Michael McCarthy (Labour)

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, to delete lines 39 to 47 and in page 5, to delete lines 1 to 18.

We have had many long debates in the House about the abolition of the dual mandate. Eventually people came around to the idea that it would happen, with one notable exception. The reasons behind it were well articulated in the House by the Minister and various others. It was argued then that the dual mandate went much further than the interlinking between local government and the Oireachtas. Looking around the House, one can see a number of business people, doctors, teachers and so on, who in effect have their own unique dual mandates.

The abolition of the dual mandate was a good thing. We are sometimes reluctant to acknowledge what is good, but this is something we all sought when we were sitting on county councils. People have now done what is required in terms of resigning their seats, organising replacements and so on. It is good to see the new system up and running. It is wholly unacceptable, however, for us to allow the European dual mandate to operate until 2007. It gives the Government an advantage because some of its Deputies are standing for election as MEPs and under the current system no by-election will be required, so the Government will maintain its presence in the Oireachtas. I understand that would be the case no matter who is in Government. The status quo may suit the Government but it may not always suit the Opposition, which is the case currently.

The codes dealing with dual mandates are inconsistent. It is not proper to operate a system which allows a lucrative and time-consuming dual mandate while not allowing another one. In the interests of consistency and leadership, the Government cannot allow this to continue. The Minister of State did not accept this amendment on Committee Stage — that is why we are discussing it now. However, I urge him to reconsider. He knows best about taking advantage of a dual mandate in terms of being able to return to domestic politics after a time in Europe. I would like him to consider the inconsistency that currently exists and I urge him to accept the amendment so that this anomaly may be addressed.