John Crown (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is for these reasons that I espoused a very fundamental reform of the Seanad which, if it had been enacted, would have given us one nationally elected Chamber based on universal franchise. It would have afforded an opportunity for people who are not heavily politically partisan in their orientation and involvement to come in greater numbers into the Chamber. Realism dictates that the reform I have espoused will not happen. Likewise, it is very unlikely that the similar and very high-quality reform espoused by Senators Katherine Zappone and Feargal Quinn will be enacted. This is because all the power to enact changes in the law and Constitution rests in the hands of a very small number of people, in an inner sanctum at the Cabinet table. In fact, that is the very problem we were hoping to address by way of the reforms we have proposed.
Having said that, it is good that we have an array of options available in order to keep the reform agenda alive. Those of us who urged a "No" vote in the referendum to abolish the Seanad have since taken criticism because no reform has occurred. In fact, the Bill produced by Senators Quinn and Zappone, my Bill and now Senator Barrett's Bill have all been put before the House at various points. We have done our bit to honour our commitment of working for reform of the Seanad. In that vein, I am strongly in favour of Senator Barrett's proposal advancing and forming part of the Government's consideration when it examines the possibility of Seanad reform. Against a background of referendum fatigue, we are cognisant that all three of the proposals that have been brought forward, as well as the Fianna Fáil proposal, could potentially be enacted on the basis of legislation without the requirement for any referendum-authorised changes to the Constitution.
I enthusiastically support Senator Barrett in his endeavours and am proud to second his proposal. I hope the Government will give serious consideration to the results of the referendum last October. It might be putting it too strongly to say that people voted overwhelmingly in support of the Seanad, but certainly they voted against all expectations, not for retention of the status quobut for a reformed Upper House. Every indicator of opinion at the time showed there was a great hunger and appetite for reform. Merely making some small changes will not be adequate, but any changes are none the less welcome.