Gay Mitchell (Dublin South Central, Fine Gael)

This legislation is the product of the insolence of office. The Dáil has become a rubber stamp and now the Government, which has been in office far too long, expects the people to become a rubber stamp. I am disturbed to hear Government spokespersons and backbenchers talk about the Opposition raising issues about this matter. What do they think our job is if it is not to raise issues? This is probably one of the most important pieces of legislation to come before this House in my time as a Member. It is extremely important legislation. If former Deputy Des O'Malley were in the House, he would stand by the Republic in decrying how this legislation has been rammed through this House.

A Green Paper should have been published setting out the alternatives available followed by a White Paper after a consultation process into which the public had an opportunity for input. At the very least, there should have been cross-party agreement in the House about the necessity of changing the way people register their votes. Is there anything more important in a democracy? Did people die in the GPO, giving their lives towards building up this democracy, so that some Minister could get together with a few people who told him this was a great idea and pass legislation binding the House by summoning a majority through the Whips? How is this an acceptable way of dealing with such important legislation?

The way in which we make legislation has changed. Either a few civil servants persuade the Minister or the Minister persuades his civil servants that legislation is required and the Minister brings an item to Cabinet. All he needs is for the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste to give it the nod; a majority will be mustered in the House to put it through. That is no way to behave in a parliamentary democracy even for a Bill dealing with traffic tickets, but for legislation as important as this it is a scandal of the highest order. Not only the Opposition should be speaking out about this. Government backbenchers would have more to say about this if they were worth their salt.

It is possible that this is the most secure system in the world, but it could also be a Trojan horse. I do not know. I do know, however, that I am a Member of Dáil Éireann, sent here by 115,000 people in the city of Dublin, and I am not happy or reassured about this legislation and nor are the people I represent. "Where is the fire?" they ask. They want to know what is the hurry with this legislation. If it works, why not do exactly as Deputy Gilmore said and try it in a few more constituencies and let people have their say? Why is there such a rush to bring this in? Who is demanding it? The answer is that nobody is demanding it. It is typical of the way this House is treated. It has become a rubber stamp for the Government.

Last summer I read a book called The Assassination of Robert Maxwell, written by two distinguished journalists, Martin Dillon and Gordon Thomas, the latter of whom has written extensively and authoritatively on issues concerning Ireland. The central thesis of the book is that Robert Maxwell was assassinated by Mossad. It contends that Mossad stole from the CIA a computer software system called Promis, which put a secret microchip into Chinese computers, enabling it to steal state secrets from China and Canada as well as from many business people. This is not in the slightest bit far-fetched; in fact, it has the ring of truth about it. I do not know much about computers. I do not need to, but I know much about people, this Republic and the values of democracy. I have the right to be convinced by anyone advocating such a dramatic change that there is a case for it. Nobody has convinced me in this instance.

Deputy Gilmore mentioned that the legislation was rammed through the committee, but it should never have been sent to the committee in the first place. Such an important Bill should have been dealt with on the floor of the House. This has implications for the way in which we sustain our democracy. It is not a far-fetched idea that somebody could in the future devise a microchip or an infra-red system, which could operate from a distance, to send our computer system into viral decline. All this might be completely wrong; it could be impossible to do any of this. Of the 166 Members of the House, however, only two or three are convinced that this is not possible. The rest, if they were telling the truth, would admit they did not really know but they obtained assurances from the Minister. If the Minister, in turn, was telling the truth he would say he did not really know, but he obtained assurances from a few so-called experts.

This is vitally important legislation. Bringing in amended legislation to take care of the views of the Opposition is not the way to deal with it. This legislation is so important that if the Government does not listen to the Opposition we should walk out in protest. I have been in this House for 23 years and nobody has ever heard me say this before. This legislation should not proceed until the genuine questions raised by the Opposition are addressed. It should be put on hold until there is real cross-party support and until people's fears and concerns about the implications of such a system for democracy, particularly in light of the absence of a paper trail, are addressed.

See this speech in context