David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

There is an enormous amount of EU legislation and it is squirted out at a rate which could lead to it being classified as pollution. Some of it is completely mad. I do not like English newspapers - I do not like those in Ireland very much these days either - but at least some of them got it right when they laughed at square sausages, round bananas and similar drivel. We have had experience of that legislation in this country in the context of the move to equalise the actuarial risks relating to motorists. For the sake of equality, women had to be charged as much as men for car insurance even though there is statistical proof to the effect that they are better, safer and more careful drivers. Everyone involved, including feminists, voted in favour of the legislation to which I refer and I could not believe that. I would not hold out any great hopes in respect of the Seanad scrutinising EU legislation.

During the referendum campaign on the Seanad, I continually outlined my concern to the effect that this suggestion is a sneaky trick on the part of the Government. If it can impose a job on the Upper House which that House cannot do, at which it would be incompetent and which would oblige it, as a result of a lack of time and resources, to neglect its other responsibilities, that would be a very good argument in favour of getting rid of it. The Seanad could possibly scrutinise EU legislation if it was properly resourced. If, for example, a system of bureaucracy were put in place to refine the list of legislation in order that the Upper House would only scrutinise that which is appropriate to it, then it would probably work. However, the ordinary work of the Seanad would be completely overwhelmed if it were to take seriously the scrutiny of EU legislation in the absence of adequate resources and support. As matters stand, what is proposed would make a farce of the Seanad. Under the Constitution, the Upper House's primary responsibility - and what it has done damn well, actually - is to introduce legislation on social issues and so forth, as many of my colleagues have done, and to correct Government legislation by amendment in instances where it is wrong.

No one should be under the illusion that working Senators - I do not refer here to the part-timers - do not put in at least as much time as any Member of the Dáil whom I have come across during my 27 years as a Member of the Upper House.

I note that it was somebody else and not the Chairman who said that.