Genuine Complaint or Publicity Stunt?
The People Before Profit Alliance have made an official complaint against Independent Senator Rónán Mullen in relation to reports he made in Seanad. This raises questions about PBPA's judgement and their approach towards elected office.
The media have been full of stories about Senator Ivor Callely and his alleged abuse of the expenses system while he was a TD and since 2007 as a Senator. Yesterday the Seanad Committee charged with the task of investigating possible abuses named four Senators that they will be writing to for further explanation. Fianna Fáil Senators Ivor Callely, Ann Ormonde and Larry Butler are being questioned; but so is Independent Rónán Mullen on foot of an official complaint from the People Before Profit Alliance.
Mullen, who represents the National University of Ireland, was a leading critic of the expenses regime in the past weeks in the media. In a Seanad debate Mullen claimed that an elected representative approached him after his election and said he should claim travel from his native Galway and not his current home in Dublin. Mullen stated he was unsure what the motives of this person was, and therefore did not name him/her. It may have been in jest or it may have been a serious proposal. Mullen refused to name this person as the comment would be taken out of possible context and could wrongfully incriminate someone for what could have been a joke. The main point was that such a type of abuse was well known in the corridors of Leinster House.
This official complaint could seriously back-fire on the People Before Profit Alliance. It seems that Mullen is being singled out not for actual abuse of the expenses system, but rather because of his past run-ins with the SWP. Mullen is a right-wing social conservative. He has a record of being strongly opposed to abortion, gay marriage and many other socially progressive reforms. Mullen is openly pro-Catholic and portrays himself as a 'family values' type conservative. Left activists have had many disagreements with him in that past and no doubt will continue to in the future.
This type of vexatious complaint can actually damage the left as it's simply not serious and seems not to be properly motivated. Complaints should be made about politicians abusing expenses and electoral office. This complaint appears to be a publicity stunt. There are wider questions that arise about PBPA's approach. Are elected representatives not entitled to speak generally about things they hear and are told without having to name names? Will PBPA Councillors report hearsay and 'name names' if they receive information 'off the record'? The perception of most people is that Mullen was not abusing the system. Many ordinary people paying attention to these events will not necessarily thank PBPA for causing a ridiculous distraction from Senators Callely, Ormonde and Butler answering questions. The image and the standing of PBPA could be undermined by this vexatious complaint.