Seanad debates

Thursday, 29 January 2009

Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Ivana BacikIvana Bacik (Independent)

I thank Senator O'Toole for sharing time with me.

I support some of the reforming elements of this legislation. It is welcome to hear the Minister say he intends to impose spending limits on local election candidates. That is an important change and will ensure greater democracy and equity in the running of local elections. I am concerned to hear, however, that this matter was not considered sufficiently urgent to be dealt with in this Bill. The Minister might clarify whether the reforms he is proposing will be in place in time for this year's local elections. I am conscious that some people have been selected as candidates and are already spending money on canvassing.

I am concerned about some aspects of the Bill such as Parts 5 and 6 on the nomination of non-party candidates for the European Parliament and local elections. While I understand the imperative for introducing an alternative procedure, I wonder why it was considered necessary to include a procedure, albeit as an alternative, whereby money would be lodged. A sum of €1,800 is required for a non-party candidate who wishes to stand in the European Parliament elections. The lesser sum of €100 is required for those who wish to stand for Dáil elections and €50 for local elections. While the Dáil and the local elections sums are less significant, I wonder why it was necessary to include that measure that one should have to pay money to stand as a candidate if one could not get 60 assentors for the European Parliament elections or fewer in the case of other elections. A challenge was made to the idea of a monetary deposit in Redmond v. Minister for the Environment, Ireland and the Attorney General. Why has the Minister seen fit to include it in the Bill and why is the sum so high, to the extent that it will be off-putting, for European Parliament elections? What is the problem with allowing individuals to put their names forward for election on whatever basis they wish? It is a matter for the electorate to decide whether they are worth supporting. I do not see why we need this proviso.

In Part 6 I welcome the Minister's commitment to adhere to the advice of the Constituency Commission in respect of the revision of constituencies. However, the Bill is a missed opportunity because establishing constituency commissions on a similar basis as before misses the opportunity to provide for a more far-reaching commission in the form of an independent electoral commission which would have a more permanent and long-term role in the running of elections as recommended by an independent think tank on which I sat with people from a variety of political perspectives. It was established under the auspices of the think tank for action on social change, TASC. It set up a democracy commission under the chairpersonship of Mr. David Begg which reported in 2005. I do not know if the Minister is familiar with the report entitled, Engaging Citizens — The Case for Democratic Renewal in Ireland, which made a number of interesting and important recommendations. One of its primary recommendations was that there be an electoral commission in Ireland which would have a variety of roles but its primary function would be as an independent regulatory agency to supervise and assist in the running of elections at local and national level. This idea is important because it would oversee the revision of constituency boundaries and also provide for outreach, research and voter education programmes, with the aim of increasing participation.

The Minister is well aware of the disturbing figures indicating low levels of participation among young voters. The National Youth Council of Ireland provides research showing that the level of participation in elections among young people has been declining. This can be contrasted with very high participation rates among the older population. In the general election of 2002 only 40% of young adults aged 18 and 19 years voted, whereas 90% of those aged between 65 and 74 voted. Something must be done to increase participation. There is a campaign to do so, run by the National Youth Council of Ireland. Voter participation levels in socially disadvantaged communities tend to be lower than in middle-class communities, something an independent electoral commission could address. This is a missed opportunity to provide for something of that nature on a more permanent and statutory footing than the more limited functions of the constituency commissions replicated in the Bill.

Senator O'Toole referred to the missed opportunity in respect of Seanad reform. I accept that this is a matter on which the Minister is engaged and hope to see the fruits of that process sooner rather than later. In the long term we should examine the basis for our electoral system. Others have called for a reduction in the number of Deputies and Senators, although Seanad reform is a separate matter, one on which we have a number of reports. There are a number of far-reaching proposals on how the Seanad could be reformed.

On how we elect our politicians, changing the basis of election for some Deputies from a geographical constituency basis to a list system might be beneficial in strengthening our democracy. The Ceann Comhairle recently commented on the need to change procedures in the Dáil. His comments could apply equally to the Seanad to make Dáil and Seanad proceedings more accessible to the public resulting in greater interest and relevance but perhaps that is outside the scope of the Electoral (Amendment) Bill and a matter for the Houses. If we examined the need for reform, we might examine our somewhat archaic procedures and how we might reform them to make them more relevant, to make people more aware of what is taking place in the Dáil and the Seanad and to make us more accountable and our procedures, transparent.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.