David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I express my sympathy to the families of the two unfortunate girls who were brutally and horribly raped in Athlone. I listened with great interest to a woman who was protesting about the crime outside a local Garda station. She stated we should forget the Seanad referendum and protect our children. In this regard, to respond to those who argue the Seanad has not done anything, this Seanad produced the most effective protection of children in the guardian ad litem legislation. Last year, a judge of the High Court described the Act as the most important protection for children that had been produced by the Legislature. We have done our job and we should continue to make that point in response to statements from people such as a functionary of the Labour Court who found it difficult to tell the truth this morning when he debated with our colleague, Senator Feargal Quinn. For example, he stated that in the referendum in 1979, the university Senators opposed the proposal to extend the vote and further democratise the Seanad. That was an absolute lie. I have been a Senator for 27 years or most of the period since the 1979 referendum and on every single occasion we have stated we want democratisation. People should stop lying, irrespective of which side they are on. The same individual stated there were only 28 Senators present for the debate on the social welfare Bill. That is rubbish. The reason there were 20 from the Government side and 15 from the other side present was that there was a guillotine on the Bill. The individual in question wants empty political gestures rather than hard, serious work.

People should read the article published in The Irish Times a couple of weeks ago by a professor from New South Wales in which he analysed the position in New Zealand, which is cited in this argument. New Zealand is doing everything possible to reverse its decision to abolish its upper house. It is introducing legislation to this end and has tried various other Bills. The country "stumbled into" abolition - that was the phrase used - and found that it resulted in an increased concentration of power. Once a parliamentary chamber has been abolished, it is damned difficult to restore it.

With regard to the posters, they are pure lies, as has been pointed out. There is no question that the sum referred to would be saved and no reputable authority has ever stated that amount of money could be saved.

The result from the Referendum Commission is very disappointing. It has no role in respect of regulation of campaign materials. The Standards in Public Office Commission said that it had no statutory function in respect of information on posters erected by political parties. This is shocking. In other words, the two bodies charged with the conduct of elections cannot stop a Government or another party deliberately lying. That should be looked at. It is not their fault they were given the wrong mandate.

My final thing is a direct appeal to the Cathaoirleach because of the respect in which he is held. I call on our true, brave and courageous Leader, Senator Maurice Cummins, to ask the Cathaoirleach that he might consider, tomorrow, the example of Thomas Westropp Bennett, who was Cathaoirleach of Seanad Éireann in 1936 when it was abolished. He said that the matter was so serious that he could not address it from the Chair. He left the Chair and joined the body of the assembly of the Seanad and spoke passionately in its favour. That is the precedent.