Seanad debates

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

An Bille um an Dara Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht (Deireadh a Chur le Seanad Éireann) 2013: An Dara Céim (Atógáil) - Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

2:10 pm

Photo of Denis O'DonovanDenis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I would like to start by quoting Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard," which we remember from our school days, such is the sense of foreboding I have this evening when speaking on this issue:


The curfew tolls the knell of parting day,
The lowing herd winds slowly o'er the lea,
The ploughman homeward plods his weary way,
And leaves the world to darkness and to me.
We will be in a very dark place once this Seanad is abolished. It is appropriate, in the evening that is in it, to say that.

Up to 15 Members of the previous Seanad, primarily from Fine Gael and the Labour Party, were elected to the Lower House. Some former Senators seemed to have forgotten their political crèche when voting for the Bill in the Lower House.

Reform of the Seanad is essential and I support the efforts made by Senator Feargal Quinn and others in their proposed reform Bill. While I have my views and proposals, united we might have some chance of saving this important institution. I was tasked by my party leader some 18 months ago to examine the issue of Seanad reform and produce a report on it. I found in favour of reform rather than abolition.

Some of the reforms proposed included putting greater emphasis in Seanad business on the Northern Ireland peace process and extending membership to people from Northern Ireland representing various communities there. This would enhance cross-Border interaction in areas such as health, education, fisheries and tourism. The Chamber could properly be used as a platform for discussing European legislation and directives. Up to 75% of all our laws emanate from the European Union, yet there is little or no debate on them. Existing scrutiny is more in ghost form rather than reality, which is a significant loss. Senior public appointments could also be scrutinised in the Seanad. The former Leader of the Opposition in the 23rd Seanad, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, is Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. Future Seanad Leaders should by right be a member of the Cabinet, too. That would show respect to the Seanad and give it an extra dimension.

The failure of Seanad reform is not entirely the Government’s fault as the previous two Governments also neglected the Seanad. Reforms have essentially been put on the slow burner for the past 40 years. Groups representing ethnic minorities and people with disabilities should be represented in the Seanad as a matter of right. The Diaspora should be represented in the Seanad as a matter of right, too. There is a tradition of emigration from Ireland going back 200 years, which needs to be recognised in the membership of the Seanad. I come from a family of 11, eight of whom emigrated. I lived in London for some time and five of my family still live abroad, but they have a great affinity for Ireland. There should be some link with them through having a representative of the Diaspora in the Seanad as such a seat would not be available in the Lower House.

This House is often referred to as being elitist. When I was compiling my report, I wrote to every Fianna Fáil and some Independent councillors to ask for their views on the abolition of the Seanad. I was disappointed with the responses, but those whom I met did not have a problem with maintaining the Seanad, albeit reformed. All of them, bar one, had no problem with this, even if reform meant they would lose their franchise in electing Members.

I also proposed that elections to both the Dáil and the Seanad would be held at the same time in order that one would run for one House or the other. I explored the notion of having a list system, as used in other jurisdictions. However, we are now facing a referendum in which we will have the simple choice of saying “Yes” or “No”. The media are very indifferent to the future of the Seanad. If anything, they are against us. The public is cynical and angry because of the economic decline, the bursting of the property bubble and the bank bailout. It is not unreasonable to expect it to give the Seanad a kick in the backside. If there were to be a vote on the abolition of the Dáil, a substantial number of people would vote in favour of this, too.

If the referendum is passed in October, we will be in the unusual situation where 60 Members, both elected and appointed, will be seeing out the last couple of years of the Government like a dead man walking. I challenge those on the Government side of the House who have expressed deep concern about the way the referendum is being conducted, with no choice being given to the people for reform, to vote against the Bill. It would not be the end of the world for them, as the House will be abolished anyway and that will mark the end of many political careers. What would they have to lose - they are facing the guillotine - if they were to state they did not accept the Government’s proposal?

It is disingenuous of Members to shed crocodile tears about the future of the Seanad when, like a herd of sheep, they will be pushed into the pen by the sheepdog when it comes to voting on the legislation. I have lost the Whip here before on a rural Ireland issue which was close to my heart and came close to losing it a second time, but I am a better person for having done so. I was expelled from the Fianna Fáil Party, but I was asked to rejoin two months before the last general election. If I had not rejoined, I might have been re-elected to the Dáil as an Independent. However, a leopard never changes its spots. I am old-fashioned and slow to change, but I am still happy to be back here.

This is my job and livelihood. Although I am a qualified solicitor, I have not actively practised for some time. I will be very sorry if the Seanad goes. A greater effort should be made to ensure we retain it. When I visited Queensland, Australia, I spoke to some senior politicians from different parties who expressed great regret that their Upper House in the state’s parliament had been abolished back in the 1920s. Surveys there have shown many people want to have the Upper House restored.

If we also look at this historically, one of the principal advocates of an Upper House was the late Michael Collins. Many forget that he was an advocate and a protagonist for the Upper House.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.