Ban all donations
Read more about: Irish Politics 
I think I once said that there is nothing wrong with corporate donations. My argument was that the corporate donation does not make a politician corrupt, the politician makes the donation corrupt. But with the revelations from Bertiegate and Tim O’Malley’s details of Labour and Fine Gael donations, I have changed my mind. Corporate donations should be stopped but not just corporate donations. All donations.
I am sure the Fine Gael supporters on this blog will give out to me for putting their donations in the same league as Bertiegate, telling me that they were all legitimate donations and feel that pointing out that I can’t spell somehow proves their point. But you know what: to me, a civilian outside of any political party, they are all dodgy. It is highly naive to think that something was not given something in return for the money. No business man is simply going to give money over for the good of the country.
They do so for a reason. Now, sometimes that reason is to get political favours, other times it is simply to get a word in the ear of the minister. And that is what is wrong. We live in a democracy where everyone is supposed to be created equal and where everyone is supposed to have an equal say in the running of the country, but that is not the case. I am unlikely ever to get to meet Bertie or Enda, never going to get the chance to get to say what I think should be done, never. If I am really lucky, I might get my local TD to my door, but that is unlikely. I will just get some local party member who, when I ask a question that I want the answer to like “will you privatise 2FM”, is likely to give an answer that sounds similar to “that would be an ecumenical matter.” But if you have the money to buy a plate at a dinner with Enda and Bertie, you instantly get access to them. You get the access that is denied to all of us.
This goes to all parties and all types of donations, even private donations. By donating money, the parties that get the largest number of donations are going to be the ones that can get the most things. The Greens, with their large rich support, are going to be able to drum up a lot more money than the poor supporters of the Socialist Party. It is unfair and undemocratic that money can decide an election.
But what are we paying for? During election time, our streets and roads are destroyed with a litany of ugly faces smiling down on us, telling us to give them our first preference without telling us why. We will see the party leaders all photoshopped (does Enda dye his hair? I mean, he is well into his 50s, isn’t he?) telling us they are the best for the job. I don’t care if the posters are biodegradable organic fair-trade Irish produced cotton posters; they are an eyesore and a waste of time. Get them off my lampposts; I like them grey. And get those fliers out of my letterbox; they are simply clogging it up and making me have to pay more to the refuse company.
Here is my idea. Ban all political donations fully. Ban posters, ban leaflets, and ban billboards. Follow the example of the Referendum Commission and produce election booklets for each area. In these booklets, every candidate will have a few pages where they explain what they stand for in the local area, then have a few pages for each of the parties to outline their plans for the future of Ireland. Outline what they will do and how they will do it, maybe even have a comparison table in there too where people can look for an issue, say third-level fees,” and see what each party stands for. This booklet would be quiet big with a lot of detail information, but if people want more information they could either check the internet or could ring a free phone and request a copy of a policy document—a list of all documents would be in the book—be sent out to them free of charge.
While it could be said that the cost of producing such a booklet would be large, and it probably would be, it would certainly be more in the democratic interest than thousands of political posters that destroy the landscape and probably cheaper overall. And if Argos can do it, why not the government?
We need to let the issues decide the election, not money.
“We must destroy the village to save it!”
Ok, maybe not, but I assume that the funds that would otherwise come from fundraising (which, I’m afraid, is exactly how FG got all that money) would, instead, come from the Exchequer, right?
One downside of your scheme is that it might make the affair awfully dull. Does this extend to things like party political broadcasts and the like too? I guess websites and other such forms of advertising would be exempt because, let’s face it, all the parties have equally awful websites. And what about party membership fees? Do they count as donations?
I’m not just being facetious here, I’m really wondering if these things count.
And on a completely separate subject, I really have to find a way to fix the navigation tabs along the top…
I don’t think they pay for party poplitical broadcasts anyway. Being that they are on the state broadcaster. As for Party membership fees emm interesting actually yes. As for the navigation tabs. I changed them .
I’m actually thinking of production costs rather than studio time. While RTE are obliged to give them free air time, the bigger parties use their cash reserves to produce a slicker product.
Seeing as Cian decided to reuse the conference registration page for registering for Top Chumps, something I wasn’t expecting at all, I might go back and rework it so it’s not tied to conference registration and so that any fields beside name and email address are custom fields. It also seems like time to work out a nice, flexible structure for the conference pages so less work is needed to maintain and archive them.
I do not really want to see the political parties completely funded by the state given the abuse of the Opposition Leaders Allowance by Charles Haughey and Bertie Aherne to buy Charvet shirts for Charlie and romantic dinners for Terry and Charlie in “Le Coq Hardi” with blank cheques signed by Bertie.
I think that maybe a ban on companies bidding for and getting state contracts if they have given donations to the parties in government preceeding an election and then for the term that those parties are in Government.
We would then see it big business gives political donations to help the the political process or just themselves.
Excellent article, while I agree all donations are not the same, they are all corrupt to some degree.
Just for the record, the Green Party doesn’t accept corporate donations at all.
However, I dont agree that posters, leaflets etc should be banned, for the simple reason of freedom of speech. A dynamic and innovative party shoudn’t be stultified by the government telling them how to campaign.
I think that if all donations are banned, the only rational way to fund campaigns is by the taxpayer. Parties get an amount proportional to their support in the previous election. The money goes into a transparent account, and any election spending from any source becomes a criminal offence.
New independents and parties can spend their own money in their first election, and get it refunded if they reach a threshold, as now.
If taxpayers don’t want to pay for elections, they should consider whether it is better that politicians answer to them, or to the tent at the Galway Races.
I agree with Simon on the broad issue.
Donations; gifts; and any benefits-in-kind will be always be open to abuse and the mere fact of their existence is reason enough to ban them completely.
Like it or not, the Exchequer is the only alternative method of cash funding. After all, the Government has no income. Any money they receive is unearned.
As stated by Keith, RTE is obliged to afford time to all parties.
Surely this facility could be extended, as a pre-condition to all owners of Broadcast Licences – TV3; TG4; East Coast radio; Talk 106 etc…
There is likely to be a grey area concerning IRA/Sinn Fein. Their election war chest has been built up largely from the proceeds of Crime.
One can only wonder if FF have the will to challenge this source of “income”.
Both Aherns, Dermot & Bertie, have stated that they would have no problem entering into a future coalition with the IRA & their political mouthpieces.
HOWEVER THE PROBLEM CAN ONLY BE RESOLVED BY AN IMMEDIATE, TOTAL BAN.
Thereafter, the various parties might submit suggestions for alternative funding and, in particular, provide a statement of what they consider necessary to prosecute an effective campaign, properly detailed & costed.