Amendments Nos. 111 and 114 are related to amendment No. 108 and all may be taken together by agreement.
SECTION 21.
I move amendment No. 108:
In page 17, lines 42 to 50 and in page 18, lines 1 to 3 to delete subsection (1) and substitute the following:
"(1)(a) Not later than the 31st day of January in every year, each person who, in the preceding year, was a member of either House of the Oireachtas or a representative in the European Parliament shall furnish to the Public Offices Commission a written statement, in the form directed by the said Commission, in respect of the preceding year indicating whether during that year the member or representative, as the case may be, received a donation exceeding in value the relevant amount specified in subsection (4) and stating in respect of each such donation (if any)—
(i) the value of the donation, and
(ii) the name, description and postal address of the person by or on whose behalf the donation was made.
(b) Not later than the 28th day of February in every year, each political party shall furnish to the Public Offices Commission a written statement, in the form directed by the said Commission, in respect of the preceding year indicating whether during that year the party received a donation exceeding in value the relevant amount specified in subsection (4) and stating in respect of each such donation (if any)—
(i) the value of the donation, and
(ii) the name, description and postal address of the person by or on whose behalf the donation was made.".
Section 21(1) provides that a statement must be furnished not later than 28 February in each year to the Public Offices Commission by a political party and Members of either House of the Oireachtas or the European Parliament in relation to donations in excess of the relevant specified amount received in the preceding year. In addition to disclosure by individual members and candidates of a political party, donations received by any such member or candidate will be deemed to be donations made to the party and must also be disclosed by the party where the donation in any year from the same source exceeds the £4,000 disclosure threshold for a party.
The section as drafted provides for the same deadline for furnishing a donation by a political party and by Members of the Oireachtas. Amendment No. 108 provides for different deadlines for furnishing the donations statement by Members of the Oireachtas and by political parties. Members of the Oireachtas will have to furnish the statement by 31 January each year, instead of 28 February. The deadline for parties will remain at 28 February as provided for in the Bill.
Members of the Oireachtas should be in a position to submit the statement by the earlier deadline of 31 January. They will be required to disclose donations received which exceed £500 in value. Provided proper records are kept during the year, preparation of the statement within the period allowed should not pose an insurmountable problem.
In the case of political parties, more time is likely to be needed to obtain information from each of its members in the Oireachtas and from individual members of the parties in branches, etc., the extent of donations received, the source of the donations and whether donations from the same source to several individuals within the party were received which, when aggregated, may exceed the disclosure threshold. The amendment will greatly assist political parties in preparing statements, as individual Deputies and Senators will have completed their statements four weeks before the parties disclosure deadline, thereby ensuring that the information regarding party members of the Oireachtas is at hand in good time. Amendments Nos. 111 and 114 are technical drafting amendments to make necessary changes in subsection (2) to cross references consequential on amendment No. 108.
Members of the House must make a declaration under the Ethics in Public Office Act, 1994. This Bill provides that we must make another declaration. Is that correct?
Yes.
How does one distinguish between a gift and a political donation? The Bill makes no provision for exemptions regarding families, whereas under the Ethics in Public Office Act, family members can give gifts.
I hope the Deputy can differentiate between moneys for political purposes as opposed to provision for other matters. The Ethics in Public Office Acts deals with other purposes as well as political purposes.
Many of the declarations required under that Act have nothing to do with politics.
That is my point. This provision would be in respect of political purposes.
Suppose I make a declaration under the Ethics in Public Office Act to the effect that somebody prints leaflets for me, for example, for my clinics. Is it the case that I would not have to declare this under that Act because I would be required to declare it under this provision?
The Deputy would have to continue to comply with the Ethics in Public Office Act, but this Bill requires him to specify the political purposes only. The same information may be given twice, but with regard to this Bill, it relates solely to expenditure for political purposes.
Will accountants and lawyers be made available to Deputies?
It may make us more efficient in keeping track of expenditure in connection with our political lives. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
I do not know how much politics has cost me, other than to say that it has cost me a great deal. I have never had a proper system of accounting.
I understood the Ethics in Public Office Act dealt with declarations by Members of the House, including the receipt of donations and gifts. I am surprised to find the same procedure must be repeated under this legislation, which I understood only to apply in elections. I am horrified at the amount of work a political party will have to undertake on an annual basis under the terms of this Bill.
There are 2,750 units in my party's organisation, which comprises approximately 500 councillors and almost 100 Members of the Oireachtas. This legislation will require the party to get information from all of these units, cross reference them and produce accounts at the end of the year. Given this, the annual deadline of 28 February for a party that size will be almost impossible to meet, on the assumption that accounts are made up to 31 December each year. Will the Minister of State reconsider this deadline and alter the date to the end of March or April?
Would the Deputy believe me if I said I would reconsider this?
Yes.
If it is the case that an additional month would help the large parties I will do my best to extend the deadline to the end of March.
While I was aware of the disclosure provision I understood it would be for each Member and the party at national level to make a declaration from their accounts and to account for the money they receive. However, the Minister indicated that parties will have to do as they have done in relation to the McCracken tribunal, that is seek information from each unit of the organisation. Perhaps I was naive but I understood it would be a matter for individual units of the organisation to make their own declarations directly and for the party to do so at national level. The practicalities involved are the problem.
As it is now 6 p.m., we will dispose of this section and adjourn. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I support Deputy Dempsey's comments. I must prepare self-employment accounts and it is difficult to collate all the information. Although it is necessary, it presents a difficulty. The provision means that every unit of an organisation must be examined. Some units of organisations will not like that but it will have to be done. There is duplication in this area. Deputies make a full disclosure under the Ethics in Public Office Act but must now comply with this measure annually. It should be centralised so that we make a disclosure to the central office of the party which should follow it through. Individuals should not have to make disclosures which will be duplicated because the party will take account of them in its disclosure. If a party must show proper accounting of all donations or money received, it must also take account of the donations received by individuals.
The section will triplicate work rather than codify and simplify this area, which should be the thrust of all legislation. Perhaps the section should be reconsidered in terms of whether the procedure could be simplified. Irrespective of the Minister's comments, this procedure is onerous. It is difficult for people to keep on top of everything. My party will contest only one seat in my area but some parties will have to fight for two or three seats in a constituency. The branch treasurers will have to know things inside out and there will be a huge number of telephone calls. If somebody gives a Deputy £20, he or she will have to ring the treasurer of their branch who will take note of it.
Perhaps I do not properly understand the legislation but I am concerned about this area. I do not receive much money but that is not the point. Great problems will be created for organisations. It is difficult to get people to take up positions in organisations, but it will be even more difficult if they are told there are rules which must be obeyed and they must telephone councillors to find out if they received donations and other such matters. In addition, the annual collection must be put into shape. I ask the Minister to streamline this section to unify the procedures. If a party or an individual Deputy presents a donation statement, that should be the end of it. My view is that the party should present it. For example, I would tell the general secretary of my party that I received £600 in donations, comprising £10 and £20 contributions and one anonymous donation of over £100 and another of over £500, and that would be it. I favour the principle of the provision but it should be simplified. It is unduly cumbersome as it stands.
This is not a new provision. It should be helpful for political parties which must make a declaration on donations in excess of £4,000, particularly if the timeframe is adjusted to allow for a longer gap between the time the elected Members make their statements and the political parties make theirs. This should feed in information which will assist political parties rather than the other way round.
The point is not that public representatives must make the declarations under the Ethics in Public Office Act. Deputy Penrose put his finger on it; it is getting information. That may not be of concern to the Minister but the provisions of the Bill will mean that my party must be totally reorganised.
That is in nobody's interest.
It will be leaner and meaner so it will be in our interest. It will be a help to us.
It is irrelevant whether I am a member of a big or a small party. This provision was in the Bill from the start. People must realise provision is being made to ensure accountability and transparency on a reasonable basis. That requires us all to be more efficient and to keep on top of matters irrespective of the size of our party.
If the provision was included initially, why was the amendment tabled?
The amendment relates to the timing.
Does it mean Deputies will have to make two declarations, stating the same things?
They will not state the same things. The Ethics in Public Office Act has a wider remit in terms of gifts that are not used for political purposes and which may not have a bearing on the requirements of this Bill.
I do not object to it but another point is that anything a Deputy receives in the preceding year must be declared the following year although they may have been private citizens for part of the year.
Perhaps we should adjourn the debate and consider this section later. I want to reconsider it.
It is not a new provision.
It is new in terms of how the Minister explained it.
The amendment relates to the dates.
I understand that. However, as I admitted earlier, I did not know it was intended that political parties at a national level must trawl the country and contact local treasurers to produce a document about the amounts of money received. I understood that if a local branch of a party received a donation it would make whatever declaration was necessary within the timeframe, directly to the Public Offices Commission. I understood the party at national level would account for donations it received at that level. Placing an obligation on national party headquarters to get information from every unit is a recipe for disaster.
It is very difficult. Many country units meet very infrequently.
It is not a new provision.
We cannot finalise this matter so the committee will adjourn now and resume at 9.30 a.m. tomorrow. In addition, the committee must deal with the budget process and selection a consultant. I propose the committee discusses that at some stage during the debate tomorrow. I just received the report from the clerk. I have not had time to read it but I will ask the convenors to consider it in the meantime.
We should organise the sitting from 9.30 a.m. to 1 p.m.
I notified the committee that I have commitments after that time.
This is a matter for the Whips. It has been suggested that this committee is delaying the Bill and the Tánaiste has expressed an interest in this but I have made it clear that the committee is prepared to deal with it. We should make it clear that the committee was agreeable to sitting late today and tomorrow to deal with the Bill. It suits me if it is now agreed to sit from 9.30 a.m. to 1 p.m.
The Select Committee adjourned at 6.10 p.m.