SDLP MLA and Leader of the Opposition has apologised after Stormont’s Standards Commissioner found he breached the MLA code of conduct by sharing in a press release that he had submitted a complaint about Communities Minister Gordon Lyons.
In June last year, Mr O’Toole submitted a complaint against DUP MLA Gordon Lyons after he made a post on social media relating to the location of individuals who had been displaced from their homes due to violent riots in Ballymena.
“The complaints process is confidential from the point of submission until its conclusion. Mr O’Toole was not permitted to disclose even the fact of a complaint. Were such disclosures deemed acceptable, the act of submitting a complaint to the Office of the Commissioner for Standards could too easily be weaponised,” Standards Commissioner Melissa McCullough said in her report.
“It is my view that Mr O’Toole knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that issuing a public press release concerning an active and confidential complaint submitted to this Office was inappropriate and in breach of Rule 12 of the MLA Code of Conduct.”
The Chairperson of the Committee on Standards and Privileges, Cathy Mason MLA said: “The Committee takes allegations of breaches of the Assembly’s Code of Conduct very seriously. Therefore, it was right that an independent investigation was carried out in order to establish the facts in relation to the allegations made.
“While the Member was found to have breached the Code, he has acknowledged the importance of the overall reputation of the standards process and has apologised to the Committee. I am therefore pleased that, following receipt of a written apology from the Member, the Committee has reported to the Assembly that the matter has now been resolved”.
The MLA will not be subject to any further action as no sanction has been recommended by the committee, therefore, there will be no debate on the matter in the Assembly.
In response to the report issued by the Standards Commissioner, O’Toole said: “Let me state initially that I do not dispute the findings of fact, and therefore I acknowledge the broader finding is consistent with the logic the former Commissioner applied to other cases. To the extent that this breach was technical and inadvertent, I will of course be mindful of the application of these rules in future.”
“I do however have to highlight the highly absurd situation created by the interpretation of the rules which has been applied. The Commissioner clears me of both the complaints made against me, and specifically in relation to Rule 17 confirms that merely disclosing the fact of a referral or complaint cannot be a breach of Rule 17, because the code at Rule 17 specifically refers to the disclosure of facts relating to an investigation and, since a complaint does not automatically lead to an investigation, it cannot be a breach.”
“But in finding me in breach of Rule 12, with reference to Clause 33 of the 2011 Act, the Commissioner is clear that in her view any disclosure of any nature, including the mere fact of a complaint is a prime facie breach. In her report, the Commissioner says this approach to confidentiality is required to “prevent the risk of misuse or harm” but does not engage with the many potentially bizarre outworkings and potential flawed incentives created by such an application of the rules. For example, what would stop a vexatious claim that a referral had been made without actually making a complaint, securing publicity but no opportunity for investigation or a response from the responding MLA. This would avoid incurring Rule 12 of the code but secure publicity for a complainant without giving the respondent any route to response or vindication.”
