Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. As is his right and obligation, the Minister has stuck rigidly to the strict interpretation of what is contained in this short Bill. I must confess I do not share the enthusiasm conveyed by the previous speaker in this regard. An all-party constitutional committee was in place as long as two Administrations ago and while I am unsure whether the present Minister was a member of it, his party and all others certainly contributed to it. Its members laboured long and hard over a number of years and produced recommendations which, in common with previously made recommendations, were studiously ignored by the then Administration. The programme for Government now contains a commitment to have a constitutional convention. As the candles were burning during the negotiations between the two parties, I am unsure when someone came up with this not terribly original idea. Thereafter, having created a mighty roar, they produced a mouse because essentially, the proposals are minimal.

I wish to ask the Minister a couple of questions in this regard. I acknowledge Members have been presented with a fait accompli, in that this will happen anyway. However, does the Minister have an opinion on the fact that one of the items to be discussed is the review of the Dáil electoral system? In my opinion, with all due respect to the public, the best people to debate and come up with proposals on the electoral system are those who are themselves practising politicians. I am curious to ascertain whether the Government intends to provide guidance to the great and good among our citizens, who will be selected at random, as to how they are to go about their business. For example, will they be given guidelines on what is the Government's thinking on Dáil reform? Are there specific areas of Dáil reform in which the Government has a particular interest and which it thinks the constitutional convention should examine? Alternatively, will the convention simply start with a blank sheet of paper? It has been stated the Government must come up with it within 12 months but I am sure it will not take that long.

I welcome the Minister's request that the convention report within two months on two of the issues to be discussed, namely, the reduction of the presidential term and the reduction in the voting age. I reckon that process should take approximately two days because one either is in favour of a reduction in the voting age or one is not and similarly, one either is in favour of a reduction in the presidential term of office or one is not. Consequently, I am unsure why this will take two months. Moreover, I question whether deciding on whether to reduce the voting age from 18 to 17 can be counted as one of the most important elements of constitutional reform. Some weeks ago, I mentioned in this Chamber that the Army recently raised the minimum age for recruits to 18 years. In other words, one arm of the State is going in one direction while another is going in a different direction. While it is just my opinion, I am uncertain whether there is great merit in reducing the voting age to 17 years.

As for the manner in which the Minister intends to select members of the convention, I am disappointed there will not be any representation from the Irish diaspora. Surely there was a need for this discussion to include those who have been lobbying long and hard and with whom, as a former emigrant, I have been aligned. I welcome the fact that this matter will come under active consideration and hopefully there will be a resolution that will come down in favour of extending the franchise for presidential elections to those of our diaspora who are spread across five continents. Obviously, certain term limits would be introduced in respect of eligibility, the process of registration and all the factors that already are in play in other countries that have extended the franchise for elections to their own diasporas. The Minister may wish to comment on whether there is any way in which the diaspora can have an input. For example, will submissions be accepted from the public or will there be a narrow focus on those who will be members of the convention to decide on such issues? As Members already have indicated, a range of civic groups are screaming and baying at the door, asking why they were not involved. Under the terms of reference that will be given to the convention, will there be an opportunity to take outside submissions in this regard?

It is interesting that all the issues, with the exception of Dáil reform, are effectively straight "Yes" or "No" questions. I refer to issues including reducing the presidential term, provision for same-sex marriage, amending the clause on women in the home and encouraging greater participation of women in public life, removing blasphemy from the Constitution and, possibly, reducing the voting age. The only subject that is not a "Yes" or "No" issue concerns other relevant constitutional amendments that may be recommended by the convention.

I am glad Senator Cáit Keane referred to the Seanad but - the Minister may clarify this point - the Taoiseach already has made it clear that he will not allow any discussion on the future of the Seanad in the constitutional convention, despite the fact that one of its main purposes is to deal with Dáil reform. I believe the latter to be an area that will be critical and will be open to much wider debate based on the criteria laid down here and the terms of reference. I believe the major issue to confront the convention will be that of the Dáil and the electoral system that elects Deputies to it, yet the Seanad will not be part of its scope. In other words, one arm of parliamentary democracy will be discussed in great detail while the other arm will be studiously ignored. This is one reason many Members on this side of the House have been so uptight about this issue and have been animated to the point to which they have frustrated their colleagues on the other side of the House, who cannot understand the reason they are becoming so animated. It is not just about the Seanad's survival or Members talking about their own future; it is a matter of common sense, as there surely should have been an opportunity to discuss the future of the Seanad in the context of the constitutional convention.

I have two brief final questions. The fact there is a full register and an edited register came as something of a surprise to me as, for whatever reason, I was not aware there were two registers. Perhaps, at the time of registration, members of the public might be made more aware that they have the option to opt in or out. If they opt in to the edited register, that register is then sold on to commercial companies which in turn can contact voters when selling their goods. Does the Minister agree there could be a publicity campaign of some kind on this practice in order that citizens would be generally aware of it? My final point is about the key issue of how the sample will be taken. I compliment the Oireachtas Library and Research Service on its preparation of a valuable document in this regard. In everything I have read in respect of the questions raised on this particular proposal, the key question concerned how the sample would be taken. Any clarification in this regard from the Minister would be welcome.