TheStory.ie

The ethics watchdog was told too much time had passed to pursue action over more than €1,000 worth of undeclared election expenses by Minister Paschal Donohoe.

The Minister for Public Expenditure had to make amendments to his electoral statements because of postering work carried out on his behalf by the businessman Michael Stone.

However, it has now emerged that the Standards in Public Office Commission (SIPO) could not follow up on undeclared donations from the 2016 election.

Previously unreleased internal briefings said that a prosecution under the Electoral Act could not take place more than five years after an offence was alleged to have happened.

An internal briefing said: “As such, several potential offences relating to the 2016 election are statute barred.”

It said however that similar undeclared donations from the 2020 general election – again relating to postering work by Mr Stone – could be pursued.

The briefing said these could be “prosecuted on indictment” but would have to be brought through the courts and proven “beyond reasonable doubt.”

A second course of action was detailed where the undeclared donations would be dealt with by way of complaint to SIPO.

The briefing document said: “The Commission previously received legal advice that it could carry out a similar information-gathering exercise using implied powers to ensure constitutional procedural fairness.”

It also advised there were “more limited grounds” available where SIPO could decline to investigate a complaint.

This included a scenario where the subject matter “is not, in the opinion of the Commission, of sufficient gravity to warrant investigation.”

Mr Donohoe was later informed by SIPO no further action would be taken and that amendment of his election returns was consistent with their approach to compliance.

During the period in which the investigation took place, Mr Donohoe had to recuse himself from ministerial duties relating to the Standards Commission.

The briefing documents were only released by SIPO under FOI laws following an appeal to the Information Commissioner.

However, they provide no significant clarity on how the decision was made not to go ahead with action over the undeclared donations.

The postering work came to light following a complaint by the journalist Liam Deegan.

It led to the disclosure by Mr Donohoe that a commercial van was used during his election campaign in 2016.

This was provided along with the labour of six individuals and was later said by the minister to have a value of €1,057.

At the time, Mr Donohoe said: “I always hold myself to the very highest of professional standards and I profoundly regret that this matter wasn’t dealt with correctly in 2016.

“In light of the information that’s now available to me, I’ve taken the steps to address the issue as comprehensively as I can.”

It also emerged that further undeclared work was carried out on behalf of Minister Donohoe during the 2020 general election.

A SIPO briefing said: “In a statement by [businessman] Michael Stone on 24 January 2023, he claims that he previously incorrectly informed the Minister that he had not provided any assistance regarding the 2020 general election. However, having re-examined the matter he realised this was incorrect.”

Another amended electoral statement was submitted by Minister Donohoe and Fine Gael to include €1,256.20 extra for the “erection of some posters.”

Asked about the investigation and their refusal to release documents about it, SIPO said they had no comment.

A spokesperson said: “It is the practice of the Standards in Public Office Commission not to comment on individual compliance matters.”

A statement from Minister Donohoe and the Department of Public Expenditure said they had nothing further to add and that SIPO was “independent in the performance of its functions.”

Right to Know has won a case where An Bord Pleanála looked to charge €3,234.30 for access to an electronic copy of a case file.

In a request made under the Access to Information on the Environment (AIE) Regulations, our legal adviser Fred Logue had asked for a file transfer of documents from a housing development in North Dublin which were not available online.

An Bord Pleanála replied to say that somebody could come in person to view the records but that scanning and copying fees would apply to be provided with an electronic file transfer.

They later came back and said that the charge for the documents would be €3,234.20 and for us to fill out a detailed form to ensure access.

We sought internal review saying the fee was not allowed for under the AIE Regulations and that there was no obligation to fill out any form.

An Bord Pleanála responded to say they upheld the initial decision and we sought review with the Commissioner for Environmental Information (CEI).

There are two main strands to the decision, the requirement to fill out a form and the outrageous demand for fees.

On filling out a form, An Bord Pleanála said this was done to ensure users complied with “legal obligations, including those related to copyright and data protection”.

The CEI said however that this could not be justified saying: “A person who received environmental information on foot of a request must be free to circulate that to others who might have an interest in the information.

“I therefore find that ABP should not have required the appellant to sign the declaration form when granting him access to information under the AIE Regulations.”

On the fees, the CEI said it was completely unclear how An Bord Pleanála had calculated the total and said the €3,234.20 sum was “objectively unreasonable” and would deter people from trying to access information on the environment.

The planning board were directed to release electronic copies of the information in full and for free.

The decision added: “I do not think it would be reasonable to allow a public authority to rely on its own failure to adequately organise its information to justify the imposition of a charge on the appellant in respect of work which arguably would not have been required had proper document management arrangements been in place.”

You can read the full decision at the following link: https://www.ocei.ie/en/ombudsman-decision/96fec-right-to-know-clg-and-an-bord-pleanala/

The Central Bank has exchanged almost €1.5 million worth of old pound notes and coins over the past three years which people had stored since the introduction of the euro.

Figures from the bank show that €1.15 million worth of notes and €341,000 worth of coins were rooted out from under mattresses, coin jars, safes, and coffers since the beginning of 2022.

It’s been more than twenty years since the euro was introduced in Ireland, but the Central Bank still offers an exchange at the fixed rate of €1.27 for each old pound.

A log of the twenty highest transactions shows that individuals swapped out punts that were worth between €9,313 and just over €25,000.

The single biggest exchange was the €25,204 – or IR£19,850 in old money – that one person received after a profitable trip to the Central Bank.

There was also a swap of IR£19,000 and four further transactions that were worth more than IR£15,000 in value.

More than €1.6 million has been spent fitting or upgrading security systems at the homes of politicians and other officeholders since the start of last year.

There has been a significant rise in expenditure by the Office of Public Works (OPW) over the past eighteen months against the backdrop of the growing threat from far-right activists and extremists.

The latest figures show the OPW paid out €809,000 for security systems at the private residences of eleven individuals in the first six months of this year.

Details of which politicians and officeholders are involved are not provided on the basis the information could be used by right-wing extremists or criminals.

However, it is known that works generally relate to at-risk Oireachtas members, ministers, judges, officials of the Criminal Assets Bureau, and former officeholders like Taoisigh or ex-Presidents.

Security concerns for politicians have grown dramatically over the past three years with masked protests outside some homes and bomb threats made against Justice Minister Helen McEntee and Taoiseach Simon Harris.

Asked about the expenditure, the OPW said: “We do not have any further comment to make at this time.”

A report into the University Hospital Limerick emergency department said staff were being asked to work on 130 separate recommendations and that it was a “huge burden” for already over-stretched workers.

It also said too many diagnostic tests were being ordered, partly because of fears about compensation claims, and dozens of patients were waiting more than 28 days for discharge.

A review of the effectiveness of the emergency department said that while it was “admirable” to try and address all the failings at UHL’s A&E, change had to be realistic.

The report, finalised earlier this year, said the ED had been the subject of “many previous inspections and reviews”, with so many recommendations that it was hard to keep track.

It said: “These vary between small simple tasks to much larger and complex tasks. We are concerned that this is a huge burden for an already stretched staff and managerial group.”

The report, prepared by four senior clinicians led by Dame Marianne Griffiths, said it might make more sense to “prioritise the recommendations” and pick out those that were “an inch wide and a mile deep” rather than the reverse.

The authors said they had been “genuinely impressed” by the staff working at UHL especially given the “relentlessness of the challenges faced in ED and the wards”.

Fire doors at one of the country’s main hospitals were left propped open with flammable material while staircases and emergency exits were obstructed by old equipment, bits of broken furniture, and filing cabinets.

A series of damning safety audits at Cork University Hospital found a succession of problems including unsafe storage of chemicals and gases.

The reports were first sought from the hospital nearly a year and a half ago but have only now been released under Freedom of Information laws.

A review of the main hospital building found escape route corridors obstructed by loose furniture, rubbish bins, and cabinets.

In one case, access to fire fighting equipment was compromised because it was right behind a “confidential bin storage”.

Images from the report show how one staircase was blocked by a wheelchair and a trolley while an examination of fire doors also uncovered a litany of problems.

In some cases, the fire doors would not close properly, had broken heat and smoke seals, were wedged open and the wrong fittings had been installed.

A statement from the hospital said: “”The audit referred to was carried out at the request of Cork University Hospital (CUH) management in 2022. CUH takes its responsibility with regards to fire safety very seriously.

“CUH has employed an independent fire consultant to assist in implementing the necessary changes as outlined in this comprehensive audit and to ensure CUH’s compliance in all aspects of Fire and Health and Safety Legislation.”

The daa, which operates Dublin Airport, has been ordered to release documents on the presence of dangerous chemicals on its land.

The airport authority has spent close to a year trying to frustrate requests by Right to Know, local residents, and journalists.

The requests all related to the presence of PFAS – commonly called ‘forever chemicals’ – on its property.

The chemicals leeched into the ground through the past use of fire-fighting foams and are a common issue at airports around the world.

Since requests under Access to Information the Environment (AIE) Regulations first began to be submitted late last year, the daa has been trying to block release of records on the scale of pollution.

During the summer, it published a number of reports to its website that were actively being sought by requesters.

The refusal of other documents was appealed by Right to Know to the Commissioner for Environmental Information (CEI).

The CEI found in our favour and sent the case back to the daa for a fresh decision.

However, the daa then decided they would try to impose a €20 fee for release of a handful of documents.

Having already paid €50 for our appeal to the CEI, we did not accept that.

It is important to note that under FOI, the sister system of AIE, fees can not be charged for information that costs less than €100 (five hours of work at €20) to process.

We appealed over the imposition of fees and the CEI again ruled in our favour.

However, the daa is undaunted and just yesterday (3 October) once more demanded payment of a €20 fee for a small number of records on airport charges.

We are aware of other cases where people have been charged small fees and paid them, only to receive records that are so heavily redacted they are meaningless.

We will continue to appeal all cases involving the daa and any attempt to use fees as a way to dodge scrutiny of their activities.

On a side note, the daa – which operates a monopoly over air travel in and out of Dublin – made profits of €176 million last year.

RTÉ was warned that complaints about releasing personal information from TV and radio stars were inevitable if they went ahead with a plan to publish a register of external activities.

The Data Protection Commission also threatened the broadcaster with enforcement in the event they did not protect the personal data of staff and contractors.

In the wake of the RTÉ spending controversy, the broadcaster had wanted to make available a list of when employees had done external work, sometimes involving payment of significant fees.

However, the Data Protection Commission (DPC) put a spanner in the works saying the plans represented a “serious interference with the fundamental rights to respect for private life” under law.

An email to RTÉ in June said: “Please note that the DPC has also been made aware that a number of individuals are very concerned regarding the legal basis for processing [their personal data].

“It is likely that these concerns will be escalated as complaints to the DPC if the processing is to proceed.”

The commission also said they had been in touch with the Department of Tourism and Culture over their concerns that RTÉ had decided “not to implement our recommendation”.

The Data Protection Commission warned too they would not be afraid to use their powers to ensure the protection of individual data protection rights.
The list that was eventually published had only anonymised information including that one person had earned over €10,000 outside of RTÉ.

Right to Know has been unsuccessful in a case where we had sought reports arising from visits of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) to accommodation centres for international protection applicants.

The visits took place at a time when the accommodation system was under unrelenting pressure following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

A previous report had been released to us that detailed an “intense oppressive atmosphere” and poor conditions at one centre in Citywest in Dublin.

However, a subsequent request by us for a number of other visit reports was not responded to in time by the IHREC.

At internal review, the human rights agency refused access to eight records on a number of grounds.

The case was appealed to the Information Commissioner with the IHREC relying primarily on Section 30 of the FOI Act in the end.

They argued that the information gathered during their visits was provided on the understanding it would be kept confidential.

It said if future visits took place it would make it less likely people would provide them information in future.

A significant part of the case rested on the public interest with the Information Commissioner accepting the records would “add considerably to the public understanding of the standard of the facilities and services provided to IP [international protection] applicants.”

The investigator added: “Ultimately, these services are provided on behalf of, and funded by, the state. It seems to me that these factors add considerable weight to the public interest in disclosing the records.”

However, the decision found this did not outweigh the IHREC being able to “continue to properly observe conditions” in centres.

They affirmed the decision of the IHREC to withhold the records.

One point that was never raised in the decision was the fact that the responsibility for inspection of direct provision now rests with HIQA.

At the time of this request, such inspections were carried out by contractors under a far less robust system.

It is no longer clear why the IHREC would have cause to visit direct provision centres given HIQA’s long-standing reputation as a highly effective inspection service.

Board members of Ireland’s adoption authority said they were being “exploited” by a government department and being made to work far more hours than they were being paid for.

In a dispute over fees, the Adoption Authority warned government that pressure was becoming so intense that standards would “inevitably” fall as they dealt with ever-more complex cases involving vulnerable kids.

The chair of the Adoption Authority (AAI) Orlaith Traynor wrote as well of board members feeling “entirely undervalued” with a €7,965 annual stipend when a similar role at state broadcaster RTÉ paid €15,000.

Correspondence reveals how officials from the Department of Children and Equality did ask the Department of Public Expenditure to examine whether the payments could be increased.

However, their requests for an increase in the stipend as well as the yearly salary of €134,854 that applies for the chief executive were rejected.

Asked about the correspondence, the Adoption Authority of Ireland confirmed that board fees and the salary for the CEO position remained unchanged.

A spokeswoman said: “Discussions by the Board of the AAI regarding this issue remain ongoing.”