My question is of interest to every member of the Cabinet, but I put it to the Taoiseach. It relates to the announcement yesterday by the Fianna Fáil director of elections who informed us that he had set a date for the local and European elections for Friday, 11 June 2004. We acknowledge that there have been some efforts at reform of local government, among which is the ending of the dual mandate, which we welcome, and the formal recognition of local government in the Constitution, for all the good it does.

Would the Taoiseach not agree that there is one major element of reform that has not taken place, that being the need for a limit on spending for local election candidates? This is already in place for national and European candidates, as we know. Does the Taoiseach not understand that there is huge public outrage and cynicism as a result of Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats buying the last general election with taxpayers' money, which is the perception?

And they are trying to buy the next one.

Stop.

Fianna Fáil spent €3.5 million in the three months before the election was even called. Is it not obvious that the absence of any limits for the local election gives a carte blanche to speculators to bankroll their chosen candidates in the hope and expectation that once elected they can propose whatever hugely profitable rezoning they wish, regardless of good planning and the burden created on local communities? Does the Taoiseach not agree that it is time to carry out a simple but useful piece of work by putting a limit on local election candidate spending to avoid a repeat of the sort of outrageous spending that has taken place and has resulted in the kind of tribunals that the Minister, Deputy Ahern, is so interested in, such as the Mahon tribunal?

The Deputy's time is concluded.

I welcome Deputy Sargent's support for the reforms we have implemented, which have been enormously successful.

The Government should finish the job.

The position on funding is that every candidate in—

The Government will create more Mr. Insatiables this year.

Sorry, Deputy, you are not the leader of your party.

He never will be.

Not yet, a Cheann Comhairle.

Aspiring candidates for leadership may not participate in this debate.

Deputy Sargent had better watch his back.

I thank the Deputy for his advice.

It was the Deputy who interrupted. He cannot have it both ways.

We will be gentle.

If the Deputies want an answer they should have the manners to listen.

I asked whether the question was in order, a Cheann Comhairle.

A Cheann Comhairle, I was only following your ruling under Standing Orders. Candidates must document and give a full account of all spending. In the last local elections the average expenditure after full checking was about €2,700.

Colm McGrath spent €16,000.

There was no evidence whatsoever that local election candidates of any party, anywhere in the country, abused the system. Under the law they must document and give full receipts for all their expenditure. To use the administrative system for local elections, in which there are thousands of candidates, would not be possible, nor is it necessary. Candidates must give full accounts and there are many people watching what they do. That is what happened at the last local elections. The average figure spent was less than €1,000. The required mechanisms are in place. I do not believe Deputy Sargent's contention that local election candidates who work hard for their communities for little payment, regardless of what party they represent, are in the business of falling into the hands of developers.

It happens.

In fact—

What about the Mr. Insatiables?

Allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.

There is much evidence that candidates keep away from many of these decisions even when it would be better for them to get involved. There is no evidence of a need for a huge bureaucratic system such as the Deputy suggests.

Was the Flood tribunal a fiction?

I wonder whether the Taoiseach has learnt anything from the tribunals, not to mention his career in politics to date. Is it not the case that one Fianna Fáil candidate, whom we can identify, recorded an election expenditure of zero? I am not sure about the requirement to declare the total amount spent. We need to do more work on this.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, has the Midas touch of political fundraising. His Waterford constituency, a four-seater, has an election spending limit of €31,743 per candidate, yet he raised €34,722. There is a clear relationship between one's political decision-making ability and fundraising. This took place after the former Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, increased the limits in the Electoral Act 1997 by 50%. Has the Taoiseach learnt nothing from the tribunals, regardless of what he says and given his laudable faith in human nature? Did Colm McGrath, then of Fianna Fáil, not spend €16,000? What about Liam Lawlor, Ray Burke and the various Mr. Insatiables we have yet to discover? Will the Taoiseach not learn from these lessons and put a limit on local election spending? Currently, people can spend not €31,000 but €310,000 if they wish, or if developer friends want to give them the money in advance for favours to be rendered in the future.

The Deputy has made his point.

Is it not the case that we need to take action and limit the spending of local election candidates?

Hear, hear.

I imagine it would take €310,000 in Dublin City Council.

The Deputy is now trying to give the impression that there is no law and no change.

There is no change.

There is no cap.

The relevant law is the Electoral Act 2001, which introduced a number of new requirements for candidates. Every candidate must open an election account which is available for scrutiny and an account for political donations of greater than €127 – any candidate in the next local election who receives a donation of more than €127 must have a political donation account – there is a ban on the receipt of prohibited donations and a requirement for successful candidates to submit an annual donation statement to the local authority. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will shortly introduce regulations to bring these provisions into effect in advance of next year's local elections. It is hardly credible to say that under that law—

Why does the Minister not put a cap on spending?

The Government did not bring in a law, there is no law.

It is law and this issue was discussed. It is the old story – we bring in a law, regulations or rules and then people want something else.

There is no law.

Please allow the Taoiseach to conclude.

It is very clear what a person can do.

It is a simple matter.

It is a simple matter. A person must have an account, there is a cap on what he or she can accept as a donation and donations must be recorded.

There is no limit.

If somebody wants to commit fraud it does not matter what we do, but the law and the regulations are there and there is also a means of audit.

There is no law on capping.