Pat Deering (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

As a member of the class of 2011, I like several of my colleagues campaigned on a reform platform during the general election campaign that year. Since I have been honoured and privileged to be given the opportunity of representing the constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny, I have discovered that reform of the Dáil and the institutions around here is more than essential. One could argue that significant reform has already taken place, including the banning of corporate donations, meaning the Galway tent will be no more. Linking State funding to ensuring greater participation of women in politics is also important. The number of Deputies has been reduced by eight and the number of Dáil sitting days has been increased by a third. One could argue it is now much easier for Opposition Deputies and backbenchers to introduce legislation, especially on Fridays.

The Topical Issue debate started off with great fanfare. This initiative needs to be reformed and given an extra bit of jizz. Deputy Charles Flanagan has already mentioned some figures and it is disappointing when the relevant Minister fails to attend to answer a question. Earlier today a question on an agricultural matter was answered by the Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation who had no responsibility for that matter. That is an area that needs to be addressed.

We are also considering a different local government structure which will be very important in the near future. We will have bigger and better local government. Our local authority members, the grassroots of our organisations, will be given more power to deal with matters at that level. Their numbers will be reduced from 1,600 to 950 and the number of local authorities will reduce from 114 to 31. All these are very important first steps in giving what most people want - fewer politicians and more democracy. I believe that now is the time to tackle the issue of the Seanad as an institution which has seen little reform since 1937 even though more than ten reports have been commissioned and are now gathering dust on a shelf in some Department.

It is almost impossible to reform the Seanad because of the number of diverse views that seem to exist as we have seen in recent weeks. Ireland, as we know, is a very small country and one House should be sufficient to look after our affairs. This would bring us into line with most European countries of a similar size. The question must be asked as to why we are where we are with the Seanad and I believe the reason is simple. To Mary and Joe Public the Seanad is undemocratic and an ineffective legacy of empire and 1930s social theory. Its type of vocational representation is not found in any other national parliament and has basically been hijacked by political parties over many years.

In recent weeks a number of proposals, including the Bill sponsored by Senators Quinn and Zappone to reform the Seanad, have been launched with great fanfare. Ironically these were launched by people who have served in the Seanad for many years. During that time some served in government and did very little on the reform issue. Senators Quinn and Zappone are again proposing a vocational system, a university system and yet again 11 Senators to be nominated by the Taoiseach of the day. There is nothing very earth-shattering or democratic about this. I believe we will end up with the same old system with the same types of people in the Seanad - I say that with no disrespect to anybody involved. I now feel the people should be given the opportunity to have their say on the future of the Seanad. A proper debate on what will replace it is very important.

A radical reform of how we do business in this House is essential. In my short time here I have discovered that the committees are greatly underused. I have seen the amount of very valuable work that has taken place at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and Marine, of which I am a member, and I feel this must be the way forward. Recently Deputy Eoghan Murphy published a document about reforming the Dáil system and it deserves close scrutiny. I wish to deal with a number of sections with regard to committees.

The removal of the whip within the committee system is essential. Much valuable work is done on a cross-party basis in committees. For example, the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine has done much work with Coillte. This has resulted in the decision today not to sell the forestry rights of Coillte. Much valuable work was done in preparation for that decision today. We did a lot of work on the relationship between our supermarkets and primary producers and this will end up in a report being published in the coming period. However, if we had more powers at committee level we could have been empowered to bring in the only supermarket that had the audacity not to come in to us, that is, Dunnes Stores. Representatives from every other supermarket were prepared to come in to us but no one from Dunnes Stores came in. If we had more power we could have been in a position to get them in to get more information from them. Committees can act as one of the measures of checks and balances. It is also important that committees are in a position to report back to the Dáil in future and a particular day should be set aside for that.

Another matter of reform relates to the Order of Business in the Dáil on a daily basis. It is farcical that we spend half an hour asking the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste, whoever is in the House on a given day, about a particular matter of legislation when all we need do is look at the book, read the list or make a telephone call to get that information. I believe it is a waste of half an hour of Dáil business and we could be doing something more valuable.

Parties have different views on this matter. The Fianna Fáil manifesto of 2011 was very much in favour of the abolition of the Seanad. Now, for whatever reason the party has changed its view completely and one wonders why. As regards the main proponent of the Seanad in its present form, the former Deputy, Mr. McDowell, referred to the Seanad as a cross between a crèche and a convalescent home not long ago. One wonders what has changed his mind since.

I support the Bill. It is an important first step but I look forward in particular to the reforms of the Dáil that will take place to make it a more valuable place for the future.

See this speech in context