Fiach MacConghail (Independent) | Oireachtas source

No curtailment but encouragement.

I wish to make a few points arising from the debate so far on section 1. I resent the question being put to us by the Taoiseach, which is about retention or abolition. It is disingenuous and it is also highly dysfunctional because it does not allow debate. I listened to Senators David Norris and Ned O'Sullivan and I am in a quandary not about whether the Seanad should be retained or abolished but about whether there is a need for a bicameral model. I believe there is a need for a bicameral model. The subdivision of that debate is whether the Seanad, as it exists, should be abolished. That is quite a nuanced debate and there are plenty of arguments to be made on both sides, some of which have to do with the way the Seanad is run.

The Leas-Chathaoirleach and the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, were involved in what is called the "Mary O'Rourke report" in 2004. The Minister of State made a lot of suggestions in the deliberations on how to reform the Seanad but the clearest sentence in the report was that the Seanad had no distinctive role in Irish society, or in Irish politics. It was not a subjective comment or a kind of judgment on the Seanad but it was the House itself saying in 2004 that there was no connection or no emotional, philosophical or, indeed, constitutional connection between the citizens and the work of the Seanad. That is not the fault of this Seanad or its Members but it was a very clear statement of the shortcomings of the Seanad.

We have been put in a position where we cannot discuss the nature of bicameralism. The question is, therefore, loaded. I am not a member of either of the Government parties. As to whether I should vote in support of this Bill so that it becomes an Act and, therefore, the question can be put to the people, Senators David Norris and Ned O'Sullivan said that if I do so it makes me somebody who opposes democracy.