Seán Kyne (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge Senator McDowell's interest in and commitment to Seanad reform. He has certainly advocated for this measure for a number of years. We have had numerous debates. It has almost become like the drainage of the Shannon in that it has been talked about for decades and very little has happened, which I acknowledge. A Bill relating to the university Senators before the Dáil today. It is an issue that has been raised again on foot of a court decision, and the Government has had to act. In my time as Government Chief Whip, I remember advocating at Cabinet to the then Taoiseach before the last election that this issue was something that perhaps he could pursue. That did not happen at the time but it has happened now because of court challenges.

I have also advocated in this House. The 2020 programme for government discussions were a long, drawn-out process and we were coming to a stage where the Seanad could not constitutionally sit. If we are talking about Seanad reform, I believe the Taoiseach's 11 nominees, if they are to be retained, should have a status as being Members of the new House until such time as a new Taoiseach is elected in order to allow a fully constituted 60-Member body. When the Seanad elections are over and if there were an impasse in the election of the Taoiseach, the old or outgoing Taoiseach's Seanad nominees could form part of the 60-Member body to allow the work of the Seanad to go on.This change happened in the election of the Ceann Comhairle, as I understand, for the first time in 2016. Let us be blunt about it. It happened in 2016 because it was not obvious what the Government make-up would be. It was not some grandiose plan that Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael had. It was a fact that we had a situation where it was not clear what Government would be put together and in order to allow the election of a Ceann Comhairle, the view was if we could not elect a Ceann Comhairle, it would give a bad signal as a country that we could not get agreement on that basic point. It was not out of necessity. What is the opposite to necessity? It happened because of the election results. It happened because there was an impasse in the election. That is why it happened. It was not something that was debated. We have had a fine Ceann Comhairle elected in Deputy Seán Ó Fearghail and I am sure we will have fine Cinn Comhairlí elected in the future just as we had in the past but it is important that was not something that there was this big debate about it; it just happened because of the election results. Senator McDowell is not saying this, because we have had under the current system fine Cathaoirligh elected in this House, whether that be Senator Buttimer, Senator Mark Daly or all those who went before and who have served, and Government nominees and those with the support of Government have chaired as impartially has they could. There were not any issues. There has been the odd skirmish, perhaps, but it could not be said that there was not a totally impartial Chair. If people have instances, they can cite those. In that vein, we have had a system that has worked and because it has worked, I see no particular reason it should be changed.

Senator McDowell is correct that it can be up to the next Government, as part of a programme for Government, whomever that may be. It may be himself, as part of that Government or other Members of the Opposition. Who knows what the Senator's plans are? Who knows what the next Government will be, what its make-up will be and what parties will be involved? If that is part of a manifesto and then a programme for Government, that would have to be honoured. On that basis, and on that basis that we would be tying the hands of the future government in respect of this House, I see no reason it should be changed.

There could be instances in the future when the government does not have a majority in this House. The days of two or two-and-a-half party system, or two-and-a-half parties running the country, are gone. We have a much more fluid electoral system. We have many more parties than we had. We have many more Independents than we had. Who knows in the future what the make-up of a Seanad will be and what situation would have to be entered into in terms of an election for a Cathaoirleach?

I do not see that this is the top priority in the reform of the Seanad. Seanad reform may be part of the manifestos of different political parties and a programme for Government. We will have to wait and see and if it is, issues will be brought to the fore as part of the next government. I do not see that there is a clamour in the country to enact changes in this manner just as there was not a clamour to enact changes in the election of a Ceann Comhairle. We have had situations where Cinn Comhairlí were removed or resigned under pressure. There is that balance of the House and the Members and standards, etc. I do not see that this is a priority or that there is a clamour for it. The system has worked well. It is working now and depending on what happens in the next government, that would be a decision for those as part of a programme for Government with regard to any changes.