Joe O'Toole (Independent)

However, we must ask why there is a university panel. If we worked on the basis of one person, one vote I would not have a difficulty with maintaining the university panel. In other words, if we elected people by direct vote and if 10% of Members were elected by university graduates — although I have no doubt a lot more than 10% of the population would be graduates — I would not have a difficulty with that. I am not, however, enthusiastic about it. My view since I became a Member — I have been on every reform group for 20 years — is that if it comes down to that, farmers and fishermen should vote for those on the agricultural panel, education partners should vote for those on the cultural and educational panel, registered members of trade unions should vote for those on to the labour panel and business people should vote for those on the administrative panel. The nominating bodies should have votes. It is disgraceful that they have no impact beyond nominating people. These are some of the gaps in the system. In such a structure, there would be a strong case for maintaining the university panel.

I am completely in favour of extending the vote to all third level graduates. I am a great loser in this regard because primary school teachers, who are my base, who graduated after 1996 have not been allowed to vote. My vote potential deteriorates every year so, therefore, I have a vested interested in increasing the university franchise.

I have no problem with the concept of indirect elections, which works in France, the USA and in many countries. It is a distillation of democracy in that one layer elects the other. The only problem I have with it at present is that the preponderance of people elected that way is unacceptable. My view is that the Seanad should become slightly larger and that the number of Members should be increased to approximately 70 and that the number elected indirectly would not be reduced to 20 but should be perhaps 30. I very much agree with the point made by Senator Boyle. The idea of a national list, a national panel, to elect people indirectly makes much more sense than this nonsense of knowledge and experience of education, etc.

We need to make changes and implement the proposals. There is a roadmap for implementation and milestones and targets are included in the report. If we do not agree to the amendment, I will co-operate with the Government motion. The business could be done in two months and we could move forward. Let us make people put up or shut up. We must be conscious of people who have been elected by county councillors. People should be given time to adjust and make changes to what is proposed.