Averil Power (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House today. Like other Members I do not believe that the Seanad should stay as it is. It has been an enormous privilege for me to be here for the past two years. I am extremely grateful to the members of the county councils around the country who elected me. It was a tough campaign, harder than the general election campaign, believe it or not, for a Fianna Fáil candidate in 2011. While the general election campaign was tough I had a team of people in my local area and I went home to my own bed. For the Seanad campaign I met county councillors in different counties and was interrogated quite rigorously by them on a range of issues. It was a tough campaign and assured me that the electors take their job quite seriously to ensure that they put all candidates through their paces.

At the same time I fully appreciate that every citizen does not have a vote. It means that the House is seen as elitist. It is seen as the preserve of a small few and that is a shame. The lack of universal suffrage means that, no matter what we do, our legitimacy is undermined. Often the House makes a far greater contribution than is appreciated. My experience is that in general debates here are much less partisan, reflect more on and tease out legislation. Members take their job very seriously and do their best by proposing amendments and suggestions that some Ministers accept. As spokesperson on education I have always found the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruarí Quinn very receptive. He has accepted some of my amendments to important legislation on quality assurance in the third level sector, child vetting and other similar issues that had not been addressed in the other House. He has taken them on board because he has come into the House with an open attitude and a willingness to listen to ideas from all sides.

We have brought forward excellent Bills in the past two years. I hope that the Dáil will pass Senator Quinn's Construction Contracts Bill next week. It is incredibly important legislation which would not have come to fruition but that we had an outlet in this House for somebody of Senator Quinn's expertise and business acumen, and the perspective which he brings to the Oireachtas. The same is true of Senator Crown's Bill on smoking in cars. I hope that, while the Government shot down the employment equality Bill that I brought forward last year, the principles behind it will be taken on board. That has helped to put pressure on the Government to deal with an important gap in our protection for employees. Much important work is done here.

There are parts of the House and its business that frustrate me. It will be no secret to Members that generally I do not participate in the Order of Business. I table Adjournment Matters, two of which were selected this week and two last week because I prefer to have a debate with a Minister. I do not see the point in shouting at Senator Cummins of a morning about all the ills of society. I do not do the amateur dramatics. I regret the fact that while excellent work is done here on legislation the only thing that is covered on Oireachtas Report and other programmes is the first hour of the day which makes it look like that is all we do. That is a great shame. We had a really good debate here a few weeks ago on youth unemployment, with really good suggestions put forward by Members on all sides of the House but that was not covered. The same applies to mental health, jobs and other key issues. Unfortunately that is not covered. I am not blaming the media for that because that it is too easy to do. In some ways we give them that content. I respect the fact that people have different ways of contributing but that is part of what we do that I wish we did not do. I wish we could just agree the Order of Business and get on with discussing issues and ensuring that we present that view to the outside world because there is much good done here.

This Seanad has performed better than is sometimes appreciated but I believe that it needs to be changed. I do not believe the House should remain as it is. The electoral system is deeply flawed and undermines our legitimacy. There is too much duplication of what goes on in the Dáil. As things stand we get the same business a week or two later. That is good for checks and balances but it means we miss the opportunity to do extra business. The Leader of our House was very supportive, and said so in his speech last week, of an increased role for this House in the scrutiny of EU legislation and made that request to the Taoiseach. Incredibly important EU decisions are made week in week out and most of our legislation now comes from Europe. The Fine Gael Leader of the House suggested to the Taoiseach that we play a role in enhanced scrutiny of that legislation but that was declined. That is a shame. It means that important decisions are made that are not considered by either House. Some of it gets to the bottom of a committee agenda somewhere but it does not get anything like the scrutiny it deserves.

Our Leader also made the point that there is a new EU yellow card system whereby national parliaments can give a yellow card to European measures and ensure that they are thought through again. I understand that has been used once since the Lisbon treaty was passed. That is regrettable. This House should have been given the opportunity over the past two years to fulfil its potential. This is because the Taoiseach has a point to prove about wanting to run down the Seanad and not wanting to give us the opportunity to do our best to represent the people and bring forward issues which would prove that we need a second House. That is why there has been constant guillotining of debates.

It is also very unfair to the people that they will not be given a choice in the referendum because what is there to fear from asking ordinary citizens whether they want abolition, reform or the status quo? Why is the Taoiseach willing only to allow the people consider the status quo or abolition? This House has put forward excellent legislation. There is a general framework for a radically reformed and powerful Seanad in the Bill published by Senators Quinn, Zappone and others. I would provide for a far better electoral system, a totally different cadre of politicians from those elected to the Dáil, people with different perspectives, representing vocational interests, a direct vote and increased powers. That option will not be put to the people.

It has not even been put to the Convention on the Constitution. I am a member of that convention and the citizens who take part in it take their role incredibly seriously. They give up their weekends to deliberate on political reform issues. At our first meeting the Taoiseach sent us an agenda to discuss the voting age and the length of the presidential term. We disposed of the second matter in half an hour because people wondered why, in the scheme of things, with all that is going on in the country they were being brought together in a hotel to discuss the length of the presidential term. It is crazy that when it was suggested at one of the convention meetings that we would discuss the Seanad a very clear message came from the Taoiseach that it was not our business and we should not do that.

A very clear message came from the Taoiseach to say that was not our business, we should not do it and that as far as he was concerned a referendum on abolition was being put to the people and that was that. It has made a mockery of the convention process, which is a good idea and if the Taoiseach took it seriously it would have a lot of potential in terms of deliberative democracy and better representation.

I find it very frustrating and disappointing that people will not be given that choice. I would love to be able to engage in a referendum campaign and talk about how we could change how things are done here. The role of senates in the US and other countries involves two totally different houses of parliament which are elected differently with different agendas. That means proposed legislation is better thought through and considered from different perspectives. There is a strong system of checks and balances. Ultimately, it delivers better value for money for the taxpayer because it stops governments making mistakes and ensures things are thought through properly.

In contrast to what we could achieve with reform, all the option of abolition will do is consolidate more power in a Cabinet and flawed democratic system. We have a Dáil, which is where the real problems in the Oireachtas lie in my view and that of most political scientists and commentators in the country who follow what goes on in the Dáil. There are huge problems there. Despite all of the promises before the election, the Government has refused to make any real effort at political reform, as has been mentioned by Senator Healy Eames and others. All we have seen is constant guillotining of legislation in both Houses and much more concentration of power in a very small number of people.

As I said at the start of my contribution, I do not believe the Seanad should remain in its current form. I would be the first person to admit there are flaws at times in how some of our work is done. The House makes a greater contribution than is often appreciated. The people should be given a genuine choice and real option in a referendum. If we are to go to the bother of spending a fortune on a referendum at a time of limited resources, we should at least make sure that it is worth people's while going to the polling stations and give them an option. What is the Taoiseach afraid of?