Vol. 249 No. 5
asked the Minister for Justice if he has received complaints about the sale of raffle tickets on the public street; if so, what action he proposes to take; and if he will issue a warning as to the inadvisability of purchasing raffle tickets from strangers in the street.
43.
asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware that section 27 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1956 is being used by commercial interests to make profit for themselves by conducting lotteries on behalf of stated charities; if he will introduce amending legislation to prevent the section being used in that way; and if he will request the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána to make regulations or take other steps to ensure that the major portion of funds collected on raffles is actually conferred on the charities for whom the raffles are purported to be conducted.
44.
asked the Minister for Justice what steps are taken by the Garda to ensure that lotteries permitted under section 27 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1956, are conducted in such a manner that permit holders derive no personal profit, that subscriptions reach the beneficiaries on whose behalf raffles are stated to be run and that expenses of promotion are not so great as to prevent the major part of subscriptions being applied for the benefit of charity; and if he will make a statement in the matter.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 42 to 44 together.
First, on a point of clarification, I would point out that there is no legal requirement that a lottery conducted under section 27 of the 1956 Act, that is to say, an occasional lottery conducted under a permit from the Garda Síochána, must be run for the benefit of charity. The requirement that a lottery must be for the benefit of a charitable or philanthropic object applies only in relation to weekly or other periodical lotteries conducted under district court licence and, as far as those periodical lotteries are concerned, returns of receipts, expenses, et cetera, have to be made regularly to the gardaí.
Nevertheless, it is of course a fact that, while the law does not provide that an occasional lottery conducted under section 27 must be for a charitable purpose, many such lotteries are, or are held out to be, for such a purpose and it is also a fact that there is no effective check on the way the proceeds are disposed of. Rightly or wrongly, the Oireachtas decided, in passing the 1956 Act, that it was not necessary to establish any supervisory machinery in relation to occasional lotteries. The point was not overlooked.
As regards commercial interests, if what the Deputy has in mind is the running of a lottery by a commercial firm, through a nominee as permit-holder, in order to promote the sale of its products, I must again point out that this is not forbidden by the 1956 Act and the Deputy's suggestion that it should be is more a matter of rules of fair trading in the commercial world rather than the merits or demerits of lotteries as such. If, however, he means only to refer to professional promoters of lotteries, I must point out that such promoters were in business even before the 1956 Act became law and the Act clearly intended that they should be allowed to continue.
I am aware however — and this applies to periodical lotteries as well as to occasional ones — that the law does leave scope to organisers of lotteries to play on the sympathies of members of the public in order to induce them to subscribe for the benefit of charity when the organisers' main or only concern may be what they themselves get out of it. As against that, I think I could be doing a serious injustice if I were to issue any kind of general warning which might have the effect of deterring people from assisting genuine charities and, on that point, I must emphasise that many reputable charities employ professional organisers who, though may be in the business only for what they themselves get out of it, nevertheless do their job very efficiently and with substantial benefit to the charities concerned.
To sum up the position, I am aware that there is scope at present for what I might call sharp practice not amounting to fraud but the difficulties of guarding against that are formidable unless the taxpayer is to be asked to maintain a very elaborate and costly supervisory machine which would enable accounts to be scrutinised in detail and the disposition of all moneys to be followed up. Furthermore, I am in no doubt that if we reached the stage of trying to lay down legal rules as to what should or should not be permissible, there would be wide differences of opinion even amongst genuinely charitable organisations. At the moment, therefore, all I can say is that I am very conscious of the problem and am examining it but I see no immediate or easy solution.
Do I understand the Minister to say that while he is aware the problem may exist he is not prepared at the present stage to introduce immediate legislation?
The most effect from of remedial legislation would be to compel all promoters of occasional lotteries to furnish full accounts. To do that would create a great deal of difficulty for perfectly genuine lotteries and would entail the employment of a large number of people by the State to check the accounts. I am loathe to put the vast bulk of charities in that difficult position and to saddle the taxpayer with the expense of maintaining the machinery which would be necessary.
I think the Minister is making it much more complicated than it need be. Is the Minister aware that in recent years, in the past two years or so, a number of firms have moved in on Ireland to run raffles in the name of charity with an income per raffle of anything up to £20,000 which confer benefits on charity of £1,000 or less, the balance going on promotion and on profits to the operators? Does the Minister think it appropriate that Ireland, because of a weakness in the 1956 Act, should be the only mug in Europe which facilitates this?
I cannot accept the Deputy's statement. I have a good deal of detail about the activities of the sort of people to whom he refers. Complaints were made with regard to the activities of a number of firms but only one of those had any foreign connections. There was an alien involved in the running of that firm. I had the alien informed that if he wished to continue to reside in this country he would have to give up that activity and I understand that the possibility of deporting that alien is very current at the moment. Any firm or group which have come to the notice of the Garda, by way of complaint or otherwise, have been purely Irish. Therefore, the Deputy's statement that foreign commercial firms are coming in to do this is not correct.
Am I to understand that the Minister is distinguishing between wrong committed by a foreigner and wrong committed by an Irish firm? Is it not equally wrong that people should be misled into subscribing to something in the name of charity when 75 per cent of the proceeds, or more, is going into the pockets of enterprising people who are operating a racket in the name of charity? Is there not a perfectly simple remedy?
There have been a number of prosecutions. As I have said, there are difficulties. The Deputy has exaggerated the problem. Although I do not deny that a number of groups have carried on in a way I do not wish to see them carrying on, the vast bulk of lotteries are run by decent people for charity.
Hear, hear.
I think it is overreacting to put all those genuine charities into the difficulties I have mentioned just because there are a handful of people who may engage in sharp practice.
Is the Minister aware that a permit is not necessary even for a person to carry out door-to-door collections of money?
I do not think that is so. A permit is necessary either from the District Court or from the local superintendent in order to collect money.
Is the Minister aware that any individual can go from door to door to collect money without any permission from any State authority?
I do not think that is the law.
That is so.
