Government kills Labour bill to bring transparency and accountability to the office of Attorney General

• Long overdue reforms of the AG’s Office voted down by Fianna Fáil-Fine Gael-Lowry Government
• Labour Bill was debated at second stage in Private Members’ Time last Thursday
• Bill would ensure due regard for State’s duty to its citizens in public litigation strategy
• Demands transparency on AG advice provided to Government

In Dáil votes last night, Government TDs voted down a Labour Party Bill to reform the office of the Attorney General in two key areas: its approach to litigation and the area of legal professional advice.

Precipitated by the recent nursing home charges scandal, Labour’s Ivana Bacik TD drafted this legislation in response to the negative experiences endured by so many litigants in terms of the State’s approach to defending legal cases brought against it.

Speaking after the vote, Deputy Bacik said:

“I have dealt with so many people who have suffered due to a State failure. Yet so many have had very negative, retraumatising experiences when seeking legal redress from the State, due to the State’s approach to litigation.

“In seeking to protect the State from legal liability, the treatment of often very vulnerable litigants tends to more closely resemble the treatment they might endure from a faceless corporate entity. That is not acceptable from a State that may have let someone down in a breach of duty.

“While of course it is necessary to protect the public purse, we in Labour are clear: there must be some regard in public litigation strategy for the State’s duty of care to its citizens.

“We also need to see a greater level of transparency from the office of the AG. In recent years Government practice has developed, such that it is now a rarity for any advice from the AG to Government to be published. There is no legal reason for refusing to publish this advice. Treating this advice as a secret on a blanket basis allows the Government to avoid scrutiny for contentious political decisions.

“On matters of public importance – such as the inclusion of services in Occupied Territories Bill or making a decision not to extend the ban on no fault evictions – there is every reason for the Government to be transparent with the public, and with Opposition and backbench TDs and Senators too.

“People, voters, cannot be expected to take it on good faith that there are good reasons for acting or not acting. Hiding behind the AG condescends the public and, ultimately, damages public confidence in the political system.

“Overreliance on AG advice that is kept secret may obscure the decision-making process. Questions around constitutionality or compatibility of legislation with EU law should be open for greater scrutiny by members of the Oireachtas. Yet TDs and Senators are routinely denied any real capacity to scrutinise legislation as the core information revealing the basis for decision-making by the Government is not made available.

“Labour’s bill would reform the role of the Attorney General by:

1. Providing a mechanism for both acknowledging and accommodating public interest concerns in State litigation,
2. Ensuring that claims of legal professional privilege are not made in relation to advice of the Attorney General referred to and relied upon by the Government in explaining its policy approach to Bills and resolutions before the Houses of the Oireachtas.
3. Finally, the bill would bring the Office of the Attorney General under the remit of codes of conduct for office holders that are provided for in the Standards in Public Office Act 2001.

“This Government is using the Office of the AG as a cover to bat away queries around their real reasons for taking political decisions.

“Our Bill would introduce more transparency into public discourse. We would have been happy to work with the Government to amend our bill, or to incorporate its provisions on a phased basis. In voting it down altogether, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have sent a worrying signal regarding their approach to accountability, transparency and the public interest.”