Rather than banning corporate donations to parties as the Greens want, a review and consolidation of existing laws would be better, suggests Elaine Byrne
The Green Party has cited the banning of corporate donations as a potential deal-maker in any negotiations for a programme for government.
Likewise, in the 1992 negotiations the introduction of ethics legislation was a precondition for the Labour Party. This occurred in the context of a series of high-profile scandals. Among these were: the allocation of a licence to Century Radio; the privatisation of Irish Sugar; the sale of land involving Telecom Éireann; the beef tribunal; issues surrounding Celtic Helicopters; the provision of passports to foreign nationals; and allegations of bribery within the planning process.
The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 was a new departure for Irish anti-corruption legislation. Since then, some 30 pieces of legislation focusing on corruption have been initiated.
The range of separate provisions concerning aspects of political finance may complicate the task of those responsible for enforcing this legislation. Moreover, this substantive network of legislative provisions may also complicate any understanding or awareness by the public of what the existing legislative framework on political funding actually entails.
The frequency with which new laws regarding money in politics are introduced is perhaps itself an indication of the problems of making workable laws. The quantity and degree of legislation implemented since 1995 now warrants a review of the existing legislation.
The political reform proposals of the Green Party, issued again in their May 20th press release, is a far-reaching attempt to address some of the shortcomings within the ethics framework. However, their commitment concerning corporate donations may not be entirely sound.
Under the current disclosure limits, political parties are obliged to disclose donations over €5,079. A limit of €6,349 exists in what can be donated in any given year by the same donor.
What is the difference between an individual or a corporation donating €6,348.99 to a political party? If the motivation to donate is to seek influence, does a donation from an individual not also induce the same advantage as that of a corporation?
The issue of corporate donations has become an emotive one of late, but perhaps its divisive nature obscures other more pertinent issues. There are shortcomings within the present legislative framework on political funding, other than the issue of corporate donations.
The Green Party's reform proposals to regulate expenditure between election campaigns are perhaps more meritorious. For example, election expenditure limit only comes into play when the election date is officially announced, some three or so weeks prior to the election date. The Standards in Public Office Commission is not required under the legislation to monitor any expenditure incurred by those political parties campaigning and electioneering prior to this period.
A robust case exists for limiting the amount of money spent between elections at both local and national level. An accountable limit on spending during and between elections is warranted.
There are no provisions to account for the total annual finances of political representatives or political parties. The donations disclosed by political parties and individuals in the 2002 election year amounted to just over €700,000 while the standards commission accounted for election receipts in that same year at just over €8 million. An obvious disparity exists where €7.3 million in donations was not disclosed because they were under the disclosure threshold.
In recent years the price tag of a general election has significantly increased. Elections now place greater emphasis on media advertising, professional image making, opinion polls, focus groups and so forth.
Anecdotal evidence suggests enormous personal spending from candidates' personal resources. Indeed a candidate at the 2004 local election has acknowledged that he spent €45,000 personally on his campaign. This has consequently necessitated greater donations and fund raising drives.
Figures from the standards commission website demonstrate that political representatives (TDs, Senators and MEPs) rather than political parties were the main benefactors of donations in the 2002 election year.
The total disclosure of donations by political parties in 2002 was €255,350 while the total disclosure of donations by political representatives was almost double this figure at €478,108. Indications are that this disparity will be even more obvious when the commission releases the 2007 register of donations.
Under the current disclosure limits, political parties are not obliged to disclose donations under €5,079 while TDs, Senators, MEPs and candidates at Dáil, Seanad and European Parliament elections are not obliged to disclose donations under €635. Although donations to political parties are pitched at a higher threshold, representatives attract significantly more donations.
It is evidently more attractive to donate to political representatives than political parties.
The nature of politics in Ireland has traditionally been more local than national in its orientation. The character of Irish politics has traditionally focused on local constituency matters rather than national concerns. Donations to local political representatives rather than parties may be a reflection of this.
Like the commendable ethics initiatives of 1992, the Green Party now has an opportunity to use negotiations to introduce further pioneering ethics initiatives.
Do we need more legislation? Should the existing legislation be first reviewed and consolidated?
Elaine Byrne is an intern at the United Nations anti-corruption unit. She is the lead researcher on the forthcoming Transparency International, National Integrity System Country study on Ireland