James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill and I commend Deputy Carroll MacNeill on bringing it forward. The Government will be supporting it, as the Chief Whip has outlined. It is a very important Bill. What it does is put beyond doubt the availability of remote voting and remote participation, should it be passed in a referendum. That is a very necessary and crucial part of our response to the recent pandemic and to other matters.

The Deputy has well described the family friendly situations and arrangements that may be assisted through legislation of this type. The Deputy spoke about small babies. Even for someone whose babies are no longer small, coming in at 1 a.m. regularly on a midweek night is not necessarily welcome or conducive to good household management, so I believe it goes across the board. Those measures are very well described by the Deputy and very important.

As the Deputy said, there was some legal debate on what the requirements actually say at present and what was interpreted at the time within the Oireachtas. I commend the Oireachtas on its flexibility in the management of the pandemic, but there may have been ways in which the existing provisions could have been interpreted somewhat differently to have allowed this kind of activity to take place. As the Chief Whip has outlined with regard to the constitutional provisions in Article 15.1.3o and Article 15.11 in terms of Deputies being present and voting and in terms of the Oireachtas meeting in Dublin or some other place, there is nothing in the Constitution that says that other place must be a physical place. Apart from the word “Dublin”, Cork, Galway, Limerick or anywhere else is not prescribed and there is some academic debate that “a place” could be a virtual place. The Internet is a place. If there was a requirement for it to be physical, which is not in the text of the Constitution, a server farm or a hosting facility is a physical place and the IP network is a physical place. Suffice to say, there has been significant discussion on that point. I think “a place” could be interpreted as being a virtual place.

I acknowledge the work of people like Ciarán Toland SC and the constitutional reform group, which has put significant academic endeavour into this. They would speak to the purpose of the interpretation of the Constitution in terms of what the founding fathers envisaged when they were framing these provisions. They envisaged it would be secure and safe and would involve representatives from all over the country – Teachtaí Dála, or messengers to the House. There is nothing to suggest they intended it would be one physical sitting in one place. If we take that purpose of interpretation, we can see the arguments that they make.

On another point, Dr. Seán Ó Conaill, a noted academic, pointed out that the Irish version of the Constitution, which takes precedence in the event of any conflict, refers to “nó cibé áit eile”, or “wherever else”, loosely translated. “Wherever else” is even less prescriptive in terms of being open to interpretation and flexibility.

As I said, if this Bill is passed, a referendum would put it beyond doubt. It is notable that many other institutions have already embraced such remote decision-making. The courts, that other arm of the State under the separation of powers, have already embraced it with gusto and there have probably been thousands of High Court decisions ordered, made and ruled over the past two years, and that has not been challenged in any credible or successful way. It is also a fact the Cabinet has met in an incorporeal fashion for many years now, and that continues to take place notwithstanding the constitutional provisions around it. Put simply, remote participation is to be encouraged and welcomed. I am unconvinced we actually need to change the laws to do it, but let us do it if it helps to get that clarity and foundation to enable it to happen.

It is a very important Bill and I commend the Deputy on bringing it forward. I certainly support its intent and its detail.

See this speech in context