JOINT COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Wednesday, 25 May 2005

Electoral Boundaries: Presentation.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Cormac Ó Súilleabháin, Mr. Odran Flynn and Mr. Gareth McDaid of the Save Leitrim group. Today's presentation will deal with aspects of the Electoral (Amendment) Bill due before the select committee later today. Due to time constraints I ask the members of the group to keep their presentation as concise as possible. This will facilitate committee members who may wish to seek further elaboration and ensure that the scheduled time of the select committee meeting is adhered to.

I draw attention to the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege but this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are also reminded of the longstanding parliamentary practice that members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person outside the House or an official, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I ask Mr. Ó Súilleabháin and his colleagues to begin their presentation.

Mr. Cormac Ó Suilleabháin

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to meet with you to discuss our concerns. It is important to reiterate that we wholeheartedly concur with the view that an independent body is the proper manner in which changes to our constituency boundaries should be administered. We fully accept that the current constituency of Sligo-Leitrim is outside the tolerated variances and required adjustment in accordance with legislation. We fully accept that Meath is entitled to six Dáil seats.

The reason we are here is well known. Under the proposed legislation, the county with the smallest population in the country is to be divided into two constituencies, leaving it with a slim chance of electing a TD from within its county boundary. Thus our key argument is the political significance of the county boundary. We have listened with interest to the various speakers on the floor of the Dáil over the past few weeks who have all been able to identify with Leitrim's plight. One cannot but conclude that there is a strong sense of moral injustice at what is happening here. Leitrim will be the only county in Ireland, North or South, deprived of representation in the main legislative body in either part of the island. All the remaining 25 counties in the Republic will be represented by at least one Deputy in the Dáil while in Northern Ireland every one of the Six Counties has representation at Westminster and at least four representatives in the Northern Ireland Assembly.

The civil rights movement in Northern Ireland of the 1960s had as its core demand equality of representation. The Irish Government and the Oireachtas have unequivocally supported that demand and were signatories to various agreements, culminating in the Good Friday Agreement, which enshrined in legislation that basic tenet of democracy. It is the ultimate irony that if Leitrim were Fermanagh we would not be here today making this presentation.

As part of our submission to the committee, we have already set out what we believe are valid arguments and concerns in relation to the splitting of Leitrim and the current legislation governing the revision of constituencies. It is abundantly clear that the Electoral Act 1997 is severely restricting the ability of the Constituency Commission to limit constituency variances and to ensure broad parity between constituencies. Furthermore, in light of the current explosion in population on the east coast, the problem of constituency revisions and the domino effect this has on the more rural constituencies along the west coast will get worse unless the Electoral Act 1997 is amended. This is a serious problem which will continue to face future constituency revisions.

However, today we wish to highlight to the committee a more pertinent and fundamental problem. There has been a technical flaw in the process used by the Constituency Commission in arriving at some of its recommendations and in particular its recommendation in respect of Leitrim. Through no fault of its own, the commission has misconstrued the situation and the domino effect of this mistake is the electoral splitting of Leitrim. We are not questioning or doubting the independence or integrity of the commission in any way. However there is an undoubted flaw in the commission's recommendations and it strongly behoves the Oireachtas to deal with this flaw. Not to do so would be an even greater injustice.

There are two key elements to the flaw. The commission incorrectly concluded that it was necessary to transfer some of Westmeath into Meath to satisfy Meath's constituency variance. The commission has given primacy to two non-statutory considerations, namely, the breaching of provincial boundaries and the number of counties in a constituency, to the detriment of two key statutory terms of reference. Both of these flaws led to the situation in which Leitrim was eventually split.

In light of this we wish to propose to the committee a possible solution to this problem which would have a minimal effect on the proposed constituency configuration. It is within the authority of the Oireachtas to amend the commission report without referring it back to the commission and this proposed solution complies with the statutory terms of reference as set out in the Electoral Act 1997. We urge the members of the committee to recommend this solution to both Houses.

Today it is Leitrim, the next time it will be at least one other county.

Mr. Odran Flynn

Leitrim is in this predicament because of the population explosion in the east of the country and the justifiable decision to give an extra Dáil seat to County Meath. The genesis of the problem and its solution is contained within the eight counties of Meath, Westmeath, Longford, Roscommon, Cavan, Monaghan, Sligo and Leitrim. There were 21 seats for the eight counties prior to the commission and its recommendation is to retain 21 seats. In effect, Meath has gained a seat at Leitrim's expense. While this submission does not dispute that Meath should get an extra seat, it vehemently argues that it should not be at Leitrim's expense.

The commission concluded that Meath should be represented by two three-seat constituencies, one of which, Meath West, had a population of 6,500 added to the constituency from Westmeath. This adjustment left Westmeath with too few people to fall within an acceptable variance from the national average and therefore remain as a three-seat constituency. Consequently Westmeath was united with Longford to form a four-seat constituency of Longford-Westmeath. Longford had previously been part of the constituency of Longford-Roscommon. Roscommon had insufficient population to form a constituency on its own. Similarly the constituency of Sligo-Leitrim no longer had sufficient population to retain four seats and the commission made the crucial decision to split Leitrim.

The commission's decision-making process was flawed. It stated in its report that to achieve six seats for Meath it was necessary to add population from Westmeath, but in fact it was not. If Meath's population of 134,005 had been split down the middle it would have given a variance of 5.4% for both Meath West and Meath East without requiring population from Westmeath. Those two variables are less than those in six other constituencies recommended by the commission: Louth, Cavan-Monaghan, Kerry South, Kerry North, Waterford and Sligo-North Leitrim.

An extra seat in Meath need not have caused a domino effect. Westmeath could have remained a three-seat constituency, Longford-Roscommon could have remained as a constituency with a small movement of population from Westmeath, and Sligo-Leitrim could then have remained as a four-seat constituency with some population from west Cavan. That would have left Cavan-Monaghan as a four-seat constituency. Leitrim would not be then the only county in Ireland without a TD. While that may seem unfair to Cavan-Monaghan, both counties in Cavan-Monaghan are guaranteed a TD in a four-seat constituency. We are happy to discuss this solution further.

Chairman

I will take questions from committee members.

Deputy Morgan

I welcome the delegation which has made an interesting submission. The Constituency Commission proposes three county breaches. The delegation has suggested a different configuration. How many county breaches does its proposal make? Is the delegation's movement of people from one county into another constituency greater or less than that of the Constituency Commission?

What is Mr. Flynn's view on the Constituency Commission's position that a constituency boundary resulting in all or part of three counties being included in a single constituency is undesirable? Is there anything in the commission's terms of reference that would lead them to such a conclusion? Under the commission's proposal Leitrim will be part of the title of two constituencies. Why is the delegation whinging and not delighted that Leitrim can have glory in both the north and south of the county?

I was struck by the comments made at the outset. I was thrown back to the early 1970s when Michael Farrell and Bernadette Devlin marched. Given the growing population on the eastern seaboard, what are the consequences for western constituencies in the future because of the trend set with the division of Leitrim?

The delegation proposes a number of four-seat constituencies. Does it accept that six or seven-seat constituencies would offer greater proportionality and that the time when such constituencies are necessary, particularly on the western seaboard, may not be too far away?

Mr. Flynn

The first question referred to the movement of population and the number of breaches of county boundaries. The commission proposes three breaches and we propose two. The level of population movement is less in our proposal than in the commission's proposal. The commission proposes the movement of 17,500 voters from south Leitrim and 8,500 from north Leitrim. It also proposes the movement of 6,500 voters from Westmeath to Meath West. Our figures are a movement of 5,000 voters from Westmeath to Longford-Roscommon and 10,700 from Cavan to Sligo-Leitrim. In both instances our proposals have less impact than the commission's proposals.

Neither the Constitution nor the Electoral Act precludes a constituency coming from more than one county. Previous commissions have accepted that two counties being in the same constituency, such as Sligo-Leitrim, is not a breach of county boundaries. All we are doing is adding one piece to another. As 3,500 people from Carlow are in Wicklow constituency, it is represented by people from three different counties, Carlow, Kilkenny and Wicklow. It is not exactly the same as what we propose but it is a precedent, and there is no reason not to do it. I will return to this point when answering the question on western constituencies as it is relevant.

With regard to the query on whether we are whinging because after all Leitrim will be in the name of two constituencies, that may be but unfortunately we will not have a TD. Leitrim will have an insufficient population to elect a TD in both constituencies and having "South Leitrim" and "North Leitrim" attached to the other counties in the name is cosmetic. The reality is that Sligo will elect three TDs and Roscommon will elect three TDs. A population of 17,500 is approximately two thirds of what is required to elect a TD. That would only be remotely possible if the entire electoral population of Leitrim united behind one candidate. In reality, examining inter-party transfers, a maximum of 70% or 75% could be achieved. It is not realistic to expect a TD to be elected from Leitrim.

After the next census there will be a minimum of three and probably four additional seats required in the greater Dublin area, which includes Louth, Kildare, Meath and west Dublin. They must come from somewhere unless the number of TDs is to be increased. There is no appetite to do that. Realistically, those seats will come from the west of the country. The only way to achieve that on an equitable basis is to create larger constituencies, as we had in the State's early years. Kerry was a seven-seat constituency at one time, as was Leitrim. The Constitution does not bar that; it merely states that no constituency should have less than three seats and does not have an upper limit. The upper limit is a restriction in the Electoral Act and the commission's terms of reference. In order to retain democracy and proportionality larger constituencies will become inevitable.

There is no requirement in the Constitution to maintain our electoral or provincial boundaries. By the time the next Constituency Commission completes its work, there will be a number of constituencies which will cover three counties. That is inevitable. The commission acknowledged in its report that if population growth continues in the current manner and population distribution is primarily in the east of the country, radical restructuring of the boundaries will be required.

Deputy Harkin

I thank the group for its presentation, which was clear and succinct. It enables us to understand the position of the group. It appears that Leitrim is going backwards. At one time Leitrim did not have a TD resident in the county. Because of that, the statutory requirement that county boundaries should be respected where practicable was inserted into the legislation. Now, 20 or 30 years later, the county is in the same position because the commission did not respect that requirement. I accept that the legislation states "where practicable" and the onus is on the Oireachtas rather than the commission to make the final decision, but nonetheless it is a backward step for Leitrim.

Furthermore, we have a situation where the Constituency Commission is respecting provincial boundaries for Dáil elections but not for European elections, where there are three provinces in a single electoral constituency. There seems to be an anomaly there, in terms of respecting boundaries for one election but not for another.

I am pleased that the presentation identified the initial flaw in the process and the domino effect of that flaw. More importantly, the presentation makes a proposal that is workable. I have tabled some amendments to the Electoral Bill that seek to create six-seat constituencies, which is feasible. The Oireachtas could decide to do so, but perhaps that is for a later date. The group has indicated that we may have to examine seriously the six-seat option as the population continues to shift eastwards and constituencies in the west lose seats. I am pleased that it has come up with a solution to deal with the issue we are facing now, while allowing us to examine the issue of the six-seat constituencies at some future point.

If Leitrim were Fermanagh, this debate would not be happening. The people in Fermanagh are guaranteed representation and the Irish Government had a role to play in that. It is amazing that we can have a county south of the Border where people might not have a representative living in the area. Is the Oireachtas happy to see one county, namely Leitrim, possibly not having a resident TD? This must be examined again. The delegation has identified the flaw and I ask the Oireachtas not to compound one flawed decision by making another.

Mr. Gareth McDaid

We accept that at some point in the future we may need to move away from the idea that people should vote for candidates because they come from a particular county. That is localism and it is probably not very good for politics. However, if we choose to move in that direction, we should do so in a holistic and transparent way. We should not begin with the smallest county in the 32 counties on the island and let it bear the brunt of that revolution at this point.

Deputy Gilmore

I welcome the delegation from the Save Leitrim group and I thank the Chairman for agreeing that it should be heard prior to the Committee Stage debate on the Electoral Bill.

I agree with the delegation that the Oireachtas has the power to determine the make-up of constituencies; it does not have to abide by the recommendations of the Constituency Commission. However, if the Oireachtas makes a decision that is at variance with the recommendations of an independent commission it may be accused of political bias. The Oireachtas operates on the principle of majority rule, which presents a difficulty, particularly for those of us in Opposition, because if the Dáil constituencies are determined by vote of the Oireachtas, then they will be determined by the majority, which would be the sitting Government at any given point in time. If we are to address the issue of Leitrim on a stand-alone basis, how do we fire-proof that against a case being made by disappointed colleagues in other counties, towns or parishes whose constituency status has changed?

The proposal that the delegation put to the committee is very interesting. The suggestion is that if Meath is to gain a seat — because of the population growth in Dublin spilling over into that county — it should more logically come from Cavan-Monaghan. This would avoid the negative knock-on effect across the northern part of the State resulting from taking the additional seat from Sligo-Leitrim. The proposal is to include the leg of County Cavan in the Sligo-Leitrim constituency and not to move the section of County Westmeath into the Meath West constituency, as proposed by the commission, but move an alternative part of Westmeath in the north-west of the county into the Longford-Roscommon constituency. Has that idea been suggested by any of the public representatives in the affected counties?

The most sought-after document in this House is the report of the Constituency Commission when it is published. There is usually a period of time during which Members contemplate its contents before electoral legislation is presented to them. If this committee were to adopt this proposal today, what level of surprise would it cause among those representing the affected counties? Have the relevant representatives been informed of the proposals from the Save Leitrim group and have they responded to the suggestions?

Mr. McDaid

I share Deputy Gilmore's concerns about maintaining the independence of the commission and about the de facto way the Oireachtas operates. However, it is within the power of a sitting Government, through the Oireachtas, to change the terms of reference in the Electoral Acts, which is a back-door way of arriving at the desired constituency boundary recommendations.

The second point, to which the Deputy did not refer, concerns the protection afforded our democratic system in Article 16 of the Constitution and by the various Supreme Court judgments, including the O'Donovan judgment, which referred to Article 26 of the Constitution, and the O'Malley judgment. The leeway for a Government to depart from the independent route of the Constituency Commission is probably not as great as it might appear.

With regard to towns, parishes and various other administrative areas requiring representation, the difference between a county and a town or parish is that the county is referred to in the statutory terms of reference; it has statutory significance whereas towns and parishes do not.

I will let Mr. Ó Súilleabháin answer the third question on whether the idea has been floated by the political parties in the various constituencies affected.

Mr. Ó Súilleabháin

No, the idea has not been floated. However, if we listen to anything said in the Dáil in the past two or three weeks by any Deputy of any political party, from any county or parish, we find they all identify with Leitrim's plight. Counties Cavan, Monaghan, Westmeath, Longford and Roscommon will all have Deputies irrespective of what party they belong to, or what town or parish they come from, because they have sufficient populations. Unfortunately, this is not the case for County Leitrim and will not be the case under the proposed arrangements. What type of error or flaw does the commission have to discover before it decides the process needs to be changed?

Deputy Healy-Rea

I welcome the delegation. After listening to the excellent presentation made by them, I have sympathy for County Leitrim, which has a genuine case. Like Deputy Gilmore, I ask what we can do to assist Leitrim or whether we are powerless in this regard. I will assist in any way I can. I know a little about Leitrim and, while I will not castigate the Constituency Commission, there is an old story that anyone who never made a mistake never made anything, and that those who made mistakes made many other things as well.

The Constituency Commission made a grave error in leaving Leitrim without a local Deputy. I feel honour bound to state that if I have any opportunity to support the people of Leitrim in a vote or in any other way in the Oireachtas, they can rely 100% on me because I have sympathy for them. Whatever kind of adjustment is required, the Constituency Commission should make a clear-cut decision in this case and allow County Leitrim to have one Deputy. I thank the Chairman for giving the members of the delegation such an excellent hearing. They have my total support.

Deputy O’Dowd

What is the population of County Leitrim?

Mr. Flynn

It is just over 25,000.

Deputy O’Dowd

That is low.

Mr. Flynn

The average population per Deputy is 23,598 nationally. The population in Leitrim is approximately 2,000 above that. Effectively, it has the exact population to support one seat.

Deputy O’Dowd

Does that figure comprise people over 18?

Mr. Flynn

No, the Constituency Commission calculations are based on population rather than electors. Obviously a Deputy represents everybody in a constituency, irrespective of age. The average was derived from the population of the country, which was approximately 3.9 million at the last census.

Deputy O’Dowd

Therefore, with regard to Deputy Gilmore's question, despite the delegation's suggestion of a possibilty of a single-seat constituency of Leitrim, the reality is that the county cannot stand alone. Government policy in terms of spatial strategy could and should build up the west of the country. However, that will take time and the only way Leitrim can move is as a whole county.

The delegation proposes that the people of Cavan-Monaghan should lose a seat. I accept that it is proposed to move a bit of that constituency but it cannot be guaranteed that the number of people involved would be able to elect a Deputy from that specific part of the constituency.

The other weakness in the delegation's argument is that it talks about a negative variance of -7% for Cavan-Monaghan but the variance is 7% for County Louth. If the delegation continued its work, it would intend making Louth a five-seat constituency and it would be necessary then to look to another constituency from which to take a seat. The reality is that it cannot be done because the delegation is not the commission.

I support and do not have a difficulty with the aspiration that the current Sligo-Leitrim constituency should probably have provided a better deal than what is proposed. However, the reality is that no matter what way the figures are juggled, other counties will be affected. The same issues will arise in those areas, to a greater or lesser extent. We have to look at the big picture. However, I support the basic aspiration that a county should, if at all possible, retain its unitary status within a new constituency.

I understand that a significant proportion of the voters of north County Leitrim opted for candidates outside the county in their first preference votes in the last general election, which is a reality of politics. Where there are swings in elections, that will happen. While I agree with the basic principle, the Constituency Commission has decided not to go along with that principle, which is the difficulty we must face. We cannot intervene or interfere with what the commission has done because if we do so for one area, it will not end there. However, if we could find a way to solve this problem, it should be done, although without disturbing other counties.

Deputy Kelleher

I welcome the delegation. I read its submission with interest. We can all sympathise with counties which have had constituency boundaries changed, and with politicians who have grievances in that regard. For example, the people of Cork will be disappointed to lose a seat, having changed from 20 seats to 19. I presume that seat went to Kildare North and the other seat referred to went to create a six-seat constituency in Meath.

The committee must be conscious that the integrity of the Constituency Commission must be protected at all times. While we can analyse and scrutinise, it would be dangerous for us to get involved in the defining of the commission's decisions by making recommendations and changes. Reference was made to the fact that this was a problem in the North for many years, in that boundaries and constituencies there were changed to suit dominant groups.

Deputy Gilmore made the point that we have a democracy but it is a majority rule democracy catering for minorities. However, a situation could arise where Government or the Oireachtas, despite the protection afforded by the Constitution and Supreme Court decisions, could change recommendations of the Constituency Commission. That would be a dangerous precedent to set, and is a practice we tried to get away from many years ago. If we binned the rule on one occasion, it would open the floodgates and undermine the integrity of the Constituency Commission.

On the issue of six-seat constituencies, the delegation stated that in future some counties will be without representation as the population in eastern Ireland increases, in particular in the Dublin area and larger urban areas. That is true and it is undoubtedly the case that some counties will be without representation per se. However, is the delegation seriously suggesting that a person from one county is incapable of representing a person from another county? The delegation seems to make the point that because Leitrim might not have a local representative, the representatives elected in the constituency would be incapable of representing the people who elected them. I am not sure the argument stands up, when analysed.

For example, the demographics have changed dramatically in Laois-Offaly where more Deputies are elected from Laois than from Offaly. If the trend continues over a period, one might end up with a situation whereby more Deputies represent one county than the other. However, this does not diminish the county's representation in the Oireachtas as five Deputies are still elected from Laois-Offaly. The same applies to Sligo-Leitrim or Leitrim-Roscommon. Ultimately, I fail to see how the votes of the people of Leitrim are diminished by dividing the county. If this was the case, county boundaries should not be altered under any circumstances and should be sacrosanct when the Constituency Commission makes its definitive decisions. The delegation argues that if an area is moved to a different constituency over a county boundary, a person elected from that constituency is incapable of representing the people from the other county.

The people of Leitrim are intelligent and they will make their decision, send members from the constituencies of Sligo-Leitrim and Leitrim-Roscommon and be well-represented in the Dáil. I understand the views of Deputy Healy-Rea but to go down this road would be a dangerous precedent. While the joint committee can listen to the delegation's views, it should not be involved in making recommendations after the Constituency Commission has made its report.

Chairman

Senator Bannon and Deputy Ellis are offering. However, does the delegation wish to respond to the questions put so far?

Mr. Ó Súilleabháin

Yes. Some of the joint committee members have referred to the precedent in this case. In my opening statement, I noted that a more dangerous precedent would be set by letting a flaw go unnoticed or unchallenged. Moreover, we do not make a party political issue but are concerned with the protection of a county boundary. This is our fundamental point. The measure does not favour Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour and is not to the particular advantage of any group. Ultimately, it is up to the electorate to decide.

Another member referred to the number of voters from north Leitrim who voted for another candidate. As I understand it, no candidate was based in north Leitrim in the last general election. I am not entirely familiar with what constituency Deputy Kelleher is from.

Deputy Kelleher

Cork North-Central, which is changing from five seats to four as a result of the boundary review.

Mr. Ó Súilleabháin

Very good. I am glad for him. I understand his arguments in respect of being represented by a person from another constituency. Ultimately, however, would he wish to be represented by someone from Tipperary?

Chairman

That is a rhetorical question and Deputy Kelleher is not obliged to answer it.

Deputy Gilmore

The people of Dún Laoghaire are happy to be represented by someone from Galway.

Mr. Ó Súilleabháin

That is an urban issue. The rural constituencies have a far greater significance. This city has a Deputy every three miles, while County Leitrim is 60 to 65 miles in length. There is no comparison.

Mr. McDaid

I shall address the point to the effect that voters should be indifferent about the side of a county from which their representative comes. If that was the reality, we would probably have a situation whereby numerous counties would not have Deputies. If people actually read policy documents, studied the issues, looked at people's records and concluded that a particular man or woman was the best qualified candidate, surely numerous counties would lack Deputies. This, however, is an unlikely situation.

Chairman

We must conclude this meeting by 3.30 p.m. With that in mind, I invite Senator Bannon to make his contribution.

Senator Bannon

I welcome the members of the Save Leitrim campaign. As a neighbour in County Longford, I support their aspirations and views regarding the prospect of Leitrim being left without a Deputy after the next general election. After the previous boundary review, Longford was lumped in with a county in a different province to form the constituency of Longford-Roscommon. Only two connections exist between Longford and Roscommon, namely, the bridges at Termonbarry and at Lanesborough. The health board, tourism and regional authority areas all differed. We always felt that even though we liked and worked well with Roscommon people, we did not have much in common with them. I do not know what my party's view is on the subject but I favour single-seat constituencies based on proportional representation. This would accommodate the people of Leitrim.

As the joint committee is aware, the Constituency Commission is independent. It was established in 2003 or 2004 and every member of the public was entitled to make submissions to it. To my surprise, I was the only person from County Longford to make a submission. For the reasons I outlined earlier, I suggested that Longford should return to the historical constituency of Longford-Westmeath. I had hoped it would be re-established as a five-seat constituency because we have a combined population of approximately 110,000 to 112,000. However, more than 5,000 Westmeath voters were removed and placed in the new Meath West constituency. We feel somewhat hard done by in County Longford because the population is approximately 31,000 as against Westmeath's population of approximately 78,000 to 79,000.

How many submissions were sent to the Constituency Commission from Westmeath? Did the delegation study them and what were the submissions' findings? What proposals were put forward by Leitrim people? This is when the ordinary citizen of any county has an opportunity to make submissions. How many Leitrim people were interested at the time? I was disappointed with the response from Longford because I was the only person from the county to make a submission to the Constituency Commission.

Deputy Ellis

I welcome the Save Leitrim representatives to the meeting. We have met on several occasions. We are in a very awkward situation. The Constituency Commission has, within reason, absolute authority in respect of dealing with constituencies. Had any of the four sitting Deputies for Sligo-Leitrim a say in the matter, they would undoubtedly have kept the constituency as a four-seater. However, the demographics are such that if the population explosion continues on the east coast, after the next revision it will take all of Sligo and Leitrim or all of Roscommon and Leitrim to make a three-seater. This is a frightening fact of life which we must live with in the future.

It is wrong to state that Leitrim cannot elect a Deputy. If the 4,000 first preference votes that left Leitrim at the last election had stayed in the county, Gerry Reynolds would have been elected with me and Leitrim would have had two Deputies. It is wrong to suggest that a person cannot represent another county. Deputy Harkin has done her utmost for Leitrim as well as for Sligo, despite the fact that she lives in Sligo. I work for Sligo people in the same way that I work for people from Leitrim. It is wrong to propagate the myth that unless one lives within a constituency, one cannot represent it.

The people of Leitrim know exactly from where they are coming and their agenda is to ensure that they return a Deputy on the next occasion. There is a total of 1.25 quotas of votes on the register in the southern part of the county. We must accept that northern Leitrim has a problem because the number of voters on the register there only comes to approximately half of a quota. Mr. Ó Súilleabháin has come around to this view that we should set a marker for the next constituency revision to the effect that, where possible, we do not wish to see county boundaries broken up.

I made the original suggestion to a number of people that the only way to save the old Sligo-Leitrim constituency would be to add western Cavan to it, which would reduce Cavan-Monaghan to a four-seater. However, it appears that the Constituency Commission did not hold the same view. None of us made submissions because we all thought that the tolerance would be sufficient and that the growth in population in both Sligo and Leitrim would provide sufficient numbers to maintain the four seats. However, that proved not to be the case.

The only thing we can do is lay down a marker for the next boundary commission and the terms of reference that will be given to it. The terms of reference will be the most significant element in future boundary commissions. Leitrim was left without any Deputy in the 1977 general election, in which I was a candidate. There were enough votes left in Leitrim for my party colleagues which would have ensured that Fianna Fáil would have won that seat. I have no doubt that the people of Leitrim will not commit hara-kiri for a second time in the next general election. It is not the ideal solution for any of us. One would much prefer to represent one's entire county than attempt to represent a portion of it, along with another county. Nobody accepts the position but the decision of the commission, which is independent, must be accepted.

We are all aware that politicians indulged in gerrymandering in the early 1970s. After that, all parties here agreed that it would be left to independent commissions to decide constituency boundaries. Nobody wants the question of how constituency boundaries should be decided returned to the political sphere.

Deputy Morgan

In the next election, can we set them out on the basis of a leaflet?

Deputy Perry

I welcome the representatives of Save Leitrim campaign. I have spoken at length on this subject in the Dáil and I have no doubt that the members of the campaign have seen the transcript of what I have said on this very important subject. There has been a considerable degree of development within Leitrim during the past four or five years, taking in such things as county development boards and Leader partnerships. This development has been evident in every village and town in the county, from Carrick-on-Shannon to Manorhamilton. The county has been transformed in an unprecedented way and many people have returned to live there. Everyone can be wise in hindsight.

As someone who is honoured to represent the people of Sligo-Leitrim, I had no idea what the Constituency Commission would decide. When the independent commission had been appointed, I did not feel it was my responsibility to get involved in commenting on its recommendations. It was to everyone's shock and amazement that the commission decided to divide Leitrim. This was despite the fact that the people of north Leitrim, particularly Manorhamilton, would have more affinity with Sligo than their counterparts in south Leitrim.

The purpose of our guests' campaign, which has been very well executed since the announcement of the Constituency Commission's recommendations, is very important. The level of disquiet about the commission's recommendations has been extraordinary. I do not know what can be done about them because the problem is not amenable to a quick fix. If one fixes this problem quickly, it will cause difficulties elsewhere. I fully support the aims of the Save Leitrim campaign but one must be realistic about what can be achieved in the short term because we are facing a general election in 18 months. I do not know if it is possible to get the commission to re-examine its recommendations because the Taoiseach stated in the Dáil earlier this week that there would no revision thereof until after the next general election. I support the re-examination of the commission's recommendations but I think the options are limited. There is no point in pretending otherwise.

Deputy O'Dowd asked whether consultation had taken place in other counties because I have no doubt that there will be knock-on effects elsewhere if someone's seat comes under threat. As a Deputy, I would like to think that I would look after the area within my constituency but it is equally important to try to get political consensus on this issue. This, however, is not a political matter. It involves a decision by an independent commission composed of members who are above reproach. I fully support the aims of the Save Leitrim campaign but I do not feel there is much I, as a Deputy, can do. My input will not change matters.

Deputy Harkin

The commission's role is advisory in nature. This decision ultimately rests with the Oireachtas, a point that has been missed at this meeting.

Chairman

Members of the Save Leitrim campaign can now answer the questions posed by members of the committee and conclude with their final remarks.

Mr. Ó Súilleabháin

Regarding the number of submissions from Leitrim, there were no submissions directly made by people from Leitrim. The reason for this is because people in Leitrim thought they were protected under the terms of reference of the Constituency Commission. As far as I am aware, in over 21 years of commissions there have been no submissions from people in Leitrim. Regarding consultations with other counties, submissions in respect of Leitrim were made by political parties where there was no consultation with people from Leitrim. A submission was made by a political party that argued for the retention of Leitrim. Therfore, there were submissions made in respect of Leitrim, although they did not come from people in Leitrim.

I understand the Deputy's point about Longford-Roscommon. I spoke with Deputies from Roscommon about this matter one year ago. They could identify what the Deputy was saying about there being no linkage between Longford and Roscommon. There are two Deputies in Longford. The Deputy does not have to go into it. The two Deputies in Roscommon will be going to an area further north of Longford, where there is likely to be nobody.

I agree with Deputy Ellis's argument that Sligo-Leitrim had to change and we alluded to that in our submission. However, there was a flaw in the way the commission's decision was arrived at, which involved the division of Leitrim. Regarding the question about the number of voters in north Leitrim, it is all down to population. To tell the people of Leitrim that they should wait for the next revision of constituencies, given that they thought the county was protected under the commission's terms of reference, is not an option.

The Save Leitrim campaign is not questioning the independence of the commission. However, if the commission makes mistakes, they must be rectified. If the commission's report actually says on page 9 that the final determination lies with the Houses of the Oireachtas and that the commission's role is merely advisory, it cannot be made clearer. It is within the power of the Deputies and Senators here today to rectify the commission's mistakes. As Mr. McDaid stated earlier, the various Supreme Court judgments in the past have confirmed that. It is the Oireachtas which decides on an issue like this, not an independent commission.

I welcome the fact that we received a hearing here today. When I was travelling up to Dublin here today, I felt a weight of responsibility. I could produce a piece of paper from 1973 when Leitrim was split three times, which refers to "another carve-up". Leitrim had a good start to the week last Sunday; I am pleading with the committee to make it a better week.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Ó Súilleabháin. I, as Chairman, and my fellow committee members felt it was important that the Save Leitrim campaign was given an opportunity to address the committee in advance of Committee Stage of the Bill. I am delighted that we were able to facilitate it. I would like to thank the campaign for its presentation.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.30 p.m. until 4.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 31 May 2005.