It is bound to be a matter of concern to the House when the Taoiseach indicates it is his policy to require Ministers to attend the House to answer questions. In recent years, Cabinet Ministers have scarcely answered one in 20 Adjournment debate matters. I was present on one recent occasion when the same Minister of State took the four Adjournment debate matters. He did not know anything about at least three of them, nor could he be expected to.

According to news reports, the Standards in Public Office Commission will today publish the declarations under the spending limits in force at the last general election. The well advertised and promoted view is that a number of Members will have exceeded the spending limits. The suggestion is that they will be mostly Ministers. I do not know if that is the case. Will the Taoiseach use this as an excuse to further increase spending limits at elections? When Deputy Noel Dempsey was the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, and in keeping with his policy for looking after the disadvantaged, he raised the spending limits by 50% just before the general election. Will that be repeated following whatever announcement is made today?

On 27 October 2002, Ireland on Sunday reported that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, will scrap legislation which places spending limits on politicians during elections. According to the report, the Minister slammed the arrangements for the general election as “nonsensical and meaningless” and pointed out that politicians could spend what they wanted in the run-up to an election while having to account for every cent during a three-week campaign.

The Deputy's two minutes are concluded.

The Minister is correct. Fianna Fáil, in particular, spent enormous amounts of money before the dissolution of the Dáil.

As did the Labour Party.

We can show the Deputy the evidence.

Allow Deputy Rabbitte to conclude without interruption.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is right to say that in that period politicians and Ministers spent what they liked.

What about Fianna Fáil's spending?

Deputy Connaughton, I ask you to allow Deputy Rabbitte to make his point without interruption.

Will the Taoiseach indicate if the Government intends to introduce the Minister's promised legislation before the next local, European or general elections?

I understand the report by the Standards in Public Office Commission is due to be published shortly. It may show that during the last general election, there was inadvertent overspending by some outgoing Members who used Oireachtas facilities during the campaign. This followed the outcome of a High Court case, the judgment of which was delivered on the afternoon of the 16 May 2002. I believe it would be accepted that outgoing Members from all parties acted in good faith in terms of the use of the facilities provided by the Oireachtas since at the time that was excluded from the Act. That was acknowledged in a press release by the commission last December, when all parties and individuals were completing their forms. The standards commission said it had decided it would be inappropriate to refer a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions where, specifically as a result of the judgment, it found that an overspend had occurred at the general election.

The standards commission went on to explain why it had reached that decision. It said it had regard to the fact that the original High Court judgment was delivered on the afternoon of 16 May 2002, the last day of campaigning in the election. Prior to that date, agents and candidates were entitled to assume that the rules of spending were set out in the relevant legislation and reflected the guidelines published by the commission. The commission has also decided that if an overspend occurred specifically as a result of the judgment, it would not recommend to the Minister for Finance that the amount of the overspend should be deducted from the reimbursement of election expenses payable to the candidate from the Exchequer. Those statements were made last year and that is the context in which this matter should be considered. I recall that in this House last year people were concerned about the workings of the legislation. I am not certain if the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, has moved on very much in his review of that because he has been dealing with many other issues. I am sure he will return to that issue eventually.

I asked the Taoiseach only one question. Is he bringing in legislation to raise the spending limits? I do not want him—

The Deputy made a number of accusations as well.

Would the Ceann Comhairle ask the Minister for Defence to be quiet?

Allow Deputy Rabbitte speak without interruption.

I do not want the Taoiseach muttering about concerns in the House about the operation of the law. That is not the issue. The issue is a straightforward one regarding spending limits at election time, and the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government's reported public statements. The public will not know that it is only following the dissolution of the Dáil that spending limits are monitored by the Public Offices Commission and reports must be made. Prior to the dissolution of the Dáil all the money a party has can be spent, and was spent most dramatically by Fianna Fáil.

It is in the newspaper articles.

In the constituency I represent the party was deluged by spending running up to the dissolution of the Dáil. For example, I recall the civic holiday of St. Patrick's day when the route of the parade in my constituency was postered by one Fianna Fáil candidate. That was only one example of the spend that took place and the 50% increase in limit prior to the election brought in by the then Minister, Deputy Dempsey, provided for Fianna Fáil to spend £944,000 more in the election that was held this time last year.

I do not want the Taoiseach to tell us what the flaws are in the operation of the present legislation, or the difficulties with the bureaucracy and how ludicrous some aspects of it may be, or whatever. This is a simple, straightforward question to the Taoiseach. The Minister, Deputy Cullen, whom I happen to note by coincidence was the highest beneficiary of declared contributions, has promised to raise the ceiling. The Taoiseach is the leader of the Government. Is he going to bring in legislation to raise the spending limits during elections or not?

The Deputy will never get an answer to that.

The Deputy does not want me to mumble the way he has been mumbling. There is no legislation listed but the Minister has said outside that we should look at it. It is entirely unreasonable that a wealthy TD from his or her own resources, and there are plenty of them in this House—

What about a millionaire?

—could spend a fortune of his or her own money right up to the campaign whereas another individual who has little or no money has to fight a campaign during the three weeks. That is the present system. The system at the moment is designed to make sure that in the years ahead this House will be full of millionaires and that is a bad system.

Is that in the plans?

Entirely unreasonable.

What about the poor independents?

Now we know where the money went.

Where does the Taoiseach go—