Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I welcome the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. I do not know why I thought he would be in Mexico with the President this week. A Minister of State is in Mexico in place of the Tánaiste.

I propose this Bill on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party and, particularly, Senator Mark Daly, who is the author of the Bill. He has done us a service and, while the Bill may not be perfect, it forms the basis of a vehicle that can be improved upon by the Government or other parties in a debate to ensure we achieve the outcome we want. Yesterday, the Taoiseach's concluding remarks on how the Seanad can be reformed referred to the countless reports and the diversity of opinion on how to reform this House and what way it can best be used. I agree with him on that point, which is where leadership comes in and where we come to a position and go forward. The common denominator throughout all contributions, even the Taoiseach's, concerned EU scrutiny. The amount of legislation that goes through these Houses on the nod is very worrying. Last year, there were 53 Acts of the Oireachtas and 590 statutory instruments, which are not the subject of any debate in most instances. There were 52 EU directives and 1,270 EU regulations proposed. In reality, we only debated the 53 Acts of the Oireachtas.

The democratic deficit that is often suggested in respect of Europe is a reality. This is an example, where we see a vast amount of legislation determined in agreement between officials in Departments and officials in Brussels. We come into the House and, under the Whip system, vote through the transposition of directives.

The Bill hopes to provide a scenario where the House can formally review all items of legislation, statutory instruments and regulations. It would do a great service in increasing the usefulness of the Oireachtas and would help to connect people with Europe, which we have never achieved. In various referendums over the years, there has been a disengagement of the public from the European system, which is responsible for many of our laws. Many of us have been in a constituency or community organisation where something could not be achieved because there was a law against it. The law was often a directive that we had the obligation to simply transpose into legislation without the opportunity to comment. Under the last Administration, the Joint Committee on European Affairs and the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny did some work but in real terms there is no EU scrutiny by the people's representatives. That is fundamentally wrong and something we need to change.

Yesterday, I spoke to the Taoiseach about the fact that Ireland has a great sense of community but no sense of state. We have no sense of state because people do not feel ownership of the national policy platform. Their representatives are strangled by a stringent whip system. There is a need for parliamentary discipline but often the legislative process and the ideas machine is not driven by the people or their representatives. This item of legislation may be imperfect but it sets out the aspiration and a suggested roadmap of how to achieve it in this House. It will increase the relevance of the House to the public and its usefulness to the Oireachtas in terms of assessment of hugely important issues that, heretofore, did not receive the kind of scrutiny they deserve and should have in the interests of the people. It will also serve to connect people with their European legislative masters. So much is being done there.

Since the foundation of the State, there have been some 28,000 statutory instruments. Worryingly, in the past ten years, almost 8,000 have come in and it is done on the nod. It is not a case of criticising this Government or the previous Government but 25% of all statutory instruments came on board in the past ten years. It suggests a level of autopilot that contributed to our demise as a nation. Autopilot was on and the practice was that legislation, regulations and statutory instruments were done in a certain way. I hope the Tánaiste can embrace the legislation, albeit with Government amendments to improve its effectiveness. We have a responsibility to the citizens of Ireland to try to deal with the democratic deficit in our legislative process. The Seanad is the vehicle to do so. There is no additional cost in doing so and it would serve our citizens and the Oireachtas well if we did so.

The Lisbon treaty afforded national parliaments the opportunity to take a view on legislation at the embryonic stage and report to the Commission. In the first two years after the Lisbon treaty, there were 139 instances of the Commission putting a matter out to member state parliaments for submissions. Some 428 submissions were made but only one was from Ireland. I gave the incorrect figures when I made this point yesterday. It is an example of a lack of engagement.

Those in authority, the civil servants and the people who were involved in this - the Government of the day - believed this was a good proposal for Ireland. It may well be - I am sure Members would conclude the same - but in reality, all EU scrutiny and statutory instruments should be debated, and this is the House in which to do it, at no additional cost. Senator Mark Daly's Bill provides a vehicle for us to achieve just that. I hope the Minister can accept this Bill in the spirit in which it is presented and in the hope that together we can tease out further aspects. Following on from the spirit of reform and the very current mandate given to this House by the Irish people, we hope to improve it by having powers to scrutinise EU legislation.