Standards in Public Office; Councillor's Responses - Web Feature

His response: Cllr Burke said the omissions on his declaration had been an “oversight with no commercial or political intent or impact”. He said he had declared his primary businesses, which were a true reflection of his commercial interests. Mr Burke said he had contacted Mayo County Council to rectify the record. He said one of the companies that was not listed had “ceased trading”. He said: “It was declared on the declaration form for each and every year it was a functional trading company,” and thanked RTÉ for highlighting the inaccuracies in the public record.

___

His response: Mr Byrne said that he had invested in a tax partnership scheme in Co Limerick “along with other partners”. He said the scheme had been run by another company but that the investors had been registered as owners of the properties. Cllr Byrne said the investment had failed and the properties had been taken over by Nama. He said he had only been elected in May 2014 and understood that the properties were in the hands of the receiver and “may indeed have been sold”. He said: “As far as I am concerned, my investment is lost and not recoverable.” He said it was his belief and understanding that he did not “hold a declarable interest”.

His response: Mr Carroll said that his failure to declare his interest in the company had been an oversight and that he had only a nominal interest. He said that non declaration of the house had also been an oversight as he thought it was in his wife’s name. Cllr Carroll said that he would amend the register.

His response: Mr Cassidy said the company had been formed to develop a single commercial site that he held with a relative. “I simply forgot to put it down on the forms,” he said. Cllr Cassidy said he would amend his declaration.

His response: Cllr Coleman said the house had fallen substantially in value and “this is not the type of ‘land’ that was intended to be covered by the declaration”.

His response: Mr Cribbin said he thought the company had been struck off as it was no longer in business. “I thought it was struck off and the letter was sent in,” he said. “To be honest, I thought it was gone. Thanks a million for putting me straight.”

His response: Mr Curtin said that he should have declared all three of the companies. He said Kelcur Timber had “never traded” and had now been removed from the company register. He said New Street Estate was a management company and “effectively a residents association” for a development in Virginia, Co Cavan. Cllr Curtin said he owned Drumstra – which manufactures trays and crates for bread – with his brother but had never received an income. In addition, he had decided to declare other new business interests as a sales representative for a timber firm and four properties. They are: his family home, the family farm, a rental property in Cabra, Dublin and a rental property in Virginia. “I had honestly, if mistakenly, believed the above were not relevant for the purpose of my annual declaration,” he said. Mr Curtin said he had now amended his declaration to reflect all of the above.

Her response: Ms Dermody said the failure to include her property interests had been “an omission” on her part. She said she had previously listed them but that she had “erroneously failed to include” them in her most recent declaration. Cllr Dermody said she had rectified her error and that there was no conflict of interest with either property. She said both were let to tenants and both registered with the Private Residential Tenancies Board. Ms Dermody said the company Diarmuid Gavin Designs Limited “has not traded in several years” and that she had formally resigned both her directorship and shareholding in the firm. “In conclusion,” she said, “the facts remain, through oversight, the Declaration was not completed correctly but the record has since been rectified.”

Her response: Ms Doherty said that from the date of incorporation in 2001, the company had never traded, never conducted any business and that it had no assets, land holdings or even a bank account. She said “in effect, this company appears on paper only and has lain dormant since its incorporation”. Cllr Doherty said she made her declaration in “good faith” and that steps were now being taken to wind the company up.

His response: Cllr Finucane apologised for his failure to include the company in his declaration. He said: “It has been brought to my attention that I omitted to declare a directorship of [this] company … I sincerely apologise for this omission.” In a letter, he explained that the company’s function was to maintain and upkeep 36 apartments at Pier Village in Tralee. “This involves the collection of yearly management fees and these monies are used for the upkeep and maintenance of this complex, block insurance, green areas, bins etc,” he said. Cllr Finucane said it was “not for profit” and as it formed part of the services of his auctioneering business, he perceived it as an “intrinsic part” of that business. He said there was no “beneficial or pecuniary interest” arising from the directorship in his role as a councillor.

His response: Mr Fitzgerald said it was an oversight that he had not included the properties. He said he could not explain it as he had listed them in previous years. He said he had now submitted an amended declaration.

His response: Mr Fitzpatrick said he had immediately reviewed his declaration after being contacted by RTÉ. He said it was evident that the six directorships should all have been declared and that this had been a “complete oversight” on his part. He said he had listed them in an earlier declaration and had taken steps to update the most recent declaration.

His response: Cllr Flynn said he had invested in the retirement facility ten years ago to provide for his children’s future education but that “unfortunately within two years [the investment] was totally lost”. He said the property rights were legally controlled by Nama even though his name was still on the property folios. He said he had submitted a revised declaration. “I honestly believed that my investment/loss in this tax based scheme held no connection or relationship to my elected position,” he said.

His response: Even though the company had ceased trading in 2012, Mr Foley confirmed that because he held a directorship, it should have been included in the declaration. In a letter from his solicitors, Mr Foley said it was an “understandable oversight, given that no activity has taken place in the company for many years”. Cllr Foley said he had submitted an amended Declaration of Interests.

His response: Cllr Foley said both were “non-trading” and that neither had traded in over eight years. “For this reason, they slipped my mind while I was making my return,” he said. Mr Foley said he had contacted South Dublin County Council to correct the record.

His response: Mr Gallagher explained that he had sold the company in March 2013 to another firm of financial consultants and he has no further involvement in the company and gets no benefit from it. Mr Gallagher’s accountants confirmed that he has resigned as director of this company and notification of his resignation has been sent to Monaghan County Council.

His response: Mr Harding said that he had and his father had been involved in a family pub in Slane, Co Meath, for nearly thirty years. Their financial advisors had suggested they operate as a company as opposed to a partnership and when this switch was made, Cllr Harding had not added it to his register of interests. He said: “I didn’t declare that change purely by an oversight.”

His response: Cllr Healy Rae said he accepted that he had not declared the firm but that it had not begun trading until early in 2015. He said Sunville Construction had not tendered for or procured any work and only carried out work on behalf of the family firm Healy Rae Plant Hire, which he had declared his interest in. “Obviously when I received your letter,” he said, “I realised I had made a mistake and rectified this immediately.”

His response: Mr Hegarty said he had been the owner of the property for “approximately thirty years”. He said its omission from the declaration had been “an oversight” on his part and that it would be rectified immediately.

His response: Mr Holmes confirmed through his solicitors that he and his wife purchased a 1/10^th share of commonage comprised in the Leenaun property in March 2005. He said its “omission was as a consequence of oversight” and that he had taken steps to rectify the record.

___

His response: Mr Kavanagh said he was a director of the company at the request of his employer. “Please be advised that this is an unpaid role,” he said, “for which I receive absolutely no benefits whatsoever, monetary or otherwise.” The councillor said its omission had been an “honest oversight”.

His response: Mr Kelleher said he had been appointed as a director of Dosco Ireland “and while I was aware this was happening, I was not aware the appointment had been made at the time of the declaration in February 2015”. He said he had amended the record to reflect the up to date position.

His response: Mr Kenny accepted that he should have listed the company. He said: “It is indeed correct that I neglected to declare my directorship … this was an oversight on my part. This company has never traded and has no activity at all. As it is dormant I simply forgot about it when filling in the form.”

His response: Cllr Kilduff said the property was three acres used for foddering animals and was in the process of being transferred to his son who keeps a small herd. “This transfer has been delayed for various reasons,” he said. Mr Kilduff said the company had been established by his son while in college in 1999 and it had not been declared because it had never traded and he had never derived an income from it. It is currently in the process of being struck off. He said he had retired from the construction business in 2010 and that his son now ran the firm. Cllr Kilduff said he had no involvement in it anymore and that the company had paid no dividend to shareholders – such as himself – since its incorporation in 1987.

His response: Mr Lonergan said his declaration had been made “in good faith” on the basis that he thought the company had been wound down. He has submitted a revised declaration to the local authority.

Her response: Ms Lynch said the omission had been an “oversight” and that the company had never traded. “The company is now in the process of being closed down,” she said, also saying she had sought to correct the declaration.

His response: Mr Martin had inherited a 20% share in his late parent’s holiday home and said it remained as a “family holiday home”. He said its omission had been “a genuine and unintentional omission” and that he had amended his declaration to include it.

His response: Mr McBride said he had “erred” in not declaring the company. “I would like to point out that this company has not traded and will be dissolved,” he said. Cllr McBride said he had never received any “financial reward” from the company.

His response: Mr McDermott said he had made a mistake and that the company was set up to develop a site but that it had not proceeded due to the economic downturn. He said it was an inadvertent error and that he should have declared the company.

His response: Mr McGuinness said that he thought he had been removed as a director of the company in question and that it had been an oversight not to include it. Records lodged confirm that Mr McGuinness was replaced as a director of the company on 26 November 2015.

His response:  Mr McHugh has written to Galway County Council to detail his interests and said: “I apologise for this oversight and am now setting the record straight.”

His response: Cllr McNamara said he should have declared he was a director of both companies and both have ceased trading. He has now submitted an amended declaration to cover one of the properties in Nama and that another has since been sold. He said it was an oversight and he did not believe he had any conflict of interest.

His response: Mr O’Flynn said he was “unaware” that family partnership property should be returned in his annual declaration. He said he had since checked with Cork City Council and had now amended his declaration.

His response: The company ceased to trade in 2011 and is in process of being voluntarily wound up by its directors.  Cllr Redmond has resigned as director of White Smiles Ltd with immediate effect, just to be compliant with the declaration”.

His response: Cllr Scanlon, a former TD, said he had contacted Sligo County Council immediately to correct the error. He said he declared the property in 2014 and had also listed it on his register of interests when in the Dáil and that he had rectified the omission since being contacted.

His response: Cllr Scully said the company was not trading. However, he said he should have listed it and it was “an oversight on [his] behalf as the company was still listed”. He said the business had “never got started or traded” and that he had instructed his accountant to strike it off the register.

His response: In a letter to RTÉ, Mr Sheahan said he had not actually filled in his declaration for 2015 and the last form he had submitted was in February 2014. “That is my first mistake,” he said. Cllr Sheahan said the site in Askeaton should have been declared. He said the property at the nursing home was in his name but had been repossessed by Danske Bank three years ago. He said he was in receipt of no benefit from it and had no responsibility for it any longer. Cllr Sheahan said Glenmanor Holdings was a dormant company and “is being retained for use at some future date”.

Her response: Ms Shields’ husband Michael said the omission had been an error that the company had not been included on the declaration. He said that Cllr Shields planned to make an amendment of the record.

His response: Cllr Smith said the omissions had been “an error on [his] part”. He said: “I have reviewed my annual declaration … it is now apparent to me that the items you refer to in your letter should have been declared by me.”

His response: Cllr Smyth said he should have listed it in his interests. He said: “Upon review, I note that my declaration was not correct and that the company was not included.”

His response: Mr Stafford said it was a “shelf company” that had been established by his former employers, a firm of solicitors, on behalf of a client. “It has no assets or liabilities … never operated and [there was] no prospect of it operating or trading,” he said. Cllr Stafford said he had listed it in his 2014 declaration but by 2015, he “inadvertently believed” that he had been officially replaced as a  director. He said he had again asked his former employer to file papers to end his directorship and that he understood this process was underway.