John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)

I wish to share my time with Deputy Nolan.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2005. I agree with the comments of Deputy McHugh and the Minister, Deputy Roche, that the report of the constituency boundaries commission should be viewed and accepted in its totality. To do otherwise would be to weaken the commission's independence and our acceptance of its independent assessment of the constituency boundaries which would be determined, in effect, by whatever Government happened to be in office.

The purpose of the Bill is to implement the recommendations of the report of the independent constituency commission which was published in January 2004. The purpose is to revise Dáil constituencies to reflect the 2002 census of population. The Bill also addresses an issue that has arisen regarding the definition of "election expenses". Many of these issues arise as a result of the Kelly case. In the short time available to me I will not go into them. I listened to the comments and questions of Deputy Fleming and will be interested to hear the replies in due course.

On account of changes in the distribution of population the Oireachtas has revised constituencies at least once every 12 years and regular revision of constituencies is determined by the Constitution. This, in effect, requires that constituencies be revised whenever changes result in populations per Deputy significantly out of line with the national average. The commission report needs to be set in the context of the 2002 census. The population growth revealed, with the new commuter culture around Dublin, indicated serious imbalances in representation in the existing 42 constituencies. The report will result in an increase in the number of constituencies from 42 to 43, while still retaining 166 Members.

The growing population of west County Dublin and neighbouring counties is reflected in the proposed change of Dublin Mid-West from a three to a four seat constituency. While we may all consider the report globally, of particular interest to us is what is happening in our own area. Dublin Mid-West was a new constituency in the 2002 general election. As a representative for that constituency, I welcome its formation. For most of my voting life, Clondalkin was divided in two by the canal. One part resided in Dublin West with Lucan moving westwards while the other resided with Tallaght in Dublin South-West. The formation of the Dublin Mid-West constituency brought Clondalkin together as a unit and local representation is better as a result. Issues are more clearly defined and focused, which I welcome.

I welcome the addition to Dublin Mid-West from Dublin West of approximately 12,000 people in Palmerstown and Quarryvale and look forward to both meeting and representing them. Lucan, Palmerstown and Quarryvale are in the one local authority electoral area for South Dublin County Council. However, Palmerstown and Quarryvale were included in the Dublin West Dáil constituency, the majority of which is in the Fingal County Council area. In many ways, Palmerstown has been divided. It is divided by the Lucan Road; served by two Garda stations and divided from what I would have viewed its natural geographic constituency. Everything in it is in common with Lucan.

The people of Palmerstown are represented with people from areas such as Castleknock and Blanchardstown. The people of Quarryvale are represented with people from areas such as Mulhuddart and Hartstown. Quarryvale is part of a single RAPID programme area with Rowlagh and Neilstown, which was divided.

The change in the Bill will focus representation and the issues that will be addressed will be much more coherent and focused. It has been difficult for both local and national representatives dealing with Lucan and Palmerstown in such a divided way. When constituents approach public representatives, they may not be aware whether the issue is a local authority or a national one. The division has certainly caused much local concern and I welcome the proposed changes.

Each constituency returns three, four or five Members and the Constitution determines the current position as recognised by the statutory terms of reference of the commission. The imperative of having three, four and five Members allows for the practice of proportional representation. Deputy Sargent was particularly anxious to see the single transferable vote system remain. The results in the UK general election last week were particularly interesting. I agree that the type of proportional representation system we operate here is particularly effective. Deputy Ring expressed concern over losing the craic if we had a quick result as happens in the United Kingdom. However, the reality of the UK system resulted in 70% or 80% of seats not changing hands owing to the first past the post system. The British Labour Party secured a little more than one third of the votes and got considerably more than half of the seats. The smaller parties in the United Kingdom do not secure seats in line with the percentage of votes they receive. The UK system favours the larger rather than the smaller parties whereas our proportional representation system is more equitable.

I agree with the Government's acceptance of the commission's recommendations as a single package of related measures bringing Dáil constituencies into line with the prevailing population patterns in accordance with constitutional imperatives and associated legal requirements. We can all recognise that it might have been possible for the commission to suggest solutions other than those recommended in the report. However, I understand it took account of nearly 100 submissions made to it from all sources such as political parties, local authorities, public representatives, organisations and individuals in formulating its recommendations. Its independent determination of the issues should now be respected. By picking out individual recommendations we would undermine the reasons for establishing an independent commission in the first place. The precedent of adhering to the commission's advice and recommendations should not be broken.

I join the Minister in complimenting all the members of the commission, Mr. Justice Lavan, Mr. Kieran Coughlan, Ms Deirdre Lane, Mr. Niall Callan and Ms. Emily O'Reilly. While they faced a difficult task, they did a good job. I also compliment them on a number of initiatives, particularly the establishment of a website to facilitate public access. This is the sort of action we require from bodies which operate in the interests of the public. They should keep in touch with the public and make it easier to communicate and work with them.

Deputy Fleming suggested that the electoral register be prepared and maintained by An Post rather than the local authorities. Having listened to his suggestion, it has a degree of merit. One of the problems with maintenance by local authorities is that when people move from one area to another, they cannot be easily tracked. This can work both ways resulting in some people losing a vote and others being registered in more than one area. We need to give consideration to this issue.

We may disenfranchise people if we do not give more detailed consideration to the provision of postal voting. The system needs to be modernised. For example, students, those in hospital and many others need to have such a service in place. They also need to feel confident in the postal voting system. The system has the potential to be abused and needs to be tightened.

Particularly as we move towards enactment of the Disability Bill, it is key that everybody is treated on a fair and equal basis. Many of our polling stations pose a difficulty regarding access. I ask the Minister to ensure all polling stations allow full access for those with disabilities.

I welcome the Bill which is sensible and reflects the changes in population that have occurred to ensure people in each constituency are represented equally and fairly. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context