LAST UPDATE | 8 May
A GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT is locked in a standoff with a new State watchdog over the department’s refusal to investigate reports by whistleblowers of alleged wrongdoing by local council CEOs and elected councillors.
The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has refused to accept responsibility for the cases, telling the Office of the Protected Disclosures Commissioner (OPDC) that it’s “not the role of the Minister or the Department to intervene with local government”.
This is despite the department having overall sectoral responsibility for local authorities.
The commissioner has refused to accept the department’s stance.
It said it normally refers whistleblower complaints to the chief executive of the relevant local authority, but said this only happens when the disclosure “does not implicate the most senior personnel” in the council.
The six separate disclosures do, in fact, concern alleged wrongdoing by senior personnel, including council chief executives and elected councillors, meaning that they cannot be referred to the chief executives. Multiple councils are implicated in the disclosures.
When asked for comment, the department continued to insist that its secretary general is “not the appropriate person for these protected disclosures”, as local government is a “completely separate arm of government”.
It said local authorities are “constitutionally-recognised, independent bodies” with their own management and governance structures and are therefore “not agencies of central government” as a result.
The department added that it takes its obligations under the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022 seriously and continues to engage the OPDC.
“The Minister has only limited discretionary powers under the Local Government Act to investigate allegations of wrongdoing in a local authority,” a department spokesperson said.
“In other words, local government is a completely separate arm of government and therefore statutorily required to have in place their own procedures and protections to handle protected disclosures – in the same manner as other public bodies,” the spokesperson said.
“We are continuing to engage with the OPDC to assist them in understanding the intricacies involved and to help them find a solution that best serves workers in local authorities who have made reports of wrongdoing, often in difficult circumstances, and to ensure that their allegations of wrongdoing are assigned appropriately in the first instance.”
The dispute is outlined in the Commissioner’s first annual report on protected disclosures – also known as whistleblowing.
It also reveals that the Department of Defence and the Department of Education were the subject of more protected disclosures than any other departments.
The head of the OPDC, Ger Deering, holds the role as part of his brief as Ombudsman and Information Commissioner. It was created last year.
In its section about local councils, the OPDC outlines the dispute with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.
Over the course of last year it received “23 reports alleging wrongdoing” in the local authority sector.
The chief executive of the relevant local council is considered the ‘prescribed person’ who investigates the protected disclosure, but this only happens when the disclosure “does not implicate the most senior personnel” in the council.
Reports concerning the CEO or elected councillors have “proved more challenging in practice”, the OPDC said, pointing to the impasse over six complaints made last year.
The OPDC said it transmitted eight local authority cases to the department in 2023 but the department “objected” to six of these transmissions.
“We did not accept, however, that the reports fell outside their remit,” the OPDC said.
“The Department’s concern is that it is not the role of the Minister or the Department to intervene with local government. At the time of publication, discussions on this point are ongoing between our Office and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.”
Overall last year, it received 283 reports of alleged wrongdoing. 237 of these were transmitted to prescribed persons or other suitable persons to investigate.
The Department of Defence (24 complaints) and Department of Education (23 complaints) got significantly more reports transferred to it by the OPDC than other departments.
The commissioner said it was “striking that so many of the school-related reports” come from the Education and Training Board sector – 12 out of 17 complaints in total.
The annual report also said the OPDC has dealt with “misunderstandings” over its role in relation to disclosures.
It said it is “not an appeals body” for investigations that have been undertaken by other bodies, or for decisions by other agencies not to formally investigate allegations.
“The role of this Office is to identify the most appropriate recipient to follow up a report of wrongdoing. In many cases, the most appropriate recipient will be the same body that previously followed up the same allegation of wrongdoing,” it said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say