Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator. I will go through them briefly. The Bill is useful, as I have mentioned. What I am about to say is not a criticism of the Bill itself, but it will show the types of things we need to address.

There appears to be no clear definition in the Bill of what is meant by "institutions of Higher Education in the State", which is the term used in Article 18.4.2° of the Constitution. That would need to be defined. I acknowledge Amendment No. 4 attempts to address this and will be a useful starting point for consideration.

In addition, further detailed consideration needs to be given to which third level qualifications should be recognised as providing a right to vote in Seanad elections. Should it be a degree or a diploma from the institution, as set out in the Bill? If that is the case, should the holder of that certificate from the institution also be granted a right to vote, or should only the holders of degrees be permitted to register? If so, should it be the holders of ordinary degrees or higher degrees? These are the types of things that need to be teased out. If the qualifications were to extend to postgraduate qualifications should it be all of those, including postgraduate diplomas and higher diplomas or only certain postgraduate qualifications? These details need to be worked out. As stated, this mus also be underpinned by primary legislation in order that it is crystal clear.

I expect there will be very detailed engagement as we move forward on drafting of the Bill. I expect there will pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill as well, depending on the timeframe the court says it wants this in. Senators Ruane and O'Reilly and other stakeholders and graduates should be feeding into that process on the publication of a draft Bill. It is also worth noting that when a previous Government published a general scheme of the Seanad Electoral (University Members) (Amendment) Bill in 2014. My Department conducted extensive consultation with stakeholders back then on issues concerning what higher education institutions should be covered by the legislation as well as what qualifications would make graduates eligible to vote. That general scheme covered the institutions of higher education, the franchise, the register of electors, the contents of the register of electors, provisions for the returning officer, nominations of candidates - which was pretty detailed - and the filling of casual vacancies. The outcome of the consultation that informed that scheme, parts of which I believe are still relevant, and indeed any fresh round of consultation will be required before we could settle on those policies and principles in the legislation.

A related question arises about what type of appeal process should be in place for determining whether or not a qualification is adequate. There are so many qualifications and so many more people accessing third level education, and though different avenues. We have seen the expansion of the technological universities, post-leaving certificate courses leading into university diplomas and all the things we have discussed as well, so we will need to be clear there will be an appeals process. What it will look like for determining the validity of a qualification? Will there be a difficultly with third level courses undertaken in Irish institutions of higher education by Irish citizens where the awarding authority is not Irish?

These considerations are not straightforward. They are complex and need to be teased out. At present we have two university constituencies of three seats each. Senator Ruane knows this because she came from there. Both constituencies have their own register of electors. The widening of the franchise is proposed in the Bill. Should each institution hold its own register or should there be a centralised register? This is something we discussed with the Senator's previous amendment. How would the logistics of managing the electoral register work? I covered that in some detail and looked at the scale of it. It is going to be a big job.Importantly, we must ensure that the first election carried out after the extension of the franchise is robust and that people can stand over the register.

Regarding amendments Nos. 1 and 11, I do not envisage An Coimisiún Toghcháin being responsible for the compilation or maintenance of the register. The question of what organisation or institution would maintain the centralised register needs to be considered further. I acknowledge that amendments further down the list attempt to deal with many of these issues, but Senators will accept that any proposal would require what we have already discussed.

The Constitution provides that Seanad elections must be conducted by postal ballot. Extending the franchise will undoubtedly lead to a significant increase in the number of postal ballots and we would have to consider the planning and logistics involved. Although such challenges are not insurmountable, we would need to plan for them carefully, particularly in light of the dependence on the postal ballot, issues arising with people not receiving their postal ballots, etc.

When the primary legislation is published, we will need to consider the cost. No costings accompany this Bill, but there will undoubtedly be an additional cost to the Exchequer in implementing the proposals.

While I do not support amendments Nos. 3 and 5, Senator Ruane has indicated that, following this good discussion, she will withdraw them.

I have commended Senator Malcolm Byrne on introducing this legislation and bringing it to Committee Stage. We have already concluded the first pairing of amendments. I also thank Senator Ruane and her colleagues for their input and amendments.