I welcome Dr. Kulkarni to the Seanad Chamber. We are an all-party committee engaged in considering a proposition for Seanad reform. Dr. Kulkarni took great care in his written submission and I thank him for it and for coming. We have 20 minutes in total. I invite Dr. Kulkarni to outline his submission to us briefly. We will then question him.
Presentation by Dr. Prabhu Kulkarni.
Dr. Kulkarni
I thank the committee very much for giving me the privilege of making this submission and giving my views on this issue. I am a resident of the Republic of Ireland since 1967. Although I was not born here I can justifiably claim to be an Irishman. As I have been a candidate for the Seanad elections on the Dublin City University panel on three occasions, I have experience of the process. I have definite views on this system, and have made it clear in my written presentation that the ideas of the founding fathers for the Seanad were totally different to what pertains today.
I wish this sub-committee a very successful outcome and sincerely hope it will have the courage to take the radical decisions required to modernise our existing electoral process for the Seanad. It would be good for the future of Ireland. The Ireland of tomorrow is approaching very fast and will be radically different from the Ireland of today. It will be totally different socially, culturally and industrially from the past. When the founding fathers drew up the Constitution, Bunreacht na hÉireann, they had a totally different conception. They were total visionaries, and the Constitution they drew up has been an inspiration for many other democracies, including India. They have achieved a great deal but life has changed worldwide and we have to plan for the future rather than live in the past. Ireland has changed significantly, particularly in the last five to ten years. We may not accept or like some of the changes but they are here to stay. The complexion and composition of future Irish society will be radically different to that of 1916 or the 1920s and we need an all-inclusive society to reflect those changes. We have seen the effect and consequences of a non-inclusive society just across the Border, in Northern Ireland. I hope we will learn from that history of non-inclusion of a significant portion of the population in the political system.
The structure of the panels for the Seanad election established by the founding fathers shows admirable vision. They created panels for the arts, industry, labour, teachers, agriculture and the two main universities of the time - the National University of Ireland and Dublin University. Unfortunately, their vision has not been reflected in the practice and the image is of an ineffective or uninfluential group of people which the public does not perceive for what it does. I know the work these people do and the legislative process through which they go. I have followed it many times in the past and admire them but this is not perceived by or transmitted to the public. One of the boring things I do occasionally is to watch the Seanad proceedings on television at night.
Boring?
Dr. Kulkarni
From the public point of view. For me they are interesting which is the reason I keep watching them.
Does it help Dr. Kulkarni sleep?
Dr. Kulkarni
No. It inspires me with the thought that I should be there, participating, then I fall asleep. It is entertaining and illuminating and I could contribute to the debate on some of the issues. As I am not a keen writer of letters to the newspapers and publishers, I do not take out my pen and paper and start writing about these topics.
My proposals for Seanad reforms are radically different. First, I would like to see the Seanad either abolished in the present form or expanded to meet future requirements. As constituted, it does not have a role in the future of our society. The sub-committee has been assigned a task similar to that of the founding fathers in that either it looks to the future, 20, 30 or 40 years ahead, and is a leader in the world, or it does as committees have in the past - tinker with the Constitution and other things and get away with it. I would admire this.
Abolishing the Seanad would not be the right direction to take; enlarging it would be best. A comparison between the proportion of Deputies to Senators in 1922 and now shows the number of Senators has remained constant, revealing the disparity between the two Houses. The number of Seanad seats should be increased in proportion to the increase in Deputies since 1922 or at least some proportion of that number.
The existing electoral panels should be changed. I am sure there are many experts who have different views. The university panels should be redefined to include existing and possible future universities. Perhaps it was a lack of vision that people did not expect education to expand to the extent it has reached today. We have one of the best educational systems in the world and that was not envisaged in 1922. That may have been the aftermath of liberation from colonial status as most of the democracies which have undergone that process have gone through that phase. As they are constituted the university panels are skewed in terms of present and sitting candidates. It is impossible for new candidates to break in. The electoral registers are completely out of date. On the Dublin University panel nearly 40% of the candidates on the present register are not known at the addresses given. The panel should either be revised every three years and the candidates asked to reapply for registration, or it should be abolished. Less than 30% to 40% of people bother to vote in the elections. There should be a new panel for science and technology to match our progress in this area.
The present 12 seats nominated by the Taoiseach go to party political candidates and rarely, even in today's Seanad, less than three or four of those 12 will be non-political or non-party candidates. This is used as a consolation prize or as a political gift. It should be reduced to five in an enlarged Seanad.
Dr. Kulkarni, your proposals are of so much interest that our questioning panel, which has read your submission, would like to question you.
I am sure Dr. Kulkarni was going to go on to tell us about his proposal for a seven year fixed term Seanad. It is novel in that almost every group which has proposed a fixed term has proposed that it coincide with the election for the European Parliament for a five year term, whereas Dr. Kulkarni's seven year term would coincide with the Presidential election. One of the attractions of holding the Seanad election with the European election is that it would coincide with a time when people would be going out to vote. I imagine there would be an even greater participation in the Seanad election were it to coincide with the Presidential election. This is unusual and had not occurred to us.
Apart from what Dr. Kulkarni says, submissions over the past couple of days have given prominence to the need to have the more diverse nature of society reflected here. This is no longer the homogeneous society it was when Dr. Kulkarni first came here and I am sure he has noticed the changes. One way of doing this is through the Taoiseach's nominees. Dr. Kulkarni has explained the difficulty of trying to get elected but one way of ensuring the election of people who are recently resident, or representatives of groups who have come to live here but are not citizens, is by specifying that one or two of the nominees come from the immigrant groups.
Dr. Kulkarni
That is a short-term answer. I am talking about 20, 30 or 40 years ahead when there will be many from different ethnic backgrounds who will be Irish citizens. For all practical purposes they, like me, will be Irish. I may not look Irish and I may not go to Mass every Sunday but I am Irish and if Ireland goes to war with another country, I will fight on the Irish side. That generation will have a means of representation and will not need the patronage of Taoiseach's nominations, just as most Protestants today do not need Taoiseach's nominations.
The difficulty is that a high proportion have come in recent years and are not Irish citizens and, therefore, not eligible to be Members.
Dr. Kulkarni
There is a large population in all ethnic groups in Ireland today who have been living here for the last 30 or 40 years. I know Nigerians who were living in Trinity College in the 1960s. I know Sri Lankans, Indians and Malaysians. Society is cosmopolitan in many ways today; our children are in their 30s now. At present there is no recognition of any ethnic minority in Ireland. If one looks at the panels on various boards such as health boards, there is no recognition on those.
Can Dr. Kulkarni suggest another way in which to encourage them to participate? We agree that they should be here; the question is how to get them here.
Dr. Kulkarni
There are various Government appointees on national boards and quangos but there are no representatives there. Many medical doctors practise here. Why can one of them not be nominated to a health board as a representative of the Government? The potential is there. For example, the Health and Safety Authority has up to six Government nominees who could come from minorities.
My thanks to Dr. Kulkarni for the presentation and my commiserations. I remember him running in the last Seanad election. I was a bit preoccupied as I was trying to get re-elected.
I am a little unclear about a number of points raised. Dr. Kulkarni talks about panels and I agree fully with him that there is one that does not reflect Irish enterprise and the nature of our new economy. That is a real anomaly. Is Dr. Kulkarni proposing that we have elections through the panel system by universal franchise every seven years?
Dr. Kulkarni
No. At present, Seanad elections take place immediately after Dáil elections and the candidates are nominated by their various panels. For example, nominations for the labour panel come from SIPTU and nominations for the industrial panel come from IBEC. The candidates from the particular business sectors are nominated by those panels. The pharmaceutical industry is very strong in Ireland. If one considers IBEC as a division of the pharmaceutical industry, then that group can nominate one of its candidates rather than the politicians making the nomination. That would give us more widespread representation.
Who would be eligible to vote?
Dr. Kulkarni
The general public would be eligible to vote. I am proposing that the same voting system would operate as in a presidential election.
However, only the nominating bodies would nominate candidates.
Dr. Kulkarni
Yes, nominating bodies would nominate candidates.
Part of Dr. Kulkarni's submission states that there should be a maximum two-term limit. Is the intention behind that to ensure that more new people come into the House? We have no history of limiting terms for politicians in any of the State institutions at local, national or European level.
Dr. Kulkarni
This is the sub-committee's chance to go into the history books.
Fair enough.
Dr. Kulkarni
The President of the USA has a two term limit and must complete all his programmes in that time. Why does one need a lifelong commitment for the Seanad? There are some Senators here whose families have been represented in the Seanad for 60 years.
We would have to review pension arrangements.
Dr. Kulkarni
Correct. Do we need a Senator for a lifetime? Some of the current Senators have been in the Seanad for 25 years. Do we need them for that long?
Is it not true that we need some people who have wisdom, experience and knowledge?
Dr. Kulkarni
If the US President can do without it, why are Irish Senators less capable of running the Seanad?
We do not have the same powers as a US President.
Dr. Kulkarni
Correct. The US President gets ready two months after his election. Most of the directors and officers go into office with the US President. I am proposing that the link between the Dáil and Seanad elections be removed. Candidates who are unsuccessful in the Dáil elections should not be able to run for the Seanad. The proposed seven year term breaks the link. If people want to run for election to the Seanad after two years have elapsed, that is a separate issue.
The opposite may well be the case in terms of people with vast experience who lose out in a Dáil election and whose experience as a former Minister perhaps would be useful in the terms of the scrutiny that occurs in and the performance of this House. It may well be useful to keep the current system to ensure that those with political and governmental experience can win seats here to stay in politics and inform debate.
Dr. Kulkarni
They can do that two years later under my proposals. I am not banning those unsuccessful candidates from running for the Seanad. When the next Seanad election arises, they can be candidates for that. Taoiseach's nominations could be used for those type of scenarios. They should be used in exceptional circumstances. If there is a coalition Government, the Seanad is sometimes seen as a consolation prize for the various party candidates who cannot get elected to the Dáil.
In American industry, it is not considered a bad reflection on somebody if their business goes bankrupt, as long as they were doing their job properly. The same should apply to Dáil candidates. I have never stood for election to the Dáil, but I cannot understand how numerous delegations claim it is important not to allow defeated Dáil candidates come into the Upper House. In my 20 years as a Senator, I could not go along with that viewpoint as those candidates make a huge contribution.
Dr. Kulkarni
We can agree to disagree. One of the problems is that we are assuming that the Ministers or Deputies who are not successful are the only capable source in Ireland.
Senators
No.
No, it is about allowing them to run.
Dr. Kulkarni
I have no problems with allowing them to run. I am talking about the Taoiseach's nominations.
I thank Dr. Kulkarni for making a strong case. He has his own experience of running for the Seanad and he has thought much about the reforms. This has added texture to his debate. We are grateful for his attendance today.
The witness withdrew.
Sitting suspended at 11.50 a.m. and resumed at 12 noon.