Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 2 Nov 1972

Vol. 263 No. 3

Referendum (Amendment) Bill, 1972: Second Stage.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Molloy)

Tairgim: "Go léafar an Bille don Dara Uair anois."

Tugadh Bille ós chomhair na Dála inniú chun Airteagal 44 de Bhunreacht a leasú. Roimh saoire an tSamhraith d'aontaigh an Dáil agus an Seanad le Bille eile chun an Bunreacht do leasú, sé sin an Bille a dheineann foráil chun an vóta a thabhairt do gach saoránach a bhfuil ocht mbliana déag slán aige. Mar a chuireadh in iúl cheana, tá sé beartaithe an dá thogra seo a chur faoi bhráid na ndaoine ag reifrinn ar an lá chéanna go luath sa mhí seo chughainn agus sé an cuspóir atá leis an mBille atá á phlé againn anois ná socruithe a dhéanamh chun ráiteas speisialta a eisiúint mar eolas do vótálaithe.

The explanatory memorandum circulated with the Bill has dealt fairly fully with the purpose and contents of this measure and it does not appear necessary for me to make a lengthy statement on the matter. Briefly, the Bill proposes to assist voters at the forthcoming referenda by making available to them a statement relating to the proposals which are the subject of the referenda.

Section 1 provides that a special card, containing the statement set out in the appendix to that section must be sent to every elector including postal voters. The statement will also be displayed in and in the precincts of polling stations and presiding officers will be authorised to assist blind, incapacitated and illiterate voters by reading out this statement to them, where necessary, and asking them whether they wish to vote in favour of or against the proposals and then marking the ballot papers in accordance with the voters' answers. These arrangements are the same as those made by the Referendum (Amendment) Act, 1968, in relation to the referenda on the Third and Fourth Amendment of the Constitution Bills, 1968, and by section 5 of the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 1972, in relation to the referendum on the Third Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 1971.

Under existing law, the proposal which is the subject of a referendum must be stated on the ballot paper by citing, by its short title, the Bill containing the proposal for amendment of the Constitution passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas and the ballot paper may not contain any paraphrase or summary of the proposal. The short title of a Constitution Amendment Bill does not give any real indication of the contents of the Bill and where two referenda are held on the same day, there would be a grave danger that voters would not be able to distinguish between the separate proposals. In the circumstances I feel the House will agree that there should be a definite statutory arrangement for informing voters of the subject matter of the referenda. The most convenient way of doing this is to include on the polling card to be issued to each voter a statement approved by the Oireachtas in relation to the proposals as has been done in relation to previous constitutional referenda. Copies of the Bills containing the proposals for the amendment of the Constitution will, of course, be available for inspection free of charge and may be purchased at a cost of two and a half pence at all post offices so that voters can study the actual terms of the proposed amendments.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Ryan

It seems to be a very sloppy and inefficient way to handle referenda, to produce on each occasion that the Dáil and the Seanad are considering an amendment to the Constitution, a separate Referendum Bill which in all cases prescribes the same procedure to set out on a card that will go to each elector the purpose of the Bill. One is tempted to suggest that we should bring in once and for all a Bill which will become a permanent Act which would prescribe the procedure to be followed in referenda. It is not unlikely from the discussion we have had here today, and from the general development of thought in the country that we may have a series of referenda in relation to the Constitution and possibly other matters. It appears to be quite ludicrous to require that in relation to each of these questions we should have a separate Bill which will do no more on each occasion than repeat the procedure which was adopted on a previous occasion.

I would like to know from the Minister why it is considered necessary or desirable to adopt this repetitious procedure instead of having a simple once-for-all remedy to this particular difficulty. It is perhaps unfortunate that we do not have, in relation to referenda, some machinery whereby parliamentarians could convey to their constituents their views on the issues in the referenda without direct charge to the Members of the Dáil other than, of course, the cost of printing and paper. It is desirable that there should not be postal charges on such occasions.

I urge that in a comprehensive Referendum Bill steps be taken to ensure that Members of the Dáil would be able to communicate to their people, who have sent them here to represent them, their views of the particular proposals which are put before the people in referenda. This Bill does not propose that. It simply proposes that a summary of the intent of the legislation be spelt out on the card to be sent to each elector. Even the very best efforts to summarise the legislation will still leave the matter incomprehensible to a considerable number of the electorate. That is not for a moment to suggest that the electorate are stupid or illiterate. Quite often matters affecting legal change have to be explained for the sake of accuracy in rather sterile and blunt legal language which may not convey to the electors the import and significance of the proposal.

It is very desirable, if we are to operate democracy meaningfully, that we have ample communication with the electors. That becomes particularly necessary in referenda like the two we are now facing where there is not a conflict between the parties and where you are not going to have that type of aggressive debate which means, inevitably, an exchange of views and the development of arguments, not merely between the politicians but through the media, the newspapers, radio and television.

There is every danger that due to lack of debate, lack of communication of ideas and counter ideas in the few weeks between now and the referenda, we could have a situation in which we could have a small poll. That would be disastrous, irrespective of the outcome. Even if the two proposals were carried it would be most undesirable that when our people are faced with two decisions they should, by their action, suggest apathy in relation to the proposals. We urge the Government, even at this late hour, to provide machinery to ensure that there is adequate communication of ideas on the referenda proposals between the elected representatives and the people.

I see that it is proposed to have ballot papers of different colours on the day of the election. That will certainly help to reduce confusion. It would be a mistake if we were to assume that the electors are not capable of differentiating between the questions put to them because we have had occasions in the past when we have more than one matter decided on the one day and our people showed a considerable amount of sophistication and capacity to differentiate between the proposals put to them.

The Fine Gael Party, subject to these comments, support this Bill as it is apparently necessary. We would like some explanation as to why it is considered necessary to have an individual Bill for each referendum. We would also like an assurance from the Minister that we will not have this series of Bills in the future but that we will have a substantial Bill to provide for all future referenda.

Mr. Treacy

There is the real possibility that the referendum we are preparing for may fall somewhat flat in that there will be little enthusiasm in the minds of the people actively to participate in the referendum. The fact that the two proposals meet with the unanimity of all parties, that they are non-contentious, may mean a small vote on the occasion. It may also mean a lack of real activity on the part of all of us in the different political parties. It would be a great pity if these important events, such as votes at 18 and the other amendment to our Constitution, which we accepted today were to be seen in that light of apathy and indifference. Anything which the Minister can do to inculcate interest in the referendum will be welcome.

It is very important that the people should know exactly what they are voting for. Therefore, the suggestion of a statement in relation to the proposals on the voting card is desirable. The Minister has not indicated to us what the statement will be. It is presumed it will be done with the concurrence of the House.

Mr. Molloy

It is in the appendix.

Mr. Treacy

I hope there will be a good turn out on the referendum day. There is a great deal of interest in the referendum especially from people outside the Twenty-six Counties and it would be a reflection on all of us if it turned out to be something in the nature of a damp squib. I do not want to go into the ramifications of polling generally, but one of the things which has appalled us in relation to elections and referenda in recent times is the number of papers which have been declared invalid by reason of the inactivity of the presiding officers. The failure of presiding officers to stamp the ballot papers is a matter of amazement to many of us. If it can be shown that a presiding officer failed in his duty to stamp the ballot papers properly he should not be re-employed for such purposes.

This is a procedural Bill and I hope that what we are doing here tonight will inculcate interest on the part of all of us, will mean when polling takes place that there will be a good turn out and that a high percentage of our people will record their views on these two important matters.

Mr. Molloy

I want to thank the House for the welcome they have given to this short Bill. As it is fairly clear and concise in form it does not need a lot of explanation but I would like to refer briefly to some of the points raised. I would express agreement with Deputy Ryan in the point he made, that it does seem somewhat cumbersome that the Minister is obliged to come in each time with a separate amending Bill whenever there is a referendum to authorise the giving of an explanation on the polling card of the questions being asked in the referendum. I understand that this matter was considered on a previous occasion and that there was some disagreement among the parties as to what authority would decide the exact wording of the explanation. As Deputies will agree, this may be a very contentious matter depending on the issue to be decided in the referendum. It is not very contentious this time because there is general agreement with the questions and there has been no opposition from any parties in the House. However, despite that difficulty, I should like to inform the House that I am considering the matter. However, as this Bill is urgent, I did not have the opportunity to change the situation in the meantime, but on the next occasion on which the House gets an opportunity to deal with electoral law, I propose to introduce some change to eliminate the necessity to come back to the House every time there is a referendum. That should clear up the point as to why it is necessary to have such a Bill as this each time.

The other point the Deputy made is a good one and I agree with it. This will also be considered for future legislation — the question of allowing Members of the House or political parties in the House the opportunity of circulating literature to the voters before a referendum in order to give them an opportunity of putting their point of view before the electors. This facility is available to candidates in a general election and to parties but is not available when a referendum is being held and it is something we could provide. It may present some difficulties but I am sure they are not insurmountable and I will certainly keep it in mind for future legislation.

I should like to assure Deputy Treacy that any presiding officer who is deemed to have been incompetent in the manner in which he carried out his functions at a polling booth has not been re-employed. There were cases even in the last referendum of officers who were negligent in their duties and I can assure him that these people will not be employed again on this occasion. This has always been the practice.

Again it might be of interest to the House to mention that on a previous discussion here on a similar Bill, this question of the stamp on the ballot paper, the embossed stamp, being used now was not terribly clear. Some Deputies mentioned this, and particularly the late Deputy Hogan, and I did give an undertaking that at a future election I would experiment with a new system of marking ballot papers. This would be the use of an instrument which would perforate the ballot paper and I intend carrying out an experiment with the new stamp which will perforate papers in one constituency in the forthcoming referendum.

Mr. Tully

That is probably Galway.

Mr. Molloy

I would like to observe it in practice and it probably will be Galway.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.