I have every sympathy, and understanding, for the viewpoint expressed by Deputy O'Connor. It is a pity that the framers of our Constitution, and those responsible for electoral law in this country, in the decades past when rural Ireland had an even stronger voice did not see fit to put forward that kind of, what one might call, positive discrimination in the electoral sense in favour of rural areas. However, we are tied by the Constitution of the country and the Constitution, as such, is indeed, most defective in terms of electoral law. In fact, it is almost naked when it comes to pronouncing on the principles of representation of the national Parliament.
I have every sympathy for the Minister for Local Government in the drawing up of this Bill. It is very questionable that this major constitutional responsibility should rest at all on the shoulders of the Minister for Local Government. It is, in my view, in the long run improper and undesirable in the democratic sense that there should be devolved on Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann—it is even less proper that it should be devolved on Seanad Éireann—the responsibility of Deputies deciding their own constituencies.
The constitutionality of the question has never been determined, largely because it suited the politicians. The democratic instincts of the Constitution have never been fully analysed in that regard. I go so far as to say that even on the Government side we would be quite stupid and unfair if we were not to admit that the party political pressures on the Minister for Local Government are, in the circumstances of the drawing up of this Bill, quite enormous. Anybody who would ignore the reality of that situation would, in my view, be intellectually dishonest in discussing this Bill.
The Ministers for Local Government who redraw the constituencies are continuously placed in a most invidious position. In the last Dáil Deputy Kevin Boland spoke about South County Dublin and how the drawing of South County Dublin affected his political future. On this occasion we have Deputy Tully facing the political problem of representing County Meath which inevitably, being a Leinster area, will be affected by the changes in population.
The irony of the whole situation is that the impetus for change has never come from Fianna Fáil in the history of this State. The Government now have the opportunity in the short few years ahead, to set right these constitutional defects.
I shed no crocodile tears for Fianna Fáil in relation to the 1947 Electoral Amendement Act, which they used ruthlessly to featherbed their own party position. They did likewise in 1961 and in 1969. The former Taoiseach, Deputy Lynch, has an enormous capacity in political life for saying nothing about things that might be questionable which he is about to undertake. No one was more cynical or more ruthless or more abusive of the democratic process in 1969 than the Leader of the Fianna Fáil Party.
The 1969 Act was the product of Fianna Fáil in power. Admittedly he had his glorious front men, such as the former Deputy Boland and Deputy Blaney who is now an Independent. He had the young carver-uppers like Deputy G. Collins. These were the men who did the carving up to suit themselves and the then Taoiseach's hand remained officially clean and officially he reaped the benefit of the subsequent general election. Let us be quite blunt about it. On the Government side we have a considerable amount of information. We know that in August, 1972, proposals were made within the Fianna Fáil Party for a revision of the constituencies. Later in August, 1972, alternative amendments were proposed particularly in relation to the Wicklow area. In September, 1972, other alternatives were submitted to the Minister, Deputy Molloy. In September, 1972, there were revised proposals for the West of Ireland and in December, 1972, further variations were submitted on request.
Bearing in mind that major amendments in constituencies were in train within the Fianna Fáil Party from August, 1972, to January, 1973, and right up to the precipitous decision by the then Taoiseach to go to the country, it ill becomes the Fianna Fáil Party to come into this House mewling and puking and, with a great show of political self-righteousness, beating their breasts in favour of a constitutional or electoral legislative constituencies commission. They have a hell of a neck to adopt that totally hyprocritical posture.
Having said that, I want to say bluntly that personally and strongly I favour a constituencies commission and I have favoured it since I became a member of the Labour Party in 1967. That brings me to a point made by Deputy Wyse. Understandably Deputy Wyse is horrified at the prospect of losing three parishes out of the south side of the city where I was born. We were born within a stone's throw of each other on the south side of Cork city. Let the people of Cork remember that when Deputy Lynch was Taoiseach he deliberately and cynically split Cork city into two three-seat constituencies in order to carry in a hind tit Deputy—a la“Backbencher”— namely, Deputy Seán French on the north side of the city, and in order to ensure that the Fianna Fáil vote on the north side of the city would bring in two Deputies as well.
There was no other reason whatsoever for the division of Cork city into two three-seat constituencies. Those who talk about the unique togetherness of the people of Cork in a Cork city constituency should remember that when they see now that at least the imbalance has been partly restored by the Minister by making Cork city a five-seat constituency. One might say that had the Minister taken a few parishes out of the north side of Cork city constituency we would have had Deputy Lynch here this morning protesting violently, but the temptation to do so was resisted. I am quite sure. The Fianna Fáil Party deserve very little sympathy on this Bill.
I favour the setting up of a constituencies commission for a number of reasons. First of all, the Minister should not be placed in an invidious constitutional position. Secondly, I do not believe that Members of the Oireachtas should have such extensive powers in relation to Dáil constituencies. I do not believe we have a democratic right to have such extensive powers as we now have. I hope that, as a mark of the different approach on this side of the House from that of Fianna Fáil —and we certainly intend to adopt a different approach from that of Fianna Fáil in relation to political administration—we on this side of the House will bring in either a constitutional amendment or a legislative amendment with which I will deal later.
We should examine the efforts of the Fianna Fáil Party to consider the question of a constituencies commission. Their record in that regard is absolutely disgraceful. As we know, a report of the informal committee on the Constitution was published in 1967. It is interesting to note that Deputy Molloy was a member of that committee and signed the report. Ironically, the present Minister, who was also a member of the committee, signed the report too. At page 21 of the report they dealt with the question of a constituencies commission. It is interesting to consider the views expressed then by Deputy Molloy and the then Deputy Tully. At page 21, paragraph 57 it is stated that:
...the committee were unanimous that, in the event of any Constitutional change, a Commission should be established to determine the delimitation of the constituencies. Commissions of this kind are a regular feature of the electoral law of other countries. The final say on the question whether or not the findings of such a Commission should be accepted ought, however, properly rest with the Oireachtas. Furthermore, it would be reasonable to require that the Commission in putting forward its findings should be obliged to give the reasons for its decision in each case. We have deliberately refrained from expressing views as to the composition of the Commission as this would be a matter which would be determined by legislation.
In 1967 both Deputy Molloy and Deputy James Tully were members of the committee and both were in favour of the concept of a Dáil constituency commission. Unfortunately, we have to place on record the fact that from 1967 to 1973 no effort whatsoever was made by the Fianna Fáil Party in Government to introduce any constitutional amendment and they had more than ample opportunity to do so in that long period. I think it ill becomes the Leader of the Opposition now, after defeat, to trot out this suggestion almost six years after the committee on the Constitution made the proposition. For six solid years Fianna Fáil never worried about the idea of such a committee until they suddenly saw themselves in Opposition with, as Deputy Jack Lynch said, and he used the phrase on several occasions, and it is indicative of his political attitude, this Government with, in his nostalgic but expressive phrase, their fingers on the loot. I heard him use that phrase two or three times over the past three or four months. It seems to me that there is a certain nostalgia in it. I presume Fianna Fáil expect this side of the House to behave in the way they did when they occupied these seats. For six years Deputy Lynch suffered in silence. This report was available and he could have taken action on it. He could have implemented the unanimous recommendation of the committee. For six years he sat silently, keeping his fingers, to use his own phrase, on the constituencies loot. This is not a very pleasing phrase to use in a democratic country.
The question arises as to what kind of commission we should have in relation to constituencies. I do not see much purpose in having a constituency commission decided on by legislation. I favour a constitutional change for a number of reasons. There are two alternatives. We can have a constituency commission by passing an Act or we can have a commission established by constitutional amendment. I favour an amendment of the Constitution. Indeed, I believe we should have a new Constitution because the existing Constitution needs so many amendments. We should have a constituencies commission with democratic independence on behalf of the people and with adequate terms of reference so that allegations of gerrymandering could not arise.
There are difficulties in relation to both alternatives. Setting up a constituencies commission by Act of Parliament would inevitably face such a commission with impossible constitutional requirements. Here Article 16 arises immediately. "No law", it says, "shall be enacted whereby the number of Members to be returned for any constituency shall be less than three." It does not require any great imagination to appreciate the insurmountable problem a commission would have in trying to decide in favour of three seat, four seat, five seat, six seat or seven seat constituencies. If they favoured a multiplicity of three seat constituencies the politicians might opt for five seats in certain parts of the country.
The Constitution is quite inadequate in regard to the size of constituencies. It merely lays it down that there cannot be a lower number than three. There is no norm and no maximum and the constitutional deficiency would eventually emasculate the position. That would be the position. I think we would be as well off if our Constitution made provision for a specific number of Deputies in each constituency. I do not favour three seat constituencies because of the diminution of the principle of proportional representation since PR for all practical purposes does not exercise any great influence in a three seat constituency. First preference votes and the strength of the relative candidate carry greater emphasis in a three seat constituency. There is need for the people to make up their minds what they want. If they do that, then it should be possible to delineate constituencies more effectively. The only thing on which people have made up their minds so far is that they do not want the abolition of proportional representation. We know that since 1968. The people quite clearly did not want to be represented by one Deputy in a single seat constituency. If we are serious about setting up a commission, we should consider the amendment of the Constitution in that framework.
I submit that in making provision for a constituencies commission it should be given considerable constitutional independence. I envisage such a commission having virtually the status of the Supreme Court. I do not think the Minister, his Parliamentary Secretary or any other Deputy has the right to draw an imaginary line up and down a road or across a county boundary. We have not the right to decide whom we will represent. A great deal of nonsense has been talked about county boundaries in relation to this Bill. There is no constitutional requirements whatever that constituencies should approximate to county boundaries. There is an appalling confusion in the minds of many Deputies between Dáil constituencies and county electoral areas of local authorities. This confusion has arisen largely because many Deputies are members of local authorities and they want a political convenience rather than a democratic Dáil convenience. They like the convenience of being members of a county council and simultaneously representing their area in Dáil Éireann. I do not see any logic in that although I appreciate the political desire to have this dual role. The Minister has done his utmost to keep as close as possible to county boundaries—his personal disposition inclines him towards this course and it should be respected—but I do not think that argument should be used too extensively.
I should like to point out to Deputy O'Connor that the special pleading on behalf of rural Ireland does not exist in the Constitution. In the PR referendum in 1968 there was a great national hoo-ha about having one's own Deputy for the county electoral areas, where the single seat Deputy would represent five or six parishes in rural Ireland, all of them having a cosy, happy, democratic dialogue between themselves. The people rejected that proposal; they said the proper criteria were population, multi-seat constituencies and PR. I do not think any government in their sane senses in the next decades would try to have another referendum on this matter. We have had two already and the people have made known their wishes. I do not think we will get in a constitutional amendment any special, positive discrimination in favour of rural areas as has been pleaded here. I am aware that in many countries, including some western European countries, there is an imbalance, and in the British constituency system there is a special balance in favour of rural areas, but I do not think there should be any special balance here.
On a personal basis, I would point out, that an all-party committee on Irish relations has been established by both Houses of the Oireachtas. One of the functions of the committee is to examine the Constitution. I am a member of the committee and I hope the question of a Dáil constituencies commission will be the subject of serious examination in the years ahead. This would be a desirable and effective measure.
I should like to comment on the contrast that exists now between the North of Ireland and the Republic in relation to the size of constituencies. Fianna Fáil can hardly claim they have been especially sensitive to the feelings of Northern Ireland in relation to this matter. In 1947 we had nine five-seaters, in 1961 we had five also but in 1969 Fianna Fáil, for their own narrow, party political advantage, deliberately reduced that number to two five-seat constituencies. Fianna Fáil also decided to reduce as far as possible the number of four-seaters.
There is a very considerable discrepancy between the constituency electoral provisions in Northern Ireland and those in the Republic. We have in the Dáil at the moment 26 three-seaters, ten four-seaters and six five-seaters, a total of 148 seats. It is interesting to note that in the Northern Ireland Assembly the North Antrim constituency is a seven-seater; Antrim South is an eight-seater; Armagh a seven-seater; Belfast East, North, West and South are six-seaters, making a total of 24 seats; North Down is a seven-seater; South Down a seven-seater; Fermanagh and South Tyrone is a five-seat constituency— the only five-seater; Derry is a seven-seater and the Mid-Ulster constituency has six seats. It can be argued that the democratic influence of PR on this island is greater in Northern Ireland than in the Republic.
In the years ahead I hope the Minister will increase the number of members in constituencies. I am pleased to note that under the 1973 Bill we will have six five-seaters as compared with two in 1969. I would urge the Government in any future examination of any constitutional provisions to take into account what has happened in Northern Ireland in regard to PR. It would be remiss of me not to welcome the fact that in the next Dáil there will be four additional Deputies, making a total of 148. This increase in democratic representation is welcome as it has occurred because of increased population.
Dáil constituency changes have an amazing effect on the fortunes of political parties. I do not think it has fully dawned on the political commentators in the Republic, neither has it dawned on the organisers of the political parties, the PR razor's edge result we had in the last general election. It gave us good and stable government. It is to the credit of that system that despite the fractional change which occurred we succeeded in getting a good Cabinet and a good change in government in general.
It is interesting to note that in the last general election Fianna Fáil lost seven seats to Fine Gael by margins of less than 1,000 votes. In Longford-Westmeath the margin was only 104 votes so that a slight change in that constituency has profound implications. In Laois-Offaly Fianna Fáil lost a seat to Fine Gael by a mere 234 votes. In North Kerry the difference between Fianna Fáil and the other parties was 514 votes, in Sligo-Leitrim the figure was 559 votes, in West Mayo, 650 votes, in Roscommon-Leitrim, 935 votes and in South West Cork the difference was 935 votes, also. Fianna Fáil lost to the Labour Party in other constituencies by historically small margins, for instance, in North Tipperary the difference was only 143 votes. In Kildare we were ahead by 561 votes, by 838 votes in Meath and by 867 votes in Carlow-Kilkenny
Fianna Fáil fared out badly by comparison with the last general election. In many constituencies there were fewer than 1,000 between them and the other parties. This was a unique feature of the election as compared with previous ones. Therefore, the PR system which was operated tightly by the Coalition parties in the last election did not help Fianna Fáil. The changes in the constituencies will have a profound effect on the fortunes of political parties as a whole. There was not very much change in the last general election as compared with 1969 when Fianna Fáil were returned comfortably. We know that as between 1969 and 1973 Fianna Fáil increased their share of the national vote by a half per cent while Fine Gael increased their share of the vote by one per cent. This was substantial in terms of a swing under PR. The Labour Party dropped their share of the vote by 3.3 per cent. I submit that the changes proposed here will have a considerable effect on the result of the next general election but the way in which the PR slot machine will fall will depend largely on the candidates and on the political climate at the time.
It would be remiss of me if I did not take this opportunity of thanking the Minister publicly for leaving my constituency of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as a four-seater. As we anticipated, we are shedding about 10,000 votes but this is necessary because we had exceeded the tolerance level for a four-seater constituency. Nobody would envy the Minister the very difficult task that faced him in regard to all the changes that were necessary. The work involved must have absorbed a great deal of his time and the result is bound to bring a great deal of personal odium on him from Opposition Deputies who may be of the opinion that they have been treated badly. Changes had to be made regardless of which Minister might have been in power. The Minister did not have available to him the benefit of any constituency commission's report and he had to work within the existing legislative powers. Bearing these facts in mind, I am convinced that he has done a good job, that he approached the matter in a much more satisfactory way than we could have expected Deputy Molloy to have done. To give an example of Deputy Molloy's thinking in this regard he had thought of transferring population from North-East Donegal to Donegal-Leitrim and of transferring population, perhaps, from Sligo-Leitrim, plus the addition from Donegal-Leitrim to Roscommon-Leitrim and to Longford-Westmeath. He was thinking in terms of West Galway receiving population from Clare-South Galway.
That is the kind of machination that the former Minister had in mind in relation to his own part of the country. Quite bluntly, I think the country is lucky to have Deputy Tully doing the revision of constituencies on this occasion rather than Fianna Fáil because we would have a completely emasculated West of Ireland structure of constituencies which would be a disgrace to any democracy. Instead, we now have a much more logical set-up in the West of Ireland, and the east coast of the country is much better represented. I commend the Minister on this and I would urge him in the future strongly to consider the setting up of a constituencies commission. I have no doubt that in the years ahead the Government will give serious consideration to the idea because I do not think we could ever expect it from Fianna Fáil.
Whatever hope we have of a constituencies commission it would be from the Coalition Government. It is hopeless to expect it to come from Fianna Fáil and certainly it will never come from the present leader of that party because Deputy Lynch had from December, 1967, when he got the report, until January or February, 1973, to do something about it. He did not do anything about it and the shedding of crocodile tears by him now does not wash politically on this side of the House.
