Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Section 1 deals with the abolition day and brings into focus what the Bill is about. We have a Government with the largest majority in the history of the State. We have seen the consequences of such a majority where the Government wants to assume onto itself extraordinary powers. We have witnessed the totalitarian tendencies, referred to by a number of Members, including me, in the past 18 months or thereabouts, which became particularly apparent in the early stages of the Government. That has significant risks for democracy and society. The propensity with which the Government has been quick to apply the guillotine and to use its very large majority in the Lower House and in this House is alarming. I am amazed the matter has not received much more thorough analysis in the media. Unfortunately, we have a media that has become very compliant in issues and policies proposed by the Government. That, in itself, has significant dangers for democracy. It is not only the thrust of what is happening but in recent times we have witnessed extraordinary pressure, which is unprecedented in my 16 years as a Member. Some who are Members for longer period than me have mentioned the exertion and coercion of Government Members to comply with the Whip on issues on which they have deep convictions and, in some instances, strong conscientious positions, which oppose some of the polices being pursued by the Government. They are being pressurised to abrogate those convictions and their conscientious positions. While we are debating that and other Bills to which it is particularly relevant in the overall interest of how our democracy functions, it is imperative to remember that this measure, which is before the House and will be put to the people, will have extraordinarily adverse affects for our democratic system.

The Bill was put forward for the purpose of abolishing the Seanad. The Government has moved away from highlighting the paltry savings which will be achieved because it is aware that will not find attraction, perhaps, with the electorate at large. Some people are starting to focus on the democratic deficit within our structures and systems. If we stand back and allow this to happen, ultimately, because of peoples' antipathy in general to the political establishment and also because of the severe pressures under which they are endeavouring to survive economically - debates in this House every day cover issues of people in debt, distressed mortgages and various other scenarios which are a severe and deep challenge for them - it will lead to fractures in society. It has happened elsewhere and if we allow it to happen here we will have to take responsibility.

Like others, I have tabled amendments to the Bill because the principle of allowing the people make the decision is one to which any democrat cannot seriously object. It is extraordinary that this Bill came about because of a whim. I noted in the Taoiseach's address on Second Stage that he said efforts at reform of the Seanad have been ongoing for 75 years. That is not quite accurate. It has been ongoing for a considerable number of years, and perhaps a number of decades. He forgot to mention that he has been a Member of the Houses for more than half that period of 75 years. To the best of my recollection, at no stage is he on record as making any serious effort or attempt at reforming or improving the Seanad, nor, for that matter, improving the Dáil. When we look at the structures of our democratic system - there are three elements to the Houses of the Oireachtas - I would be a strong proponent of everything being done to improve and increase the productivity and effectiveness of the Houses. I do not deny that the Seanad is in need of reform. I may have differing views from some of my colleagues as to how that reform should take place. The position of Uachtarán na hÉireann and the Dáil are equally in need of reform, and in my opinion the Dáil is in far greater need of reformation than this House.

Part of the reason we are suffering so badly economically is due to the structure under which a small coterie of people, generally 15 from the Dáil - there was only one exception where a Member of the Seanad was appointed to Government - with their advisers and public servants, decide most of the policy issues and legislation that come before us. When the Whip is applied, as is done rigidly in this House, which is at variance with most other democracies including the common law systems from colonial days in other jurisdictions, Members are reduced to rubber-stamping what has already been decided. The consequences of that, particularly in the economic area, are pretty obvious. I know from debates and discussions we had among ourselves that many people in the Government parties in the past 13, 14 and 15 years had different views and concerns on economic issues but because of the Whip system and the groupthink which applied, we went with what was decided by that Government.

I am dealing with the abolition day and the effects it will have on our democracy. That is reason I am bringing this into the debate. To put forward the idea of abolition as distinct from giving the people a choice to abolish or reform the Seanad is, in fact, a serious mistake.

In part, it is done in order to achieve a situation where people, because of their angst and antipathy to politicians and the political system generally, will use that hostility to set aside one of the institutions of our democracy, which is Seanad Éireann.

In past debates, comments were made and papers prepared which said that the primary purpose of an Upper House is to provide a system of checks and balances on the legislative process. The powers of the Seanad were talked about and it was said that the House was a deliberative body with limited powers of initiation and review of legislation, but with the capacity to initiate discussion on matters of public interest. One such paper went on to advise a new role for the Seanad. It proposed that Seanad Éireann should establish a standing committee for future strategic policy needs. It said that Seanad Éireann should have a particular role concerning the EU and equality issues.