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

I compliment the previous speaker on her positive, well-researched and well-presented contribution. It was constructive, as always. I have been a Member for almost 19 years and was involved for quite a while in the Dáil reform committee. For 14 years under Fianna Fáil there was no Dáil reform, except for Leaders' Questions. When I came in, Michael Noonan was leader of Fine Gael and he brought forward a motion, which was accepted because it was happening anyway. There was nothing else in 14 years. We brought forward many packages and then decided we would do it incrementally, with no engagement, and nothing happened. Fair play to the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Paul Kehoe. On the first day in here he brought in major changes. Once they are embedded, people do not realise what they mean and people who were not here previously have no experience of how shambolic the situation was before that.

I could spend the day talking about this but the biggest change was pre-legislative scrutiny. In the past five years, 7,386 people have come before committees of the Houses, given evidence and engaged with their Parliament. That is a huge change. They have impacted on legislation before it was drafted and published and we have the evidence to show that. In the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality which I chair, more than 500 citizens of this State have been given the opportunity to engage with their Parliament and to impact on legislation before it is published.

Once the legislation is drafted and published, one cannot make any major changes. It is a massive change, but nobody is talking about it. It is the biggest change I have seen in my 19 years in the House but because it does not involve fireworks in the Chamber, grandstanding, sitting-in and that type of nonsense it does not get headlines. Massive amounts of time, work, effort and energy go into this and that is making a major change, but nobody is writing about in the newspapers or talking about it on television or in the media. We have spent hours, days and weeks at committee meetings listening to ordinary citizens, representatives of non-governmental organisations, NGOs, and academics who have come to the meetings to have their say. It is the biggest change I have ever seen.

The election of the Ceann Comhairle by secret ballot is important. I note the Deputy who was so critical during his two minutes and could not say anything constructive has now left the Chamber. He could not even bother to hear the contribution of anybody else. It is appalling. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan spoke about respect for the Ceann Comhairle. That is crucial. There should be no occasion when a Member questions the Ceann Comhairle in the Chamber. If one has an issue one should meet the Ceann Comhairle outside, not have a row in the Chamber. That is unseemly and should not be done. The next time the Ceann Comhairle is elected I hope everybody will respect that and speak through the Chair, not at each other across the Chamber.

Members should also stop using scripts and reading speeches which somebody else has written for them. Get rid of the scripts. They should be outlawed. Members should come to the Chamber and make the contributions their own by speaking to headlines and notes.

Regarding the D'Hondt system, chairing a committee is a huge responsibility. This has been the Dáil of committees; the committees of the Oireachtas have come into their own. Unfortunately, the referendum to allow committees to have a proper investigative role was not passed by the people. That hampers the work of committees, and I believe people are understanding that now. Another big change is the Taoiseach appearing before the working group of chairpersons. We must continue making changes. The new Members after the election must continue pushing the limits, exploring and looking for ways to do things.

Attendance in the Chamber and in committees is a big problem. Members do not attend committee meetings because many of them are tied up doing constituency work. The time somebody spends in a committee room should be logged and noted, from the time they arrive to the time they leave, by the minute. Somebody who arrives to a meeting, makes one contribution and leaves gets the same credit as somebody who spends hours debating at the meeting. People should be members of only one committee, and there should be only 15 members of each committee. It should be a privilege to be a member of a committee, not a right. Perhaps not everybody should be a member of a committee. That would avoid situations where people are expected to attend two meetings at the same time. It would also give members a chance to give more detailed attention to the business of a committee. There should also be convenors at committees. Many committees have had problems getting a quorum. As there is no coverage of committee work, for the most part, members do not feel compelled to turn up. That is not good enough.

We should be doing a great deal more in the House. Second Stage speeches are a disaster. One Member comes into the House and reads a speech, quite often to himself or herself. Often Members of the Opposition do not even bother to show up. When we were in opposition we had a rule there there always had to be at least one person on the benches. I agree with Deputy Troy that even today the attendance is dire. Why is that the case?

See this speech in context