Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Approximately five years ago I was asked to become president of Eurocommerce, which represents both the retail and wholesale trades throughout Europe. Eurocommerce is based in Brussels and at the time I was not quite sure what I was getting myself into. My wife pointed out that I would only be obliged to attend 12 meetings a year and I then discovered that each of the subsidiary organisations in the 27 member states expected the president to address their annual conventions. This meant I would be obliged to visit places such as Estonia, Greece and Portugal. Eurocommerce is a very good organisation which represents the views of retailers and wholesalers. There are other bodies which represent farmers and producers and one can see why there is a need for organisations such as Eurocommerce.

It was not until I read the motion tabled by the Independent Senators that I realised that there are significant outstanding issues in respect of lobbyists. In that context, we are currently debating the future of the Seanad. If the House were abolished, there would be less oversight and this could exacerbate the problems relating to lobbyists. Mr. John Devitt of Transparency International has said of our political system, "Other forms of abuse are possible because of the weak or non-existent regulation of lobbyists, the concentration of political power in the hands of government ministers and weak oversight by the Oireachtas ... the planning and public contracting system still creates incentives for bribery".

We have to act upon the covert links between business and Government and introduce transparency in lobbying and fundraising. All of this can be done very simply online and I will outline an example of it presently. We should extend this approach to all levels of society and put public spending online in an accessible fashion. I raised this issue previously and I have said on several occasions that I am unsure why the Government is not doing more on lobbying and increasing transparency through putting all public spending online in an easily accessible way for every citizen to examine. This is done in America and it should be easy to do it here. We should look to the example of other countries. In the United States businesses are obliged to reveal what policies they have been seeking to influence on behalf of which clients. We should include something along those lines in Ireland and this is a step towards that end.

I would be interested to hear the discussion on the position of former politicians. How should we deal with former politicians who end up, immediately after they leave these Houses, working for lobbying companies? Should the Oireachtas be more picky about who it allows in? In Australia, in general, lobbyists must organise a pass to get access to the federal Parliament and it must be signed by two parliamentarians. Should we look to there for example? Our current system is probably far too open.

While a register of lobbyists may seem like a good idea, how do we define what a lobbyist is? An hour ago I attended a very interesting talk by representatives from a disability group in the audiovisual room. I suppose what they were doing was lobbying and I found it very useful. We need to distinguish in some form or other between someone who is carrying out commercial lobbying and those like the representatives of the disability organisation, which was only established this year and which is seeking to influence Government decisions in future. Such work is to be supported and understandable.

Some weeks ago I introduced the Public Health (Availability of Defibrillators) Bill. Representatives from the Irish Heart Foundation saw it and came in to see me. I found the advice they were able to give most useful. They were lobbyists. It is almost a bad thing to say someone is a lobbyist but there is certain lobbying that we must support and we should ensure that we do so. Do lobbyists include charities or youth groups who meet the local Deputy or Senator? Let us suppose a group is seeking to improve the environment in its area. It is not as straightforward as it first seems.

If there were a register, should there be fines and deadlines for not signing up to the register of lobbyists, for fundraising or for furnishing misleading statements? In the United Kingdom there was a recent proposal to introduce fines of up to £5,000 for missing deadlines and higher fines and a maximum two-year jail sentence for knowingly making misleading statements. That is a real method of countering unethical business-government relations. Should we consider following that lead?

Perhaps we are losing sight of the wider picture and putting too much blame on business interests. In the United Kingdom, research by the Hansard Society, a think tank, found that UK Members of Parliament are more amenable to being influenced by charities and interest groups than by businesses. However, as we all know, the interests of charities can result in negative consequences, just like those of businesses or trade unions. We must not always lump charities in with so-called good lobbying as opposed to bad lobbying.

We need to take a hard look at the relationship between alcohol, tobacco and politics. In Australia, the Parliament of New South Wales recently passed legislation banning donations to political parties by the alcohol, gambling and tobacco industries. I am unsure whether any money is given by alcohol and tobacco companies to political parties in this country, but we need to make things clear. Could we, as politicians, send out such a strong message by introducing legislation to formally break the link between the tobacco industry and its lobbyists and the political system? That would be a positive step. I appreciate the motion before the House. It gets us talking and thinking but, above all, I hope we will get to act on it.