Sir, – The point made in your editorial "Ethics in public life – a little . . . and late" (January (25th), concerning the recommendations of the Standards in Public Office Commission (Sipo) on electoral reform being ignored by governments, has a particular poignancy now that another general election is upon us.
One of these Sipo recommendations is to repeal the provision in the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Acts that allows outgoing TDs the use of Leinster House facilities after dissolution up to polling day.
It may surprise people that parliamentary funds can be used by outgoing TDs after the Dáil dissolution when they are no longer members. But a distinction is drawn between electoral activity and ongoing public representative activity, and the former must be accounted for within a candidate’s election limit.
Sipo guidelines for election candidates recognise, for example, that “some candidates at the election who are already public representatives may be required to communicate with their constituents during the election period”.
The Oireachtas Commission guidelines allow for the reimbursement to the commission for the use made by an outgoing TD candidate of Leinster House facilities for electoral purposes “other than in respect of duties as a public representative”. It is left up to the outgoing TD to differentiate whether the use made was for electoral or public representative duties, ie wind-down, ongoing constituency casework.
However, allowing for such a distinction to be left to the discernment of an outgoing TD was seen as high risk and a weakness in terms of transparency and accountability, especially if an alleged breach of the candidate’s election limits (or of any candidate in the particular constituency) was the subject of a more forensic examination in an election petition in the High Court subsequently.
Sipo recommended that “to ensure a level playing field between candidates, and a degree of transparency, the use of public funds for electoral purposes should form part of the electoral code rather than other legislation which patently has quite a separate purpose”.
This Sipo recommendation, first made in 2007, was endorsed by the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption in its 2010 report on Ireland.
It is unfortunate that this and other Sipo recommendations have not been enacted and that the opportunity to remove the risk of potential seepage of parliamentary funds for electoral purposes in this area was not taken once and for all. – Yours, etc,
KIERAN COUGHLAN,
(Former Clerk of Dáil
Éireann and former member
of Standards in Public Office
Commission),
Dublin 18.