Ms Marian Harkin:

I thank Members very much for their kind words which are genuinely appreciated.

I agree with Senator Cáit Keane on the 40% target for women on boards. Before I was elected, if somebody had asked me whether I agreed with quotas and so on, I would have said "No," but I have changed my mind. I now see that the system has to be changed from within. Once there are enough women involved, it becomes the norm. I do not believe in having quotas forever; they are only needed for a certain length of time in order that it becomes normal and critical mass is achieved. Decision-making is better when it is balanced between men and women. Women are not better; neither are men, but they do some good things together.

The Senator went through the significant role played by the Seanad in detail and also referred to the need for prior approval and unanimity on issues such as the common consolidated corporate tax base. That is as much in the hands of this House as it is in the hands of the Lower House. The Senator also talked about the need for checks and balances. If one was to use a footballing term, one would say there were some good full backs in the Seanad and that they were absolutely needed. I also agree with the Senator on the petitions committee.

I thank Senator Marc MacSharry for his kind words. He asked about the alignment process with regard to the Leader programme boards, as did Senator Kathryn Reilly. I could say a great deal on this issue, but as my time is limited, I will not, except to say the Irish model is seen as one of the best at European level and the Court of Auditors has given its approval. It manages to ensure voluntary and community participation. The Leader programme is not just about jobs and money, it is also about building communities. If we take this away and place it under the governance of county managers, we will do a huge disservice to the Leader programme. It is not that I have anything against local authorities. Most of those present will have served on a local authority and I know that they do good work. However, 5% of the rural development programme moneys is set aside not for politicians but for ordinary citizens. I talked about participative democracy. People can effect change by participating. The current proposals will take this away from them - I am sure of it. I am not saying the Minister will change his mind or do a U-turn because, at the end of the day, I come from the European Parliament where we negotiate and try to reach a compromise. I hope the Minister will find a way to work with the local development companies and ensure there will continue to be community and voluntary participation under the Leader programme.

Senator Marc MacSharry also talked about parliamentary responses from Ireland. I honestly cannot answer question, but I know that none has come to my committee which deals with employment and social affairs issues. The Senator has said people do not have a sense of ownership of the policy platform. We all agree with this. What we need to try to do, as politicians, is to bridge that gap in some way. If there was a petitions committee and a citizens' initiative that was meaningful, although it would obviously have to be restrictive in certain ways, people would see that democracy was not just about the numbers 1, 2, 3 that they place on their ballot paper but also about how they, as interested citizens, could be involved. If this House could play a role in that regard, the opportunities would be enormous and the rewards very significant.

I canvassed with Senator Kelly and have not forgotten this. I am not sure if I should call him John or Senator Kelly.