on Committee and Report Stages.
The Minister of State is welcome, as always. I give the Bill a partial welcome. The lobbying regime has come in for strong criticism in the past. There has clearly been a revolving door between Government and big business. The Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, has long called for reforms and made numerous submissions to Government. Unfortunately, Government long ignored these calls. It was forced to introduce this Bill following the public outcry when former Minister of State Michael D'Arcy attempted to take up employment with the lobbying organisation for the Irish funds industry. This would have been in breach of the one-year cooling-off period. He had not sought a special exemption from SIPO and there are currently no sanctions for breaching the period. The regime also permits former Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas special access to Leinster House without any requirement to sign in or any records being kept. Brian Hayes, a former Fine Gael Minister of State and now with the Banking and Payments Federation Ireland, is a noteworthy example of this.
D'Arcygate also led to the introduction of Sinn Féin's Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020, which is stronger than the one before us because it would have enacted 13 of the recommendations SIPO made to the then Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in 2016 and 2019. Professor Gary Murphy told the finance committee the enactment of the Sinn Féin Bill would not only improve transparency and accountability but also Ireland's international reputation, which is something that is badly needed. It was also endorsed by Transparency International Ireland, especially as it extends the cooling-off period from one year to two years, which is considered best international practice.
The Government’s Bill broadens the scope of the rules to ensure certain business groups fall within the scope of the Act, regardless of the number of their employees, and requires members of such groups to be named on lobbying returns to ensure the groups do not avoid the requirement to register. We, of course, welcome this. It makes breaches of the cooling-off period a civil offence, which means sanctions could include a caution or reprimand and a monetary penalty of up to €25,000 or a prohibition from lobbying of up to two years or both. Interestingly, the finance committee recommended consideration be given to making a breach a criminal offence, and indeed the Sinn Féin Bill would have done so. The present Bill does not extend the cooling-off period to two years, despite this being international best practice and a recommendation of the finance committee and the experts who appeared before it. The Sinn Féin Bill would have done this. The Government Bill will not ensure special exemptions from the cooling-off period will be made public. This was a recommendation of the pre-legislative scrutiny report and SIPO and something the Sinn Féin Bill would have done. I find it extraordinary that when exemptions are made, they would not be made public. How on earth does the Government justify that? It will not change the special privileges enjoyed by former Oireachtas Members, despite this being a clear recommendation of the pre-legislative scrutiny report. The Bill will extend the review period for the Act from the current three years to five years. Amendments to the lobbying regimes will always be necessary as lobbying tactics and strategies evolve to circumvent the objectives of the legislation. Longer review periods are slower to address potential weaknesses and Sinn Féin believes this is a retrograde step.
In summary, there is a revolving door between politics and big business that undermines confidence in the system. People are rightly concerned this Government, like previous ones, is more responsive to lobbyists working on behalf of special interests than it is to voters. Thejournal.ie identified 91 individuals who were designated public officials, DPOs, under section 22 of the Act. In 62 cases, former special advisers acted as lobbyists and often lobbied their former ministerial colleagues. In some instances, this was in breach of the cooling-off period. Thejournal.ie identified 38 individuals who were formerly prescribed DPOs but who had failed to mention it on their lobbying returns, and these represented in excess of 300 entries. Fine Gael is especially at fault here. The Uber Leaks files revealed Fine Gael inserted text written by Uber itself into its 2016 general election manifesto. Ed Brophy, who was formerly a special adviser to the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, now works as head of public affairs for Amazon. In 2020, he was lobbied by Amazon. Within months of leaving his position, he had lobbied senior advisers to the three Coalition leaders on housing and energy policies. Just a week ago, the Business Post revealed a firm created by Paudie Coffey, a former Fine Gael Minister of State at the Department with responsibility for housing, and Paul Fox, an ex-special adviser, was hired to lobby on behalf of Didier de Witte, who is a Belgian businessman convicted for evading more than €1 million in tax.
Our Regulation of Lobbying (Amendment) Bill 2020 was introduced in the wake of D’Arcygate. As with our Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Bill 2021, which was another vital mechanism for transparency and accountability, there was a chance to ensure we had the strongest protections possible to try to close the revolving door. The Bill before us could have tried to put a stop to such things, but instead it does the bare minimum. This is another missed opportunity by the Government. The recommendation to increase the cooling-off period to two years was ignored, despite it coming from Transparency International Ireland, Professor Murphy and SIPO. The use of criminal rather than civil sanctions would have sent a real message and acted as a serious deterrent. The Brian Hayeses of this world will continue to enjoy special privileges. We will remain in the dark as to why certain individuals, like Ed Brophy, were given a special exemption from the cooling-off period.
The Senator is naming an awful lot of people who are not present in the House and are not able to defend themselves. He has continually used the names of people who are not here.
I will take that on board; it is no problem. I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach. The programme for Government also commits to extend the lobbying register so the lobbying of senior officials in bodies like the Central Bank of Ireland, ComReg, the National Transport Authority and the HSE that have significant policymaking or development functions will need to be reported on on the same basis as central and local government. No action has yet been taken on this issue.
We need to see why the Government declined so many of the recommendations of the report of the finance committee. We need to understand those reasons well. I also hope the Government will allow sufficient time on Committee Stage to thoroughly interrogate this Bill and deal with our amendments. I hope there will be no attempt to rush this Bill through, as it is far too important. I look forward to the Minister of State's response explaining why the Government has declined to make this Bill as strong as it needs to be.
I thank Senators for their input into this debate. Senator Maria Byrne spoke first and I thank her for welcoming the Bill. She underlined the importance of having different perspectives, but also the importance of having clarity around definitions, what constitutes lobbying and what one can and cannot do. As she said, it is important we appreciate we are not making laws in isolation from the real world. People are coming in to us from groups, whether public or private, and lobbying us. It is also important people can see who is doing that, when they are doing it and how they are doing it.
Senator Boyhan requested a technical briefing, as I offered it, and we are happy to provide that. He is looking for more details on what the rationale was for not accepting the pre-legislative scrutiny recommendations.
Senator McGreehan noted the need for updating and the increase in transparency and accountability that will be brought about as a result of this Bill.
Senator Martin noted the role of lobbying in a democratic system does not have to be entirely negative. On Committee Stage, he wants to discuss the review period changing from three years to five, which Senator Gavan also mentioned. Senator Martin said he believed any sanctions that come out of this Bill should be in accordance with the principles of natural justice, and I absolutely agree. He asked that, on Committee Stage, we also discuss administrative sanctions versus criminal offences, penalties for anti-avoidance provisions, and whether both of those should be imposed at the same time. He referred to case law of cases in which he was involved. All major sanctions imposed by SIPO at present must be confirmed by the Circuit Court.
Senator Gavan offered a partial welcome to the Bill and outlined problems that occurred in the past in lobbying in Ireland. He also asked that we move to a shorter review period rather than going from three years to five years. We found in practice that it can take a year to carry out the review, so we were in effect down to the Bill operating for two years before we move back into review.
Senator Martin says it should be something that we can revise whenever we want, and it is. For example, we had a review in 2019 and we then had another review in 2020, so that is possible too.
Senator Gavan is concerned that the Bill does not go as far as implementing all of SIPO's recommendations to make breaches of section 22 a criminal offence with criminal sanctions, rather than civil and administrative sanctions. I will give some rationale for that. Based on the Department's analysis, legal advice received and in consideration of international good practice, the policy recommendation that I accepted was that criminal sanctions represented a disproportionate policy response. In line with the advice of the Office of the Attorney General, administrative and civil sanctions were explored and developed. The civil and administrative sanctions regime is considered to be an effective and proportionate policy response to what appears to be a relatively low risk of breaching the post-term employment restrictions, which are set out in section 22. However, where breaches do occur, however infrequent, they can have a disproportionate impact in undermining public trust. My understanding is that SIPO's preference for criminal sanctions was not a policy choice but an administrative one. It is SIPO's view that it would be administratively simpler to have a criminal sanction regime for all offences. However, as I have set out, in the case of sanctions for contraventions of section 22, this is not an appropriate policy response. My officials will engage with SIPO on the appropriate resourcing to support SIPO in implementing this new requirement.
There was also a question about what type of penalties exist in other jurisdictions for those who breach lobbying laws. We did look at that. In comparison with other jurisdictions, Ireland is a leader in the regulation of lobbying activities, in particular in the realm of providing for a cooling-off period. Canada, for example, is one of the other few common law jurisdictions that has introduced a statutory regime for lobbying, including provisions relating to the imposition of administrative fines and prohibitions on lobbying. The UK has introduced lobbying legislation, but this has a narrow application, as it only encompasses consultant lobbyists engaging with Ministers and permanent secretaries. Australia's lobbying regime operates on a non-statutory basis.
Some of us will remember the introduction of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015, which we are amending. It was very positive legislation, which meant that if, for example, somebody who wanted to see land rezoned came to me as a councillor, as I was a designated public official, that request would have to be published. There is a good reason to rezone land if housing is needed, and it is a bad reason if somebody is trying to make money. The added transparency helped to ensure confidence in the system. Those rules were probably introduced as a result of the planning tribunal.
Interaction between the political system and the public provides political representatives with valuable insights, information and policy perspectives, which are vital to good governance. This is especially important given the complexity of the challenges facing public policymakers and the wider impact decisions of the Government have on all aspects of the economic and social system. The reasons for regulating lobbying in Ireland are all grounded in the need to enhance transparency around this interaction. This transparency, furthermore, is an important determinant of trust in government. The main goal, therefore, in establishing a register of lobbying back in 2015 was to make information easily available to the public on the identity of those seeking to influence public policy decisions, as well as providing a framework for holding those engaged in lobbying accountable for the manner in which they conduct the activity. I believe this goal has been achieved. There are approximately 2,500 organisations and individuals who are now registered on the lobbying register, and nearly 75,000 returns are freely available for viewing and scrutiny by the public.
This Bill brings in eight major changes. It extends the time period between statutory reviews from three to five years. This is to allow for the impact of any policy or legislative changes to become clear. Second, it brings certain business groupings with no employees within the scope of the Act, and it requires that members of such groups be named on lobbying returns to ensure that the groups do not avoid the requirement to register. Third, it extends the Act's scope to include non-remunerated officeholders, so as to capture all relevant lobbying activity. It then provides for an exemption from registration requirements for communications made by political parties to their members, who are designated public officials, DPOs, only in their capacity as members of a party. It is important that a political party can speak to its own members, that is, to its own Deputies, Senators and councillors without that being considered to be lobbying, which would not make any sense.
Fifth, it introduces legislative provisions to improve the operation of the online lobbying register. Then it introduces a new relevant contravention in the Act, covering the taking of any action by a person that has the intended purpose of avoiding the obligations to either register or submit lobbying returns to the commission. This is to avoid loopholes or people trying to work around the Act. It amends the Act to make failure to comply with the cooling-off provisions of section 22 a relevant contravention under the Act and a system of administrative sanctions operated by the commission will be introduced in this regard. This system will involve minor or major sanctions and the sanctions proposed include a caution or reprimand, a monetary penalty of €25,000, and a prohibition from lobbying for up to two years. We will also set out clear timelines in the Act for the processing of section 22 applications made to the commission by former relevant DPOs.
I thank all Senators for their insightful contributions. There is more discussion to come on Committee Stage. I welcome amendments. I look forward to hearing from Senators.
I thank the Minister of State for his very comprehensive response to the debate.
Before we conclude, I welcome students from Mount Mercy College, Cork, who are here courtesy of Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan. I hope they enjoy their day in Leinster House, in particular their time in the Seanad.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?
Next Tuesday.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 25 April 2023.