Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Crown for tabling the Bill and acknowledge the contribution he has made in general to this House. I regret to hear that he may not be standing for election, but that is everybody's personal decision.

I would say, before I address section 1 in detail, that the Government will be opposing this Bill, and I will outline why. I appreciate that the Bill before us specifically addresses electoral reform, but the stated objective of the Bill suggests an ambition to achieve a far wider Seanad reform. We all are in agreement - many Senators have said it, as have I, as a former Member of this House - that reform is needed.However, I am not convinced that this particular Bill can fully deliver on that as it is currently drafted. The Government has agreed an approach to Seanad reform which is based on the implementation of procedural reforms and reform of the Seanad university constituencies, and also on advancing reform more generally through considering the recommendations of the working group on Seanad reform which was established by the Taoiseach. It is in that context that the Government has considered the content and stated purpose of this Bill and has decided to oppose it for a number of reasons that I would like to put on the record. First of all, administrative issues arise which compromise the ability of the Bill to be implemented in practice. The Bill, if implemented, could give rise to significant costs which do not appear to have been comprehensively analysed. That would have a huge impact on the Exchequer. The Bill would also reduce representation from the sectoral interests and agriculture, labour, industry and commerce in the Seanad. In the absence of any explanation for this change, the Government is not persuaded that it is justified or that it should be agreed.

The Bill also removes the nominating bodies entirely from the process of candidate selection for the vocational panels. The Government is not convinced that the Bill adequately replaces the existing arrangements or that the new arrangements for candidate selection would adequately meet the constitutional requirements in relation to the formation of the vocational panels. A key feature of the Bill is the extension of the franchise to all local government electors in the State and also to Irish citizens who are resident outside the State who are passport holders. This would create a second directly elected House of the Oireachtas with a significantly wider franchise which could be more than 5 million votes. As I have said previously when debating another Seanad reform Bill, if the Seanad was to be so configured and the right to vote in Seanad elections so provided for, the Constitution would then have been framed in this way. As we all know, it is not.

The Bill does not quantify the likely electorate, but we estimate that more than 5 million people would be entitled to vote under the Bill as drafted. Clearly, this would have serious cost and administrative implications which I believe are not adequately addressed in the Bill. On the matter of costs, the Bill provides for a novel way of paying for the running of the Seanad elections, which is that the costs would be met from the parliamentary activities allowance paid to Senators and to the political parties whose members are Senators. The Government will not be supporting the Bill as currently drafted.