SIGNIFICANT IRISH PUBLIC FIGURES BEGAN IN SEANAD - KENNY

Posted on June 20, 2013 1:52 PM   |   Permanent Link   

Speaking on the Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Eireann) Bill

I want to welcome this legislation which will start the process for the referendum on the future of Seanad Éireann.
Much has been said on this issue already, and I have no doubt that much more will be said on the question of the Senate before the referendum is concluded, but I am glad the process is now formally underway.
The Government is providing the ultimate public debate in the form of a long public referendum campaign between now and early October when we can have a national discussion on the Seanad.

I think those in favour of retaining the Seanad would have to agree that the present Seanad is quite simply not up to the job of acting as the Upper House. I have never been a member of the Seanad myself, but as far as I can see, it is out of date in terms of how it does its legislative business and as well as that, the electoral system that elects its members is highly undemocratic and elitist.

I would have to say that it has been used as a preparation ground for aspiring political party candidates, or as retirement ground for those who have served their party and as compensation for those party members who have lost their seats. That is not a positive sign that the present Seanad is working as it should, I must say. I think that whatever the outcome of the referendum is, the Seanad as it presently functions needs to go.
But all of that said, it has to also be acknowledged that there are Senators who have made excellent contributions and have done great work.

Public figures that have made significant contributions to politics in Ireland began their political careers in the Seanad. I am thinking particularly of the current President Michael D Higgins, former President Mary Robinson, and former Taoiseach Garret Fitzgerald. I believe that Irish society would have been much poorer without their contribution and owes much to them and to the Seanad.

I feel it is very important to point out that the decision regarding the abolition of the Seanad will be a decision of the People, and not the members of the Oireachtas or the Government. If the People decide that they want to retain it, it is their right to make that decision.

If the People make the decision to retain the Seanad, then the Government must respect that decision and I feel it must develop proposals to deal with that situation. I feel quite strongly that if the referendum were to fail, it should not be seen as the People want nothing to be done in terms of the Seanad. I detect quite a lot of unhappiness out there in terms of how it functions. I also detect quite a lot of concern as well in terms of how this house functions, and I think that we as legislators, as well as the Government, need to bear that in mind, and to respond to that in a serious, meaningful, constructive way.

The proposal to abolish the Seanad is being done in conjunction with changes to local government to give councils more autonomy. It is also fair to say that a unicameral system - where a country has one parliamentary house instead of two - is common in countries of a similar size to Ireland.

What we as legislators must ask ourselves, and what the People must ask themselves is, does this State really, genuinely need Seanad Éireann. Is there an overwhelming argument that requires a second house to oversee the work done by the first? The consequences of whatever happens as a result of the referendum vote itself must be considered fully by the People.

Whatever views people might have of the Seanad, or whatever views they may form during this referendum I feel they should study the options before them very carefully - this vote is about amending our Constitution - and like all referenda, the ability to do that should never be taken lightly.