Amendment No. 1 is in the name of Deputy Dempsey. I observe that amendments Nos. 1, 2, 5 to 8, inclusive, 10, 12 to 18, inclusive, 22, 25, 26, 28 to 45, inclusive, and 48 to 50, inclusive, are consequential on amendment No. 3. I suggest, therefore, that we discuss amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, 5 to 8, inclusive, 10, 12 to 18, inclusive, 22, 25, 26, 28 to 45, inclusive, and 48 to 50, inclusive, together.
European Parliament Elections Bill, 1996: Report and Final Stages.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 5, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following:
"‘Central Returning Officer' means a person who is appointed by the Minister under section 17 to be the Central Returning Officer for the purposes of this Act;".
Many of the amendments were thoroughly discussed in select committee. I want to again press on the Minister amendment No. 1 and related amendments. If the Minister is not willing, as he indicated on Committee Stage, to exclude the Clerk of the Dáil from the legislation, perhaps he would consider amending the Bill in the manner I suggested by substituting "Central Returning Officer" for "Clerk of the Dáil". If the Minister accepts this amendment, all he need do under section 17 is declare that the Central Returning Officer for the time being shall be the Clerk of the Dáil, and the effect of the proposed legislation will be the same. I press this amendment on the Minister because of reservations I outlined on Committee Stage regarding the Clerk of the Dáil having to undertake this work.
The Minister, and the Department, seem set on having the Clerk of the Dáil as the Returning Officer and my amendment would allow the Minister to nominate the Clerk of the Dáil as the Central Returning Officer. It would also allow the Minister to appoint somebody else as the Central Returning Officer in the future if what I fear comes to pass. The Minister has discussed this with me. He should consider changing the Bill in the way I suggest. If some future Minister needed to change this he could do so by regulation without recourse to law. I ask the Minister of State to accept the amendment.
These 27 amendments seek to retain the present position of Chief Returning Officer which the Bill proposes to drop by assigning the functions to the Clerk of the Dáil. These functions consist of making a return of persons elected to the Parliament and the storage and disposing of election documents. These amendments were discussed on Committee Stage, during which Deputy Dempsey indicated there were three main reasons for the amendments.
The first was the storage of documents. Storage of documents by the Clerk of the Dáil is not new. He stores documents from Dáil general elections and by-elections for six months and he therefore has to have space available. As the timing of general elections and by-elections is not fixed and they can occur at short notice, the space is there. Storage of European Parliament election documents for six months will not be a very difficult task especially as the six months period will be known well in advance, unlike Dáil general elections and by-elections.
The second reason was the hidden administrative burden. The Deputy is overstating the case here. We are talking about the receipt of four notifications of election results and the issue of a letter to the European Parliament once every five years.
The third reason was access to non-confidential documents. I will not delay the House as it is covered by amendment No. 4. My amendment No. 9 proposes to meet the concerns expressed on Committee Stage. I am still opposed to these amendments because there is no sense in having two different officers notifying the Parliament of who has been elected to represent this country in the European Parliament. The Clerk of the Dáil already communicates with the Parliament in relation to the filling of causal vacancies, a role he is ideally located to discharge in view of the potential residual role of the Dáil in this area. It would therefore be preferable for him to take on the task of making a return to the Parliament of the persons elected at the election proper. I oppose the Deputy's amendments.
Deputy Dempsey to conclude the debate on these amendments.
I accept that in amendment No. 9 the Minister of State has gone some way to meeting my concerns, but maybe he has not got the drift of what I am proposing. I do not propose to have two different officers doing this. I accept that the Department is determined that the Clerk of the Dáil should do this work but I suggest, instead of writing it into legislation that it must be the Clerk of the Dáil, that the person deemed to be the Central Returning Officer be appointed under section 17. I accept what the Minister of State wants and what the Department is apparently hell-bent on getting. I ask that the hands of future Ministers not be tied should they want to change that. The Minister of State might consider this again. I accept he is talking about the Clerk of the Dáil and that under section 17 it will be said that the Minister will make the regulation declaring the Clerk of the Dáil the Central Returning Officer. I recognise that the Clerk of the Dáil will be the returning officer but future Ministers should have a chance of changing that by regulation.
The Clerk of the Dáil's views were considered on this matter but nevertheless the Government has decided that it is appropriate that it should specifically be the Clerk of the Dáil who would report the decision of the people to the European Parliament and that he or she would be the appropriate officer to do so. I cannot accept the amendment.
Is Deputy Dempsey pressing his amendment?
As we want to finish this reasonably quickly, I very reluctantly withdraw my amendment and the related ones. I hope at some stage that the Minister of State is not on this side of the House arguing the same case.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 not moved.
Amendment No. 4 is in the name of Deputy Dempsey. It is related to amendment No. 9 and the suggestion is that they be taken together, if that is satisfactory.
The Minister of State has gone some way towards alleviating the fears we had in relation to the Clerk of the Dáil being under a lot of pressure in the six months following a general election. I will accept the Minister of State's amendment and withdraw mine.
Amendment No. 4 not moved.
Amendments Nos. 5 to 8, inclusive, not moved.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 14, between lines 41 and 42, to insert the following:
"(7) All documents sent by a local returning officer or a returning officer in pursuance of this Act to the Clerk of the Dáil, other than documents referred to in subsection (2), shall be open to public inspection at such time and under such conditions as may be specified by the Clerk. The Clerk shall supply copies of or extracts from the said documents to any person demanding the same, on payment of such fees not exceeding the reasonable cost of copying and subject to such conditions as may be sanctioned by the Minister for Finance.".
Section 20 provides that after an election, confidential papers such as ballot papers can be inspected only on foot of a High Court order. However, the section is silent on access to non-confidential documents such as nomination papers. The point was made on Committee Stage that some regulation on access to non-confidential documents is desirable in order to avoid disrupting the normal work of the Clerk of the Dáil and his staff. I undertook to review this matter and, if appropriate, to table an amendment on Report Stage. This amendment proposes to regulate access to non-confidential documents after an election by providing, in section 20, for public inspection under conditions laid down by the Clerk of the Dáil. The amendment also provides that copies of election documents may be supplied to interested persons on payment of the reasonable cost of copying. The amendment is similar to a provision in the Dáil electoral code which has worked very satisfactorily as far as I am aware. Under the Bill, the Clerk of the Dáil must destroy all election documents six months after polling day. I commend the amendment to the House.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 not moved.
Amendment No. 11 is in the name of the Minister. Amendments Nos. 27, 46, 47 and 51 form a composite proposal and it is suggested that they be dealt with together if that is satisfactory.
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 27, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:
"(5) A person to whom paragraph (4) applies may include in the nomination paper the name of any political group formed in accordance with the rules of procedure of the Parliament of which he or she is a member, provided that, at the time the nomination paper is delivered to the returning officer, a certificate (in this Schedule referred to as a ‘certificate of European political affiliation') is also produced to the returning officer, being a certificate signed by a member of the Secretariat of the relevant political group that the person in question is a member of the political group formed in accordance with the rules of procedure and of the Parliament and named in the certificate. Where such a certificate is produced, the returning officer, provided he or she is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so in relation to the candidate, shall cause a statement of the name of such political group, in addition, where appropriate, to the expression ‘Non-Party', to be specified in relation to the candidate on all the ballot paper and on notices.".
These amendments are identical to amendments tabled on Committee Stage which I undertook to review. I have considered the matter and am satisfied the amendments are desirable to ensure equality of treatment on the ballot paper for all MEPs and parties represented in the outgoing Parliament. These amendments will enable a non-party candidate who is a sitting MEP to include on ballot papers a reference to the European political group of which he or she is a member. This facility is already enjoyed by party candidates. I emphasise we are talking about political groups formed by MEPs and functioning solely within the parliament, not about European political parties.
Some Deputies in committee felt the amendments should be extended to enable non-party candidates who are not sitting MEPs to specify the parliamentary group they intend to join, if elected. I do not agree. It is one thing for a sitting MEP to inform the electorate of an existing political affiliation which is beyond dispute, that is membership of a political group within the outgoing Parliament. It is a different matter for non-party candidates to inform the electorate of the political group they plan to join if elected. We can legislate only for facts, not for intentions. I am satisfied the amendments I propose will not give rise to difficulties in the case of non-party candidates who are not sitting MEPs.
The general treatment on ballot papers of non-party candidates at all elections is due for discussion by the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs. This will give Deputies an opportunity to consider all aspects of this issue. I assure the House that any recommendations Deputies make will be considered carefully for inclusion in all the electoral codes. Amendments Nos. 27, 46, 47 and 51 are consequential technical amendments to the substantive amendment. I ask the House to accept them.
The Minister considered these amendments after issues had been raised on Committee Stage and has come back with the same provisions. In light of the McKenna judgment I put down a marker that this will cause difficulties in the future. I accept the Minister has taken advice from the Attorney General and has made a reasonable point about a person's intention to form part of a group. However, I still think somebody who is accepted by a European Parliament group as an independent, prior to an election, cannot have that stated on his ballot paper. I predict here and now that we will have a test case on this matter during one of the European elections but I will not oppose the Minister's amendments.
I have considered the matter since the Committee Stage debate and I am satisfied the proposed amendment will not give rise to any difficulties. Any recommendations from the select committee will be considered carefully and positively by the Minister and the appropriate actions and decisions taken.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 12 to 18, inclusive, not moved.
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 51, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following:
"(b) a ballot paper may include a photograph of each candidate and the form of the ballot paper may be adjusted accordingly,".
As I announced on Committee Stage this amendment will enable candidates' photographs to be included on ballot papers at European elections on a trial basis. This issue has been the subject of discussions and representations by public representatives for a number of years and was supported earlier this year by the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs. Subject to resolving any technical problems the intention is that the candidates' photographs will be included on ballot papers at the 1999 European elections. The Question of including photographs on other election ballot papers will be considered in the light of experience at these elections. I ask the House to accept this amendment.
I welcome and support the amendment which states that a ballot paper may include a photograph of each candidate. Is there a need for a saver in the section? One does not want to use the word "shall" because if the difficulties are not overcome the legislation will have to be amended. If a candidate decides he or she does not want a photograph on the ballot paper could there be a legal difficulty? I am not sure the Minister's officials understand the point I am trying to make.
The point raised by Deputy Dempsey is an interesting one. We should not put an absolute requirement on any candidate to include a photograph. The candidate should be given the choice of including a photograph. That is the minimum freedom that ought to be given to candidates. At the end of the day the only essential detail that needs to be put on the ballot paper is the name and the party or in the case of Euro elections it is reasonable to include the grouping. If we go down the road of requiring people to include photographs, they will then be asked to include their ages. Can one imagine the hilarity if we were to include our confirmation photographs, or a photograph at an age of about 25 when in fact we are much older. This could be a whole lot of nonsense and the best we can do is to allow the option to include a photograph. For that reason I would not agree with the word "shall" as opposed to "may". The word "may" leaves our options open and that is the wording I would support.
The word in the legislation is "may".
I support that.
I have not yet met a politician who would not want his or her photograph on a ballot paper. There are technical difficulties. The technical problems being examined are twofold, one relates to ensuring that the printing process can generate the photographs in sufficient quality on ballot papers and the other is the time factor. There are other details which I can make available to Deputies if they so wish.
I support the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
We come to amendment No. 20. Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 are related. I suggest we discuss amendments Nos. 20, 23 and 24 together if that is satisfactory.
I move amendment No. 20:
In page 54, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:
"(5) The local returning officer shall, where practicable, give public notice of all polling stations which are inaccessible to wheelchair users not later than the eighth day before polling day.".
The purpose of these amendments is to make voting easier for people with disabilities and the follow on from the provisions in the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1996. The first amendment provides that where practicable, the local returning officer must give advance public notice of polling stations which are inaccessible to wheelchair users. This should increase the take up of the existing facility whereby wheelchair users who cannot gain access to their local polling stations can apply to vote at another accessible polling station. A similar provision in relation to public notice of inaccessible polling stations is included in the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 1996.
On Committee Stage I undertook to review the other two amendments. They require local returning officers and returning officers to ensure that the places they appoint for verifying ballot paper accounts and counting votes are accessible to wheelchair users. The view was expressed in committee that it should be mandatory in all cases to appoint centres which are accessible to wheelchair users. I will do this in the case of count centres in the four Euro constituencies. However, we must retain some flexibility in the verification of ballot papers which takes place at 34 centres. In the case of amendment No. 23, the words "where practicable" are included to ensure the verification of ballot paper counts can proceed in cases where a building accessible to wheelchair users is not available. This should be the exception. This is similar to the provision in the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 1996, which provides for similar flexibility in relation to count centres in the 41 Dáil constituencies. I ask the House to accept these amendments.
I welcome these amendments. They do not go far enough in some respects but they are an improvement and, together with the provisions in the Private Members' Bill introduced by Deputy Mary Wallace, will be of help to wheelchair users.
I have a difficulty with the inclusion of the words "where practicable" in amendment No. 23. I do not wish to delay the debate and will accept this wording, but I ask the Minister to confirm that returning officers will be instructed to secure centres to which people can gain access. The provision under which returning officers must give public notice of polling stations which are inaccessible to wheelchair users is an improvement and I welcome it. I commend the Minister for taking on board the suggestion that count centres must be accessible to wheelchair users.
I welcome these amendments and have no hesitation in supporting them. In my constituency some polling stations are inaccessible, even to able-bodied persons. It seems from past experience that returning officers do not go out of their way to be consumer friendly in terms of selecting polling stations. The need for polling stations to be accessible must be brought to the attention of returning officers. When elections are held during the winter it can be very difficult for senior citizens to gain access to some polling stations. The provisions as they relate to wheelchair users should be extended to cover ordinary voters so that voting is made more accessible. I commend the Minister on tabling these amendments which have the support of my party.
I assure Deputy Dempsey that all returning officers will be reminded of their obligations. Like Deputy Quill, I do not understand why the residents of a housing estate should have to cast their votes in a polling station three miles down the road when there is a polling station across the road from the estate. This type of bad planning discourages people from voting. Returning officers should be mindful of the need to ensure polling stations are user friendly and are located in areas which are easily accessible.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 21:
In page 54, line 41, to delete "the Minister may prescribe" and substitute "may be provided for by regulations under section 94(5)(j) of the Act of 1992 for the time being in force".
This is a technical amendment which will automatically apply to European elections any regulations made by the Minister with responsibility for Dáil elections providing for facilities such as Braille ballot papers. If the amendment is not agreed the Minister will have to make separate regulations for European elections identical to those made for Dáil elections. The amendment will avoid the unnecessary duplication of regulations and I ask the House to accept it.
That is a good idea.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 22 not moved.
I move amendment No. 23:
In page 63, line 28, after "election." to insert "The local returning officer shall, where practicable, ensure that the appointed place is accessible to wheelchair users.".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 24:
In page 64, line 43, after "election." to insert "The returning officer shall ensure that the place appointed under this rule at which he or she will count the votes is accessible to wheelchair users.".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 25 and 26 not moved.
I move amendment No. 27:
In page 73, line 13, after "affiliation" to insert "or of European political affiliation".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 28 to 45, inclusive, not moved.
I move amendment No. 46:
In page 79, line 43, after "affiliation" to insert "or of European political affiliation".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 47:
In page 80, line 42, after "rule 5(3)" to insert "or (5)*".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 48 to 50, inclusive, not moved.
I move amendment No. 51:
In page 91, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:
"‘certificate of European political affiliation' has the meaning assigned to it by rule (5),".
Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments and received for final consideration.
I move: "That the Bill do now pass".
I thank Deputies for their co-operation and constructive approach to this debate. Even though all their amendments were not accepted, we achieved a fair level of consensus. The Bill will consolidate and amend existing domestic law relating to the conduct of European Parliament elections and will continue the ongoing programme of electoral law reform. It is important legislation and should be helpful to elected Members, candidates and members of the public who wish to consult it. Deputies will agree it is helpful to consolidate the law on a particular matter in one Act so that people do not have to read through several Acts. This worthwhile legislation incorporates a number of important improvements. I thank the Deputies for their positive contributions.
I thank the Minister and his officials for their courtesy to us during the debate. I thank the Minister for accepting some of our amendments but I am sorry he did not accept my main amendment. Nevertheless this is good legislation which will consolidate and improve the law in this area.
This Bill represents an improvement in terms of electoral legislation and I commend the Minister for introducing it and steering it through the Dáil. I am happy to have given the Bill my support.
Question put and agreed to.