Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am of the view that the proposal before the House is worthwhile. It sends out a clear and unambiguous message to the effect that we value the opinions of our young citizens. The office of the President of Ireland is very much symbolic and ceremonial in nature. In that context, we should consider reducing the age at which people can be elected to it. The age relating to the office of the President of France, which is the seat of many executive powers, is 18 years. Our President can be faced with issues such those relating to whether to sign legislation into law or refer it to the Supreme Court but he or she has access to the Council of State and it can provide him or her with advice if he or she does not feel capable of making a decision in respect of such issues.

What will be the outcome of reducing the age of eligibility? First, there will be greater diversity on the ballot paper. This means there will be much more choice for the members of the electorate, who will ultimately determine who will serve as President. Under the legislation, a person will be able to put himself or herself forward for election to the office of President but he or she will still be required to obtain the support of 20 Oireachtas Members or four county councils in this regard. The Bill does not state that the next President of Ireland or some future holder of the office should be 21 years of age. What it stipulates is that anybody above the age of 21 will be eligible to articulate his or her narrative and put forward his or her proposals, vision and views on the office of the President to the electorate. I have faith in the electorate. A number of previous speakers stated that they do not trust the electorate. I trust it to be able to determine whether a candidate who is 24, 25, 44 or 45 years of age is fit to serve as President. The electorate has the capacity to determine who is suitably qualified to be elected to the office of Uachtarán na hÉireann. I have every confidence that young people will be able to articulate their message, views and vision in the context of why they would like to serve as Uachtarán na hÉireann.

Next year we will celebrate the centenary of the 1916 Rising. Two of the signatories to the Proclamation of Independence, Joseph Plunkett and Seán Mac Diarmada who were involved in leading the Rising were below the age required to serve as Uachtarán na hÉireann. Many more, including Michael Collins, Seán Heuston and Con Colbert, to name but a few, were all under than 30 years of age when the fought in 1916. Those men played a pivotal role in the foundation of the State and nobody once questioned their competence or capabilities or whether they would be able to do what they did. Those men were leaders. Sadly, we do not have such visionaries or leaders serving in the political system today. However, it must be acknowledged that the youngest Member of the Dáil is good enough and possesses the necessary capabilities and abilities to serve as a Minister of State.

I do not believe that age should be a barrier to anyone putting himself or herself forward for election to office. The history books show what young men and women can do. I believe in the electorate's capability in terms of determining who is the best person to serve. What we are doing with the Bill before the House is offering the electorate a wider choice in the context of who might be elected to serve in the highest office in the land.

See this speech in context