Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Senator Mooney's question is relevant. What will be presented to the people on the ballot paper? Will the question require a "Yes" or "No" answer to the abolition of Seanad Éireann under the Thirty-second amendment of the Constitution? A little bit more than that is needed. There will be considerable change with this. It is very misleading. What type of information campaign does the Government plan so that the considerable detail of this will be explained?

I wish to highlight two issues of major concern to me. We live in a democracy and the Seanad is a limb of democracy. In the proposal we will present to the people, the safeguards provided by this House are not being added to the other House. I refer, in particular, to legislative delay. If this House is abolished, a Bill could go through the other House with one reading. The Standing Orders of the Dáil could be amended in time so that legislation could go through with one vote. This is very serious. There is no other unicameral parliament in Europe with such poor democratic safeguards. For example, Finland has a three month delay while other countries have the ability to refer legislation to a referendum. Legislative delay is critical and it must be built into the Dáil. It is something on which I plan to campaign if this proposal is put to the people in a referendum. The people will not have the safeguard of legislative delay built into the Dáil. Legislative delay ensures better review of legislation. At the end of the day, legislation has far-reaching implications for people's lives. It changes their lives in many fundamental ways. It is quite normal for a money Bill to have up to a 21 day delay and for a non-money Bill to have up to a three month delay. That must be built into the Dáil but there is no proposal for that to happen.

The second issue is the very serious deletion of Article 27 by the abolition of this House. Article 27 gives the people the opportunity to petition the President for a referendum on an issue of vital national importance. That is a wonderful safeguard that is rarely used but at least we know it is there. In the context of the abortion debate, some sectors of Irish life have spoken about petitioning the President on that issue. It could be the abortion issue today and another issue tomorrow. Let us be careful and not eradicate a House of democracy, although indirectly elected and little understood, until we replace with at least the same.

I would like the people to be offered the opportunity in the referendum to choose reform. I understand we cannot offer reform or abolition but this is still in the hands of the Cabinet and the Taoiseach and they could look at that type of wording. Obviously, if the response to reform is "No", that gives another message. I am very disappointed and I would like the Minister of State to address the issues to which I refer in regard to the very important democratic safeguards built into the Seanad which are not being proposed for the Dáil.