Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I do so regularly but they are not selected. That, however, is another issue.

The Taoiseach promised that Ministers would be at their desks rather than attending events throughout the country. In reality, they are never at their desks. The Taoiseach presents for Question Time once a week, on a Tuesday, whereas his predecessors were obliged to attend twice weekly. In other words, instead of increased accountability, the Government has reduced the allocation of time during which the Taoiseach can be subjected to questions from the Opposition.

The number of committees has been reduced. The system is nothing but a joke now, with a range of functions stockpiled onto individual committees thus rendering them unworkable. The only Opposition Chairman is Deputy John McGuinness of the Committee of Public Accounts and, as we know, attempts were made last week to unseat him. On the question of Dáil numbers, the Government has proposed that membership be reduced by eight at the next election. We have had no explanation as to why the number eight was chosen. That level of Dáil reform is essentially meaningless.

We are all aware of the circumstances in which the proposal to abolish the Seanad was conceived. The Taoiseach, while still in opposition and floundering in opinion polls, needed a way to get one up on the Tánaiste, whose party was then threatening Fine Gael's position as main Opposition party. The result was a dramatic shift in Fine Gael policy, which the Taoiseach set out at a speech in Glenties. Noel Whelan wrote an informative article in The Irish Times some weeks ago in which he referred to the decision by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Simon Coveney, to introduce the Animal Health and Welfare Bill 2012 in the Upper House. The Minister said on that occasion:

As the engagement from Senators has been hugely positive, I considered it appropriate to introduce the Bill in the Seanad before taking it to the other House as there are many Members here who want to get engaged in the detail of the legislation. That is important because this is important legislation.

He went on to laud the Seanad for its work on that legislation.

The Government has made a complete hames of the money-saving argument for the abolition of the Upper House with its projected figure of €20 million. It took the independent Accounting Officer of the Houses of the Oireachtas to knock that projection on its head. There has been a refusal to answer questions in this regard, even though the figure the Government gave is twice that of the estimate from the Accounting Officer. The Minister referred to Finland as a country to which we should aspire. He did not mention that it has 200 Members of Parliament and its committees have far more extensive powers than do the Oireachtas committees, including the capacity to hold Ministers to account.

My party will be campaigning vigorously in opposition to this amendment and in favour instead of reform of the Seanad. We all agree that such reform is needed and that the existing archaic electoral system cannot continue. A root and branch reform is required. As somebody who purports to be in touch with ordinary people, the Minister should know that the citizens of this country value democracy and the capacity to elect their public representatives. Despite all the populist spin and commentary which seeks to denigrate politics, people ultimately want representation but they also want oversight of the Government. A reformed Seanad can perform that function. The reality, however, is that this Government is seeking to remove all oversight. Its objective is the centralisation of power and a scaling back of the opportunity for Dáil scrutiny. This is, I repeat, a sad day for democracy in Ireland.

See this speech in context