Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)

We can make arrangements for that on Sevastopol Street or somewhere like that. Perhaps the Minister might outline his thoughts on the issue.

By restricting the consultation process to those on the voter register, the Government cannot achieve a true reflection of opinion on these issues. By its nature, the voter register excludes those in the Six Counties, the Irish diaspora and those under 18. It does not allow us to identify people in some communities, such as the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

In our submission we outlined how this aspect of consultation should take place. We indicated that "the Central Statistics Office should be charged with responsibility for random citizen selection within the demographic categories, as it has the public trust in the gathering of demographic data on behalf of the Irish people". It is not an appropriate task for private polling companies, as the Minister mentioned. The electoral register is not a sufficient tool as it will automatically exclude young people from participation. It is ironic that there was a suggestion that they be included but the process seems to exclude that cohort. The electoral register will not adequately represent people living in marginalised communities, many of whom are not on the register.

Sinn Féin believes the constitutional convention should be fully inclusive in composition and use a participatory process, actively involving the economically disadvantaged, the socially marginalised, citizens from all 32 counties of Ireland, Unionists and their official representatives, citizens in the diaspora and our newest citizens. That is in addition to the political parties, civil society representatives and those with relevant academic and legal expertise. We must also ensure equal representation of women on the convention, which should hold its hearings throughout the island to get a geographical spread of views. This would have provided the basis for a real conversation about the future of Ireland and its people.

The convention must consider the broadest possible scope of matters, including guarantees of economic and social rights, the extension of voting rights for northern citizens and citizens in the diaspora and the architecture necessary to establish a more robustly inclusive, fully representative and accountable democracy with mechanisms for direct participation. Sinn Féin wants to see a rights-based society. The new constitution arising from a process of consultation must include maximum human rights guarantees, and it must contain all the modern equality and human rights protections that meet our international obligations. Sinn Féin wants to see a constitution that is seen as a benchmark for the international community. The new constitution arising from this process should not only be exemplary, but also be durable, justifying the investment of resources, time and effort that will go into it. To do this, the process must be realistically framed and not rushed by an inappropriate deadline of 12 months. This will only lead to accusations that the process is rushed and tokenistic. Judging by what is on offer tonight, that accusation may prove correct.

Sinn Féin supports bringing proposals for a refreshed constitution before the people in a referendum in 2016. That would truly be an honourable way of marking the 100th anniversary of the 1916 Rising. We can generally agree that the topics listed in the Government's position paper should be considered by the convention but we do not agree that "other matters" are simply an afterthought. We believe in comprehensive reform of our political institutions at all levels, including the Oireachtas, local government, regional government and all-Ireland co-operation and governance mechanisms, including an all-Ireland council of Ministers, the all-Ireland parliamentary forum and the all-Ireland consultative civic forum. There should also be electoral reform in its widest sense and the introduction of mechanisms for participatory democracy at all levels of governance so that resulting constitutional provisions or amendments will be coherent and holistic.

We fully agree that fundamental Seanad reform is necessary but we do not agree that Seanad reform should be outside the scope of consideration by the convention. The public should not be asked to vote on Seanad reform separately. To reduce Seanad reform to a question of whether to abolish it is too simple. Large numbers of people see the need for a second House and a second tier in our democracy. Asking the people if they are for or against the abolition does not leave room for discussion about reform, so the Government is going at the problem the wrong way.

The cost of running the Seanad must be reduced and as it stands, it cannot be defended. I would not try to do so and most Members would not even try to do so. Nevertheless, the issue cannot be boiled down to a simple "Yes"or ""No" question on retaining the House. The constitutional convention provides an opportunity for us to debate the matter, and some of the members of the Minister's party would agree with me on it.

See this speech in context