Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

I have no doubt that he is. He will not have a member of the Fianna Fáil party in his sights if he is trying to obtain a seat. He is welcome to a seat if he is fit to earn it, once it is not one of the three held by Fianna Fáil. We got on well with Mr. Flanagan before and I would have no problem working with him again.

Given that my constituency is not directly affected by the boundary changes, I want to concentrate on section 6, which deals with a financial matter.

The Schedule to the Electoral Act 1997 (inserted by section 50(v) of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2001) is amended by inserting the following subparagraph in paragraph (2):

''(a) any of the matters referred to in subparagraphs (i), (iii), (iv) and (v) of section 22(2)(b) or, in the case of a presidential election, subparagraphs (i), (iii), (iv) and (v) of section 46(2)(b),''.

How could anyone understand that section? Neither a Member of the House nor a member of the public — apart from the Parliamentary Draftsman and those involved in drafting legislation — could understand it.

That is part of the problem here. We pass legislation yet sometimes we do not know about what we are talking. I defy any Member to explain the meaning of that section. We are blessed in having an explanatory memorandum according to which:

Section 6 addresses an issue raised by the Standards in Public Office Commission in relation to the definition of election expenses for the purposes of the Electoral Act 1997. It amends the Schedule to the Act (inserted by section 50(v) of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2001) by inserting a subparagraph clarifying that the following items are not to be regarded as election expenses at presidential, Dáil and European elections: free postage provided for candidates; a service provided free by an individual or provided by an employee of a political party; normal media coverage; and the transmission on radio or television of a broadcast on behalf of a candidate or political party.

Section 33 of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2004 inadvertently raised a doubt about the continuing exclusion of these items as election expenses. That section, therefore, was enacted in error. Given that section 6 of the present Bill is unintelligible to an ordinary person, or any Member of the House, we could make further mistakes. I hope not. I trust that the officials in the Department have got it right on this occasion because the mistake in the 2004 Act led to particular problems.

There was an Electoral Act 1997, an Electoral (Amendment) Act 2001, an Electoral (Amendment) Act 2004 and now this Bill. Establishing the meaning of any section in the Bill resembles tracing one's family tree back four or five generations. There is a need for a consolidation Bill to deal with the Electoral Acts.

Section 6 aims to clarify that free postage, party political broadcasts and other items will not be deemed election expenses. Section 33 of the 2004 Act raised a doubt in the view of the Standards in Public Office Commission. That change was made as a result of the Supreme Court decision in the Kelly case. As a result of those changes we inadvertently over-amended the Act and now we must correct that.

This highlights the question of the election address, the litir um thogáim. Proportionality is needed in this respect. We have never held an objective discussion on this aspect of election activity. Many years ago the election address was deemed a significant item of election activity and the legislation provided for every candidate, or where there were several candidates in a party, the party, to issue an election address to each registered voter in his or her constituency.

Fianna Fáil is the largest party in the country and under existing legislation it is allowed to spend more than €3 million. The cost of the election address to each party, is approximately €1.5 million per party. The only real purpose of that expenditure is to give a bonanza to An Post whenever there is a general or presidential election.

If the Oireachtas believes we should spend €3 million per party on an election and €1.5 million on an election address the parties are in effect allowed to spend up to €4.5 million. If the parties had that much to spend they would not spend €1.5 million on an election address which is a small peripheral aspect of the campaign. Candidates must deal with other election literature they distribute in the course of their daily canvas. Postering is a significant activity. They also place advertisements in local newspapers and engage in other such activities, including producing newsletters and leaflets, and at national level parties run a national campaign producing policy documents and so on. The legislation lays too much emphasis on providing what is essentially a subsidy for An Post. While it is not intended as such, that is the outcome. A senior executive in An Post said recently the company had a good year last year. He mentioned the figure of €6 million or €7 million received through election addresses.

In addition, candidates can send an election address to each registered voter. If there are four or five voters in a house, and four or five candidates issue election addresses, there may be 20 items of literature coming into the house over a day or two which turns the public off. By long-established practice the Dáil seems to believe this sum should be spent during an election campaign. If this is to continue the candidates involved should be consulted to see whether that is the best use of those funds. I am satisfied it is not.

We may have to reconsider other issues arising from the Kelly decision. Before the year is out, or at least before the next general election, there will be further electoral amendment Bills to correct the situation. If it is necessary to pass this Bill because there is uncertainty about whether the free postage for candidates and the cost of party political broadcasts should be included as items of election expenditure what was the situation in regard to the two recent by-elections? If they were fought in a context that required clarification what was the position? Will that be accounted for? Maybe we will be told about this in due course.

As a result of the Kelly decision the salaries for parliamentary secretaries during the campaign have been factored in as an election expense. Does this apply also to the salaries of the parliamentary assistants recently approved by the Oireachtas? If so, much of the expenditure limit allocated to a candidate who is an outgoing Oireachtas Member will be reduced before he or she is out of the starting blocks. That needs to be considered in terms of the overall expenditure limits for elections. The essence of the Kelly judgment was to deal with payments out of public funds and the facilities available to Members of the House that were not available to non-sitting candidates going before the public. It was designed to provide a level playing field. I suspect the matter has not been fully thought through in the preparation of this legislation. We will have to return to it at a later date.

The Dáil computer of every Member, even those with computers in their constituency offices far from this building, is linked directly by ISDN lines to the Dail central computer. Every evening the Dáil computer takes back the work done during the day and this is stored on the main server in the Oireachtas rather than on the individual computers in constituency offices. One cannot access copies of names and addresses and backup files as the security copies are not available in constituency offices. They are only available when one is linked to the Oireachtas computer in this building. When an election takes place every Member will link directly to the Dáil facilities when he or she uses his or her computer. There is a cost to that and it will be deemed an expenditure under the Kelly judgment. Nobody knows what the cost will be but it will have to be attributed to each Deputy in some way. If Deputies were told that the Kelly judgment was to be strictly implemented it would mean that none of us could turn on a Dáil computer in a constituency office during the three weeks of a general election campaign. I do not think this matter has been teased out.

See this speech in context