Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This was a very tame amendment, although some of the other amendments are more serious. It was an all-party Oireachtas committee that recommended a lowering of the number to ten which, along with nomination by two county councils and directly by 10,000 citizens, were the three recommended entry ways.

We are asked in the context of the abolition of the Seanad to see this as a major reform measure. We are to have the abolition first before we see substantial Dáil reform. It does not bode well when a fairly tame amendment that was recommended by an all-party Oireachtas committee in which Fine Gael participated, cannot get support. Less than an hour was given here for Committee and Remaining Stages. This is a sham because there is no intention by the Government seriously to debate or accept any of the amendments. In the context of the abolition of the Seanad, many other things happen, as others have said. I will use the next amendment on Article 12 as an example. If one was to proffer a charge against the President, one used to require 30 votes in the Seanad and the Dáil. I propose it changes to 50, and there is a world of difference there. Some of the safeguards in the Constitution come with the abolition of the Seanad. Those 30 Members of the Dáil can be made up by the Cabinet and Ministers of State. It is not about a pro ratachange. It is a fundamental change on some levels of protections, which are there for the citizens of this State.

If the Government cannot accept something that was recommended by the all-party Oireachtas committee I do not know why we are all going to sit here until 10.30 p.m. and why the Government allows the Committee and Remaining Stages when there is such a disregard for the process, so little time is given, there is no intention whatsoever seriously to engage, scripts are written before Members come here and a small amendment such as that does not even get consideration.

See this speech in context