Mary Fitzpatrick (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. I am here in LH 2000 as well.

I have a couple of questions for the witnesses. While the Bill is very welcome, I get their point that it is too limited and not ambitious enough. I wonder if it is trying to be all things to all men. I am thinking in particular about the points we have raised with the witnesses on the veracity of communication and the messaging. Should this Bill not be dealing with those issues? They are issues that do not relate just to elections or referendums but ones we are contending with on a daily basis in the political discourse and the political environment.

The witnesses spoke about the Digital Services Act and other legislation and policies that are being pursued. Would it be better if the electoral commission did not deal with any of those issues? Those are issues we recognise have to be dealt with in real life on a constant basis and the electoral reform work of this Bill should focus exclusively on the activity that takes place on polling days, be they referendums or local, European or general elections. That is a strategic question in respect of the Bill.

The other issue I wish to raise is more operational in nature. It has to do with the register of electors. I listened closely to what the witnesses said about what is currently proposed but there is one aspect I do not get, and I come from a local authority background and have a great deal of respect for those working in franchise. I have also had my challenges with the register of electors so I have a real interest in this issue. I believe we have an opportunity to improve it but I am not convinced by the idea that on the one hand we are proposing to have a centralised rolling register of electors and on the other hand we will continue to maintain the maintenance and management of it in each of the local authorities. What is the witnesses' opinion on that? I appreciate that there will be an initial transition that would have to be managed but I refer to setting as the objective having one centralised register on a national basis, which would obviously have to be digital, online and verifiable.

The other two points raised were about having reports on elections and referendums and not just when the Government does not get the result it wants. Do the witnesses believe it should be a statutory requirement to prepare such a report within six or 12 months? In what sort of timeframe should a report be required? Should it be prepared by the electoral commission and what would be the parameters of that report?

In terms of penalties, what are the witnesses’ views on compulsory voting and requiring compulsory participation? Do they believe that is a good or bad thing? Would it work? If it was to be made compulsory what type of penalties would be imposed? I believe the current penalty is a class A fine or something like that. What are their views on that? I thank both witnesses and Mr. Farrell also.