Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, to the House. Like other Members, I am pleased to see the legislation. We have known for some time that it would come. I am not as certain as my colleague, Senator Quinn, on this question, which I have debated many times. If someone is being punished by society, should that include depriving him or her of the right to vote? We deprive them of a normal constitutional right, their liberty. Whether it is right to deprive them of a vote too is open to question, but on balance I would agree with Senator Quinn that ultimately we must come down on this side of the debate. It is right because it is part of making people aware that they are still part of society and must be rehabilitated.

While it is welcome, I would like to raise several issues to which I hope the Minister of State will respond. I may not be in the House for it, but I will certainly consult the Official Report. Article 16.1 of the Constitution determines the right of persons to stand for election and vote. The right to vote is distinguished by citizenship and various other criteria. The Electoral Acts we are amending today also stipulate that to exercise a vote, one must do two things. First, one must be normally resident in a constituency. Second, one must be registered. I would like to discuss those two matters and ask a question.

The Constitution always envisaged that there would be no more difficult a bar to standing for election than having the right to vote. However, one must have normal residency in a constituency to cast a vote. Am I right to conclude that one need not normally be resident in a constituency to stand for election in that or any other constituency? That leads me to the second question. Does one have to be resident in the State to stand for election? I raise that because it touches on such issues as the rights of emigrants. From my reading, it seems to me that a person need not normally be resident in the State to stand for election. I will return to citizenship shortly.

However, to cast a vote, one must be normally resident. Is that legally and constitutionally sound? Does the fact that a person need not be normally resident in a constituency mean that he or she can be living outside the State? Can an Irish citizen who is an emigrant to another country stand for election here? If that be so, is it not quite extraordinary that a person living abroad should have the right to stand for election but not the right to cast a vote? Is there not an inconsistency there and a conundrum never contemplated by the Constitution? I would like to hear the Minister of State's view on that, since it raises issues not dealt with hitherto.

That brings me back to postal votes. We are doing something about which many of us have talked over the last ten or more years, that is, introducing postal votes. With a hopping industrial, economic and social scene in Ireland, and the complications of study at home and abroad, many people cannot be at home to vote. Why is it so difficult to cast a postal vote? Many prisoners will be doing information technology courses. How can one shift thousands of pounds at the click of a mouse as long as one enters one's code and password but not vote electronically? Would it not be more secure than the kind that we have currently? Is it envisaged? At times we have passed technical legislation to say, for example, that IT transmission shall also include postal votes. Will that cover this case?

I recently went to the trouble of consulting www.checktheregister.ie. I was appalled by what I found, which was a classic example of what happens when we get consultants in to set up a website when departmental staff would do a better job. The problem is as follows. Imagine that I want to check Joe O'Toole, Thornton, Kilsallagh, County Dublin. I hope that the advisers take this on board and alert the Department, since it is quite appalling. I keyed in my correct address and townland and then entered "OToole" to see how many family members were registered. The site required a first name, which I thought was rather strange, since it should surely be able to recognise "OToole". I entered "Joe", but the site stated that there was no "Joe OToole". Having spoken to the person going from door to door renewing the electoral register, I knew that I had gone through the process correctly, so I persisted. It occurred to me that I might be registered under the name "Joseph", which would please my mother. I keyed in "Joseph OToole" but found that I was not listed. It then occurred to me that although most such systems do not recognise an apostrophe, I should perhaps try it in that format, entering "Joseph O'Toole". This time my details came up.

That is appalling, stupid, badly organised and mismanaged. Someone should be kicked around and told that things should not be done like that. I should be able to enter my address in the ordinary register of electors, keying in the street and house number, and see how many Faheys or O'Tooles are in that house. It should just come up in front of me. Surely it would take only two minutes for someone to adjust. It turns matters on their head instead of making them easier, rendering them more difficult. I was delighted to see that it could be done so easily on-line, but I was appalled to find that the search feature was so deficient. I should be able to enter "O-Toole", "O Toole" or "OToole", in upper and lower case, with all variants recognised. That is what would happen if one did it using Google or on any site trying to sell one something. I ask the Minister of State to consider making this change to the system. I have no doubt those charged with doing so within the Department will be able to make it as effective as any external system.

I support this legislation and look forward to its enactment.