Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Nov 1973

Vol. 269 No. 5

Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Mr. Callanan

When I reported progress, I was saying that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries congratulated me on giving honour where honour was due on the question of local government. I want to emphasise that the Electoral (Amendment) Bill which is before the House at the moment—talk about gerrymandering— is deliberately taking two seats from Fianna Fáil in Galway. I have been reading the report of the debates on the 1968 Act and the comments made by the then Opposition. I also read the book by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Garret FitzGerald in which he said that the revision of the constituencies along those lines would be an excuse for the Protestants of the North not to come in here because of the gerrymandering at that time. At that time a member of the then Opposition from my own area commented on the partitioning of Clare and said what a terrible thing it was to partition Clare.

I am a member for the Clare-South Galway constituency. This highly respected Deputy from the constituency knows well that, whatever connection there is between the portion of Clare which is in with South Galway at the moment, there is no connection at all between Galway city and the proposed partition of Clare. There is no connection whatsoever between Lisdoonvarna, Ennistymon, Corofin and Galway city. I would ask the Minister to consider this seriously.

At that time a statement was made in this House that Clare could not elect a Deputy of its own. Do not forget that Clare did elect a Deputy of its own in the person of Deputy Dr. Loughnane after the last revision of the constituencies. If Clare is partitioned again, I bet that if he stands in West Galway he will be elected again. The change is meant to get a seat for Labour in West Galway and in my area we are to lose a seat according to the figures. According to the figures at the last election we have to lose two seats in the Galway area.

In 1968 a comment was made about the part of Roscommon which was in with Clare-South Galway. I come from very near the town of Ballinasloe. The people in the portion of South Roscommon which was in with Clare-South Galway do all their business in Ballinasloe. They wish to be in with part of Galway because they are connected in every way with the town of Ballinasloe. The Deputy in question said he was related to people in Clare. The map of the new West Galway constituency is the most amusing map I ever looked at. Headford is beside Lough Corrib and that is now in East Galway. This is being done to sweeten part of the new constituency for a Government Deputy. The line comes up and goes right into East Galway, takes in Craughwell village and puts it back into West Galway. It switches back again and takes in Gort town. The new West Galway constituency has the crookedest line you ever looked at.

The then Opposition said that there was gerrymandering in the revision of the constituencies and that the people in the Six Counties would be prevented from coming in here. We understood that all the angels and archangels were on that side of the House. All the speeches from the then Opposition were in favour of the setting up of a commission. I want to know what happened since. People complain when they are on one side of the House and when they go to the other side of the House they do the same thing, or a lot worse. According to the figures, we did not deliberately take seats from Deputies but this Bill is brought in deliberately to take two seats from Fianna Fáil in the Galway area. That cannot be denied. I may be one of the victims but that does not matter. We will fight all the way.

I do not intend to delay the House. I spoke at length on this Bill on the previous occasion. Crocodile tears were shed about Leitrim at the time of the previous revision. Leitrim will be split once again on this occasion and there is no justification for that. I have not been a Member of this House for very long and, while the Minister personally might not like to see me kicked out, this legislation will put some of us out of the House. I cannot change my mind where a principle is involved—perhaps I am not suited to the political life.

I consider the Minister to be a fair-minded man and I commend him for many of the things he has done in Local Government but I would ask him to reconsider the question of the revision of the constituencies. There are still enough electors in the west to return 30 Deputies but that number has been reduced to 28. The Minister should leave County Clare alone; it is big enough for a four-seat constituency while West Galway should have three seats. In my area, five Deputies will be fighting for four seats and three of the Deputies are on this side of the House. As I pointed out previously, it would take a Deputy three days to travel by car from Westport to Clifden and from there to Lisdoonvarna. The people from that area of Clare have nothing in common with the people in Galway city.

The Minister is a man of commonsense and I would ask him to do something about the revision of constituencies in the west. I am not familiar enough with the rest of the country to go into details about it. On this Bill one must be parochial because Deputies do not know enough about the geography of other counties. I know the geography of the west and the saddest aspect is that we are trying to drive people into the cities and towns. The rural community is losing all the time. When discussing the Estimate for the Department of Local Government with particular reference to county councillors, I said that the criterion should not be merely population. A rural Deputy must travel considerable distances to meet his constituents, whereas in towns and cities the Deputy concerned can meet his constituents quite easily. The people of rural Ireland have played their part in building this nation but their influence in directing the affairs of the country and in electing representatives to this House is getting smaller. I would appeal to the Minister to reconsider the revision of constituencies in the west.

Mr. Healy

As the previous speaker pointed out, each Deputy will speak about his own area or constituency. I intend to do that and to point out certain inexplicable inconsistencies in the Minister's thinking regarding Cork city. I must confess I do not understand what prompts that thinking but I do not want to draw completely wrong conclusions and say that this is just a political manoeuvre. There is enough cynicism among the people about those in public life; there is the feeling that they will say one thing today and something else tomorrow, will say one thing when they are in Opposition but do something else when in Government.

It is difficult to understand how the Minister could differentiate in his treatment of Dublin city, the capital, and Cork city, the second city in the State. In Dublin there are many four-and five-seat constituencies but because of density of population it was regarded as necessary to change them to three-seaters. In the city of Cork where there is also a large population the three-seaters have been changed to five-seaters. I do not understand the logic of that.

Cork city has an expanding population and one would have thought that if a change were to be made an extra seat would be allocated to that area. It might be argued that the present population of the city would not warrant an extra seat. The solution should be fairly obvious, namely, to bring in those who have purchased their houses in the suburbs in the last ten or 12 years. These people still regard themselves as citizens of Cork city and by bringing them in one of the present three-seat constituencies could have become a four-seater. That would have meant seven seats for the expanding population of Cork city which is what the area requires.

Instead, the Minister proposes to transfer people living in the suburbs to a constituency whose area covers 100 miles, bordering Kerry on one side and Limerick on the other. Not alone does he propose to transfer the suburbanites of Cork city but he also intends transferring people who come from some of the oldest parts of Cork city, from The Lough, Ballyphehane and Togher. Many of these families have lived in the areas for generations and have close ties there. Now they are being put into sparsely populated rural areas and I do not understand the logic of this. Even the University College is being transferred as a result of the adjustment. The Minister is the first man to propose that the university should not be regarded as being in the city.

I listened to and read what Deputy Kelly, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach, had to say about Cork city. If we accept his explanation why this revision was so planned it is very enlightening and gives much food for thought to those who want to criticise the measure. At column 2030, Volume 268 of the Official Report, dated 15th November, 1973, he stated:

The situation in relation to Cork is a special one because one would expect a good Fianna Fáil vote there...

If a Member from this side of the House said that there would be some resentment shown by the Minister and his advisers. The Deputy went on to say that because the Leader of the Opposition comes from that constituency——

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Tully)

The Deputy was not fair. He should have completed the sentence when he started to quote.

Mr. Healy

Deputy Kelly stated:

The situation in relation to Cork is a special one because one would expect a good Fianna Fáil vote there by reason of the fact that the Leader of the Opposition comes from the constituency.

Mr. Tully

Fair enough. That is a different thing.

Mr. Healy

I do not see much difference. If a Fianna Fáil vote is sufficiently strong in any constituency there must be a reason. It condemns the Minister, but that is the reason he is changing the constituencies.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Molloy suggested that I should take it off.

Mr. Healy

I am not speaking for Deputy Molloy. I am speaking for myself.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy would not be the first who disagreed with him.

Mr. Healy

Deputy Kelly also stated that in 1973 Fianna Fáil had four seats out of five. He explained to the House what each party paid in votes for its seats. He is a university don and I am taking his word for these figures. Fine Gael paid 8,071 votes for each seat; Fianna Fáil paid 7,591, a difference of 480; and Labour got 4,715 votes and no seat. It may be a fact that Fine Gael have to pay 480 votes more for a seat than Fianna Fáil. That happens in proportional representation. Does he blame anybody because Labour did not get a seat? They got 3,356 votes fewer than a seat would have cost Fine Gael. That is peculiar logic. The blame must be properly placed. The community did not support them and that is why they lost the seat.

He also said that Fianna Fáil gained four seats out of five in 1973. That is very misleading. Fianna Fáil had four seats out of five but they only won three out of five at the general election. They got the other seat when they won a by-election. I am using this example as an argument against the present situation. I have not had the benefit of a higher education and so I must muddle through life the best I can.

Deputy J. Lynch was one of the three Members Cork returned out of a five-seat constituency for years past. This had nothing to do with the fact that he was Taoiseach or Leader of the Opposition. I feel sorry for the Minister if he thinks that this juggling around will change the situation in any way. I am confident that Fianna Fáil will still retain three seats out of five in the Cork city area.

Mr. Tully

Why all the weeping?

Mr. Healy

I am not weeping. Far from it. I am trying to show the Minister the error of his ways.

I do not see the political sense of what the Minister is doing. I feel confident that Fianna Fáil will gain three seats out of five in the city and three seats out of five in Mid-Cork. They will then have six seats out of ten as they have now. I deplore the downgrading of the city of Cork. To take one-third of the citizens of Cork and put them into a rural area is, to my mind, unexplainable and unpardonable. I cannot see the logic of this.

If this is typical of the Minister's thinking, it does not say much for the preparation of this Bill. Did he get advice from the Cork representatives in his party on the situation there? I do not wish to be disparaging about my colleagues, even if they are from the other side of the House, but their information was not worth very much.

Ruairí Brugha

This is my first experience of a Constituency Revision Bill. I have not had much time to study it. I listened to my two colleagues. Deputy Callanan said the Minister was trying to put him out of this House. I know the Deputy well. If he feels that this is so, I believe it.

Deputy Healy spoke of what is happening in Cork city and county. One of the difficulties about the revision of constituencies is that, in theory, if the Minister wished to establish a constituency half a mile wide from Dublin to Cork, he could do so. A Deputy would be kept busy trying to cover such an area. The Minister appears to be directing his attention rather deliberately and, to some extent, perhaps cynically, towards establishing what he would hope to be a near permanent Coalition Government.

As I have said, I have not had time to study the question in detail. I have, however, given some thought to the area I and two other Deputies represent. There is an interesting change. Deputy Healy has spoken of the situation in relation to the suburbs of Cork city moving to the country. An area of the South County Dublin constituency Dundrum No. 1 Electoral Division has been moved into a city constituency, Dublin South-East. It is an area roughly bounded by Clonskeagh Road, Goatstown Road, Mount Anville, Foster Avenue to Stillorgan Road. It has fewer than 3,000 votes. I am interested because I live in the centre of that area. I have done so for the past 25 years. This portion of South County Dublin is being transferred to Dublin South-East. The area of Dundrum No. 2 beside that area also bounds the Dublin-Bray road and goes back to Mount Anville but it has not been changed. This is the area in which the Minister for Education, Deputy Richard Burke of Fine Gael, lives. It is approximately three-quarters of a mile from my home. In order to restore the new area to the size of a constituency the Minister is transferring some areas from Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown and also an area of Wicklow County which is, apparently, part of the urban area of Bray.

Deputy Callanan first mentioned that the change in his area seemed to be arranged in order to get him out of the Dáil. I am certainly not complaining to the Minister, but it does strike me that if an area which is part of County Dublin and a district electoral area known as Dundrum No. 1, in the centre of which I have lived for over 25 years, is being transferred into a city area, the purpose must be to try to ensure that I will not be a Member of the next Dáil. I will not make any comment on that. Such comment might be thought to be facetious. I have noted similar action on the north side of the city where, accidentally or otherwise, an area in which a Fianna Fáil Deputy lives is being transferred to another constituency.

Impartial people must see this as an effort to dislodge Fianna Fáil Deputies. Whether the Minister, or colleagues of his, worked this out, little credence will be given to his statements and a general atmosphere of cynicism will be engendered among the people. When a Minister for Local Government sets about redrawing constituencies he may be said to be doing so for party political benefit. This is not the sort of example which should be given to the younger generation. Irrespective of how the Minister, or his colleagues, may feel, this is not what should be done. I am not very concerned about whether I am a Deputy in the next Dáil. However much the Minister may juggle with constituencies, there will be Government and Opposition Deputies in most constituencies. The present restructuring of the constituencies may lead to cynicism about politicians and their parties, particularly among younger people.

I will not make any particular plea to the Minister. I have studied one constituency carefully and have come to the conclusion which most people must reach if they study that constituency. I feel there is a deliberate move here to try to get rid of a Fianna Fáil Deputy, myself from the next Dáil. This is not good for politics. It is not good for the public life of this country or for the morale of the people one would like to see having some confidence in the political parties and institutions.

Mr. Kavanagh

Listening to the Opposition speakers one would get the impression that constituency revision was an exercise in which Fianna Fáil had never before had any hand, act or part. On this occasion the job of changing the electoral boundaries has been entrusted, for the first time, to somebody other than a member of a Fianna Fáil Government. The general public will shed no tears at the pleas from the Opposition that they are being "hard done by" in this Bill. The opposite is the case. If the changes made on a previous occasion were to be used by the present Minister as a headline he could have used his powers to "do a job" on the Opposition—a job which they would never forget. The magnanimity of the present holder of the office of Minister for Local Government has given a fair balance in the changes he has made. He has given the Opposition a very good chance in future elections to enable them to return with more seats than ever before, if their performance is good enough and if the Government performance is not adequate.

The Minister's decision to make three-seaters in practically all constituencies in Dublin gives a fair opportunity to any Opposition who are good enough to take advantage of that situation and to win two out of the three seats in each one of those constituencies in Dublin. No Minister could have done more for an Opposition. If the Opposition are good enough they can win seats at an election. If they have done their job and if the public want a change, they can return Fianna Fáil with a larger majority in the Dáil than they ever had before. I cannot accept that the Minister has gerrymandered the constituencies, as has been alleged by many Opposition speakers. That is not true, as can be seen, if one studies the maps that have been distributed to us and the figures for each constituency.

On a previous occasion the then Minister, Mr. Boland, decided he would copperfasten the majority which the Fianna Fáil Government then had in the Dáil by creating four-seaters in Dublin. This required a great change in the voting patterns. It favoured areas where Fianna Fáil had a following for many years—for instance, in Dublin North-West and Dublin South-West. A number of three-seat constituencies were created. If we examine the White Paper on the Bill we will find that the 1969 Act created 26 three-seat constituencies.

The 1973 Bill creates the very same number. On that score, I do not see how anybody could claim the Minister has done anything wrong or underhand in creating three-seat constituencies. The number has not changed. It is somewhat more than in 1961 and 1947. The number of four-seat constituencies has been reduced. This means the chances of there being a swing in returns from the constituencies will be greater. Four-seat constituencies must of their very nature, being an even number, mean that, if the voting pattern breaks down anything between 40 and 60 per cent Opposition and Government or vice versa, then the seat can be won by either side. The number of constituencies with even number membership is reduced and, therefore, democracy can work much better in the new set-up than in the last set-up.

The number of five-seat constituencies has also been increased. It is obvious to anyone looking at the map that has been produced by the Minister that his aim to breach as few county boundaries as possible could only be achieved if, where a county had fewer votes than was required for the minimum constituency of a three-seat size, a few of the smaller populated counties were combined together and five-seat constituencies were created. Donegal has been made into one constituency. It must seem logical to even the most biased person in this House or outside that that county should always have been one constituency.

Taking figures, taking county boundaries and tolerances into account, I think the Minister has produced a Bill which will give every party an even chance at the next general election. In recent by-elections we have seen the previous Government winning over 50 per cent of the seats with about 45 per cent of the votes. Surely any system that created that kind of divergence in results was patently unjust to the then Opposition. It was particularly unfair to a smaller party like ourselves who, in order to get a seat had to get something like ten votes for every seven that Fianna Fáil got. I would see the changes, particularly in constituencies like my own, as being the only way a Minister could deal with the problem in individual constituencies. Those counties which abut on the county of Dublin were faced with a problem, because they share the increasing population which is occurring, perhaps at a greater rate, in the county of Dublin. The counties of Louth, Meath, Kildare and Wicklow have all increased their populations over the previous census.

Of course, we all welcome this increase in population, but in an exercise such as devising constituencies, it can be unfortunate for a constituency like my own in Wicklow. Its population has grown by 8,000 since the previous census, which meant that, since it was a good deal lower than was necessary to increase the number of seats in that constituency, the Minister had no option but to take some portion of that constituency and put it into a neighbouring one. At the previous general election the only county in Ireland whose boundaries coincided with the constituency boundaries was the county of Wicklow. I am glad that things are improving in Wicklow so that the population is expanding, and the efforts of my predecessor and others have brought about an increase in the wealth of that county and in its ability to give a living to many more people in it. I hope and believe that trend will continue under the present Government, so that in the future, instead of the Minister having to reduce the size of Wicklow in order to contain the proper number for a constituency he may be able once again to give us an extra seat and have the constituency and the county identical. I feel that trend is in Wicklow as well as in Kildare and that that situation will obtain after the next census, when I am sure the same Minister will be there to make the necessary changes.

It was, indeed, unfortunate that part of the urban district of Bray has had to be put into South County Dublin. It is particularly regrettable in a personal way for me, since that part of my constituency has always been a very loyal Labour stronghold. However, it does indicate that in making the change the Minister was not motivated purely by party political considerations. He had tough decisions to make and he made them. He made that decision in Wicklow, knowing that the weakest candidate at the last general election there was a Labour TD. That is the answer to any member of the Opposition who says, like the previous speaker, that the Minister is trying to gerrymander that particular person out of his seat. It was ridiculous to hear that from a Dublin TD and shows a great lack of confidence in the electorate and in his own ability to retain the vote he got in the previous general election. I can confidently promise the Minister that the Labour votes that are temporarily lost to me in the county will be made up not only through my efforts but through the efforts of the Government, whose excellent administration of affairs will, I know, continue for the next three or four years until the next general election.

As I say, everybody, including every member of the Opposition from Dublin, knew that, because of the vast expansion in the population of Dublin, no matter what Minister was in power, new constituencies would have to be created. The Minister has done a good job in keeping the rural part of County Dublin separate from the corporation areas, wherever possible. Many people have the feeling that there is not an agricultural vote in Dublin, but by the changes the Minister has made, he has ensured that there will be TDs who represent the agricultural interest in County Dublin returned after the next election. The electorate is said to be most volatile in cities and particularly in the city of Dublin. Therefore, the constituencies created, which roughly coincide with many of the larger urban areas of the city, such as Artane, Ballyfermot, Cabra, Clontarf, Finglas, Rathmines and so on, will give satisfaction to the people living in these areas.

Old areas of Dublin are returning again to constituencies which were crudely breached by the last Electoral Act. The people in those very distinct and separate areas will be happy to know that their Deputies will be close to them. The Deputies will almost certainly have to be resident within their areas and available to the voters at very short notice. We in rural constituencies have a good deal more travelling to do, but our constituents are much more personal. We recognise thousands of them and we are instantly recognisable to them. The changes made in Dublin will create the same situation in the city and perhaps Dublin will return a number of Deputies such as were thrown up in the past, Deputies who were typical of certain areas of the city. They were colourful Deputies in the House and there have not been as many of them in the last few years as there were formerly.

One of the criticisms of this Bill is that there will be fewer Deputies in the west of Ireland. The unfortunate position is that there are fewer people in the west. When there were more Deputies they did not achieve the changes necessary to keep people there. I do not agree that more TDs in the west necessarily means a better deal for the people of the west. It did not happen in the past when every effort was made to have as many TDs as possible there. Perhaps now the people there will get better representation from those who are elected. They will certainly have to be more vociferous on behalf of their constituents in the Dáil and they will have to work harder to put the problems of the west before the Dáil. There was a proliferation of Ministers and Deputies in the west in former days. That is not the case now and will not be the case in the future. Those people in some way failed their constituents. If they had done a good job for them the people would still be there. That is the answer to anybody such as the former Minister for Local Government, who comes in here and accuses the Minister in shrill tones of denuding the west of its power and influence in this House. If the west expands in the same way as the east then Deputies must be put back there. The tolerance issue is still alive in the west. Places like North Kerry, South Kerry, East Galway and West Galway are still below the 20,000 population limit for each Deputy, so it is not true that the Minister did not use the tolerance provision for the west. If he has had to reduce the numbers it is because people unfortunately are still leaving the west and a better effort by everybody, including the Government, to change that will have to take place. It is much more likely to take place under the present Government. We have seen the energy which has gone into the policies they have initiated in the past few months. I expect that energy will continue to the benefit of the whole country.

The Minister has done a very good job for counties like Waterford, the boundary of which was crudely breached on the last occasion to give political advantage to the then Government. The Minister has again made that a four seat constituency, which it should always have been. It was quite logical that the city of Cork should return five Deputies, rather than the six at present returned, by taking in large areas of rural Cork. Everybody expected that change. Those of us who know the voting patterns fairly well accept that a change in Cork city will probably mean a loss of a seat for the Opposition which, assuming voting patterns do not change, should be won back in the new five-seat constituency of Mid-Cork. This is assuming that Fianna Fáil still have the same ability to collect votes and do the job they did at the last election. If the Government continue their present progress there will be no use saying that changes in the constituencies resulted in the loss of seats for the Opposition. It will be simply on the record of the Government and nothing else.

There have been no changes in Limerick or Kerry, so the charge of gerrymandering just is not true. I am glad to see that the constituency of Sligo and Leitrim has returned to something of a normal shape and appearance and that the people of Leitrim will not have to travel in all directions to find their Deputies. Louth is a four-seat constituency. The Minister himself was treated very harshly in the last change. Not only was his county divided among three constituencies but the area in which he was born was removed from his constituency. I am glad that he has made Meath a four-seat constituency. It required a little bit of Kildare to do so. Just as in the case of Wicklow, with the increase in population taking place in Meath perhaps at the next revision it will be made a five-seater.

The changes made have been logical and the obvious ones for the Minister to make. This Bill will result in the Government parties and the Opposition being returned in proportion to the votes they get and not, as happened at the last three or four elections, when 45 per cent of the votes returned almost 55 per cent of the seats. The Minister had difficult decisions to make, difficult even if people assumed that he made those decisions with only his own party and the other Government party in mind. It is quite obvious from the changes that were made that he has offered the Opposition a fair test at the next election. If they are good enough and if the people think they are good enough, they can change the Government, because it will be the will of the people being reflected in the number of seats.

It will not be as a result of a gerrymander which was the case in respect of some previous elections. The public know that changes are necessary. They know, too, that no Minister could revise the constituencies without being charged with gerrymandering in some instances. On this occasion the Minister has done a very fair job. In every area he has endeavoured in so far as was possible to take account of county boundaries and any changes he has made have been minimal. I congratulate him in this respect.

This Bill is of interest mainly to the Deputies of this House and to a few aspirants outside. The public have very little interest in it and they are anxious that it be dealt with as speedily as possible so that more important legislation can be dealt with.

Mr. Carter

Looking through the reports of the discussions on this Bill so far it seems to me that there are some Deputies here who are preoccupied with the idea of commissions. There have been speeches from otherwise sensible Deputies asking for a commission to investigate the business before us. Can anyone tell me what commission whether composed of politicians or of legal luminaries or professionals of any other kind are better fitted for the framing of a Bill than are the Members of this House? We assume that politics is the art of the possible. Regardless of which Minister may carry the portfolio of Local Government, there are bound to be complaints voiced in the House. It is my opinion that for some years past there has been too much use of the word "gerrymander". That is an ugly word.

When we are faced with the revision of constituencies in order to comply with the relevant Article of the Constitution we know that we have on hands an emotional subject. We know that the Minister concerned must change the constituencies in such a way as to permit reasonable representation for each area and we know that arguments can be produced for and against any changes that may be proposed.

I would draw the attention of the House to the position which obtained when this question of constituencies was referred to the courts for a ruling on what was a permissive tolerance. The then Minister was accused by the Opposition of engaging in near-the-bone practice in favouring his own party. Of course, he was only trying to carry out a reasonable re-arrangement of the constituencies and in this context I quote him as reported at column 1221 of the Official Report for the 27th November, 1968:

It is necessary in the first place to be quite clear about the relevant provisions of the Constitution. Subsection 3º of subsection 2 of Article 16 lays down that:

The ratio between the number of members to be elected at any time for each constituency and the population of each constituency, as ascertained at the last preceding census, shall, so far as it is practicable, be the same throughout the country.

I would draw particular attention to the reference to the number of Members "to be elected at any time". From this it appears that equality of population at the time of the revision itself is not enough and that having regard to the 1966 Census returns, which show substantial departures from parity in the case of many constituencies, a further revision of many constituencies...

The requirement of equality in the ratio of Members to population is qualified by the phrase "so far as it is practicable".

This must be considered in the light of the High Court decision in 1961 that the relevant provisions of the Electoral (Amendment) Act of 1959 were unconstitutional because they had produced some departures from the average population ratio per Deputy and there were no relevant circumstances suggested by these departures. In effect the court ruling was that deviations of up to 17 per cent from the national average were excessive and could not be justified on grounds of adhering to county boundaries, having due regard to geographical features and so on. The judgment did indicate that a deviation of up to 1,000 would be acceptable.

If we look at the Bill then in the context of the court ruling and in the circumstances in which we are dealing with the Bill here, we soon see that any Minister is tied to a figure of 1,000. In the light of that any movement of people from an area in a three- or four-year period could cause considerable difficulty to anyone framing a Bill such as this. I have no doubt but that the Minister, being a politician, when considering this matter had regard to how his own party would fare. That is a human quality and I will not blame the Minister for it. Previous Ministers have been blamed and have been accused of gerrymandering. If we look at the figures for both the 1969 and the 1973 elections we see that, on the one hand, we got a majority and, on the other hand, we lost a majority. It is my contention that we can go too far in denigrating or downgrading the efforts of the one and the other and I think we should look in another direction for the cause of either a loss or gain in general election.

It is not manifest to me that the rearranging of constituencies will in the end make all that difference. The winds of popularity are very changeable. They may blow from any quarter and the man who relies upon them will probably be marooned in the end. I think that quotation is from the late Dr. O'Dwyer. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle will correct me if I am wrong. In a desire to overstate the position Deputies on both sides may regard a Minister handling a Bill of this description as a fair target for abuse. I know Deputy Boland was such a target when he was putting the last Electoral (Amendment) Bill through this House. I also know that quite a volume of that abuse was quite unfair. He certainly dealt with his own constituency in a very fair manner. He is no longer a Member of this House, but I merely mention the fact.

I do not go with this baby talk because it can go too far. I do not agree with those who call for a commission to do the work that should be done on the floor of this House. As politicians we should do our own work and, if there is blame, we should share the blame, if there are kudos, we should share them too.

To what kind of a commission could we refer a Bill of this kind? What qualifications would the members of such a commission need to assimilate, first of all, and then lay down rules for the guidance of this House? No matter what commission was set up it would have to refer its findings to this House for decision. The day we start indulging in baby talk is a day we will rue; it is a day the country will rue. If I were in the Minister's place I would do my best to share out the representation and I would so delineate constituencies to enhance the prospects of the party to which I belong. That is politics and politics is the art of the possible. No matter how some who practice politics may try to downgrade the subject it is still politics and it is still supreme.

If we want to amend the law of the land it is within our power to advocate that and to do it. The law of the land at present stipulates that certain rules must be kept. So far as I know any Minister who is responsible will try to keep within the rules because if he does not there is the guideline from a court ruling that he must keep within a figure of 1,000 of a tolerance. That is the point I should like to stress.

No matter what may be said about the east gaining more representation than the west it is a childish argument to advance the view that it was because of the quality of the representation in the past that the west lost and is still losing its population. That is not true. The west lost a lot of its population down the years since the Famine but, happily, this trend has been toned down and emigration has been reduced to a trickle. We should be glad of this and recognise it for what it is. Many other countries have suffered in a similar way. Sweden, for example, was a net exporter of labour in the thirties, but, thereafter, became an importer of labour. That is a day we should look forward to. Let us not blow this whole question too high.

The 1961 Electoral (Amendment) Act was referred to the Supreme Court for a ruling. The court advised that it was not at odds with the Constitution. I should now like to quote, briefly, from the judgment given by that court. This judgment laid down the attitude of the court towards the provisions of subsection (3) of section 2 of Article 16.3.2º of the Constitution which has relevance here. The subsection deals with the ratio between Members and the population of each constituency.

The ruling states:

The decision as to what is practicable is within the jurisdiction of the Oireachtas. It may reasonably take into consideration a variety of factors, such as the desirability so far as possible, to adhere to well known boundaries such as those of counties, townlands and electoral divisions. The existence of divisions created by such physical features as rivers, lakes and mountains may also have to be reckoned with.

The problem of what is practicable is primarily for the Oireachtas, whose members have a knowledge of the problems and the difficulties to be solved which this court cannot have. Its decision should not be reviewed by this court unless there is a manifest infringement of the Article. This court cannot, as is suggested, lay down a figure above or below which a variation from what is called the national average is not permitted. This, of course, is not to say that a court cannot be informed of the difficulties and may not pronounce on whether there has been such a serious divergence from uniformity as to violate the requirements of the Constitution.

To justify the court in holding that the subsection has been infringed it must, however, be shown that the failure to maintain the ratio between the number of members for each constituency and the population of each constituency involves such a divergence as to make it clear that the Oireachtas has not carried out the intention of the subclause.

In the opinion of the court the divergences shown in the Bill are within reasonable limits.

We, therefore, have the position that no matter how we try to reject it—some of us want to reject it by calling for commissions, councils and other bodies to do this work for us— we cannot escape from doing our work by engaging in such tactics. We shall have to do it ourselves because there is no other body capable of doing this work. That is my argument.

The court refused to lay down a figure above or below which a variation from the national average would be permitted but it did hold that the divergencies shown in the 1961 Act were within reasonable limits. The Supreme Court stated that the problem was primarily one for the Oireachtas, but also made it clear that the courts could pronounce as to whether the Constitution has been violated and since the only figure mentioned as an acceptable divergence is the 1,000 indicated by the High Court it is clear that this is the only figure that can be utilised with impunity. It is clear that against this background in no case should the population ratio diverge from the national average by more than 1,000. There you have it.

When we come to consider the practicality of this, as the House must consider this question, it is not always practicable to keep within this divergence. Therefore, this may be a matter for another day. Now is not the time to talk about it, I presume. We all know that, however we may try to integrate city and country, the position is different in each case. In the west of Ireland, which is losing this time strictly on figures, we have a more difficult problem. We hope that in the future this problem will not arise. We hope to see the population rising there. Perhaps we have reached a culminating point. If emigration is down to a trickle you are bound to start a bit of a climb. Unless external influences or external conditions interfere in the years ahead, in the west we should see at least the beginning of an upwards climb in the population. This subject would then no longer be a bone of contention on the floor of the House.

In the west the constituencies are more ungainly and unwieldy than they are in built-up areas. The Deputies who represent those areas are involved in much more travelling than their counterparts in the city. This is only natural. In view of the rules within which we must work, more or less, we can see the difficulty in creating more representation for the west and, at the same time, keeping within the tolerance allowed for each Deputy. It is a strange fact that at the last election we gained votes and lost seats.

Mr. Coogan

For whom the bells toll.

Mr. Carter

One party lost 40,000 votes, believe it or not.

Mr. Coogan

You are losing tonight.

Mr. Cunningham

That tale is not told yet.

Mr. Carter

We increased our vote, and we increased it again by 23,000 in the presidential election. That is the fortunes of war.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Carter

The fact that the party in office make a change in the constituencies does not always indicate that the party making the change will remain in office after the change. As I said, we gained votes at the last election and lost seats. This could happen on the opposite side of the House as well. We must take this out of the arena of making charges and countercharges and indulging in baby talk about commissions. We must deal with the raw material ourselves and we must not throw in the sponge. I do not know of any body with more competence to deal with this subject than the Oireachtas. Whether we are branded as indulging in manipulation, or whether we are branded as favouring some colleague, this arrangement must be made on the floor of the House. The countries in which politicians failed to make such arrangements in the past fell a prey to commissions, councils and committees.

I am a great believer in the principle that, if one is in politics, and if one makes certain laws, or supports certain principles, or advocates certain things, whether or not one is under fire, one must stand up and defend one's principles. When I hear some of the arguments advanced for mythical commissions to deal with matters of this kind I doubt the reasoning powers of the politicians who make such statements. In the last analysis what commission is greater than the Dáil? If there is any man in the Dáil who does not recognise that, I should like to hear his arguments. Funnily enough, beyond calling for powers for a commission, un-named, unspecified, and so on, people who call for such help never set out what the membership, or the qualifications, or the terms of reference of such a commission should be. This is where I call into question the motives of the people who are engaged in what I would call this baby talk.

This Dáil, as previous Dáils going back to 1922, has the task of rearranging the constituencies and time and again the same arguments have been put forward. Any Minister for Local Government is bound to be open to charges and countercharges but he should be able to accept them, as all of us should be. Our work is performed in the open and every three or four years we are subjected to the approval or disapproval of our constituents. If they do not agree with our actions we will soon find out. However, there is no such bridle on a commission or on a man who works behind locked doors. I am not denigrating commissions because they are eminently suitable to do certain work but the work of rearranging constituencies should not be done by a commission.

The population of the country has tended to congregate on the eastern coast. If one drew a line down the middle of the country one would find that two-thirds of the population live east of that line. As I said earlier, in time when we are able to eliminate emigration we hope that pattern will change. However, as long as cities and towns on the eastern coast continue to grow and as long as industrial promoters continue to show preference for the east we will have this imbalance.

This imbalance is not confined to this country but is widespread in other States. For instance, Denmark is being progressively industralised and today it is much more difficult to get people to live in rural areas than in the industrialised centres. The reason is that bread and butter are readily available in the industrialised centres. I am not saying they are not available in rural areas but if we are to redress this imbalance we must try to regenerate those areas. Much work has been done in this regard and we have a fabric on which we can build but there is much more to be done. That work may be for another generation, for other Members of this House, but I wish to but on record my approach to this matter. For example, if I had the portfolio of Local Government, I would take a decision and I would put up with the results. If I were kicked out at the next election I would accept that also because I would have to. A tribunal composed of people who must go before the people every three or four years is the best kind of tribunal to deal with the revision of constituencies.

I have not found any great fault with the Minister. If there was any advantage to his party, I think he quite rightly favoured them rather than the Opposition. I would do that myself in similar circumstances and I ask anyone here to show me the politician who would not. It is a much better approach than to hand over the matter to people who could lock the door and carve up the constituencies as they liked, knowing they would not be subject to retribution or chastisement but could do it with impunity. We can have our debate in this House and we can find fault with what the Minister has done. We can give him credit for the good points and knock him for what we consider are the bad points. We should all subscribe to the view that the Dáil is the right place to deal with matters of this kind.

Mr. White

I have heard several speakers on the other side using the word "gerrymander".

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. White

I was speaking about the word "gerrymandering" which I have heard so often from the Opposition benches. Everybody associates that word with the then Minister for Local Government, Mr. Kevin Boland. As long as he is alive it will be associated with him.

Mr. C. Murphy

Is it in order to mention a person who it not here to defend himself?

Mr. White

Unlike the last and only time constituencies were gerrymandered, very few Deputies on this side of the House have any complaints. As a result of what happened that time, Deputy McLaughlin and Deputy Reynolds found themselves living outside their constituencies. Various other Deputies lived on the perimeter of their constituencies. The present Minister has tried to keep the county boundaries intact. Fine Gael are not responsible for the population decline along the western seaboard. We must ask ourselves: why has it declined? The answer must be that Fianna Fáil were in office for the last 30 years and did very little to remedy this. A few years ago we heard the slogan: "Save the West". Different deputations from the west and north-west put proposals to various Ministers. It is only in the last year or two that the people began to wake up and scream loud enough and their Deputies began to speak for them with the result that a certain amount of industrialisation has come to the west and north-west. Since the Coalition Government took office more emphasis has been laid on the western seaboard. This must be maintained. The population in these constituencies will be increasing in the next few years. The court ruling said that the Minister must have a tolerance of only 1,000 per Deputy. This has tied him down, especially in areas like Donegal.

I should like to deal with counties in Ulster, Connacht and along the west and north-west. I will deal first with Donegal, although I think it is wrong to take Donegal in its present concept. It is wrong for the Opposition to say that Donegal is too vast a constituency for five Members to look after. This is not the first time in the history of the State that Donegal has been a single constituency. It was a single constituency many years ago. The difference then was that the Unionists were able to elect one of their own. When Fianna Fáil divided the constituency they divided it in half so that the Unionists would not be able to elect a Member of their own. That day is gone. Very few people today would vote for a denominational candidate as such. This is a very good thing. It is only right that we should all work together regardless of religious denomination.

I cannot see how anybody in Donegal at the present time can use the word "gerrymander". If that word must be used I am probably the only one whose constituency has been gerrymandered. It was cut a quarter of a mile from my door. I look on this very simply. If a Deputy has three or four years to work for a constituency and the people do not re-elect him, then he does not deserve to be reelected. If a Deputy makes an impact on his constituents they will not forget him at election time.

At one time Donegal was a one-seat constituency. Then it was cut at the Gap and the top end of Falcarragh and divided into two three-seat constituencies. At that time Fianna Fáil took four seats and Fine Gael got two seats. A few years later it was again divided and Falcarragh was moved to Gortahork and the Finn Valley was taken in to make up the population of the south of the county. The last time Donegal was divided a third of Leitrim was added. Gortahork and Falcarragh were again left in the north-east constituency. I should like to see Donegal divided into two three-seat constituencies but the population is not there. I have no doubt that in a few years' time we will have adequate population to enable Donegal county to have two three-seat constituencies. No matter how a Donegal man tries to represent a neighbouring county, he is still classed as a Donegal man. It is a pity to see the southern part of the constituency taken off. As I have said, it would be much better if Donegal were all one. Of course, the Minister has not got any say in the matter owing to the court ruling.

I am sure everybody will remember the uproar when Leitrim was butchered into three parts. The people there thought Leitrim should be a constituency on its own. Leitrim has a population of 28,000 and therefore can elect only one Deputy. Each constituency must be at least a three-seat constituency. We have improved the position. Instead of dividing it into three, we have divided it by putting half in Sligo-Leitrim and half in Roscommon-Leitrim. The people of Leitrim will now have Deputies of their own to represent them.

It is worth remembering that it was the people in the west of Ireland at the election previous to the last which put Fianna Fáil in office. It was the same people who put the Coalition Government in power today. It is wrong for any Deputy to say that in four years, time he will get the same number of votes as he would get now. It is fair to point out that in country areas the voting trend does not change very much. The young vote will be a changing vote. The young people will not necessarily vote as their fathers and mothers did. No one in this House can say that in five years' time he will still be here, no matter how the constituency is carved up, the country divided, or who is in Government. Donegal should not need so many electors to elect a Deputy.

For an area so vast the situation should be the other way around. Cities like Dublin, Cork and Galway should have more electors per area than an area like Donegal. We had a referendum on that subject. While agreeing generally with the Minister, I naturally disagree with him sometimes. I know that the Minister is tied by the tolerance of 1,000 votes in arranging the constituencies. He has tried to be fair. No one in this House can be sure that he will be elected next time. Only the people can decide that.

Mr. Cunningham

Prior to the testing of the previous Act, the general guiding principle in the revision of constituencies was that that there should be a leaning towards the less populated areas. In the larger areas a higher population was allowed per Deputy, and in the eastern part of the country generally a lesser number per Deputy. This principle was a wise one. It appeared from the legislation that it was possible to have a fairly wide deviation from a given number. Advantage was taken of this deviation so that the western, southern and northern areas of our country were favoured in this way. The constitutionality of one of the previous Acts was challenged. The Act was declared to be unconstitutional. The ruling was that a certain deviation from 20,000 constituents per Deputy would be constitutional, and the figure was agreed on as being 1,000 either way. While the operation of that, even to the best advantage possible, in favour of the less populated areas limited the benefits which those areas got under previous Acts, it still was operated the last time in such a way that the least possible damage was done. In other words, the benefit of the 1,000 deviation was availed of fully.

In the Bill now presented to us by the Minister this principle has not been recognised at all. As a matter of fact, the reverse is the case. The greatest deviation allowed is in the populated areas and the least in the other areas as a general rule. The Minister, when drafting this Bill, did not consider fully the less populated areas. As a result, the less populated areas from Donegal to Cork have forfeited Deputies. If this Bill is passed—and there are many people on the opposite benches who do not agree with it because they are fair-minded and they know that the less populated areas should have the advantages available to them—that whole area will suffer. Therefore, Dublin gains at the expense of the country. This is the first point that emerges.

It must be asked could the situation in the light of the High Court ruling be improved? The answer is "yes". The western counties could have another Deputy if full advantage were to be taken of the 1,000 tolerance one way or the other. If the Minister had put on his agenda the principle that any benefit available should be given to the western counties, then even within the limits laid down the west of Ireland could and would have a Deputy more than is proposed under this legislation.

Why was that important issued ignored? Why was it contravened? In other words, the drafting and carving-up were done in such a way that the west of Ireland would lose the greatest number which it is possible to lose under the decision of the High Court. I want to lay this accusation at the feet of the existing Government. For whatever reason, they have deliberately decided not to allow an extra Deputy for the western counties. If this legislation is passed, the eastern part of the country with the highly populated areas will benefit. This is a pity. It is so because of the decision by which the Minister is bound. The west will lose a number of Deputies but they could have lost that number less one had the Minister used his power and availed of the advantage which is there.

The last speaker referred to Donegal, one of the largest counties in Ireland. It was possible to have the constituencies there as before with part of Leitrim added. The Minister, for reasons best known to himself and, evidently, not known to the last speaker, decided to make Donegal a five-seat constituency. However, the method of doing it is suspect.

Deputy White said it was unfortunate that part of the southern extremity of Donegal was pushed into Leitrim. As a matter of fact the extremity of south Donegal was not pushed into Leitrim, and here I would like the House to have a clear picture of what the situation is. There is a narrow neck of land stretching between the Border and the sea from, say, Bannintra for ten to 12 miles right out to Bundoran. To get the required cutoff from Donegal the Minister could have drawn a straight line across from the Border to the sea and said: "A certain figure south of that goes into Leitrim", but he did not do that. Had he done that, the town in which Deputy White lives would find itself in the Donegal-Sligo-Leitrim constituency. I do not know why it has been called the Leitrim-Sligo constituency, because it is the Donegal-Leitrim-Sligo constituency.

Mr. White

I understood Fianna Fáil had a proposal to cut this constituency at Laghey.

Mr. Cunningham

Maybe the Deputy knows better than I do what the thinking was. Actually there were no proposals. However, there is this long narrow strip of territory to which I have referred. Ballyshannon is towards the southern end of it. The main road runs right through Ballyshannon, through the middle of this long narrow strip with about a mile or two of land between the roadway and the sea and a few miles between it and the Northern Ireland territory. Therefore, instead of pushing Ballyshannon and Deputy White into Leitrim, the Minister takes the narrow strip between the main road and the Border right up to Ballintra and puts it into Leitrim. The remainder of that long strip from Ballintra to Bundoran and as far as Ballyshannon, he leaves in Donegal. Once he has got Ballyshannon into Donegal, that is that. But what will happen? Here you have a long stretch of road leading from Ballyshannon to Ballintra, with the constituency of Sligo-Leitrim-Donegal meandering one time to one side of the road and another time to the other side. The result is that somebody close to Ballintra is in the Donegal constituency, somebody next door is in the Leitrim-Sligo constituency and so on down the road. Neighbours are alternately in Donegal-Sligo-Leitrim without any reference to whether they are nearer one or the other. The logical thing to do was to have a straight line across, but this would upset the arrangement, and so we have this strange set-up. I thought for a moment they were trying to pinch Lough Derg from us. On the other hand, there is the seaward spike heading down until it embraces Ballyshannon, and that job having been done, that is Donegal.

Mr. White

Surely the Deputy is not afraid of the votes in Ballyshannon?

Mr. Cunningham

I did not say I was, but if the Deputy wants to assume I am he is quite free to do so. I know the Deputy did not whisper in the Minister's ear and did not influence this situation one way or another. He tells us here, and we believe him, that he does not like the arrangement. I hope that between now and the final Stages of this Bill when it becomes necessary to vote on it—this is unfair, of course—he will try to influence this decision. Being at the other end of the county I do not have to worry about it, but I am just wondering why this sort of thing has happened.

It would be bad enough to cut a clean slice from a county, but to do a carve-up job like this raises questions in my mind. Is it because the people at one side of this narrow strip, on the northern side of the main road, are in some way different from the people on the other side of it? Even then, that argument would not hold because there can be houses on the same side in different constituencies. It will look queer, say, to a student of politics who will be making a study of the Minister's proposals, if they are passed, if he drives along with somebody from whom he is seeking advice, and at one stage of the drive between Ballyshannon and Ballintra he is told: "You are now entering the Sligo-Leitrim constituency" and a few yards on: "You have now arrived in the Donegal constituency", or still further on: "You have now arrived in the Donegal-Sligo-Leitrim constituency". On that pleasant journey along that beautiful part of our county he can get muddled. What merit was in this exercise and what was the reason for it? Deputy White evidently is not happy with Donegal becoming a five-seat constituency. He would rather see two three-seaters. Unfortunately, he is not a member of Fianna Fáil who would have produced two three-seat constituencies for him.

Mr. White

I would not have changed it to suit myself.

Mr. Cunningham

No, seeing that he did not fix this one to suit himself he would not have done that.

I am not the only Deputy who will be asking questions on the line-out of the constituencies. Recently we have been electioneering in Monaghan. It is a very scattered constituency. It is long and narrow with several promonotories jutting out into other constituencies. The Deputies who worked in the Monaghan constituency over the last few weeks found that it was a difficult constituency in which to travel. Added to this to make a five-seat constituency will be the present County of Cavan.

Mr. Tully

Exactly as Fianna Fáil proposed it.

Mr. Cunningham

It will be impossible for the people there to have close contact with or proper service from their Deputies. It will be the same in Donegal. Anyone looking at the map of Donegal with all the deep inlets of the sea, the mountain ranges and so on, would say that six Deputies for the county were too few, that there should be better representation. Now with the number reduced to five, and that seat going to Dublin where a small space can hold the required number of people per Deputy, the people in Donegal and such counties will be less well represtened than before. Short of using a helicopter I cannot see how somebody can deal with the territory from Malin Head to Ballyshannon. It will be an impossible task for five Deputies. Now with the extra work placed on TDs, with every item of legislation passed here introducing new regulations and benefits there are more queries and there is more representation to be done by Deputies. The situation in our county will be very much worsened by the withdrawing of a Deputy from that area.

I am not against five-seat constituencies. I do not disagree with the idea, but if there must be five-seaters, city areas would be the ideal places to have them where 100,000 people can be found in a fairly compact area. Even in suburban areas a Deputy would have very little travelling to do. Again, we find the extreme that we found in regard to the tolerance issue. In the matter of the tolerance issue Dublin was favoured. In the numerical make-up of the constituencies Dublin was favoured again. Anywhere that an advantage could be given it should have been given in the less-populated areas. Under the previous Acts, this was done. In the west we had almost all three-seat constituencies. We were accused, of course, of operating the three-east constituency for the benefit of the Fianna Fáil Party. That is a legitimate political accusation. Nobody objects to that. If one party wants to accuse another party of taking political advantage of the carve-up of constituencies that is fair enough. However, three-seat constituencies did favour the less populated areas such as the western counties and the midlands of Ireland. Not alone under the last Act but under previous Acts we had nearly all three-seat constituencies along the western seaboard right down to Kerry and into West Cork, through Galway, Mayo, Sligo, Donegal and Roscommon. Whatever one may say about political advantage this had the advantage of smaller electoral areas which benefited the people there.

A very large part of Cork has been pushed into Mid-Cork in order to make a five-seat constituency there. Here, again, a rural area is made into a five-seat constituency by the addition of another area. There have been complaints from various Deputies and this has been discussed outside the Dáil. Even Deputies of the Government parties have indicated their displeasure with some of the proposals. The Minister took his time in drafting the Bill and it is not my intention to ask him to change it now. Rather, I am merely pointing out the flaws as I see them. It would have been possible within the confines of the High Court decision to have given an extra Deputy to the West. When the existing Act was being debated here there was a furore in regard to the breaching of county and local authority boundaries. In this instance I have not counted the exact number of breaches of urban, city and county boundaries but I am of the opinion that the number is greater than was the case on the last occasion.

We might ask what Leitrim is gaining from this shake-up. There will be Leitrim-Roscommon and Leitrim-Sligo-Donegal constituencies. The previous speaker made the point that Leitrim would now have a Deputy. I cannot understand the logic of that.

Mr. Tully

It is being divided into two parts instead of three.

Mr. Cunningham

But is this a very big improvement?

Mr. Tully

The people there think it is.

Mr. Cunningham

There remains a Leitrim which consists of parts of three counties. This involves incorporating part of Donegal with Leitrim. What I object to is the non-use by the Minister of the tolerance provision. There is much to be said for having this work carried out in the future by a commission, but the task is a difficult one regardless of who undertakes it. Perhaps this House should think in terms of amending the tolerance provision at some future referendum. Such an exercise would be worthwhile because speakers on all sides agree that if the Minister's hands were not tied by the High Court ruling he would hardly denude the west of Deputies and that the people of Dublin or Cork would not grudge more Deputies per 100 square miles in the west than in the east of the country. Therefore, we should consider a change whereby there would be a lesser population per Deputy in the west than in the east.

The three-seat constituencies in Dublin will mean that in most cases no constituent will be more than a distance of a mile from a Deputy whereas in the proposed Donegal constituency there might be no Deputy nearer than 30 miles to some of his constituents. The same would apply to the west generally, so that people might have to travel between 30 and 50 miles to see their Deputies. This situation is more likely to arise in five-seat than in three-seat constituencies. When one considers the terrain over which a Deputy has to travel in a western constituency one might ask why the Minister eliminated many of the three-seat constituencies in the west while creating three-seaters in Dublin. I agree that the Minister's latitude was limited but within those limitations he could have done a much better job. I trust he will bear in mind the possibility of having the Constitution changed in regard to tolerance at some future referendum so as to give proper representation to the people who need it most. I would very much like to see this being tackled in that way.

Mr. Hegarty

First of all, I should like to compliment the Minister on doing a very difficult job well. His is really an unenviable job. I believe he has done a very fair job in this Bill. As he said himself, if there were 144 people doing it they would probably all do it in a different way.

This Bill is essential because of the change in the distribution of population. I do not agree with some of the earlier speakers who regard size as a disadvantage. Size is not really relevant in this day and age of modern transport. Most Deputies hold "clinics" and these are a great help to a Deputy. Frankly, I do not see size as having anything to do with this Bill.

I am a rural Deputy but there are some very big towns in my constituency—Mallow, Fermoy and Cobh, to mention a few. In my experience there are more problems in city constituencies than there are in rural constituencies. This is only to be expected when one remembers the density of population and the problems with regard to housing and everything else. I compliment the Minister on giving the extra seats to the urban areas. Deputies have complained about the volume of work that they have to do. No doubt we all work reasonably hard. No doubt we all do our best for the people we represent. I will admit that city representatives are under greater pressure and I would not object to increasing the number of seats still further if that would give a better service to city dwellers.

There is justifiable annoyance on the part of some because of the changes made. That is understandable since a Deputy may have put a great deal of work into some particular area and now finds himself asked to operate in a new area. However, I do not see that as an insurmountable problem. A new Government has just assumed office and there will be plenty of time for Deputies to build themselves up in these new areas. The picture is nothing like as bad as it is painted.

I compliment the Minister too on adhering where possible to county boundaries and to the boundaries of local administrations. In the past the constituency I represent suffered somewhat in that respect. I have no complaint at the moment. The Minister has not made any change at all in my constituency and, for this, I am grateful to him.

Deputy Cunningham referred to a population imbalance. I think the Minister has done more in the last few weeks to balance the population than any Minister who preceded him. I have strong views on this; the more that is done to move people into rural Ireland the better it will be. One has only to visit Belgium or Holland to appreciate how crazy we are here with regard to industrialisation. We must start creating industries out in the country and thereby bring back the population to rural Ireland. The Minister has very wisely eased the position with regard to planning and the development of housing in rural areas and, in doing so, he has contributed significantly to balancing the population. This is very relevant to this Bill. Indeed, if we were to keep on in the way we were going, all our Deputies would be based in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and what-have-you. Some Deputies complain about too much representation in area A and too little in area B. If these Deputies set about getting industry into their areas they will get the population justifying increased representation and I have no doubt the Minister will give every facility from the point of view of housing.

It is inevitable that the Minister should come in for criticism with regard to boundaries. My constituency came in for a very severe trimming some time ago, an unfair trimming, but we had to accept it. The Minister is now in the hot seat. He has carefully prepared the Bill before the House and I am certainly very pleased with it because he has done a good job. This is a very small island and to travel even from Cork to Dublin is not a great journey. Consequently, any Deputy who is serious about his job and conscientious about representing the people of his constituency will not complain about distances. In this case Mahomet must go to the mountain, to the field or wherever the people seek his services.

This idea, while it is unique in rural areas, is not really new. It will mean that it will be essential for Deputies to be available at certain places at appointed times to meet their constituents. In coming years Deputies will have ample time to become acquainted with the new areas and the people they will represent in future. In relation to this Bill I should like to remark that the cities and densely populated areas need better representation numerically than they are getting, or are permitted to get, under existing law. In cities like Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway, Deputies are over-worked. Even if it was necessary to change the law to increase representation for such areas it should be done.

The Minister had a very unenviable task to do in preparing this Bill. In my view he presented a very fair Bill. It is fair to say that Deputies, even on this side of the House, may not be too pleased with what has been done but that goes to prove the fairness of the Bill. I compliment the Minister on that. It is very difficult to point a finger at the Minister and accuse him of gerrymandering or carving up any constituency. It is also difficult to cast any aspersions on his performance in preparing the Bill. In my view he did a meticulous job. I never approached the Minister while he was contemplating the changes but, like other Deputies, I accepted that change was necessary by virtue of the increases in population.

To those Deputies who are grumbling about the changes outlined in the Bill I should like to tell them that time is on their side. They have ample time to build up and strengthen their position in their new constituencies. In canvassing in the Louth portion of the Monaghan constituency recently I was amazed to find that adjacent houses were in different constituencies. The Minister has done a lot of tidying up in this regard and has put all of Louth back into the Louth constituency.

The suggestion has been made that an independent commission should, in future, concern itself with the revision of the constituencies, but I would not be in favour of any commission doing this work. This is a job for the Minister for Local Government who has excellent officials at his disposal to help him. He would be shirking his responsibility if he handed over this work to an outsider, what one could describe as an ombudsman. Irrespective of who carries out the revision of the constituencies he is not going to please everybody and his proposals must eventually come before this House for approval. It should be remembered that this is our responsibility as the elected representatives of the people.

It is possible that if the job had been carried out by somebody else it might have been done better but the opposite is also true. Taking everything into consideration the Minister has done a fine job. At the same time, I believe he should endeavour to improve the situation in relation to the densely populated areas. These are the areas where the bulk of the problems are. The country people have ways and means of contacting their representatives but a lot of the poor people in towns and cities do not seem to have the knack of getting in touch with their Deputies.

The Minister for Local Government is living up to his promise. He was in the happy position recently of being able to go to his native parish to tell the people that he had honoured his commitments.

Mr. J. Brennan

I cannot agree with the last speaker when he complimented the Minister on the job he has done in preparing this Bill. Perhaps, from the point of view of the Members of that side of the House, he has done a good job and for that reason he deserved the compliments of the previous speaker. Normally, I would not waste my breath on speaking on these proposals because all the points I wish to put forward have been covered repeatedly by other speakers. However, if I did not speak it might be taken that I was in agreement with what is about to be done. I should like to register the most vehement protest at the proposals outlined in this Bill, particularly in relation to my own constituency.

Deputy Garret FitzGerald, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, has contributed many articles touching on this subject. One that has been referred to in the House on a number of occasions seems to sum up the whole position, whether you take this effort, or the last effort, or any other effort. He was writing an article in relation to what we should do to show the people of Northern Ireland that the things we were condemning were not done by ourselves. As reported in the Sunday Independent of 12th September last year he said that nothing had, in fact, been done to change our corrupt system of constituency manipulation. Those words are as true today—and more so—as they were then. The same article could be republished substituting the word “Coalition” for “Fianna Fáil”.

It has become the standard practice of the Government, whenever they find any little difficulty, to say: "This is what Fianna Fáil did and we are only doing the same." The people expected more. They were entitled to expect a lot more if they were influenced by what they were led to believe in the various communications media. I do not think the Minister can seriously intend to go through with the political surgery of Donegal as outlined on the map with which we were supplied. I cannot understand how anybody can seriously compliment him on restoring his own county and then take a look at the rest of the map and see what has happened to other constituencies.

I confess openly that my constituency as I found it, extending as it did from Killargue in Leitrim to Meenacladdy in Gweedore, well over 100 miles, was difficult to handle and difficult to represent as rural areas are expected to be represented. As the previous speaker said, Mahomet must go to the mountain. A representative is supposed to move around, meet the people, attend meetings of various development associations, gatherings, deputations and delegations to which he is invited week after week, apart altogether from the contact which he should keep with his own organisation, frequently attending meetings of units of his organisation, in the case of Fianna Fáil the Fianna Fáil cumainn.

It is proposed to manipulate this change in such a way that the areas of density of population, and particularly the overcrowded capital cities, will be given the full benefit of the tolerance ratio. It is proposed to treat the west of Ireland in the opposite way. Nobody could have blamed the Minister or the Government if an attempt had been made to preserve, so far as the ratio permitted, the maximum representation in the west. A lot of lip service is paid to the west of Ireland. The last two censuses showed very heartening signs of an improvement. While there was a slight drop in the population of my own county, the decline has been virtually arrested today. I have no doubt that the next census of population, even if it were taken now would show a considerable improvement in the population there.

The Minister had the figures of the last two censuses to show him how to keep to the minimum in the ratio permissible in accordance with the court's interpretation of the Constitution. He had the knowledge that there was a rising population in rural Ireland, unless the trend in the last two census periods has been reversed. There is no reason to expect that in the past eight months—unless more serious things are happening than we know about—it has been dramatically reversed. It is possible that the situation which developed in 1957 could recur and upset the trend shown in the last two censuses. But there is no reason to believe that it will particularly if the improvement shown in the agricultural industry is kept moving at the rate at which it is moving. If the trend in that direction is not reversed I can see the forecasters being proven wrong in their estimate of the fall-out from agriculture for each year. It could easily be reversed by a stabilising of the numbers employed in agriculture.

One need only advert to one's empirical examination of the situation to know that a great many young people who emigrated years ago are now returning and have been returning and re-occupying the small farms from which they emigrated. The trend in population is very obviously moving in the right direction. To hit the west of Ireland at this time by a reduction in its representation does not show any signs of any attempt to do anything worthwhile or anything serious for the west. This is deplorable.

This could be done by passing on the extra margins required from the contiguous constituencies which would enable the west to have the acceptable tolerance. It could be kept to the minimum and the cities kept to the maximum. I do not think anyone supports the lobsided development of urban life as against the depopulation of rural Ireland. Many things have been tried and done which were successful to some degree in an effort to reverse that situation, or at least arrest it. People are flocking to the bright lights, leaving comfortable country homes and creating amenity problems in the cities. Why we should put our foot on the accelerator at a time like this to further encourage that trend is something which I cannot understand and which nobody in this House could defend.

Life in the west is beautiful. Those of us who were born and reared there are rather proud of our background. The social changes which set in motion this movement towards urban life in the first instance were widespread not only in this country but in other countries too. In recent years there were many encouraging signs that that trend is now in the process of being reversed. I remember that, when the constituency changes took place before, I was disgusted with the size of the constituency which I found I must represent. This was at a time when the Ceann Comhairle was one of our constituency representatives and was not permitted to be politically active, which meant that two of us had to look after this vast area.

I hoped and felt that some ways and means could be found whereby that situation could be remedied. I certainly did not expect that we would revert to the old situation of the 1922-37 period and that the county would be all one constituency.

Some Deputies on the other side mentioned that when it suited Fianna Fáil Donegal was a single constituency. That is not correct. It was a single constituency originally but when the first opportunity presented itself in 1937 two constituencies were created, East and West. The continuous decline in population due to emigration necessitated further adjustments until the unfortunate court interpretation of the Constitution was implemented.

I have always been in favour of taking areas into consideration as well as population and I have adhered to this view whether in Government or in Opposition. I do not think it fair to have many three-seat constituencies in the city where a representative can walk around his constituency before his breakfast while Deputies in rural Ireland have to cover areas of up to 100 miles. It is not logical and it cannot be defended by anyone. I do not think it would change anything if I spoke here for the next three hours, although I have no intention of doing so. Some people are defending this proposal when they know in their hearts that it is a piece of political surgery calculated to give maximum benefit to the Government. That does not worry me because I know it is not possible to gerrymander the minds of people. In rural Ireland people have fairly mixed opinions, more so than in urban areas, and it is possible to corral sections of voters and put them where it is thought the greatest advantage could be obtained. The situation is changing rapidly——

Mr. Tully

I would ask the Deputy to repeat what he said, as I did not quite catch it.

Mr. J. Brennan

I referred to the position where people have the same opinions, where you can say people are supporters of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour. That situation is changing.

Mr. Tully

I thought the Deputy said it was possible to corral them and hand them from one constituency to another.

Mr. J. Brennan

If the Minister knew there were certain fixed opinions in a certain area, it would be possible to corral that section and transfer it elsewhere. However, people are becoming changeable in their views, particularly the younger people. The manipulation of the constituencies will not help anyone. It is rather like telling people that you know how they think politically and that they will be put where the combined effort will give the maximum benefit. That is the only thinking behind this measure.

Deputy FitzGerald tried to exploit the efforts of Fianna Fáil in favour of the Coalition. There was a time when everyone was advocating having a commission, making it appear that not only must justice and fair play be done but that it must be shown it is done. It was said we must give an example to Northern Ireland where gerrymandering had become standard practice. All these things sounded lovely and one would expect that those who advocated them would be the first to do something about them but, like every other problem that has presented itself, the Government content themselves with saying that this is the way Fianna Fáil did things and they will do the same.

I could excuse all that if the west of Ireland had been treated in a fair manner. I do not think the Minister seriously intends going on with the jigsaw puzzle he has created in South Donegal, in the Ballyshannon and Bundoran areas. Ballyshannon is left virtually an island in order not to dissect the area in which a Fine Gael Deputy lives. That is not a proper basis on which to revise the constituencies.

Mr. Tully

Perhaps Deputy Brennan could tell me how I could find enough people to make up the number.

Mr. J. Brennan

The number required to retain two constituencies in Donegal was very small. If the Minister had allowed County Leitrim to revert to its old position as a unit, which was mentioned very often in debates in this House, he could be excused to some extent but since he is leaving it mutilated——

Mr. Tully

That is not so. I am dividing it into two instead of three, which Fianna Fáil did. That is the big difference.

Mr. J. Brennan

The Minister could have left it in two pieces and have left Donegal in two constituencies also. This would be a very simple thing to do—all the Minister needed to do was to add a few thousand extra votes. However, this peculiar serpentine line is drawn on the map and it takes in an area with which I am very familiar. Castle-Ard, which is on the Donegal side of Ballyshannon, becomes part of the Sligo-Leitrim constituency, while Ballyshannon, which is further on towards Leitrim, becomes part of the Donegal constituency. I do not think anyone could justify this and I hope the Minister will see his way to changing it.

Mr. Tully

Does the Deputy want me to move Ballyshannon into Sligo-Leitrim?

Mr. J. Brennan

I do not care which way the Minister does it but he should do something logical——

Mr. Tully

I invite the Deputy to listen to me when I am replying. If he can listen to what his people proposed without hanging his head——

Mr. J. Brennan

I am not in the slightest concerned. Those old, empty threats about what the Minister is going to do will not worry me.

Mr. Tully

They are not threats. I am telling the Deputy he should listen to my reply.

Mr. J. Brennan

It does not get away from the silly, stupid exercise being carried on. I will get the seat in Donegal even if the Minister carves it up in 90 pieces or adds three counties to it. I am not personally worried and I want to put that on the record. The facts must be stated in fairness to the people of those areas who are disgusted with what has happened. I do not know what the previous Minister intended to do——

Mr. Tully

I do. It is here.

Mr. J. Brennan

He might have been doing some doodling on the matter but I am not aware of it. I would not let him have come up with a result like this. I would have resigned from the Government before he produced that.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy did not resign when the previous Minister made his constituency 100 miles long and put in a large part of Leitrim.

Mr. J. Brennan

I did not like it much but there was not much else he could have done. The only other option for him was to make the huge county of Donegal into one constituency which could not be defended by anyone. Nobody could support a proposal to have a county of that size a single constituency. There is a total bias in favour of overcrowded urban areas and I do not understand how anyone can defend that. People have tried to justify it by saying that Fianna Fáil made Donegal a five-seat constituency. They did not. It was a multi-seat constituency from the inauguration of the State. Then it dropped to seven Members. When the 12-year period elapsed and revision was necessary—before the present post-interpretation of the Constitution —the opportunity was taken to make it into two manageable constituencies of East Donegal and West Donegal. That was an ideal situation which the people preferred.

If, as Deputy Garret FitzGerald stated, the corrupt system of constituency manipulation is to continue it is on the cards that the next piece of political surgery will be the prerogative of Fianna Fáil. Are they supposed to carry out a similar political arrangement? I do not think they should. People expect more from the Coalition Government. They could have stood out in the eyes of the people as being what they pretended they were. They have failed ignominously.

Nothing I say will change the minds of those who are set on doing something which is to their political advantage. I am violently opposed to this Bill. I am disgusted with it. Nobody in Donegal is in favour of it. If the Minister thinks that the political advantage which he foresees will give him two seats out of five instead of two out of six, then he should realise that political thinking can rebound. He could find that it does not achieve what he is setting out to do. There is no reason why he cannot add a part of Leitrim to the Donegal-Leitrim constituency and maintain two constituencies in Donegal. This is a simple exercise. He can also support a drop in population in other constituencies by moving towards the constituencies nearer Dublin. Let the ripples of improved population move towards the western seaboard and give that benefit to the west which is now being given to the overcrowded capital of Dublin.

I cannot compliment the Minister on doing a good job. The Minister in an election campaign told the people of his own constituency how he had restored it. I was amused because I knew that the very opposite was happening to my own county of Dún na nGall. The Minister should take a second look at this Bill.

Mr. Gilhawley

This is the first opportunity I have had to congratulate the Minister on the good job he is doing in Local Government. I wish him luck and health in his present position.

I listened to the end of Deputy Brennan's speech. I come from the area next to Donegal, Sligo. He said that making Donegal a five-seat constituency could not be justified. He must have a very short memory. He belongs to the party which tried to justify a constituency of Donegal-Leitrim which stretched from Tory Island—am I right?

Mr. Brennan

If the Deputy had been in the House he would have heard me give the exact boundaries.

Mr. Tully

One hundred miles.

Mr. Gilhawley

——from Tory Island to beyond Manorhamilton, about one-third the length of Ireland. His party also justified the Sligo-Leitrim constituency which stretched from Ballina across to Newtowngore on the borders of Cavan, more than one-third the breadth of Ireland.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Gilhawley

I was referring to two constituencies in my part of the country which stretched for practically 100 miles, Donegal-Leitrim which stretched almost one-third the length of Ireland, and Sligo-Leitrim which stretched from Ballina across to Newtowngore on the borders of Cavan, more than one-third across Ireland. Deputy Brennan said that leaving Donegal as a unit with a small piece taken off Leitrim could not be justified. He was a member of the Government which justified the mutilation of Leitrim into three, one part with Donegal, one part with Sligo and one part with Roscommon.

The Minister has done a reasonable job. It is a difficult job for any Minister to draw up constituency boundaries. It is almost impossible to hold county boundaries. Some Members of my party are dissatisfied; some Members of the Opposition are dissatisfied; some Members of my party are delighted, and some Members of the Opposition are delighted. This shows that the Minister tried to be fair and responsible in the manner in which he did this job.

I was listening to Deputy Molloy last week. He made a long, meandering speech, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The Deputy said that the west of Ireland had been dealt a cruel blow. He mentioned Clare and Donegal. He said that the west was getting second-class treatment and mentioned the neglect of the west. In this long, confused speech Deputy Molloy also mentioned the retention of country boundaries in one place, but later said that the west could retain their existing representation but that all the constituencies in the area would require alteration. With one breath he said that the boundaries could be left alone, and with the next that they required alteration.

The Deputy also said that 21 constituencies need not be altered and among those were North-East Donegal and Sligo-Leitrim. Later on he said that five constituencies would be too small and one of these was Donegal-Leitrim. Donegal-Leitrim is vast and fits in between North-East Donegal and Sligo-Leitrim. If he thought Donegal-Leitrim was too small where was he going to get the votes from? The only place was Sligo-Leitrim.

Here comes the gem. I do not know whether the Deputy was trying to impress us when he said that Bundoran was well into Donegal. I know Bundoran well. Many people know that Bundoran is right on the edge of the county, less than one mile from the boundary of Leitrim and about three miles from the border of Sligo. The Deputy went on then to bemoan Leitrim. He said that no attempt was made to restore Leitrim to a separate electoral entity. He should have done some research. Leitrim has a population of 28,000 people. That is sufficient for one Deputy, leaving 9,000 over for another Deputy. I do not know how one could leave Leitrim as a separate electoral entity.

Towards the end of his speech Deputy Molloy said that the people of the west would revolt against the situation. If he thought he impressed anybody with his long, confusing speech he is wrong. Low as the credibility of the Opposition is, it has not been enhanced by this speech of Deputy Molloy. The people of the west revolted in the last general election. The people of Connacht especially were largely responsible for putting Fianna Fáil out of office. This was because of their neglect of the west, mentioned by Deputy Molloy himself. We are losing a seat in Connacht and we all regret it. It is no fault of the National Coalition Government, nor of the Minister. This is due to the constant neglect of the previous Government.

I regret what led up to the loss of a Deputy in the west. People are far more important than an extra Deputy. I see the signs of decay in the province in relation to people. That is why I regret the loss of a seat in Connacht. There has been wailing and weeping from the Opposition about the loss of this seat. They have shed crocodile tears over it. This is pure hypocrisy. If they had been as interested in Connacht during their 16 years in office as they now pretend to be, we would not be losing the seat and Fianna Fáil might be in office today.

Let us examine the reason for the loss of this seat in Connacht. The blame rests squarely on the Fianna Fáil administration. During the 16 years they were in office more than 40,000 people left the province. They left because there was no employment for them. They went to the industrial cities of London, Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow. That is where they are to be found today. I said before in this House in connection with the high incidence of emigration from Connacht that if there was foot-and-mouth disease panic stations would be manned and millions of pounds would be poured in, but because 40,000 people were involved the blind eye was turned.

There are welcome changes today. Fresh air seems to be blowing through the province. There is new confidence there. A trickle of the emigrants are returning home. If that tendency continues by the time the next general election comes we might have sufficient people in Connacht to get back the Deputy we are losing now.

Gerrymandering was mentioned. I have mentioned Donegal-Leitrim which stretches 100 miles, and Sligo-Leitrim which stretches from the Cavan border to the edge of Mayo, which is more than one-third the way across Ireland. The people opposite should be afraid to mention gerrymandering. They carved up Leitrim. They wiped it off the political map. Donegal, Sligo and Roscommon were altered for political reasons. The Opposition should be ashamed to mention gerrymandering. This is the first time that the revision of the constituency boundaries is out of the hands of the Opposition. It seems that they are realising only now that they are no longer the Government party, but it might be consoling for them to know that constituency boundaries never kept any Government in office, and it was the constituency boundaries set up by Fianna Fáil in the west of Ireland especially in Connacht that put them out of office. The people, not the boundaries, are the decision-makers.

In the rural areas, which are thinly populated, Deputies have to travel long distances. It is almost impossible to keep in touch with every part of the area. In cities and towns a Deputy could probably walk around his constituency. In rural Ireland—and I believe it would require a referendum to implement this—a Deputy should be elected for every 15,000 to 16,000 population. He would be able to keep more in contact with the people and give a better service to them than in trying to cater for 20,000 people.

My constituency of Sligo-Leitrim looks a much more compact constituency than it did before. North Leitrim is in with Sligo; Manorhamilton is the centre of north Leitrim, and this is only 14 miles from Sligo town. My town is 16 miles from Sligo town. The Minister did the best he could with the constituency. It did not favour me by one single vote, because I am in south Sligo, but I congratulate him on the fine job he has done in that part of the country.

Mr. Geoghegan

This being a constituencies Bill, sitting TDs on all sides of the House are interested in it. Let me say that any Minister, no matter from what party he comes, would have a very tough job revising the constituencies. I concede that to the Minister. However, we are losing seats in the west to the east and I certainly could not agree more with the last speaker, Deputy Gilhawley from Sligo-Leitrim, that there should be a reduced figure in respect of representation in rural Ireland. If it required going to the country in a referendum it would be well worthwhile.

The population is so scattered in the country areas that it is impossible for the country TD to give the service he should give to his constituents. Let me go further and say I am probably one of the very few TDs who are full-time politicians from Monday morning to Sunday night and from Sunday night to Monday morning, for practically 24 hours of the day sometimes. Perhaps I travel around my constituency more than anybody else: maybe I am not thanked for it—I do not know—but they have been returning me here for the last 20 years and they must think I have done a fair, honest job for them or they would not return me. The reason I am speaking on this matter is that I believe that, in changing the constituencies, which the Minister was bound to do under the Constitution, having regard to the last census, he should have left West Galway as it was.

Mr. Tully

I thought the reason the Deputy came in was that he was afraid the debate would collapse.

Mr. Geoghegan

I do not think the Minister should accuse me of that. The Minister will readily admit that in Galway we are more over our quota than under it. In fact, we could shed some few thousand voters and, therefore, he should have allowed West Galway to remain a three-seat constituency. Galway city is continuing to grow, not in hundreds but in thousands, every two to three years. For some reason of his own, the Minister decided to make it a four-seat constituency. He has taken practically half of Clare and put it back west as if it was not far enough back already, and he has brought the Galway West constituency down to include even Lahinch in Clare.

From the city of Galway, which is the eastern part of the old constituency, to the western end of it, is a distance of 70 to 75 miles. In taking, as he proposes to do now, the Clare part of the constituency and putting it in with the western old part, the Minister is adding 55 to 57 miles to the old West Galway constituency. You take in part of Lahinch, all Ennistymon, the Blackhead end of Lisdoonvarna, along by Carran, Ballyvaughan, up to the Galway Border at Kinvara. If my figures are correct the Minister is taking something like 9,214 votes from the Clare constituency and putting them into the West Galway constituency.

If one takes the portion of Galway that has been in the South Galway constituency up to the present and the portion in the North Galway constituency one has approximately 3,000 to 3,500 more which makes a total of 13,000 odd votes. The Minister in his introductory speech said that as far as possible he did not want to breach county boundaries. If either North Galway or South Galway was short West Galway could have shed 2,000 to 3,000 voters to bring them up and the Minister would be breaching no other county boundary. If he had to breach a county boundary, in fairness to the people he should have taken a horse shoe shaped part of the old South Galway and part of the old North Galway and put them in with West Galway to make it a four-seater, if he wanted to do that. He would be adding about 15 to 20 miles to the old West Galway constituency as compared with between 55 and 57 miles, as he is doing. The people of both Clare and West Galway are entitled to fair representation and I venture to say that no matter who is elected from the area he will not be able to give them the service that is due to them. It would take a half day to travel from Galway to Cleggan and if one wanted to visit the islands, as one must do, one would have to take a boat. The Minister is smiling but I am not smiling.

Mr. Tully

Bill Loughnane said he would look after that end of it.

Mr. Geoghegan

While I am in this House I will do my utmost to represent the people of West Galway to the best of my ability and I will go out to meet them in the different areas on whatever day of the week suits them but with that stretch of Clare coming in I do not see how I could do justice or how the Minister could expect me to do justice to the people of Clare as well as to the people of West Galway. It is all wrong. I agree with Deputy Gilhawley that while under the Constitution there must be approximately 20,000 voters to each Deputy, in the city of Dublin one can get from one end of a constituency to the other on a bus for about 8p while a Deputy in Galway is asked to travel from Inishbofin on the west to Lahinch in Clare and from any of the Aran islands to the borders of Mayo. I think that is asking for too much. I fear the Minister is not being fair to the people there. No matter who is elected to represent them and no matter what he does he cannot represent them the way I like a TD to represent his people. If I am lucky enough to come in here after the next election and if the Minister is still over there, he might make representations to the Minister for Defence to see if he would give me a helicopter so that a fellow could get around his constituency.

Mr. Tully

He might. He is a very obliging fellow.

Mr. Geoghegan

Will the Minister make representations to him for me?

Mr. Tully

Anything for a friend.

Mr. Taylor

In case of emergency we will always help the Deputy out.

Mr. Geoghegan

There was a time when the Aran Islands were part of the Clare constituency. There was also a time when that portion of West Galway east of the city was in the old South Galway area and Currandulla —Lough George was in with North Galway. If the Minister still wanted to leave it a three-seater, we could have shed some voters from the West Galway constituency. The Minister could have pushed some of the old south Galway area back to where it used to be and put the portion of West Galway that used to be in North Galway, the Annaghdown-Clare-Galway area, in with North Galway. That would bring it up to a reasonable figure.

We have along the western seaboard very hilly areas and one cannot pass very easily from one small town to another. One may have to make a detour of 20 miles or more. Suppose I were in Carna, where I lived for many years, and I wanted to go to Lettermullen, it was only a stone's throw to there across the water from my own door but to make the journey by road involved a distance of 43 miles, and anybody who must travel as far as that to meet his constituents cannot meet them as often as he would wish. I would like to see my constituents twice or three times a week if possible, but the Minister is denying me that opportunity. He is making it very difficult for me by putting a large part of Clare into the West Galway constituency. I am familiar with every inch of the area, from Lahinch to Kinvarra, that the Minister is putting back into this constituency.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy should be thanking me for giving him a safe seat.

Mr. Geoghegan

I fail to understand why the Minister has made this change. After reading the map twice I decided to clean my glasses lest my eyes were deceiving me. I know the Minister is not a drinking man but there must have been something queer in his mind when he made the decision in relation to West Galway.

It is my wish that some day a Minister will introduce a Bill for the purpose of reducing rural constituencies to a population of approximately 15,000 while increasing city constituencies to a 30,000 population. In Dublin it is possible to go from one end of a Deputy's constituency to another for no more than a 10p bus ride whereas in a rural area one may have to travel as much as 130 miles to reach one's constituents. I have a good idea why the Minister changed the West Galway constituency. That constituency has always been a three-seater and I think it can be said that those Deputies who represented it down through the years did a good job. The people of that area always saw fit to return two Deputies here. I shall not mention people who are outside this House but I know why the Minister made this change.

Mr. Tully

I am giving the constituency four seats, but the Deputy is not thanking me for it.

Mr. Geoghegan

I have a good idea that the people of my constituency will return me again to this House.

Mr. Tully

I have ensured that by making the constituency a four-seater one.

Mr. Geoghegan

The Minister might have made it possible for whoever is elected to see his constituents without having to travel great distances. It is about 57 miles from Galway city to Lahinch. That is a long journey for anyone to have to travel to meet his public representatives and not everybody has his own means of transport.

Mr. Coogan

I shall look after those people.

Mr. Geoghegan

Between now and Committee Stage I trust the Minister will reconsider what he proposes in respect of West Galway. He said he would not breach county boundaries any more than was necessary but in this case he has done so to the extent of 57 miles. No doubt the people will show their displeasure at this at the next election.

Mr. Taylor

Everybody knows that it was necessary to revise the constituencies in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and that in doing so changes in population had to be taken into account.

Mr. Coogan

A Fianna Fáil Constitution.

Mr. Taylor

There has been an increase in population of 3.3 per cent. The promotion of industry on the eastern seaboard has resulted in a big shift of population to that area but in the west, where no real provision was made to keep the people at home, it was obvious that there would be a decrease in population. I was impressed by some of the speeches, particularly that made by Deputy Gilhawley, in which he made reference to the big decrease in population along the west coast, particularly in Connacht, and said that, consequently, it was impossible to retain the existing representation in that area. I was amazed to hear some of the West Galway Deputies bemoaning the fact that they are to get portion of Clare. Deputies Molloy and Geoghegan, and Deputy Coogan, too, are very popular in County Clare where they have connections and where they are very welcome.

Mr. Geoghegan

I do not want to interrupt. The only thing I said was that we have more than enough for three in the old West Galway constituency and why change it? That is what I said.

Mr. Taylor

I am sure Deputy Geoghegan will not object to having more territory and a bigger population from whom to gain support. I know Deputy Coogan does not mind.

Mr. Tunney

It does not affect him.

Mr. Coogan

We saw you coming and we will see you going.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Taylor

The Minister has done a very fine job in the interests of the people. As far as possible he has retained county boundaries and kept a balance. It is practically impossible to adjust constituencies without affecting somebody. I do not believe the Minister made these adjustments with any ulterior motive. Two major towns have been taken out of my constituency and transferred to Deputy Coogan, Deputy Geoghegan and Deputy Molloy. The late Bill Murphy was born and bred in one of these towns and we all know the support he commanded. I am glad the Minister extended the boundary of East Clare around by the Shannon and down into Limerick city. Any Deputy who thinks he will not retain his seat under this Bill is devoid of courage. Remember he will have four long years in which to consolidate his position. Every Deputy here can rest assured of a long tenure. Today's news confirms that. It also confirms the policy of the Minister and his colleagues in Government.

There is an obligation to revise constituencies every 12 years. The Minister has adhered to the 1,000 statutory tolerance to the best of his ability. There will be four extra seats in urban areas. They are justified because of population trends. Deputy Gilhawley talked about a loss of 40,000 from Connacht. From 1966 to 1971 in two small rural districts in West Clare there was a loss in population of 964 in one case and 640 in the second case. That gives an idea of the trend in rural areas. I can never forgive anyone allowing such an unfair imbalance to continue for such a long time without any effort being made to correct it. Present indications now are that it will be corrected and if this Government continue, as I hope they will, for many long years to come the population in the rural areas will be restored and the imbalances will be corrected. When that day dawns, we shall probably have many more Deputies representing the west.

Deputies should have more confidence in themselves and in their ability to represent the people. I saw Clare represented by people who had not lived in the county for many long years. I have known people to come in there and attempt to gain a seat, unsuccessfully, of course, though they made a good impression. Deputies should have courage to face up to these constituencies. I wish them all well. I would like to see them all back here, but that is entirely up to themselves.

Mr. Tunney

We have in Deputy Taylor's part of the country and in Deputy Geoghegan's part of the country an area known as the Gaeltacht and there we have all the accumulated wisdom of past generations of Irishmen. They have a seanfhocal, ná déan nós agus ná bris nós. When we think about that we realise that the nature of the Irishman, contrary to what he might say—and there is evidence that this is true—makes him very slow to part with anything that is already established. I will not call him conservative lest we confuse it with the political connotation of that word but on every side of the reluctance—and perhaps it is not peculiar to the Irishman alone—of Irishmen to change from the old position and to move to the new one. There is evidence to be seen among Irishmen that, whether it be the reconstruction of a road, the changing of the location of a post office or the appointment of any new officer in an area, we are inclined to retain the old position. That is our position at the time of this proposed change. When ultimately the change takes place I suppose we are as ready as anybody else to accept it. As Deputy Taylor has indicated, and as has been indicated by the Minister, there is this evidence of our reluctance to give up the established order.

At this juncture, and as this is the first piece of legislation introduced by the Minister on which I have spoken I should like to congratulate him on his appointment and wish him well.

There is evidence of our desire to reject the new or the innovation. We all know that this change is required. The Constitution requires that a revision of this nature should take place. When talking about human nature and human behaviour it would be unwise to isolate the politician as being different from anybody else. In the matter of politics it would be unwise for people on these benches who are in opposition to accept that any Government should be so idealistic in introducing any piece of legislation not to have due regard for there being evidence of that attitude in successive Fianna Fáil Governments. Truthfully, I must say I do not see any effort on the part of the new government to legislate in a fashion which would not be advantageous to themselves. If I have any criticism of the Minister and his speech it is that in his speech introducing this measure he expressed the idealistic and he talked about what was required of him under the Constitution, but in practice, he did not convince me that he made any effort to attain that.

If the measure came before me as one which had been considered by the Government in office, one which they were introducing with a balance weighed slightly in their own favour, I do not think I could honestly offer any criticism. However, we have this expression of the idealistic. The Minister told us, as reported in the Official Report of the 15th November, at column 1987, that in drawing up the proposals his objective was, first of all, to ensure fair and reasonable representation for the people of every area and that was what the Constitution required.

I do not think the Minister has spelled out in any great detail how he sought to pursue that ideal, and if he did pursue it I suggest he did not succeed. Perhaps, he will spell this out when replying. In column 1986 of the Official Report of 15th November the Minister expressed the view that it was particularly desirable that the historic county boundaries should be preserved as far as possible and that natural communities should not be divided between different constituencies.

When one thinks of what has happened in Clare, Cork and even in Dublin, I do not think one can detect a great awareness on the part of the Minister to preserve historic or natural boundaries. One can show, and I am not saying that this played any very prominent part in the preparation of this Bill, the inconsistencies which occurred more often than not in areas where it could be said that Fianna Fáil were stronger than the combination of the Coalition Parties. There is something within me which makes me accept that as being reasonably natural. My objection would be solely to the fact that the architects of the Bill would claim for themselves motives which have not been reflected in the Bill.

I will just give one or two examples. They stated that in areas of high density of population the ideal constituency would return three candidates. We have evidence of that in Dublin with the one exception of the constituency which has the honour of returning the Taoiseach, a rather influential member of the Labour Party, Deputy Desmond, and another honourable member of the Fine Gael Party, Deputy H.P. Dockrell.

In deciding what was required for the purpose of this Bill, whatever about the position enjoyed as of now by any Member of this House, it would be incorrect, and it would not be in accordance with true democracy, if he or she got consideration different from that applied to other Members. Taking the stated aim of three-seater constituencies in areas of high population density let us move south to Cork. We are reminded often enough that Cork is our second biggest city. Cork enjoys, if that is the correct word, the same density of population, in parts, as we do in the metropolis. It is fairly significant that, despite the stated objective of having three-seater constituencies in cities, where already we had three-seater constituencies, they have now disappeared.

One cannot be accused of being suspicious to some extent about that when one realises that in the two existing three-seater constituencies we had the former Taoiseach, Deputy Wyse, Deputy French and Deputy Healy. Fianna Fáil had representation of four out of six seats. It would appear that the name of the numbers game is to hive off a certain number of votes and, even though you are speaking the stated aim of having three-seaters, you now break the stated aim of retaining natural and historic communities by putting part of Cork city in with the agricultural area which exists in the most northerly part of Mid-Cork. Last Sunday week I had the pleasure of listening to the Minister addressing the people of Ardee where, inter alia, he referred to his proposals in this Bill.

Mr. Tully

Did the Deputy see the enthusiasm for it?

Mr. Tunney

We must accept that politicians are politicians but let them state that they are. There is no need for us to make any apology for the fact that we are politicians. On that occasion the Minister was speaking for the moment and to what he regarded as the best advantage for himself and for the Fine Gael candidate on whose behalf he spoke.

Mr. Tully

Is the Deputy talking about Deputy Toal?

Mr. Tunney

I was in the constituency for two and a half weeks and I did not hear him referred to as anything else except the Fine Gael candidate.

Mr. Lalor

Are you going to fiddle the recount?

Mr. Tully

You cannot fiddle it. You cannot fiddle 284 votes out of the way.

Mr. Tunney

We want only half of that.

Mr. C. Murphy

I wonder are the Minister's figures accurate.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy had better check them.

Mr. C. Murphy

I do not think the Minister is accurate.

Mr. Tully

Yes, 284.

Mr. Lalor

That shows we were justified. The figure given initially was 298.

Mr. Tully

You are helping me now.

An Ceann Comhairle

Could we get back to the Bill?

Mr. Tully

We are talking about Deputy Total.

Mr. Tunney

It would be only half of that. If we got half those plus one that is all we would need.

Mr. Tully

"If wishes were horses ..."

Mr. Tunney

I was trying to indicate where I thought there were certain inconsistencies in the manner in which the Bill was introduced and in the claims made that the only objective was fair and reasonable representation. I listened to the Minister when he spoke on behalf of the gentleman who was advertised as the Fine Gael candidate in the by-election. He explained to the people of Ardee that because he believed Louth should not be divided he proposed in this Bill to reinstate Ardee with Louth. I was treating myself to the pleasure of indulging in certain suspicions of the Minister's motives in re-arranging certain areas. I do not know whether his concern for re-arranging that part of Louth and the constituencies of Monaghan and Louth arose from his anticipation of the result of the by-election. The examples I have given indicate that the proposals in the Bill are not in accordance with the stated aims and objectives.

I admit when studying the Bill I had some regard to my own position and I assume every other politician did likewise. With regard to the three-seat constituencies in Dublin, I confess a certain personal happiness about the situation but I am not convinced it is the best thing for democracy and representation. It can be shown that three-seat constituencies will lead to a certain stability so far as sitting Members are concerned but this might not be the best for the Members, the Government or the people they represent.

I join issue with speakers who have attacked the Minister about the situation in the west. When one speaks of the west, invariably one's mind goes back to Cromwell. Deputy Geoghegan said the Minister was shoving people into West Galway and perhaps if I were in his position I could not resist the comparsion with Cromwell. However, when listening to other speakers I wondered how they interpret their role as public representatives, and this applies to Members on the other side also. At column 1985 of the Official Report dated 15th November the Minister stated:

My own view is that it is very important to have the maximum possible number of Deputies, particularly since the House must now deal not only with the full range of domestic policy and legislation, but also with developments in the European Communities.

I agree with the Minister in this. Whether Members of this House can continue to make a case that representation here demands the availability of Deputies to every constituent must be questioned and this was the concern of a number of Deputies who spoke on this matter. I do not want to be accused of not having regard for the west. In passing I might say it was only a matter of weeks which decided I was born in Dublin rather than in Mayo and, in fact, practically all of my relations are still in Mayo and I have relations also in Galway. I cannot be accused of not having genuine regard for people in the west.

It has been mentioned by several speakers that a Dublin Deputy can walk from one end of his constituency to another in a matter of hours or that a 10p bus ride will take him from one end of the constituency to another. That does not prove much and has no relevance to what we are discussing. I have said at other times that even though a Deputy might be able to travel throughout his constituency in 30 minutes, city constituencies are much more impersonal than rural areas. The people I have the honour to represent suffer from a greater and a more disastrous anonymity than those in rural constituencies. In the latter there is a link between villages and towns. There is a community feeling that is entirely absent from city life.

A rural Deputy who has been elected by 2,500 or 3,500 No. 1 votes is better known to his constituents than a Dublin Deputy who was elected by perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 No. 1 votes. The argument that because of distance a rural Deputy is further removed from his constituents than a Dublin or Cork Deputy cannot be sustained. The role of the TD is meeting and counselling his constituents and, as I have said, this should not be the sole criterion so far as representation here is concerned. This is a very important part of representation. Counselling is much more important for city than rural Deputies.

The greatest need for city dwellers in my opinion is the creation of a situation which will allow a Deputy to get closer to his constituents. He should be able to help them overcome the feeling of frustration they feel against the institutions which exercise so much power over them. If at any future date attempts are made to change the Constitution it will not be a case of applying a ruler to a map and assuming that because certain constituencies cover certain mileage that greater representation is desirable.

It is no harm to compare politics with sport, for example an intercounty GAA football team. Any young man who makes the grade with his county football team overnight becomes well known throughout the county. A young man making the grade with a Dublin football team very often is not known to his neighbours. Certainly he will not be known to all the people living on his street.

I hope I have demonstrated that the Minister gave little evidence that his approach to this Bill is different from that of other Governments here and abroad. More important, there is ample evidence that it is as sophisticated and polished a job of gerrymandering as I have ever seen.

Mrs. Burke

I should like to discuss this Bill in so far as it affects Roscommon. The revision of constituencies had to take place. The previous Government stated that they were preparing changes before going out of office. Generally speaking, this Bill will meet with approval. In a job of this size some Deputies are bound to be disappointed and I am one of those. I fully appreciate that it is impossible to please all Deputies. For instance, Athlone Urban, which was put into the constituency during the last revision, is now returned to Longford-Westmeath. Fair enough. That is its natural boundary and that is where it should have been. Ballaghaderreen and Loughglynn, which were formerly with Roscommon, are now with East Mayo. Ballinlough which was put into North-East Galway during the last revision is now in East Mayo.

I expect at this late stage that the Minister will not make changes but I want to put it on record that I disagree with the Minister's proposals as far as Roscommon is concerned. Roscommon has suffered more than any other county. I was disappointed that Roscommon county boundaries were not restored if that were possible. The Minister had a difficult job to do and if we are losing a seat in Connacht, which had to affect county boundaries, that was not the fault of the Minister or of the National Coalition; it was the fault of the previous Government. I hope that when the constituencies are being revised again the population of Connacht will have increased. Finally, I wish to congratulate the Minister and I wish him well in his new appointment.

Mr. C. Murphy

Reading the Minister's introduction to the Second Stage of this Bill I find that he has twin aims in mind. It was stated that the first objective was to ensure fair and reasonable representation for the people of every area. The Minister stated:

Secondly as I have already stated, I endeavoured as far as possible to avoid breaching existing administrative boundaries and tried to ensure that natural communities were not split, unnecessarily, between different constituencies.

They are laudable aims.

Each Deputy in approaching this Bill would probably give great thought to his or her own area. The Minister referred to Meath which has now become a four-seater. There were interruptions such as "and give you a present of a seat" and "you are the only people who gained there". Each constituency is close to the heart of the Deputy representing it. The constituency closest to the heart of the Minister is Meath. We find the Minister speaking of gain and loss. One would imagine that the twin aims which the Minister mentioned in the introduction to the Second Stage were of no great importance. It is all gain and loss. That is reasonable.

Looking at the Bill we find that there are six five-seaters, ten four-seaters and 26 three-seater constituencies. We find that five rural areas and one city area have five-seaters. We find Carlow-Kilkenny, Cavan-Monaghan, Mid-Cork, Donegal, Laois-Offaly, and the city constituency of Cork city. There seems to be a certain variance here. In Dublin we find all constituencies are three-seaters. We find a five-seat constituency in Cork. What criterion was used in this Bill? If Dublin has three-seaters surely Cork should also be arranged in three-seaters. That would appear to be logical. We find parts of counties have been grafted towards the city of Dublin in order to arrange extra seats. The Minister spoke of his intention to retain county boundaries as far as possible and to avoid breaching existing administrative boundaries. My constituency certainly cannot be a standard one for the Minister's purpose of retaining administrative and county boundaries.

The further charge which I can make against the Minister is that instead of a policy of decentralisation there is a policy of centralisation. This is to be expected from a city-based Government. Part of Kildare and two sections of Wicklow are taken in towards Dublin. I am speaking about Bray and Rathmichael which are taken into South County Dublin. The north ward of Bray Urban Council has been removed. I am glad Deputy Kavanagh is listening to me.

Mr. Kavanagh

I am well aware of this.

Mr. C. Murphy

I hope the Deputy will not feel this loss to his cost.

Mr. Kavanagh

This hurts the Deputy more than it hurts me.

Mr. C. Murphy

I am only interested in the Minister's twin aims. The Minister spoke in terms of gains and losses. We are all human enough to be interested in our own constituency. The Bill is all designed in terms of gains and losses. If the Minister is making an effort to retain administrative boundaries why should part of the area of the urban authority of Bray be moved to a different constituency? It is being done to boost the population of Dublin. It is a further effort at centralisation which is to be expected from a Dublin-based Government.

There is a further breach of the constituency of Wicklow where we find part of the Blessington area moving into this county. This is to be lamented even more, because in the last few years great strides have been made in this area in industrialisation. Indeed, it is fitting to pay tribute to the West Wicklow Development Association who gave hope, life and encouragement to a rural community. What does this Bill propose to do—take this area within the city? I doubt if the other two Deputies who represent the constituency of Wicklow with me would approve of this at all. We are all interested in rural development. Over the years there has been too much emphasis on the east coast, Dublin tending to expand and choke itself with the establishment of further industries. The Wicklow Development Association have made great strides in a rural area and now the area in which they worked is taken under the umbrella of the city. This is tragic.

Mr. Kavanagh

It will not hinder Wicklow development in any way.

Mr. Begley

It might hinder the Deputy.

Mr. C. Murphy

I do not think so, but we should not become personal about this. It is just a general point in which I am criticising a Dublin-based group for reaching out and taking part of a rural area into the city. Instead of having decentralisation you have centralisation. In relation to the three-seaters, I wish to quote the Minister, who said: "You are the only people who gained there" in the part of the debate which involved the constituency of Meath. The reason these three-seaters have been established in Dublin is so that the Labour Party might gain 13 seats and so that, in the only four-seater, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, the one sure one, if one can be sure of anything, they would gain a 14th seat. In the hinterland around Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown there is this nest of three-seaters. Wicklow has a three-seater and fairly central inside it there is a four-seat constituency. I do not call it a "gerrymander"; it is a "jimmymander", in the vain hope that the election result might read: Fianna Fáil, 13; Fine Gael, 13; Labour, 13.

Mr. Tully

Fianna Fáil are so confident that I wonder what they are squealing about.

Mr. C. Murphy

I am not squealing about anything. The Minister missed what I said at the beginning. I shall take him back to what I said.

Mr. Tully

I was listening to the Deputy outside.

Mr. C. Murphy

No. The Minister was not here.

Mr. Tully

Deputies are not allowed to repeat things in this House.

Mr. C. Murphy

Can the Minister not bear to listen to it? Does the truth hurt that much?

Mr. Lalor

Should the Deputy not be allowed to speak without interruption?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair was tolerant because the interruptions were of a jovial kind in the past few minutes.

Mr. C. Murphy

We are dealing with a very important topic now. The Minister is becoming very sensitive about it and I may be making an impression on him. The Minister mentioned, as I have already stated, his twin aims were: (1) to ensure fair and reasonable representation for the people of every area; and, (2) to endeavour as far as possible to avoid breaching existing administrative boundaries and try to ensure that natural communities were not split unnecessarily between different constituencies. I should like to quote from column 2018, Volume 268, of the Official Report of 15th November, 1973, in which there was an interruption by the Minister when Deputy Molloy was speaking about Meath. His first interruption was: "and give you a present of a seat". The second interruption by the Minister was: "You were the only people who gained there." We may have discovered the real key to this Bill in the word "gained". The Minister was not interested in the primary or the secondary aim. In drafting this Bill he was interested simply in gains and losses.

Mr. Tully

That is the Deputy's assumption and he is entitled to assume anything he likes.

Mr. C. Murphy

When we are close to home we think of gains and losses.

Mr. Tully

We were all watching gains and losses today—one gain and one loss. We gained; you lost.

Mr. C. Murphy

It might be one gain and three losses.

Mr. Tully

One gain, one loss today.

Mr. C. Murphy

If there were four horses in the field it might be different. It depends on one's approach. I challenge the Minister to deny that in revising these constituencies he just thought of the word "gain". I do not think the question of fair representation or retaining existing administrative boundaries was utmost in his mind.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy is very ponderous.

Mr. C. Murphy

That is the kernel of this Bill. Instead of decentralisation, in this Bill we find centralisation. Rural areas are being moved towards the city.

Mr. Kavanagh

Where?

Mr. C. Murphy

Part of Kildare has been moved towards Dublin.

Mr. Lemass

West County Dublin and Mid-County Dublin. Places like Celbridge and Blessington.

Mr. C. Murphy

Have the Government abandoned all thoughts of decentralisation? They are a Dublin based group. Are they confining their power to Dublin?

Mr. Tully

We are a lot more rural than either of the two Deputies over there.

Mr. Lemass

The other way round by a long chalk. I am Dublin and proud of it but I have represented rural Ireland as a Parliamentary Secretary for three and a half years.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Murphy, and, incidentally, if he would address his remarks to the Chair, we might have fewer interruptions.

Mr. C. Murphy

I represent a rural constituency. Unfortunately, part of this rural constituency is now to be brought under the umbrella of Dublin. Not only are there to be two breaches of the constituency boundary but also a breach of an urban authority boundary and a county boundary. I cannot see any reason for this at all. I thought at first that the idea might be that the people lived in those areas and worked in Dublin so Dublin might be regarded as a work base but, on examination of the areas concerned, I find that people from those areas do not travel to the city for employment.

Mr. Tully

That is all cod. The Deputy must know nothing at all about the area.

Mr. C. Murphy

Let us take the North Ward in Bray which is being moved. I grew up in it and many of my friends live there. I know exactly where those people work. The people who commute between Bray and Dublin are not resident in Bray No. 1, the area which is being moved. I think Deputy Kavanagh would agree with that. The people in that area, which is a working class area, work in two or three factories in the area and in Bray town. They are not the people who travel to Dublin. They are being drafted in towards the city. I do not think it is a good idea.

Mr. Kavanagh

What part of Bray does the Deputy want to be put into Dublin?

Mr. C. Murphy

I do not want any part of Bray nor of Wicklow moved from the constituency.

Mr. Kavanagh

Under the Constitution it has to happen.

Mr. C. Murphy

Not necessarily. If the Deputy can give me an exact quotation, I would appreciate it. There are two breaches of the constituency boundary. I wonder how many other counties are affected in a similar fashion. There was only one criterion used and that was to boost the population of the city, to draw people closer to Dublin instead of dispersing them from the city. Would it not have been a better idea to take people from the city area and move them towards Kildare and Wicklow and increase the population of those areas? Over the years we have been trying to avoid moving people to Dublin.

Reading the Official Report and newspaper articles when the 1969 Act was going through the House I found many pious thoughts and comments to the effect that an independent commission would be a fairer way in which to revise boundaries. At that time apparently the present Government did not see much hope of being entrusted with the reins of office by the people. Now that they have the reins of office——

Mr. Begley

Increasing their lead.

Mr. C. Murphy

We see that after a short time in office power tends to corrupt.

Mr. Kavanagh

You are the experts.

Mr. C. Murphy

What legislation have they put through the House before this Bill? Practically none. This is their first piece of legislation and it is a great effort to cement the present regime in office, to augment their numbers in future elections. Speaking of future elections, we see predictions of a result of 86 for the National Coalition Parties and 62 for Fianna Fáil. That will not happen. People will accept so much but they will draw the line. It was said that the last Act was an effort to keep Fianna Fáil continually in office. I recall reading that it was very difficult to see Fianna Fáil out of office for the remainder of this century. It proved to be an extremely good Bill, returning one party on one occasion and another on the next.

Mr. Kavanagh

That was the decision of the people.

Mr. C. Murphy

Did that Bill not succeed in maintaining the balance of power? This evening's anticipated result of the by-election indicates that people are interested in a balance of power. Therefore, any Bill which is designed to return 86 members of the Government parties as against 62 from the Opposition is doomed to failure.

Mr. Kavanagh

Their morale is very low.

Mr. C. Murphy

The people will see this Bill for what it is—an effort by the Government to hold on to office. Instead of nibbling at the apple that might result in some small swing in their favour, the Government have decided to take a huge bite but the apple was responsible in earlier days for results that were not anticipated and the same may happen in this case.

Can anyone explain why Cork City is to be a five-seater while Dublin is to have three-seat constituencies? It cannot be attributed to an imbalance in population because there has been no decrease in the population of Cork City, but the transferring of a huge portion of the city must lead to a reduction in the number of seats. Regarding the portion of Bray that is to be transferred one could make the case that it is on the north side of the river but no such argument can be made in relation to Cork. Have those people who are being transferred from Cork City to Mid-Cork a closer association with the latter than with the former? The changes in this Bill are based on the premise of gain and loss.

Mr. Kavanagh

I cannot follow that argument.

Mr. C. Murphy

All these pious platitudes of fulfilling the needs of the Constitution mean nothing in this instance because this is a Bill that has been introduced by a Government in an effort to secure their continuance in office. Apparently they do not trust their own ability to be returned to power again and, consequently, in order to avoid any possibility of being removed they have arranged the constituencies in such a way as to allow them aim at a target of 86 seats. Had they trusted their own ability they might have aimed at something in the region of 78 seats but they have chosen the maximum number possible. This is the rock on which they will perish. The balance of power is the important factor in so far as the people are concerned because the Irish as a whole dislike a situation where there is gross imbalance. This figure of 86 seats has been mentioned in editorials as well as in other informed sources of speculation.

Mr. Begley

I am glad the Deputy mentioned the word "speculation".

Mr. C. Murphy

Informed speculation. The media have examined this Bill and see it as an effort by the Government to be returned with 86 seats to Fianna Fáil's 62 in the next election.

Mr. Kavanagh

Let us wait and see what will happen at the next general election.

Mr. White

The Deputy must not have much confidence in Fianna Fáil when he is predicting that we will have 86 seats in the next Dáil.

Mr. C. Murphy

The Deputy has taken my point.

Mr. Kavanagh

Deputy Murphy has a high opinion of the present Government.

Mr. C. Murphy

I do not think it really and the Deputy does not think it either because, if that were the approach, it would have been approximately 78. But the Deputies over there have no confidence in themselves and so they introduced this measure. No doubt they will put it through since they have a majority and, having put it through, they hope it will perpetuate them in office. They are not trying for a modest change. They are rigging it in such a way that it will take a huge swing to deprive them of office. As this comes home to the people they will appreciate how in a very short term in office power has already tended to corrupt. The first thing the Government Deputies do is try to make sure that they will remain in office. They want to be doubly sure of it and so they aim at 86. If something goes wrong they can afford to lose a few but they will still be there. That is the approach.

The increase in population which has led to this revision of the constituencies is to be welcomed. The fact that it will increase membership of this House by four is also to be welcomed irrespective of the party affiliation of the successful candidates. Pressures are increasing, particularly since we entered Europe, and more demands are being made upon Deputies and so we will welcome four more Members who will share the workload with us.

The increase in the population is gratifying. We hear less and less about emigration these days. Indeed, it is heartening to find the emphasis placed on an increasing population rather than a decreasing one. I hope the population goes on increasing. I am sure that is a hope shared by all my colleagues in this House. I hope the Government will be able to maintain this increase.

Mr. Kavanagh

The Government had an addition today.

Mr. C. Murphy

I would not be too sure of that. I do not think the final results are with us yet. He will have the honour, whoever he is, of representing a three-seat constituency. When this Bill becomes law he will find himself among six representing a five-seat constituency.

Mr. Lemass

Monaghan gave a seat to Cavan today.

Mr. C. Murphy

He will find himself among six, as I said, representing a five-seat constituency. His seat will have gone to Dublin when this Bill becomes law. I thought the emphasis was supposed to be on decentralisation rather than centralisation. There may be an increase but tomorrow or the next day, or whenever this Bill becomes law, whoever he is will find himself representing a three-seat constituency amongst six representing a five-seat constituency.

Mr. Kavanagh

And endorsed by the people of Monaghan.

Mr. C. Murphy

And I will accept their decision as I accepted their decision on 28th February last.

Mr. Kavanagh

And why should the Deputy not?

Mr. C. Murphy

The decision of 28th February——

An Leas-Ceann Comhairle

We cannot discuss the results of the last general election.

Mr. C. Murphy

That decision was reached under an Act passed in 1969, an Act which was regarded as a piece of gerrymandering in an effort to perpetuate Fianna Fáil in office. Events proved that that Act was a fair piece of legislation which retained the balance and, respecting the wishes of the people, a Government was formed of two contrasting parties, the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party. We have not yet seen the emergence of a National Coalition Party. The last time I checked the register of political parties there was no such political party registered. But who knows? Maybe when this Bill becomes law we will find such a party registered. In aiming for the speculative figure of 86 people they might risk throwing away the mantle of the Labour Party to come under this umbrella of the National Coalition Party.

Mr. White

A united Government, which is more than the Deputy can boast about.

Mr. C. Murphy

Then we shall see which way the people will accept this. One can arrange the constituencies to a certain degree but maybe those true members of the Labour Party will not be happy with this arrangement and this would rock the boat sufficiently. This could happen to such an extent that even the huge target of 86 seats would not be sufficient. I wonder if this was the reason why 86 seats were sought rather than the modest total of 78. Is it anticipated that, when this Bill has passed through this House and the Seanad, we will see the emergence of a National Coalition Party? This Bill seems to be an effort by the present Government to ensure another term in office. The thought strikes me that this Bill will see the emergence of a new party.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This is not relevant to the Bill before the House.

Mr. Tully

Particularly in view of the result of the Monaghan bye-election.

Mr. C. Murphy

When the House were discussing the constituency of Meath the Minister spoke of the people who "gained" there. This is the criteria of this Bill.

Mr. Tully

I received thousands of votes over the quota in my constituency and I did not come in a "hind tit" man. For that reason the Deputy is wasting his time talking about things like that.

Mr. Lemass

The Minister is making sure that he does so again. We will pick up the votes, however.

Mr. C. Murphy

I am alluding to the underlying principle of this Bill which is the word "gained". In column 2018 of the Official Report of 15th November the Minister used this word. It is too easy to talk in terms of gains and losses. A better Bill would have been before this House if the twin aims of fair and equal representation for all the people had been maintained and if the Minister endeavoured to avoid breaching administrative boundaries.

The present Minister for Foreign Affairs in a newspaper article expressed an idea that the people of the Six Counties——

Mr. Tully

The Deputy should quote. He has said that he is quoting what the Minister for Foreign Affairs said and he should do so.

Mr. C. Murphy

The Minister for Foreign Affairs made this statement in a newspaper article. This article was published in the Sunday Independent of 12th November, 1972. The article states:

For 50 years, Unionist control of local government in Northern Ireland was extended far beyond the areas where Unionists secured a majority of votes.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy is quoting somebody he says quoted the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. C. Murphy

It has been quoted on to the record of the House from this newspaper.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is the Deputy quoting from the Official Report?

Mr. C. Murphy

I am quoting from the Official Report of 15th November, 1973, column 2004. According to the Official Report of that date the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in this newspaper article, went on to state:

This was done by gerrymandering —by rigging constituency boundaries in such a way as to convert a minority of votes into a majority of seats.

In that Official Report, column 2005, the Minister stated:

If we were serious about creating in the Republic conditions that would encourage a decent Northern Protestant to look towards a prospect of eventual reunification, we should, of course, have implemented all relevant Northern Ireland reforms here——

Mr. Tully

The Deputy is not quoting the Minister for Foreign Affairs. He is quoting from the Official Report which deals with an article in a newspaper.

Mr. C. Murphy

That article goes on to state:

——and especially the electoral reform to abolish gerrymandering, which northerners know all too well could be used against them in a united Ireland, as it was used for so long in Northern Ireland to deprive the minority there of its just representation in Parliament or in local authorities.

Nothing has, in fact, been done to change our corrupt system of constituency manipulation....

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is the Deputy quoting the Minister for Foreign Affairs?

Mr. Begley

The Deputy is quoting what Deputy Molloy said.

Mr. C. Murphy

Yes, and Deputy Molloy, in turn, was quoting what the present Minister for Foreign Affairs said in an article in the Sunday Independent of 12th November. It is slightly confusing but it is a newspaper report. This article was written by Deputy Garret FitzGerald, now Minister for Foreign Affairs. It is to be found in the Official Report of 15th November, 1973, at columns 2004-2005. If people became a little confused it was because it was a little too involved for them or they wanted to cloud the issue. He said: “Nothing has, in fact, been done to change our corrupt system of constituency manipulation”.

Mr. Tully

He was talking about Fianna Fáil. We changed all that.

Mr. C. Murphy

Has this Bill changed this system of constituency manipulation?

Mr. Tully

It has, of course. This is a fair one.

Mr. Lemass

The Minister does not even blush.

Mr. C. Murphy

I should like to quote from the Official Report, volume 268, column 1984 of 15th November, 1973. The Minister said:

In bringing forward a constituency revision Bill at this stage, therefore, we are continuing a process already started by the previous Government.

Mr. Tully

Yes, a process only. There is a difference between a process and a Bill.

Mr. C. Murphy

If the Minister has changed it, how can he say he is continuing a process? He admits to continuing the process and now he is trying to make out that he has changed the system.

Mr. Tully

The system is changed. The process of having the constituencies reviewed was started by Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Lemass

The more the Minister tries to explain the more likely he is to trip himself up. He should stay quiet and listen to Deputy Murphy.

Mr. C. Murphy

Deputy Molloy quoted from this article in the Sunday Independent of 12th November, 1962, by the present Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Tully

Between Deputy Lemass and Deputy Murphy they have not got a single original thought.

Mr. Lemass

That is the arrogance we have learned to expect from the Minister. I will have more to say about that later on.

Mr. Begley

We will look forward to that.

Mr. Tully

It will be a gem.

Mr. C. Murphy

Nothing has been done to change our corrupt system of constituency manipulation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is repeating himself.

Mr. C. Murphy

I am indeed.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should know that repetition is out of order.

Mr. Begley

He has run out of words.

Mr. Tully

He is whiling away the tedious hours.

Mr. C. Murphy

I cannot see a change in the system. On his own admission that he was continuing a process already started by the previous Government, the Minister can hardly tell the House that he has brought about a reform in this process. When the 1969 Bill was before the House it was suggested that a Bill revising the constituencies would best be handled by an independent commission but, with the change of Government, these thoughts have been submerged.

Mr. Tully

Do not tell me the Deputy is in favour of it now.

Mr. C. Murphy

It may be an injustice to the electorate that this Bill is before the House rather than a Bill designed by an independent commission or by a commission set up by all parties in the House.

Mr. Kavanagh

Deputy Carter would not agree.

Mr. C. Murphy

If the record is checked it will be seen that Deputy Carter expressed a similar view.

Mr. Tully

He did not.

Mr. Kavanagh

He expressed the very opposite view.

Mr. Begley

He was completely against a commission.

Mr. Tully

Anyway, it would be contrary to the Constitution.

Mr. C. Murphy

A commission representative of all parties would have yielded a far better document for discussion than this Bill.

Mr. Begley

Did Fianna Fáil intend doing that?

Mr. Tully

I have what Fianna Fáil intended.

Mr. C. Murphy

The electorate anticipated that the Government— especially from thoughts expressed no later than four or five years ago——

Mr. Tully

A couple of hours ago in Monaghan they reversed a 3,000 majority of the Deputy's party having heard what the Bill contained.

Mr. C. Murphy

The new representative will be the voice of the people.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Let us leave the election out of it. Let us keep to this Bill.

Mr. C. Murphy

He comes here to represent a constituency which is now under review.

Mr. Tully

It was being reviewed by Fianna Fáil too.

Mr. C. Murphy

If Monaghan was to maintain its present representation of Deputies and a third newly elected, and if Cavan was to maintain its representation of three Deputies, we would have six between the two counties.

Mr. Kavanagh

Who represents Ardee?

Mr. C. Murphy

With three representing Cavan and two representing Monaghan at the moment——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is repeating himself.

Mr. Tully

Fianna Fáil proposed to give Cavan and Monaghan part of Louth which would be combined to form a five-seater. We know now.

Mr. Lalor

You proposed that in 1968.

Mr. C. Murphy

This Bill proposes that there should be a five-seat constituency in Cavan and Monaghan rather than the present three-seaters and this will mean a loss of one. The Minister showed to Members of the House a certain file he has which he proposes to quote from. I wonder if this is morally correct? We had another Minister quoting a letter when he was dealing with his Estimate——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is straying from the Bill. The Chair wishes the Deputy to keep to the Bill being discussed.

Mr. C. Murphy

The Minister has stated he has these records which he intends to produce.

Mr. Tully

I hope the Deputy will be in the House to hear them.

Mr. C. Murphy

They purport to deal with the Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973. It appears the Minister will tell us what Fianna Fáil intended to do with the constituencies.

Mr. Tully

Is the Deputy ashamed of that?

Mr. C. Murphy

No, I am not ashamed. Earlier in the House there was a mention of a missing file but then the word "file" was dropped and the word "note" was used.

Mr. Tully

All I have are the copies but they are good enough for me and for the House when they go on the record.

Mr. C. Murphy

A Government have a moral obligation to the people but I wonder if each Minister has a moral obligation to the Opposition?

Mr. Lalor

The National Coalition have no morals.

Mr. Tully

If we wanted to take our morals from what went before us we would be in a pretty bad way. We did not have to sack any Ministers yet and we will not sack Ministers.

Mr. Lalor

Is the Minister the Taoiseach now?

Mr. C. Murphy

As the Minister has stated, this Bill is a continuation of a process already started by the previous Government.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am sure the Deputy is aware he is repeating what he said on two occasions.

Notice taken that 20 Members were were not present: House counuted and Members being present,

An Lean-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair wishes to hear Deputy Murphy on the Bill without interruption. The Deputy should stay with the Bill and should not repeat what he has said already.

Mr. C. Murphy

In paragraph 10 of the Explanatory Memorandum it is stated that in the general area of North Leinster, including Cavan and Monaghan, there will be a net gain of one seat bringing the area's representation up to 20. It appears that a small part of Monaghan will come in with Louth to form a new constituency, an increase of one seat making Louth a four-seater. A small part of the county that is in the news today will be transferred to Louth and the balance of Monaghan with Cavan will form a five-seat constituency. At present parts of Louth and Meath are with Monaghan which returns three Members to the House. As part of Monaghan is being put into Louth this means an extra seat has been taken from the midlands and given to the Eastern part of the country and this is unfortunate.

Mr. Tully

Can the Deputy explain where the seat is taken from the midlands?

Mr. C. Murphy

The extra seat given to the east will be seen as a further boost to that part of the country with a loss to the midlands and the west. This is to be expected from a Government that have few, if any, members from west of the Shannon. This Bill proposes to decrease their representation. Part of Wicklow is being brought into Dublin, and the magnet there is all the more strong because the Government is based on the east coast. This will be seen as a reflection of the emphasis on the east coast at the expense of the west.

Many speakers mentioned population decline on the western seaboard as the reason why the number of seats has decreased. In his speech Deputy Molloy pointed out that taking five Dublin constituencies and five western constituencies, he saw there was an imbalance of the necessary quota for one Deputy.

Mr. Tully

Would the Deputy repeat that please? Would he explain that statement? It is above my head.

Mr. C. Murphy

I refer the Minister to volume 268, No. 14 of 15th November, 1973. I am not quoting Deputy Molloy exactly but if the Minister so desires I will give him the exact reference and he can then work out the figures which Deputy Molloy had in mind.

Mr. Tully

Is the Deputy quoting Deputy Molloy?

Mr. C. Murphy

I mentioned him earlier and I mention him again. He demonstrated that by taking the number of voters in five Dublin and five western constituencies that the population in the west was adequate to return one member more than the cumulative total of the five Dublin constituencies.

Mr. Tully

That is nonsense. Because Deputy Molloy said it, that does not mean it is right.

Mr. C. Murphy

I believe Deputy Molloy used figures which he got from the table supplied in the explanatory memorandum. If any Deputy wishes to do so, he can compare the population totals in those constituencies and will see that there are 20,000 odd more in the western than in the Dublin constituencies. What do the Deputies who represent the west intend to do? They have come here from time to time plugging—and rightly so—the west. Fair play to the west. Fair representation to the west. Under this Bill they are entitled to another seat. I challenge any Deputy to approach the Minister and obtain it.

Mr. Lemass

I was surprised to read in the newspapers this morning that in his contribution to yesterday's debate on the Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973, Deputy Coughlan said that, in his opinion, we had the best Minister for Local Government this State has ever known. I should like, Sir, through the Chair, to take the Deputy to task on that statement.

With the exception of this very careful Bill which we were promised before Easter, then promised before the summer recess and which eventually arrived with the excuse that the Minister was waiting until such time as we declared ourselves regarding a by-election which is in the process of conclusion——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I must correct Deputy Lemass. Deputy Coughlan did not speak on this Bill yesterday. He spoke on the Estimate for Local Government.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Coughlan said yesterday that he thought the Minister for Local Government was the greatest thing since the sliced pan. I have watched the Minister carefully. The Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973, is, in fact, the No. 3 Bill of 1973. The No. 2 Bill was legislation prepared by Fianna Fáil Government and considered to be of no great urgency. It was brought into the House by the Coalition Government when the Leader of the Opposition drew attention to the fact that after the summer recess there would not be any legislation before the House.

As far as I can remember, I have not got the exact reference so I cannot quote it, when former Deputy Kevin Boland, then Minister for Local Government, introduced his Bill the present Minister said: "Our day will come and we will carve them, and carve them better than you".

Mr. Tully

The Deputy took this statement out of the air. Of course it is not true, but that is nothing unusual.

Mr. Lemass

It has been said to me on many occasions and I have no reason to doubt it. I am sure the Minister will tell us in his reply what he said on that occasion and under the rules of this House we will have to accept his word.

I was saying that this is only the third Bill which the new Government has found time—I use the word "time" most emphatically—to bring before the Houses of the Oireachtas. While the Minister's advisers helped him prepare this Bill, it had to be designed in accordance with Mr. Justice Budd's Court judgment. The previous administration did not appeal the High Court ruling but the then Opposition felt it should be appealed. Now they feel it is to their advantage to use Mr. Justice Budd's judgment. My main complaint tonight is that this Bill is only the third new Bill of this Government.

Mr. Tully

I spent my first six months cleaning up the mess left by my predecessor. I will list them for the Deputy if he wishes.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Lemass

As I was saying when I referred to Deputy Coughlan——

Mr. Coughlan

No better man.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Coughlan is reported as saying that the greatest Minister for Local Government, since the establishment of the State, is Deputy Tully.

Mr. Coughlan

The greatest "messer" since the institution of this State was the previous Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. We have two "greats".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Lemass, without interruption.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy let Deputy Henry Kenny fix St. John's Castle. I did my best to protect him. I referred to Deputy Coughlan's statement. It was pointed out to me that he was speaking on the Estimate about the best Minister for Local Government we ever had. If I may say so in relation to all the people who changed sides after the last general election the most arrogant, insincere and least brilliant Minister in the entire Coalition Cabinet is the Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Tully

Coming from the Deputy that is a compliment. Your IQ is in your boots.

Mr. Coogan

On a point of order, is this not a waste of time when our Deputy has now been elected——

An Leas-Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lemass, please. Will Deputy Coogan resume his seat?

Mr. Coogan

What about the worms?

Mr. Lemass

Apparently the Deputy is not aware of the service which worms perform. There are 14,000 in every Irish acre.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will Deputies allow Deputy Lemass to speak?

Mr. E. Collins

I would like to hear the Deputy talking about worms.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair wants to hear him speaking on the Bill.

Mr. Lemass

We had previous Electoral Bills before this House. The present Minister, and certainly members of the then Opposition, were advocating the idea of an independent committee. I am on the record of this House as saying that I did not favour such a committee. Many of my party and many Deputies on the Government side believe that this independent committee would take the revision of constituencies out of politics. I do not believe that can happen.

Mr. Tully

That was after the election.

Mr. Lemass

I am not objecting to the Minister's proposal. I am a firm believer in the maximising of three-seat constituencies. When the first referendum took place in relation to one-seat constituencies and the Government of the day were then defeated I advocated, within my own parliamentary group, that if one-seat constituencies were not acceptable to the electorate as a whole then three-seat constituencies would be best. I did that for a simple reason. Public opinion does not change rapidly but if it changes it is most likely to change in areas such as Dublin city. I believed that if the electorate in general wanted a change of Government they should have the entitlement to elect two instead of one Deputy of their conviction. In this way whatever Government were elected they would be elected with a very clear majority and we would not have this type of play-acting over one seat being so very important. In a three-seat constituency situation which the Minister now proposes, particularly in urban areas, the electorate would have a clearer choice than they would have in a four-, five-, six- or seven-seat situation. As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare will remember, there was a seven-seat constituency in his area and on one occasion Fianna Fáil elected five out of the seven Deputies and, indeed, it was on my late father's surplus that Jim Larkin was elected.

Mr. Tully

People became very intelligent since then.

Mr. Lemass

I will have to resort to a personal attack on the Minister unless he remembers his manners. I will not take his arrogance.

Mr. Tully

When the Deputy sobers up he might.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will the Deputies allow Deputy Lemass to speak?

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Coogan of Galway, first Mayor on satellite and still in orbit, used to take very special interest in calling me a "Jackeen" Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. Coogan

The Deputy was, too.

Mr. Lemass

When we look at this Bill we see exactly how the eastern seaboard, as Deputy C. Murphy said, has been privileged apparently. We will contend with that when the time comes. Studying facts and figures it would appear from the last general election that this Bill favours the eastern seaboard. Talking about Ministers from Dublin, we have Deputy Cosgrave with Deputies R. Burke, Cluskey, Keating, Michael O'Leary, John Kelly, O'Brien and others. We have Deputy Declan Costello as Attorney General. Deputy Coogan must be delighted with all the "Jackeens" he sits beside and supports.

Mr. Coughlan

They are gentlemen.

Mr. Lemass

I hope that the Deputy is not implying that I was not a gentleman when I was Parliamentary Secretary.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputies should avoid personalities in the House.

Mr. Lemass

I hope that the Deputy is not implying that I was not a gentleman in my dealings with him in this House. If the Deputy is making that allegation——

Mr. Tully

Deputy Lemass comes in here and starts getting touchy.

Mr. Coogan

On a point of order—

Mr. Lemass

A statement was made implying that I was not a gentleman——

Mr. Coogan

On a point of order, no reference was made to the other side of the House.

Mr. Lemass

I have been in this House for 17 years. I am not speaking as a "garsún."

Mr. Coogan

I am 20 years here and I had not my father to pull me in.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Lemass, without interruption.

Mr. Lemass

During the revision of the constituencies which occurred when Deputy Blaney was Minister for Local Government——

Mr. Coogan

Another of them.

Mr. Lemass

—I had a word with him and suggested just one little point and it was that in any constituency——

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will the Deputy move the adjournment?

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 29th November, 1973.