Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Thirty-fifth Amendment of the Constitution (Age of Eligibility for Election to the Office of President) Bill 2015 provides for the amendment of Article 12 of the Constitution. It provides for the age at which a citizen becomes eligible for election to the Office of President to be reduced from 35 years to 21. It is a short but important Bill in the context of the Office of President, as provided for in the Constitution.

In drawing up its first report the Constitutional Convention gave consideration to the current age requirement of 35 years, which applies to citizens who wish to be elected to the Office of President. The convention recommended that the age of candidacy be reduced, but it did not suggest a specific age to which it should be reduced. The Government accepted the recommendation and agreed that a referendum should be held in 2015 on reducing the age from 35 years to 21, the same as the minimum age for Dáil and European election candidates. As the Bill has emerged from a recommendation of the convention, I take the opportunity to acknowledge the work done by the convention in bringing forward proposals for constitutional change. The impact of its work is clear. The two referendums to be held in May are based on recommendations made by the convention.

In addition, the convention recommended in its fourth report that an electoral commission be established. The Government accepted this recommendation and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, recently took the first steps towards establishing an independent electoral commission when, on 27 January, he published a consultation paper. The paper was discussed in the Seanad on 4 March and on 10 March the Minister met the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht to discuss it as part of the pre-legislative process. The joint committee will engage in a consultation process and report to the Minister with recommendations.

On the Bill before us and the specific proposal to lower the age at which a citizen becomes eligible for election to the Office of President, I note that the issue was considered previously in Constitution reviews undertaken in the 1990s. The members of the 1996 Constitution review group were divided on the issue. Some members considered there was not sufficient reason to differentiate between eligibility for Dáil membership and the Presidency. They were prepared to rely on the judgment of the electorate to make a proper choice between candidates. However, other members considered that the presidency called for special qualities which were more likely to accrue and mature over a longer span of years than 21. The majority of members ultimately favoured no change or only a minor reduction in the age limit.

The all-party committee on the Constitution took a different view in its 1998 report on the President, in which it recommended that any citizen who had reached the age of 18 years should be regarded as eligible for election to the Office of President. The committee found that there was no logical reason for setting the age at which one became eligible to be President at a greater age than that at which a citizen might exercise the right to vote in elections. In making this recommendation it concluded that young people should be encouraged to engage in politics. It took the view that any young candidate who succeeded in being nominated would be an exceptional and worthy candidate. These recommendations were not taken up at the time and lay dormant until the Constitutional Convention considered the question again 14 years later in 2012. A narrow majority of the members of the convention - 50% versus 47% - found in favour of lowering the age at which a citizen could become eligible for election to the Office of President. While the convention's report did not advance any argument for or against lowering the age threshold, the proposal has since generated debate among political commentators and in the media. I propose to share with Senators some of the points that have been aired.

Those in favour of lowering the age threshold from 35 years point out that doing so could generate a greater diversity of potential candidates, thereby providing a greater choice for the electorate. The view is advanced that the electorate can be trusted to judge the suitability of candidates, irrespective of their age. It is also argued that capacity to undertake the job need not be age related and, more generally, that it could encourage younger people to engage in politics. On the other hand, those against lowering the age threshold suggest there is no public demand for change. It is argued that lowering the age threshold could weaken the Office of President as considerable experience is considered desirable in making decisions on such matters as the referral of a Bill to the Supreme Court or the dissolution of the Dáil. There is also the view that the older age brings a certain gravitas to the office that may be absent among young persons.

The wide divergence of positions taken on this matter in other countries does not offer us any guidance. The age of eligibility for holding presidential office ranges from 18 years in Croatia, Finland and France, for example, to 50 years in Italy. In the case of France, the President has wider executive powers than our President. Most countries have a minimum age requirement of 35 or 40 years for eligibility for the office of President. The age of Presidents in Ireland has ranged from 46 to 78 years. The Government, in accepting the convention's recommendation to lower the age threshold, agreed that a minimum age of 21 years would be appropriate as it matched the minimum age for election to the Dáil and the European Parliament. It will only be possible to gauge the impact of the change over time if the Bill is passed and subsequently approved in the forthcoming referendum in May. In the event that it is approved and a person younger than 35 years is a candidate at a future election, people will ultimately decide on the suitability of that person for election to the Office of President.

On referendums generally, I have noted the commentary in the media on other recommendations of the Constitutional Convention and, specifically, when referendums on these might be progressed. As Senators are aware, the Government has run six referendums since taking office and a further two will be held in May, both of which arise from recommendations of the convention.

Earlier this year the Taoiseach indicated in the Dáil that, while he did not envisage any further referendum being held in 2015, this was a matter for the Government to consider at a later stage. It is the clear Government position that the best approach is for only two referendums to be held in May. This is a reasonable position. While the Government agreed to hold a referendum on lowering the voting age to 16 years in 2015, it would be premature to proceed with the vote in May. This matter was discussed and the Government's position outlined in the Dáil in February and March when Private Members' Bills on lowering the voting age and voting by citizens resident outside the State were debated.

I have also noted commentary in the media and elsewhere that the referendum proposal in the Bill is, in some way, not as significant as some of the other proposals for constitutional reform that have emerged from the Constitutional Convention. I do not accept that view. Article 12 of the Constitution provides that the President shall "take precedence over all the other persons in the State" and "shall exercise and perform the powers and functions conferred on the President by this Constitution and by law". Given this position in the Constitution, the proposal to reduce the age at which a citizen is eligible for election to the Office of President is significant. Moreover, proposals to change the Constitution are always significant milestones in the ongoing development of the State.

The debate on the proposed amendments to the Constitution in the referendums in May has begun. Following publication of the constitutional amendment Bills, the Minister established, on 27 January, the Referendum Commissions for both referendum proposals. It is the task of the commissions to explain the subject matter of the referendums to the electorate, promote public awareness of the referendums and encourage the electorate to vote. The commissions' preparatory work is under way.

I will now outline the details of the Bill. Section 1 provides for the amendment of Article 12 of the Constitution, as set out in the Schedule to the Bill. Section 2 provides for the standard citation of Constitution amendment Bills. The Schedule, Part 1, provides for the substitution of the Irish text of Article 12.4.1° of the Constitution. The new text provides that every citizen who has reached the age of 21 years is eligible for election to the Office of President. The Schedule, Part 2, provides for the substitution of the English text of Article 12.4.1° of the Constitution. The new text provides that every citizen who has reached the age of 21 years is eligible for election to the Office of President.

The opportunity is being taken to correct a possible conflict between the Irish and English texts of Article 12.4.1°, as they stand.While the Irish text requires a candidate to have completed 35 years of age, the English text requires a candidate to have reached the 35th year, which would happen on his or her 34th birthday. In the amendment to the Constitution now proposed, the Irish and English texts of the Bill are aligned. Attention was drawn to this possible conflict between the Irish and English texts in the Constitution review reports undertaken in the 1990s that I mentioned earlier. The all-party Oireachtas committee noted that the issue had been raised by the eminent constitutional lawyer John Kelly, a former Member of both Houses of the Oireachtas, in his book The Irish Constitution.