In recent times, senior civil and public servants have been mired in controversy. The public purse is being used by those at the most senior level to enhance their own salaries and, in other cases, to advance policy initiatives the Government has not underwritten. We have seen these questionable practices in the appointment of the Secretary General of the Department of Health on an unjustifiable salary and the actions of the Office of the Planning Regulator in the application of policy other than that of the line Minister. There are many other examples.

In early January of this year, following a complaint in 2019, the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, issued one of the most damning reports in its history. It exposed most inappropriate behaviour by Wexford County Council's chief executive, Tom Enright, and the then cathaoirleach, Fianna Fáil councillor Michael Sheehan. Mr. Enright was found to have used the weight of the public purse in an attempt to influence the editorial output of South East Radio, something you might see in Mother Russia. Within two days of the issuing of the report, the Fianna Fáil chair of Wexford County Council, Councillor Barbara-Anne Murphy, called a meeting to immediately push through a vote supporting the chief executive, ignoring the findings of the SIPO report, her own legal advice and established custom and practice for dealing with serious disciplinary matters concerning a chief executive. It was an action for which she herself should be sanctioned. The vote was controlled and rammed through by councillors of the two main parties, namely, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, the parties in government. They made a laughing stock of SIPO effectively by giving it the two fingers. SIPO's 376-page report had taken two years to compile. Other senior officials, including the county secretary and directors of services, made contact with councillors to impress upon them the importance of supporting the chief executive in a vote. Implicit in that contact was that the potholes and footpaths in councillors' areas would not be attended to if they did not support their man. This action should be investigated in its own right and for which those concerned should be sanctioned. As one junior official in Wexford County Council put it to me, these votes will cost the council money.

Do the Taoiseach and his party recognise the importance of SIPO and its findings as a mechanism for maintaining public confidence in the civil and public service? I believe the Taoiseach does. He mentioned corruption earlier. In that circumstance, what sanctions does he propose for councillors Sheehan and Murphy for aiding and abetting the chief executive in this debacle?

We are travelling into previously unvisited territory.

Absolutely.

I perfectly accept the validity of exploring issues around a SIPO report but I would have concerns about mentioning people who have not been mentioned heretofore and who are not here to defend themselves in any way.

It is all on the public record, having been reported in local newspapers.

All right. Just let us tread carefully.

First, there has always been a tradition in this House of not making allegations against people who are not here to defend themselves or respond. Second, my understanding is-----

The Taoiseach has never respected that.

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

The Deputy's case went the whole way to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges when she abused privilege in this House.

The Taoiseach might address the question.

She never apologised for her abuse of privilege.

I exercised my privilege.

She abused it. We need to adhere to those traditions because if people are not here to defend themselves or respond, it has to be taken into context.

In any event, to make a general comment on public servants, we are fortunate in this country to have high standards of public service across Departments. There is no doubt there are strengths and weaknesses, but overall Irish public servants have done well by the State since its foundation. That has been made manifest most recently in the public service's response to Covid-19, an unprecedented once-in-100-years pandemic, at national and local levels. Therefore, let us not tar everybody with the same brush regarding one particular issue, development, incident or action in one local authority. I believe in the Irish public service. I have my criticisms and frustrations, but fundamentally in respect of how this State is organised, we need a strong public service and to ensure it is adequately resourced and given the leadership it requires. That is fundamental to a parliamentary democracy. That is my view on that.

On local democracy, we delegate authority to local councils. They may not always decide on policies or issues we are happy with or agree with and we may disagree with actions taken. My understanding of the first council meeting is that councils are obliged under statute to convene a meeting after a SIPO report. I can check that, but that is my understanding. The first meeting would have been adjourned until a subsequent meeting. A SIPO report should be taken very seriously, of course, in respect of actions. With regard to a more general principle — I do not have the full background here — as far as I am concerned there has to be a very clear demarcation line between governments, be they local or national, and media. The independence of media is a central tenet of our democracy and should always be respected and protected.

Yes. I notice the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, gave the Taoiseach the information on the meeting. It is correct. A meeting was convened, and there was to be another within seven days. Even when an independent councillor voiced his opinion that he had not had sufficient time to consider the 376-page report, the council proceeded with the vote, against legal advice that it could be subject to judicial review.

Without a shadow of a doubt, the Taoiseach is a decent person and has the public interest at heart, even though he is well able to spin. I am not going to stand here and be lectured to on whether there is no accountability at local level. The reality is that if we do not have accountability at local level, we cannot have accountability anywhere else. The members in question are members of the Taoiseach's party. These are questionable actions by directors of services and the county secretary, in which case they actually garnered a vote, and that has to be addressed. This whole debacle has served no purpose other than to emasculate SIPO. Is there an answer to that? Can the Taoiseach tell me what the purpose of SIPO is if this is not going to be addressed? To me, it is a complete waste of the public's money if something that took two years for SIPO to compile took less than seven days for Wexford County Council, under a Fianna Fáil chair, to do nothing about.

There are many parties on that council; let us be clear about that.

The chair is a Fianna Fáil chair.

The SIPO report will have an impact and, I would put it to the Deputy, is already having an impact. When a report like that is published, even though it is specific to a particular action by a chief executive officer in a particular local authority, it has wider implications and ramifications for other chief executive officers in local authorities throughout the country.

Not if there is no sanction, Taoiseach.

Yes, it does. I would not agree with the Deputy. Not everyone is going to behave in the same way that one council does or one chief executive officer may do. Others will take note of what was laid down by SIPO and its findings regarding this issue. That is my view. It will have-----

The message is that we will all do what we like.

-----far-reaching impacts on the future behaviour of councils.

There was no impact. It made no difference. He got a standing ovation and a round of applause.

Deputy, will you let the Taoiseach respond?

Other councils will take a different view and take on board the SIPO report and its conclusions.

There cannot be any attempts to influence the content of any local radio discussion, debate or its treatment or coverage of any issue-----

That is what the report says.

Even if there are advertisements that emanate from the council and so on, that is not correct. It can never be used for that purpose by anybody. I am very clear about that.

But nothing was done.

Nothing about the flawed legal advice that was offered.