Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

I am sticking to the amendment, which relates to Senators. I think I should be allowed to make my point. The Minister will probably speak for as long as I do.

There is value in having the voice of local government in the House. One of the problems that will arise is a high turnover of Senators because councillors like to elect sitting councillors to the Seanad. Nominated Senators have a particular problem because they are practising county councillors who are in the House for just one term. If they are not nominated on the next occasion and are not elected to the Seanad, they will be left without the vocation which they may have practised for a long time at local government level. This is despite the fact that they may have been very good representatives both at Seanad and local government level. We are doing people in that position a disservice. It is ironic that I am putting this argument when all the nominated Senators are on the Government side.

To have a dual mandate is more manageable for a Senator than a Deputy, though I am against the change in general. There is no question but that Seanad Members spend less time in the Houses. This is evidenced by the fact that we are paid substantially less and have substantially fewer resources than Deputies. Senators do not have a local mandate and are not elected by their local constituencies, as are Deputies.