Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

Despite the fact the Technical Group is quite disparate, we try to capture the essence of important issues and wish to engage positively in this reform process. We have quite a lot of ideas, some of which have received broad backing within our group, and others that emanated from individuals. While we are not opposed to the measures, we do have difficulties with some of them. Perhaps the biggest difficulty is that there is a big difference between having a vision that is delivered in increments, and a piecemeal approach. We are concerned that the latter approach is being taken. We want to see not just Dáil reform but also broader political reform.

I acknowledge that this is the first of three increments that have been promised on Dáil reform. However, it will not be possible to achieve real Dáil reform - where localism is placed where it should be, in the locality - unless there is meaningful local government reform. We will always be dominated by a local approach unless we also adopt local government reform. We must see both types of reform as part of a broader vision.

Like my Technical Group colleagues, I am in favour of political change, including Dáil reform. The public deserve nothing less. It was one of the three big topics raised on doorsteps during the general election campaign.

We must strike a balance between a formal and informal process of reform. The process itself was quite informal and while there was a positive aspect to that, the negative aspect was that there was not enough time towards the end. That lesson has been learned from this particular process.

We would like to have seen Ministers' question time changed so senior Ministers would have to attend the Chamber. We want to see a proper engagement in a full Chamber. I am disappointed, however, that is not on the agenda. It is not just about having people in the Chamber, but also having Members here to do meaningful things that the public can understand.

I support some of the points that have already been made concerning Friday sittings of the Dáil. We feel that such matters could be dealt with on Tuesday mornings, or even by lengthening the Tuesday evening sittings. We have no difficulty with Friday sittings so long as they are meaningful and include the Order of Business. We are concerned that having a quorum of ten Members is more about optics, although I acknowledge that what is intended is a serious change.

We would like to have seen something more serious done to address the issue of guillotines. Another issue with which we have serious concerns, is the inability of Members to raise points they feel strongly about. Earlier this week, Deputy Mattie McGrath was asked to leave the House because he wanted to make a point he felt strongly about. We sought a small change to Standing Order 26 to allow for a brief statement by a representative of each Opposition party or group. We were not seeking the right for every one of us to make such a statement, but only a representative. We thought that was a modest proposal to overcome a problem that will arise later this year because it was not addressed in the current batch of measures. The citizens of this country are sovereign. The Constitution says absolutely nothing about political parties. The architecture of the standing orders has been devised by political parties. We may be a nuisance to many people, but we are here for the next five years if this Government lasts that long. We want to play a meaningful role, but we do not want to be sidelined where we cannot have somebody stand up to represent our group. We thought that was a fairly modest change, and I am very disappointed it was not taken on board. We looked for others, but this was our primary concern with the standing orders.

We have concerns about the time limit being put on the Order of Business because we do not know how workable that is if votes are called. The Ceann Comhairle is then required to restrict people from raising legitimate things, so we have concerns about that. We are concerned that the topical debates will deliver too much localism. It will be down to each of us individually to make sure that does not happen. There was something akin to an education process during the last election campaign. This crisis happened because the focus of attention was not on national issues. We must make sure this Dáil stays focused on those national issues. I think people wanted us to come to this Parliament and not be paid over and above the very generous salary that we receive for roles such as chairing committees. That has not been addressed here.

We provided the Minister of State a comprehensive document on how parties are funded. Most members of our group do not get party funding and we are not looking for party funding. A party allowance is paid to the leader of each political party, but that is not possible with independents. If we agree to employ additional people to make our group function better, that should not be criticised.

We would also like to have seen less focus on the Whip system. There are independent thinkers in all political parties, as well as the independents. We would like to have seen a relaxation of the party Whip system to take account of that. We will continue to engage in the process, but we want to see that the process is meaningful and that this Dáil is a very different place at the end of its lifetime.

See this speech in context