I find elements of today's debate rather difficult to understand, particularly the position of Members of Fianna Fáil and supporters of the party like Deputy Finian McGrath. It is difficult to understand why this particular debate is being rolled out. I understand that there is cross-party agreement in this House for very good reasons. Given that the independent commission has put forward its report, as the law and arrangements now stand, the Government of the day has given a clear indication that the report will be implemented and form the basis of the boundaries at the next election. For that reason, it behoves every Deputy in the House to act with caution in respect of how we deal with the independent commission's report.
The Labour Party has put forward proposals for the reform of how the structure works. We need look no further than the United Kingdom where commission revisions are ongoing on a rolling basis every number of years. When boundary changes are recommended, it is followed by, in effect, a local inquiry where individuals, groups, public representatives and political parties in the affected areas are, if they are so minded, empowered to make representations or comments on whether the proposal is acceptable and, if not, why not. The boundary commission is not in any way obliged to accept these, but it does allow a public discussion of the pros and cons of what is being proposed, which is so important, as it is with planning matters. I would like to see us move to that system.
As the Minister pointed out in his speech, of the 43 constituencies in the State, 37 are largely unaffected by the changes proposed in the boundary commission's report. The vast majority of constituencies remain as they were. Obviously, then, this debate is of no great interest to the Members representing those constituencies. However, in the areas where the changes have been, in some cases, enormous, there is a difficulty. We must be conscious in this House at all times of the potential for democratic deficits where the people of particular areas, regions or counties feel they are being left out, left behind or unfairly treated by the public administration system.
I do not know what the Government intends to do. It is sending out smoke signals that if there is sufficient opposition, particularly from the Opposition, to the independent commission's report, it will either not be implemented or it will only stand for a short period of time and the boundaries will be changed again by the time of the next general election. The Government must give some indication of what are its serious intentions. Does it intend to accept and honour the independent commission's report? If so, it should proceed to implement it in the usual way by laying legislation before this House. Is today simply a day out, to allow Members to ventilate their concerns, or is it meant as a serious exercise?
I am also concerned that the commission has had, for some time, a rather extraordinary concentration of three seat constituencies in the north and west of Dublin city. The Constitution clearly makes provision that to give effect to proportional representation to the highest degree possible, we should not have an over concentration of three seat constituencies. Three seat constituencies arise from the dictates of demographic and geographic considerations. However, as Deputies have said, there are profound arguments in favour of moving to five seat constituencies in Kerry and Tipperary. On the issue of the concentration of three seat constituencies in north and west Dublin, I do not know what the commission's thinking was on the matter. It means that, in terms of proportionality, this and previous reports of the commission have been quite seriously defective.
In addition, leeway is given in the Constitution for under and over representation. To take an example, Dublin West has been continually under represented in the commission's boundary recommendations. So much so that at the time of the last election, Dublin West was fully entitled to one extra Deputy. Dublin North, as Deputy Darragh O'Brien pointed out, was just marginally shy of the population required for one additional Deputy. It is very difficult to understand the thinking of the commission and its absolute failure to take into account population growth when making its calculations on under and over representation.
I am aware that population growth is not a point of reference which is provided for in the Constitution. However, one must say at times that Mr. Eamon de Valera was an extraordinarily far-seeing man in that he allowed a very large amount of leeway so that it is possible for the commission, in its deliberations, to be cognisant of the fact that, for instance, the areas west and north of Dublin city and the Drogheda area are all growing at an enormous pace. Indeed, in the rest of the country, certain areas are significant growth centres and therefore are likely, by the time of the next boundary revision, to have enjoyed a surge in population which ought to be reflected in the under and over representation provisions made by the commission.
Other Deputies representing Dublin North and Dublin West have spoken about the failure of the commission to recognise the new town of Swords and, on previous occasions, the new town of Blanchardstown. In 1991 I was first elected to Dublin County Council. People from north Dublin and Swords may not believe this but at that time, north Dublin then extended down to the very leafy suburbs of Deerpark in Castleknock and Mulhuddart. That was the reason for the famous occasion when the former Deputy and then Minister, Mr. Ray Burke, was at the opening of an estate and had some trees planted. Then, when the ungrateful electorate in the local area — perhaps because they did not know him — did not vote for him, he ensured that the trees were taken back. That happened in what is now the Dublin 15 area. We must bear in mind that boundaries have been changed before. At that time, it was not done by a commission but by the then Minister. Boundaries have shifted.
There is a case put forward by the Swords Electoral Boundary Action Group which is very deserving of attention. It explains in some detail why River Valley, Highfield and areas such as Knocksedan should naturally stay with the Swords area and the town of which they are part, which should be part of the Dublin North constituency. I will be honoured, obviously, to represent the people of that area. I have the good fortune to know it exceptionally well so it is not a personal difficulty for me to represent the area. However, I appreciate and agree with the concerns of the people in Swords that cutting off 12,000 votes in Swords and tagging them on to Dublin West is very difficult. It increases the democratic deficit and decreases the capacity of people to know their TDs and public representatives.
Another difficulty which I wish to refer to briefly concerns the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, who is currently overseeing a commission on local election boundaries. He has said that the local election boundaries and ward revisions should relate to constituencies. Does that mean that the people in the aforementioned parts of Swords will be put in with Mulhuddart for local election voting? That will actually make the current bad situation even worse.
All of the rumours are that the Green Party and the Minister are involved in an attempt to tee up larger local election ward areas in order to advantage the parties in Government, and the Green Party in particular. However, attempts to massage boundaries to facilitate particular political parties, of all shapes, tend to blow up in one's face. I ask the Minister to clarify, with regard to the local authority ward revisions, if Swords will be added into Mulhuddart. If so, it will make a bad situation much worse for the people there. Although I will be happy to represent the area, I believe the commission is wrong in this instance.
The Government is trying to play both sides of the field in having this debate while not being absolutely clear about whether it will implement the commission's report. It has no option but to stand by the commission.