Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Labour)

Politicians are only in it for themselves. They all have their snouts in the trough. They are all corrupt The only thing that motivates them is their re-election. They have one hand longer than the other. Their only concern is their expenses.

These statements are comments from an Internet discussion site and a radio show that took place in the past couple of days. While they are easy to write off as ranting from an angry public or anonymous posters, we should not write them off that easily. These comments are an expression of the widespread cynicism towards politics and politicians in this country and we are only deluding ourselves if we think otherwise. Research carried out after last year's general election found that politicians are the least trusted of all professions. The last couple of decades have done untold damage to the reputation of politics and politicians. While it is easy for some to point to Fianna Fáil as the main problem, this fails to recognise that these attitudes were not simply confined to just one party. The damage done is not confined merely to Fianna Fáil, but to the body of politics. Such cynicism and distrust may eventually lead to damage to the democratic legitimacy of the State and we should pay heed to that.

This Bill addresses some of the concerns about the corrupting effect of money in politics. It will restrict donations to political parties, be they corporate donations from private sector companies or contributions from trade unions. The Labour Party fully supports the Bill and acknowledges the Minister's dedication, commitment and action in this regard. Although there will be a considerable financial cost to the Labour Party, it is our view that the interests of democracy and transparency are best served by substantial legislation in this area. It has long been the policy of the Labour Party to end the corporate funding of political parties, in so far as that is possible within the confines of the Constitution. We welcome this legislation on that basis. The Bill will contribute to an improvement in the standard of practice of politics in this country and by doing so will help to lessen the corrosive cynicism towards politics. Much of this will be achieved through regulation, but also through the practices of politicians and political parties.

There are few Members of this House whose bona fides I would question. What I mean by this is that most of us are here because we wish to serve the people and to work for the good of the State although we differ with regard to the means to do this and our goals. These differences are important in terms of the dynamics between government parties and the Opposition, but I recognise that the majority of Deputies are here with the best of intentions. However, there has been some corruption, with the result that much political activity is now seen - fairly or unfairly - through that lens Further legislation and work on the part of every party and Independent Deputies is required in order to counteract both that perception and the challenge posed by cynicism towards politics and to ensure we root out that perception. We must develop an intolerance of corruption in this House and of those associated with the actions of those found to have been engaged in corrupt practices, whether by the courts or tribunals of inquiry.

The two issues in this Bill are mirrored, in a way, by the election to the House of Commons in 1865 of a man named John Stuart Mill. His opponent in that election was W. H. Smith, of the famous book-selling family, who used his vast wealth to buy a great number of votes. Political corruption was present at the start of Mill's time in parliament. Twelve months after his election he touched on an issue of relevance to the other aspect of this Bill, an issue that would see him pilloried, in both his own time and in history, as well as dismissed by some of his fellow MPs as being mad. In 1867, during the debate on the Second Reform Bill, Mill introduced an amendment that would have resulted in women receiving the vote. It was rejected but this was the first time that such a motion had been proposed in the Commons. Mill felt that it was appropriate to create that debate in English society. Sadly, and shamefully, it was 50 years later before women's suffrage finally won the vote, in 1918, but even then it was not on the same terms as men.

In Ireland, women have had the vote since Independence. Indeed, before independence, Ireland had elected the first woman MP, Countess Markievicz, who later became only the second female Minister of government in Europe. She left office in 1922 and we had to wait until 1979, 57 years later, until another woman was appointed to Cabinet. Of the total of 4,744 Dail seats filled since 1918, only 260 have been occupied by females. Only 91 women Deputies have been elected since the foundation of the State. In this, the 31st Dail, women hold only 25 seats out of 166, which, as outlined earlier, represents a percentage of just 15.1%. This places Ireland in a global position of 79th, considerably lower than the global and European averages of 20% and 22.3%, respectively.

This under-representation of women means we are missing the talents and insights of half the population. This may be a matter of humour for some but it cannot be denied that the lack of women in politics is having an effect, in the context of our policies and in outcomes of our work and our deliberations. Their different experience means that women parliamentarians are more likely to raise issues that involve women and to bring their perspectives to bear on policy-making. Women are often less adversarial and, as was mentioned by one of the Opposition speakers, are often more consensual in parliamentary and committee debates. This can only help to enhance the quality of governance in this country. In any event, the appeal of democracy as an idea is not that it is the most efficient system of government, rather that it is the most legitimate form of same. Having women, who make up just over half of the population, so under-represented undermines the legitimate authority of this House. This must be remedied. I welcome the Minister's commitment to addressing the situation in this Bill.

The issue is not that the electorate does not vote for women but that they do so in proportion to the number of women who run in elections. The issue, therefore, is that there are not enough female candidates participating in the democratic process. In the last general election, in Cork South-West, Kildare South, Limerick and Roscommon-South Leitrim there were no women on the ballot paper. The Labour Party's commitment to this ideal is reflected in its high percentage of female candidates but, as noted earlier, we have not reached the 30% mark. Our having only two extra women candidates participate in the democratic process would have addressed that 30% quota. It is important that all parties work in this regard, simply by reaching the quota outlined in the Bill. A quota of 40% is a goal we must look to achieve later. These are starting points; we must be blunt about it.

An earlier speaker mentioned the five "Cs": child care, cash, confidence, culture and candidate selection. These are important issues. I shall take one, child care, which predominantly affects women as they are still more likely to have the responsibility of rearing a child in the home. Although a crèche facility is provided in Leinster House, the sitting hours of the House do not suit those with young children or families. I include myself. This can form a barrier for women in becoming involved in politics as often the arrangements and meeting times for branches and cumanns - Deputy Donnelly has the luxury of being an Independent in that respect - are often in out-of-hours situations.

Maternity arrangements for Deputies is another issue which must be addressed. Although statutory maternity leave is not available to women Members of the Oireachtas, as they are not employees, Deputies or Senators who give birth in office do not have an entitlement to survive or protect their domestic circumstances outside the Houses.

This Bill, in both its aspects, will represent a significant improvement. For that, I thank the Minister, Deputy Hogan, for his dedication and commitment and, above all, his action in this area. On both counts the Bill represents a significant step on the road to another destination which we must reach. No doubt more must be done on the two significant aspects of this legislation but I welcome the Bill for what it is and gladly support the Minister in his endeavours.

See this speech in context