Dáil debates

Wednesday, 9 May 2012

Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Bill 2011 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Séamus KirkSéamus Kirk (Louth, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to contribute to this informative debate. It is interesting to listen to the observations made by Government Members, and Independent and political party Members of the Opposition. When talking about the electoral and political system, individual observations or analysis offered by Deputies reflect their position as Independents or members of parties. Deputy Colm Keaveney referred to public trust in politicians and the fact that it is at a low ebb. Perhaps it is opportune for the Government to allow all political parties to have a no holds barred debate in the House on public trust and what politicians need to do to rebuild the trust of the public.

It has been suggested that there are too many Members of the House at a time when our population is increasing. Constituencies on the eastern seaboard are filling out and the number of people represented in certain constituencies has grown by comparison to others throughout the country. Should we have fewer Members? Should we consider the multiseat constituency? Is there a problem with Members in the same political party expending too much effort and time on the competitive element within the party? It is a problem Fianna Fáil had in the past although not to the same extent today. It will be a problem for the two parties in Government, the Labour Party and Fine Gael. When election time comes around, the competitive consideration in constituencies will be manifest.

The question of payment and level of salary and allowances paid to Members raises the matter of whether we should consider a part-time arrangement for Members without frontbench responsibilities, those who are not Ministers or Ministers of State. Should we consider a part-time arrangement for the sitting of the Dáil to allow Members to work as teachers, or to operate pubs, farms or IT companies?

Many speakers have remarked on the perception that career politicians live in a bubble and we do not know what is happening in the wider economy and the wider world. There is a grain of truth in this view and perhaps a person who also has another job as well as being a Member of this House would bring a different perspective to debates. I will not hold my breath as I do not think the House will revert to such a system. When I was first elected to this House quite a few Members attended on a part-time basis as they also worked in the Law Library or practised as solicitors or worked in other occupations compatible with membership of the House. They could contribute to debates for a certain number of hours during the week and also continue with their jobs. Whether the quality of contributions was the better I cannot say.

There needs to be a fundamental examination of the electoral system in order to rebuild trust in the system. The process of alienation of the public from the political system has become a cancer and it is not good. When individual members of every party engage with the electorate, they must be perceived the same as people who work in other lines of public contribution.

This Bill deals with the issue of donations and gender quotas. The political history of the recent past and perhaps earlier will show that the issue of corporate donations has been at the heart of many of the problems which affect the political system and there clearly is a need to bring this practice under control. I am sure other Members will agree that it costs money to survive in politics, to fight elections and to look after the constituency between elections, and there must be some system for financing the political system. There is understandable resistance to the public purse contributing to the level it does, whether to Independent Members or to individual political parties. However, this is a democracy and it is a question of how to fund politics if all sources of funding are cut off. How will parties such as Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or the Labour Party, Sinn Féin or the Independents finance themselves? These are the big questions. However, I fully accept the principle that corporate donations must be controlled to ensure that such donations do not have a negative effect on the political system, that these are eliminated completely rather than minimised. I acknowledge this Bill goes some distance in this regard.

Last November, the Fianna Fáil Party brought forward proposals which are much more effective and will better address the issues. I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to that Bill which was debated and voted down. That Bill was a serious attempt on the part of Fianna Fáil to address this cancerous problem at the heart of the political system in Ireland. It envisaged a greater empowerment of the Standards in Public Office Commission to audit and monitor the accounts of political parties, to extend the SIPO supervision to independent expenditure and referenda and to implement the recommendations of Mr. Justice Moriarty relating to extending provisions to Independent and non-party candidates. The combination of these measures with the lobbyists Bill would restore public faith in the institutions of the State. These measures will underpin the efforts to level the playing field for all stakeholders, strengthen the democratic principle of political equality and break the very unhealthy link between business and politics.

The issue of gender balance is a perennial problem in politics and particularly as regards membership of the Oireachtas. There are simply not enough female Members of the Oireachtas. A greater number of female Members would have a marked impact on debates and on the subject of debates. However, the greatest challenge for the system is how to ensure more people come into politics. In an ideal world, candidates come through the ranks of political parties and are selected at convention, but it is clear this system has not worked. The numbers we would like to see in the House are not turning in here after each general election. An effective and strong quota system may be the solution, whereby 30% or 40% of candidates in a general election must be female but at the end of the day, it is the electorate which decides who comes in here. At least, political parties would be fulfilling their obligation and making their contribution to ensuring more female Members. The quota system proposal is to be welcomed and I hope that further efforts will be made to ensure a higher number of female Members.

I refer to statistics on gender breakdown in the Dáil. Only six out of 30 Ministers are women, 20% of the total. Women account for only 13% of Cabinet membership, two out of 15 people. This is similar to the 17% of women Ministers in the Fianna Fáil-Labour Party Government of 1993, some 20% in the Rainbow coalition Government of 1994 and 16% in the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government of 1997, when the country had its first female Tánaiste. These statistics highlight the challenges facing the system and they compare very unfavourably with the position in the European Union generally and in stark contrast to the gender equality in countries such as Spain, Sweden and Iceland. I hope the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government will consider the genuine effort made by those who framed the Fianna Fáil Private Members' Bill to address these two issues. I ask the Minister to consider incorporating its provisions into future legislation in the best interests of the democratic system.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.