Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Members may well be watching debates, as most people do, in their offices but nobody outside knows that. None of the thousands of visitors who come to the Visitors Gallery every day are aware of that. I suggest, as a starting point, that Members begin to demonstrate their commitment to the actual Chamber by attending it more frequently and being seen to do so.

A related issue I wish to raise is the calling of amendments on the Order of Business asking for Ministers to address the House, on whatever topic, on the given day. Calling for votes and grandstanding in such a fashion on the Order of Business only serves to have a knock-on effect on business for the rest of the day. I accept that while my party was on the other side of the House we also engaged in that process, but it is not right. We all remember the day the Tánaiste came to the House last July and was left standing outside the door. That type of behaviour does nothing to enhance the standing of the Seanad.

Let us cut to the chase. We will have a referendum on whether the Seanad should be abolished; the Government is committed to holding it and it is included in the programme for Government. I am convinced the public will not support a Chamber as long as they have no say in who is elected to it. All other reports on Seanad reform dealt predominantly with how the Seanad should be elected, with some 80% of the reports dealing with that subject. This matter will have to be agreed well in advance of any referendum because the electorate cannot be expected to buy a pig in a poke. They will not do so.

I fully support the idea that European affairs and scrutiny thereof should form a greater part of the business of the Seanad. I wrote to the Oireachtas Commission in January, seeking additional resources to allow us to deal with those matters, had a meeting with the human resources section and believed we were going to get the required resources but nothing happened. I have written again on the matter to the chairman of the Oireachtas Commission and await a response. I am convinced we should play a greater role in the scrutiny of the EU work programme and EU directives, though without duplicating in any way the work being undertaken by the House committees already in place.

Debates on the future of the House should take place and we have already had a number outside the House. On the question of whether the Seanad should be abolished, in spite of the fact that I allowed time today for this excellent report to be debated and in spite of the excellent contributions in the report from Senators Quinn and Zappone, people outside the House will be listened to by the public to a much greater degree than the present membership.

They are the brief comments I wish to make on the document produced and how I see us moving forward. I am open to reforming the Seanad in any way possible - either within Standing Orders or by amending them, if necessary - in order to improve the way it works. The major problem we must address and in respect of which we must try to establish unanimity prior to the matter being put to the public in a referendum is how the membership of the House is elected.