Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

It is not just politicians who are concerned by the proposed changes. People who live in the constituencies affected are also concerned. The impression might be given that it is just a matter of politicians looking after their own jobs, but there is a wider concern about many of the changes that are being proposed. It is important to put that on the record.

We oppose the legislation because we feel it is fundamentally flawed. We have put our views regarding the constituency commission's recommendations on the record of the Dáil, and my colleague, Deputy Morgan, raised the matter on the Adjournment some months ago, at which time we asked the Minister to reject the commission's recommendations and instead introduce legislation to allow for the formation of six-seater and seven-seater constituencies, after which the commission would be reconvened. Regrettably, the Minister has not done that.

Sinn Féin previously made a substantial submission to the constituency commission regarding the election of Members for Dáil constituencies. That submission was driven not just by the need to consider boundaries in the context of the 2002 census results. More importantly, it came in the context of what constitutes a just electoral system. Our concerns centre on the increase in the number of three-seat constituencies in the State and the proposed division of County Leitrim between the two proposed new constituencies of Sligo-North Leitrim and Roscommon-South Leitrim. It is an accepted fact that a larger constituency size enhances the proportionality of the electoral system as a whole. The recommendations in the constituency commission's report, which are to be implemented under the Bill, take the State further down the road of diluting the proportionality of our electoral system. That is not in the interests of diversity, nor is it in the interests of the people. It amounts to a mutation of the PR STV system. For a third consecutive commission, the number of five-seat constituencies has been cut, while the number of three-seat constituencies has risen steadily. Most worrying about the growth in the number of three-seat constituencies is the way in which it deals with population growth and change.

Sinn Féin is concerned that the existence of three-seater constituencies in certain areas and five-seaters in others creates inequality between voters in different parts of the State. It is discriminatory in that voters in three-seat constituencies have less chance of electing their chosen representative if he or she comes from a smaller party compared with people living in a five-seat constituency, a point Deputy Finian McGrath made very well. Members should contrast the ability of voters in Finglas and Foxrock to elect their chosen representatives in the Dáil. The people of Finglas, in three-seat Dublin North-West, do not have the same opportunity of putting their chosen party or representatives into Leinster House as the people of leafy Foxrock in the five-seat Dún Laoghaire constituency. Is it merely a coincidence that there is a proliferation of three-seat constituencies north of the Liffey, whereas larger constituencies are more common south of the Liffey? Will the people of Leitrim have any chance of electing a representative of their county to the Dáil ever again? Is the legislation restricting the size of constituencies to three-seaters, four-seaters and five-seaters a deliberate attempt by the establishment to keep the marginalised marginalised? One of the constituencies where minor changes are being proposed under the Bill is Dublin North-East, which is currently a three-seat constituency. A major new development has commenced there, in the north area fringe, which will impact heavily on the population in that area. New developments are springing up all over Dublin, and Dublin North-West is another area where this is the case. Boundaries might have to be changed every couple of years. It would make much more sense to have larger multi-seat constituencies, which could accommodate such population shifts without having to change the electoral boundaries constantly, hence our idea of six-seater and seven-seater constituencies.

The restriction in constituency size is designed so that the constituency commission's report delivers the results desired by the larger parties, in particular the Minister's party. No doubt, the Minister will dismiss that critical flaw by referring to the independent nature of the commission. That is not good enough. The essential provision is that the commission is constrained by statute to have constituency sizes of three to five seats. The proportionality that is possible under the PR STV system in place in this State has been substantially diluted through the selective redrawing of constituency boundaries and the reduction in constituency size to three from five seats. Members used to be elected from nine-seat and seven-seat constituencies in the 1920s, when the system was instigated.

Proportional representation with a single transferable vote, PR STV, using multi-seat constituencies, is a unique system, which is hardly practised outside Ireland. It is not designed with the intention of being applied to three-seat constituencies. The number of members returned per constituency is a crucial component of the Irish electoral system. The higher the number of members returned per constituency, the greater the proportionality of the system. Sinn Féin will table amendments to the Bill to amend section 6(2)(b) of the Electoral Act 1997 to allow for the formation of six-seat and seven-seat constituencies. We should not have to do that; it should be the Minister who tables such amendments. Such an amendment would result in progressive legislation. We should withdraw the Bill until the existing legislation is amended. The amendments that Sinn Féin will table later should the Government fail to withdraw the Bill will restore the positive attributes of the PR STV system, with representatives being local and accountable and voters being able to make inter-party and intra-party choices. A larger constituency size brings extra proportionality to the electoral system as a whole. Following that change, the constituency commission could be reconvened to consider the possibility of establishing a six-seat constituency comprising the three counties of Sligo, Leitrim and Roscommon, avoiding the unacceptable division of County Leitrim between the two proposed new constituencies of Sligo-North Leitrim and Roscommon-South Leitrim. That will let us comply with the sensible terms of section 6(2)(c) of the 1997 Act, which states that "the breaching of county boundaries shall be avoided as far as practicable."

The Government needs to recognise that we risk losing the respect of people in areas such as Leitrim for the electoral system when it is seen to be unfairly applied in a way that prevents them from electing their chosen representatives to Parliament. That will no doubt contribute to the growing levels of apathy, and I am sure the Minister is aware of the real anger that exists throughout County Leitrim regarding the changes contained in the Bill.

I will make some final comments on Dublin South-West, my constituency. The difficulty there is the division of the Rathcoole and Saggart areas, and there is a further difficulty affecting people living in Brittas. The townland of Brittas is being cut off. Many people would say that the natural hinterland for Saggart and Rathcoole, particularly given the existence of the M50, will be Dublin South-West, particularly the Tallaght area. Tallaght South includes Saggart, Rathcoole and the area of Brittas, but some areas are not included in that.

I welcome many of the changes in my area, for instance the addition of parts of Firhouse. There has been a ridiculous situation there. At one stage, a footpath formed the division between different parts of the Firhouse area. The whole area of Saggart-Rathcoole, particularly Brittas, needs to be examined.

See this speech in context