Pearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)

Gabhaim buíochas don Seanadóir Hannigan as a chuid ama a roinnt liom.

I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with some of what the Minister of State said. It is not often that I find common ground with the Government. However, introducing change to the Seanad on a piecemeal basis does not represent the way forward. I was on my own for a long period in arguing that the Seanad should be abolished. However, Fine Gael has since come around to this view. There is something rotten at the core of the Seanad, that is, the way in which Members are elected. The electoral system for this House is elitist and apartheid in nature and belongs to a different era.

In the light of the promises we have received from the Government in respect of real Seanad reform, I was taken aback when I read this legislation. We use the term "Seanad reform," but what does it mean? There is no doubt that the Seanad could be reformed. However, it must be remembered that during the lifetime of the previous Seanad Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Labour Party and the Independents signed up to an all-party report on Seanad reform which recommended that the number of Senators and Taoiseach's appointees be increased. The report contains a number of positive suggestions but the reform it advocates is not that which I want to see being introduced. Serious reform is required.

The legislation before the House would confer on a group which represents councillors - I have nothing against LAMA or the important work it has done in representing councillors across the State - more power in respect of the election of Members to the Seanad. Not only do councillors already hold most power in deciding who sits in this Chamber, Fine Gael now wants to give them the power to nominate those who can go before them for election.