Dáil debates

Tuesday, 5 July 2011

Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2011: Second Stage

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Richard Boyd BarrettRichard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)

There is nothing surer than the need for political reform. The people of this country desperately want reform and for their politicians to be brought down to earth, taken out of the bubble of the Houses of the Oireachtas and planted with their feet firmly in the ground where ordinary citizens are forced to suffer the effects of bad political decisions.

In the context of the obvious need for accountability and politicians who are responsive to the needs and wishes of the public, this Bill and almost anything the Members of this Dáil might say is virtually irrelevant because of the EU-IMF package which hands over the control of this country to the unaccountable representatives of bankers and bondholders who care nothing about ordinary people. This Bill merely shifts the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic of the economy and Irish society. It does not even proceed in the direction of addressing the need for political reform. The measure to ensure by-elections are called within six months is reasonable, if overdue, and it is also reasonable to reduce the spending limits on presidential elections. I support the abolition of the Seanad because it is an elitist institution which does not represent every sector of society. The question remains of how to develop a political system that genuinely represents the people. Can we achieve that aim by providing less democracy and public representation or do we need more democracy and better and more responsive representation? The Seanad should be replaced by another tier of democracy composed of genuinely elected representatives of all sectors of society. As non-professional politicians, these representatives would not be paid but they would have real powers over local services and issues, as well as oversight of this House.

The plan to reduce the number of Deputies goes in the wrong direction. Savings of €3 million have been suggested as the maximum that can be achieved from this measure. We all want to cut the cost of government but, given the obscene level of remuneration that many politicians and Ministers receive, why do we not cut their pay? We could save far more than €3 million by cutting the pay of politicians. If we did so, they would also be more responsive to ordinary people because the big problem is that they are unaffected by the decisions they make over the lives and incomes of others. If our pay and conditions were more closely aligned to that of the average citizen, perhaps this House would be more representative of the needs and aspirations of ordinary people. To put it simply, instead of reducing the number of public representatives we should be cutting politicians' pay, expenses and leaders' allowances. It would not only be fair in itself to cut the pay of politicians at a time when they are slashing the incomes of ordinary people, but it might also make them more wary of imposing austerity on those who cannot afford it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.