Rónán Mullen (Independent)

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Seanadóir Doherty as ucht a chuid ama a roinnt liom. I compliment the Labour Party on tabling this motion. I agree with speakers who said there was no need to table an amending motion. There is nothing contentious in the motion, nor is there an attempt to play the blame game. We should have approached this on a cross-party basis.

Jokes are going around about oxymorons, one of which was the concept of military intelligence. Independent Newspapers has been offered as a possible oxymoron on another occasion. It would be a terrible shame if transparency in government, in public policy or in lobbying was seen as an oxymoron.

I take as my starting point the lack of confidence to which the Labour Party adverts in its motion. It has been well said that trust takes a long time to build up and an instant to lose. We can see a collapse in confidence but also a collapse in trust that had been building up over many years vis-À-vis many institutions that were seen to let the public and individuals down. Most recently, it is business and banking. The collapse in trust is detrimental to our society. It is in all our interests to try to restore confidence and do what we can as different players in public life to restore confidence in the institutions and people that serve the public.

We need a renewal of the debate on integrity, morality and the concept of virtue. For too long we have been ashamed of having a discussion on morality, as if some thought such a discussion required people to go back to an authoritarian past, when people were not allowed to think for themselves. It is sad to see what is almost an allergy to a proper, searching, thorough debate on the principles of morality, integrity and virtue.

In the business scandals, the economic crisis and the crisis in banking, we see a crisis of virtue more than a crisis of regulation. People focussed on meeting narrow interests such as the interests of shareholders, where they were under pressure to reach short-term goals of profit. To meet those goals they put self-interest front and centre and disregarded other issues that personal integrity would require them to consider. I refer to moderation in their dealing, self-control and respect for those who worked beneath them. Those above put pressure on those below to achieve certain results. They failed to apply the standard expected and failed to recognise their responsibility, particularly those in positions of leadership, and compromised the integrity of those acting beneath them in the chain.

The crisis of virtue calls for a reflective response rather than playing the blame game or scoring points off each other. The media has a particular role to play. Elements of the media are feeding a scepticism about business and politics and, while it may be deserved, when this veers into cynicism it is damaging to society. We need a more thoroughgoing journalism that is willing to lead the search for answers. As Aristotle said, politics is about free people reflecting on how they should order their lives. How little we get of that genuine, searching debate and how much we get of point scoring. Today the media has gone off at the deep end about something that should not have happened, namely that the Seanad did not sit yesterday while some people were off playing golf - not myself I hasten to stress. Regardless of whether they should have been doing that or whether the Seanad should have been sitting, how predictable and Pavlovian of the media to rise to this and see it as yet another stick with which to beat politicians. The more contempt generated for politicians, the more contempt generated for politics itself and the more people's willingness to participate in their own democracy is undermined. We are all the victims when scepticism spills over into cynicism.

What is the response? It is to return to these principles of integrity, morality and virtue. We in politics need to set a standard in areas like how appointments to boards have been made. It must be the best person for the job rather than the person from the constituency looking for travel expenses.

In the way we raise money, it seems rather odd we have put together a legal apparatus which requires us to declare donations above a certain limit but we can collect a small fortune provided the donations are small enough, without having disclosure. This nonsense brings the regulatory system for donations into disrepute. We must be careful about the way we spend taxpayers' money in expenses on needless junkets etc. Until leadership comes from politics, scepticism will sadly spill into cynicism.

Perhaps it will be for another time, but with regard to lobbying I would like to reflect on the research of Professor Gary Murphy in DCU and others, including Raj Chari and John Hogan, in their brief analysis of the need to regulate lobbying and the different models of doing so in other countries. The salient point is that where there is regulation of lobbying systems, people are more likely to agree that such regulations help to ensure accountability in government, which is greatly desired.

The British chief rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, spoke about religion on occasion losing its way when it seeks power rather than influence. As we consider the role of lobbyists in our society, we should encourage a culture where lobbyists are free to seek influence provided they do so transparently. It is when they have access to power in a way that is not transparent that damage is done to the public culture and people become cynical about decisions.

As much as we need to introduce regulation around lobbying, we must never forget we cannot be embarrassed about the need to promote a culture of virtue. No amount of regulation will save us from problems unless there is a strong culture of civic virtue where people operate the golden rule and act out of respect not just for their own needs but that of others in the wider society.