David Norris (Independent)

I got a good hearing from a minority of the attendance who were prepared to take controversy on the chin. We had a good time and an interesting exchange. At that time, I thought the only problem was section 4 planning permissions. I would count as a negative the absurd deference paid to county councils in this House in particular, though not so much in the Dáil.

I do not want to tread too far into the subject of the tribunals but it would be wrong of me not to refer to them. There has been a series of scandals in which members of local authorities and county councils were involved, including Members of the Oireachtas. This is shameful. It has brought the question of local government into focus and into a kind of contempt in the minds of the general population because the impression is given that people are abroad who, in the words of James Joyce, not only were prepared to sell their country for thruppence but would get down on their knees and thank the almighty Christ they had a country to sell. That is a pity.

I am not making any individual accusations or claims but a general atmosphere has been exposed, largely by the operations of the former Minister, Mr. Michael Smith, and his colleague, who offered money for information, which led to the establishment of the tribunals. That must be recognised. I do not for a minute believe this problem exists only in Dublin, although it may be on a smaller scale elsewhere. I hope it is rooted out, which should be the first aim. We should have respect for the work that it has done, but we should make sure it has done it properly, appropriately and honestly, without any suggestion of malpractice, which is certainly in people's minds. It is an important part of our democracy, as it touches people's lives in areas such as planning, housing and the provision of basic services. We are entitled to a higher standard than we have had. I say this while honouring the contribution made by many persons of integrity at local level. They have been let down, however.

I support the work and development of local authorities in its appropriate place, which is not interfering in the work of the Oireachtas. Members of local authorities can talk to Members and brief them, but in recent weeks such authorities have been used as an excuse or figleaf for the subversion of the work of this House with regard to the cancellation of the proposed committee to inquire into Shannon Airport. This is utterly wrong. Perhaps this was the real reason, but it may well have been the Government using local authorities as a cat's paw and an excuse.

The necessity for the Government to complete the work started when it decoupled part of the relationship between the Oireachtas and local authorities, by stopping double jobbing, has been highlighted. This was the nauseous practice of people being both Members of the Oireachtas and members of local authorities. This was the reason, we were told, we could never meet on a Monday. The Oireachtas could not meet on certain days of the week, not because of a matter of national importance, but because local councils were meeting. This was inappropriate and wrong.

We tend to get laughable lectures regarding democracy and it is assumed and often stated that the university seats in the Seanad are undemocratic. They are the only democratic element in this House. These seats at least have real constituencies. As originally designed it was intended that all Seanad seats should be voted upon, and there were nominating bodies. These nominating bodies were eventually neutered, by having the power of voting removed from their ordinary membership. The overwhelming bulk of my colleagues, most of whom are excellent politicians, are still spancelled by an unhealthy, unrealistic, nonsensical and undemocratic method of election involving constituencies of fewer than 1,000 members. An overwhelming number of these are local councillors.

This is wrong and vitiates the entire process. I call on the Minister to look again at this. My colleagues and friends in this Chamber would not have the slightest difficulty getting elected on a proper, wider mandate. It would free them from the absurd deference which is paid to local authorities.

We hear much waffle about carnage on the roads and how we should have respect for speed limits. Why should anybody have respect for a system that is totally chaotic and inconsistent? Everybody knows this. There is a chaotic system of speed limits on the country's roads because the determination of these limits is left exclusively in the hands of local authorities. It should be a national issue. Road deaths are a national scandal and should not be left in the hands of local authorities.

The same should be true with regard to speed bumps. Why are these not nationally regulated? Some, in posh areas, are nice undulations, which would hardly cause a hair to rise on that back of one's head. Others are like the Cliffs of Moher, and these are structurally dangerous to a car driven at 10 km/h. If the Minister wants respect from road users, there should be consistency on issues such as speed limits and speed bumps. It should be logical to suggest that any ordinary decent citizen should be able to drive their car up to the permitted maximum speed. That takes into account a car being driven over a speed bump.

I mentioned this issue to a person, stating that these bumps are meant to deter joyriders. The person laughed, saying that in her area the bumps only encourage joyriders as they get a better bang from hitting them. They destroy the cars and jump out of them. We should have some really consistent and high standards in our local authorities. They are an important part of our Government. We have not yet reached those standards, and the Minister could take action on the matter.