Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

As already stated, there are different views on this matter. I respect from where people are coming because everyone is trying to find the right balance.

To take the example of a person receiving a donation of €1,500 and using it in conjunction with other moneys he or she might be saving for political purposes, what he or she received would not then be for personal purposes only. In my opinion, that is how the commission would view the matter. The money in question must be for one's personal use. If one is enabled to use money one would not otherwise be in a position to use because it is destined to be used for political purposes, such money is then regarded as a political donation.

If one is involved in active politics, one is required to have a separate account into which political donations one receives should be placed. If one does not have such moneys in a separate account, one will be asked why that is the case. What Senator Cox is referring to would raise issues with the commission.

It has been said that one does not legislate for honesty. We are not in a position to turn someone of a malevolent disposition into a virtuous paragon of the community. What we are providing in this legislation is a code of conduct. It is a regulatory framework which people are expected to live up to by reason of the fact that they are in public office. We are indicating a threshold or circumstances where a commission set up under an Act of the Oireachtas would have to advise a person what he or she should or should not do in any given circumstances by reason of the amount being provided for his or her benefit by a third party in the form of a gift. If the gift to the officeholder is from a relative or friend, that officeholder must also obtain the advice of the commission. For the rest of us who, as Members of the Oireachtas or officeholders, receive gifts from third parties who are not relatives or friends, what is regarded as a gift that is declarable is set out in this amended legislation. That is where it is at.

Senator Finucane made one suggestion, while Senators Cox and Quinn have also made suggestions. The Government believes the proposals I am bringing forward strike the correct balance. Given the different considerations concerned, I do not pretend that mine is the font of wisdom compared with that of everyone else. It is the collective view of the Government that this is where the correct balance is struck. It is incumbent on us all to perform our duties conscientiously and within this regulatory framework in the interest of providing transparency and some reassurance to the wider public. The public entrusts to us these responsibilities not because it thinks everyone here is malevolent but because it thinks we can do the job and that we are the best available in this democracy to do so. We all get that vote of confidence and do the job. Given the political culture that now exists and the change that has occurred, we need to provide ourselves with a regulatory structure that meets the requirements of the situation, enables us to do our job effectively and enables the public to be satisfied that everything is done above board and that there are no issues of conflict that would debar us from doing that job conscientiously and well. That is what we are all trying to achieve in this legislation.

I explained on Second Stage why this has come about. There were no limits in these areas before. We are imposing limits now and I am also taking the opportunity to update thresholds which will serve us for the years ahead in respect of officeholders and non-officeholders in respect of gifts for personal use only for the purposes of ensuring that we can continue to do our job effectively and that the people can be reassured as to what we are doing in the first place.