Category: Seanad Eireann

Fintan O'Toole's deadly naivety on Senate reform

I’m disappointed but not really surprised that Fintan O’Toole is in favour of keeping the Senate (Irish Times).

Despite years of excellent analysis and passionate campaigning against political and business corruption he has never crossed the (psychological) line and admitted that he lives in an intrinsically corrupt state.

He sincerely but naïvely believes that politicians in favour of the Senate will keep their promise to reform the institution.

He sincerely and naively believes that such a reformed Senate will be capable of making the Dail accountable.

He sincerely and naively believes that by voting NO and writing the word ‘reform’ on his ballot paper that he will be making some great statement.

It is naivety of the most deadly kind because if enough people are of the same trusting/innocent mind as O’Toole there is a strong possibility that the NO vote will carry the day.

If his mindset wins the day I believe O’Toole will spend the rest of his life regretting his once in a lifetime opportunity to strike a blow against those powerful forces he has spent his life fighting.

If his mindset loses and the Senate is abolished there is at least a possibility that the resulting shock to the corrupt political/administrative system will trigger an unstoppable popular demand for revolutionary reform.

Senate referendum: A once in a lifetime chance to damage our corrupt political system

I don’t know nor care why Enda Kenny decided to allow Irish citizens an opportunity to abolish the Senate in a referendum on 4 October next.

What I do know with absolute certainty is that it is the greatest opportunity Irish citizens have ever been granted to do serious damage to the corrupt system that has betrayed and destroyed their country.

The Senate is much more than an exclusive club for the ruling/ privileged elite. It serves two other crucially important purposes.

It is an important visible symbol of the ruling elite’s power and it serves as an invaluable networking base to maintain that power and privilege.

I have no doubt that people such as Michael McDowell, David Norris, Mary O’Rourke and others are horrified at the prospect of losing this powerful institution that has, over the decades, been corrupted out of its original, legitimate use to become an exclusive club where political and business insiders look after each other’s interests.

The arguments put forward by the NO side are, for the most part, dishonest and ridiculous.

For example, the campaigning group Democracy Matters is asking citizens to vote in favour of retaining the Senate in order to revive the economy.

This ridiculous idea demonstrates the dearth of genuine reasons on the NO side for retaining the rotten institution.

The principal argument put forward by the NO side is political reform. Retain the Senate and we will (really, honestly this time) reform it to serve the people.

Well, we’ve heard that promise many, many times over the decades and 12 reform reports later we’re still waiting.

In 1979 the people voted in favour of a tiny, insignificant reform, the extension of the Senate franchise to graduates of all universities.

What happened?

Government after government, political party after political party contemptuously ignored the will of the people.

This elite club just couldn’t bring itself to share any power whatsoever with the great unwashed.

There will be no real political reform for so long as the corrupt political/administrative system responsible for destroying the lives of so many citizens remains in place. This will be the case whether or not the Senate is abolished.

If the referendum is defeated and the Senate remains in place those promising to reform the institution will, without a shadow of doubt, break their promise, it’s the way of Irish politics.

Instead, we will see the usual pretence of reform that will have just one principal aim – to ensure the Senate remains an exclusive club for the ruling elite.

The YES side led by Enda Kenny is just as dishonest when it promises major political reforms to compensate for the loss of the Senate.

There will be no substantial reform of our corrupt political system. The entire political system needs to be abolished and replaced with a truly democratic system that is publicly accountable and subject to the rule of law.

It is obvious that a great many people will be tempted to vote NO in order to punish this government or because they have given up on politics in general.

This would be a great pity.

This government will go; another will be installed. There will be no change; the corrupt system will continue to exploit Irish citizens as it has done for decades.

Any satisfaction gained by punishing this government will be short-term only.

If, however, the Senate is abolished it will send an earth-shattering shock through the corrupt political/administrative system. It will inflict permanent damage on the system from which it is unlikely to recover.

A vote to abolish will remove, in one decisive blow, a major source of support for those who desperately want to maintain the current rotten political system.

A vote to abolish could see the beginning of the end for the corrupt system that has blighted our country for so many decades and perhaps, just perhaps, set us on the road to building a new republic where politicians of vision and courage work for the good of the country and its people.

Copy to:

All political parties

Senator Norris: Politicians must not display their elite/privileged position too blatantly

The following pompous/patronising statement was delivered by Senator David Norris in May 2011 during the first session of the current Senate.

It is our responsibility by reason of our privileged position not to encourage the notion that we are a special class. Politicians are merely ordinary people who have taken on an extra burden of responsibility on behalf of the wider community. We should not see ourselves or behave as if we were an elite.

On the same occasion Senator Norris pompously compared the parochial, elitist club that is Seanad Eireann with the Roman Republic and its senate.

As if there was even the remotest link between the greatness of ancient Rome and the activities of a crowd of gombeen bog trotters labouring under the delusion that they live in an accountable democracy.

McDowell trips over his arrogance

Michael McDowell was getting the better of Fine Gael director of elections, Regina Doherty during a debate on the upcoming Senate referendum (Late Debate, RTE).

But towards the end his arrogance got the better of him and, not for the first time, his elitist mindset betrayed his real reasons for retaining the Senate.

No European legislation is being considered in the Oireachtas – we need more expertise to deal with the EU – Do we really think that Michael Healy Rae, Ming Flanagan and various others are going to now spend their afternoons going through European directives and making suggestions for new laws to Europe, that’s not going to happen.

Doherty was quick to condemn his arrogance but McDowell just couldn’t stop himself.

Let’s look at the directly elected people in Seanad Eireann. Fergal Quinn, John Crown, Sean Barrett, David Norris Ivana Bacik and Ronan Mullen. They’re damned good senators, they’re good people.

Good people perhaps, but all members of an exclusive, elitist club that has long outlived any relevance it may have had.

Senator Landy to be investigated

I rang the Clerk of the Seanad during the week for an update on my two complaints against Senator Landy.

I was informed that they have been passed to the Committee for Members Interests for further investigation.

As usual I was treated with barely concealed contempt particularly when I asked some questions about procedures within the office of the Clerk of the Seanad

For example I wanted to know:

Is the office officially required to acknowledge receipt of complaints?

Where would I find the legislation covering complaints to the office?

Bizarrely, I was told I would have to get my own legal people on that, that the office was not in a position to give legal advice on such matters.

Eventually I got answers to my straight-forward questions but, as usual, I had to wrestle with the non-cooperative bureaucratic mindset first.

Two more complaints against Senator Landy:

As I mentioned in a previous article the Clerk of the Seanad has rejected my complaint regarding bribery claims by Labour Senator Denis Landy on the grounds that I did not make a complaint against a specific member of the Senate.

During my research compiling a new complaint I came across a code of conduct for members of Seanad Eireann on the Standards in Public Office (SIPO) website.

Delighted with this new information I rang SIPO to enquire about the procedure for making a complaint.

Sorry, Mr. Sheridan, we only deal with complaints against office holders. We cannot accept a complaint against an ordinary member of the Dail or Senate.

So why is this code of conduct published on your website?

Oh that’s just to inform citizens that such a code exists but it has nothing to do with us.

So what authority does a citizen submit a complaint to for breach of this code?

The Clerk of the Seanad or Dail.

So here I am again – back at the start of yet another circle.

I have now submitted two complaints to the Clerk of the Seanad specifically against Senator Landy (See full complaints below).

The first complaint is made under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) and is centred on the fact that Senator Landy did not report the bribery allegation to the relevant authorities and that he has refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe.

The second complaint is made under the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann, specifically under sections 1, 2, 3(i) and 3(ii) which states.

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.

Complaints to Clerk of the Seanad.

15 August 2013

For attention of: The Clerk of the Seanad.

This is a formal complaint made under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) regarding a reported incident that occurred within the Houses of the Oireachtas on a date between the 1st and 19 July 2013.

The incident concerns a claim by Labour Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy is reported as saying:

I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government.

According to the report Senator Landy has refused to name the person who approached him but he did describe the person as a political figure.

The incident was first reported in the Sunday Independent on 21 July 2013. I have included the complete report below.

My complaint against Senator Landy is that he has failed to report this incident to the relevant authorities. He has also refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe.

I base my complaint on the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) and specifically on the words “or done a specific act” contained in the legislation.

Senator Landy’s failure to report allegations of a serious crime to the relevant authorities is a specific act of omission.

Senator Landy’s refusal to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe is also a specific act.

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

15 August 2013

For attention of: Clerk of the Seanad.

This is a formal complaint against Senator Denis Landy for breaches of the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann.

The incident concerns a claim by Labour Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy is reported as saying:

I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government.

According to the report Senator Landy has refused to name the person who approached him but he did describe the person as a political figure.

The incident was first reported in the Sunday Independent on 21 July 2013

My complaint against Senator Landy is that he has failed to report this incident to the relevant authorities. He has also refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered what is, in effect, a bribe.

Senator Landy’s failure to report the alleged crime and his failure to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe are in breach of the following sections of the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann and in particular is in breach of Section 3 (ii).

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.

Yours Sincerely

Anthony Sheridan

Formal complaint to Gardai and Clerk of the Seanad in response to Senator Landy's allegations of bribery

On 1 August last I submitted a formal complaint in writing to Cobh Gardai in response to allegations of bribery made by Labour Senator Denis Landy (See full complaint below).

I also submitted a formal request to the Select Committee on Members’ Interests Seanad Éireann to investigate the matter.

This submission was made to the Clerk of the Seanad by email.

The Clerk of the Seanad rejected my request on the following grounds.

One: It was made via email. Apparently, all such submissions must be made in hard copy and physically posted to the Clerk of the Seanad.

While endearing, this insistence on using an ancient communications system does not auger well for those who argue that the Senate is a viable institution that should be retained.

Two: I requested an investigation into the matter rather than making a complaint. Apparently, I should have made a formal complaint under Section 8 (2) of the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001.

Crucially, this legislation only allows for a member of the public to make a complaint against a member (of the Houses of the Oireachtas) who may have contravened Sections 5 or 7 or done a specified act.

In plain English, this means that a complaint must be made under Section 8 (2) of the Act and therefore must be made against a member.

The Catch 22 is, of course, that I am not making a complaint against a member. I am making a complaint regarding allegations of a very serious crime that took place within the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The strict adherence to the letter of the law/legislation by bureaucrats and the absence of any mechanism by which a complaint can be made regarding allegations of criminal activity within the confines of the Houses of the Oireachtas means that my complaint is likely to be rejected on the grounds that I am not making a specific complaint against a specific member.

The following exchange between myself and a senior official at the office of the Clerk of the Seanad makes this very clear.

Me: Should I submit it as a complaint?

Official: Yes, a complaint is the word used in the Act. You may make a complaint in respect of a specified act, as in an action. The Act says that a person who considers that a member (emphasised) of the Oireachtas may have contravened Sections 5 or 7 of the Act or done a specified act, something that is not permitted may make a complaint to the Clerk, so your complaint must relate to a member.

Me: In other words, my complaint must be against a member?

Official: Yes.

Me: So what you’re saying is that my complaint is going to be rejected because I will not be making a complaint against a member?

Official: I’m not saying that but I can see how that is a logical conclusion.

Me: I can’t see any other conclusion given what you’ve said to me.

Official: Yes.

Irish citizens who will be voting to abolish or retain the Senate later this year will be wise to consign this archaic, expensive and totally useless institution to the history books.

After all, that’s the bubble in which its members, regulations and procedures actually exist.

Copy to:
Clerk of the Seanad
All political parties
Michael McDowell

See below:
Complaint to Cobh Gardai
Request for investigation to Clerk of the Seanad
Reply (rejection email) from Clerk of Seanad
Second complaint to Clerk of Seanad

Cobh Garda Station
Cobh
Co Cork

1 August 2013

To Whom It May Concern:

I wish to formally report allegations of bribery made by Labour Senator Denis Landy as reported in the Irish Independent on 21 July 2013.

Senator Landy claimed that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy was reported as saying:

“I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.”

I have included below the full Irish Independent report.

Yours Sincerely

Anthony Sheridan

Signed:

——————————————————————————————————-

First submission to Clerk of the Seanad

29th July 2013

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a formal request to the Committee on Members Interests (Seanad Éireann) to investigate a claim by Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush foreign holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government or, that he was effectively offered a bribe.

I include a report on the matter published in the Irish Independent on 21st July last.

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Reply from Clerk of the Seanad

Dear Mr Sheridan,

I refer to your email of 29 July 2013 in which you make a request in the following terms:
“This is a formal request to the Committee on Members Interests (Seanad Éireann) to investigate a claim by Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush foreign holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.”

While members of the public can correspond directly with Committees on any matter, I would note that there is no statutory procedure to request the Committee on Members’ Interests to commence an investigation.

There is however a statutory complaints procedure available to members of the public under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001. Section 8(2) states “a person…who considers that a member… may have contravened sections 5 or 7 or done a specified act may make a complaint …to the Clerk …”.

Under the same section, The Clerk of the Seanad refers complaints to the Members’ Interests Committee of Seanad Éireann unless s/he forms the opinion that the complaint is frivolous or vexatious or that there is “not sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case in relation to the complaint”.
If the complaint is rejected, the Clerk is obliged to send the complainant, the member concerned and the Committee a statement of reasons for so doing.

Therefore, please confirm if you wish for me to treat your correspondence as a formal complaint in line with the procedure under the Ethics Acts. If you confirm that you do not want to make such a complaint, your correspondence will then be forwarded to the Committee.

If you choose to follow the complaints procedure outlined it is crucial that you provide to me all evidence available to you which is relevant to your complaint.
This information will assist me in considering whether the complaint must be sent to the Committee. If you do choose to make such a complaint I should be obliged if you would also sign your letter and return the signed copy to me.

You may rest assured that on receipt of this further information, this matter will be dealt with promptly in so far as I and the Clerk are concerned.
Please find attached an appendix with certain relevant sections of the Ethics Acts enclosed.
Yours sincerely,

Second submission to Clerk of Seanad (By post)

8th August 2013

To: The Clerk of the Seanad.

This is a formal complaint made under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) regarding a reported incident that occurred within the Houses of the Oireachtas on a date between the 1st and 19th July 2013.

The complaint concerns a claim by Labour Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy is reported as saying:

“I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.”

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government.

According to the report Senator Landy has refused to name the person who approached him but he did describe the person as a political figure.

The incident was first reported in the Sunday Independent on 21st July 2013. I have included the complete report below.

The response of some politicians, as reported in the Irish Independent of 24th July, may be helpful in considering the matter.

Labour Seanad chief whip Aideen Hayden is reported as saying:

“It is obviously a very serious matter if someone has attempted to subvert the workings of the house in this way.

Seanad leader Maurice Cummins called on Mr Landy to report the matter to the Gardai. The Fine Gael senator told the Seanad that allegations of bribery and corruption were an extremely serious matter.

Rebel Fine Gael senator Fidelma Healy Eames also called on Mr Landy to give the “truth” about what had happened.

“If someone attempted to bribe him to absent himself from votes in this house last week, then that is very serious.”

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Oliver Cromwell: Right on the button regarding the Senate

The best letter to date on the question of abolishing the most exclusive club in the country.

Sir,

I find it farcical when members of the Seanad, elected through a “rotten borough” electoral system or appointed, unelected, by An Taoiseach, present themselves as an essential political bulwark protecting us from the excesses of our democratically elected Dáil.

The most appropriate message for members of the “best club in Dublin” is Oliver Cromwell’s 1653 injunction to the Rump Parliament: “You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately. . . Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”

Yours, etc,
Peter Molloy
Dublin