Council chamber secrets: Misconduct, falsehoods and waste

Like many popular tourist attractions, the picture-postcard village of Cill Rónáin on the island of Inis Mór is a victim of its own success.

Every summer, as thousands of tourists and students visit the island, the village's sewerage system struggles to cope.

A part of the village known locally as "the Pit" contains overflowing sewage, and has been described by the authorities as a public health risk.

One local, Joe Flaherty, has taken a keen interest in this problem and related planning issues on the island.

And, in the process, he stumbled on something that, amongst other matters, ultimately resulted in a council official being found to have engaged in "gross misconduct".

Mr Flaherty pays close attention to planning applications in Inis Mór.

Having studied a particular planning application carefully, he noticed that an expert report related to wastewater included in the application was carried out by a Galway County Council official, the then-Senior Assistant Chief Fire Officer, Michael Clifford.

Mr Flaherty lodged an ethics complaint with Galway County Council.

It turned out that Mr Clifford – who used a variety of business-type names in his planning reports, including the Irish spelling of his name – had developed a "side business/consultancy" in which he acted as an agent providing technical advice in planning applications submitted to the council.

He was ultimately found to have not properly or adequately declared this work to the council, in line with his statutory obligations. A council disciplinary process recommended that he be dismissed in November 2020, but he resigned from the council the following month.

The council sent him a letter to mark his retirement and thanked him for 17 years of loyal and dedicated service.

In a statement, Mr Clifford said he never abused his position with the council in any way, nor did he do anything improper. He said his private work was completely separate and not done on council time.

But when asked by RTÉ Investigates as to why it did not refer the matter to the Standards in Public Office Commission – the public ethics watchdog – Galway County Council said that this was because it had "arranged an external investigation" into the matter under the council's disciplinary process.

It also said that it did not do this because the "employee was no longer in the employment of Galway County Council".

The case of Michael Clifford raises several important questions concerning the system of local government regulation – in terms of conflicts of interests, the nature of the inquiries that councils conduct, and the extent to which the public should be informed about those inquiries.

Ten years ago this week, following the publication of the Mahon Tribunal's final report, those kinds of questions were also evident in the political discourse.

Irish politicians, whose collective reputation had taken a battering, displayed much soul-searching in the weeks and months following its publication.

Watch RTÉ Investigates: Council Chamber Secrets tonight at 9:35pm on RTÉ One and RTÉ Player.

Local government was a key focus of the Mahon Tribunal's work. The public was promised that political reform in this sector would be swift and emphatic.

The then-Minister for Housing and Planning, Jan O'Sullivan, said that the report's recommendations would be implemented "to ensure such behaviour can never, ever happen again".

Her government colleague, Phil Hogan, the then-Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, said he would examine the report and "take whatever further steps are necessary to restore and underpin confidence and transparency in the local government system".

The Mahon Report recommended various changes to legislation concerning local authorities, including the tightening up of rules about conflicts of interests, enhanced reporting requirements for councillors and public officials, and increased powers of investigation for the Standards of Public Office Commission.

While some of its recommendations were implemented, many have been ignored.

Over the past several months, RTÉ Investigates has examined the local authority sector, which has an annual budget of more than €5bn and employs over 30,000 people.

As part of our research, we trawled through a vast array of records obtained from all 31 local authorities, including planning files, court files, council reports and minutes, and other internal council documents.

We also analysed some 15 years' worth of audits involving every council in the country, published by the Local Government Audit Service, and hundreds of other internal council audits.

Our investigation details failures in the local government sector, including allegations of employee fraud, false accounting, the misleading of other public bodies in grant applications, and the shocking waste of taxpayers' money.

In our analysis, two predominant themes persist in the local government sector.

One is the lack of accountability. Another is the persistent absence of real transparency.

'Recommendations are a matter for management'

Each year, every local authority is subject to an audit from the Local Government Audit Service, a division of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, which publishes its reports.

And while the Local Government Auditor highlights examples of poor practices or waste of public money, its impact can be limited.

It can make "recommendations" to local authorities to get their act together – but that's about it.

"The implementation of recommendations made is a matter for the management of the local authority," the department told RTÉ Investigates.

"However, the lack of action on recommendations made at previous audits may be referred to in subsequent audit reports."

But our analysis of audits from the Local Government Auditor indicates that there are no repercussions for councils that habitually ignore audit recommendations.

While Local Government Audits are available on the department's website, they generally attract little media attention.

The situation for other publicly funded bodies, which the Comptroller and Auditor General audits, is quite different.

The heads of those organisations can also be brought before the Dáil's Public Accounts Committee, where they can be questioned by TDs and Senators, resulting in media coverage and increased public scrutiny. This is an experience that council chiefs are spared.

Reports completed, but not published

The absence of accountability and transparency is evident at several councils in recent years.

In examining various council-related controversies, a distinct pattern emerges.

A controversy erupts, painting the council, or a council employee, in a less-than-favourable light.

The council – or in some cases, a government department – responds and says it is investigating the controversy.

Sometimes, it appoints an external investigator to do this – for example, a retired senior official from another local authority. And sometimes it does this in-house.

It is seen to be doing something.

While the investigation is taking place, the council can easily swat off any Freedom of Information requests, media queries or queries from its councillors by saying that it cannot comment on the matter or provide any further information until its "investigation" is completed.

Time marches on. Media and political interest in the controversy wanes.

Eventually, with the investigation completed, the council often refuses to release the investigation report, perhaps because of privacy grounds or because the report contains "personal information".

On other occasions, a Garda investigation provides the council with a rationale for not disclosing information about a particular issue – a situation that can sometimes last over several years.

And there, the matter is put to bed – but with no answers given to the public.

This raises an obvious question: What is the point in commissioning a report that will only ever be read by a handful of council officials or civil servants?

A case in point involves Donegal County Council. The council was the subject of various reports concerning its planning system, following allegations made by a former council planner, Mr Gerard Convie, who claimed that he had evidence of planning irregularities in the county.

Mr Convie's battle with the council is protracted and dates back to the early 2000s, involving various court cases and several different reports and reviews.

The latest of these was carried out by a senior counsel, Mr Rory Mulcahy, appointed by the Department of Environment and Local Government to review the matter in September 2015. He completed his report in 2017, but it has not been published.

The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Darragh O'Brien, said in response to a recent parliamentary question that he was "considering" the report but did not commit to it being published.

Elsewhere, a report carried out by Cork County Council, completed in 2009, has also not been published.

This report was conducted internally at the council, on foot of a controversy in 2006 when it emerged that it had agreed to pay more than €11m for lands at Charleville, which had months earlier been on sale for €8m.

It launched an investigation into the transaction. The matter dragged on.

But the council has refused to release the report even many years after it had been completed. Earlier this year, it told RTÉ Investigates that the "release of information publicly, and particularly so long after the event, would deter potential witnesses and complainants from coming forward".

"These investigations can take years to complete, and allegations can be left hanging," said John Devitt, the chief executive of Transparency International Ireland, which campaigns against corruption.

"And with the passage of time, it appears that many in government seem to think that the public will have forgotten."

There is, additionally, a more recent example of a report being completed but not released.

In 2017, it was reported that an investigation was underway at Cavan County Council over allegations that "fake invoices" had been submitted to the council for work that was not done, but which was paid for.

The council commissioned an external investigator to review the matter, who completed a report in August 2018.

But the council won't release the report or related records, including, for example, the costs of the investigation.

When we sought certain invoices submitted to the council, the council refused our request, citing an "on-going Garda investigation."

However, we checked this with An Garda Síochána, which told us last October that "Gardaí in Cavan are not aware of any investigations concerning this matter, at this time".

We then alerted Cavan County Council to this response, which later upheld its refusal, based on an "on-going investigation".

And, when we asked for clarification on this matter, given that gardaí in Cavan were not aware of an investigation, the council told us: "This matter is ongoing. Cavan County Council will not be making any further comment."

But, earlier this week, the Garda Press Office came back to us with a new response on the matter. This time, it told us: "An Garda Síochána has received correspondence which is currently being assessed to determine what if any Garda action is required."

Criminality

There have been several Garda investigations into council officials for alleged theft or fraud in recent years. But court prosecutions appear to be rare.

In one case, an official from Dundalk Town Council – which was folded into Louth County Council in 2014 following the abolition of town councils that year – admitted that he had pocketed rents collected from social housing tenants for himself. He had also admitted to destroying council rent books.

The council told RTÉ Investigates that €14,537 was taken, involving seven different tenancies.

The official had agreed to repay the money and was dismissed for "gross misconduct" in 2014. Earlier this month, the council said that €6,627 was still owed, but that the former employee continued to make repayments.

It also said that "the Council notified An Garda Síochána of the potential offences of the employee and informed An Garda Síochána that the organisation would furnish any information required should an investigation be commenced".

When asked about this matter, the Garda Press Office told us that: "Following receipt of a report An Garda Síochána carried out a preliminary assessment. No formal complaint was received. Following the completion of a file, the DPP directed No Prosecution in this case."

At Westmeath County Council, an employee at Athlone Marina was dismissed by the council in 2018 in connection with over €3,000 that was "unaccounted for" at the facility.

While the council had referred the matter to the gardaí, ultimately, in 2019, the Director of Public Prosecutions directed that there should be no prosecution in the case.

Limerick City Council – which amalgamated with Limerick County Council in 2014 – provides another example of a council official caught stealing, but avoided a court prosecution.

But, in this case, the reason the official was spared a prosecution is clear.

According to the 2008 Local Government Audit of the council, the official was dismissed over the "misappropriation" of council monies, which he had admitted to.

It added that, while consultation did take place with gardaí, because the official had agreed to make "reparations... the Garda course of action was not pursued."

Meanwhile, in Waterford City and County Council, the Local Government Auditor discovered that a council employee had taken a colleague's council credit card and used it for personal purchases in pubs, hotels, and shops over three days in August 2019, spending €700 in total.

They had also attempted to take out over €3,200 in ATM withdrawals, but the card was declined.

After this was uncovered, the employee paid back the money to the council and was given a written warning letter.

An Garda Síochána confirmed that the council did not make a complaint about the "inappropriate use" of the credit card.

When asked why it had not reported the matter to the Gardaí, the council said: "Waterford City and County Council do not comment on such matters as they relate to individual staff members."

It also said that, while it takes issues of fraud or theft seriously and "where appropriate refer matters to An Gardaí", such actions "have to be weighed between our different statutory responsibilities and the duty of care to our employees".

There are other ongoing garda investigations involving other local authorities.

It was first reported in 2017 that an employee of Galway City Council had been suspended in connection with "irregularities" involving the operation of its parking meters.

A garda investigation into the matter is continuing.

And at Limerick and City and County Council, councillors were told in 2020 that an employee was dismissed following a "detailed investigation" that had taken place over the previous nine months. It said that it had referred the matter to the gardaí.

RTÉ Investigates understands that the investigation relates to payments the employee approved to a company.

Grant pains

Local authorities can apply to a seemingly endless list of grant schemes for funding from government departments and other public bodies.

When submitting their grant claims, it is assumed that local authorities provide full and frank information in their applications.

It is also expected that they comply with the terms and conditions of the grant process – after all, the process involves one public body communicating with another.

But councils are not always truthful when applying for grants.

The Clew Bay cycle route in Co Mayo was billed as a gem in the county's tourism offering. It involved a 105km safe cycle route and a new 45m suspended cycle bridge on Achill Island.

One of the project's supporters was local TD Michael Ring, the Minister for Rural and Community Development from 2017 to 2020.

Much of the funding for the project came from the department's Outdoor Recreation Infrastructure Scheme. In January 2019, Mr Ring said that funding of €200,000 would be provided to fund the cycle bridge at Achill.

In October that year, Mayo County Council applied to his department to draw down the funding.

Typically, for such projects, it is a condition of the grant claim that the council spends its own money initially and then applies to the grant funding body to recoup what it had spent.

When it applies to draw down the funding, it gives certain assurances that it has complied with the terms of the grant.

In this case, when the council applied for funding of €200,000, it told the department that the project was "100%" complete and claimed it had incurred costs of €250,000. It also said that it had followed procurement guidelines and had documentary evidence on file for the project.

But things began to unravel for the council when, in March 2020, the department informed it that the Achill Island project had been randomly selected for an audit.

And this later uncovered a big problem: there was no bridge.

In fact, there is still no bridge. The council had misled the department.

In December 2020, the department wrote to Mayo County Council to say that, while the council had indicated that €250,000 had been incurred on the project, at the time of the audit, the project's total costs came to around €32,000.

Because of this discovery, the department then examined four other Mayo projects that it had funded under the Outdoor Recreation Infrastructure Scheme to the tune of €850,000 – and things got even worse for the council.

"I regret to note that similar issues were identified with all four projects", the department said, "specifically, the drawdown of funding for projects which had not incurred the requisite expenditure and for which no or minimal works had been completed".

Ultimately, the council had to repay the department more than €1m it had received for works that it had wrongly claimed had been completed. This meant that the projects were not finished – much to the dismay of Mayo locals.

In a statement, the council said, "while expenditure was coded incorrectly... the Department has been fully reimbursed in respect of the decommitted funding", adding that it has worked to "fully address" the matters raised by the department.

Mayo County Council is far from the only local authority caught out for misleading grant funding bodies.

In Kerry County Council, a case was highlighted by the Local Government Auditor in its 2017 report.

The council applied for funding under a scheme administered by the Department of Agriculture to carry out repair work at Fenit Harbour.

When it came to drawing down funding in November 2017, the council said that it had incurred costs of €110,000 and provided the department with certificates stating the project had been completed.

It later transpired that the works were nowhere near completion at that point, and, ultimately, the project would not be completed until April 2018.

"This was an isolated case", the council explained to the auditor, "where works were to be completed by year end and due to circumstances outside the contractor's control, the supply of parts for the works were delayed by five months".

But an almost identical issue occurred in 2018, involving the same funding scheme, relating to repair work at a pier in Dromatoor, Ballyheigue.

As part of its application to draw down funds, the council told the department that November that the project had been finished at a cost of €21,000. A departmental inspection the following month discovered that work on the project had not even started. This time, the council blamed a change in weather conditions for the delay.

In relation to the two grant claims, Kerry County Council told RTÉ Investigates: "Whilst there was no financial loss to the Council or the State, Council Management considered this a serious breach in procedures."

There are other examples.

Clare County Council submitted invoices as part of a grant claim to the National Roads Authority in 2014 to upgrade its salt-spreading vehicles, indicating that it had incurred certain costs of €131,000. While the invoices were issued, they had not been paid out.

The Local Government Auditor described this as a breach of grant claims procedures because the council had not incurred those costs when it requested payment.

The council told RTÉ Investigates there had been delays with the relevant supplier and said that, when the grant was recouped, it understood that the works would be completed quickly. The works were only finally completed in March 2016, and the final payment was made then.

Waste of taxpayers' money

The audits prepared by the Local Government Auditor also identify a recurrent feature of local government – the waste of public money.

Some of those highlighted cases do not necessarily involve vast sums of money but are nonetheless striking.

For example, at Cork City Council, the auditor highlighted in its 2015 report that the council had rented out two buildings on a "temporary convenience letting arrangement" in 2007 for nominal sums.

But those arrangements continued for many years, only ending in 2016 and 2017. For one of the buildings, the council requested an independent valuation that found that it had a market-rate rent of up to €35,000 per year – a far cry from the €10 per week it was receiving under the temporary letting arrangement.

Meanwhile, an example of squandering of public money at Carlow County Council does involve a considerable sum of money – more than €11m and counting.

In 2007, Carlow County Council found itself in an astonishing High Court case, taken by a contractor it had hired to complete a road, known as the Carlow Eastern Relief Road.

The contractor had claimed that it was ordered to build the final section of road on land the council did not own.

This discovery later resulted in the contractor taking proceedings against the council on various grounds, including alleged breach of contract.

Initially, the project was expected to cost around €5.5m. But according to the 2010 audit of the council, the High Court case was settled for €11.3m.

The saga is not yet over, as the contractor still has other ongoing legal proceedings against the council relating to the project.

Because of those ongoing proceedings, Carlow County Council has refused to disclose the project's total costs are to date.

Reforms?

In 2015, the prospect of ethics law reform was on the political agenda when a proposed piece of legislation, the Public Sector Standards Bill, was presented to the Dáil.

Under this legislation, a new Office of Public Sector Standards Commissioner was proposed, in addition to various other reforms that had been initially recommended in the Mahon Tribunal.

The commissioner would have the power to initiate investigations, even in the absence of a complaint. (Currently, the Standards in Public Office Commission can only initiate inquiries upon receiving a complaint.) It would also have powers to impose fines.

"For the first time, a uniform framework of ethical regulations will apply at national and local level in Ireland," said Brendan Howlin, the then-Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, in a Dáil debate in January 2016.

"There will now be a consistency of approach to ethical obligations across the public sector and, in a new departure, overarching integrity principles for public officials will be enshrined in legislation."

Of course, all of this sounded promising. But progress on the legislation later ground to a halt.

In August 2017, Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe wrote to the Oireachtas Finance Committee to warn that it was "essential that the Committee now quickly moves" to schedule the completion of thecommittee stage of the proposed legislation.

Mr Donohoe said that this was necessary because of the "public interest in implementing the recommendations" of the Mahon Tribunal.

But this request had little impact.

When asked for an update on the legislation in June 2019, an Oireachtas official replied that the Dáil term was due to finish the following month and that "All our remaining meetings are fully accounted for, and there are no plans to deal with this Bill in the remaining time".

The delays continued, and once the 2020 General Election was called, the bill died.

With the Public Sector Standards Bill now a distant memory, the Government's latest initiative is a "review" of ethics legislation. In November 2021, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Michael McGrath, told the Dáil that this review had begun, describing it as "a very significant body of work".

"We still have outstanding recommendations from tribunals of inquiry that reported several years ago, and I am determined to make progress in that area," said Mr McGrath.

Given the pace of reform, it doesn't appear that anything meaningful will happen anytime soon.

As John Devitt of Transparency International Ireland put it, "Turkeys don't vote for Christmas."

"And politicians are not inclined to want more meaningful or thorough oversight."

Watch RTÉ Investigates: Council Chamber Secrets tonight at 9:35pm on RTÉ One and RTÉ Player.