Katherine Zappone (Independent)

I thank the Leader for allowing time for the House to participate in debate on this critical issue of the most appropriate and acceptable way to begin our work together each day as we sit as Senators. I see this as yet another way in which the Leader and members of the 24th Seanad are committed to ensuring reform of the practices in order that we are more effective, relevant, representative and inclusive. Perhaps our colleagues in the Lower House ought to take note.

I shall, however, be a lone voice, with the greatest of respect to all the colleagues who have spoken and yet to speak. I agree with much of what virtually everybody has said, especially Senator Bacik, and some of what Senator Mullen has said. I wonder about the lone voice, I guess I am just so very different, therefore, I will be true to my difference.

Senator Bacik has already offered the House something of an historical analysis on the practice of saying a Christian prayer. My view is that it reflects a time in history where there was not a clear separation of church and state and that the prayer is a manifestation of the interweaving of Roman Catholicism with the politics of a new republic. In my view, this reflects an historical period where the people were not as conscious of the importance of separating religion from the business of politics in a republic. This was an error that has now gone by. We have heard some of that in the contributions.

In my view, this was an exclusionist adherence to one world religion and no longer reflects our history, nor does it reflect the contemporary thinking of theologians and theorists of religion and the ways in which religion and meaning-making are studied and practised today. There exists a growing pluralism of the membership in the five great world religions within Ireland today and a growing number of people who lead ethical and spiritual leaves, outside the context of any world religion.

The last census of population demonstrates that 186,000 people ticked the "no religion" box, up 34% from 2002 and several thousand others opted not to answer the religion question. There also exists a growing number of people who hold an attentiveness to the "beyond in our midst" - those are words taken from the great thinker Paul Tilley and I count myself within this number - as well as those who attempt to lead ethical lives through reflection on the meaning of the best ways to be human and to practice the good, both the personal good and the good of the common. Consequently, it makes good sense to reform the practice by moving away from the practice of what is a bygone era to choosing a practice that respects the pluralism of belief of members and between and among the people we represent. I am in favour, therefore, of a moment of silence at the beginning of our work where we can each draw on the inspiration, meaning and ethical values of that which we believe, and as Senator Mullen said, of the reflective space.

I see no good reason to maintain a prayer from one world religion even if it is combined with a moment of silence. Such a combination would form a practice that does not adequately represent the diversity of Irish people because it still emphasises an element of the predominance of one religion's value at the expense of other ways of making meaning.

I conclude with a cautionary note - any argument that the belief of the majority dictates practice in the House is not wise counsel and, I submit, will not build a society of inclusivity and equality. Therefore, I am not be in favour of the amendment. Most members are calling it a compromise - I appreciate and respect that - but I do not agree. I view it as maintaining an exclusivist practice and it is not a practice towards inclusivity.