Ned O'Sullivan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is nice see Government Members filling the benches. Clearly, they have no stomach for this debate.

I was speaking about the danger to democracy and how a previous Government, under the leadership of Éamon de Valera, also had to contend with a subversive organisation, the so-called IRA. It spent the Second World War collaborating and playing funny games with the Germans and raided the Magazine Fort in the Phoenix Park. The organisation also brought German spies into this country and in doing so was totally at odds with the then Government. The IRA remained a threat to democracy in this country until recently, when it finally decided to pack in its activities. Some remaining splinter groups of that organisation believe democracy is not important because they, even though they represent only 1% or less of the population, do not agree with it. That is the background to my opposition to section 1. It is important democracy is protected. Erosion of democracy starts small and continues until it is gone.

The Taoiseach's commentary around an alternative to the Seanad was ill-advised. Following that commentary, the Taoiseach was immediately called aside by his handlers and we have not heard any more on the matter. The Taoiseach suggested that this House should be peopled by so-called experts and others of exceptional wisdom, to be appointed by him. Such people are to have no democratic mandate. While we may be flawed in many ways we have been through an electoral process. It is not easy to get elected to this House. It is a difficult and testing process. The Taoiseach proposed to wave a wand and fill the seats of the Seanad with his friends and people in whom he has confidence and trust. It was a hair-brained idea, one which the Taoiseach has not repeated. However, it is a matter that will have to be addressed if the proposed referendum is to proceed. I hope it will not. I hope this Bill will be defeated by a sufficient number of Senators, not because I want to deprive the people of a vote - far from it, we are all democrats - but because they should be offered a proper choice. If this Bill is defeated, the Taoiseach and the Government, to its relief, will be forced to reconsider the matter and introduce alternative legislation based on proposals such as those put forward by Senators Zappone, Quinn and O'Donovan. Let those proposals be put to the people.

Those Senators opposite who say they support retention of the Seanad but propose to support the passage of the Bill in order that the people will have an opportunity to decide on the matter are doing a disservice to the people. There is no point putting the wrong question to the people. To do so is unfair. It is giving the people a Hobson's choice. Let us defeat this Bill, following which the Taoiseach might come back with a more considered, intelligent and progressive approach which, if put to the people in a referendum, we could all support. We do not want a star chamber in place of the Seanad. The star chambers were invented by the kings of England in medieval times. When they needed advice they would convene a star chamber, the people of which would advise on how to proceed. They quickly became a dictatorship themselves. That is what would become of what is being proposed. Such a chamber would be answerable to nobody but the Taoiseach, who could probably dismiss them as quickly as he or she appointed them.

We have seen from the debate on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 how important this Chamber is. There has been much more debate on that issue in this Chamber, even if only on the Order of Business, than there has been in the other House. It has also been a much more enlightened debate. I am in the minority among my party in the Seanad in that I will be supporting that legislation. I have listened with great interest to the commentary of people on all sides of the debate. Without the Seanad, that debate would be greatly diminished. While I am critical of the Taoiseach in terms of his attitude to the Seanad and his arrogant behaviour of late on many other issues, he has shown great courage in staying the course in the debate on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill despite fierce and unprecedented pressure from within his party and from powerful institutions and organisations, some of them public and others anything but public.

I recently raised the issue in this House of who is funding the group opposed to the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013.