Paul Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Likewise, with town councils no option was given other than go or stay. As a former councillor, I know the Seanad performs a great role and I would hate the vocational panels and input of councillors to be totally diminished to 13 seats. As a councillor, my greatest link with national politics and policy was through my interaction with Senators. Now, as a Senator, I see that role in reverse. The councillors of Ireland are at the coalface and they deal with the public. There is a very close relationship between the councillor and the Senator, more than with the Deputy, which in essence forms a link between these Houses and the people on the street and changing that would be detrimental.

I must comment on my colleagues to my right. Once again, even in a debate of this nature, as a Fianna Fáil Member I had to take a snipe. I will not lower myself to snipe back and in fact I will give a compliment. As Senator Devine reminded us, Sinn Féin canvassed for the abolition of the Seanad and I thank them for that. If that party had canvassed for its retention, none of us would be here today. We owe the party a debt of gratitude.

I really appreciate the contribution from Senator Lawless and I am delighted he is here. Nevertheless, I have a major issue with the Bill and the proposed inclusion of the overall diaspora and Irish passport holders. We have all shouted for boys in green in the Lansdowne Road stadium or what is now the Aviva who, when they arrived in Dublin Airport, may have had to get directions to the stadium. They had an Irish passport but how Irish were they? There is a diaspora that is interconnected and not long gone, as well as some we would like to bring home. Giving them a vote for its own sake will not bring them home or give them any more of a connection with Ireland and how Irish governance is carried out. Today, we are discussing the giving of a vote in a Seanad election to up to 5 million people. We still will have vocational panels, where people will have a choice as to which panel they will work from. The logistics will not be possible. We could have a dry run for a presidential election, if possible, that would involve one ballot paper, and we could see how that works. I see the merits in the philosophy of including an entire diaspora, and I agree with it to an extent, but the logistics in this scenario will not be possible. The way the proposal has been designed with the vocational panels, whereby people decide on which panel they wish to vote, is not possible. We could have a dry run with a presidential election involving one ballot paper to see how it goes.

As I stated at the outset, I am only learning how this House works and I should declare, so far so good. I have been able to raise issues that I was not able to raise in the council chamber. I am thankful that in some, although not all, cases I have obtained positive outcomes. We have a major role to play in the analysis and scrutiny of European and national law, as has been mentioned. Where does that go? Perhaps our day could be more condensed and we could be more fruitful in what we do. The scheduling should be examined as much as how and why we got in here. A Senator mentioned a knee-jerk reaction to reform in a contribution but this is definitely the slowest knee-jerk reaction that could possibly happen. There is a need for reform and it is not a knee-jerk reaction.

The Bill is to be welcomed and although I will support it, I will keep my options open on Committee Stage, as my colleague noted. There will be a need for much scrutiny in much of the make-up of the Bill and there must be some amendments. In theory the Bill must be welcomed as there is a need for reform, although that should not just be for its own sake. It does not need to be the dramatic type of reform that seems to be the populist opinion. As was highlighted in the referendum about this Chamber, the populist opinion might not be the right one. In 2013, when politicians were to be kicked around the streets, who would have predicted the people of Ireland would vote to keep the Seanad? Nobody in their right mind could even imagine how anybody would vote for politicians at that time.

The people have spoken and they want a Seanad. It is up to us, na Seanadóirí, to figure out how we do our business. I do not want to get carried away in how we decide to elect Senators and complicate matters. The last count I attended was so complicated, it was unreal. It is so complicated I did not even know I had been elected when it happened. From what I hear today, we are going to make this even more complicated. Perhaps I am reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, as I am still recovering from a campaign that hit the four corners of the country. I have a vision in my mind, with what is being spoken about here, of having to do a global campaign.

We must think very strongly about how to include the diaspora. I have no problem with the idea in theory as it is a great idea. As some Senators have mentioned, I lived outside the country for some time. I was more Irish then and travelled for two or three hours in taxis to see Irish bands playing. If I had been at home and they were on the radio, I would have turned it off. The Irish diaspora can be more Irish than we are but we should not include them for the sake of it and complicate the process. One would not know what kind of Seanad we would end up with if 5 million people were voting. Some would wear green jerseys like the Irish soccer team players who did not know how to get to Lansdowne Road when they arrived in Dublin. What kind of Seanad would they elect?