Feargal Quinn (Independent)

On balance, it appears the Minister of State has got it right. Senator O'Toole referred to my concern about the process being cumbersome and bureaucratic. I agree that there is a danger of this happening. Some 75% of employees in the private sector are not represented by trade unions. Even in general elections, a large proportion of the population no longer vote. The voting tradition is less strong and I would like to see that change. However, it is wrong to almost insist on having elections when it is agreed between employees that those who are interested will have a say on that basis. Let us not assume that every employee wants to be actively involved in these issues. We should encourage it. A good employer will encourage it anyway. I do not believe we should enforce elections that would involve, to paraphrase Senator O'Toole, cumbersome methods.

I am interested in the notion that a representative would not hold office for more than three years. At the time of the last Seanad election, a proposal was put forward at a meeting in UCD that no university Senators should be allowed hold office for more than two terms. I think it was put forward by a new candidate. It is a reminder that if the prevailing culture is democratic in nature and if an incumbent is doing a good job, he or she is unlikely to be removed from his or her position. That is usually what happens. If a person is not doing a good job, there will clearly be a move against him or her. On that basis, the Minister of State is right not to accept that amendment. I do not hear any enthusiasm for the amendment in any event. The Minister of State has it right about the employer agreeing with the employees rather than necessarily having an election in all cases.