Strengthening Whistleblower Protections, Enforcement and Accountability in Public Administration: Motion [Private Members]
Dail Éireann — 2025-11-26
============================================================

Paul Nicholas Gogarty (IND), Dublin Mid-West

We all personally know or locally are aware of whistleblowers. I know some myself. They are vital to protecting the public interest. These individuals call out corruption, waste, incompetence, bullying and abuse, including our distinguished guests in the Public Gallery. All too often, they pay a price for their transparency and honesty.
The proposals before us are about changing that, going beyond the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 and ensuring any legislation has teeth. They are about making sure whistleblowers are protected, supported and respected within every sector. My colleagues' first proposal is that every public body must investigate whistleblower reports quickly and fairly - no delays, no excuses. If they fail, a new Office of the Protected Disclosures Commissioner would have the power to sanction them. That is how we make sure disclosures are not ignored. It is not rocket science. Implementing it may require massive changes in culture and will face institutional resistance but this has to be overcome.
Then there is the measure seeking personal responsibility. If an official obstructs an investigation, destroys evidence or lies, he or she should face additional criminal charges, which should help stop cover-ups. I especially like the proposal to give whistleblowers the right to go more easily to the High Court to force an investigation so the court can compel action not coming from elsewhere. This needs to be in turn protected from abuse and spurious claims but if done right, it is a safety valve when the system fails otherwise.
Whistleblowers often suffer retaliation and it can be very subtle. I support proposals for reinstatement, full compensation and exemplary damages, including a more detailed analysis and appreciation of what constitutes constructive dismissal. It might not always be possible but striving to make it the norm is laudable. Tied in with this is the need for a legal aid and support fund so whistleblowers, and sometimes their families, can get representation, counselling and assistance. Speaking up should not mean financial ruin or personal collapse, as it has in the past. We have to have checks and balances but the motion should be tested with supporting additional legislation.
Gagging clauses and non-disclosure agreements should be banned or hugely restricted. I take on board what the Minister of State said about section 15 of the existing Act but coercion and intimidation are currently very difficult to prove and no whistleblower should be silenced against their will for pursuing the common good, whether it is by tangible actions, threats, ghosting or anything more subtle. Public bodies should, therefore, have to certify every year that they have not used prohibitive non-disclosure and that no staff have inferred or implied the same.
We also need accountability, which is why publishing the quarterly data showing which bodies failed to meet deadlines make sense, along with sanctions for repeated failures where escalative action is not taken. I welcome the proposal's provision for independent oversight and a review after three years of whether the reforms are working, which is why I cannot understand how the Government could not them take on board and integrate them with existing legislation.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/dail/2025-11-26/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:22+00:00
Sitting date: 2025-11-26