Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)

It is a women's organisation. It has been a good organisation overall.

It is within political parties and the political culture where our greatest failings lie. Representation of women in the Oireachtas has been held back by our political culture and by parties failing to allow sufficient numbers of women to have their names go forward. Females have never made up more than 15% of the membership of this House, which is their current standing, nor have recent years been especially positive. In the most recent general election only five more women were elected than in 1992. Of the 556 candidates who ran in the most recent general election, only 86 or 15% were women.

This Bill is an effort to circumvent that limitation by ensuring the people have a reasonable proportion of women from which to choose and that political parties take all possible measures to ensure there are sufficient female candidates on the ballot paper representing them. I believe these measures in the Bill are likely to meet with success in ensuring these Houses reach a minimum of 30% female candidates for the next general election.

In nearly any state that has introduced quotas, there has been a significant increase in the representation of women. In Sweden, 45% of MPs are female; in Germany, it is 32%; and in Norway, it is almost 40%. They are a long way ahead of us. In my party, we brought in a quota system a number of years ago. We wrestled with it for a long time. Many of us were against it, but it was the only measure that cracked the issue in terms of getting women into senior positions in the party. Male Members should not see gender quotas as a threat. We should embrace them as a means of bringing about equality in the Houses of the Oireachtas and in the political system. We must ensure women and the voice of women are properly represented in the Seanad, the Dáil and local authority chambers.

Women bring their own particular perspective to politics and to life, not because of any particular talents that are innate to them but on account of their life experience. Women are more likely to be carers, the majority of lower paid workers are female, and females are more likely to be closer to the community. In considering the very poor gender balance in this Oireachtas, which has historically been a huge problem, I welcome this move and commend the Minister on taking such a step.

I might, however, sound a note of caution that this will not be a silver bullet or a panacea to deal with all of these issues. While it is to be hoped the Bill will improve the representation of women in the Houses, and in all likelihood it will, it does not mean we will have significantly more women in politics. Elected representatives are only a small proportion of those involved in politics, and the obstacles that have held back the representation of women in these Houses will continue unless the broader issue is tackled. All of us are aware that the sinews that make up political parties and political organisations are important. Without them, none of us would be here. Even the Independents have their support groups, and rightly so. Women make up a large part of such groups and if one does not have that, there will not be proper representation, proper political structures or a proper basis on which to build a political system.

These are cultural issues within the Irish political system. Many of the women who run for election would not have wished to have done so because of the difficulties they faced in terms of income, child care and other factors. The culture of Irish political parties is male orientated, in terms of the way sittings and meetings are structured, when and where meetings are held, and many other respects. Indeed, these institutions are far from ideal in this regard. The long hours make it difficult for a young mother, or indeed a father, to be a Deputy. The long sitting days, the travel, the expectations and the constituency workload bear down on them. The reform of local government is important in this regard. Much decision-making and many issues that could be dealt with at local government level are currently dealt with by Deputies. The ending of the dual mandate was a positive move by a previous Government. It is to be hoped we will soon revisit the reform of local government. I am not asking for the load to be lightened. I am asking, however, that we examine ways in which the work of these Houses and the work associated with being a Deputy can be made more flexible and easier for those with young families. In many ways, the Houses, as currently constituted, are anti-family. These measures will not change any of that. Papering over the cracks is only a temporary solution.

The issue of quotas is only a small part of what we need to do to ensure more women engage in politics, stand for elections and, importantly, join political parties. Political parties are voluntary organisations and it is honourable to be a member of any political party, regardless of what part of the political spectrum one is on. Funding, child care and unsocial hours have already been signalled by women as barriers to their engagement in politics, and this must be addressed. Some academics have coined the obstacles as the five Cs: child care, cash, confidence, culture and candidate selection. Many of us would agree this is accurate. While I do not oppose the introduction of these measures and the taking of positive measures to redress the balance, and while I note that they have been reasonably successful in other places, I would point out that they tackle and manage one of the symptoms of the problem and do not tackle the root causes of the under-representation of women or the more marginalised sections and classes of society. They still face significant obstacles in terms of child care, the times at which meetings are held, the time required to be dedicated to political activity and the male dominated culture of society at large and the networks surrounding politics. None the less, I welcome these measures as a positive step. I ask the Minister to consider my comments and to be emboldened by the legislation to work with other Ministers to tackles issues such as child care and to take measures to improve the involvement of women, not only in elected roles but in the political system generally.

They might also consider the question of whether it would be appropriate to extend these measures, along with other comprehensive proposals, to local elections and other elections. Many of the same cultural and social obstacles to the representation of women exist in other institutions, and we must examine ways in which these can be tackled to achieve greater representation of females in local government and public bodies. I was a member of a VEC for two terms, and it would sit at 4.30. If one wants to stop women from being involved, one should hold meetings at 4.30, the time when children are coming in from school and one is trying to get dinner ready. At that time, I was involved in the same activity. It creates considerable problems for women. Public bodies need to consider that as well.

I also want to touch on the other major part of this legislation which covers maximum corporate donations, the full disclosure of such donations and other such measures. I welcome that the Minister is reducing the maximum single donation a political party can accept in a year to €2,500, the requirement for audited accounts, the creation of a register of corporate donors and the reduction in the minimum donation that must be declared by a political party to €1,500 and by a candidate to €600. Political transparency is very important. We saw over many years the way in which the political system was tainted by allegations, substantiated facts on financial ambiguities, improper donations, lack of transparency and outright corruption.

Some political parties have been seen for many years as being far too close to big business. Indeed, many commentators would have noted that the Galway tent culture was a factor in creating the economic crash. In the eyes of many, the closeness of developers and bankers to the Government meant that no one cried halt at the soaring prices of houses or property, the unsustainable tax base, the reckless levels of borrowing in the major commercial banks, and the lack of regulation of those banks caused by that culture. Limiting the influence of big business and of a small number of wealthy individuals on our political system is essential for the protection of a fair democratic system. Where there is a culture of large corporate donations, this tends to influence policy decisions or, at the very least, access to political figures, which is not unique to this country and happens across the world. The policy objectives of such corporations or wealthy individuals will not always accord with the objectives of the people at large, whereas, at the end of the day, we are here to represent all sections of the community.

The less well-off will rarely have the same access to political figures or the same influence and, therefore, policy objectives which are in the interests of lower income groups will lose out. On that basis, while the limitations on corporate gifts and the new level for declared donations are welcome, I would ask the Minister to go further. There is a need to ban all forms of corporate donations. There is a commitment on page 22 of the programme for Government to that end and we will table amendments to put an end to corporate donations and to hold the Government to that commitment, with which we agree.

Corporate donations are capable of being a malign influence on the body politic, a fact the Government recognised when it made its commitment. It was said this was part of the election manifestos and I accept there must be compromises when a Government is being formed. However, it is there in black and white in the programme for Government and we would like to see it implemented. Why is the Government back-tracking on that position? Has the Minister been put under pressure to ensure important streams of revenue to the two parties in Government are not hampered? Has the Labour Party, worried about the ending of its trade union funding, put pressure on the Minister? I hope we get an answer to this question. We need to know why the Government has dropped a very important part of its election platform and a commitment in the programme for Government.

The Minister has a chance to remove the spectre of the Galway tent from Irish politics once and for all, and he should grasp it. We welcome how far the Minister is going in the Bill and we ask him to go a little further and to ban corporate donations. Overall, the Bill is a very positive move forward and we will be supporting most of what is contained in it.

See this speech in context