Annual Report 2005

Complaints against Office Holders

Inappropriate use of facilities paid for out of public funds

The Standards Commission received a number of complaints/enquiries during the course of 2005 regarding the inappropriate use by office holders of facilities paid for out of public funds.

In July 2003, the Standards Commission published a Code of Conduct for Office Holders drawn up by the Government in accordance with section 10(2) of the 2001 Act. The code is designed to indicate "... the standards of conduct and integrity for the persons to whom it relates in the performance of their functions...". Paragraph 1.5 of the code provides that office holders should "... at all times observe the highest standards of behaviour and act in good faith with transparency, fairness and impartiality to promote the common good in the performance of their official functions." and "... act only by reference to and dedicate the resources of their offices in furtherance of the public interest".

Paragraph 2.2.3 of the code states that office holders

"are provided with facilities at public expense in order that public business may be conducted effectively. The use of these facilities should be in accordance with this principle. Holders of public office enjoy an enhanced public profile and should be mindful of the need to avoid use of resources in a way that could reasonably be construed as an inappropriate raising of profile in the context of a General Election. Official facilities should be used only for official purposes. Office holders should ensure that their use of officially provided facilities are designed to give the public value for money and to avoid any abuse of the privileges which, undoubtedly, are attached to office."

The Standards Commission is disappointed that in 2005 it was again required to deal with such issues. It considers that office holders, together with heads of Government Departments and Offices, should ensure that procedures are in place which are clear and which discourage and prevent any inappropriate use of public funds for personal, electoral or party political gain. In the absence of clear guidelines, it may be reasonable to expect that public concern could again arise in the event of instances of office holders appearing in public advertising as the general election approaches and that further such complaints could be made to the Standards Commission.

Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Ivor Callely T.D.

The Standards Commission received a complaint regarding an advertisement for the "operation freeflow" system which outlined traffic and travel arrangements in Dublin in the pre-Christmas period, and which featured a photograph of the Minister of State. The complainant was of the view that the Minister's appearance in the advertisement was a direct contravention of section 2.2.3 of the Code of Conduct for Office Holders as outlined above. Having considered the matter, the Standards Commission wrote to the complainant advising that the Standards Commission did not consider that the inclusion of a photograph of an office holder in an advertisement relating to a matter which encompassed his or her functions as an office holder was necessarily inappropriate. However, it also considered that the provisions of the code were insufficiently clear so as to distinguish between the appropriate use of a photograph of an office holder as part of a necessary advertising campaign and an inappropriate raising of profile in the context of a general election. The Standards Commission wrote to the Taoiseach and requested that the provisions of section 2.2.3 of the Code of Conduct for Office Holders be reviewed in order that office holders are provided with clear guidelines as to the circumstances in which public resources can be used in a way which avoids the inappropriate raising of profile in the context of a General Election.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Tom Parlon, T.D.

The Standards Commission received a complaint regarding the appearance of the Minister of State in an advertisement endorsing a particular animal feed. The complainant considered that the Minister of State's appearance in the advertisement breached the ethics guidelines for members of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Having considered the matter, the Standards Commission decided that it would not be appropriate to commence an investigation under the Ethics Acts. The Standards Commission wrote to Minister Parlon and expressed its view that a serving office holder should not be directly associated with the endorsement of a particular commercial product, unless such is required in the performance by the office holder of his/her official functions. The Minister was also told that his actions were not in keeping with the spirit of the Code of Conduct for Office Holders.

Back to contents