John Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

There is a bigger problem if there is a longer extension. Britain will then be required to hold elections for the European Parliament. The question Deputy O’Brien raised concerning Article 50 will also then be an issue. It is arising now more in the context of a second referendum being held rather than revocation. If Article 50 is revoked and Britain remains part of the EU, then the European Parliament would have to look again at how it would be composed. We can only deal with the recommendations of the committee we set up to look at boundaries for European and Dáil elections. That report is clear that, because of our geographically based system, we should allocate the seats in the manner suggested by the committee. The Attorney General, along with many others, has been consulted at every stage of the process. That issue was raised by Deputy Ó Broin. I may be doing the Attorney General an injustice, but this method is seen as the least worst option. I say that in the sense that it is an attempt at marrying our geographic constituency system with the prospect of having two additional seats sometime in the future.

These are completely uncharted waters. It will be a nice niche area for historians in future who may be examining when legislation such as this was considered. The Attorney General, however, is clear and the advice we have is also clear. This is the best solution for the Irish electoral system. The boundary committee that was established did not recommend a 13-seat national constituency. That might, indeed, have been a better way of overcoming the proportionality question. That would, though, involve turning our electoral system, as we have known it since the foundation of the State and indeed before that, completely on its head.

Regarding the questions raised by many of the Members, we await a decision by the European Parliament on the status of these MEPs. That includes pay, but that is only one aspect. Members have also made points regarding the ability of an MEP-designate to have an office and participate in the Parliament in some way, shape or form. That is a legitimate question but there is no clear answer yet. We expect to have one well in advance of the election. On Deputy Jan O’Sullivan’s point about non-officeholders, for legislative reasons we are dealing with our existing provisions regarding the dual mandate and, in particular, in these amendments. We cannot designate for people who are privately employed. It is a legitimate issue to raise. We need to get clarity, at the level of the European Parliament and European institutions, as to the status of the cold storage MEPs.

See this speech in context