Dáil debates

Wednesday, 9 May 2012

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

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Jerry ButtimerJerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I wish to share my time with Deputy Tom Hayes. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, to the House. I agree with Deputy Kirk that we are all faced with a challenge and that the people will decide who comes into this House and who will be elected as local councillors. However, when I hear members of the Fianna Fáil Party and their supporters talking about political reform, I remind them that Fianna Fáil was the party in Government for the longest period of time and I ask where were the measures for political reform or an attempt to bring about real reform. We have instead seen a liaison and a relationship between big business, a chosen few and political influence. This is the reason for two tribunals in Dublin Castle .

As regards the advancement of women in politics, Fianna Fáil was in Government for 14 years and we saw no such legislation coming forward. However, I welcome the publication of this Bill. I agree with the over-arching aim of the Bill which is to reform the political process, to restore the trust in us as practising politicians, in political parties and in the financing of political parties.

Members of the Press Gallery who write about politics and social and political commentators must remember that politics is a part of democracy and democracy is not cheap and it comes at a price. We must fund political participation in democracy either by means of private donations or through public funding. There cannot be an opt-out clause - it is either one or the other, so there is a consequence to whatever we do. That is why it is important to cast our minds across the Atlantic Ocean to America and look at the inordinate and absurd amounts of money being spent in the US primary elections, as well as the amount being gathered both by President Obama and former Governor Romney in pursuit of the office of President. Even the amount of money being spent on congressional elections by both Democrats and Republicans is ridiculous.

We should have a real debate about what it means to fund democracy in our country. We cannot just be silent participants. Democracy comes at a cost and that is the way it should be. We either opt for one or the other, but we must make a decision.

I am sorry that the Minister, Deputy Hogan, has left the Chamber. I want to make it clear to the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, however, that under no circumstances can we allow politics to become the preserve of a chosen few. We cannot allow those who have money to be the few who go forward for election. The peann luaidhe, ballot paper and the ability to run must never be lost on the ordinary citizen. Every person must be able to run for election if they so wish; we cannot allow a chosen few to run this country. That is why this Bill, no matter how flawed or imperfect it may be, is an attempt to change the system where influence is continuing.

I agree with Deputy Kirk that we must have a wider debate about politics and democracy. If the amount of money one has is the benchmark for going forward then our democracy will be the poorer. Deputy Timmins is correct in saying that we should examine the amount of money being spent between elections. Senator Paul Bradford gave a fine speech in Seanad Éireann a few months ago - I would ask all Members of the House to read it - about the interaction between politicians and the public.

I welcome the intent to limit political donations and the influence of donors. The majority of us in the House are not governed by what we get or do not get, or by attempted influence. When I was a city councillor on Cork City Council I made up my own mind. I was not influenced by anybody else but chose what I thought was best for my community. That should be the reality for all of us.

If we want to remove political donations, however, then somebody must pay for democracy. The Minister wants to promote greater gender balance and inclusion through the legislation, which I welcome. As somebody who had a female colleague running as a candidate in the last general election, I know it is healthy to have competition. It poses the question as to how best we can get more men and women involved in politics. Is it by changing our electoral system to single seat constituencies or to a list system? Do we want our politicians to be catch-all people who do everything, or parliamentarians engaging in legislation and committee work? If we analysed what we do every day, we would find that a disproportionate amount of work is taken up with constituency matters, which is why people come to us.

The beauty of our system is that as elected politicians we can walk down the streets of our constituency and engage with the public, unlike other democracies where constituents never see a politician. In other jurisdictions, local politicians may not even live in their constituencies. They may go there once a month or on a weekend jaunt.

The regulation of donations is important and is to be welcomed. Equally, should we allow a Deputy to have a golf classic? If someone wants to donate to that event, should he or she be debarred from doing so? If I want to have a lunch to raise funds for the local Fine Gael party, should I be stopped from doing so if the donations are €100 or €200? Personally, I do not have a problem if a person wants to contribute to a candidate or a political party, but there must be a regulation to ensure that the person confirms they have contributed.

We should have full State funding of political parties. If I had my way, I would eliminate any corporate or private donations and make the State pay the price. In that way there would be full openness, transparency and complete honesty on behalf of the party that is being funded.

The trust between politicians and the people was breached not by many but by a few who must be made to pay the price. The actions of a few have denigrated politics. However, for all its flaws the system of politics in our country is a good one. As my mother used to say, "The ballot box is a great leveller. You know where you stand and who you are when people go in to cast their votes".

The Minister's policy objective is to be commended. He is trying to involve more women in politics and is also trying to limit the relationship between money and influence on political parties. That is the way it should be.

I hope the provisions of this Bill will encourage more women to get involved in politics. This poses the question, however, as to why fewer women than men are involved in politics. Deputy Kirk cited some statistics in that regard. We are 23rd in Europe as regards the number of women in parliament. Is the party political system wrong or is the selection process by party gate-keepers the problem? Is it the fact that we have a lob-sided calendar and schedule? Whatever the reason, the Minister's attempt at change is to be welcomed.

The political system is being reported on by the media who I believe should also be examined. In the Fr. Reynolds case, which was a fiasco, we have seen how RTE was left to go unchecked. Similarly, the reporting of politics must be objective and fair. I would question the intent, agenda and motivation of some periodicals.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.