Political lobbying and funding political parties are two sides of the
same coin. They are about trying to ensure that a certain view shapes
Government decisions and legislation.
Last
month the European Commission published the EU Anti-Corruption Report which
showed that 81% of us believe corruption is widespread in this country, 5%
above the EU average of 76%. Once again, events of recent days, in more than
one sphere, justify those suspicions. While the report found that Government
had “undertaken substantial reforms in its anti-corruption policies” it also
suggested “more work could be done to improve the capacity to prosecute and
punish corruption cases”. The authors also argued that “further work could also
be required to address the few remaining concerns around the funding of
political parties”. So many recent developments vindicate that contention.
One
aspect of this murky business that does not get the attention it deserves is
how access to the highest levels of power can facilitate one view and frustrate
another. For instance, in recent weeks Minister for Agriculture, Food and the
Marine Simon Coveney shared a meeting with Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Alf-Helge
Aarskog, chief executive of Norwegian fish-farming world leader Marine Harvest
who hope to secure more licences for salmon farms along our shores. Would — or
have — those who oppose salmon farms been offered the same high-level
opportunity to influence decisions? This meeting would not have come to light
had Mr Aarskog not spoken of it elsewhere. It must be assumed these off-radar
meetings take place on a range of subjects without the knowledge of other,
equally legitimate, interests in decision-making processes.
The
role of former politicians in lobbying is more than questionable too,
especially if they move seamlessly from one career to the other. The practice
of retired senior civil servants joining corporations interacting with the area
of public life they were so recently involved in seems pretty dubious too. It
should not be too difficult to put a clause into these pension packages that
would prevent this gun-for-hire approach. Ex-politicians should be subject to a
cooling off period too, one measured in years rather than months, before they could
join a lobbyists’ register — if only we had one.
However,
no matter how stiff measures to prevent inappropriate lobbying or funding are
made it is impossible to hermetically seal something as human as government
from those determined to influence it. It is not, however, impossible to impose
convincing sanctions on those who would breach those disciplines —if we had
them. That such measures are still pending suggests that Government realises,
as we all do, that they would be honoured more in the breach than in their
observation. We, it seems, get the politicians we deserve in more ways than
one.
No comments:
Post a Comment