Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

If an overwhelming majority of people vote in favour of abolition of the Seanad, we should see that as a desire of the people for reform, not of the Seanad but of this Chamber. Many of the comments made about the accountability of the Executive to the Dáil are true. However, it is rich when comments about what needs to be done in this Chamber come from members of Fianna Fáil, whose members also object to reforms being carried out by this Government. When Fianna Fáil did not like the look of what was happening under the freedom of information legislation, it quickly changed that legislation to restrict access to information that should be freely available to citizens. Many of those restrictions have been reversed by this Government.

The Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Bill is about giving more powers to the Dáil to conduct inquiries without putting charges against individuals in order that we can gain information and make this Chamber work better. Many of the faults and failings of the Dáil as a Chamber are not so much about what this or previous Governments do or have done but about what we, as Members of the Chamber, actually do. Too often we do not act like parliamentarians but sit screeching and roaring at each other across the Chamber. At committee level, we run the risk on many occasions of committees having to be suspended or not even starting because we cannot even get a quorum to attend in the committee rooms. That is a disgraceful way for parliamentarians to act. When people talk about the lack of confidence they have in us and in how we act as democratic parliamentarians, it is that which concerns them.

Very little has been said during much of the course of this debate about where we see our own failings inside this Chamber. There is talk about parliamentary questions, Topical Issue debates and so on, but there is a great deal we can do to make this Chamber work better and more efficiently. Many of the contributions during the long debates that take place are very much politically driven rather than legislation-driven. They are not about people trying to take a strong legislative viewpoint to improve legislation and make it work better for people in this country. The debate is all about taking a political potshot at members of the Government, with little or no thinking put into it. What we should be doing to drive the discussion of the proposed referendum is to ask what those of us who are not Ministers or Ministers of State can do, as parliamentarians, to act as a counterbalance to what happens within the Executive. That is why I so completely support much of what the Taoiseach is doing. I believe he has a genuine commitment to make this Chamber work better, if we are prepared to work with him.

There have been some mistakes in the way committees were set up but the intention was to have a greater number of members involved in order that we can act on the scrutiny of legislation and fulfil our role in marking the Departments of Government assigned to each committee. Unfortunately, I do not see that happening. Everybody tells us how important Europe is, for example, and how much legislation comes from there, but one would be hard-pressed to get many Members of this House to come to scrutinise the legislation for which they are responsible. We need to change that.

There is a great opportunity for us to highlight the deficiencies of both Chambers during the course of the proposed referendum campaign and we should use it so that people can demand we become more accountable to them and that we are able to act as a greater counterpoint to the Executive. That was the initial reason the Oireachtas, the Executive and the Presidency were established in the way they were - it was so that no one group would have too much power to dictate to others. I believe the Taoiseach and the Ministers involved have a genuine commitment to those types of reform and we should have that type of discussion rather than take simplistic potshots. Fianna Fáil's use of the opportunity to attack this legislation has all the markings of a political attack on the Government rather than a well-thought out, support the Seanad type of campaign. The former Minister for Justice has been referred to a few times. He was one of the very architects who sought to restrict freedom of information during the course of the previous Administration but is now campaigning like a knight in shining armour to save the Seanad. This not only smacks of hypocrisy but is almost laughable.

There is an opportunity here. As Members of this Parliament we should demand of ourselves to consider what sort of reforms we can see happening in this Chamber and in the committees. The committees can offer a great opportunity to hold a Government to account if we consider the work they do and work them properly on our own behalf. If we look at every way this Chamber works we can demand that reforms be carried out. We have to find out why our people are resistant to some of these changes. It may be because they feel the people whom they elected to this House have no great interest in seeing these reforms work. As it stands, in our political system one is elected for reasons of what is considered to be clientelism and localism and this is seen as the way one approaches one's work as a Teachta Dála. If we are to change that, we have to give real power back to this Chamber in the way Deputies make decisions about people's lives by way of legislation.

I have nothing against Members of the Seanad and I was a Member of that House, but I believe it is surplus to requirements at this time. We can afford to abolish the Seanad. That is not in any way being disparaging about current or former Members of the Seanad. People work hard in every job they do as Members of the Oireachtas, whether in the Dáil or the Seanad. However, I believe we can afford to abolish the Seanad. Perhaps we should consider putting additional resources into the committee structures in order that we can have a real resource to counterpoint the Departments with which we deal.

Perhaps additional resources could be provided to Members who produce reports on legislation or examine the work of Ministers. That is the approach we should be taking instead of the simplistic potshots that seem to mar this type of debate.

See this speech in context