Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

For many decades I and the Socialist Party have called for the abolition of the Seanad, and pointed out many decades ago that it is an utterly undemocratic and elitist institution in how it is elected, or more correctly, selected. As we know, the bulk of its members are elected by a tiny electorate of councillors, Dáil Deputies and outgoing Senators with a further 11 appointed by the Taoiseach of the day. Deputies and councillors have numerous votes in Seanad elections. The system makes the Seanad an institution of loyalists from the establishment political parties of the day, and this is the reality. The only independent voices come from the university graduates vote, but here again we find intolerable elitism. What gives university graduates special democratic rights over people who may not have been to college but who have worked or slaved all their lives, pay their taxes and make a contribution? They are denied a vote. The Deputies and councillors with numerous votes as a result of their office have additional votes if they happen to be graduates; it is a rotten borough and totally democratic. It creates a Seanad which is a reflection of the Dáil in its political composition and is superfluous.

I acknowledge that a few people who were or are Senators have used the institution as a forum to advance progressive and important issues. I salute Senator David Norris in particular, who with great courage has campaigned for the civil rights of many people and particularly for the gay community when its members were shamefully criminalised. He used the Seanad as a forum and used the courts. No doubt Senator David Norris and, importantly, the campaigners with him in the extensive campaign, could have found many means with their campaigning abilities to achieve the same end.

The approach of the Government and the Taoiseach to the abolition of the Seanad is replete with cynicism and opportunism. I was dumbfounded to hear the Taoiseach use as an argument against the Seanad the fact it had not been reformed because of 75 years of inaction by the political establishment. He tried to suggest he, for the past 30 years, was not himself at the very heart of the political establishment, being at the very heart of the most establishment party, Fine Gael. There is a possibility the contempt in which a huge majority of ordinary people throughout the country hold the Government, and the contempt they have for its arrogance and hated austerity policies, could lead those in favour of abolition to take advantage of the referendum to deal the Government a blow. This is not ruled out.

I am inclined to abstain from voting on Second Stage of the Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill 2013 because it contains provisions, apart from the referendum, with which I strongly disagree. Candidacy for the Presidency must be nominated by 14 Dáil Deputies. I stand for the abolition of the Presidency. It is another democratic reform which should have been put in place. If there is to be a presidential election it should be open to every citizen to stand. We should not get rid of one undemocratic institution and preserve another. On the basis it contains a number of such elements it is not a reform of the Constitution in any radical way, particularly from a socialist perspective, but I agree with getting rid of one undemocratic institution.

See this speech in context