David Norris (Independent)

Given the lateness of the hour, I shall resist the temptation to give a disposition on the Immaculate Conception which Senator Mooney so tantalisingly drew for us. If logically followed, which no piece of dogmatic theology ever is, it leads to the complete destruction of the notion of original sin. However, putting that to one side, may I say that I am in favour of a general reflection of the population? If one is going to have a mathematical reflection of the population, one should look for 51% because, as I understand, women are in the peculiar situation of being in the majority.

Given that he has certain views about this House, I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that this House has certainly had one woman Cathaoirleach or I think two women Cathaoirligh whereas his House has never had a woman Ceann Comhairle. We are an advance and we also have higher participation by women. We are a little bit further along the way the Minister appears to wish to push the country rather than his House, so perhaps he could take a little bit of a lesson from us.

This is social engineering but I do not have Senator Mullen's problem with it. When issues of social benefit do not move fast enough, they must be given a discrete nudge but, at the same time, that sometimes means people get bruised in the process. If I were in a political party and were a male candidate who was passed over simply because of a gender quota by somebody who I regarded as my intellectual, moral and physical inferior, I would feel really upset if this person was selected simply because she was female. I hope this will be a transition period and that it will wither away. I hope also we will not be kind of nitpicking about it.

Maybe it would be great if there was gay representation because gay people comprise approximately 10% of the population. There is an even greater discrimination there because we know people are afraid to reveal themselves but there is an increase as there are now openly gay Members in both Houses. That is a very welcome development. One of them is a Taoiseach's nominee. That shows we are growing up as a country, which is terrific. There was not all that much social engineering, except the nomination by the Taoiseach, and I honour and respect him for it. However, I do not think the person I am thinking of - it would be invidious to name anybody - who is a very distinguished public figure was nominated simply because of her sexual orientation.

I have a couple of observations on the bland generalisations which have come from all sides of the House, such as women are more realistic than men. Are they? Some are but some are wonderfully unrealistic dreamers, thank God. Some of them conceal their essential nastiness under a guise of realism just as some men do. I am pretty bloody realistic because I know that despite the fact that everybody says this is a great amendment, they will not vote for it, so it will not get through. Let us cut the crap, get on with it and vote on the amendment.

Another generalisation is that not only are women realists, which some of them are, but that they are interested in politics and are not disinterested in it. Many of them are interested in politics but I have bad news for the House. The vast majority of the population of this country is uninterested in politics-----