Seanad debates

Wednesday, 3 October 2012

Radical Seanad Reform Through Legislative Change: Statements

 

4:15 pm

Photo of Labhrás Ó MurchúLabhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

That would be real democracy in action. In recent years much lip service has been paid to the issue of reform. This document is not a knee-jerk reaction. Anybody who has read it from cover to cover will agree that its authors and the consultants have undertaken an indepth analysis of the issues involved. Does a House of Parliament and its possible abolition not deserve analysis and to have the facts put into the public domain? When the Clerk of the Dáil appeared before an Oireachtas committee, he made it clear that the cost of the Seanad was ¤10 million. Some would say it costs only ¤7 million. So far as the public is concerned, in the ether there are figures such as ¤20 million and ¤150 million floating around. That is not the way to conduct a debate, as one is not being fair to the people because one is not giving them the information they need with which to make a decision. I would regard it as an exceptionally serious decision to abolish the House which is noted for its forensic examination of every piece of legislation. It is noted for the minimal level of partisanship and the lack of personality politics as witnessed day in and day out in the other House. Does the public know that almost 30% of legislation is initiated in this House? If it does not, the question arises is this because we are not effective as legislators or that the media have not given us the opportunity to let the public know precisely what happens in the House.

Returning to the empty chair, we are speaking to ourselves. The saddest point is that subsequent to the people's response in the referendum we might all realise that we had something in place that we could have moulded and reformed. For as long as I have been a Member, including during the peace process, we have kept using a megaphone to speak to people in Northern Ireland. We have an opportunity to bring them into the House. On any report on which I have the opportunity to make a contribution I will make that point. I could list ten issues that cause consternation arising from European Union legislation, the bog issue being one. There is also the requirement that one must register one's hens, that one must change one's kitchen if one wants to make scones and sell them in shops. All of these requirements arise from EU directives. This House could have played a role in that regard. We will have one opportunity to leave party politics to one side and, on behalf of the nation, not just those living on the island of Ireland but the 70 million people of Irish extraction who want to become part of the electoral process, provide for representation. I do not see that happening, however, except through providing for representation for them in the Seanad.

This is an historic debate and I express my thanks to Senators Zappone and Quinn and the other Senators who have taken a constructive approach to it. I still hope that if there is a referendum that the next section is included in order to give people the opportunity that they are entitled to and not to answer a simple "Yes" or "No" question. People are discerning so one should not underestimate their intelligence. One must include reform as an option. It is only then that we will be truly democratic and truly endeavouring to reflect the wishes of the people. I still hope - perhaps I am wrong - that it will happen and that the Cathaoirleach's chair will not always be empty in the future.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.