Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

That is a significant part of the problems we have in both Houses.

The Local Authority Members Association should be a nominating body for the Seanad. I served on that body as chairman and member for a number of years and was a colleague of the Minister of State in the General Council of County Councils for a long period. I was also a member of the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland.

I agree with the Minister of State's point that the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland and the General Council of County Councils are representative of the corporate bodies of local government whereas the Local Authority Members Association is a representative body for the members. I listened with interest to what the Minister of State had to say on retrenchment and rationalisation. There were suggestions in the past in this regard that came from officials in the Department. I hope we will have Ministers who will use their own knowledge, experience and discretion when the permanent government makes propositions to them and that they will do the right thing. I would not like to see any amalgamation because the various bodies serve different purposes.

I am aware that some of the discussions surrounding the reform of local government may well lead to the removal of a tier of local government. Therefore, the future of the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland and town councils may well feature in any reform programme. The Local Authority Members Association represents the lowest paid public servants in the country, councillors. I served as a councillor for twice as long as I have been a Member of this House. As with many other Senators, I know the volume of work done at council level and how it has been increasing exponentially, particularly since better local government was introduced some time ago.

I do not believe the arguments on retrenchment and rationalisation are in the White Paper on local government reform or what the Clerk of the Seanad decided previously is relevant to what we are discussing today.

When chairman of the Local Authority Members Association, I took up with the then Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, the issue of recognition of the association on behalf of its members. It was addressed by him through local government legislation. We sought to be a nominating body, not only for the Administrative Panel but also the panel I believe is most appropriate for the association, namely, the Labour Panel. I was told by the Clerk of the Seanad that without the approval and support of other nominating parties on that panel, which the Clerk felt would not be forthcoming, it would not be possible to make the decision to include us. However, we in these Houses can make these decisions. We should be making them and exercising our electoral mandate and franchise.

I welcome the extension of the debate on Seanad reform. I sometimes smile when I hear many Members seeking reform of a body that is often recognised as a much better debating Chamber than the Lower House. Many Ministers in the current Cabinet and former Ministers have said privately to me and others that they prefer to introduce legislation in this House than in the Lower House. I do not know the view of the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran, who served in this House for a number of years. The Ministers make this point to me because they feel there will be more objective and higher quality debate without partisanship. We should be slow to decry the merits of this House. That is not to say that I do not agree with some of the points made by Senator Joe O'Toole in that there is room for reform.

There are many upper Chambers in many European parliaments whose Members are elected similarly to ourselves. Members of local authorities who have a strong electoral mandate and make very fundamental decisions on behalf of citizens also exercise the franchise to elect members to an Upper House. France is a notable example.