John Gilroy (Labour)

I welcome the Minister to the Chamber. We appreciate that he is a frequent visitor.

I will take the opportunity to second and discuss the Government amendment. Given the Sinn Féin motion and the Fianna Fáil amendment, it is interesting that two parties representing strands of Nationalist and republican opinion find it difficult to agree on the nature of nationalism and republicanism. Neither party holds a monopoly on the views expressed by republicanism.

At first glance, the motion appears simple and abbreviated. It seems to call for an extension of voting rights in the presidential election and a review of the nomination process. If we deconstruct the motion, all sorts of problems arise. They do not relate to the motion itself, but to its construction and the underlying assumptions. I agree with Senator Keane, in that we will only have time to touch on one or two issues, something that the motion's proposers have overlooked.

The proposal that Seanad Éireann "recognises the need to enhance the democratic process on this island" is not contentious. Rather, it and its universal application everywhere else in the world are welcome.

The proposal that the House "recognises the desire to enable northern participation in the political life of the nation, as an important part of the Irish peace process and a natural outworking of the Good Friday Agreement" is vague. The use of the word "nation" makes me suspect that there is more going on with the motion than I can see. Deliberate or not, the vagueness allows for a range of interpretation, as the very idea of what constitutes the nation is contested. One part of Northern Ireland's population regards itself as British and as being of the social, cultural and political fabric of the United Kingdom while another part considers itself Irish. The motion fails to clarify what it is we are discussing when referring to the nation. Even the name is contested, for example, the Six Counties, Ulster, Northern Ireland and the North. The name each speaker uses reveals his or her notions of nationhood.

The third part of the motion "affirms the democratic values of citizenship and equality" and is universally applicable and welcome. The fourth part, which calls for an "extension of voting rights to all Irish citizens in the Six Counties as well as citizens living and working abroad", may not be appropriate for discussion in the House at this time. I say this for several reasons. First, someone who is of a more suspicious or cynical nature than I am might be tempted to view the motion as being politically motivated and as an attempt to use the House's procedures to gain political currency for a particular candidate in a presidential election. I believe it is a happy coincidence that the motion is before the House at this time. However, the cynic might claim that the credentials of the proposers would be more credible were this proposal withheld until after a presidential campaign instead of appearing in the middle of one. We will leave it at that.