Seanad debates
Tuesday, 23 July 2013
An Bille um an Dara Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht (Deireadh a chur le Seanad Éireann) 2013: An Tuarascáil (Atógáil) - Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill 2013: Report Stage (Resumed)
12:00 pm
Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source
It is always wonderful to listen to Senator Ó Murchú, whose interventions are always very thoughtful and considered. I hope what he said today will be reported. I had not intended to speak but earlier events have encouraged me to do so. I take my role as a legislator very seriously. In addition to being a legislator, I am a citizen who is directly affected by the legislation we pass and referendums to change the Constitution, as will be the case when the question of Seanad abolition comes before the people in the autumn. As such, in approaching this Bill I endeavoured to balance my Senator's hat and my private citizen's hat appropriately and honestly. As an active Member of Seanad Éireann, I see its flaws, live the frustration and understand the criticisms. On the other hand, I have experienced the capacity of the Seanad to scrutinise Bills, secure greater human-rights-proofing of legislation and policy and add a layer of expertise and consideration that is often lacking in Dáil debates. At the very least, the Seanad is in need of radical reform, but so too is the Dáil if we are to resuscitate political democracy. As it stands, I am utterly unconvinced about the Dáil's ability to deliver the self-reform needed to plug the hole in checks and balances that would be left by Seanad abolition.
I went into some considerable detail on these points in my Second Stage intervention and made it clear that I would not impede the passage of the Bill through the House. Arriving at my position on this incredibly important question is a journey I am still in the process of making. However, as reflected in my intervention on Second Stage and my vote against the motion tabled by my colleagues to recommit the Bill to Committee Stage and consequently delay the referendum, I believe this is a question for the people alone to answer. If we were to have invoked the 90-day delay, I wish we had done so regarding respite care. I could not, in good conscience, have this as the first occasion in my term as a Senator on which we would invoke the delay. I do not believe I should have to. The only conversations I had with people last week prior to my vote were with colleagues who wished me to vote in support of the motion. Most were respectful but, unfortunately, not all were. I will let that sit in the past, however. The record of this House will clearly show that, on each and every decision, I vote with my conscience and with courage.
No comments