David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This is an interesting debate. I agree that it is a pity it is taking place at the close of session when there are few people around. I was not, unfortunately, a member of the convention but I took an interest in the debate and on the recommendations arising out of it. Like some of my colleagues, I come from a rural constituency. While many colleagues from the urban constituencies are interested in increased seat numbers and larger constituencies, representatives from rural constituencies know only too well the practical issues involved in representing a large constituency. If the number of representatives is increased so too will the geographical areas.

Deputy Griffin comes from County Kerry, which for the purposes of the next general election will become one constituency. When one takes into account all of the peninsulas and so on in that area, representation of that constituency by only one Deputy will be horrendous. It will be very difficult. As stated by Deputy Griffin, it will take many hours to travel the entire constituency. The same will apply in the case of Donegal. I have previously spoken about the European Parliament constituencies and the fact that virtually half of this country is in one constituency. In my view, a constituency of that size is too big. It means that often two Deputies from the same party must each focus on one particular half of the constituency. In my constituency Deputy Barry focuses on the northern half of Cork East and I focus on the southern half of it. While we do some work together across the constituency, that is how it works de facto. In a situation where there is only one Deputy from a particular party in a constituency he or she has to cover the whole constituency in order to serve the constituents who voted for him or her. It is very difficult to have to drive hundreds of miles to do that. I caution against larger constituencies with more seats.

I note that most of our European partners use a mixed list system of one type or another. There is a need for further discussion on that issue. It is often said that in politics there is too much clientelism, localism or parish pump politics. Deputy Tuffy mentioned in her contribution that we have to represent constituencies and we also have to legislate. I believe that in legislating we represent the whole country and not only our constituencies. Very often people come to us with trivial problems. I note that the convention indicated that we should strengthen local government and the role of the local councillor to provide that he or she can take on more local issues, thus freeing up Deputies and Senators to address the national situation. I believe that is an issue on which we should do more work.

Another issue discussed is the listing in alphabetical order of names on the ballot paper and the design of the ballot paper. Theresa Reidy of UCC has done a lot of work on this issue, on which I commend her. I noticed a flaw in the ballot papers for the local elections in terms of the location on the left-hand side of the ballot paper of the logos of political parties. The Independents did not have any logos and as such the box to the left of their names was blank. This meant that people who chose to record their vote on the left-hand side of the ballot paper were unable to vote for the representatives of any party because the box to the left of their names contained a logo and, thus, they invariably continued to vote for the Independents. That is a flaw in the ballot paper. People were supposed to record their votes in the boxes on the right-hand side of the ballot paper but some chose to do so on the left-hand side which meant they voted in many cases for the Independents. The advice from the returning officers was that it was a clear indication of voting preference. Many hundreds of people who recorded their votes on the left-hand side of the ballot paper were precluded from voting for party representatives because the boxes to the left of their names were filled with logos.

Very often a person will give their No. 1 vote to an Independent and then continue on in terms of preference. If that person chooses to record his or her vote on the left-hand side of the ballot paper and he or she is not too pushed about who gets the second, third and fourth votes and so on they will tick the following empty boxes. That is what happened. I ask that those who design the ballot papers ensure in the future that the boxes with no logos are blacked out so that people are compelled to record their votes on the right-hand side, thus giving everybody involved a fair chance. Design of a ballot paper is a serious matter.

According to some research because names on the ballot paper are listed in alphabetical order those whose surname starts with the letter A have an advantage because it is at the top of the ballot paper. It has also been said that those listed at the bottom of the ballot paper may also have a slight advantage. It has been proposed that names be randomly mixed up to ensure people get an opportunity to be at the top or bottom of the list as the case may be. As I said, design of a ballot paper is an important matter.

On the issue of a reduction in the number of Deputies in Dáil Éireann, I have heard it said that the number should be around 100. When the Irish soccer or rugby team plays an international match they have the same number of people on the pitch as the other team. In other words, in a soccer match against France or Germany and so on, there are 11 people on each team. There is an optimal number of people needed in a Legislature. If one removes Ministers, Ministers of States and then splits in two the number of Government and Opposition members then the choice for the Taoiseach, in terms of the number of people he can put in Cabinet, becomes limited. The workload for the remainder of us also increases. I caution against any great reduction in the number of Deputies.

I believe that an electoral commission is important. Perhaps the Minister will when summing up the debate indicate if it will be established prior to the next election, which presumably will be in 15 months time, and whether it will be operational for the purposes of that election. I would welcome a response to that question. On the extension of polling days and hours, I am not too sure about that. I think we need to do more to create an excitement around elections that would encourage people to come out and vote. In some countries - I think Australia was mentioned in this regard - there is a national holiday type atmosphere around elections.

On improvement of the accuracy of the electoral register, that is an old chestnut. Another issue discussed was that of greater access to postal voting. I have drafted a Private Members' Bill which I hope will address the issue of access to postal voting for people who are away on holidays on polling day. I would welcome debate on that legislation so as to make the small change required in that regard. Perhaps the electoral commission could be tasked with ensuring that people who present an airline ticket to show that they will be away on holidays on polling day are facilitated with a postal vote.

Education programmes are also important. Returning to the issue of the electoral register, there should be a programme of registration in schools or colleges for students when they reach 18 years of age or 16 if it is changed.

Has the Minister any proposals to encourage such a programme or even mandate it?

I agree with the convention’s proposals on the appointment of non-Oireachtas Members to Cabinet. It is already provided for but has only happened on a few occasions over the past decades. The proposal for Dáil Members to resign their seats on appointment to Cabinet happens in other jurisdictions. Perhaps Ministers are too close to the Dáil. In other jurisdictions where they resign their seats, parliament then becomes a little more independent.

Direct democracy initiatives are always very welcome. There are two types of reform, one of which is big bang reform. Many Members claim the Whip system is awful. I have been a Member for 18 years and there have been only three times when Members have agonised over the imposition of the Whip system. Most parties agree in their party rooms to be guided by the Minister or spokesperson on the path to take regarding certain legislation. Rarely, does the Whip become an issue. However, a significant reform has occurred unnoticed, namely pre-legislative scrutiny. I have the privilege of chairing the justice committee which, since the general election, has scrutinised 11 Bills, hearing evidence from over 420 people and non-governmental organisations. The committee has published eight reports. Its report on missing persons led to a missing persons day while its report on prostitution led to legislation in the area being brought forward. The same applied to its reports on community courts and domestic sexual violence. The pre-legislative scrutiny system involves much, so that when the Bill is finally published by the Government, it is actually a very good document. This has been the biggest change I have seen here but it has got no coverage. These are the kind of reforms we need to be addressing.

See this speech in context