I move:
That Seanad Éireann approves the Electoral Act, 1997 (Section 33) Order, 1999 and the European Parliament Election (Reimbursement of Expenses) Regulations, 1999 copies of which, in draft, were laid before Seanad Éireann on 24 February, 1999.
Reimbursement of Election Expenses: Motion.
The draft order and draft regulations were laid before the House on 24 February 1999 in accordance with section 33(3) of the Electoral Act, 1997, in the case of the draft order and section 21(3) of the same Act in the case of the draft regulations. The Act provides that, where an order or regulations are proposed to be made, a draft of each shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas and the order or regulations shall not be made until resolutions approving the drafts have been passed by each House. A resolution approving the drafts was passed by Dáil Éireann on 31 March 1999 and I am pleased to bring the draft order and the draft regulations before Senators today.
In relation to the limitation of European election expenses, section 33 of the Electoral Act, 1997, as amended by the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 1998, provides that the aggregate of election expenses which may be incurred by or on behalf of a candidate in connection with his or her candidature at a European election shall not exceed the relevant amount specified for the constituency by the Minister by order. Section 33 of the 1997 Act commenced on 1 January 1998 but it requires the draft order to be agreed by both Houses of the Oireachtas before it is operative.
Before deciding the amount to be specified, a number of possible scenarios for determining an expenditure limit were examined. Regard was had to the amounts included in the Electoral Bill, 1994, when it was published. These provisions were subsequently omitted at Committee Stage at the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs in March and April of 1997. The amounts then specified would have provided the following expenditure limits per candidate if the political party expenditure was divided equally among its candidates in a constituency: in a three seater, £210,000 for one candidate, £135,000 per candidate if there were two candidates and £100,000 per candidate if there were three candidates; in a four seater, £230,000 for one candidate, £155,000 per candidate if there were two candidates and £130,000 per candidate if there were three candidates.
Two other methods were examined before a decision on the amount to be specified was taken. In the first, the population ratio between Dáil and European constituencies was applied to the expenditure limits set for Dáil elections in the Electoral Act, 1997. The results, based on a mathematical correlation, were for a three seater, £142,660 and for a four seater, £191,420. An alternative calculation based on the number of Dáil constituencies in each European Parliament con stituency resulted in expenditure limits per candidate of £139,000 for a three seater and £188,000 for a four seater. The foregoing analysis suggested the following range of possible expenditure limits for one candidate in a three seater, between £139,000 and £210,000, and in a four seater, between £188,000 and £230,000.
The draft order before the House proposes that the limit for election expenditure by candidates in the European elections in 1999 should be £150,000 per candidate in each constituency. It is not proposed to set different amounts for the three seat and four seat constituencies. As Senators are aware the Munster, Leinster and Dublin constituencies have four members each while Connacht-Ulster has three members. The £150,000 is inclusive of a candidate's political party expenditure.
Under the Electoral Act, 1997, a political party which authenticates a candidate must appoint a national agent and each candidate must appoint an election agent. The national agent and the election agent will be responsible for furnishing an election expenses statement after the election to the Public Offices Commission. It will be a matter for these officials to ensure that any expenditure relating to the European election which is incurred in connection with the local election being held on the same day is accounted for by them. Any other party official, branch or candidate at a local election will have to inform the national agent and/or the election agent at the European election of their intention to incur expenditure in connection with the European election and obtain the agent's authority.
It is an offence under the Electoral Act, 1997, for any person to incur election expenses or make a payment, advance or deposit in respect of such expenses at a European election on behalf of a political party or candidate without the authorisation of either the national agent or election agent.
There is no reason that there should be problems in accounting for expenditure at the European or local elections, but there will no doubt be extra administrative work in keeping records, etc. The following persons in particular will have responsibilities at the elections: the national agent for a political party at the European election; the election agent for a candidate at the European election; the national agent of a political party at the local election; the designated person of a political party at the local election for a local electoral area and the candidate at the local election.
It will be the responsibility of these persons to keep records in order to furnish election expenses statements, including statutory declarations that the statements are to the best of the person's knowledge and belief correct in every material respect and that he or she has taken all reasonable action in order to be satisfied as to the accuracy of the statements.
In relation to election expenditure, the definition of election expenses at the European election will be the same as at a Dáil election. The period for the purpose of disclosing expenditure will be the period between the date of the Minister's polling day order, which will be made not later than 7 May, and polling day. In addition, any election expenditure incurred before the polling day order for use during the election period must be disclosed in the election expenses statement to the Public Offices Commission which has recently issued guidelines on the European Parliament election for political parties and candidates.
Turning to reimbursement of expenses, section 21 of the Electoral Act, 1997, as amended by the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 1998, provides that the Minister may make regulations providing for the reimbursement of election expenses of candidates at a European election and may make provisions corresponding to the provisions relating to the reimbursement of election expenses of candidates at a Dáil election, subject to any modification appearing to the Minister to be appropriate. The 1997 Act provides for the reimbursement of a candidate's actual election expenses for a Dáil election up to a maximum of £5,000, if a candidate's votes exceed one quarter of the quota.
In deciding on the maximum amount to be reimbursed, regard was had to the ratio of recoupment to expenditure limits set for a Dáil election. These ratios are 36 per cent, 29 per cent and 25 per cent for a three, four or five seat constituency. The draft regulations propose that the maximum amount to be reimbursed at the European election is £30,000 or 20 per cent of the expenditure limit. The cost, based on the number of candidates who exceeded one quarter of the quota at the 1994 European election, will be approximately £1 million.
I commend the draft order and draft regulations to the House.
I welcome the Minister to the House. As my colleague from Galway, he is more than doubly welcome. I listened to the Minister's statement today and I have read the Dáil debate on this issue. This legislation is fairly innocuous. They are arbitrary figures that seem to have been pulled from the air. I have asked people who have been involved in European elections what their expenditure was and nobody could tell me exactly how much. I doubt it would amount to £150,000. I looked at the original figures provided by the Minister regarding a three seat constituency and I cannot see the basis for the decision made. I can see the link between the two first sets of statistics and the compromise figure he came up with but I cannot figure out the basis on which it is founded.
I have also spoken to some of the agents involved with candidates in European elections and they seem satisfied with these regulations as they are not excessive. However they pointed out – and this was stated in the Dáil and will be stated again today – that the decision regarding the capping of expenditure on European elections and the proposed capping of expenditure on Dáil elections does not gel very well with what the Minister has said about not putting a cap on local election expenditure. When the Minister can cap European election expenditure and propose to cap Dáil election expenditure, I fail to understand the reason the same could not have been done for local elections. Perhaps the Minister will respond to this. When the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey was in this House, nobody was satisfied with his reply on why there was no capping imposed on local elections.
The keeping of records is also interesting. No doubt there will be a great deal of accountancy involved in this. The list of those with responsibility for keeping records includes the national agent for a political party in European elections, the election agent for a candidate in a European election, the national agent for a political party in local elections, the designated person of a political party in local elections for a local electoral area and the candidate at local elections. They will fall over each other keeping records.
I do not see them keeping complete and accurate records because it is nearly impossible to decide what is a justifiable expenditure. For example, the local election candidates will have photographs and claims about what they have done, contributions they have made and what they will do in the future. However the European election candidates will be on the same card. Who carries the expenditure for that? Can the card be split into pieces and one part defined as being for the European elections and the other for local elections? How does one decide what is justifiable expenditure? I brought this matter up previously in regard to local elections. One could say that if someone who has already been elected as a councillor is canvassing for a local election, he has been canvassing since the last election. If he used an office for a clinic during that time, could the cost of the office be considered as expenditure for the election? The same applies here.
As I stated, the figures are arbitrary. I know the purpose behind the legislation is to introduce the concept of openness in elections. The events mentioned earlier which are taking place today regarding the tribunals have highlighted these needs, but I do not feel they are based on solid fact. Perhaps the Minister can tell me the basis for deciding on the figure of £150,000.
I too welcome the Minister to the House. As Senator Coogan stated, we recently had a debate on the local election donations legislation and obviously we discussed the issue of capping then. I do not fully concur with the comment that it is necessary to put a cap on local elections. The amounts spent are nominal in most cases. The 1997 Act must be complied with. It is part of our legislation and it allows for the Minister to set by ministerial order the limits of expenditure and/or reimbursement. It states that the aggregate of election expenses incurred on behalf of the candidate in connection with his or her candidature at European elections shall not exceed the relevant amount specified for the constituency by the Minister.
On the figures mentioned by Senator Coogan, it is interesting that when the Election Bill was introduced the political party contribution was £150,000 for each constituency and there were limits for the candidates. Depending on whether it had three, four or five seats that limit ranged from £60,000 to £100,000 each. Amendments on Committee Stage omitted the expenditure limits and they are now being introduced by ministerial order. They are in line with the contents of the Bill when published.
It is also interesting to consider the correlation with the Dáil. There is a mathematical correlation based on the population for Dáil and European elections. Expenditure limits per candidate for the European election would have been £142,000 in a three seater and £191,000 in a four seater. The limits being set here are well within those parameters. The question of whether there should be capping is a moot point but not germane to today's debate. We have to approve the order to comply with the Act.
The recoupment is set at a maximum of £30,000 which represents 20 per cent of the limit. Candidates who do not spend in excess of £30,000 will probably recoup their full expenditure. Hopefully that is an incentive for candidates of political parties to spend wisely. Much election expenditure is spent on press and television advertisements which are quite costly. I presume they constitute a significant proportion of the overall cost.
The Minister for the Environment and Local Government mentioned one of the difficulties in setting limits in relation to local elections and perhaps the Minister of State could comment on it. The difficulty is that there is no database to show precisely the level of expenditure incurred in the past. It did not have to be accounted for and would have been spent in many different ways. While people might know the amount spent by political parties, the overall figure would not be available. The legislation will provide the information deficit in this regard when the returns are made following the European elections.
The Minister has outlined clearly the background to the regulations and the reasons for it.
Mr. Ryan
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire – is minic a bhíonn sé anseo. Tá sé de nós aige i gcónaí éisteacht linn agus a bheith dearfach faoi gach rud a dhéantar sa Teach seo.
I am surprised the Minister of State did not repeat what I understood to be Government policy, that is, the intention to abolish capping of election expenditure. In an off-the-cuff remark, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government said during the debate on the Local Elections (Disclosure of Donations and Expenditure) Bill that this was his intention. I did not take part in the debate but I know from colleagues that when pushed the Minister said that he intended to abolish expenditure caps for Euro pean and Dáil elections in the next Bill. I would like to know if this is Government policy or was the Minister being provocative?
This is an important issue. I believe in capping expenditure. This is probably most necessary in the area where it is not being capped. The smaller the number of votes needed in order to achieve one's electoral objective, the greater the degree to which money can be used to influence opinion and outcome, because money can be concentrated in a small area.
I have personal experience of the extraordinary amounts of money people spend. During the last Seanad elections a candidate who was unsuccessful spent as much on advertising in The Examiner as I spent on the entire election. This person spent approximately £6,000 or £7,000 on colour advertisements on the front page of the newspaper, which was approximately the cost of my entire election campaign. However, I am not sure this made much difference to the candidate.
I am surprised to hear people being concerned about keeping records. We prescribe the most elaborate record-keeping for charitable organisations because of the fact that they are either in receipt of public money or money the public gives them voluntarily for a specific purpose. Political parties are in precisely the same situation, they are either in receipt of public money or money the public gives them for a particular purpose. The public is entitled to know that money given is used for the purposes for which it is given. Uncertainty about expenditure is a bad example and, therefore, I would not be too worried about record-keeping.
However, I am concerned about how we decide what is spent on European and local elections. A Fianna Fáil Deputy who lives in my area has said publicly that he expects to spend approximately £6,000 on the local elections. This is not fair to other Fianna Fáil candidates who are not as affluent as this gentleman. I refer to the Deputy because he mentioned the figure. It is unfair that others in the same ward in one city should have to match that level of expenditure. This is why the absence of a cap on local elections expenditure is a peculiar exception and contrary to the spirit of what has been happening in politics generally in recent years. I am concerned that this may be the beginning of a fundamental change in thinking.
I agree with Senator Coogan that the figures seem enormous. However, having been a minnow in the pond of the Cork by-elections in November 1994, when the entire resources of the two biggest political parties in the State were thrown at it, I could see how small my expenditure of £6,000 was by comparison with what the two political parties were spending. I have no doubt that the sums Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael spent on those by-elections were of the magnitude of the cap which is now proposed for the European elections. I am sure expenditure for both parties exceeded £100,000.
The question is whether it gives the return.
Mr. Ryan
It is easy to spend a lot of money on elections. I am surprised that the political parties, who are extremely professional, have not done a cost benefit analysis of the expenditure. I suggest to the Minister that he would save the country and political parties a lot of money, and benefit the environment, if he were to ban completely election posters instead of the three week restriction. This is not enforced because my city is already festooned with posters. I was of the opinion that there was a time limit on when posters could be put up as well as when they should be taken down. This could be done by amending the Litter Act and deleting the exception made for party political posters. I do not think these posters impress the public. A Fine Gael candidate in the last general election decided not to use posters and I do not think this did her campaign any harm. This would also be of environmental benefit because these posters are a waste of valuable resources.
I support the regulations. However, I would ask the Minister to clarify whether it is Government policy to abolish caps on election expenditure.
Táim buíoch de na Seanadóirí as ucht lántacaíocht a thabhairt do na moltaí atá os comhair an Tí ar maidin.
Senator Coogan asked why there was no cap on local election expenses. As the Senator knows, this matter was debated extensively in this House during the passage of the Local Elections (Disclosure of Donations and Expenditure) Bill, 1999. It was also debated extensively in the Lower House this week during the Second Stage debate. I do not think I should reopen that debate here.
The Senator commented on the difficulty of meeting the requirements in relation to reporting on expenditure for European elections and extracting local elections expenditure from these figures. Deciding what the cap should be on expenditure for local elections would cause some difficulty given that approximately 3,400 candidates will be going forward for election on different sides of constituencies and electoral areas. The complexity of this in terms of reporting would be massive. This matter has been debated here already and the House has made a decision.
In reply to Senator Ryan, I am not aware of a Government decision on future capping of election expenditure. I am aware only of the decision to bring these proposals before this House. That is the position at present. However, this does not mean that these decisions cannot be changed by a future Government or at some future time by this Government.
Táim buíoch den tacaíocht a tugadh don Bhille agus do na Rialacha atá á leagan síos le haghaidh Toghcháin don Eoraip.
Question put and agreed to.