David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 6, lines 39 and 40, to delete “ or to an independent member”.

It is all part of the same argument about statement of expenditure. I wanted to exclude the Independent Members from preparing a statement of any expenditure from the allowance to be paid to the parliamentary leader or to the Independent Member, as the case may be. How much more work are we supposed to do? I refer to the conditions of employment. I lack the capacity for forward vision which Senator Walsh has - his gift of prophecy or clairvoyance. I have no idea what the Minister's father, as a trade unionist, would think and I thought that was a rather extraneous remark. As someone who is a member of three trade unions, the conditions of work in this place are becoming abominable. We are not trusted with anything. We have to sign in. I have had my full complement several months ago, at the beginning of June. We are monitored and watched in this silly sort of way and in addition, we have to keep all these records and submit statements. I just do not have the time. I am doing the work I was supposed to do under the Constitution. Do I have to hire an accountant? What happens if I make a mistake? Do I get into some kind of a difficulty?

I wish to delete the reference in the Bill to where an Independent Member in receipt of an allowance or portion thereof under section 10, dies, that his or her personal representative should prepare or cause to be prepared a statement of any expenditure from the allowance as soon as may be, but not later than 120 days after the end of the financial year in which the allowance has been paid. I think that is daft. For God's sake, could they not be allowed to keep the few days extra? The Minister will be waiting a long time before he gets people making these returns. A relative of my grandfather's was a knight of St. Patrick and he died in 1937. The British Crown demanded return of all the regalia. It took them three years to find the regalia because he had different places of residence. They found a bit in Granston, a bit down in Doneraile and a bit in a house in London. Eventually they sent them all back.

This provision is more pettifogging. I refer to the provision about keeping records for not fewer than six years. In my view this is an onerous provision. I would like to see people in Parliament being treated with respect. I have always tried to behave honourably. I have never swizzled or cheated or inflated accounts. This year I will probably be able to produce accounts for expenses that will show I will have spent a lot more than I looked for. We are allowed €12,000 unvouched expenses and I have put down €3,000 because I was afraid that I would over-claim and then the newspapers - which are such friends of mine - would say that Norris stole this money from the Exchequer. I do not agree with the provision to have to keep this stuff for six years. I have already lost a computer; I do not know where it is but they are hunting for it. I never used it. I have no use for old receipts either.

I would like to be treated with respect. I know there is a growing lack of respect. I am still a member of the Common Room and I am sure my colleague, Professor Barrett, is also a member. In the old days, they had a book into which members wrote the expenses for their visitors' drinks. I began to think I was an alcoholic because I had a whole series of pages because I was always bringing people in for dinner and to talk with them. We would have a glass of Madeira wine, for example. Then I discovered it was not that I was an alcoholic, it was because my colleagues were stealing entire bottles of gin or brandy and not writing it in the book.