A headline in today's Irish Independent reveals that "contractors gave 90pc of all FF donations",largely from gala fund raisers organised by some of the best known names in the Irish building industry.
And an Irish Independent probe reveals that more than one-third of all donations given to Fianna Fail in the past six years came from builders, developers and contractors. The party's close link with developers has come under scrutiny in recent weeks as part of the ongoing controversy over the system of donations to political parties.
This "probe" is based on information disclosed to the Standards in Public Office Commission and can be accessed from their website. But such declared donations are only a fraction of what the party will spend at the next election. So where has the rest of the war chest come from? Elaine Byrne of Limerick University, author of a forthcoming Irish study on behalf of Transparency International, argues in today's Irish Times that there are no provisions to account for the total annual finances of political representatives. A true picture of how political parties are funded would contain elements like Exchequer funding, donations above and below the disclosure limit, membership fees, national draws and other sources of fund-raising.
A limit of €6,349 now exists in what can be donated in any given year by the same donor. The total disclosed donations to all political parties and representatives over an eight year period amounted to just over €5 million. These figures are available on the Standards Commission website. Byrne points out the "obvious disparity, given that it is estimated that a total of €14.8 million will be spent by the three main parties in just one year at the next election". To illustrate her point, figures for the 2002 election are cited:
In the last election the Standards Commission accounted for election receipts totalling just over €8 million. The donations disclosed by political parties and individuals in that same year, 2002, amounted to just over €700,000. In the absence of publicly available audited accounts, where did the difference of €7.3 million came from? Not from Exchequer funding obtained under the Electoral Acts and the Party Leaders Allowance Act, because this legislation specifically prohibits the use of the funding to recoup expenses incurred at an election or a referendum. Neither does this legislation permit the promotion of a candidate prior to the election period.
There are some obvious ways around the rules on political campaign funding. The election expenditure limit only comes into play when the election date is officially announced, some three or so weeks prior to the election date. It is a huge weakness that the Standards Commission is not required under the legislation to monitor any expenditure incurred by those political parties campaigning and electioneering prior to this period. Political parties are on a "permanent campaign" basis so funds expended before the writ is officially moved can make an enormous difference. Byrne cites figures published by the Irish Times published after the last election that in the three months before the 2002 General Election writ was passed, Fianna Fáil had spent approximately €3.5 million.
There will be a lot more money sloshing about this time. According to Village magazine a few weeks ago Fianna Fáil is expected to spend €10 million and its nearest rival, Fine Gael, will manage about half that figure. The headline on the front cover was "The Buying of Election 2007". Political parties are the key institutions in our democracy and we should be entitled to have a fully audited statement of income and expenditure. Whatever papering over the cracks was agreed yesterday between FF and the PDs - vague promises about new laws covering the receiving of gifts - it will not remove the taint of corruption that is firmly embedded in people's perceptions about our democracy.
Some will argue for a move towards exclusive state funding for parties. I'm not sure about this but we need new rules about funding for individuals who want to become candidates for public office. On Saturday Garret Fitzgerald referred to the phenomena of candidates being allowed and encouraged by party bosses to run their own personal campaigns. There are no limits to election spending by candidates for local authorities, the usual starting place for Dáil aspirants. What's to stop local business interests taking a speculative punt on an up-and-coming candidate and effectively locking that person into financial dependency in return for unspecified favours sometime in the future? We know perfectly well that bribing of local politicians became a widespread practise in the 1980s and 1990s.
Comments