Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I was a member of the Constitutional Convention and was able to attend all of its meetings. Caithfidh mé a rá go raibh na cruinnithe go léir thar barr agus go raibh an comhrá, an díospóireacht agus an t-idirphlé eadrainn go léir dearfach. The convention's work went a long way towards improving public perception of Deputies and Senators. Many of the citizen members of the convention left with a much more positive view of our work after engaging with us closely at the various meetings. I acknowledge the hard work and commitment of the staff of the convention in making meetings run smoothly and in the excellent choice of venue at the Grand Hotel in Malahide.

We know that weak parliaments are associated with executive dominance, whereas strong parliaments tend to be linked with weaker governments and, consequently, more frequent elections. Where does Ireland stand in respect of those two scenarios? We elect Deputies to carry out all of the tasks of the Dáil as defined by the Constitution, which range from law-making to overseeing the Executive and holding the Government to account for financial matters and international affairs. It is important that voters elect people who can perform those tasks efficiently and fairly, with the best interests of the country at heart. Two matters that have a bearing on today's discussion were decided prior to the convention's meetings. The constituency report for 2012 decided that the number of Deputies should be reduced by eight, to 158, and the number of constituencies should be reduced from 43 to 40. These changes have since been enacted. It did not make sense to me to enact these changes prior to the establishment of the Constitutional Convention, given that it was going to deal with electoral reform. It would have made more sense to await the convention's findings before deciding what aspects of the 2012 report should be provided for in legislation.

The electoral system for the Dáil was discussed over two weeks. We had a range of interesting presentations, some of which dealt with alternatives to our current system. These alternatives included single member plurality, single transferable votes and a mixed member proportional electoral system. One presenter applied the three alternatives to the 2007 and 2011 elections and came up with different scenarios. The 2007 general election returned 78 Fianna Fáil Deputies. One of the alternative systems would have returned 142 Fianna Fáil Deputies and another would have returned 114. The number would have increased under any of the alternatives. The 2011 general election returned 76 Fine Gael Deputies. There would have been 114 Fine Gael Deputies under two of the alternative systems but a smaller number under the third. I acknowledge that it is not an exact science, but the alternative systems would have made for very different governments and parliaments. It was clear that independent candidates do best under PR-STV. I am glad, therefore, that the Government has decided to retain that system.

We had extensive discussions on doing things better, including greater efficiency, transparency and accountability. The question arises of whether changing the electoral system would contribute to such improvements. I do not believe the existing flaws and shortcomings are due to a particular electoral system or that changing it would have changed the way we do politics. That is a different debate.

One criticism of the proportional representation system is that candidates in the same political party vie with each other as well as with candidates from other parties and independent candidates. This can lead to an emphasis on the local at the expense of the national. It was suggested that abandoning PR-STV would allow Deputies to devote all of their attention to the tasks outlined for them in the Constitution.

However, we all realise how vital it is that Deputies are conscious of the effects of national policy and decisions on the lives of Irish people. Being involved at the local level should complement the national level.

One of the alternatives is the list system, but that still means that candidates from the same party will be in competition with each other. An interesting question was asked in 2011. Voters were asked if they would vote for the same person if the person was in a different party. A total of 32% said "Yes", 35% said "No" but approximately 33% did not know. After two weeks of debate there was a decisive result in favour of keeping the current PR-STV electoral system. To try to minimise the parish pump type politics they suggested constituencies of no less than five seats, which the Minister has rejected, and they were in favour of more than 159 Deputies. Another issue that was discussed very forcibly was the electoral commission, and there was a debate at most of the tables on the inaccuracies of the electoral registers and how that must be addressed.

With regard to voter turnout, we are aware of how difficult that is with the low turnout in this country. Some countries have voter turnout of 90% and more. The civic, social and political education, CSPE, programme is not working. It is not engaging young people. They are still disaffected and disinterested in voting.

On the matter of Oireachtas Members being members of the Cabinet, I firmly believe that is how it should be. They have a mandate as they are elected by the people. There was a suggestion that when a Deputy was appointed a Minister, he or she would resign his or her seat to concentrate on ministerial work.

The Constitutional Convention showed direct democracy in action. It was a good method of showing participative democracy. It was disappointing that Seanad electoral reform was not on the agenda, but we had a short discussion about it. I look forward to the new committee that is examining Seanad reform devising a democratic and fair system of electing Members of the Seanad, instead of the rather convoluted system we currently have.

I read the Minister's speech. Recently, members of the Constitutional Convention were invited to meet the Taoiseach. They were all still engaged and asking questions about what is happening with the work they did at the convention. My suggestion is that when all of the meetings have been covered in the debates in this House and when all of the recommendations have been addressed, there should be an opportunity for all of the members to meet together and produce a comprehensive paper on what happened with their work and recommendations.

See this speech in context