Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am happy to clarify. This relates specifically to interpretation in section 2 of the Bill.

To continue where I left off, this would have the effect of creating a second directly-elected Chamber of the Oireachtas. Although the Bill does not quantify the likely electorate, it can be estimated that some 5.2 million persons would be entitled to vote. Apart from the policy question and the matter of whether this proposal is legally sound, serious costs and administrative considerations must be taken into account. Notwithstanding the removal of the requirement for registered post, these have not been addressed in the Bill or the explanatory memorandum to the Bill.

Included among the interpretations in section 2 are the definitions for the terms "constituency", "electoral commission", "gender sub-panel", "local authority", "Minister" and "university constituency", among other terms. The definition used for "constituency" is confusing and unclear in its usage in the Bill. Throughout the Bill the term "constituency" is used to describe a panel of candidates, which does not fit with the common understanding of the word as an area of territory or a particular electorate or group of voters.

Section 2 provides for a definition of the term "electoral commission", which is then used in section 35 of the Bill in regards to voters in Northern Ireland. These provisions in the Bill are legally flawed and unworkable. They envisage a role being performed by the Northern Ireland division of the electoral commission of the United Kingdom in verifying eligibility to register by applicants based in Northern Ireland. Legislation made in this State could not compel or direct a body in another state to perform a particular function. This is notwithstanding the position that the wrong body was identified in the Bill in any event. Functions in relation to electoral registration in Northern Ireland are carried out by a different agency, the Electoral Office for Northern Ireland. The electoral commission is a separate body with other electoral responsibilities, but not voter registration.

Elections to the gender sub-panel, as defined in section 2 seem potentially to offend the equality provision in Article 40.1 of the Constitution. Votes would carry different weights, with some candidates elected even though they have fewer votes than a candidate elected by reason of gender preference. This would give rise to a difference in the treatment of voters and candidates. Overriding policy objectives to achieve gender equality would not be enough to counter the discriminatory treatment of individuals where key democratic rights and the election of candidates chosen by voters is in question. The Government has some experience in legislating for gender balance in elections, having introduced provisions in the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012 affecting Dáil elections. What is proposed in the Bill before us is of a different order and is potentially unsound.

There is also an issue of discriminating between citizens living in the North and those living in other jurisdictions outside the State, who would have to have an Irish passport to vote. This would impose a cost on them in order to exercise a vote which would not apply to a voter in Northern Ireland or in this State.

The definition of "local authority" is incorrect, having regard to the Local Government Reform Act 2014.

The term "Minister" is defined in section 2. Later in the Bill, certain functions are assigned to the Minister which would appear to undermine the independence of the Seanad returning officer, a term which is also defined in section 2.

The universities constituency is defined in section 2, but the provisions for the universities constituency are significantly lacking. The register of electors, candidate nominations, conduct of the elections, the composition of the constituency, and other elements are framed in a way that is problematic from a legal perspective. Administratively, it is questionable whether an election in the six-seat universities constituency proposed in the Bill could be organised using the Bill as a basis. The alternative offered by the Government is a better approach. Earlier this year, the Government published the general scheme of a Bill to reform the Seanad university constituencies and expand the franchise. Work is currently progressing on the preparation of a Bill and this is to be published in 2015.

My final point is significant with regard to the Bill as a whole. As Senators are aware, this House has the right under Article 15.10 of the Constitution to set its own rules and Standing Orders. Chapter 3 of Part 3 of the Bill, which sets out additional roles for the Seanad, appears to be in contravention of this article. The Bill directs the Seanad in how it makes its rules. There are also implications under Article 15.10 for the Dáil, in so far as the Bill impacts on how it sets its rules and procedures. The Government has already, through the Leader of the Seanad, presented a package of reforms to the Seanad Committee on Procedure and Privileges to improve the operation and effectiveness of the Seanad. The Government's proposals are comprehensive. Importantly, they are also capable of being implemented, and are consistent with constitutional rights afforded to the Seanad and its Members.

Some of the provisions in the Bill dealing with inquiries undertaken by the Oireachtas have already been implemented in other legislation since the Bill was published.

In making these initial observations on the Bill I am mindful of the hard work and effort put into its drafting. Committee Stage is where we test a Bill. Just as Opposition Senators have a duty and an obligation to robustly test Government legislation, so too the Government must test Private Members' Bills being considered in the House. While there are policy differences in the Bill, there are also questions about the legal and administrative provisions included. These are particularly evident in section 2. While we will oppose other sections of the Bill, the Government opposes section 2 as it stands.