Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

If I had a euro for every time the word "reform" was mentioned in this House in the past ten days I would be able to repay the national debt. The time for reform has passed and we have to be radical or redundant in this debate. I commend the Government for showing leadership in putting this question to the people. The only way we can bring about reform is by forcing it. I do not hold any great opinion for or against the Seanad, but we have to be radical and by abolishing the Seanad, we will force this House to reform. One of the results will be a strengthened committee system that can scrutinise legislation. It is suggested we need layers of politicians for this task, but I do not think that is the way to make progress. The 158 politicians left in this House will be more than sufficient to engage in all of the scrutiny required in a country of this size.

I was recently in Ballydehob in west Cork where I visited a get up and go and innovative enterprise, the Wilson family's ceramics heating company. This company is run by extraordinary individuals, but they are frustrated with the Government and by politicians because they believe we could be doing much more. Among the issues they raised were energy costs and refocusing on manufacturing. As we were debating these issues, I suggested one simple step they could take to assist us in our reform efforts was supporting us in the referendum on abolishing the Seanad. Whoever may be in this House after the next election, they can make more progress by having fewer politicians. I ask those who fight for and hide behind democracy why they are terrified of democracy. Real democracy involves putting this question to the people to allow them to decide. Perhaps they should have more say in matters because that is the essence of democracy.

The greatest threat to reform is the practice of playing to the gallery. It has been suggested the number of Dáil sitting days should be increased. That is a notion to which I object strenuously. I do not accept there is a need for longer sitting days. It is a disingenuous suggestion. We have the ability to do more with less and it is nonsense to say we should be here for four or five days a week. That poses the greatest threat to real democracy because it takes us away from our constituents and does not allow us to interact with them. It would create a cocoon in which we would be completely isolated from the public. That is a threat to democracy. I would not like to see this proposal progressing beyond the talk stage, although I am sure that, like many other proposals made in this House, talking is far as it will go.

A number of speakers have referred to the straw man argument in respect of the use of the guillotine. Everything that needs to be said has been said on many issues since I was elected. The only difficulty is that not everybody has said it. I do not think it important for democracy that everybody should say the same repetitive line time and again.

I believe the Seanad should be abolished. The countries that have joined the European Union in recent years have a new found democracy. My wife is from Estonia and I have studied that country's political system. Estonia was in the hands of a dictatorship for many years, but it did not see the need to establish a second House of Parliament to demonstrate its democratic credentials. Estonia is happy with one House because it regards itself as a true democracy. Only two countries with similar populations, Ireland and Slovenia, have a second chamber. It is an unnecessary burden because it doubles the amount of work and hinders the progress of Parliament by doing everything twice. I support the Bill and will be playing my part to campaign in the name of progress for the abolition of the Seanad.

See this speech in context