Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

That must be emphasised. It was mentioned that the Government is examining the French model, where seats are reserved in parliament for nationals living abroad, with the promise that Irish citizens living abroad would be given a vote very shortly. We acknowledge the commitment is progressing, no matter how slowly it may be doing so.

It is over a year since the Constitutional Convention recommended that a referendum be held on extending voting rights in presidential elections to Irish citizens in Northern Ireland and Irish emigrants. Despite the Oireachtas resolution establishing the convention and the four-month timeframe in which the Government had to respond to the recommendations, it has not happened in this case. That is despite the fact that were it not for the putting down of this Bill by the Sinn Féin Party, we would not be talking about the issue tonight. Reports of the Constitutional Convention are particularly important as it was made up of 66 ordinary citizens who gave their time for no personal reward and engaged, in good faith, with politicians in a process of deliberation. We owe it to them at least to allow a Dáil debate on the merits of the recommendations, as has been promised by the Government, as opposed to me or anybody on this side of the House. Why have they not been given the courtesy of that hearing, having conducted some hard work deliberating on the matter? It should be discussed in the national Parliament as promised.

The final report indicates that the convention made several constitutional recommendations in important areas, such as giving voting rights to citizens abroad. Instead, we are going to use the opportunity of a referendum to discuss leadership qualities and debate whether a 21 year old can be President of Ireland. The Government took the easy option by dealing with only one tricky topic at a time. The marriage equality issue must be answered, as we acknowledge, but the decision on the minimum age for a President is only an illusion, as I stated earlier. If we are serious about making politics and the presidency more relevant, engaging the multitude of young Irish who have emigrated in Irish politics by giving them a stake in who is elected to the office should surely be of higher priority than reducing the minimum age for presidential candidates.

In an international context, it is important to read into the record the position in many other countries throughout the world. A 2006 study from the Institute for Democratic and Electoral Assistance of countries that allowed emigrants to vote included the findings that 21 African nations do so, as well as 13 North American and South American countries, 15 Asian countries, six Pacific countries and 36 European countries. Of these countries, 65 allow external votes for everybody, while approximately 25 place restrictions based on factors such as whether a person intends to return permanently or how long people have been away. Citizens from the US can vote no matter how long they stay away, whereas citizens of Britain are disqualified after 15 years away. There is form and a wide range of experience that can be drawn on from those countries which have engaged successfully in the practice.

With regard to the limitations in voting ages, my concern is that given Irish citizens must currently be 18 to vote for a President, we do not support extending the right to vote to all 16 year olds. As I stated earlier, there is merit in reducing the voting age but it should be done in Irish elections before it is trialled abroad in the first instance. A number of other limitations could be considered to address the fears expressed about the disruptive impact in the short term on presidential elections, including limiting the number of expatriates to those who were born in Ireland. That would reduce the potential disruptive impact on expanded voting rights. Expatriates should vote in the Irish Embassy of a country in order to limit numbers and there should be a time limit related to the last point at which the person resided in Ireland. For example, it could be as it is in the UK at 15 years.

I thank the proposers for putting forward this Bill, which is timely, considering the Minister produced his own policy document in the area this week. Although it did not contain the commitment to extend voting rights, it demonstrates a willingness to do so. The exact weight of the willingness can only be measured in time. I hope the Government will use more stringent timeframes and measures to analyse what progress, if any, is being made in the area. Only then can we begin to properly criticise the Government for inaction in the area. There are many other issues within diaspora policy that one would welcome. As I indicated, it is a natural progression from the extension of the emigrant support programme established in 2004, as the Minister of State alluded to. I hope this can be expanded and more funding can be allowed by the Government to assist these people. I also hope every effort will be made to encourage many of those who I hope will be successful in returning to the country to partake in its recovery over time.

See this speech in context