John Gilroy (Labour) | Oireachtas source

This Chamber could certainly do with having more female members because of the testosterone-fuelled cheers coming from the opposite side, which are only a display of machismo. I had a long chat this morning with Senator Byrne about this amendment. It is a decent attempt to reach some sort of compromise on the matter. I have put a lot of thought into this since we spoke this morning. While I feel I should support the amendment, I have one or two genuine questions that mean I cannot support it in its current form. I will explain why if the Members opposite can listen without tut-tutting and whatever else they want to do.

Section 7, which establishes the public water forum, is probably not the right forum for dealing with this subject. The very thrust of the forum concerns customer participation, customer advice and customer protection in an operational away. I do not believe we could constitute the forum such that it would have the expertise needed to examine the intricacies of a constitutional referendum. That needs to be done by a specific body with the required legal expertise and authority. For that reason, I will not support the amendment as it stands.

The other argument concerns what body should have responsibility. I believe it should be the Constitutional Convention. However,