As the body with responsibility for supervising the Act the Standards Commission should have a statutory role to review the operation of the Act and report on its findings. (Chapter 1 - Introduction)
The proposed establishment of an Electoral Commission, as set out in the current programme for government, should prompt a complete review of the legislation. (Chapter 1 - Introduction)
The Standards Commission is required to consider whether to refer certain candidates to the Gardaí for failure to furnish a Certificate of Monetary Donations or bank statement by the statutory deadline of 19 July 2007. The Standards Commission is of the view that it does not seem reasonable that a person who opened a political donations account but who failed to furnish the necessary supporting documentation to the Standards Commission, should be prosecuted, whereas a person who did not open a political donations account in the first place is not liable to prosecution under the Act. In that regard the Standards Commission considers it imperative that an offence be provided for failure to open a political donations account when required to do so. (Section 2.4 - Consideration of Certificates of Monetary Donations and Bank Statements)
The use of public funds for electoral purposes is a major issue which requires to be re-evaluated in consideration of future changes to the electoral law. The provision of such clarity within the ambit of the electoral code rather than as part of other legislation which patently has quite a separate purpose (the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Act 2006) would better ensure a level playing pitch for all candidates. (Section 3.3 - Election Expenses the costs of which were originally met out of public funds)
Section 59 of the Electoral Act 1992 provides for the appointment of "election agents" to assist the candidate generally in relation to a Dáil general election and for the appointment of deputy agents to be present on the candidate's behalf for the counting of votes and for other specific purposes set out in the 1992 Act. This has caused confusion as some candidates notified these "agents" as their election agent for the general election even though these persons had little or no function or knowledge in relation to controlling expenses incurred on the candidate's behalf at the election. The Standards Commission recommends that the term "election agent" should be amended to either "election spending accounting officer" or "election spending agent". (Section 3.4 - Appointment of candidates' election agents)
Notification of a change of election agent must be routed through the Returning Officer for the constituency. This causes an unnecessary level of bureaucracy for all concerned and can delay the Standards Commission in finalising Election Expenses Statements which have not been completed by the notified election agent. The Standards Commission considers that it would be preferable if candidates were required to notify the Standards Commission directly of the appointment or change of an election agent. (Section 3.4 - Appointment of candidates' election agents)
During the election there was considerable evidence of and much comment about pre-election spending by parties and candidates. This expenditure was not required to be accounted for if the materials were not used during the election period. This raises legitimate concerns that such "front-loading" of campaign expenditure undermines the effectiveness of the expenditure limits and may create the perception that accounting for expenditure at elections is little more than a paper exercise. The Standards Commission recommends an election period of 2/3 months duration and considers that expenditure on goods, property or services used for electoral purposes during this period could reasonably be construed as intended to elicit support at the election for a candidate or political party. (Section 3.7 - The Election Period)
The exclusion of items such as refreshments for volunteer campaign workers and candidates' petrol costs from the definition of election expenses can create a difficulty for some non-party candidates or for candidates of the smaller political parties. These items represent real costs for which these candidates cannot be reimbursed should they qualify for a reimbursement and their total election expenses are less than €8,700. The Standards Commission might be allowed to exercise some discretion and include such items (if properly receipted) in the total election expenses which may be reimbursed to these candidates. (Chapter 4 - Reimbursement of candidates' election expenses)
The Standards Commission has encountered a difficulty in supervising the provisions section 31(10) of the Act insofar as these provisions refer to the publication of advertisements which directly or indirectly promote or oppose candidates or political parties. The provisions of section 31(7) of the Act which are relevant to "other persons" placing such advertisements refer to incurring election expenses and includes the term "seeking to influence the outcome of an election". The Standards Commission is conscious that this ambiguity in the Act which could be used as a defence or construed against the prosecution of an offence under section 43(4) of the Act (for failure to comply with section 31(10) of the Act). The Standards Commission considers, therefore, that some consistency might be brought to this part of the Act by including the term "seeks to influence the outcome of an election" as part of the provisions of section 31(10) of the Act. (Chapter 6 - Correspondence with newspapers, magazines etc. re section 31(10) of the Act)