Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

While I am going to speak about the Dáil reform report, I will also try to make some broader points about democratic change and the change needed that goes beyond the remit of the sub-committee.

We welcome the report. We played a role with others in producing it and broadly support it. The report must be considered in the context of the political changes that are taking place, not just here in Ireland but across Europe and in America. The fundamental change taking place is based on the impact of the economic crisis of 2007-2008, the impact of massive austerity, driven by neo-liberal ideology in the interest of the 1% and by the key establishment parties in many different countries across Europe, including Ireland, and by the impact of that in undermining the old political certainties and the old political parties. This was reflected dramatically in the general election here, a third historic election after local elections and the previous general election, which brought about the smashing of the two and a half party system. The two and a half party system is dead. It is no longer reflected in this Parliament and, therefore, there was an obligation and necessity for the rules of the Dáil to change to reflect that reality. While the two and a half party system is dead, what will replace it has not fully emerged. The idea of a substantial left force, to represent working class people, that could become a major party in this country has not fully emerged but it is a process that is taking place.

This was the context of the discussions that took place and it is reflected in the changes and reforms proposed. I will mention some of what I consider the positive reforms. The business committee is a step forward. It is not sufficient but it is a step forward towards taking power over the Dáil out of the hands of the Government and into the hands of the Dáil, with the full reflection of the different trends of opinion that exist here, which represent different trends of opinion within society. The second reform to welcome is the increased space for opposition motions and Bills, reflecting the reality of the increased weight of the Opposition in the Dáil and the fact that our voices should be heard as well and we should have the ability not only to propose but to pass legislation.

I welcome the fact the Ceann Comhairle will be empowered to have a quarterly report on Ministers and that where Ministers repeatedly refuse to answer questions, the Ceann Comhairle can raise that matter. This is necessary. This issue was a problem in the last Dáil. I refer for example to the case of Siteserv and the 19 questions asked by Deputy Catherine Murphy that were not answered. There were multiple instances of such failures. Trying to get the Irish Water payment figures was difficult and it remains difficult to get them, even now that water charges are almost dead. I see this proposal as a positive step and I hope the Ceann Comhairle takes advantage of this power and pays close attention to the answers Minister are giving or not giving and then lays his report before the House.

The ability to abstain is not a revolutionary change but it is correct politically that the range of political views on a topic can be expressed as these can sometimes not be expressed by means of the binary options "Tá" or "Níl".

Political forces may choose to abstain on a particular issue where, for example, they agree with the thrust but not the specifics. Combined with the ability to give a written explanation of their vote, even when they do not have the opportunity to speak, this is important for the process of political clarification and to enable people's ideas to be accurately reflected in how they choose to vote.

The most important change is to the rules for groups. The fact that there may be multiple technical groups is significant and an important step forward, reflecting the reality of the rise of Independents and small parties in Irish politics. There are people who now regret that they voted for Independents, thinking they were votes against establishment parties only to find they have put establishment parties back into power. Nevertheless, people have the right to vote for Independents and chose to do so. They should have the right to organise themselves and have access to the necessary resources to properly participate in the Dáil like any other political force.

From the point of view of the left and the Anti-Austerity Alliance-People Before Profit, the change which is of most significance is the reduction to five in the number of Members required to be an official grouping inside the Dáil. This is a necessary democratic change and there is an argument for reducing it further, but it is an historic point in that there is now a clear anti-capitalist, socialist, principled left force as a grouping inside this Dáil. That reflects a change taking place across many countries in Europe and America, with Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, Podemos, Izquierda Unida and the rise of the left. We are unashamedly going to take advantage of the situation to have Leaders' Questions on a weekly basis and Private Members' Bills, as well as Priority Questions to Ministers on a greater scale than in the previous Dáil when we were part of the Technical Group and had to strive for access to parliamentary time.

We were happy to participate in the Dáil reform sub-committee on a collaborative basis to reach agreement on these things and are happy to have reached agreement on Dáil reforms. We will be happy to continue to agree on various issues as they come up, but we also unashamedly say we plan to be the Opposition. There will be other forces claiming to be part of it, but we will use our access to speaking time to oppose the neoliberal agenda and the interests of the 1% which we believe are reflected in the establishment political parties in this House - Fine Gael, the Government Independents, Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party. We will use the Dáil as a platform and act as tribunes of the people to expose and highlight what is happening. We will be a voice for working class people - the 99%. We will mobilise in significant struggle such as next Wednesday at 5 p.m. when there will be a demonstration outside Leinster House at the same time as the motion on water charges of the Right2Water forces will be discussed. We will put forward a very different vision of how society could be organised, a social society in which people's needs come before the interests of profit.

On the issues that were not addressed, or which we did not get a chance to address, the discussion on the inability of the Opposition to bring forward amendments or Bills which would impose a charge on the State was instructive. We did not do anything about that, but I do not believe the question is closed. There is a limitation in the Constitution, but the limitation in Standing Orders is significantly more restrictive than the one in the Constitution and we believe Standing Orders should be changed to make the position as open as that in the Constitution. More fundamentally, we need a change in the Constitution as we should not be restricted in proposing Bills to abolish Irish Water or oppose certain cuts that would result in the imposition of a charge on the State. We believe it is the democratic right of the Opposition to be able to do these things.

We have to return to the issue of ending the practice where the Government avoids voting on Private Members' motions by tabling its own amendment first, an amendment which simply states how great the Government is on whatever topic is being discussed. It is undemocratic not to be able to put pressure on the Government to vote against or for a particular motion tabled by the Opposition.

Another issue which should be inserted in the final page in the list of other issues to be discussed is the prayer. It was agreed but does not appear in the final draft. It was not the main issue at the committee, but it is one which should be resolved. In modern day Irish society it is anachronistic and inappropriate to start our day with a prayer. This should be a secular Parliament and we should not start our day with a religious prayer. It has been agreed that this will go before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, but it is an appropriate question for the Dáil reform sub-committee to discuss when it reconvenes because it relates to Standing Orders.

I will make some broader points on our vision for society. The problems we have with democracy in this House are a pale reflection of the fundamental absence of democracy in society as a whole. There has been a process, called the hollowing of western democracy by Peter Mair, whereby the limited democratic rights on the basis of capitalism have been diminished even further. A driving force has been the European Union and a few weeks ago the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Charles Flanagan, gave the game away when, in talking about Irish Water, he said European diktats had to be followed. It gave the game away by confirming that there were diktats and that the European Commission dictated austerity policy, with which right-wing governments agreed. The European Union is fundamentally undemocratic - indeed anti-democratic - and an authoritarian, neoliberal construction. That is seen in the role of the European Central Bank and was seen in the various silent coups that took place where elected governments were replaced by governments by bankers and for bankers, with a mandate to rule in the interests of the markets. It is also evident in the ability of the European Commission to fine states that do not implement sufficient austerity measures. That is designed to stop pressure being placed on elected governments and to stop governments from being elected with a different policy. It states people can elect whomever they want but that they must implement neoliberal policies.

There are fundamental democratic problems here also. It is undemocratic that people are elected on a certain platform and then betray that platform. Much was made of Deputy Alan Kelly's statement that it was treachery to get rid of water charges, but he had obviously forgotten that he had previously been elected on a platform of opposing water charges and had then been so won over to them that it became treachery not to implement them. It is undemocratic that people can be elected and betray all of their promises, yet nothing can happen to them. People should have the right of recall of Deputies who break their promises. People should also be on the average wage of those they represent. We also support the initiative of 1Yi for popularly initiated referenda whereby a certain number of people can sign a document to initiate a referendum to change Government policy or the Constitution.

Fundamentally, we are for a different model of democracy, a participative model where power is devolved to local or workplace level, where elected councils take responsibility for things at that level, while we elect representatives who would be recallable to decide on things that must be decided at a higher level. It is not, however, just a question of political democracy. The key decisions affecting many people's lives, whether they have a house, a job or a decent income, are not made in democratically elected chambers such as this House, the European Parliament of local councils, or even by unelected bodies such as the European Commission or the European Central Bank. Many decisions are made in the boardrooms of big business with an interest only in profit. Many decisions are made by those with accounts in Panama or by the markets, about which the media love to talk and speculate. That reflects the domination of profit. If we want a truly democratic society, we have to have democratic public ownership of the key sources of wealth in our society.

Key parts of the economy and key natural resources should be in public ownership under democratic control. They should not be run by quangos or political appointees. Workers, consumers and the public as a whole should be brought into the heart of the running of all aspects of our society. That is how we will achieve the fundamental and real democratic change that is socialist change.

I thank everybody who participated in the writing of the report. In particular, I thank the staff who did a phenomenal amount of work. They turned around papers in a short space of time. That is greatly appreciated.

See this speech in context