Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

This is not some kind of a performative routine from Opposition parties that have decided that we do not like this and we will ritually condemn it because it happens to be an amendment from a Government party and that is what we do. I am genuinely horrified that a measure such as this has been proposed at the last minute, without having been properly signalled to the Dáil, and without it having had the opportunity to properly interrogate and ventilate all of the issues that arose here over the past few weeks.

I will give a potted history of this. We had Second Stage a number of months ago, when there was no reference whatsoever to this proposition. We had Committee Stage in the Select Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage just two short weeks ago. We all spent an extensive period of time in the committee rooms debating what is very necessary legislation that will improve our democracy and help run our elections independently of Government - a demand we have all had over the past 25 to 30 years.

We learned at the weekend, because of a press statement from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, that the Cabinet agreed to sign off on this measure on 24 May. We had an explanation of sorts from the Department that it took a little while to draft the amendment and that is why it did not appear before us on Committee Stage. It is not a complicated amendment but it is a controversial one. It is controversial for all of the right reasons, for anybody who believes in transparency or political reform.

Our track record shows that the Labour Party believes in transparency and political reform as do I. We took big money out of politics in 2015. There is no demand for this. It is a retrograde, backward step and it could potentially herald the return of big money into politics through the back door. We know about the toxic, corrupting, poisonous influence that big money has had on politics and on faith and trust in democracy in this country going back many years. That is why the reforms restricting corporate donations were introduced back in 2015.

I see the problems associated with this. How will we be sure beyond all doubt that moneys raised through these kinds of lotteries are coming through the system legitimately? An organisation could have every capability to exceed the corporate donation limits by signing off on a number of tickets under different names in order to make a contribution to a political party and thereby circumvent the very transparent and rigid rules that are in place at present and have served our democracy well.

The Taoiseach referred yesterday, in response a point I raised on the Order of Business on this very issue, to my party, the Labour Party, having benefitted from democratic resources from our sisters and brothers in the trade union movement since our foundation. The party was founded by the trade union movement. We were legitimately receiving support through SIPTU and other trade unions, but we decided that if serious corporate donations were to be eliminated in this country, we would have to stand up and say that included support from trade unions as well. We took that hit and we did that for the benefit of transparency and political reform.

The truth is that the only demand here was because the Fianna Fáil Party was rumbled in its efforts to operate a lottery, through a licence that it obtained through the court system in recent times. I believe Fianna Fáil feared that the last decision would be judicially reviewed and it would have a series of other problems on that front. This amendment is designed to get one particular political party off the hook and allow it to compete in what I would describe as a financial arms race with other parties that it describes as wealthier than it.

Rather than doing that, we should ensure that we continue to have a level playing pitch apply to all political parties in this country. This measure is a bad day for transparency and political reform in this democracy. It is disappointing that it is coming before us. One of the most interesting emails I received on this issue over the past few days was from a high-profile NGO. I know Deputies Ó Broin and O'Callaghan have received it and perhaps other members of the Select Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage have also received it. It relates to our collective and individual efforts over the past few years to try to ensure that the funding laws for NGOs that are caught up, inadvertently, in the legislation that we have in place are amended in order to allow them to play the full role and participate in this democratic society in the way that they should. There have been soundings from the Department and indications from the Minister that they acknowledge that this is a problem and that it could be resolved. However, it has not been resolved and no efforts have been made to reach out to me, Deputy Ó Broin or Deputy O'Callaghan, who have proposed amendments to fix this long-running sore in our democracy. No efforts have been made to do that. This has not been prioritised.

As that email said, it is very telling what this Government's priority is. This is an eleventh hour, last-minute amendment, which was not properly signalled to us. It is about enabling political parties to have a new way of raising money, while the long-standing issue of the treatment of donations to NGOs remains unresolved. That is revealing about the priorities of this Government and it saddens me to have to say so. We will vehemently oppose this measure. It is bad for democracy, for the financing of political parties and for openness.

See this speech in context