Dominic Hannigan (Meath East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Spring for kindly sharing his time. He spoke earlier about family connections with this House and I remind him that it was 70 years ago this week when his grandfather was first elected to this House.

I congratulate Deputy Spring and his family on that anniversary. Like many of the speakers in this debate, I have had the opportunity to serve in the Seanad. I spent three and a half years there before entering this House in 2011. Therefore, I have a knowledge and understanding of the role the Seanad plays in our political system. I have also had the opportunity as a Member of listening to and learning from some of the greatest parliamentarians of our time. I have seen the Seanad operate on good days but I have also seen it operate on bad days. I was present for the debates on NAMA, civil partnership and the bank guarantee when voices from around the House raised issues that had not been considered in this House. Senators put down amendments to Bills that had not been suggested by this House to help to improve legislation. However, I have also been there on occasions which were not so positive. I recall farcical situations when business was stopped to facilitate games of golf. I listened to debates around claims for expenses by Members which were suspect, to say the least. I have seen the Seanad vote to change legislation, only to see the Government of the day vote again to overturn the first vote. During my time in the Seanad I saw the Government of the day and the Seanad of the day, by their actions, make the case for abolition.

In the context of this debate, one must ask if there is sufficient good being done in the Seanad to justify its continued existence. I have no doubt that there are individuals of worth there. I also have no doubt that the current crop of Senators are decent, well-meaning national servants. The views explored and exposed by many of the Senators have not been shared and explored elsewhere. However, the institution in which the Senators serve is rotten and in my view, rotten beyond reform. There have been ten or 12 different proposals for reform of the Seanad since 1937 but none of them has come to fruition. There has been much talk, for instance, of extending the franchise to all university graduates. That is fine if one is a graduate but it is still elitist vis-à-vismy friends, family and neighbours who never had the opportunity to go to college in the first place. There has also been much talk about extending the role of the Seanad, giving it more oversight on European issues and so forth but we have committees to do things like that. Certainly, we should increase the power of committees where necessary and increase their ability to hold the Executive to account. However, we do not need to reform the Seanad to do that. People have spoken about how the Seanad holds the Government to account but that is being done elsewhere too. It is being done in the broadcast, print and social media. Indeed, Twitter in many ways is the Seanad of the people of today. The simple fact is that the Seanad simply replicates what is going on elsewhere and what is being done well elsewhere. It has become little more than an expensive crèche for aspiring TDs and a nursing home for elder states-people. We need to do what other small, mature democracies have done, namely, shut it down and move on.

See this speech in context