Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We will share time.

I want to indicate in a personal capacity that I am totally opposed to the establishment of a citizens' assembly along these lines. I regard it as a pointless exercise and demeaning in a democracy of our kind, in which we have a Parliament established by the people whose function is to consider such topics. The notion of assembling 100 persons at random using a polling company and superimposing a so-called independent chairman, with an advisory service attached on top of that whose staff are in effect chosen by the chairman, means that the chairman's agenda will effectively run the assembly.

The eighth amendment is one issue here, but the other issues, such as how we respond to the challenges and opportunities of an aging population, are the business of this House and the other House. They are not the business of an ad hocassembly of 100 persons convened to consider that subject. They are in no better position than 100 persons chosen at a football match or anything else to consider these issues, and the suggestion that there is some authenticity or authoritative character put on them by reason of the fact that they are assembled at the behest of the Houses of the Oireachtas is false.

We have a Constitution. We do not need fixed-term parliaments. We want it to be the case that when TDs in Dáil Éireann decide they no longer have confidence in the Government, it goes, no questions asked. The Taoiseach of the day is obliged to resign if he or she has lost the confidence of a majority of the Dáil. That is a sacrosanct principle of the Constitution. This is a half-thought-out proposition that has no basis in public opinion. I have never seen coherent articles written in the newspapers by authoritative persons stating that we should have fixed-term parliaments and scrap the right of Dáil Éireann to have an election when necessary. The manner in which referendums are held seems to be code for an underlying Government agenda to revisit the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court to the effect that there should be no use of public funds to influence the result. The people of Ireland vote in referendums. They understand what the issues are. They use their votes intelligently and we do not need a change in our constitutional approach to these issues. We do not need the views of 100 persons assembled for this purpose.

Climate change is hugely important, but 100 persons assembled at random are in no better position than 200 persons elected by the people to make decisions on these subjects in these Houses through discussion with expert persons brought before committees, considering reports and considering all of these issues. This assembly is a sham. It should not be accepted for what it is. If, as the previous speaker stated, there is a desire to examine in depth the problems arising from the eighth amendment and how it should be dealt with, that is a one-off issue to be dealt with in a sensible way and not through a ridiculous sham of an assembly convened on the basis of a polling company's random sample of persons.

Finally, there is no such thing as a random assembly of this kind for the simple reason that the persons who can take time off to participate in it are a different subset from those who must go to work every day. They are a different subset from the self-employed - including myself, if I were not in this House - who could not possibly agree to participate in this kind of arrangement. They knock out those who have family obligations and caring obligations. Persons of that kind all are swept aside and it is a self-selecting group.

I am wholly opposed to this idea. It is an exercise in political cowardice by a Government that is in office but not in power.