Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Healy referred to what he believed were the Government's broken commitments. That is ironic, given that the legislation before the House was a commitment by the Taoiseach in his capacity as leader of Fine Gael before the last general election and by him, the Tánaiste and the Fine Gael and Labour parties in the programme for Government. The commitment was to hold a referendum.

In an energised contribution, Deputy Finian McGrath mentioned abolitionists versus reformists. It is important to point out that the only people who have the opportunity to abolish the Seanad are the Irish people. I thank the Government for its early establishment of a referendum commission and the appointment of a judge to chair it. From past referendum campaigns, we know how essential it is that people be provided with all of the information and facts in an impartial fashion so they can make an educated and informed decision when voting.

The decision to put to the people a referendum on abolishing the Seanad shows guts. It would be easier for a political leader, including the Taoiseach, to keep trucking along without changing systems. It would be easier for a Fine Gael leader with Fine Gael Senators not to propose that people currently employed in this building should lose their jobs if the Irish people abolish the Seanad. It would have been much easier for the Government not to abolish town councils or not to reduce the number of councillors. Through this referendum Bill, however, the Government is telling the Irish people that, since their private and public sector workplaces have been asked to change practices and, to use that famous phrase, do more with less, including fewer colleagues, so must the Oireachtas change. While the entire world changes around us, we cannot stay in a Leinster House bubble operating a system that we inherited from the British establishment when it ran this country. That history is the reason for our bicameral system and for us being so out of step with other countries of a similar size in the EU. It does not have to do with a lofty, grand constitutional ideal. Like many aspects of this country, we inherited it from the British. As a modern republic that is recreating its economy and society and stabilising our country, it is time that we investigate whether our structures are fit for purpose.

The Fine Gael Party, our leader and the Government have been consistent on this matter. The only party in the last general election to campaign for a reformed Seanad rather than an abolished one was the Green Party, which won no seats in this House. The manifesto of every other political party at least referred to considering the abolition of the Seanad.

Many ideas have been suggested as to how to reform a second House. When I vote on the referendum in the autumn, I will ask whether we need a second House. In the opinion of the Government, myself and many others, we do not. Many countries operate quite well with one house of parliament. I respect many of those who argue to reform and retain the Seanad but some of their arguments are somewhat insulting, elitist and condescending, for example, the idea that the Irish people cannot be trusted to elect their leaders and that, since the people elected to the Dáil are not up to the job, we need experts, specialists, elites and people with the God given right to sit and judge our laws. I trust my electorate and the Irish electorate. If they do not believe that I am up to the job, they can sack me. Why do we need to second guess the electorate? That is not a democratic or republican value.

We have also heard arguments about the need for expert advice. While I agree, I would argue that we were provided with a range of expert advice at the hearings on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. Not one of those people who provided advice was a Member of the Oireachtas. Regardless of their viewpoints, they gave compelling arguments and presented their evidence. I would argue that many of the experts who appeared before the Oireachtas hearings impacted on the formation of legislation more than any Member did. We have seen a format whereby experts can be engaged.

I have heard a great deal about the Seanad amending legislation. The overwhelming majority of the accepted amendments were tabled by the Government. They were often technical in nature and could have been tabled by a Minister at a strengthened Committee Stage.

Many people hold the sincere opinion that elections of the Seanad should be opened up to everyone but this would just create another Dáil. We do not need a second Dáil that would mirror existing structures.

The last argument, which is compelling when first heard, is that there are some very good Senators who would never get elected to the Dáil because they are not involved in the parish pump politics that we too often see. This is not true. Deputy Ross was, as the longest serving Senator, the father of the Seanad. I congratulate him on making the decision to seek election to this House. He was elected with a huge vote. I see no evidence to suggest that the many fine Senators who want to continue making a contribution cannot put their names before the people like every Deputy has done.

It has been mentioned that we are not reforming the Dáil. Deputies and people in the media have mocked Friday sittings. Perhaps many mock them because they have not been present. Those who have been present know that our first job as legislators is to legislate. Before there were Friday sittings, I would have had zero opportunity to table legislation as a Government backbencher. My electorate can now ask whether I took the opportunity of the first Friday of every month to table a Bill on a local or national issue. The efforts of Deputies Healy and Finian McGrath can be measured in this regard. How many Private Members' Bills have they produced? Instead of waffling, moaning or acting as talking heads on media programmes, Friday sittings give every Deputy rather than just Government members the chance to roll up our sleeves and table legislation. I am involved in a cross-party group on mental health that has devised a Private Members' Bill. We would not have had an opportunity to table it without Friday sittings.

I welcome the referendum. There has been a great deal of discussion on reforming the Seanad, but we do not need a second House. This House can do the job. Committees need to be further empowered. Like Deputy Ross, those who are making valuable contributions in the Seanad can put their names forward to contest the next general election for Dáil Éireann.

See this speech in context