Vol. 408 No. 8
24 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Finance whether the Government are considering any proposal to assist political parties by providing additional public funds; if he has any plans to meet with the political parties to discuss this matter; if any conditions are envisaged with regard to corporate donations, upper limits on donations or public disclosure of donations as a condition of any such funding; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The answer to the question is, no.
I trust that the Minister has not been influenced by an inter-parliamentary ogre.
I am taken aback by the Minister's reply, which is somewhat at divergence with the view he expressed during the debate on the Bill recently.
It is not.
I ask the Minister whether the decision results from the measure being described by the chairman of the Progressive Democrats as similar to children planning to rob a sweet shop. Surely there is an argument to consider the issue, provided it was linked to restrictions on corporate donations and full public disclosure?
The Deputy has a great capacity for misreading statements made by various people from time to time. He should go back and read the debate again. I said that if Opposition Deputies had submissions to make then the Government would gladly consider them. My colleague, speaking in the same debate the following night, spelt out the matter more clearly when he said that the forum for inter-party discussions is the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. All parties are represented there, all parties can use that forum as a vehicle for discussions, and if any proposals emanated from there they would be considered. The Deputy is slightly twisting what I said. The statement made about the robbing of sweet shops had nothing at all to do with my answer today.
Would the Minister not agree, since Members quoted earlier the late Deputy Kelly in relation to copying the political establishment across the water, that Ireland would be better advised to follow the European example? Every other member of the continental/ European Community nations provides for some form of support for political parties. Would the Minister not be prepared to reconsider his rather terse reply made, perhaps, under political duress?
The reply was not made under any political duress whatsoever. All I am saying is that a forum exists. All parties are represented on that forum and may discuss matters there and then bring them forward. I am not changing one iota from what I said before, and I do not wish to prejudge the issue going before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Is it not the case that political parties have been funded by the Government for many years——
Parliamentary parties.
Yes, parliamentary parties, parliamentary parties are political parties. Having received that assistance, I shall rephrase my question. Is it not the case that political parties, parliamentary parties, have for many years been funded and that that is a well established practice? Indeed, all parties in the House, including both parties at present in Government, receive funding under that heading, and have received it for quite a while. Would the Minister agree that that has not been the responsibility for the Committee on Procedures and Privileges? Why does the Minister wish to bring the committee into the matter at this stage, given that the Committee on Procedures and Privileges have not been involved in previous arrangements for funding?
The requirement is not new. There was a forum in which a non-party approach could be taken if that was desired. This matter does not necessarily have to go there. If they wish each party can make their own submissions and their own decisions. A suggestion was put by my colleague, Deputy Brady, for a forum in which all parties are represented and in which all parties can have a discussion.
Does the Minister's terse "No" apply to the second half of my question? Having regard to the exchange between Deputy Bruton and Deputy Quinn, I ask the Minister whether the junior partner in Government, which does not have parliamentary group status in the House, is funded under the existing regulations.
That is a separate question.
No, Minister, that is the question.
I would be inclined to say "No", but I want to be sure before I say it.
Does the Minister mean to say that after the long nights spent in the battering courts he does not know?
I am saying that that is a separate question. Before I answer the Deputy off the top of my head I shall find out exactly, and relate the detail, but I am pretty certain that as they do not conform to the requirements they are unlikely to receive the funding.
Very briefly, I wish to ask the Minister to give details of past payments made to political parties. Could he list any past payments that may have been made to the Progressive Democrats when they were a party that had more than six Members in the House?
That disposes of the time provided for questions for oral answer.
