Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Catherine Murphy and I are the two Independent Deputies on the Constitutional Convention. Initially, I had thought it would be a daunting process because there was a serious and lengthy time commitment and time constraint, but, probably because of the organisation of the Constitutional Convention, it has proved a worthwhile and positive experience. Although initially I may not have been altogether positive about it, I am certainly more so having taken part in it. Deputy Murphy and myself have been at each of the meetings while within the parties there has been some change of personnel. We have been there for each of the weekends.

The proposal came from the programme for Government. It was interesting to reflect on the associated principles. The Government decided that the convention should be innovative, independent and influential. Certainly, it has been innovative. Once it was established I believe it began to show its independence. On the influential aspect, insofar as it can be, it has been, but that aspect will depend on how the Government responds to the reports from the various meetings.

Various committees have been formed to examine reform but the involvement of citizens is one aspect of the convention that is definitely a plus on the innovative side. This is the first time such a measure has been tried in the State. Great efforts were made to ensure that the citizens were representative of society generally, although this was not always fully the case.

On 10 July 2012 I said I hoped that there would be a balance in terms of age, gender, socioeconomic background, the employed and the unemployed, urban and rural, people from the Gaeltacht, the islands and new communities. I pointed out the need to include young people proportionately but I do not believe that box has been ticked in reality. That was part of the debate in the House with the Taoiseach. When we consider the extent of the youth population in this country, it is clear that it is under-represented. We all believe that we are young, but I am referring to people under 24 years.

I expressed a fear that the make-up of 33 Members of the Oireachtas and the 66 citizen members could result in parliamentarians having an inordinate influence on the convention. Having attended the convention over the months, I believe parliamentarians tend to dominate the proceedings, in spite of the best efforts of the chairman, who does say, on occasion, that if a Member has spoken then she should not speak again until other people have had an opportunity to speak. Nevertheless, sometimes parliamentarians get in more often than citizens. Some of us keep to the principle that if a Member has spoken, she should not dominate proceedings subsequently, but I do not believe that is par for the course. We should leave some silences to allow citizen members to speak more. Citizen members have been particularly articulate at the table discussions and have been very open and frank during those sessions.

We know that there is a disconnect and disaffection in the political system as well as a lack of interest in public representatives. We see this in the low level of voter turnout. The parliamentarians who have taken an active part in the Constitutional Convention have probably boosted the general citizen perception of what parliamentarians do.

I had the honour of being the independent speaker at the opening of the Constitution Convention in Dublin Castle. One point I made at the time was that it should be about our identity as a nation. Another point I made was that sometimes we take our democracy for granted. We have basic rights that people, especially women, do not have in other countries. It is important to remember the freedoms we have, including the rights of free speech, assembly and education. We also have a free press, fortunately, for a while at least. We also have the right to amend the Constitution. I chair the Irish section of the Association of European Parliamentarians for Africa, AWEPA, which involves African parliamentarians. We will have some African parliamentarians attend one of the convention weekends and this represents an important opportunity for them to see a constitutional convention in action.

In the Technical Group submission, we made a point about the need to strike a balance between those areas in need of reform and protecting those parts of the Constitution which have been a solid foundation for realising our democratic free and sovereign State. It is important to remember that since we are in the era of the decade of commemoration and commemorating the defining moments in our history, we should acknowledge that the Constitution came out of the Proclamation and the ideals of the 1916 Rising under the tricolour and the starry plough. It was about breathing more freely together, growing, changing and rising to all challenges, and there are many challenges.

I acknowledge and compliment the organisation of the convention, from the appointment of Tom Arnold as chairman and Art O'Leary as his right-hand person, to all of the staff involved from the Oireachtas not only during the weekend meetings but also in preparation for the meetings and after the meetings when they are writing up the reports. One idea that came from the group was to have a steering group that would meet in between the meetings of the convention and that has been a useful development.

I acknowledge the venue and the practical arrangements at the Grand Hotel, Malahide. There has been an excellent service there. I acknowledge that much work went into ensuring value for money in terms of the budget available. It had been intended that one of the meetings would take place outside Dublin but when the staff from the convention investigated it the costs were far higher than holding the meeting in Dublin. Again, this is part of the innovative aspect of the convention. It came up with the idea of bringing the convention to various towns in Ireland where there would be more citizen representatives who would be able to voice their opinions and where citizen representatives from those areas would have the opportunity to advise people in those areas of the essence of what is going on.

The media has been somewhat hit and miss in its coverage of the convention. It has given a good deal of coverage to certain aspects of the convention, but it could give more coverage to other aspects that are perhaps not as prominent or that might not generate as much media interest.

At each of the meetings to date, great work has been undertaken by the Oireachtas team to ensure balance in the various presentations on the topics. It is fair to say that given all of the submissions received by the team and all the offers they get from various groups etc., they have done a great job to ensure that there is balance and that various voices are heard.

On the Sunday mornings there is a session while the votes are being counted where there is an opportunity for people to make points on what they believe was positive or areas they believe could be improved. In fairness to Mr. Arnold, Mr. O'Leary and the team, they have been very proactive and they have engaged in taking on those particular suggestions. As a result, there have been some changes. At the first meeting, on the Sunday, even when the voting was going on or being counted, other presentations were taking place. Most of us took the view that it would have been useful to hear those presentations before the voting. That was taken on board and there were some changes in the following meetings.

At the time the topics for the convention were announced, there was a good deal of disappointment on the part of various people, myself included, at the narrow remit of the convention. That point was made in the Technical Group submission on the matter. The view was that there was an exclusion of certain topics, which, we believed, were of vital importance in shaping the type of society in which we live, including economic, social and cultural rights as well as matters of housing and health. I am keen to see the rights and conditions of prisoners being considered by the Constitutional Convention and the rights of people with disabilities, mental and physical. I hope that during the last weekend we will have our usual frank and open discussion about where the Constitutional Convention will go afterwards and I believe that would be useful.

We started off with a rather non-contentious issue, reducing the voting age to 17 years - I heard what the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government had to say on that - and the presidential term of office. I was somewhat surprised because I had thought there would have been more of an interest in reducing the term to five years. My opinion and the view of the table I sat at was that seven years with a possible further seven years was rather a long time. We live in a democracy and we know the outcome of the vote.

There is much useful discussion on the nature of the ballot paper. That goes on for some time and we get a draft paper early on Sunday morning. Then, there is a discussion on that and if there is a belief that it needs to be amended it is taken on board and there is general agreement on what that ballot paper should look like.

It is important that the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and perhaps the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government should make an appearance at the Constitutional Convention before it concludes its deliberations. When it came to the presidential election, I acknowledge that when we were debating that matter, the chairman was rather open about considering the nomination process for President, especially for people who are independent. That was important.

When it came to Dáil reform and the electoral system to the Dáil, there was much disquiet on the part of some people that it was too narrow and only considered one particular area in need of reform, whereas many people there would have liked to have seen it cover many more areas. It was very hard to understand the reason Seanad reform was not being discussed at the Constitutional Convention and I acknowledge some Senators went to great efforts to try to have it included. I understood from where the Chairman was coming and he allowed their views to be expressed, but I believe a real opportunity was lost in that regard. I hope it is not because the Government had made up its mind that this was the done deal, that is, the Seanad is going, because that would be a shame. Here was an opportunity for citizens to give their opinion on that issue as well before going immediately into a referendum on it.

The weekend devoted to the provision for same-sex marriage was one of the most emotive sessions and while I would not use the word "challenging", it was really great to have been there on that particular weekend and to have heard the speeches from those who are directly affected by the lack of equality of marriage. For me and for others who were present, it was confirming and affirming of the value of marriage because other people also wished to be involved in marriage. Attending that particular session was one of those times about which one subsequently will ask where one was, when it was being discussed and decided, and it was very good to have been there.

As for the session on greater participation of women in public life and so on, I do not believe that simply amending the Constitution really will bring about any great change in that regard. I believe there are two more sessions to go and then a weekend to consider further ways forward. It has been a highly positive experience and the parliamentarians who were present certainly are doing their best to show we are not really the waste of space so many people consider us to be.

See this speech in context