Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Feb 1963

Vol. 200 No. 3

Private Members' Business. - Electoral Bill, 1962—Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Jones

Before the adjournment of the debate I was referring to the sections of the Bill which deal with questions that may be put to voters when they come to the poll. I referred to the fact that there was a departure from the proposal of the Joint Committee in this respect. In the explanatory memorandum issued with the Bill, that matter has been adverted to in the following terms:

The Joint Committee did not recommend the abolition of the oaths and affirmations which a presiding officer may put on polling day as to the age or identity of a voter...

Most people who have experience of elections would agree that one of the greatest safeguards against personation has been the deterrent inherent in an individual having to subscribe to an oath or affirmation. The Joint Committee, having discussed this matter very fully, considered that that safeguard should remain. I cannot see why it is proposed to remove that safeguard in Section 26 and retain it, for a different type of voter, in Section 27. One would imagine that the consideration of uniformity would have commended itself to the Minister.

Everybody agrees that the right of an individual to vote is one of the fundamental safeguards of democracy. A person who, on coming into a polling booth, finds himself deprived of his vote, feels very much aggrieved. We should not lightly remove any safeguard which has been embodied in legislation up to now. In those circumstances such a person got a tendered ballot paper. Under this Bill he will get an ordinary ballot paper. I would again indicate to the Minister that we feel very strongly in regard to this matter and consider that the oaths and affirmations should not be abolished.

With regard to the compilation of the register, the recommendations made by the Joint Committee which are being implemented in this Bill are very proper and very sensible. The local authority is the body most closely in touch with this work and the provisions maintain the chain of connection between the Minister, his Department and the local authority who have been carrying out this work through the rate collectors. The Joint Committee gave this matter a great deal of attention. The publicity given by the Department during the past year to this question of registration and what it means for the individual has been most useful. It has brought home to the public the necessity for being alive to the fact that registration is most important if a person is to retain his right to vote. Anything which the Department can do to publicise that fact would be most desirable. In the making of regulations in regard to the registration of electors I would ask the Minister to have due regard to the suggestions made by the Joint Committee in regard to administrative action. There were 11 such recommendations, contained in pages 51 to 55 of the Second Interim Report of the Committee.

The recommendation by the Committee in regard to the fee payable to rate collectors, if implemented, would lead to a better register. The best safeguard an individual can have is that the person compiling the register feels that the work he is doing will be sufficiently rewarded rather than that he should be penalised for a bad register. The power exists for penalising an individual who does not prepare a register properly. In most things in life it is far better to offer an incentive for the better type of work rather than a deterrent against the slovenly type. I would suggest, then, to the Minister that he might consider that matter in regard to registration.

In regard to cost, it would appear that it will be borne equally as between the Department of Local Government and the local authority concerned in the compilation of the register. It does strike me that the local authority enter into it inasmuch as the register of jurors is also based on the register but I would point out that the register would have to be compiled in any case and I would ask that as far as possible the heavier portion should be borne by the Department in view of the fact that the register has to be compiled in any case for Dáil elections.

The Joint Committee considered at great length the question of notification of births by the superintendent registrars in various areas to the authorities compiling a register. After lengthy deliberation, they did not consider it wise or feasible that that should be done in so far as births might be recorded in places outside the area of the local authority compiling the register, but there is no such good reason as to why, for instance, the superintendent registrars should not be compelled to supply to the authorities a list of deaths that have taken place within the 12 months. That would help in large measure to keep the register up to date. It would be much easier for the superintendent registrars to supply a list of deaths than to supply a list of births.

The count facilities are also dealt with in this Bill. I am glad that there will be uniformity under this measure in regard to ballot papers marked other than by figures. Hitherto such papers were disallowed. I think everyone with experience of counts is aware that voters often mark ballot papers with an "X" or by writing "one", "two", or "three". There was no measure of agreement on such papers as between constituencies. I am glad that under this measure provision is made for validating such papers in future.

With regard to facilities at the count, there are, of course, limitations as to the type of building which may be available in different areas. I am sure the Minister will impress on the registrars the necessity for securing the most suitable building to enable those present at the count fully to satisfy themselves as to the validity of the count at all stages.

Under this Bill, an elector will be registered where he is ordinarily resident; he will be deemed to be where he was last resident unless he notifies to the contrary. That is a wise provision. The degree of uniformity for the whole country is very desirable from every point of view. When the Minister comes to make regulations in regard to registration, I am sure he will have due regard to the dates the Committee recommended would be the most suitable in regard to registration and the receipts of claims and objections. These were very fully considered by the Committee and, for very good reasons, they recommended certain changes. I trust the Minister will give effect to these. We shall have an opportunity of discussing them again inasmuch as these regulations will have to be laid on the Table of the House for approval.

I thoroughly approve of the provisions with regard to the limit on expenses. It is time logic applied to the situation. The register of political Parties is a new departure. It was felt this would lead to more reality and give the electorate a better opportunity of making a choice. Why the Bill has departed from the recommendation of the Committee in regard to the individual who wishes to describe himself in, as the Committee said, five words is something upon which I should like to have some explanation from the Minister. Why such a candidate should be described as "non-Party" instead of being described in the five words recommended is something I cannot understand.

Self-nomination is very desirable. Everybody who has been a candidate in an election is aware of the tension which exists in case the proposer, seconder, or assentor to the nomination might turn round and fail to sign the paper in the proper way or not, perhaps, have the proper number, and so on, on it. These provisions bring the whole matter more into line with modern practice. Indeed, this Bill could serve as a model in this regard.

The section dealing with forfeiture of the deposit was considered very extensively by the Committee. The Committee, having deliberated at length, felt that the fraction ought to be reduced from one-third of the quota standing to a candidate's credit at the end of the count to a quarter. Why the Bill has departed from that recommendation I do not know. I am sure the Minister will give us some explanation as to why he has seen fit to make that departure.

There was again a lengthy discussion on the hours of polling. It was felt that a large section of the electorate did not vote because the hours did not suit. The Committee suggested the hours should be 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. all over the country. The Bill departs from that recommendation, making it not less than a 12-hour period between 8.30 a.m. and 10 p.m. A period of 12 hours is, I think, long enough and I do not believe any greater efficiency will be obtained by extending the period. Why the period should be changed to 8.30 a.m. to 12 midnight requires some explanation from the Minister.

Those are the principal changes to be noted in the Bill in regard to Dáil elections. In regard to local elections a deposit is being required of the candidates. This is an innovation and, perhaps, a desirable one. The other sections dealing with local elections are, in the main, following recommendations which have been made here in regard to the conduct of Dáil elections. They should lead to a greater interest and a greater facility in the exercise of the franchise by people in local elections. The provision whereby the candidates are free now to represent any area within the ambit of the local authority is a useful departure and does make for the wider type of representation to which the voters have been accustomed in Dáil elections.

We welcome this Bill as a simplification of the electoral law and an introduction of well worthwhile innovations into it. I regret it has not been found possible to bring all the electoral law into one piece of legislation on this occasion but at least the work of the Committee over the 12 months has not been wasted, and the Minister says this measure will be followed at a later stage by some other piece of legislation. I should like to pay a tribute to the Committee for their work in this respect and to the officials of the Minister's Department in relation to the valuable suggestions which they brought before the Committee for its consideration.

Mr. A. Barry

I should like to join in congratulating the Joint Committee on the work they have done. It shows evidence of having been accomplished by men who are aware of the kind of problems with which this Bill seeks to deal. The Minister and his Department should be thanked for the explanatory memorandum which accompanied the Bill and which makes it easier for us all to get a bird's eye view of the proposals.

The growth of democracy since Dickens wrote about the Eatonswell elections has created many problems in trying to ensure that the people's voice is translated into proportional representation. The enormous expansion of the electorate since that time has added to the problems even in the rather minor matter of the inability of the officers or staffs at polling stations to establish the identity of voters. That is the particular difficulty in the cities. The system of proportional representation makes the exercise of the franchise harder for the electors. The British electorate, with only two or three candidates on the ballot paper, have only to mark a cross in front of one of the names and their task is relatively easy. English people have spoken to me about the difficulties of electioneering in this country and the difficulty of marking a ballot paper. A lot of their opposition to PR is possibly due to the fact that they are not intelligent enough to use it. Our people are and have shown that kind of intelligence. On one notable occasion, the House will remember, our people were able to sort out the issues very well. Two different propositions were issued to the voter at the one time and the difficult phrasing used in connection with one of them made the task of the voter a difficult one, but the voter worked it out. In the average constituency there are about ten candidates and the voters sort them out all right. The problem of the county boroughs is being attended to in this Bill. The Minister has been given power to make the voting papers more manageable by dividing areas, which is a very desirable development.

I agree with the last speaker about the sacrifice of the deposit and I think the reduction of the proportion of the vote to a quarter from one-third is still punitive enough to prevent frivolous candidature and would not be too punitive for a certain kind of candidate who may not have Party funds at his disposal, who would be a desirable asset to any Parliament and for whom defeat would be a serious financial loss. As we all know, for the kind of candidate I have in mind the loss of the deposit is only part of the loss in electioneering which is not an inexpensive business.

One other criticism I have to make is in relation to the extension of the hours of polling. I have in mind that a number of our polling stations are in schools which do not have lighting facilities. It is very undesirable that voting should take place in dark or near dark.

At last we have begun to look at the facts of life and are allowing the use of Party names on the ballot paper. This is an excellent development which makes it much easier for all concerned but particularly the voter. There was always the problem of candidates with similar or near similar names. The Party label will help in this case. I certainly think the word "non-Party" is a better word to use than "Independent" because the word Independent" always had for me a connotation of superiority which my experience of Independents does not justify.

The best men in Parliament have always been men in a Party. I do get tired occasionally of those who sit on the sideline with that smug superiority over those who have to sit behind or in the front bench and bear a Party label. If democracy is to work at all it can only work with a Party system. If a man comes in here as an Independent or as a non-Party man in future, I hope, he would want to be an extremely good man to be any better than the average of the Independents of whom I have had experience.

The fifty-fifty sharing of the costs of providing the register is fair. The scrutiny of electoral costs is another phase of the facts of life and it has no relation whatever to conditions to-day. I hope there is no danger that a Kennedy or a candidate of that calibre will come on the Irish scene and sweep the electorate with great wealth but there are values outside money values which we cannot measure. No one can say how useful it is to a political Party to have a great newspaper behind it. Who can measure the public relations provided by a paper of that kind to the candidates, no matter how unsatisfactory they may be as public representatives? The support which the Press newspapers give to candidates is a support that can never be measured by the electoral authorities and bears no relation to the facts of life as we know them to-day.

The proposal to add a supplement to the register is an excellent one. All of us have had the experience that no matter how often the registrar publishes notices that the register has closed, there are always those who are not on it and dead men still masquerading as electors. This is a useful and sensible provision. I am particularly pleased with the improvment this will make in local government elections. The deposit which will now be required by a candidate in a local government election is quite important. It will put an end to the experience we all have had of completely frivolous candidatures. In the city of Cork, we can always count on getting eight or nine of them in a local government election. They are an added difficulty in a ballot paper that may already contain 60 or 70 names. These frivolous candidatures bring the total up to 80 or 90 names. Most people tire when they reach the 19th or 20th name and I think in the last local elections the ballot paper in Cork had 78 names. In that regard, the Party label is going to be a great help to the voter, now that Party politics are part of the local scene.

The most valuable contribution in the Bill is the power it gives to have the voters notified of where their votes are. Doing that is likely to improve the turn out from 30 to 40 per cent of the electorate which is the best we have been able to get in recent times. If it is made easier for the local government elector to vote, he will vote. That ignores the case that can be made against me that if he is interested enough, he should vote. Human beings are not like that.

Our system of local government has earned a bad name but I would say that the inherent taint of corruption or near corruption has now almost completely gone. That inherent taint made it appear to the public generally that the local representative, on the whole, was not worth voting for. Anything that makes it easier for the voter to improve the quality of our public representatives is a great step forward. Such a great amount of the work of government has now been moved on to the shoulders of local representatives that it is very desirable that those who take part in local government should be of the very best quality.

I welcome the Bill. I think it is an excellent document. I think it is a fine thing to get this simplification of the electoral law and if there are any further steps to be taken, they should be taken as rapidly as possible. We can all put our fingers on instances of weakness and if the achievement of good public representation is to be secured, with all the benefits it can bring and all the things it can put an end to, the simplification of the electoral law and the fairness of the electoral system are most important constituents. The machinery of democracy is quite as important as the theories or the philosophies of the system.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I welcome this Electoral Bill. It eliminates many of the restrictions which have existed heretofore and it gives an opportunity to any ambitious man who feels that he should go up for election to do so. I am pleased that a person has not now to be living in the area in which he stands for a local election. That was the case in Dublin for a number of years and I am glad that the system is being brought into line with modern requirements. The idea of having property in one area and living in another is a fairly logical approach to the matter.

The fact that a man will have to deposit a certain sum of money when standing for election to a local authority is adding some dignity to candidature for local elections. People do not take much interest in local elections, notwithstanding the fact that local councillors take a very active interest in the life of their district. A lot of work has to be done by local councillors in their areas and, collectively, at their meetings. I hope the changes in respect of the voters at county council elections will encourage people to take an interest in local affairs. The only time we hear anything about local affairs is at the time of the striking of the rate. I am not going to bring the rates into this, but I should like to see something in the Bill to encourage people to take a greater interest in local affairs. In recent years, we have had very small polls at local elections. From time to time, a councillor is asked to do almost the impossible.

Mr. A. Barry

That is not beyond you.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Sometimes it fails me, too. We have here an opportunity of making the local authority chamber more important in the eyes of the people. The Minister and his officials have gone to a good deal of trouble along with the Joint Committee in compiling this measure. We shall be dealing with it on Committee. The liberal approach in this Bill is very good. With the naming of the political Parties on the ballot paper, I am expecting to get a few more votes.

Mr. A. Barry

They might think you were masquerading as a Fine Gael man occasionally.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am sure many people did not know me in the past. The more liberal approach to spoiled votes must be welcomed also. We will be able to interpret the wishes of the voters. At election time after a heavy campaign, our nerves are not too good when we are dealing with spoiled votes and hoping the decision will not be against us. I think that 12 hours, as provided in the Bill for the opening of booths, is a long time. I hope everybody will have voted during that period. Any further comments I have I shall make on Committee Stage.

Mr. Byrne

In general, I welcome this Bill, subject to reservations. I have misgivings on two or three aspects of it. I thought Deputy Barry might have told us something of the system that operates in Cork city in relation to the registration of voters. For several years past, those of us working in Dublin have noticed official announcements put in by the registrar in Cork—large notices in the paper—advising people in the Cork constituencies of the necessity to register before a certain date. We have been rather envious that this notice has been confined to Cork city. More credit to the Cork registrar and the Cork people responsible for this enterprising and quite expensive step.

There is a need for national publicity advising people of the necessity to register, to examine the electoral lists to see whether or not their names are on it. All of us who stand for election in Dublin city are very familiar with the person who comes along to you on polling day to protest he has not got a vote and to ask you to do something about it. Of course, nothing can be done. The reason for that is that the present form of statutory notice which appears in the paper, put in by the registrar of electors, takes about three inches in the legal notices. If the Minister would on a nationwide basis engage in publicity at the appropriate time of the year, a very useful purpose would be achieved. It is important that all who are entitled to do so, who have the necessary qualifications as to nationality and age, should have their vote at election time. There have been far too many complaints on this score in the Dublin constituencies in the past.

I have misgivings about the rights of self-nomination which are being conferred in this Bill. I believe the necessity to acquire the signatures of eight sponsors in the past was a guarantee against a crackpot candidate. At least he had to find eight persons to sign his nomination paper, even if they were only his relations. We now have the position where any crackpot can go along at election time and fill in his own nomination paper. I do not think that is a good thing.

I have not studied the Bill in close detail and I am not in a position to say whether or not it is correct to say, as the last speaker did, that the Bill is taking a more liberal approach to the question of spoiled votes. A distinguished gentleman who was city sheriff and returning officer in the city of Dublin for many years, the late Dr. Lorcan Sherlock, established a certain code which perhaps was not in strict conformity with the provisions of the Electoral Act now being amended. A guiding rule which he adopted was to allow any vote which clearly indicated the wish of a voter. A vote marked with a single "X" was, under the provisions of the present law, an invalid vote; but it was the practice under Dr. Sherlock, on the ground that the voter's intention was clear, to allow such a vote. I hope the Minister can give us an assurance that this reasonable interpretation of the law will be permitted in the future. There still are surviving amongst our electors today many people who when they first voted did so under the old British system by marking an "X" against the name of their chosen candidate.

Again I have misgivings about the provisions which remove the affirmation and oath in cases of attempted personation, which it has been customary to apply. Elections now, goodness, have become much tamer affairs than they were, even up to a few years ago. There are some people who believe that personation can be attempted and sometimes is attempted on a fairly large scale in this city at times when there may be a very keenly contested election. Anything being done in this Bill to make it easier for a person to steal another's vote is a retrograde step and the form of challenging a suspected personator, requiring him to make the affirmation and, if necessary, take the oath, served a very useful purpose in the past.

There are many other minor matters with which perhaps it might be more appropriate to deal on Committee Stage, such as the need in urban constituencies to control the abuse of publicity, or near intimidation of persons approaching the polling booths by what I would call, for want of a better name, shouters. These congregate outside the approaches to the polling booths on election days, passing out handbills and pestering people who are going in to vote, who have already made up their minds whom they are going to vote for and who know their candidates, but who are subjected to all sorts of harassment as they approach the polling booth.

Because one candidate or one Party engages in this form of activity, we all have to do it. We all have to see to it that there are youngsters outside the schools with dirty pieces of paper with our names on them, because this has been the practice, and it is difficult for any one candidate or any one Party to set the precedent of departing from it. If we could find some way of empowering the returning officer or the police authorities to ensure that the approaches to our polling booths for, say, 100 yards would be free from molestation, I do not think anybody would object to it. It would make the experience of voting, of discharging one's duty, much easier than it is at present.

In Dublin a few years ago, certain persons of English origin who had lived and voted here for 20 to 25 years, suddenly found that their names had been removed from the voter's register. I want to know from the Minister if there is anything in this Bill to ensure that that sort of thing will not happen again. The question of clarifying the rights of British citizens, in particular, those born in the North of Ireland, is something which needs to be looked into. They are not foreigners as are French, German or Dutch people. If we go to England, we are accorded the right to vote in a very short time and indeed in this context I would say that I regret that the Joint Committee which examined the electoral law did not see fit to confer on Irish citizens living in England, temporary emigrants, the right to vote in Irish elections, if necessary, by post. Other countries confer such rights on their citizens who live abroad. Australia is one example. Some time ago, there was a notice in our Irish papers advising citizens of Australia to attend at their Legation or Embassy on a certain date to comply with certain electoral formalities. A very strong argument can be made for permitting our citizens who are temporarily outside the country to continue to vote, if necessary, by post.

I have little more to say on this Bill which in general terms I think is a good one. I recall that after the last general election candidates of all Parties in my constituency in Dublin undertook, at the request of the returning officer, to see that the system of paying the expenses of the returning officer and the salaries and fees which he pays to his staff would be revised. He made the case that his scale of fees was very niggardly. It is very important to ensure that at elections in the future we will continue to have first-class personnel carrying out the official functions, functions which have been carried out in the past in Dublin, at any rate, and I am sure throughout the rest of the country, in an exemplary manner. It would be very unfortunate if a niggardly scale of remuneration in any way militated against that state of affairs.

Mr. Timmons

I should like to welcome this Bill and congratulate the Minister and the Select Committee appointed to go into this whole matter. There are a few features in the Bill on which I wish to comment. I join with previous speakers in welcoming the power given to local authorities to issue voting cards. Undoubtedly that will help to stimulate interest in local elections. On the question of registration generally, I should like to see some provision made to enable a section of our community who, because of their vocation, have been disfranchised in previous elections, namely, commercial travellers, to vote. It has been represented to me that a large number of those men leave Dublin city early on Monday morning and do not return until Friday evening or Saturday morning. It is the normal practice to have general and local elections on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. It should be possible to compile a register and to give them a postal vote in the same way as Army personnel and members of the Garda Síochána.

I welcome the provision in the Bill which enables long term patients in hospitals and institutions to vote. It has been an undesirable feature in the past that patients and even persons resident as members of the staff in such institutions were unable to participate in an election. I hope that when an election takes place, it will be possible for the returning officer to make provision for a ballot box to be placed in institutions of that nature. I have in mind our sanatoria and other institutions situated on the fringes of cities.

I welcome the provision which simplifies the procedure in regard to blind persons voting. The Bill enables a companion to help him complete the ballot paper.

The appearance of Party affiliations on the ballot paper is a progressive step.

I should like to say a word about the question of registration. I understand that regulations have been made which may provide a more suitable time for people to claim their votes. As matters stand, the period in which people who are not registered must complete their forms and make their claims ends on 22nd December. It has been the experience generally in the city that that is not a suitable time, and I hope that an appropriate time will be fixed as a result of this Bill. I should also like to see better provision made by publicity or otherwise in regard to large numbers of people in urban areas like Dublin who unfortunately are not registered. It has been represented to me that there are people occupying premises with restrictive covenants against subletting or taking in lodgers. They take in lodgers in contravention of these regulations and as a result when the registration officer comes around, the names are not filled in in the forms. It is only when a general election takes place that the occupants of such houses find themselves without a vote. Some steps should be taken to deal with that situation. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs play their part in informing the public by radio and television of the importance of registering for voting purposes, but something should be done to extend that publicity to bring the matter home to those people who, through no fault of their own, are being deprived of their votes.

Mr. Sherwin

I have not studied the Bill except the gist of it published in the press but I will certainly examine every section of it on Committee Stage because that is the important stage of a Bill such as this. I have, however, certain views and would like to express them.

First of all, I am not at all agreed that candidates' names should appear on the ballot paper in alphabetical order. Why should a man because his name begins with A, B or C have the advantage of getting several hundred votes never intended for him? It is idle to suggest that that does not happen. All of us who attend the counts can see that people start from the top of the ballot paper and mark one, two, three, four and so on down to the end. Many of these people do not know what they are doing. They just know that they have the power to vote and that they have a day out. If there are several such people and there are candidates whose names begin with A, B or C, they are going to knock out someone at some stage and one of them will become a member of the House or of a local body although that is not the real will of the voters. These things just happened because a person was lucky enough to have a name beginning with A, B or C. I do not think that is fair.

My name begins with S, at the very bottom of the ballot paper. I have overcome that but only because I reached the stage where my name had become a household word and the voters knew what they were looking for. In the early stages when I was trying to put my name over like any other newcomer, I was up against it. I can say that I missed being elected to Dublin Corporation on one occasion in particular on that account because of a man just in front of me who was fortunate to have a name that put him on the top of the ballot paper. I knew that if he was eliminated before me, I would get the bulk of his votes because he was from my locality and was actually getting the votes that would come to me or anyway they would have gone between the two of us. This man had the advantage and I was eliminated. I believe that the loss of my corporation seat, at that time was due only to the fact that he was fortunate enough to have a name commencing with A, B, or C, whereas mine was at the bottom of the ballot paper.

Why should that be? If there are several hundred people who have not the intelligence to understand this point, why should we not all share in that? Why should only some people share in it? I know that some people deliberately changed their names to Irish in many cases so that they would appear at the top and not at the bottom of the paper? It has been done. Why should some people profit because there are hundreds who are a bit stupid?

I have even said that there should be a circular ballot paper, but that perhaps would confuse them. But at least when candidates are nominated, they ought to be summoned to a meeting and all their names should be put into a drum and as they are taken out they should appear on the ballot paper. There should be no advantage for some people whose good fortune it is that their name commences with A, B or C, because the will of the people is being defeated. The people who vote intentionally and knowing what they are doing might be actually a majority, but because a few hundred people do not understand this point, the candidate is deprived of what the majority intentionally willed, that he should be the winner whereas he automatically becomes the loser. If there are hundreds of stupid votes, let us all share in them.

Like most Deputies, I have a great deal of experience of elections. I was reared in politics. I was in the Fianna when I was a child. I know how elections are fought. Personation profits the Party but the individual suffers. The surest way a person can get away with personating is to have the card of the registered voter. Possession of the card gives the personator confidence. The agents are afraid to challenge. Parties have the great advantage of having committee rooms in every area. I cannot afford to have a committee room other than my house. When election day is approaching, the followers of the Parties, knowing that such a person is sick and that another person has gone away, rush to the committee rooms and hundreds of cards are handed in.

Mr. Timmons

That is not true.

Mr. Sherwin

I know this business. Whether they are used is another thing. They came knocking at my door. I had no one to personate, even if I wanted it. The Minister should provide serious penalties in the case of a person found in possession of another person's card within the precincts of a polling booth. That would help considerably in abolishing personation. I am speaking with knowledge. In every area there is a director of canvass, the IO of the area, who knows everything that is going on. The others might not know what is going on. He is able to issue the cards to certain people who volunteer. That does not happen in all cases but it does happen in lots of cases. Whether the personator takes an oath or not, it should be a serious offence to be found in possession of another person's card in a polling booth.

From time to time, I have expressed the opinion that persons of 18 years of age should have a vote. In some countries, they have a vote. The view has been expressed that such persons are not sufficiently mature. I cannot accept that, in view of the fact that a man can be conscripted and forced to serve his country at 18 years of age, that at that age a man cannot plead ignorance of the law and can be dealt with under the law to the extent that he can be hanged for certain offences against the law. Marriage is legal at 18 years of age. It is an extraordinary position that a man of 18 years of age can be married and have children but cannot vote. In the past, a person had to have so much property to be eligible to vote. All along the line the right of the individual to vote has been granted only grudgingly. Whether the people responsible like it or not, they will have to face the fact that this right to vote will come in time. It may be that there is a fear that the swing caused by giving youth the right to vote would not be in the interests of certain persons or might favour certain policies or certain people but that is no excuse for withholding the right. A youth of 18 years of age should not be held responsible before the law if he is considered too ignorant for the purpose of registering a vote. Old people may suffer from senile decay but they can vote. I shall say no more on that point.

I have no objection to the name of the Party appearing on the ballot paper. It would benefit certain weak Partymen. A candidate must get his name before the public. If everyone knows about you, you have a good chance of election. The weakness of a new Party candidate is that the public may not be familiar with his name. This provision will help the new men. Persons who might not otherwise get a vote will collect a few hundred as a result of this provision. I have no objection.

On the question of having a proposer, seconder and eight assentors, I agree that that should be done away with, although Deputy Byrne thinks it is not right. He said any "lug" can go up. Birds of a feather flock together. If there is a "lug", he will have other "lugs" and there will be enough to put eight names down on the paper.

Mr. Byrne

I hope the Deputy is not suggesting that I used such a vulgar expression?

Mr. Sherwin

"Nut" is the word the Deputy used, or something like that. If he is a "nut", he will have other "nuts". There was one objection to the necessity to have eight assentors. Somebody would write down his name giving the initial "G" instead of "Gerald". The name appeared differently on the ballot paper. On many occasions I would have to carry out the whole procedure a second time. The names must correspond exactly with the names on the ballot paper. It is as well to abolish the provision.

It is provided that candidates for local elections will put down a small sum of £10. That is a good thing. Ten pounds breaks nobody and it will keep people from making a nuisance of themselves. Some people put down their names for fun. I know one man who put his name down because he had a grudge against the corporation officials. He had not the slightest intention of fighting the election. No one likes losing £10 and this provision will have the effect of eliminating the type of person to whom I have referred. A serious candidate will have no difficulty in getting £10. This provision will reduce the numbers on the ballot paper and make voting so much easier for the voter.

People in homes and hospitals will in future be allowed to register. In the past, the well-to-do could be brought by car. Now all will be enabled to vote because they will be permitted to post their votes. I appeal to the Minister to consider the danger of these votes being collared by some clever person in the home, hospital or institution. I appeal to him to consider the danger, too, of pressure being used to get these people to vote a certain way. In the old rotten boroughs, the voters admitted they had to vote for the landlord or run the risk of losing their job or their land; the landlord was there to watch the way they voted. We do not want a recurrence of that sort of thing. I urge the Minister to take steps to ensure that these people in homes and hospitals will not be imposed upon by any clever gentlemen.

The real work on this Bill will be done on Committee Stage. I should like to emphasise again the unfairness of printing the ballot paper alphabetically. Candidates whose names begin with an "A", a "B", or a "C" get hundreds of votes not intended for them, and the man who would be the people's real choice is robbed. It is hard to have to say this. If my name began with an "A", I should not like to hear this argument either, but the present system is not fair. I approve of the Party affiliations being shown on the ballot paper. I believe I was beaten in one election because there were two candidates with the same name and when surplus votes were distributed, half went to one and half to the other. In fact, the two were not of the same Party and it was quite obvious the voters were confused and did not know for whom they were voting. I lost a seat in the early days that way because another man in my area got at least 300 votes which were never intended for him. I was eliminated because of that. This change is for the better. People will in future know for whom they are voting and they will have a much better opportunity of indicating their will.

Mr. Rooney

I find myself in agreement with Deputy Sherwin in relation to the alphabetical order of names on the ballot paper. He mentioned, quite correctly, that a man named "Walsh" may change his name to "Breathnach" in order to get at the top of the ballot paper. I suggest the papers should be printed in rotation, and candidate No. 1 should appear as candidate No. 2 on the second ballot paper, and as candidate No. 3 on the next, and so on until he comes to the bottom of the paper.

I approve of the provision whereby the name of the Party will be shown opposite the candidate's name. That will give voters a better opportunity of voting for the Party of their choice. I met a supporter of the Fine Gael Party after the last Dublin Corporation election. He told me there was very little literature at the polling booth, but he felt fairly confident and he went in and got his paper, believing he could pick out the Fine Gael candidates. When he got the ballot paper there was only one name he could identify as Fine Gael. He was not sure of the others and so he just put No. 1 opposite the one name that he knew was associated with the Fine Gael Party. That man wanted to "vote the ticket" as they say. There was no literature available and he could vote only for one candidate of the Party he was supporting. The inclusion of the Party on the ballot paper will help people to "vote the ticket" and leave them no longer dependent on literature at the entrance gate to the polling booth. That is a tremendous improvement from the point of view of the electors.

I emphasise that the names of the candidates should be rotated. The inclusion of the Party will be of tremendous assistance to voters who are not sure of Party affiliations. We should remember, too, that some voters are self-conscious and nervous in the polling booth and they want to get through with the job with the least possible fuss. Some may have defective eyesight. Some may come without their glasses. What do they do? They will just try to mark the ballot paper somehow but will not admit they have come without their glasses. Then there is the person who is semi-illiterate and who wants to pretend he can read the ballot paper intelligently. The chances are that he will put his mark at the first name on the paper believing he has put his mark at the name of the candidate whom he had in mind. Any steps that are taken which will make it easier for an elector to cast his vote correctly are to be welcomed. The suggestions in this Bill are an improvement in that direction. If any other improvements can be thought of in regard to the ballot paper they ought to be included in this Bill by way of amendment.

The hours of voting also arise because we must consider the convenience of electors. I have nothing to say against the hours provided in the Bill. They offer every facility to people who wish to cast their votes on election day. Many of us know that women voters particularly are not keen on voting if it interferes with their domestic duties. In other cases if a car calls to bring them to the polls they will not avail of it unless they have dressed up and titivated. There are people then who have other excuses at a time when transport is offered to them.

This brings me to the question of the distance of the polling booth from the person wishing to cast a vote. In some cases people have very long distances to travel. We do not have a system of compulsory voting, and, therefore, if people find that three miles is too far to a polling booth they will not travel. In Australia and possiby some other countries it is compulsory for a qualified person to cast his vote on election day. There is a great deal in favour of making voting compulsory because very often the very people who have not cast their votes in an election are the people who criticise the policy of a Party or Government after the election.

Side by side with compulsory voting in Australia there is a provision that the State must ensure that no polling booth is more than one mile from an elector and then he is automatically fined if he does not cast his vote. If he is voting under protest he can claim his ballot paper at the polling booth and drop it into the box unmarked. There is no compulsory voting in the British Isles and in a democracy there is an inclination on the part of people to neglect the very important duty of casting their votes. There are many countries where the people would be glad to have the opportunity of casting their votes freely and without interference or danger to themselves and their families. In democratic countries many people do not realise the value of their right to vote freely and without any kind of intimidation or interference. Therefore, the question of compulsory voting ought to be considered but we should ensure that every facility will be made available to people in connection with claiming their ballot papers and casting their votes.

I come now to a more contentious aspect of voting, that is, as to whether we should have Sunday voting. There is no Sunday voting here or in Britain but there is Sunday voting in the majority of countries on the Continent of Europe. There are many arguments in favour of it. I mentioned the case of the lady who was not prepared to avail of the transport provided for her until she had titivated and who possibly got no opportunity during the rest of the day of casting her vote. Most people in this country are churchgoers, whatever their religious denomination may be, so both men and women are ready and, if you like, respectably dressed to go down to the village on Sunday morning and cast their votes after the Mass or church service. That would mean that there would probably be an 80 per cent poll before one o'clock and there would be ample transport available during the rest of the day for the small percentage who would not have cast their votes by that time. It would be a great convenience to the electors in general.

There might be strong objections from various religious denominations but all aspects of the suggestion should be considered especially the fact that such a high percentage of votes would have been cast before lunch-time on the Sunday. Sunday is usually a day of rest away from the daily routine. In the ordinary way an elector must take some time of the day or evening away from his work or leisure hours. The arrangement whereby in many households some people must be at home and some away could be the same for Sunday as it is for weekdays. That arrangement obtains in most households every Sunday.

I should like to deal with the question of postal voting. I feel that people who are genuinely away from their own polling districts ought to be facilitated in every possible way. Polling cards will be issued to such people in their own home in the normal way but it has been mentioned that commercial travellers, particularly, are away during the week and cannot be expected to be at home to cast their votes. Surely they should be given some opportunity to vote if a good system could be devised?

They are not the only people affected. There are bank clerks and others who are sent out to various places by their employers and the distance might be so great that they could not undertake the heavy expense of travelling back to the place where the vote is available to them. It should be possible to decide that if a commercial traveller is going to be in Galway on polling day, although his vote is in Swords, he will be given the opportunity of casting his vote in a pre-determined polling booth in Galway instead of either leaving him without his vote or having to travel 150 miles back to cast it. It should be possible to arrange, in this Bill, that a person who is away from his own polling district can be given the opportunity, subject to due notice, to vote at a specified place elsewhere.

After every general election, we read in the newspapers of people who travelled 200 miles to vote and of the enthusiastic political Party organisers who went to considerable trouble to bring one or two people over a long distance to vote. The suggestion I have made would cut out the fantastic inconvenience and cost involved in the transport of people over these long distances. A person is entitled to his vote and it is up to the State to ensure that, within reason, he is given the opportunity to cast that vote on the day of a general election.

I am glad to see that polling cards are now to be issued to local government electors. Any of us who have taken part in local government elections have realised the real value of these cards. Many people feel that the vote is not available to every person over 21 years of age who is on the register. They believe that the vote in a county council election is available only to a ratepayer or a householder. The result is that polls in county council elections are very low although the county councils administer most of the national services. Most of these services are available to the electors through the county council which shows the real importance of county council elections though many people do not realise this. One of the reasons for that is the feeling in the minds of people that the vote is available only to ratepayers and householders.

Some people really believe that the vote in local elections should be available only to householders and ratepayers and that people who are not regarded as responsible citizens, usually the young people who have no views one way or the other, particularly in relation to the services available, should not be allowed to participate. The position is that they are entitled to vote and they ought to be encouraged to vote.

I should like to see very severe penalties imposed for personation and attempted personation. It is a disgrace that the vote of any citizen can be stolen from him very easily on election day. When the aggrieved person arrives at the polling booth to be told that his vote has already been used, his only consolation is that he is given a pink paper which enables him to cancel the effect of the vote stolen from him. In every election I have contested, and I have contested quite a few now, there have been examples of personation. In the last election, there was a ballot paper in our county with the names of the candidates belonging to a different constituency. It was the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown constituency and the presence of that paper in our box showed that it had been taken out of some booth in the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area. Obviously, there was some mix up in the Party room and the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown ballot paper got in with some of the County Dublin ones that were being used or abused. That kind of abuse should be stopped if at all possible.

On another occasion, there was a constituency which had about 75 nurses on the register. When it was checked, it was found that only about 35 of these nurses were in residence. The others had gone to various hospitals, had completed their courses and were scattered throughout the country but the votes of those other nurses were used. They were personated. I complained about the matter and brought it to the notice of the Attorney General, asked him to take action and he declined to do so. I hope the seriousness of personation will be realised from the Attorney General down to the lowest person on the day of an election.

I believe that during the last election the voting papers of the men in the Congo went astray and that the votes cast by them were ineffective. The ballot papers never got into the count. There must have been some great negligence there, too.

One of the previous speakers mentioned the right of non-nationals to vote. We should consider at what stage a non-national will be entitled to vote. There are plenty of people here who came from other countries. Perhaps they have lived a long time here and have brought up their families here. They are paying their rates and taxes to this country. They are as good as, if not better than, many of our best citizens. If the law seems to be treating those people unfairly, some arrangement should be made to give them an opportunity of participating in local elections and Dáil elections.

I welcome this Bill and congratulate those associated with the preparation of it. It has brought about many improvements and brought our electoral system into line with modern trends. I am sure that as a result of this debate the Minister may find it desirable to bring further amendments for further improvements. In any event, the Bill, as it stands, is a very welcome step indeed.

Mr. Blaney

As was to be expected, there has not been, so far, much controversy on the matters in this Bill. Generally speaking, it has been accepted as an advance on what we have been accustomed to operate under our present laws. I suppose this was only to be expected considering the vast amount of consideration given to it in all its aspects by the Joint Committee and, indeed, before the Committee was set up, by the officers of the Department of Local Government. All aspects of the electoral law were put under the microscope, so to speak, to find out where they were wanting and what sensible changes could be made.

In the Department of Local Government, this review has been going on intermittently for many years. During the year before the Committee was set up, the matter was pursued very actively. It had reached an advanced stage at the point when it was decided by the Government that the Committee was the best way of finishing the job. The result is the production of this Bill, which is further evidence of the agreement that has been reached by all those who have studied the matter.

This Bill will be followed by another Bill, probably during the present year. I would be very hopeful it will be the present year. This other Bill will deal with petitions and disqualifications. After we have dealt with that, there will be the ultimate step of a consolidating Bill. That will probably take a further year. For the benefit of those who feel somewhat disappointed that we have not been able at this stage to have one Bill covering everything, I should like to say it looks as if it will be possible within the next two years to achieve that very desirable end. We would all wish to see one measure embracing all the parts we have been dealing with and the remaining parts which will be dealt with in the other Bill.

The Committee were quite well aware of the difficulty—and the delay that would have been attendant on it —of making one measure do the entire job. It would have meant that we possibly could not have implemented the parts already on the Statute Book, nor would it have been possible to have a Bill as large as this before the House so soon. They expressed that view at an early stage of their deliberations and foreshadowed that we would be probably forced to take their recommendations in part and deal with them not in just one consolidating measure but in a number of measures to be followed by a consolidating measure. That is the programme in front of us and which I can see coming to an end probably within the next two years.

Deputy Jones mentioned a number of matters as not being in accord with the Committee's report. It is true there are a number of things that do not accord. I took it from the Deputy that not only was he somewhat disappointed but he was really surprised to find there should be any discord as far as the approach to the Committee's report is concerned. Deputies are quite well aware from the information available from those who served on the Committee that, although a report was produced covering many items, there was not always obvious accord amongst the members themselves. It is only to be expected then that some differences of opinion should occur in so far as the final production is concerned as compared with what was agreed to eventually by the Committee. Taking it by and large, however, the divergence from the recommendations is not of any real substance and should not become a matter of controversy here.

The withdrawal of the oath that could be administered by the returning officer is one of the things Deputy Jones pointed out we have dropped. He wants to know why we should drop it in Section 26 and retain it in Section 27. The Deputy is aware that in regard to personation, we have come down pretty heavily against any offender. We have stiffened the fines and we have made prison sentences a very distinct possibility. In fact, a substantial fine, up to £500, or six months' imprisonment, or both, may apply in the case of offences.

Mr. Jones

But after the event.

Mr. Blaney

Of course.

Mr. Sherwin

There are seldom any prosecutions once the election is over.

Mr. Blaney

In the case of section 27, which deals with the incapacitated voter, as compared with Section 26, which deals with personation, there are no fines or no imprisonment for a false declaration that one is incapacitated and cannot mark one's own paper. This oath can be said to be of some use in the sense that it can deter people. It is the only deterrent. In Section 26, there are very severe penalties providing both for fines and imprisonment. I know for a fact that one of the things the ordinary voter going to the polls can be afraid of and can be very upset about is if he is called upon to take an oath or affirm by a presiding officer at the instigation of some political Party agent.

As I say, in cases where they had nothing to fear, where the oath was the truth, nevertheless the taking of that oath in a number of cases has had an unsettling effect on people going into the polls and has made them rather nervous and quite upset. They were completely in the right but yet they were called upon to go through this performance to which they objected. On the other hand, if there is a question of the oath being of value in the prevention of personation I wonder whether the person who goes out wilfully to personate will be deterred by the oath or an affirmation. I question whether that would be a great deterrent.

Mr. A. Barry

I have seen people running out of the polling booth rather than take the oath.

Mr. Blaney

The Deputy may have, but do not forget if they have reason to run out and if the reason is one for which you would seek an oath to be administered, surely it is quite easy for them to be followed up by the law and let the jail and fine——

Mr. A. Barry

At present they must take the oath.

Mr. Rooney

There is no offence until after the oath has been taken.

Mr. Blaney

I agree that that is so, but if they vote in somebody else's name by falsely representing themselves and if that is known or suspected at the time it is being committed by the offender and that offender is followed by the law, then the fact that he has voted means that he has committed the offence for which he is liable to a £500 fine or six months' imprisonment, or both. The difference, as pointed out, was that you have the fine and imprisonment, that you have these penalties in Section 26——

Mr. A. Barry

And the vote has been cast.

Mr. Blaney

But what is the difference? If they have already perjured themselves and still vote, whose loss is it?

Mr. A. Barry

But they would not vote at present. You do protect somebody's vote that way.

Mr. Rooney

They do not face the challenge.

Mr. Blaney

I doubt it. The question that has been asked is that why the penalties in one case——

Mr. Jones

It is the question of distinction. I made the point that we consider the retention of that very necessary and perhaps the Minister will agree to look at that again.

Mr. Blaney

I will have a look at anything. In fact, the debate has been so short that I have not had time to consider anything but it goes without saying that anything that has been said will receive further consideration. The House will appreciate that my reactions to what has been said are spontaneous but that does not debar me from giving further consideration to what has been said. The difference between the two sections is that one has a deterrent in law and the other has not. The oath remains where the deterrent in law does not exist and there is no oath where the deterrent in law remains. That is the difference.

Mr. Jones

The fact that the person is made to swear that he is illiterate will certainly be a deterrent.

Mr. Blaney

In the case of illiteracy, there can be no judge other than the person himself as to whether or not he is illiterate to the degree that he cannot properly mark his paper. The oath has a real meaning there. I know it is a rather tenuous sort of argument but it is true in such cases that there can be only one judge, that is, the person himself.

Mr. A. Barry

I agree.

Mr. Blaney

So there is a point there. The question of the dates in regard to the compilation of the register has also been mentioned. I should say that I do not agree particularly with the dates which operate at present and I have been trying to find ways and means of making such dates fit better into our pattern and thereby compile the register more fully. We can probably shorten the present procedure without changing the actual dates very much. For instance, we could make 15th October the qualifying date rather than 15th September. This would mean a decided advantage from the point of view of the rate collectors who in many cases are responsible for the setting up of the lists. They are very busy during September and at that particular time, with the ending of their half year, a month later would probably be of great assistance to them to do their job more readily.

That, as I say, would take that month off and we probably could reduce the overall period from then by starting with the qualifying date on 15th October and still finishing up on 15th April as the date for the emergence of the register. My own belief is that if it can be operated, it would simplify things for all concerned if the date of the emergence of the register were arranged for 1st January and thus qualify on age grounds people who come to obtain a vote for the first time as all those born 21 years previously. We would not then have to go around finding out whether it was on 14th, 15th or 16th September. If the register falls for 1st January, 1962, anybody born in the year 1941 will immediately qualify on age grounds.

That in itself would be quite an advance and if we can so synchronise the other operations, it would be quite a helpful start and, in addition, would be a very good way of starting the new year. It would cut out this idea of finding out whether the date was 14th, 15th or 16th September, or the 14th or 15th of April, as the case may be. However, that will come to be prescribed by regulations of which the House will undoubtedly hear more at various stages, and anything that can help to make these regulations do the job better than it is done now will certainly be considered by whoever is responsible at whatever time the Department of Local Government are looking after this particular item.

The question of the non-Party description of those who do not belong to Parties would seem to be received with somewhat mixed feelings. Very often, this is rather a more useful and a better way to describe such people than to describe them as Independents. It is the better way to make clear that if you belong to a Party, you are down as a member of a Party and if you do not belong to a Party, you go down as non-Party.

Mr. Sherwin

Why not put Independent?

Mr. A. Barry

Non-Party is better.

Mr. Sherwin

It may be to you but I would not say so. We will argue about that on Committee Stage.

Mr. Blaney

That is a matter we can argue on Committee Stage. I feel that it is clear and unequivocal and without question indicates what it says and means what it says.

Mr. A. Barry

The other does not.

Mr. Blaney

It certainly does not in all cases, and while I am not casting any reflection on anybody, there is a certain connotation which I do not think rings clearly true in all cases. However, we can have another discussion on that when the section comes to be debated on Committee Stage.

It has been suggested that one-third of the quota is too many votes to set up as a target below which, if a person's vote falls, he loses his deposit. The first thing we have to realise is that in a general election there is no constituency that is not at least a three-seat constituency. If we take the quota in those circumstances and take one-third of that quota, then the percentage of people in that constituency constituting one-third of the quota is a very small percentage of the total. When you consider that £100, which has been there since 1923, having been reduced at that stage from £150, is being left as the deposit, I do not think we should have much grouse if we say, on the one hand, that you have still got the £100 deposit but you must get one-third of the quota rather than one-fourth which has been suggested, on the other. That would make things too easy.

Mr. Jones

The Committee had all that before them.

Mr. Blaney

I know, but do not forget this. I do not set myself as a paragon of all the virtues in regard to these things, but I have been thinking about this for a long time before there was a Committee. I have gone into it and I have considered the Committee's views and I came to conclusions, too, before there was even a Committee. I have given it the once-over since then again to see the way this worked out. From my personal point of view, I would prefer to see the deposit raised. If there were a question of giving away to the quarter, I would feel that in all fairness to the whole working of our elections the deposit should be raised. If there were any question of reducing the actual limit of votes that one must get to save it, then the amount should be raised.

Mr. A. Barry

We should recognise that under PR a contest could take place between two candidates, one of whom will have one-third of the quota and the other a vote or two less than one-third. The latter would be eliminated and lose his £100. The other could and in fact would be elected as a result of his elimination so that the hardship is considerable.

Mr. Blaney

It is when you get down to cases.

Mr. A. Barry

If he could get one-quarter, it is unlikely that the remaining man would be elected right away. That is in itself unjust.

Mr. Blaney

Whether the man who remains in is elected or not is of no assistance to the man who has not only got the hammer but loses his money as well.

Mr. A. Barry

It is a great difference.

Mr. Blaney

It does not make the loss of the deposit any less or any more to the man who has lost it merely because another man remained in after him in the election.

Mr. A. Barry

He would not lose it if it were a quarter.

Mr. Blaney

If he had not a quarter, he would lose it. However, I feel that one-third is fully justified in the PR system where we have not less than three seats in our constituencies and have one-third of the quota which is one-twelfth of the votes cast. That is what the person now must have to save his deposit at the time of elimination and not on the first round. He has to have before elimination, one-twelfth of the votes cast. That is not asking too much, and as a percentage it becomes less than that as the number of seats in the constituency rises to four or five. With £100 having the little value it is alleged to have to-day, I do not think this is really unjust. If we were to reduce the requirement from one-third to one-quarter, I would feel very strongly that we should increase the money deposit.

The loss of his deposit in an election is not all he loses. Whether it is £100 or £150 does not really matter a great deal at that stage. If you reduce it to a quarter and leave the £100 stand and leave the other innovation where a man can nominate himself or be nominated by an agent, it is made terribly easy and could for reasons other than to get himself elected make it attractive for a person to stand or to be got to stand by somebody who would put up the £100 to block somebody else's chances. That is the real feature of this business of deposits and the number of votes you have to get without which you will lose your deposit. Bringing it to the point where a person can nominate himself is a liberalisation which we have to temper with a certain sense of balance. To go too far in all directions would be bad. We are going as far as we think it is good to go.

Another question that has been asked is why we are changing the hours of polling from the hours recommended by the Committee who recommended that the hours should be from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. We propose in the Bill that the period should be twelve hours between the hours of 8.30 a.m. and 10.30 p.m. In other words, there is a flexibility to choose within those 14 hours a period of 12 hours. You could theoretically start at 8.30 in the morning and finish at 8.30 p.m. or start at 10.30 a.m. and finish at 10.30 p.m., or you could have it at any points in between. Summer and winter voting can involve a very different approach, and it is for that reason that I have suggested and am putting to the House this sensible arrangement of 14 hours during which to have 12 hours' voting rather than dogmatically saying, as has been recommended by the Committee, that the period should be fixed absolutely and without any flexibility from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.

Mr. Jones

Does the Minister mean not less than 12 hours, or does he leave himself open to take more than 12 hours?

Mr. Blaney

Yes that is right. He could take 14 hours.

Mr. A. Barry

Surely it would be wiser in the winter to ensure that there will be no voting in the hours of darkness?

Mr. Blaney

In any event, we are able to stop two hours earlier than would be possible if the recommendation were accepted. The Committee recommendation was to start not earlier than 10 a.m. and to finish not later than 10 p.m. We may start at 8.30 a.m. if we feel that that suits best and stop at 8.30 p.m. Their recommendation would compel us not to start until 10 a.m. and not to close before 10 p.m. Under the present system, we may start at 8.30 a.m. if we feel that suits best, and stop at 8.30 p.m. So, at least, we gain one and a half hours.

Mr. Clinton

Who will have the authority to make the decision? Is it to be made for particular constituencies or for the country as a whole?

Mr. Blaney

It will be the same hours for all in any given election. I just want to point out that we are not really departing from what the Committee said but are adopting a more flexible arrangement and making it possible for those hours or other hours to be used, as the time suits.

There were arguments as to the schoolhouses being used in the rural areas where there is no lighting available. I cannot guarantee that in the middle of winter we will make it possible to have polling completed before dark but at least the arrangement is flexible and gives one and a half hours more of daylight than would have been possible under the system proposed by the Committee. We can start half an hour earlier in the morning, when there will be light.

Mr. A. Barry

Is it clear that you are not limiting the day's polling to 12 hours?

Mr. Blaney

No. What we are doing is making it so that we do not have less. We may not have less.

Mr. A. Barry

You could have 14 hours?

Mr. Blaney

You could have 12½, 13, 14—any period between 12 and 14.

Another matter that was raised, particularly by Dublin Deputies, was the need for national publicity in connection with the compilation and preparation of the register of electors. There has been such national publicity. There has been TV, radio and newspaper publicity on a national scale and there has also been, concurrently with these efforts, the stamp cancellation slogans that have been adopted over recent years which are applied to the letters issuing from post offices during certain relevant periods each year. Certain registration officers, not only in Cork, as was mentioned earlier, have been participating in helpful publicity also. The registration officer in Dublin has been doing likewise.

All of these things together, on the national scale and at local level, in the cities, particularly, of Cork and Dublin, are helping to get a more realistic register prepared but it is undoubtedly true that, no matter what publicity is given, how widespread it may be or how often it is repeated, you will not get across to the people concerned who will find themselves, when the election comes around, off the register. They just do not seem to be tuned into the same wavelength as those who have that slight interest in these public matters. The only time they become interested is when they find they have not a vote and then it is, unfortunately, too late. Not only does it happen that such people are too late on the day of an election, but you will find the very same people are probably too late at the next election. It is one of those regrettable features that publicity can improve to some extent but, I am afraid, cannot cure entirely.

It is easier for those from rural constituencies to do something about this matter than it is in the cities but there is a great deal that public representatives can do and are doing to supplement all the other methods that have been adopted, whether it be through rate collectors, the local Garda, radio, TV, newspapers. Public representatives, both local and parliamentary, do, in the rural areas, quite an amount of work each year in helping to see that their supporters and those they know to be their supporters are on the register. From all Parties that effort comes and it certainly makes an impression. It is not so easy and it is not so useful in the cities. Unfortunately, it is the city registers that show the greatest weaknesses in this regard. We cannot really do in the cities as we do in the country. It is not possible for public men to do in the cities as we do in the country. They do not know everybody. It is not such a personal matter as it is in the country. In the city, you do not know your neighbours so well as you do in the country.

It is not true to say, as somebody suggested here, that nothing is being done about it. Quite a lot has been done by national as well as local publicity over recent years. I have no doubt we are getting through to a certain number of people. I am not living in the fool's paradise of believing that publicity, no matter how well done, will get across to all those who are not really interested now in whether they have a vote or not but who may be sufficiently interested at election time when they find they have no vote and will cry about it, whereas, if they had a vote, in many cases they probably would not use it. I think we will get through better in future than we have done in the past, due to all the help we get from the radio, the Press, television, and so on.

Deputy Byrne mentioned the difficulties in Dublin. I cannot say that I have personal experience of the difficulties he mentions in Dublin polling stations or their vicinity, on an election day, created by the ganging up of the various Party adherents, shouting home their men. Candidly, I cannot see what good it does if everybody is shouting. It would seem to me that it would only succeed in annoying voters. Perhaps I do not understand the mentality of the people in Dublin. I would imagine that the Party that would take steps to restrain people from doing that would probably gain votes.

Mr. Sherwin

It is a small percentage. A voter will go in with a card in his hand and ask: "Where is that name?"

Mr. Blaney

That surprises me. It is not something of which I am personally aware. Therefore, I cannot comment fully but it would seem to me to be waste of time and effort——

Mr. Sherwin

It is, largely.

Mr. Blaney

——and a source of annoyance to the voters. If everybody is at it, presumably nobody wins or loses by it but I think that if anybody were to stop it and if it were known that he had stopped it deliberately, he would probably gain a little by it.

Mr. Sherwin

You will not stop it. If you lost your seat by two votes, you would never rest if you had not had your kid there shouting.

Mr. Blaney

I might take the philosophical view that if I had him there shouting, I would have lost by 22 votes. However, I am not competent to comment on the way the mind of the Dublin voter works.

Mr. Sherwin

They are intelligent but there are a few.

Mr. Blaney

This ragging of the voter, if carried on to any great extent, should not be encouraged and if there is anything we can do, whether through individual effort or Party effort, to minimise that sort of thing in future, it would be very well for us all if it were done.

Deputy Byrne also complained about long-resident English people being given the franchise here and then suddenly in recent years being knocked off. I do not know why they were on the register in the first instance. So I could not comment on why they should be put off. If they are not entitled, according to our Constitution, to be on, they have not lost something to which they are entitled but had something to which they were not entitled. Further than that, I do not wish to comment.

The question of postal votes for those of our people abroad is a very nice suggestion but I am afraid a rather difficult and impracticable one to carry out and one which I think would have been considered in its broadest context by the Committee and certainly has not been recommended by the Committee.

The suggestion that the returning officer is so badly paid was something new to me.

Mr. A. Barry

We have all heard it.

Mr. Blaney

Who has not heard that everybody is badly paid, when it comes to that?

Mr. Rooney

Could the Minister indicate what the returning officer is paid?

Mr. Blaney

I do not know. I have never come across any case in which this post was shunned because of lack of compensation. It may be shunned for other reasons.

Mr. Rooney

I believe there is a certain fixed sum, so much per thousand or per hundred registered electors.

Mr. Blaney

Subject to correction, I believe there is a certain sum calculated.

Mr. A. Barry

The Minister will find that the man who finishes the count quickly loses probably on the job. He pays more people for doing the job.

Mr. Blaney

That is quite possible. I shall look into the matter. It would be a pity to spoil our electoral machine merely for the sake of the few pounds necessary to make it worth the returning officer's while to do the job more efficiently or better than he has been doing it.

Reference was made to postal votes for commercial travellers. This is an old agitation. While there would appear to be a justification for it, the fact is that it would be very difficult to provide the machinery to operate such a vote without abuse. Again, if it is given to commercial travellers, then others would want to be included in the same machine. There are many people who have to be away from home on the day appointed as polling day. There is nothing they can do about it. If special provisions were made for commercial travellers, all these other categories would have to be included. The difficulties would be great. The burden of trying to arrange it would be very heavy, if not impossible, and there would once more be the possibility of abuse. This matter was considered by the Committee and, despite their liberal-mindedness in many other directions, no recommendation was made in this respect.

Deputy Sherwin has his own troubles with regard to the alphabetical list. For what it is worth, I reckon the top of the list No. 1 and the bottom of the list No. 2. If I were not at the top, I should prefer to be at the bottom rather than in the middle. While one may not have the best of the bargain at the bottom, one certainly has second best.

Mr. Sherwin

The alphabetical order gives a certain advantage to certain people, and they know it.

Mr. Blaney

I think it is more imaginary than real. So long as you are not cluttered up and crowded out in the middle, you are all right. At either end of the paper, you have a good chance. If someone knows you are at the bottom, he will not miss the bottom. He will not miss the top either. If you are in the middle, the possibility is your bitterest opponent will get your vote.

Mr. Sherwin

The person I am talking about does not know for whom he will vote and he starts at the top.

Mr. Blaney

That is lack of proper tutoring then.

Mr. A. Barry

It is a reflection on the electors in some areas.

Mr. Sherwin

A percentage. Do not get me wrong.

Mr. Blaney

I know people who start at the bottom and work upwards, perverse people who do things the other way round.

Mr. Sherwin

An odd person may start at the bottom, but 99 per cent start at the top.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order. Deputy Sherwin has already spoken.

Mr. Sherwin

I do not want to be misrepresented. I do not say 99 per cent do that, but 99 per cent of a small percentage operate that way.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order. The Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Blaney

Again it has been suggested 18-year-olds should be allowed to vote: we allow them to fight for their country; we allow them to die for their country; we allow them to marry and have families; but they are not allowed to vote. There is a good deal of sense in that, but the fact remains that we are dealing here with electoral law and an amendment of the Constitution would be required to remedy the present defect.

Mr. Sherwin

I am glad to hear that admission anyway. You can die for your country, but you cannot vote.

Mr. Blaney

I appreciate the argument. With regard to inmates of homes, hospitals and institutions, it does not follow that they will be registered in their constituencies. Neither does it follow that they will be entitled to a postal vote. They will be qualified to vote in the constituency, provided they are registered, in which the establishment in which they are resident is located. I visualise a ballot box being made available in the establishment, with a presiding officer and all the rest of the paraphernalia. They will vote for the candidates in the constituency in which the hospital, home or institution is located.

Mr. Treacy

Will that apply to inmates of county homes?

Mr. Blaney

Yes.

Mr. Clinton

Will it include the staff?

Mr. Blaney

If they are resident in the institution, yes. If they are resident elsewhere, outside the institution, then they will vote in the ordinary way with the rest of the electorate in the area.

Mr. Jones

Would the Minister comment on Section 21. 11 (2) in regard to this question of the withdrawal of nominations or will he consider that between now and Committee Stage?

Mr. Blaney

Yes, I shall certainly give that consideration.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 13th March, 1963.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 28th February, 1963.