Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I wish to thank all our colleagues in the House who have made valuable contributions to this discussion. The Government has provided its response to the recommendations in the first report of the Constitutional Convention. Many Deputies have made valid suggestions and offered ideas which will contribute further to the debate on the themes of the recommendations.

I wish to assure the House that the Government has an open mind on the convention's recommendations. The response to the convention's first report would clearly indicate that we are anxious to facilitate, as quickly as possible, the implementation of some of the important matters that have been discussed and recommended to the Government.

We are already committed to holding a referendum before the end of 2015 on reducing the voting age and reducing the age limit for presidential candidates. We will further examine the work that has to be done concerning the nomination process for presidential elections, in terms of citizens' engagement. The issue of greater and direct citizen participation in nominating a presidential candidate requires further consideration concerning its implementation. We have asked the Oireachtas Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht to do further work on that matter.

As regards other matters that were raised, I can assure Deputy Tuffy that I am not playing up to any anti-political or anti-politician agenda, as she asserts. That might be something she could address with the Fourth Estate - the media - as regards the meaningful work that goes on in this House by all Members. If members of the media were attending the Constitutional Convention, they might see that the type of points the Deputy has made are being teased out with members of the public. Value is put on certain matters that are not always treated with the same respect when they are published.

As regards our voting system, it is clear that lofty academic and media comment will not gazump the people into voting for a different system without valid reasons for doing so. I welcome that. I do not believe we should be changing a system that works reasonably well. We can certainly reform the way we do business but I do not think we need a more elitist parliamentary system. That has been acknowledged by the public, as we have seen through this convention.

Deputy Charles Flanagan spoke about putting a referendum commission into an electoral commission. We can do that but it will not change anything in terms of the content or import of what happens in practice. The Referendum Commission has been in place for many years. It was formalised in the 1998 legislation and was established as a separate independent way of giving voters independent information on a constitutional matter that was put before them. I do not think there is any difficulty in merely putting information before voters independently, notwithstanding the fact that there is some frustration perhaps on the basis of some of the judgments that have been issued over the years on what one can or cannot do.

I wish to add my words of gratitude to the chairman and staff of the Constitutional Convention who are presiding effectively and diligently over the convention's work. All the Members who contributed to this debate have acknowledged that. It is gratifying to see that the work of engaging citizens and Parliament together in this review of our Constitution, through this particularly novel means, is working exceptionally well. It may provide a model for how we can gain greater public participation in future.

I acknowledge the work of the participants and thank everybody for that, especially ordinary members of the convention who gave up their weekends to be part and parcel of this important historic work.

See this speech in context