Transparency Issues And GoFundMe Pages For Irish Politicians.

Spoiler alert: they're not very transparent!

Think of platforms like GoFundMe as the new-age lemonade stands; instead of quenching thirst, they’re quenching the seemingly insatiable financial needs of politicians everywhere. But before you toss your coins into this digital wishing well, let's talk about the transparency issues that lurk in the background. In recent years, online crowdfunding has become a pivotal tool for political campaigns, democratising the reach of fundraising beyond traditional methods, like, erm, the infamous Fianna Fáil Galway tent.

Under political funding laws in Ireland, the maximum allowable donation to a politician from an individual is €1,000, falling to €100 if the person wants to remain anonymous to the public.

Political crowdfunding is where every candidate with a smartphone and a dream of political office can effortlessly pass around a digital hat, similar to passing around the basket at mass. The primary transparency issue is the anonymity of some donors. While traditional political contributions are heavily regulated with stringent disclosure requirements (stop laughing down the back), online platforms do not impose the same level of scrutiny. This can lead to situations where the identities of donors are obscured, making it difficult to trace the sources of political funding. SIPO (Standards In Public Office) clearly doesn’t have the manpower, regulatory or auditing ability to monitor the anonymous activities of online political crowdfunding.

GoFundMe has rules, but they’re more like guidelines, like when the wife says, “Just a pinch of salt.” The lack of targeted regulatory oversight means these financial campaigns can very easily slip through the legal cracks.

GoFundMe has something called the “Giving Guarantee”. They claim to guarantee you a full refund in the rare case something isn’t right. What’s a rare case! How does that work for political donations? The recipient’s wife could be spending the money shoe shopping on Grafton Street, or the candidate could be blowing the money on cocaine and strippers, the person who donated would be none the wiser. Mind you, some occupants of our Leinster House chambers might consider those legitimate political expenses.

Political crowdfunding capitalises on the power of social media and the internet to quickly mobilise financial support from a broader political audience. This opens doors for candidates with a certain grassroots appeal, particularly those without the backing of political parties with the financial ability of a strong local constituency organisation. It massively complicates the financial transparency landscape and highlights the lack of regulatory oversight.

The digital nature of crowdfunding opens up the possibility for foreign or malevolent entities to contribute anonymously. This can potentially lead to violations of election laws that prohibit foreign interference in domestic political campaigns, further muddying the waters of transparency. With the global nature of the internet, your friendly neighbourhood politician might find themselves inadvertently backed by Mikhail from Moscow, who, being from Moscow, may have ulterior motives for wanting said politician elected.

Without strict monitoring, there is a risk that the funds raised may not be used as intended. Although platforms typically have policies on how funds can be accessed and utilised, the onus is largely on the politicians to report and ensure accurate usage, which may lead to discrepancies and potential inadvertent misuse. Without a hawk-eyed accountant or regulator peering over the shoulders of campaign donations, campaign funds might wander from their pledged paths. A bit like handing a teenager your bank card and telling them, “Only for emergencies”.

Even though these platforms are often associated with small donations, there is still the risk of substantial influence from larger, more powerful financial contributors who can use the very obvious loopholes to exert influence without being subjected to traditional donation caps and disclosures. Despite the imagery of crowdfunding being powered by the little guys, you’d be very naïve to think the big spenders aren’t exploiting the transparency loopholes.

As online political crowdfunding evolves, addressing transparency issues is vital for upholding democratic integrity. Consider that Mikhail from Moscow will have little or no disregard for Irish electoral financing laws. While GoFundMe may not prioritise this also, it’s crucial for Micheál from Mayo to care. After all, even though Mikhail can't vote in Ireland, his financial influence could outweigh Micheál's, potentially swaying local democracy in favour of more nefarious outcomes.

Doing the financially right thing by a politician doesn't always guarantee a happy ending. If Ben Dunne was still around, he’d tell you exactly that.