Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I support the amendment. There should be no undue restriction on citizens who want to vote for a candidate of their liking. I have a problem with the Bill as a whole and, while I understand that my amendments were ruled out of order because they were not in the spirit of a Bill that proposes the complete abolition of the Seanad, we cannot have a proper debate on Committee Stage if other options are not open for discussion. It is regrettable that my amendments were ruled out of order. We should have been able to tease out the reason a preferendum was not presented as an option. The approach proposed by Deputy Catherine Murphy could have been fully debated, as could a range of other issues.

This is probably the biggest change to the Constitution we will undertake. As we can see from the Bill, the changes are not confined to a single Article of the Constitution. The fact that the debate is being guillotined in the space of an hour means we will not have sufficient time to discuss each of the Articles proposed to be amended. I could show Deputies the divergence between the Constitution as Gaeilge agus as Bearla. While amendment No. 10 proposes to change a number from 14 to ten, the question of how that is presented in the first language can often be interpreted differently than its presentation in English. I am disappointed that we will not be able to tease out the consequences of ending a Chamber, albeit an undemocratic one in many ways. I would also like to have the time to understand the full effects of apparently minor changes, some of which will be unknown to the vast majority of citizens. They will have consequences for the democratic life of this country.

While amendment No. 10 proposes limited change, I would like to hear what the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government has to say about it. Other issues could have been addressed in the context of this referendum. These are the issues that the public believed the Constitutional Convention would address when it was first suggested as a vehicle for changing the Constitution. The Government decided to take a different tack, however.

See this speech in context