The sub-committee is pleased to welcome Professor Kevin O'Malley and Mr. Barry O'Brien of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland to this meeting. The members of this all-party sub-committee are engaged in a process of Seanad reform. I thank the members of the RCSI delegation for responding to the sub-committee's request to attend this meeting. We have less than 20 minutes to discuss the issues. I notice that Ms Jody Blake, an old friend who helped us so much during the passing of The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (Charters Amendment) Bill 2002 is in the Visitors Gallery. The delegation remembers "Yes, Minister". The sub-committee has read the RCSI's submission which I invite Professor O'Malley to summarise.
Presentation by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.
Witnesses: Professor Kevin O'Malley and Mr. Barry O'Brien.
Professor O’Malley
The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland is delighted to have been invited to make a written submission and discuss this matter with the sub-committee. The RCSI has first-hand experience of the Seanad in action, as the Bill mentioned by the Chairman went through the Seanad and the Dáil. I cannot speak too highly of the way in which the Seanad operates and expedites its business. I mention this to people at the least excuse.
The submission we have brought forward deals with the issue of modernising systems of representation. It is clear and self-evident that the current form of election is terribly antiquated and anachronistic. The panel system is resonant of a certain period in the history of the State. It is clear that the constituencies and the voters need to be reconsidered.
A number of the RCSI's ideas are not mentioned in its submission. We feel an element of the election process should involve a vote of the people. When one starts to select constituencies one is, by definition, excluding others. Perhaps a combination of panels and selective groups should make choices, but the population at large should also make choices. Both of these electorates should come together to elect the Seanad. It has occurred to the RCSI that the European Parliament constituencies could be used for a popular vote, with three, four or five Senators being elected by the general electorate from each. We have reservations about this system as the election may become completely politicised, but that may be the price one will have to pay. One would not want a Seanad election to be a simple re-run of a recent Dáil election, but there may be ways around this.
The original idea of a constituency comprising university graduates was a good one. If it is still seen as valid, it should be opened up to include graduates of third level institutions other than Trinity College and the NUI. I refer to the other universities, the institutes of technology and other colleges. It would be relatively simple to allow degree holders from such institutions to vote. If the university notion remains valid, it is clear that it has to be extended to other third level institutions.
When we examine the panels, it occurs to us that one should have regard for current systems which work terribly well. I refer to the notion of the social partners, for example. We do not define terribly well how that would work. It is important that young people are engaged in the process and the notion that registered students should comprise a constituency may have a certain charm. My colleague, Mr. Barry O'Brien, feels the role of charities has become increasingly important in society and that they should be recognised in some way.
The RCSI feels the idea of incorporating the emigrant element and the Northern Ireland element - I assure the sub-committee that I do not use the word "element" in a pejorative sense - could best be dealt with in the Taoiseach's 11 nominees, or some variant of that procedure. It would be terribly difficult to organise an electorate of emigrants, for example. Many of them are in far-flung parts of the world and there may be problems in deciding who should be defined as an emigrant. I also think direct appointment might be the way forward in the case of Northern Ireland.
The RCSI does not have a difficulty with the principle of nominations being made by the Taoiseach. It is obvious that it has a political purpose, but it also has a balancing purpose which has been used quite skilfully in the past. Society has become much more complex since the Constitution, which sets out these matters, was written.
There may be a case for increasing the membership of the Seanad from 60 to 100 or 110. This would allow for an input and expertise of people from all walks of life and could make a useful contribution. I will finish my remarks at that and if my colleague, Mr. O'Brien, wishes to add anything, I invite him to do so.
Senator Hayes is the questionerand either your good self or Mr. O'Brien may answer.
I thank Professor O'Malley and Mr. O'Brien for their submission on behalf of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and the thought they have given to this matter. Uniquely, of many of the institutions which have come before the sub-committee today, they have dealt with other matters outside the issue of the inequality concerning the university vote. That is much appreciated.
Professor O’Malley
Thank you.
The submission referred to how the Seanad would be helped by a precise definition of its roles and responsibilities. Perhaps the delegation would expand on this issue. Is it a matter to which it has given much thought? How exactly could it be helped? What new roles and functions should the Seanad take on in 2003?
The delegation brought forward an interesting idea that there would be one graduate constituency where all graduates would vote and, in quite an egalitarian way, it put everyone into that constituency, from institutes of technology to the University of Dublin. It suggested that it would be for one college to nominate and another to second. Why did it make this proposal? At present, any citizen can be a candidate for the NUI panel or the University of Dublin panel, irrespective of whether he or she is a graduate. By doing that, would it not be restricted in such a way that the colleges would have some influence on the Senators selected?
Can the delegation give the sub-committee some evidence as to the number of its graduates who would be non-national? One of the great contributions of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland is the number who have come to this city and have been educated and have gone to other parts of the world. Anywhere one goes in the world one meets people from various races and backgrounds who have studied in Ireland through the Royal College of Surgeons. It is a wonderful experience and adds hugely to this city, the medical profession and education in general. How many of the college's graduates are non-national? Presumably, under current circumstances, they would not be entitled to vote if they are not Irish citizens. Can the delegation give some evidence to the sub-committee of the actual register of existing graduates?
Professor O’Malley
I would be delighted to do so. Perhaps I can take the second and third questions and my colleague, Mr. O'Brien, will deal with the issue of functions and how they might be better defined.
The notion of nomination by one institution and seconding by another institution was to ensure individuals had sufficient support to justify their names going forward. That may not be necessary but that was the logic underpinning it in order that there would not be many hundreds of names of no-hopers, and a certain level of support within the third level would need to be seen to be eligible to go forward for real election. It was not a big issue but that was the thinking behind it.
With regard to alumni overseas, we would probably have of the order of 7,500 to 10,000 non-EU graduates overseas from 60 to 70 countries. The majority of our graduates of the medical school would be overseas. Nowadays, of the order of 80% are non-EU citizens. Nowadays we have graduates in pharmacy, physiotherapy and nursing, the majority of whom are Irish.
What is the total number of graduates?
Professor O’Malley
It is of the order of 10,000.
Of that 10,000, Professor O'Malley is saying——
Professor O’Malley
About 7,000 at least would be non-EU citizens.
Thank you.
I am very interested. I thank the college for its submission which is very thoughtful. Certainly the broad approach is helpful. Perhaps the delegation can develop its idea on the new approach to the panel. I wish to get the broad view of its vision. It wishes to maintain a university constituency, the Taoiseach's nominees, perhaps put some arrangement in place for emigrants and the Northern Ireland representation and, perhaps, also to have three European constituencies and a new approach to the vocational panels based on national economic and social groupings, etc. Has the college in mind a somewhat enlarged Seanad and, if so, has it some figures in mind?
Professor O’Malley
No, we do not have a cohesive master plan. If panels are to stay, the number waiting in each of the panels should be altered to take into account the way society has changed and, perhaps, new designations.
Yes.
Professor O’Malley
I am not saying how the panels necessarily would link up with new constituencies - new sets of voters. It is difficult to justify the notion that voting people into those panels is done only by county councillors. That seems extraordinary.
The question then arises as to whether voting should be extended to the membership of the nominating bodies, for example, the various cultural organisations or the educational organisations which have the right to nominate. Is the delegation suggesting that the franchise be extended to members of those organisations beyond simply nominating?
Professor O’Malley
With the Senator's permission, may I ask Mr. O'Brien to address that issue as he has definite ideas on it. He might also deal with Senator Hayes's question about the functions. Is that in order?
Yes.
I raise the issue of charities to reinforce my point. One of the distinctive features of the Seanad which should be reinforced in a refinement of its function is that it should bring higher level thinking to the whole legislative process. It is there not so much to be pushing vested interests but to be a place of quiet consideration outside of the white heat of the Dáil Chamber to ensure we end up with better legislation and a better State. In that context charities represent, in many respects, the selfless giving of so many people to aspects of the State's functioning, upon which the State is largely dependent and for which it should be very grateful. For example, rather than referring to everyone who is a member of, or contributes to, a charity, there might be an annual convocation of all registered charities in Ireland which have the benefit, as we do as a unique college, of having a special tax provision in their favour, which convocation of charities might elect two or three members to the Seanad. Each charity might have one vote. The prominent charities, such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul or others, would probably end up garnering much of the support for themselves. Those giving of themselves in society should have the opportunity to find representation at the highest level in this House.
Yes.
Returning to the function of the higher level contemplation and sophistication which this House can bring to bear, we should look at the issue of students. I am reminded by Una O'Higgins-O'Malley, an in-law of the gentleman on my right, who recently wrote in a poem that when we are planning the future of Ireland, we should not stare at the roots of our ancestors but instead should gaze into the faces of our children.
Young people feel disenfranchised from the political process. Why? Every registered student in Ireland - that is a fixed constituency - would have the opportunity to participate in this election process in a new and sophisticated way.
Would they use it?
That would be for them to decide. I would go down the line that they would. There are temptations and risks that they might use it for other purposes.
Students being——
All registered third level students.
Those over 18 years of age.
Yes, and also all registered charities. Those constituencies are easily defined. They can make a unique contribution to an enlarged House and bring us back to the notion of the function of the Seanad as one of higher level thinking which reflects what the future is about and what children require.
In regard to presentation, as matters stand, the functions and representation of the Seanad are spread over a considerable amount of the Constitution. That needs to be tidied because fundamental to participation is that the general public understand what the Seanad is about and the unique role it can play.
We are a mystery.
I appreciate the thought and effort that went into this submission. Obviously, I do not agree with some aspects. Having emerged from obscurity to get myself elected, I would not have liked to have gone through the route of getting two governing bodies to nominate me. It is interesting that a number of issues have arisen from a variety of sources, and the representatives have articulated them very well. If they have time, perhaps they could consider further how we could institutionalise the concept of social partnership into this Chamber which is slightly less political than Dáil Éireann. Social partnership does not just mean public pay deals. They may or may not happen. Some time we will not have a national pay agreement but that will not end the institutional social partnership process. The only place where the social partnership model is not visible in society is in the political process. That marginalises politics and also marginalises the social partners. The social partners are all outside politics, with certain spectacular exceptions——
Insiders.
——and politicians are outside the social partnership process, except for Government. That is an institutional anomaly. If the representatives have time at some stage to consider this further, we would be glad to hear their views.
Professor O'Malley or Mr. O'Brien wanted to return to the question about functions put by Senator Dardis.
Whatever that function is, it certainly needs to be tightened up and made comprehensible but I would come back to the notion of selfless sophistication. With the greatest respect to those who have come through that route, we do not want to end up in the future with a situation where somebody is known as the Trinity College Senator, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Senator, the UCD Senator or the University College Galway Senator. What we want is cross-fertilisation at the highest levels in order that nobody in this House will be representing anything other than what is best for Ireland.
I thank the representatives from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland for coming and their forthright submission. We will bear their considerations in mind when making our final deliberations.
The witnesses withdrew.