Terry Leyden (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

No, I am not. This is the kernel of the Constitution. We are taking away the power of the amended Lisbon treaty, on which the people voted. They voted for it on the basis that there would be a direct connection between the treaty and the Seanad. Given all these factors, the President should refer this Bill to the Supreme Court to assess exactly the position in which it puts the House vis-à-vis a decision by the people. I would be very satisfied to hold a referendum if the Supreme Court decides what we propose is legal, irrespective of the view of the Attorney General's office. The Attorney General is appointed by the Government. Although she has an independent position, she relies on the Government for appointment. She is at the bidding of the Taoiseach and the Government to bring forward the legislation and the regulations to gut the Constitution in regard to the abolition of the Seanad. The real independent voice in Irish society is the Supreme Court.

The President will be informed of the wishes of this House. The President is someone who would read most of the debates, as did Presidents McAleese and Robinson, who were very well informed on the overall discussion on this issue.

I think the Taoiseach would read most of the debates, as President McAleese and President Robinson did. They were very well informed on the overall discussion regarding this issue. To finalise this important point, Article 8 provides that where the national parliamentary system is not unicameral, the above provisions - Articles 1 to 8 - shall apply to the component chambers. In Ireland's case, both the Dáil and the Seanad will be involved. The protocol provides for timeframes within which national parliaments will be afforded, advised and furnished of European Union institutional documents, together with the timeframe in which national parliaments are to respond. In such circumstances, the Seanad or the Dáil would be allowed to refer any legislation back to Europe. I suggest that would be a very important role for the Seanad. I have made the point previously that the Seanad can have a role in protecting the rights of the people and Senators can do some work in that regard.

As I have said previously, I have been a Member of both Houses. I was a Member of the Dáil for longer than I have been a Member of the Seanad. As I have pointed out, I have also been in the Minister of State's position. I will not go through that again. I am not speaking here as someone who has ever shown any disrespect for the Seanad. I have enormous respect for the Seanad. I brought the Companies (No. 2) Bill 1987 through this House. Many companies are going into protection at the moment under the terms of that legislation, which I brought through this House and the Dáil. The protection afforded to companies under the legislation in question has saved thousands of jobs over the years. When I brought Bills through this House, I did so with the full support of the Civil Service. I gave each Bill the time that was necessary. I did not rush any legislation through. I was available to take each Bill on behalf of the Department of Industry and Commerce, where I served as Minister of State with responsibility for trade and marketing, the Department of Health or whatever Department I served in. Aside from that, I am speaking on the basis of the work I have done since I became a Member of this House. I have represented Irish people abroad at many events in my capacity as a Senator, sometimes in very difficult circumstances. I will not go into the details of the case of a particular Irish citizen-----