Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)

That is correct. I congratulate Deputy Catherine Murphy on introducing the Bill, which Sinn Féin will be supporting. We are of the view that it is important to engage in further discussion on this legislation on Committee Stage. That said, the Bill is far from the finished product and there is room for improvement in respect of it. I say that as a republican who considers all legislation which comes through the House from an all-Ireland perspective. In that context, there is a glaring omission from the Bill but I will return to that later.

The debacle which attended the most recent presidential election highlights the need for reform with regard to how we elect the President. This is a matter to which those of all parties and none alluded during the presidential election campaign. The Taoiseach indicated that it will be considered in the context of the upcoming constitutional convention.

Sinn Féin does not have a major difficulty with section 1(b) of the Bill, which proposes to reduce the number of years for which a person may serve as President from seven to five. Arguments can be made both in favour of and against changing the length of the presidential term.

Section 1(c) deals with the age limit which applies in respect of those who can stand for election to the Office of President and we are of the view that this matter requires further debate. There are many capable young people who, under the current age limit, would be prevented from standing for election to the office. I accept that it is too simplistic to compare the Office of President with most other forms of employment. However, the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 outlaw direct and indirect discrimination on the basis of age. If the relevant provisions were applied in respect of the election of the President, then the State would be acting illegally. As already indicated, this is a simplistic argument and I am merely putting it forward in order to highlight the folly of having an age limit in place.

Further debate is required in respect of section 1(d) and (e). Requiring that someone must secure the signatures of 20 Members of the Houses in order to run for President clearly has the effect of confining the ability to seek election to those who are either members of larger political parties or who have associations with such parties. While there is a large number of Independent Deputies in the current Dáil - these Members comprise the Technical Group - that was not always the case in previous Dáils and it may not be the case in respect of future ones. Were it not for the fact that there is such a large number of Independent Deputies in this Dáil, there would only have been six rather than seven candidates in the recent presidential election. Consideration must be given to the issue of the number of signatures required from Oireachtas Members in order for someone to obtain a nomination in respect of running for the Office of President.

The Bill contains a proposal to the effect that a person could secure a nomination by gathering 10,000 signatures from members of the public. While I do not want to commit to a particular number, this is certainly a proposal in respect of which Sinn Féin would be in favour. We are of the view that what is proposed would enhance the nomination process relating to presidential elections. However, it remains to be seen how we would proceed in the context of the logistics involved and in respect of verifying the validity of the signatures gathered and ensuring that those who supplied them are on the electoral register. The theory behind this proposal, which we support, is good.

I referred earlier to a glaring omission. The latter relates to the right of Irish citizens in the Six Counties to vote in presidential elections. The Bill does not refer to this matter. My party welcomed the Taoiseach's commitment to the effect that during the deliberations of the constitutional convention - which is due to be established shortly - consideration can be given to extending voting rights to citizens in the Six Counties. Extending such rights would represent a natural outworking of the terms of the Good Friday Agreement and is something which should happen in due course. Since the establishment of the Office of President, Irish citizens have been denied the right to vote in presidential elections. Successive Administrations have failed to address this matter and nothing has changed. However, I hope the constitutional convention will take action in respect of it. If the Bill progresses to Committee Stage, my party will certainly be considering tabling an amendment in this regard.

The Good Friday Agreement enshrines the right of people in the Six Counties to hold Irish citizenship. However, these individuals are disenfranchised when it comes to choosing the President of Ireland. I ask Deputies to reflect on the term "President of Ireland". For me, this term implies someone who represents all 32 counties. The terms "President of the Irish Free State" or "President of the Twenty-six Counties" are not used. There is no reason, therefore, for not allowing people of all 32 counties to elect the President.

Having defeated repeated attempts to impose second-class citizenship on sections of society in the Six Counties for many decades, Sinn Féin would not like to see a situation develop whereby the political establishment in this State would get away with paying lip service to those in the Six Counties and their rightful place within Irish society. It is ironic that citizens of the Six Counties can win all-Ireland championships, play for the national rugby team and stand for the Office of President, as was the case with Martin McGuinness in the most recent election. Not only can people from the Six Counties stand for the Office of President, they can, as was the case with Mary McAleese, actually become President. Despite this fact, those to whom I refer cannot exercise their democratic right to influence who may occupy the Office of President. An amendment to the Constitution and political will on the part of the Government are all that would be required in order to allow citizens to vote in presidential elections.

When Mary McAleese left office in recent weeks, she received high praise from Members on all sides and rightly so because she was a fine President. She received that praise because of the way she sought to include people across the island of Ireland. The inclusive way in which she sought to fulfil her duties as President was rightly recognised by both Deputies and Senators and also by all members of society. However, some of those who fell over themselves in the quest to see who could bestow the most praise on Mary McAleese are the very individuals who are now frustrating the process to extend voting rights to citizens within the Six Counties. I hope this matter will be addressed sooner rather than later.

Not only does this issue affect citizens of the Six Counties, it is also - in light of the increase in the number of people who are emigrating - becoming more relevant to those who live abroad. I refer to people who are being forced to leave Ireland as a result of the disastrous economic policies pursued by previous Governments. I am not just focusing on the previous Administration in this regard, I am referring to successive Governments. They are now being denied the opportunity to determine who is best placed in terms of forming a Government to introduce policies, which would turn around the economy and which, hopefully, would lead to a situation where they could come home and contribute to restoring this nation's dignity and integrity. I understand that the Bill was tabled in an attempt to make the presidential nomination more inclusive, and my party welcomes that. However, that inclusiveness must include affording all citizens the right to fully participate in the democratic and civic life of the nation. I would point out to the House that being an Irish citizen does not stop at the Border.

See this speech in context