Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

He has a very willing partner in that cause in the media. As I have said to other Members for years, one had to be either gay, a former president of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, or a Sunday Independent journalist to get coverage in this House. Otherwise, one did not get coverage in "Oireachtas Report". Of course that is for the alcoholic insomniacs, as Deputy Pat Rabbitte once called them, who stay up until the middle of the night to watch that programme. Other than that, despite the efforts of Jimmy Walsh, there was no coverage of this House or its work. What the media like to do is cover the Marc MacSharry intemperate outburst or the colourful language of Senator Terry Leyden on whatever issue, and such scenarios are replicated time and again.

They do not want to talk about the family home Bill, the FGM Bill which Senator Bacik tabled and the countless Private Members' Bills all of us have had a hand in over the years, myself included. They just want to cover what they choose.

I had a row with a journalist on air, which probably did me no good considering the coverage which followed for a few days afterwards, a few weeks ago. I asked him if he knew how many Private Members' Bills were passed by the Seanad and he said he did not. I told him he should inform himself. He came on to RTE as a paid commentator in addition to his salary as a journalist to tell people authoritatively what he thinks should happen to the Seanad when he has not taken the time to educate himself about what goes on here. That is the truth.

They do not know what is going on here. They say if we were doing stuff that was more useful and interesting to the public maybe they would cover it, but that is just a cover for people being too lazy to cover it, not wanting to cover it and hiding from the fact they do not by saying it is not worthy of coverage. That has been replicated over the 11 years I have been here. I am sure the father of the House, Senator Norris, and others can say that was always the case.

It is the fault of all taoisigh that the Seanad was never reformed. In the commentary I hear on the airwaves, the one group of people who have nothing to do with it are Senators. I have known no Senator who is not an avid enthusiast not just of reform but radical reform. Those of us who are here long enough to remember the Mary O'Rourke report all provided submissions to it. Some of our issues were taken on board and others were not. We may have refined our views further since the report was published.

It was Fianna Fáil policy to reform the Seanad in its 2007 manifesto. As we know, the wheels came off the economy and so on and things moved on from there. In October 2009, as Senator Bradford said, in a rush of blood to the head on the way into the Fine Gael president's dinner and to the shock of the then Fine Gael leader in the House, now Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, the now Taoiseach said he would abolish the Seanad.

As I have said many times, I can fully understand people in politics playing the ball. I can even understand people playing the man from time to time. How a leader with the experience of the Taoiseach, Deputy Kenny, wants to go about digging up the pitch makes no sense to me. I think of the Iranians wanting to get rid of the Shah without thinking what would replace him. I think of the Enabling Act in Berlin and things like that.

Real leadership is having the courage to take on vested interests and reform. It is not about abolishing things. It was a purely populist move which naturally captured the public's imagination at the time. There is, rightly, a level of apathy from people towards all politics at the moment. People will vote to abolish the Seanad, and we will spend 50 years trying to replace it and will not be able to get agreement on something to replace it.

In terms of more general reform of the entire system, it is not a criticism of this Government or an absolution of previous Governments, but what we have is a functional dictatorship which is called a democracy. The Taoiseach of the day decides on policy, advised by senior civil servants, political advisers and so on. A core group in Cabinet has the balance of power and influence and the Whip does the rest. There is very little, other than tokenism at parliamentary party meetings and some amendments here and there, that gets through the system.

As a result, the people are completely detached from the political process. They have no sense of ownership of the policy platform of the day because they do not feed into it. What radical policy difference was implemented by each of the six last Administrations? The reality is there is probably not much at all. A permanent Government is in place all the time.

I would love to see a scenario where the Cabinet would be elected and then step out. As in the American system they would have to sell their policies to the Parliament of the day. Both Houses are mere tools of the Cabinet of the day and the three or four people who decide what will happen. Love or hate the Taoiseach, his view is that the House should be abolished. The reality is that the full energy of Government will push that agenda. The Minister, Deputy Richard Bruton, is the director of elections.

The matter is being taken seriously because the Government wants to abolish the Seanad. There is no information on what will replace it. There has been loose talk about a committee which will have experts on it. Who will they be? Will it lend itself to cronyism no matter who is in government? It is not a question of Fine Gael, the Labour Party, Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin or any other party. Much could be done with the vehicle that is Seanad Éireann. All of us are in favour of reform.

There is one thing I find offensive when I hear commentary. We rightly hear praise of Gordon Wilson, Maurice Hayes, Senator David Norris and Senator Zappone. I find it offensive that because I happen to be from a political party that in some way my contribution is compromised. I am on the industrial and commercial panel. I was a CEO in the Chambers of Commerce movement in which I was involved for years. I have started businesses which have gone bust, I have been unemployed and I have been employed. I have taken the vocational interest to which I am elected very seriously. I do not think anybody would be as qualified as me to be in it.

The theory of vocational sectoral interests being represented here is sound. Of course we should be directly elected by the people; that is something with which none of us disagrees. As I said, it is a question of the political will from the top four people who run the whole show. It happens to be the Taoiseach at the moment; it was Brian Cowen, Bertie Ahern and countless others over the years. Unless that will is there will be can be no reform. If it was up to us the Seanad would have been reformed already.

I pay tribute to the current Leader. Even though in the heat of debate we often clash, during my 11 years here he has been the best Leader. I know his hands are tied behind his back at a higher level within his political party. He has done great things to enhance the role of the Seanad and is always very well organised when he comes to the House. He often has the answers prepared for questions we did not know we were about to ask.

It is a very sad day that it has come to this. To be truly remembered, if that were the wish of the Taoiseach, would be to have the courage to reform the Houses and make them a true instrument of the people. Sadly, I believe the people, as things are currently constructed within our political system, do not have any sense of ownership of the policy platform of the day. Unless that changes there will always be a certain level of apathy.

The Taoiseach should be careful for what he wishes. The people, sadly, will vote to abolish the Seanad. There will be a vacuum. One need only look at the number of amendments tabled over the course of the past year to see that. There are empty seats in the Gallery. Nobody wants to cover that and are only waiting for the next intemperate outburst from Marc MacSharry, Senator Leyden, Senator Norris or whoever.

It does an injustice to the Irish people to allow them to abolish one third of the instrument of the State without truly informing them what has gone on within the Houses. With the noble exception of Jimmy Walsh who recently retired, this House has only ever had token coverage. I do not mean to be overcritical of any journalist or media organisation, but it happens to be an absolute fact. As a result, there is no Referendum Commission or campaign which can accurately capture the amount of contribution the House has made to Irish society since its foundation. That is a very sad situation.

Sadly, nobody wants to hear from Senators in this debate because they will say we are being subjective and want to keep our jobs. That may be the case. Nevertheless, I hope some people want to keep the Seanad. Open It, Don't Close It, Democracy Matters and those who have tabled Private Members' Bills on Seanad reform all have the best possible intentions. If the House is to be saved it will require civil society taking a stand and not former senior Ministers, however good they are, like Michael McDowell, saying they want to keep the House but want it reformed.