Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will not take the full 20 minutes or anything near it. I forewarn the Minister that he will be summing up shortly.

I am delighted to speak on this legislation. I wish to elaborate on the point Deputy Terence Flanagan made about funding being used to prevent an individual getting elected. What he is talking about is that the money would be currently used to promote or support a potential candidate in the area at the moment.

I noted an opinion piece in The Irish Times written by the Houses of the Oireachtas head of communications in which he bemoaned the standing of politics and politicians and that no one understands us and the difficulties we have. I tweeted - I have become a practitioner in recent times - that it is difficult to expect the public to have respect for us when one half of us castigates the other for half the day and for the second half we change places and we point out the ills of the other side and vice versa. Then, when we leave the Chamber and the precincts of this House, we expect the public to love us. It does not work like that because we generally make good copy when we are tearing the heads off each other with the occasional derogatory comment.

Notwithstanding that, this legislation is a relatively simple Bill dealing with a 10% cut across the board and the removal of the ministerial severance pay. In principle, no one could argue against it and it is appropriate in current times. The issue of funding for political parties has caused considerable difficulty and grief. Notwithstanding that the general public do not have much interest in this type of legislation and do not like the basic concept of putting their hands into their pockets to pay for the political system, they probably prefer it to what has happened over recent decades in this country. I feel, however, that the legislation is unfair and may be unconstitutional. I do not want to elaborate too much on our own position. I know the Minister thrashed this out during the debate in the Seanad and while he initially seemed hostile towards it, he mellowed a bit as the debate went on. I am not sure, however, that he has mellowed sufficiently to accept an amendment on Committee Stage.

I am a strong advocate of party discipline and of the party Whip system, which is necessary in virtually everything except perhaps some of the social issues. I know many commentators have suggested that removing the respite grant or special educational needs provision might have been social issues. However, when dealing with the allocation of economic or material resources at that stage it is not an issue of conscience, but an issue of choice. Nobody wants to cut the respite grant, but we do not have it in this bucket of money. People talk about austerity. I hear commentators continually lamenting and berating the austerity policies. In defence of the Government - I was a Government party Member for most of the time of this Dáil - I do not accept that living €11 billion of €12 billion above the country's means represents austerity. In our households, if we lived at 10% or 20% above our income, we would not be calling it austerity; we might call it being a little bit irresponsible.

See this speech in context