Michelle Mulherin (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

When we speak of reform of the Seanad we are in essence talking about how it can work best within the framework of our parliamentary democracy. We have to respect that it is a different animal from the Dáil with a different but nonetheless important function. There are two aspects, first, electoral reform and how we elect Senators; and, second, how it operates and functions. We need to address both to achieve reform.

The view of the public is that it does not get to vote on the Seanad and it wonders what the Seanad does, although when we had a referendum people wanted to keep it. There is a good case to extend the franchise on the basis that we need to have as much participation from people as possible. The proposal here is to extend the franchise to people with Irish passports, people in Northern Ireland and others living outside the State. The nation extends beyond the country’s boundaries; there are many who feel an intangible link that makes them feel Irish, no more so than when they are abroad and their identity is more challenged by contrast with other cultures. We stand very proudly over our culture. As a democracy, we should draw circles of inclusiveness. It is a healthy development in recent years that there has been more reaching out to our diaspora, and not just for economic reasons. Those people have the same genetic history as us in general, although I know there are new Irish now. We can learn from the people of the diaspora and they from us. We celebrate when they succeed, in politics and business, as, for example, the Kennedys did, and we like to claim Barack Obama, rightly so. We are very proud.

I do not agree, however, with extending the franchise to people other than Irish citizens resident in the State. It would be important to have the diaspora represented here but that could be achieved by Taoiseach’s nominees. There is a simple mechanism already. I am delighted that Senator Lawless is here and that he contributes. He can give us the emigrant’s perspective. I know he actively helps the young diaspora. An exception could be made for people who left in the past five or ten years. I agree with much of what Senator Paul Daly said. There is a real connection. For the most part I subscribe to the view that unless one is paying taxes in this country, one should not have the franchise for national or local elections.

I am concerned about the detail of how this would operate. The Leas-Chathaoirleach mentioned that over 5 million people who have Irish passports could have the franchise. The proposal for conducting elections through an e-mail to be printed, completed and sent back seems very casual compared with our approach to national elections and with the Seanad election as it operates now, local elections and referenda. There would be a lot of scope for personation. It is a fair and proper concern in the conduct of elections, to know that the outcome is a legitimate representation of the votes of people who were entitled to vote. This proposal cannot be stood over. What is the rationale for moving people from panel to another when one is oversubscribed? A person may not have an interest in another panel or may not want to register. I could run on the education panel but if I cannot get onto it, I would have to get onto another. There could be an imbalance. The system is good at the moment. When I was a councillor, I got five papers and voted for all the panels. That is the best way to go. Does voting for the Seanad need to be scrutinised less than for other elections? The answer has to be "No".

The people spoke when they were asked if they wanted the Seanad to continue. I was not in favour of abolishing the Seanad. The people wanted a watchdog, and that was the gist of their message. It does not need any great legislation or debate in here. Senator Reilly, the former Minister for Health and for Children and Youth Affairs, spoke on this Bill. He was one of the few Ministers who allowed legislation commence in the Seanad. Why is that not happening? The Government has only five hours in the Dáil to put through legislation. That begs the question as to why more legislation is not commenced in the Seanad. Can somebody answer that question? This is not rocket science. Why does the Seanad not scrutinise EU legislation?

This Bill is not reform. It is reform for more of the same. It will be unwieldy and the process will be confusing for those who wish to participate. Dividing the country into regions with one candidate from each will not be very balanced. All candidates may be from Dublin. I understand the tenor and intent behind this, but I can see trouble coming down the line. I see other problems in the legislation that I do not have time to deal with here. I will do so on the next Stage.There is a lot of hoo-ha being made about reform. I would agree with the Sinn Féin Senator, Senator Devine. Why has it not happened? It can happen right now, and that would be meaningful in terms of the operation. I agree with Senator Paddy Burke who stated that we are putting the cart before the horse here. I would ask: is this for real?