Dáil debates

Tuesday, 5 July 2016

Ceisteanna - Questions - Priority Questions

Constitutional Convention Recommendations

3:55 pm

Photo of Gerry AdamsGerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach to implement the outstanding recommendations of the Convention on the Constitution; and to hold referendums in respect of its reports and recommendations. [17117/16]

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The last Government responded in the Dáil to all nine of the Convention on the Constitution's reports. The reports contained 38 recommendations, 18 of which would involve change in the text of the Constitution. I will summarise the convention's main recommendations and the response to them.

In its first report, the convention voted against reducing the presidential term of office but recommended that the age threshold for candidacy in presidential elections be reduced from 35 years. A referendum on this was defeated on 22 May 2015. The convention's recommendation to reduce the voting age to 16 was accepted but a referendum was not held on this matter. There are currently no proposals to proceed with such a referendum.

In the convention's second report, the reference in Article 41.2 of the Constitution to "a woman's life within the home" was considered. A Programme for a Partnership Government commits the Government to holding a referendum on this issue.

In its third report, the convention recommended an amendment to the Constitution to provide for same-sex marriage. A referendum on marriage equality was held on 22 May 2015 and was passed by a majority of 62.1%.

The convention's fourth report made recommendations on the electoral system. The recommendation that the proportional representation-single transferable vote electoral system be retained was accepted, while the recommendation to increase constituency sizes was not. The recommendation to establish an electoral commission was accepted and work on this is continuing. The recommendation that there should be a referendum to permit the appointment of non-Oireachtas members as Ministers was not accepted as the Constitution already allows the Taoiseach to nominate as Ministers two persons who have not been elected to the Oireachtas but who have been nominated to the Seanad.

In respect of the fifth report on amending the Constitution to give citizens resident outside the State the right to vote in presidential elections, the last Government indicated that it was necessary to analyse the full range of practical and policy issues that would arise in any significant extension of the franchise before a decision could be made on holding of referendum. That analysis is ongoing and will be considered by Government in due course. I have asked the Minister of State with responsibility for the diaspora to make this a real priority.

As regards the sixth report on the offence of blasphemy, the programme for a partnership Government says that a referendum will be held on removing the offence of blasphemy from the Constitution.

The seventh report made recommendations relating to Dáil reform. The House will be aware that Standing Orders were amended in January of this year to provide for election of the Ceann Comhairle by secret ballot. Standing Orders were also amended to introduce a system whereby I, as Taoiseach, will appear before the working group of committees twice a year. Provision has also been made for the proportionate allocation of committee chairs using the d'Hondt system. In addition, a sub-committee on Dáil reform chaired by the Ceann Comhairle was established. Also, A Programme for a Partnership Government commits the Government to a referendum on enhancing the reference to the Ceann Comhairle in the Constitution.

As regards the convention's eighth report, A Programme for a Partnership Government states that this report on economic, social and cultural rights will be referred to the new Oireachtas Committee on Housing for consideration of the substantial questions it raises on the balance of rights, proper governance and resources.

Finally, the ninth report deals mainly with the convention's conclusions and recommendations on the convention process and says there was unanimous support for a second convention. The House will be aware that the Government is committed to establishing a citizens' assembly with a mandate to look at a limited number of key issues. There are no plans otherwise to implement convention recommendations that were not accepted by the last Government other than as set out in A Programme for a Partnership Government.

Photo of Gerry AdamsGerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I begin by commending the work of the Convention on the Constitution and the delegates, citizens, politicians, expert witnesses, Chair and secretariat. I hope I do not misremember but Tom Arnold and Art O'Leary played a very good leadership role in all of that and it worked well, although the Fine Gael-Labour Government's choice of issues for subsequent referendums left a lot to be desired. I suppose the biggest success was the marriage equality referendum.

We have since been told that a citizens' assembly is to be put in place. We have not been given an explanation of why elements that worked well - the participation of Members of the Oireachtas and the Northern Assembly - have been stripped away. It would be useful to get some sense of that. We in Sinn Féin have a very strong view that political representatives should be included in those deliberations. We are told that the first meeting of the new assembly will take place in November. Can the Taoiseach indicate when the polling company will be appointed to identify the citizens? When does he expect to appoint a chairperson for the assembly? We also want to know who will be responsible for referring issues for discussion to the assembly. Can the assembly determine these, or will they come from the Government?

As the Taoiseach has outlined, the nine reports from the assembly contained 38 recommendations. The Government accepted six out of 18 that would have meant constitutional change. We have been given no explanation. These citizens spent an awful lot of time, briefed themselves, and felt really proud to be part of that democratic process, but the recommendations they made have been rejected without, as far as I can ascertain, any explanation.

The programme for Government proposes that referendums be held on a further two of the outstanding issues - to amend the Constitution to remove the offence of blasphemy, and to give the office of Ceann Comhairle constitutional standing - yet we have no date for either. There is a proposal for a referendum on the article in the Constitution that refers to a woman's life within the home. We have no date for that. One can see as we go into a new, revised and different shape for a citizens' assembly that there is still outstanding work from the last grouping, which gave us an awful lot of their time and some very thoughtful recommendations. The very least they and we deserve is a response to their recommendations and some sense of when they will be implemented.

4:05 pm

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Adams for his comments. It is fair to say that Tom Arnold and all of those people who were chosen and participated in the Constitutional Convention were proud of the fact that they were responsible in many ways for changes to the Constitution. They felt very pleased to be a part of the democratic process by contributing to questions that people were asked in a referendum and to the answers they gave, with particular reference to the marriage equality referendum.

We have learned some lessons. I had thought originally that it might be possible to run four or five referendums on the one day and people could tick the boxes. That is not the way it works, because when there is a referendum people begin to ask what the issues are on the "Yes" and "No" side. If one imagines knocking on the door of a constituent's house and saying "I am here about the referendums; there are four or five next Wednesday, and these are the issues," one does not have the opportunity to explain that in the 30 seconds or 90 seconds one might get on a doorway. I have come back from that view. One or two might be the most we could have because, if multiple referendums were held on the same day, citizens would lose interest and say "I cannot take all this in," because of the "Yes" and "No" side and the way things are conducted.

The assembly will be 100 citizens. That is not to decry in any way the contribution made by the political representatives on the last occasion. I have authorisation from the Cabinet to set up the assembly. We got authorisation to use the electoral register, which has to apply. I will now proceed to go through the process of nominating an appropriate polling company, which will be able to use the information on the electoral register to select the 100 citizens. I will take advice from anybody on potential candidates for chairperson. The first issue they will look at is the eighth amendment. The implications of that are very serious and sensitive for many people.

Tom Arnold was not appointed until later on in the day. It might have been better if he had been appointed a little earlier. That is not to decry his merits or value at all, but perhaps if the chairperson were to be appointed earlier he or she might be in a position to give out information about what the work of the assembly will be. We will consider that. I hope to have the polling company up and doing its work pretty soon. I would like to think it would be ready to go as an assembly by the end of September so we can have the first meeting in October, not November. I have committed to bring that forward because of the importance and interest in looking at the question of the eighth amendment.

Will the assembly be able to do things itself? Yes, it will. The Government has given it a few things to do - to look, first of all, at the question of the eighth amendment and aging in Ireland, on which there are a number of issues. The assembly itself could decide to look at X or Y as well. The remit of the assembly is for 12 months unless otherwise decided. The first issue it will reflect on is the eighth amendment, and when it makes its recommendations or propositions it can send them back to the Oireachtas. I do not know how long that will take. I assume they will want some reasonable time to reflect on those issues and call in people who might advise them on the range of activities. The items the assembly is to consider, including the eighth amendment, are set out in the programme for Government. The chairperson will be completely independent. I hope that those who are selected by the polling company will do their job well.

I am not in a position to say here that we can have referendums on X or Y. We need to get agreement from everybody on the referendums the previous Government agreed to hold but was not in a position to hold and whatever might arise from the reflections of the assembly with regard to the eighth amendment. We need to get agreement from everybody as to the timing or the number of referendums to be held. My original thought of having a super-referendum day is one I cannot see working in reality because people get overloaded with information from the for and against sides, depending on what the issue is.

Photo of Gerry AdamsGerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach did not answer the question about why he changed the composition to exclude Oireachtas Members and members of the Northern Assembly. We will now not have anyone from the Six Counties, either a citizen delegate or political representative. He also did not give any clarity about the unfinished business of the Constitutional Convention and the series of recommendations it made. Neither did he show any interest in explaining what happened if the Government, for whatever reason, decided not to go with a recommendation. People deserve an explanation of why that was the case.

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Many of the questions or recommendations from the Constitutional Convention were ones we would have difficulty with in terms of the issues or the lack of depth of what was proposed. We would not necessarily say we would follow through on every recommendation the Constitutional Convention made on referendums or that they should automatically be referred to the people on the basis that they were recommended by the convention. While the last Constitutional Convention held informative debate and produced thoughtful recommendations, it was hamstrung from the beginning. It covered a significant range of issues rather than being focused on one major topic such as political reform. It jumped from issue to issue. It also suffered from the fact that its agenda was, in some instances, set to delay the then Government from having to take a stand on a number of issues. The rejection by the people of the proposal on the minimum age for candidates for the presidency showed what happens when marginal issues are elevated over more urgent ones. We need a more comprehensive approach to holding referendums and the Oireachtas should be centrally involved in that process.

I take the Taoiseach's point that one cannot have four or five referendums in one day. I would never have subscribed to that idea because most referendums are about weighty subjects that demand much consideration in advance, as we have learnt from Brexit. The point is that we should, as an Oireachtas, either agree on a number during the lifetime of a particular Oireachtas or whether, at least, there are issues that we can get consensus on. There are some hanging around since a previous Oireachtas committee, for example, regarding reform of the Constitution, and some from the Constitutional Convention that might have merit. It might be worth considering whether the Oireachtas can agree to hold one or two a year over the coming years.

4:15 pm

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The idea of the Constitutional Convention, which originally came from the former Tánaiste, Eamon Gilmore, proved to be a very good one. It is a disappointment and a mistake to move away from the inclusive political involvement in that, because the interaction of professional politicians and general citizens was good for both sides. People came with an open mind.

I do not agree that we should have two or three referendums, as though we have just lined up a list of things to do, and I ask the Taoiseach's view on it. What all of us who have been knocking on doors in referendums know, and if the experience of Brexit for the past few weeks indicates anything, is that we should be careful about what questions we put to people. They should be issues of moment and substance, and if we are going to make changes, particularly to the Constitution, we should have a good and convincing reason.

Finally, it is clear that when there is a major event such as a presidential election taking place in conjunction with a referendum, as was the case with the first referendum we held on parliamentary inquiries, it overshadows the referendum to the extent that there is no real engagement with the issue. In addition, where an important referendum is in the public mind together with a less important one, there is no real debate about the less important one. We must be very careful in how we proceed on referendums, and I would not be in favour of simply saying, "Let us have a plethora of them. Let us list them every three months." Unless there is a convincing and compelling reason to undertake a democratic process of this nature, we should not be embarking upon it.

Photo of Seán Ó FearghaílSeán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Taoiseach to be brief.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I share Deputy Howlin's view and, indeed, Deputy Martin's view. I have no intention of setting out dates for referendums without consultation with everybody. I agree with that. There is no point in saying that we will have a referendum in October on some issue unless we have buy-in from all of the political parties here and agreement to set aside day X in month X for a referendum on a major issue.

I suppose, when one reflects on the Constitutional Convention, one must conclude that while it did good work, perhaps we gave it too much work to do. If one gets 18 recommendations for referendums, obviously, that is four or five years' work. These are expensive issues to handle and a Minister of the day must contend with that. I also agree that it is difficult to motivate people about many of the issues that might arise in terms of changes to the Constitution and we should, perhaps, consider more carefully the major issues, societal or otherwise, that need to be dealt with by way of referendum.

We decided on this occasion to have as broad a citizen representation as possible and that is why the recommendations from the assembly will come back to the Oireachtas, where all the Members will be involved in any event.