Martin Conway (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

That is obvious. It would be utterly hypocritical of anybody to sit in this House and draw a salary and believe that it should be abolished. There are many positive aspects to the House and a great deal of very positive work is done here. All Senators, of all parties, make very valuable contributions but we must look at the big picture. For the first time in the existence of this House it will be to the fore in political debate and discourse for a few months. I support the holding of a referendum. It is the correct decision. The Taoiseach made a commitment to hold a referendum on abolition. Many people here will not like to hear this but most people in the country do not believe that the Seanad is working and do not believe that in its present form it should continue. I happen to be one of those. I believe that a reformed Seanad is important and will play a useful role into the future. If the people do opt to retain the Seanad it will be with a strict caveat that we have fundamental reform.

Many have asked why reform is not being put to the people in the referendum. There is no provision within our Constitution for a preferendum. The Constitution provides for a referendum with a yes or no option. I hope that the people will opt to retain the Seanad. If they do, it will be very clearly with the obligation on a future Government to reform it. If the people opt to retain this House, within the present Government and its programme for Government there will not be the opportunity for reform. In future election manifestos and in a future programme for Government I suspect that Seanad reform will be one of the top priorities. It has probably gone too far to be reformed. There have been ten or 11 reports on Seanad reform. I understand that when Mary O'Rourke was Leader of the House and the Minister of State was Leader of the Opposition they worked very hard on a report that was widely acknowledged to be very good. It was a shame and a pity that the previous Government did not move towards implementing that report. The referendum will probably be the best thing that has ever happened to this House because it will be endorsed by the people. I do not think that the people are going to abolish this House.

On a personal level I consider it a great privilege to be a Member of Seanad Éireann and it gives my community an opportunity to have a representative in the Oireachtas. It gives County Clare an extra two national representatives. With Senator Mulcahy and me, instead of there being four Oireachtas Members from Clare, the four Deputies, there are six. The county can see the results. In my area as a result of my work in Seanad Éireann, speaking to Ministers and so forth several projects have got the go-ahead. In the past few months we have seen the results of that in north Clare, where some vital infrastructural projects such as the Doolin coastguard have got the go-ahead, some years in advance of the community's expectation which was that it would go ahead in 2016. Thankfully, the project will be finished and put to bed by the end of this year.

We have made inputs about aviation policy with Shannon Airport and the new independent structure and there was an announcement yesterday of direct flights between Shannon and New York and Shannon and Boston all year round. As Oireachtas Members all six of us from Clare have worked extremely hard together to put forward the case for Shannon Airport which has worked in our favour and in favour of the country. There are initiatives such as the Gathering. The fact that there are two Senators in Clare, along with the four Deputies, helps tourism figures.

I hope that my being a Member of the House with a disability and the first Member of the Oireachtas with the disability that I have has created a precedent for others. After a recent television appearance I received several letters and e-mails from teenagers with significant disabilities saying that they now believe that a career in politics is possible for them. That would not have happened if the Seanad did not exist.

The initial purpose of the Seanad was to reflect, and give a voice to, minorities. The 42 new Senators here reflect a vast array of minorities, for example Senator Van Turnhout with her expertise in the area of children's rights has influenced and helped to shape Government policy. History will decide that the Government has done phenomenal work for children and Senator van Turnhout's amendments will enable her to claim justifiable credit for that type of work.

Senator van Turnhout, through her role in this House and through the amendments that she has put forward, certainly will be able to claim justifiable credit for that type of work. I look at what Senator Fiach Mac Conghail has done in terms of the arts, what Senator Eamonn Coghlan has done in the area of sport, what Senator Mary Ann O'Brien has done in the area of small business, and many more. We are fortunate here in this House to have such an array of talent, not only on the Independent benches but in the main political parties as well. This House provides a wonderful forum for discourse and debate that does not happen in the other House. The 60 Senators here punch way above their weight as compared to the 166 TDs. If due diligence was done on the contribution and ability of the Seanad in terms of numbers as compared to the Dáil, one would be surprised at the results. Often we have debates here on the economy and finance and I regularly take great pleasure in listening to Senator Sean D. Barrett, probably one of the country's best economists. We have his expertise in this House available to the Government free of charge. That is something that really needs to be acknowledged.

The people will ultimately decide whether we need a Seanad or not. I would suggest that comparing Ireland to other countries is not particularly relevant because few countries use the proportional representation single transferable vote, PR-STV, system of voting. The only other country that has a PR-STV style of election is Malta. With PR-STV, there are competitive adversarial multi-seat constituencies. Countries that have a single parliament do not have that type of electoral system and their MPs can focus all of their resources and time on national politics and legislation. In this country, that is not the case. If one wants real political reform, one must start with the electoral system. One cannot really suggest having a single House with a PR-STV electoral system, particularly with the multi-seat structure that we have in this country, because invariably there will be TDs who should be concentrating on national politics but are really focused on self-preservation, getting themselves re-elected and dealing with local issues. As long as we have that type of system, we need a House of Parliament such as the Seanad which will represent interest groups and expertise in various areas.

The Irish people are a discerning electorate. They will see this as being a small short-term gain but in terms of the long-term strategic benefit of Ireland, they will vote to retain the Seanad. I want to send a clear message to the Government. If the people vote to retain the Seanad, there will be a clear requirement for a future Government to introduce reform, and I suggest starting with the report of the former Leader, Mrs. Mary O'Rourke.