Dáil debates

Wednesday, 11 May 2005

Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2005: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

12:00 pm

Photo of M J NolanM J Nolan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)

During the lifetime of each Dáil the Houses of the Oireachtas are presented with an Electoral (Amendment) Bill to take account of the shift in population in various parts of the country. As reflected in the census of population that gave rise to this legislation, in recent years we have seen a continuance in the shift of population from west to east. We have seen an expansion of the greater Dublin area. As a consequence, the constituency of Kildare will have an extra seat. The Meath constituency will also have increased representation in the next Dáil as a result of the commission's deliberations. The Bill's main purpose is to review Dáil constituencies and bring them into line with the up-to-date population data set out in the 2002 census and, in that context, to implement the recommendations contained in the related Dáil constituency commission report.

One aspect that concerns me a little is that, while we are amending constituencies and representation in Dáil Éireann for the next general election, the basis on which we are legislating will be out of date by that time since early in 2006 a new census of population will be taken. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility for this Administration and the relevant Departments to ensure the census report is published. Any amending legislation necessary to reflect the shift in population could be put in place by the time of the next general election which we are told will take place in spring 2007.

It begs the question of whether there might be a constitutional challenge to the results of the next election if it is found that the census of population report for 2006 and the constituencies at the general election which will take place in 2007 are found to be in conflict. I do not think it beyond the bounds of possibility for the Government to introduce legislation to reflect the census of 2006. If there was a political commitment from all sides of the House rather than merely from the Government benches and the requisite political consensus, it would be possible. I urge and encourage the Government and Opposition leaders to do so.

The process of reviewing constituencies means that there will always be winners and losers. However, the recommendations should be taken as a total package. I support this legislation because of the commission's independent nature and the fact that it sat and deliberated, seeking and receiving submissions on the various constituencies. It did so in a fair manner. However, I disagree with several of its recommendations. I was one of those who made a submission on the commission's report, as I did with previous commissions, regarding several constituencies, something reflected by several speakers in both Houses.

In the census of population for 2002, Longford had a population of 31,000, Carlow, 46,000 and Leitrim, just under 26,000. Since, with 166 Deputies, the average representation per Member is approximately 23,000, Longford should have at least one Deputy; Carlow, two, and Leitrim, one. However, because of the breakdown of the constituencies that the commission has recommended, it could happen that both Leitrim and Carlow will not be represented individually in the next Dáil. Longford, with a population of 31,000, will be represented because of the constituency profile. It has been included with Westmeath but part of the latter has been included with Meath in order that the balance is in favour of Longford, thus ensuring it will be represented in the next Dáil.

The case being made by Leitrim and Carlow is fair and valid. I am disappointed that the commission failed to take account not only of my submission but also those of all the political parties and others which showed more than a mere vested interest in politics. Submissions were made by chambers of commerce, local authorities and several other organisations in the county concerned. This is the second time we see parts of several small counties being so affected, with part of Carlow now being pushed into the constituency of Wicklow.

It is fair to say it is unfortunate that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, is not here since he is well aware of these views, representing as he does that part of Carlow now in the constituency of Wicklow. I also emphasise that the people of Carlow are in the south-eastern administrative regions for health, tourism and development purposes, whereas the vast majority of the constituents represented in the Wicklow constituency are closer to Dublin and reflect this in those whom they elect. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is a very diligent attender of clinics in the east Carlow area, for which he is to be commended.

It is important that we highlight such aspects. Article 16.2.2° of the Constitution states a Member of the Dáil should represent between 20,000 and 30,000 constituents. On that basis, it would be a sad state of affairs if the counties of Carlow and Leitrim were not represented individually in the next Dáil. We all know the tradition and loyalty to county collars. If one had a Dáil with 166 Members but without separate representation from two counties, that would be a sad day, not merely for the counties but also for politics. Only two counties could be affected by the commission's recommendations. As I outlined, I accept the commission's independence but feel, having been so affected for the second time, some of its members may be looking over their shoulders when finalising the exact details of their report.

The commission's terms of reference stated very baldly that the breaching of county boundaries should be avoided where possible. In three cases that has not happened. It is unfortunate that the three cases where that has not happened are three of the smaller counties. If anything, we should be proactive in ensuring the smaller counties are protected. However, for the second time in the case of my county, that has not happened.

The terms of reference also state there should be due regard to geographical considerations, including significant physical features. In my own case and that of Wicklow, the population of which is growing substantially, something that next year's census will show, there is a physical geographical divide in the shape of the Wicklow Mountains which run right through the county. The people of Blessington have far more in common with the people of Tallaght than with those of Greystones or Bray. The people of Baltinglass would have much more in common with Carlow than with the eastern coast of the county. The population movement is from the west to the east, something that is reflected in the commission's report which recommends increased representation for such counties as Kildare and Meath.

Before I finish, I would like to mention electronic voting and the fact that we have spent up to €50 million on equipment that is lying idle. It is a disgrace that we continue to store it at great cost to the public purse and without any idea of where we are going. I would like to see that matter resolved before we go to the public again.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.