Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

In some way this indicates that the Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas has pre-eminence in a sense. The wording recognises the problem and for that reason it is either meaningless or, if it means anything, it will be open to a constitutional challenge. I read in The Irish Times recently that an independent councillor has said he would be willing to take a constitutional challenge to any such measure.

There are many contradictions. The Minister said that he will not treat councillors less favourably. That should be the case because elected councillors have primacy over Oireachtas Members if they are not members of a local authority. That is as it should be. The Minister said that in time people will focus less on local government, but I doubt that. He spoke about the separation of the duties of legislator from those of a local authority member. The abolition of the dual mandate creates a problem for Members of the Oireachtas and this is an attempt by the Minister to deal with this issue.

In fairness to all Members of the Oireachtas I ask the Minister to publish the regulations so that we can see what is proposed by this section. Section (3)(a) proposes "the supply, without charge, of notice, agenda and minutes of local authority meetings to members of either such House". I can obtain this information from the Internet, as can my next door neighbour or anyone else. Subsection (3)(b) refers to the "supply by local authorities of other specified documentation or other specified information". I ask the Minister to spell out what this means because it is very important from our point of view and for our rights as Members of the Oireachtas. Subsection (3)(c) is also meaningless because Members correspond with local authorities in the same way they correspond with residents' associations and various bodies.

This amendment is like the Emperor's clothes and its purpose is to keep backbenchers on board. Members who vote for this amendment are making a mistake.