Frances Fitzgerald (Fine Gael)

I was amazed to learn from the Minister of State's contribution to the debate that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, had not yet gone to the Cabinet with the findings of the deliberations of the all-party group on Seanad reform, as he was meant to so do almost one year ago. My understanding was that he intended to come to this House before December with recommendations from the Government. What has happened to that process? When does the Minister intend to take the actions he proposes in respect of the electoral commission? One can only conclude from what the Minister of State said that yet again Seanad reform is not on the agenda.

I welcome the Minister of State and thank Senator O'Toole and the Independent Members for using their Private Members' time to facilitate a discussion on Seanad reform. However, if one were to examine the agenda of the Seanad since its return, one would be obliged to express extreme disappointment at the fact that the Government has not placed any legislation on the Order Paper of the Seanad in the last four weeks. Why is this the case? What is happening to the legislative programme of the Government? As this House has taken as its primary function the examination and amendment of legislation, it does not help if no legislation is brought before it. This makes it very difficult for Members to gain credibility.

While Members are debating Seanad reform tonight in the context of its future, such a debate does not take place in a vacuum. All Members must recognise the extent to which confidence, trust and faith in the body politic and its ability to deliver are unquestionably at an all-time low. At such a critical time for the country from a fiscal, economic, social and political point of view, it is a serious issue that the people have so little confidence in the Oireachtas and in how our democracy is run. It is one we have taken very seriously in Fine Gael.

I reject Senator Ross's comments. His description of the work we have done on the New Politics document is far from the truth. We have taken the question very seriously, as anyone who reads the document will see. A lot of research and thought have gone into it and we have not pulled the recommendations made from anywhere. We made them following examination and detailed work with a view to reforming the political system to make it more effective and efficient, which is what the people want to see.

The people have been left feeling very despondent, yet Irish people care about their political structures in delivering. The public meeting, Building the Future, held in the RDS on Saturday last was attended by 1,000 citizens. Some 2,000 people had applied to be there to talk about what mattered to them, how the State was run and how they wanted to see it delivering for its people. This is something Irish people care about, even if they are disillusioned with the structures. Therefore, it behoves us to address the issue.

We must accept that the problem goes further than the Seanad. The Dáil needs radical change to deliver a Parliament of which the people can be proud. That is why Fine Gael has stated that when in government we will witness the biggest revolution in parliamentary structures since Independence, including holding a referendum; asking the people what they think about the future of the Seanad; reducing the size of the Dáil; strengthening the role of Members in the committee system; changing the budgetary system; and producing other radical reforms. We cannot talk about reforming the Seanad in isolation. Reform is about how both Houses operate.

How the budgetary system operates is relevant as we approach budget day in the next few weeks. How many times have we discussed changing the way we deal the budget? That has relevance for this House, as well as the Dáil. How many times have we talked about having meaningful dialogue, looking at the Estimates and having real discussion in the Houses? It does not happen. How many times have we talked about having a register of lobbyists and reforming quangos? It is extraordinary how slow the system is to change and respond. That is why the people are disillusioned. They see report after report being produced.

The Fine Gael report, New Politics, analyses the history of unicameralism in Europe and how other countries provide for checks and balances in the legislative process and other areas. The biggest failing of the Seanad is not how it has done its work but the inability of Governments to fix it. We have had 12 separate reports which we have reviewed during the various debates on Seanad reform. The most recent was drawn up in 2004 when there was a real sense of agreement. Reports were also compiled in 2002 and 1997. There was the report of the all-party Oireachtas committee on the Constitution in 1967, the report of the Seanad Electoral Law Commission in 1959, the report of the Joint Committee on Seanad Panel Elections in 1947 and the report of the Commission on Vocational Organisations in 1943. Other reports date back to 1928, but none of the recommendations made in any of these reports was taken on board, to any degree. So much effort has been put into producing reports but so little into implementing the recommendations made. This is a general failing of the Government. We bring in consultants and receive reports, but their recommendations are not acted upon and the reforms not made.

The Seanad has failed in spite of and not because of the quality of its Members. Everyone is agreed on this. Work of quality has been done in this House, whether one talks about people who started their careers or spent part of them here. It would be invidious to name names. Some have been named tonight, many of them politicians. It is wrong for Members to denigrate politicians who come through one part of the system as opposed to another. There is no question that reform is needed across the gamut of the Seanad electoral system.

The failure has not been of those in the House but in the way it is constituted. The flaw is in the design and goes to the heart of the Upper House. There have been superb debates in this House. People often say the standard of debate is stronger in the Seanad than in the Dáil, but it does not receive the coverage we would like. That is just one example of how the Seanad is viewed.

We cannot look at Seanad reform in isolation from reform of the Oireachtas. That is the key point Fine Gael is making. Having reviewed the issue, we said it would make more sense to bring about substantial change in the Dáil, including adding the checks and balances that modern democracies with similar chamber parliaments have adopted, rather than maintain the illusion of checks and balances in the current bicameral Oireachtas. Many disagree with this approach, but it is the point of view we are presenting on reform.

I do not think anyone disagrees that reform is necessary. We must reform the way politics does its business in both Houses of the Oireachtas. The reform agenda has long been talked about and we desperately need to take action. I welcome this debate, but the time for talking is long over. We must take action. I am not impressed by the approach of the Minister who said he was serious about reform and would present a plan before December last year. What has happened to that plan?