Electoral (Amendment)(Dáil Constituencies) Bill 2012: Second Stage

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The purpose of the Electoral (Amendment)(Dáil Constituencies) Bill 2012 is to provide for the number of Members of Dáil Éireann, to revise Dáil constituencies in the light of the results of census 2011 and to provide for the number of Members to be elected for such constituencies.

In the programme for Government we committed to "reduce the number of TDs following the publication of the results of the 2011 census of population". A first step towards achieving that was taken in the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2011. In that Act the range for the total number of Members of the Dáil was set at not less than 153 and not more than 160. Today's Bill provides for a total number of 158 Members of the Dáil. It delivers on the programme for Government and we will see this change in the Thirty-second Dáil.

In debating and deciding upon this Bill the Oireachtas will meet its constitutional obligation to review and revise constituencies with due regard to changes in the distribution of population. We have legislative provision for supporting the Oireachtas in this task. The Electoral Act 1997 provides for the establishment of a constituency commission and for that commission to report to the Ceann Comhairle. The most recent commission reported to him on 21 June 2012. The Government has given consideration to the recommendations of the commission and has agreed to implement them. The Bill provides for this.

While the Oireachtas has, in the Electoral Act 1997, made additional provisions for constituency review and revision, the provisions in the Constitution have primacy. Bunreacht na hÉireann makes clear and distinct provision for the membership of Dáil Éireann. Article 16.6.2° of the Constitution provides: "The number of members shall from time to time be fixed by law, but the total number of members of Dáil Éireann shall not be fixed at less than one member for each thirty thousand of the population, or at more than one member for each twenty thousand of the population." Over the years the ratio has tended to be at the lower to middle end of this scale. At present, with 166 Members and based on the 2011 population, there is one Member to every 27,640 of the population. The ratio was one Member to every 25,541 of the population in the last revision. As a result of this Bill, the ratio will be one Member to every 29,040 of the population. While this is the highest ever ratio in the State, it is within the constitutional limit.

Article 16.2.3° of the Constitution provides: "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." This is not the case at present. For example, the population to Member ratio, based on the results of census 2011, in the constituency of Laoighis-Offaly is 11 % above the national average. In Kildare South it is 9% above and in Kildare North it is more than 8% above the national average. At the same time it is 10% below the national average in Dublin North Central, 8% below in Dublin South Central and more than 7% below in Limerick City.

The ratio between the number of Members and the population of each constituency, based on the most recent census, is not the same throughout the country at present. This requirement is qualified in the Constitution by the phrase "as far as practicable". The Bill addresses the need for the ratio to be the same in so far as it is practicable by providing for an arrangement of constituencies that allows for a high level of parity of representation. In all the constituencies specified in the Bill the variance from the national average representation of one Member for 29,040 of the population is within 5%. That national average is based on the total population of the State as ascertained at census 2011 divided by 158, the number of Deputies to be in the next Dáil.

This constitutional provision was considered by the courts in two cases in 1961 - the High Court case of John O'Donovan v. the Attorney General and the Supreme Court reference case relating to the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 1961. It was considered again in the High Court case taken by Deputies McGrath and Murphy in 2007 where it was argued that the constituencies on which the general election was being fought at the time did not comply with the requirement in Article 16 of the Constitution. In none of these cases did the courts quantify a precise degree of equality of representation required by the Constitution.

Article 16.2.4° of the Constitution provides that: "The Oireachtas shall revise the constituencies at least once in every twelve years, with due regard to changes in distribution of the population". This, in effect, requires that constituencies be revised whenever population changes ascertained in a census lead to population-Deputy ratios in individual constituencies that are significantly out of line with the national average. That is the case at present and the Oireachtas must respond accordingly.

Provision is made in section 5 of the Electoral Act 1997 for the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to set up a commission to report on Dáil and European constituencies upon the publication of the census report setting out the preliminary census result. The terms of reference of the commission are specified in the Act. These are, of course, subordinate to the relevant constitutional provisions.

The commission that reported in June 2012 is the fourth commission established under the 1997 Act. This was the first occasion on which a statutory commission was required to carry out a review of constituencies on the basis of a reduced number of Members of Dáil Éireann. It was also the first statutory commission established with authority to work upon the publication of preliminary census results. This was in response to the 2007 High Court judgment in the Murphy-McGrath case. The court in that case had regard to the constitutional requirements and to the high quality of Central Statistics Office, CSO, preliminary population data. The court concluded that consideration should be given to initiation of constituency revisions on publication of the CSO preliminary report on a census, with the revision work being completed when the final data are available. The Oireachtas responded to that judgment by amending the Electoral Act 1997 to provide for the earlier establishment of a constituency commission.

The starting point, therefore, for the work of the constituency commission that I established in the summer of 2011 was the preliminary census results. The commission remarks in its report that, in the event, no material differences emerged between the preliminary and final census results, but the ability to begin the preparatory work greatly facilitated the commission's timely completion of its mandate. As the commission indicates in the report, the initial work of analysis of the effects of population changes and the reduction in membership was undertaken by reference to the preliminary census results published on 30 June 2011. The recommendations from this work were then formulated and confirmed on the basis of the definitive census results published on 29 March 2012. The report on the final results of the 2011 census of population showed the total population in the State as 4.59 million, an increase of 8.2% on the 2006 population. The commission had three months after the publication of those results within which to complete its work.

Copies of the commission's report were made available to Deputies last June on the day it was presented to the Ceann Comhairle. By now I am sure all the Members are very familiar with its content. However, for the record of the House I will outline the main features of the commission's report in regard to Dáil constituencies. The commission recommends that the number of members of Dáil Éireann should be 158. It recommends that there should be 11 five-seat constituencies - the same number as at present,16 four-seat constituencies - one more than at present, and 13 three-seat constituencies - four fewer than at present. This gives a total of 40 constituencies. The commission recommends that 11 constituencies should remain unchanged. These are, as they are listed in the commission report, Longford-Westmeath, Meath East, Carlow-Kilkenny, Wexford, Louth, Meath West, Cork East, Wicklow, Clare, Dublin Mid-West and Cork South-West. It reports that it considered making those constituencies, which I have listed, conterminous with the relevant county boundaries. However, to have done so would have either resulted in variances in some of the constituencies concerned, which the commission considered unacceptable, or required changes in adjoining constituencies. The commission states in its report that it was satisfied, in the light of the constitutional requirements and its terms of reference, that the existing arrangement was acceptable from the point of view of equality of representation.

The commission recommends changes to constituencies in the following areas - Cork, Donegal, Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan and Monaghan, Dublin, Galway, Mayo and Roscommon, Kerry and Limerick, Waterford, Tipperary, Laois, Offaly and Kildare. In the Cork area the commission recommends a reduction of one seat to take account of the population, as ascertained in census 2011, and in the context of a 158 seat Dáil. The commission recommends maintaining the existing five constituency formation in Cork but with the transfer of electoral divisions from Cork North-Central to Cork North-West and from Cork South-Central to Cork North-Central. Acceptance of these recommendations, in the Bill before us, provides for an improvement in the representational ratio in those constituencies relative to the new national average of 29,040 members per TD.

In the Dublin area the commission recommends a reduction of three seats in the context of a 158 member Dáil. One constituency in the area - Dublin Mid-West - remains unchanged. Change is recommended in the configuration of all other constituencies and in the names of four constituencies. The commission recommends an arrangement of constituencies outside the city that mirrors as far as practicable the administrative county boundaries. The population as ascertained in census 2011 allows this to be done and the Bill provides for the adoption of the commission's recommendations for the area. In the city there will be one less constituency, reflecting both the population as ascertained in census 2011 and a smaller Dáil.

The commission made recommendations for constituencies in the counties of Donegal, Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan and Monaghan having examined a range of options for the areas. These are outlined in the report. The commission identifies the particular challenges presented in reviewing constituencies in these counties. These include the fact that Donegal is contiguous with only one other county, namely, Leitrim. Also, having regard to the population as ascertained in census 2011, an arrangement of constituencies based exclusively on county boundaries is not feasible.

In the Galway-Mayo-Roscommon area the reconfiguration of constituencies recommended precludes direct comparison with the current seat allocation for the area, as it does also in the rest of Connacht and Ulster. Having regard to the population as ascertained in census 2011, an arrangement of constituencies based exclusively on county boundaries is not feasible. As the commission points out, the population of Mayo can no longer form a five-seat constituency and Roscommon does not have sufficient population to stand alone as a constituency. Implementation of the recommendations in the Bill means that the Connacht-Ulster area will be divided into seven constituencies instead of eight as is the case at present. The seven constituencies will be represented by 28 TDs compared with 31 at present.

In the Kerry-Limerick area the commission recommends a reduction of one seat to take account of the population and in the context of a smaller Dáil. The commission recommends that the county of Kerry should form a five-seat constituency. It also recommends that there should be two Limerick constituencies, a four-seat Limerick City constituency based on the existing constituency with the addition of ten electoral divisions from the county, and a three-seat Limerick County constituency.

In the Waterford-Tipperary-Laois-Offaly-Kildare area the commission recommends no change to the overall allocation of 22 seats. However, significant changes to constituency arrangements are recommended and these address in particular the representational ratio imbalances in Laoighis-Offaly and Kildare that I mentioned earlier. Waterford should be a four-seat constituency comprising all the county and city area, thus ending the breach of the Waterford county boundary. There should be a new five-seat Tipperary constituency comprising 93% of the population of the county. The county of Offaly with some population from Tipperary should form a three-seat constituency. The county of Laois with some population from Kildare should form another three-seat constituency. There should be a small realignment between the Kildare constituencies which should remain as a four-seat Kildare North constituency and a three-seat Kildare South constituency.

The commission was also required to report in regard to the constituencies for the election of members to the European Parliament. In its report the commission recommended maintaining the existing arrangement of constituencies for the election of Ireland's 12 members to the European Parliament. I will not, therefore, be bringing forward any amendments to the Third Schedule to the European Parliament Elections Act 1997 in which the constituencies for European Parliament elections and the number of Members to be elected for each constituency are specified. That Schedule was most recently amended by section 8 of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2009.

I will outline the provisions in the Bill before us. It generally mirrors previous Bills providing for the revision of Dáil constituencies following a census of population. Section 1 defines "Minister" as the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government for the purposes of the Bill. It provides for the interpretation of the words "motorway", "road" and "street" in the Schedule to the Bill. Section 2 provides that the number of Members of Dáil Éireann will be 158 after the dissolution of the Dáil next following the enactment of this Bill. Section 3 provides that after the dissolution of the Dáil next following the enactment of this Bill, the Members of Dáil Éireann will represent the 40 constituencies specified in the Schedule. Section 4 provides that the number of Members to be returned by each constituency will be as set out in the third column of the Schedule. Section 5 provides for the repeal of sections 2(2), 3, 4 and 5 and the Schedule to the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2009. These specify the existing Dáil constituencies. The repeal will come into operation on the dissolution of Dáil Éireann next following enactment of this Bill. This means that the existing constituencies will remain in place for the purposes of by-elections in the meantime. They will also remain in place in that period for the purposes of the Referendum Acts. Section 6 contains standard provisions on Title, collective citation and construction.

The Bill before the House continues the long-established practice of implementing the recommendations of independent constituency commissions in full. It is a matter for the Oireachtas to revise the constituencies and I look forward to the debate on the Bill. I commend the Bill to the House.

Deputy Barry Cowen

It was interesting to hear the Minister's presentation of the Bill, particularly his reference to the Articles of the Constitution which pertain to these issues. The Minister stated:

The Minister also referred to Article 16.6.2° which provides: "The number of members shall from time to time be fixed by law, but the total number of members of Dáil Éireann shall not be fixed at less than one member for each thirty thousand of the population, or at more than one member for each twenty thousand of the population." I accept this basis for the revision of constituencies and I particularly accept, and why would I not, with regard to my constituency that it will lead to an extra Deputy in County Offaly. However, it is only fair, proper and appropriate as an Opposition spokesperson on political representation and the electoral process to put this process in context. In this regard I wish to paint the picture which existed prior to the most recent election. I want to analyse the utterances of Fine Gael and its partners in government. One would have thought a proposal in this area would be part of a suite of proposals by the Government to address political reform and change the methods by which we carry out the democratic process. It is in this context I believe the parties in government should be measured.

I accept that in an election each party has a right to inform the electorate on the means and manner by which it would carry out its functions if elected to government. From an economic perspective, one must identify ways and means by which the gap between income and expenditure would be met. Significant commitments were made at the time by the parties now in government. It could be argued many of these commitments and aspirations, and the means and methods by which they would close the gap, did not have to contain the number of promises they did. Many commentators would have predicted the result in any case. My party has accepted the electorate's decision and is in the process of reorganising itself on foot of it. It was also patently obvious the impression was given, from an economic perspective at least and also from other perspectives which I will discuss, that there was a softer or easier way, and we had utterances such as Labour's way or Frankfurt's way. People bought into this. Prior to the general election, people saw a budgetary process which took €8.5 billion out of the economy. In budgets prior to that a further €12 billion was removed. When one sees the consternation being caused in government and among the electorate about the forthcoming budget, which seeks to remove €3.5 billion, it puts into context the situation at the time.

As elected representatives we meet our constituents regularly at clinics or party meetings, and in recent weeks and months there has been a perception among the electorate that they almost bought a pup or a pig in a poke. They feel that perhaps the new Government could have addressed these issues in a different way, as was suggested in their election campaigns and manifestos. To put this aside, a great play was also made on the fact there would be substantial political reform with a new way of doing business in the Dáil and new politics. People were very concerned and anxious and bought into this. In recent times it has become apparent to many people this is not and has not been the case. The satisfaction rating of the Government in opinion polls at present has decreased to the early 20s in percentage terms. In these snapshots in time people have not given the impression they are moving en masse to us or any other political party. It will take time for us as an Opposition, and others, to offer credible alternatives and be in a position to regain the trust and support of the public. We and others must work on this, and this will continue to be the case.

We must look at the suite of offers and promises made with regard to electoral reform. It is only then one might identify the litany of cynical electoral ploys which have been abandoned since entering government. In May 2011 the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, stated the programme for Government contained the most ambitious and far-reaching agenda for political reform ever before the House. If the reform being mooted or the minimal reform which has happened since is, in his opinion, the greatest political reform ever put before the House and it is measured only by what went before, it is a harmless virtue to sing about.

It is important in the context of the time available to me to discuss the Bill to put on record the commitments, and the responses having entered government to these commitments, with regard to electoral reform and Oireachtas business. With regard to sitting hours, the programme for Government stated Dáil sitting days would be increased by 50% and that a four-day sitting week would be introduced.

The Government has yet to reach the 50% target. On sitting days, 25% of the increase is due to what I can call the charade of Friday sittings. The Minister will have heard descriptions of freaky Fridays and fiver Fridays recently, but the Fridays we have once a month could be described as farcical Fridays. They are an affront to what was proposed to be real reform.

There is extensive overuse of guillotines to continue to ram through non-emergency legislation, despite promises in this regard from the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Kehoe, the Chief Whip, who had made what some might describe as justifiable remarks on the use of guillotine in previous Dála. He had given a commitment to the Members of this Dáil that the matter would be addressed. Far from it, it has not been addressed.

The proposal on the Seanad is being kicked further into touch rather than being addressed in the first year of this Dáil. No doubt the initial setting up of the Seanad and its composition was well meant, and it had a considerable means by which legislation passed by the Dáil could be examined by those with expertise in that regard, but it is unfortunate for us to have to admit that it was the political parties which hijacked that House by virtue of it becoming either a breeding ground for aspiring politicians or a nursing home for those who had passed through this House. The constitutional convention could offer a real opportunity for meaningful debate in this area. There has been no relaxation of the rules on Cabinet confidentiality, no establishment of an electoral commission and no major reform in the role and significance of Oireachtas committees, other than merely reducing their number.

The Taoiseach, while in opposition and indeed on entering Government, stated he would have a report card system. He promised to improve transparency on the performance of his Cabinet and each of the Ministers. He reiterated it on many occasions. After a year in office, he stated that a report on progress on its policies was imminent. He was starting report cards already as far back as March of last year. At Christmas 2011, he stated he would have Ministers' "noses to the grindstone" with this imminent report card system. Obviously, it went by the wayside.

We were promised a constitution day. The Taoiseach stated he would set a programme to allow for a series of constitutional amendments to be decided on what he called "Constitution Day", to be held within 12 months of the new Government being formed, and that was to include the question on the abolition of the Seanad. The Government has failed to hold that much vaunted constitution day and its campaign on the Oireachtas inquiries powers undermined that vaunted overhaul of the committee system.

The constitutional convention talks about addressing some number of topics, such as reducing the voting age to 17 and reducing the presidential term to five years. My party believes this is an extremely limited range of topics to discuss. The challenges facing the State are far too profound to waste time on cosmetic changes such as reducing the presidential term limit. We believe it must face up to more fundamental problems within the political system.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am slow to interfere. I remind Deputy Cowen that the Bill is really about the number of Deputies and the changes in the constituencies.

Deputy Barry Cowen

I understand that. I tried initially to place in context the meaning. It is why I had to go on this preamble. It is only right and proper.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have been fairly liberal with Deputy Cowen.

Deputy Barry Cowen

I know the Ceann Comhairle has.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am afraid I must drag Deputy Cowen back a little.

Deputy Barry Cowen

I know the Ceann Comhairle must. He himself remembers many of these commitments having partaken in the process.

An Ceann Comhairle

I cannot comment.

Deputy Brian Stanley

Impartial.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Ceann Comhairle probably has a view.

Deputy Barry Cowen

I will refrain at this stage.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am trying to give Deputy Cowen the position.

Deputy Barry Cowen

The Ceann Comhairle has given me enough latitude. I have been allowed to make the points I wanted and they are on the record.

This Bill should be part of a wider suite of proposals which constitute real political reform, such as a new electoral system and revamped Cabinet membership and enhanced scrutiny by this House, while still seeking to retain the link between TDs and the communities and constituencies they serve but at the same time seeking to ensure there are more national considerations represented in the Oireachtas. There is no effort to improve the Dáil's oversight of all aspects of the public sector. The principles of legislation are not debated in advance of drafting. The time allowed for Private Members' business has not been extended. Legislation submitted to the Dáil is not subject to independent fiscal analysis in advance of debates. There are no proposals forthcoming or mooted on a revised budgetary process on which we heard much debate. There is no establishment of a legal service to the Oireachtas. While I accept the premise of the constitutionality of this Bill by virtue of changes in population and the responsibility on the Minister, having been advised of the census, to put a commission in place to address changes in population, and there is a long-standing precedent in the House that any proposals emanating from that process are not necessarily objected to and the good faith and independence of that commission has been respected, it is essential to note that the Minister, having promised to reduce the numbers by 20 and then, on entering Government, stating that the Government was hamstrung by virtue of the Constitution and the independent commission could only reduce it by eight, made those commitments as part of a suite of proposals which the Government stated would amount to major political reform. No doubt there is an appetite for such reform, and I empathise with it. I would allow the Minister the benefit of the remaining years, however long that might be, in government to address these issues of political reform in a real way and, in doing so, to honour the commitment the Government gave to the electorate. Given what I stated about the context of the last election from an economic perspective, no doubt the error of the Government's ways in that regard have been seen in recent months.

For example, they have been seen in the context of our national debt and its sustainability. They are also being seen by virtue of the mechanism by which negotiations are taking place with Europe on that national debt.

We have yet to accrue the benefit we were to the euro currency by virtue of the measures taken by this country at that time. Our people continue to be levied with that burden. In parallel with that there has been no growth in our economy to compensate for that fact, which only compounds the issue. Only recently have we seen what we hope is a change of tack in that regard for the Minister to achieve results that he was bound to do on behalf of the people.

The change is becoming imminent on that policy strand vis-à-vis the Minister's commitment to the electorate before the election. There still remains ample time for the Minister and the Government parties to revert to the commitments they gave in a wider context, including a suite of measures that constitutes political reform. I have seen nothing in all the aforementioned areas that would constitute major political reform that anybody could empathise with, either within or outside this House.

The public were susceptible to that and were in the mood for change. They were exasperated at the failure of the systems in place to address issues which caused difficulties for our State. That was compounded by difficulties outside the State. Notwithstanding this Bill, I implore the Minister to exercise his responsibility in that regard and honour his party's and the Government's commitment to bring about real reform before this Dáil signs off, whenever that may be.

As regards the specifics of the Bill, I welcome the efforts to retain county boundaries where possible. That is sacrosanct for any member of society and the Minister knows that better than most. I welcome the fact the Constituency Commission was not afraid to address problems which arose subsequent to the constituency boundaries devised by the previous commission. To that effect, I welcome back the sector of my county that was lost to Tipperary. I empathise and sympathise with those who have come in to us. I understand how they feel not only about crossing a county boundary but also a provincial boundary. It is not easy. While people might always have been great neighbours, they never flew each other's flags too high when it came to hurling. That is neither here nor there, however.

I recognise that the commission was not swayed in any way by submissions, but it took cognisance of many of them. In so far as it could, it used the direction contained within the Constitution to arrive at a consensus. I doubt very much if, at the next stage, we will have any recommendations or amendments. However, I do want to place on the public record my disappointment, and that of my party, that the Government has not lived up to its commitment to the electorate to engage in radical reform of the democratic electoral system and institutions of the State, including this House and the Upper House.

I acknowledge the Minister's efforts in putting forward the People First document and, although I have misgivings about it, they are for another day. When that legislation is brought before the House, we will discuss it in more detail. In its own right, it was an effort to address the very issues on which the Minister gave commitments in the most recent general election. I reiterate my disappointment that the Minister has not addressed political reform as he could have by virtue of a suite of measures. If this is one of them, it is a very poor attempt at it.

Deputy Brian Stanley

If the Bill before us goes through unamended or unchallenged, the negative effects will be long-lasting. The Electoral Act 1997 provides for the establishment of a commission to review constituencies. The recent commission, established in 2011, received a total of 533 submissions. I applaud the people who took the time and effort to make those submissions. The total of 533 is a huge increase on the 99 submissions received by the previous commission in 2004. It certainly puts paid to the perception that the public do not want to engage with, or participate in, our democratic institutions.

Even healthier is the fact that only 18% of the submissions were made by politicians and political groups. Interestingly, over 50% of the submissions related to Swords, so there is a very active citizenship there. These submissions were seeking to have Swords and its environs in one constituency.

The report upon which the Bill is based recommended an overall reduction from 166 to 158 seats, which represents a total reduction of eight seats for the next Dáil. This is despite the growth in population in this State. Census 2011 results show that the population of this State has continued to grow strongly since census 2006, increasing by 348,404 persons to 4,588,252. This represents an increase of 8.2% over the five-year period.

The commission claims that it was required to base its report on the population in census 2011, but the report fails to reflect this reality. It was the first time that a commission has had a predetermined outcome of reducing the number of TDs.

This Government was elected on a platform of reform, but if this Bill is adopted in its current form, it will clearly undermine the Government's credibility on this issue. To strengthen democracy we must ensure there is proper and full representation. Reducing the number of TDs only restricts representation and consolidates power around larger parties, further restricting minority views.

The main aims of the Bill are to reduce the number of TDs from 166 to 158, reduce the number of Dáil constituencies from 43 to 40, and redraw many of the general election constituencies. On paper it looks harmless enough and appears simply to move boundaries and reduce the number of TDs, but once one puts it into context and joins up the dots, one gets a different picture. On the one hand, the Minister is trumpeting local government reform, which we want and support. On the other hand, however, the Bill will cause confusion within local authorities and for elected public representatives, particularly Teachtaí Dála. There is no joined-up thinking between both processes.

Only last Friday, a commission was established to review local government boundaries and councillor numbers in preparation for local elections in 2014. We have seen the terms of reference. Before us now, however, is a Bill which will have some general election constituencies dealing with four different local authorities. In the case of Sligo-Leitrim, an elected TD will have to deal with four local authorities and four different county managers in Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan and Donegal.

Deputy Phil Hogan

We got Leitrim back together again.

Deputy Brian Stanley

Hold on. I will come to that in a minute.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Is Deputy Colreavy on board in that regard?

Deputy Brian Stanley

While Sinn Féin wanted to get County Leitrim back together-----

Deputy Phil Hogan

Fair play to the Deputy.

Deputy Brian Stanley

-----we did not want the Minister to saw off bits of counties Cavan and Donegal. This is bad practice and Members have the power to do something about it because what they have received are mere regulations. However, were they to opt for this, it would be bad practice. Moreover, this is a serious point and not a potshot at the Minister, Deputy Hogan. It is bad for public administration.

My own constituency of Laois-Offaly will become two separate constituencies. While that appears rational on paper, when one studies the detail, the new constituency of Laois will take in all of County Laois and six small electoral divisions in County Kildare, based in two separate local electoral areas, LEAs, with two separate sets of administration. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government should take heed of this point because he has spoken at length about joining up local government. There will be two separate administrations in the Athy area and Kildare LEA area, while Offaly will now take in all of County Offaly and a large section of County Tipperary. The Member seated to my left in the Chamber, Deputy Cowen, will be canvassing very close to the Acting Chairman, Deputy Tom Hayes, down near the borders of Nenagh town. That constituency will be shaped more like a banana than an apple. It will be a long drag of a constituency, extending from below Enfield right down to the edge of Nenagh town. It is misshapen and will take approximately one and a half hours to drive through it, on not very good roads. It will take in part of that area-----

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy should use the motorway.

Deputy Brian Stanley

There are no motorways down through County Offaly and it will be difficult to get from one end of it to another.

Deputy Phil Hogan

There is a motorway near Borrisokane.

Deputy Barry Cowen

There are good roads.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Tom Hayes)

Deputy Stanley, without interruption, please.

Deputy Phil Hogan

There are good roads.

Deputy Brian Stanley

It will make it very difficult for any Deputy. In fairness, a Deputy based in Edenderry will have a long way to travel to Nenagh.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The county has good roads.

Deputy Brian Stanley

It will make it difficult for a Deputy to do justice to constituents at distant and separate ends of such a long constituency.

Sinn Féin seeks better joined-up thinking within the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and within this Chamber. We propose that there must be a correlation between local authority and general election boundaries. In so far as possible, the Dáil constituencies must correspond with them. This will allow for better more efficient public representation and a better focus of resources for public administration. I know from personal experience that it is more efficient to deal with one or possibly two local administrations than being obliged to make contact with several such authorities to get the same results.

Deputy Phil Hogan

That is what Sinn Féin is doing in the North.

Deputy Brian Stanley

There should be seamless links in the services provided locally, regionally and nationally, as well as in a joined-up way.

Deputy Phil Hogan

That is what Sinn Féin is doing in the North.

Deputy Brian Stanley

If the Minister wants a debate here on that subject some day, I will have it with him. However, at present Members are dealing with the patch for which he is responsible.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy should look to the situation in the North.

Deputy Brian Stanley

The Minister should not be so combative and should listen. He is always seeking suggestions and while I am trying to make some to him, he will not allow me.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Tom Hayes)

Minister, please.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy has not made one yet.

Deputy Brian Stanley

To break up counties in some form of geopolitical jigsaw will lead to duplication and frustration. I make the point that the Minister has the chance to make some shape to Dáil and local government boundaries. He should try to have some correlation between the two. While the Minister may not admit this to me, when he thinks about it later he will be able to see the sense of it. This view is reinforced in the terms of reference of the Constituency Commission. According to those terms of reference, breaching county boundaries is to be avoided as a far as practicable. However, the Bill provides that 22 out of 40 constituency boundaries will breach county boundaries. More than half the constituencies proposed breach the terms of reference. Both politicians and political scientists have recognised the problems that breaching county boundaries cause, such as voter alienation and low turnout. This was evident recently.

Moreover, five constituencies will now be in breach of the Constitution. Article 16.2.2° of Bunreacht na hÉireann states that "the total number of members of Dáil Éireann shall not be fixed at less than one member for each thirty thousand of the population, or at more than one member for each twenty thousand of the population". However, Cavan-Monaghan, Donegal, Dublin North-West, Galway West and Mayo each will have more than 30,000 people per Deputy.

The programme for Government made a commitment to reduce the number of Deputies with the objective of reducing the cost and size of government. While I will not argue with reducing the cost, the present Administration reckons it can save €2.2 million by reducing the Dáil membership to 158 Deputies. However, if one was simply to reduce democracy to a cost-saving measure, one's arguments are fundamentally flawed, as reducing the number of Deputies will only serve to concentrate power around the larger parties to the exclusion of Independents, smaller parties and women. If one wishes to focus on cost savings, one could simply introduce a measure to cap the pay of public servants for three years, which would save hundreds of millions of euro. A cap on city and county managers' pay at €100,000 for three years would save €1.46 million, while a cap on hospital consultants' pay at €150,000 for three years would save €1.6 million.

Sinn Féin is committed to introducing savings and let us start with the people in this Chamber. I propose that the number of Deputies be kept at 166 and that ministerial salaries be cut to €100,000 and those of Deputies and Senators to €75,000 and €60,000, respectively. This would save €4.3 million and these proposals would save more than the Government is proposing in this Bill by merely cutting numbers. I reiterate that one should cut the costs and not the number of Deputies.

The reduction in the number of Deputies also will serve to undermine the Government's own Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act passed earlier this year. One of the main aims of that legislation was to increase the number of women elected to the Dáil. However, as political analysts will concur, the reduction in the total number of seats in the Dáil means there will be fewer opportunities for women to win seats. Larger constituencies are considered to be better for the election of women candidates but the Bill before Members maintains only 11 five-seat constituencies.

In conclusion, this Bill is important and has implications for democracy and inclusivity. Sinn Féin Members intend to table a number of amendments on Committee Stage in an attempt to strengthen democracy, accountability and inclusivity in the structures of government in this State.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

This Bill is a missed opportunity.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Hear, hear.

Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly

It reduces the number of Deputies from 166 to 158, which is a reduction of eight or less than 5%. On the basis that each Deputy costs the Exchequer approximately €250,000, that constitutes a saving of approximately €2 million. However, will that make the Oireachtas more effective or will it make democracy more effective in Ireland? It will not, although I believe it could have done. The question this Bill should have been addressing is, what is the problem that must be fixed? Having participated in this Dáil for almost two years, I can state that the Oireachtas does not work. Before I was elected, I worked with large public and private sector organisations, helping them to transform their cultures to have high-performing cultures. I can safely state that in terms of cultural dysfunction, in my experience the Oireachtas is in a league completely of its own. Much of this is down to centralised Cabinet power.

As the Minister is aware, Ireland has the most centralised power structure of any western democracy. This House does not hold the Executive to account. In the Chamber, Government backbenchers always vote along party lines or they get thrown out of the party. This is not normal and in other democracies, this does not happen. In other democracies, elected representatives within Government parties do vote against their Governments and they are not thrown out of their parties. Legislating for the X case is on the agenda at present for tragic reasons. Tomorrow night, Government Deputies will vote against the motion tabled, even though many of them will agree with it. Moreover, what will happen when legislation from the Government side finally comes before the House? One Labour Party Deputy was quoted in the newspapers on Sunday as stating that there should not be a free vote because if there was a free vote for this issue, there could be a free vote for anything. If one puts aside the lack of logic of that statement, it is highly telling. The Deputy was stating that directly elected representatives should not under any circumstances ever be allowed to vote as they see fit to exercise their democratic mandate.

As for the committees, I sit on the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform and I can tell Members it is not independent. It holds neither the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, nor the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, to account. Moreover, the level of control by the Cabinet is so pervasive that Deputy Mathews was unable to get the wording changed on an invitation to the Governor of the Central Bank, Patrick Honohan. In respect of political funding, I have suggested that all political funding should go directly to the Deputies and if they then wish to give it to their respective parties, they should be allowed do so. However, party backbenchers have argued vehemently against this, terrified that it would transfer power and democratic accountability from their parties to them.

My question to my fellow Deputies is this: if we do not vote according to our judgment, our conscience or in the interests of those whom we represent, if we cannot publicly disagree with the leaders of the parties of which we may be members and if we do not even want political funding to come to us, what are we doing here?

What are we, as Members of Dáil Éireann, doing in that case? Article 28 of the Constitution states "The Government shall be responsible to Dáil Éireann" but it is not, as the Government - or the Cabinet - controls Dáil Éireann completely.

It is getting worse. In 2008 the Oireachtas voted for the Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Act, which gave the Minister for Finance power to give the banks any amount of money they wished for.

Debate adjourned.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 20 Nov 2012

Electoral (Amendment)(Dáil Constituencies) Bill 2012: Second Stage

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 20 Nov 2012