John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

I wish to clarify the reference to the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution of which I was a member. Senator McCarthy was correct that the committee produced a report on property rights which reflected a consensus. Nobody had a veto in that case and what emerged from the committee was a balanced view across all parties and independent members. That is not the same as what is proposed in the amendment before us. It proposes to provide one group with a veto which is why it would be wrong to endorse it.

When I was on the other side of the House, I had the experience of proposing an amendment to a previous Electoral Bill whereby pictures of candidates and party logos would be included on ballot papers. I proposed the amendment on the basis of an unfortunate experience of a shouted vote, which I thought was very unfair. If a person is illiterate, everything should be done to accommodate him or her in casting his or her vote in secrecy. The then Minister rejected the amendment, telling me that to accept it would be to introduce a beauty contest.

We should be very careful about getting into fraught areas. I insist that the amendment is much too restrictive in its references to all aspects of the voting system and all parties. It should be rejected.