Business Financing of Politics in Ireland: Theory, Evidence and Reform

Abstract

This article takes a new perspective on business and politics in Ireland from the comparative literature on business financing of politics. It introduces a theoretical language based on the concepts of ideological and pragmatic donations and discrete and reciprocal exchanges. It goes on to discuss the extent to which the Irish political system generates incentives for these types of behaviour. The empirical core is a quantitative analysis of disclosed donations to TDs between 2002 and 2009, but it also exploits anecdotal sources and official reports. This study concludes that there has been considerable scope for the exchange of brokerage services in reciprocation for small disclosed donations. Current reform proposals will reduce but not eliminate this potential, especially if there is no enumeration of commercial payments and loans received by politicians and parties.

Keywords:

• political finance
• business–government relations
• interest groups
• Ireland
• corruption

Notes

Sinn Féin, now contesting leadership of the opposition with Fianna Fáil, is interesting from a political finance perspective. It raised very large amounts of money in America and is regularly accused of benefiting from bank robbery. However, it was a protest party in the period covered and of little relevance in understanding the relationship between business and politics in Ireland.

This excludes donations from the deputies' political parties. Some of these donations may have been the result of collections of donations at the constituency level; others seem to be transfers from the central party; and several relate to the use of an office. These transfers seem odd given the much more normal pattern of representatives donating part of their salary to a party.

However, barristers have been coded as individual donations.

This assumes that the Spencer Dock Development Company, part-owned by Treasury, represented the same interest.

The Tribunal's language is confusing on this issue, but, at a minimum, it advocates the publication of some loans, and, at a maximum, all loans (Moriarty, 2011: 1,158).