I am in favour of this Bill, mainly because it changes the conditions under which mental patients were given an opportunity to vote in the last general election. It was seen, there, that it was a very great mistake to have the legislation in a manner that permitted the voting machine to operate as it did in that election. This change, I believe, is not the answer. I think it is a very great mistake to give the power of voting to mental patients. These people are now being asked to participate in the elections of members of the Dáil and Seanad. Let us remember that these unfortunate people will not be listened to in a court of law where the laws passed by the Dáil and Seanad are put into effect. Take a mental patient out of any of these institutions and bring him down to a court of law and it is obvious that any evidence he gives or statements he makes will be contested and will not be accepted. Similarly, if any of these people make a will, or are given the opportunity to make a will, it will be contested.
Take the mental patient who has spasms and who may be very ill mentally for a couple of days, weeks or months and quite sane for another time. That is the type of patient who, during his time of sanity, ought to be entitled to make a will when he is able to make clear decisions which will be acceptable. But, once he is in a mental institution, the power of a patient to make a will is not likely to be contested because it just does not exist. I feel, therefore, it is a great mistake to bring the legislation so far as to permit mental patients to vote.
Possibly the RMS will have some say in this matter. He will be in a position to certify whether the patient is going through one of these stormy mental periods or whether, on the day of the election and the days approaching it, he is sane and able to make a sane decision, to make a sane choice. There is a lot in what Senator Sheldon has said in relation to the address at which the patient will be registered. It is most important to examine the points made by Senator Sheldon. The question of where you will put the people on the register is very important and I think this Bill is not the answer.
With the democratic outlook that prevails in this country and the very fair outlook that there is amongst our people, there is the danger that we can go too far in being fair. The Civic Guards were deprived of the right to exercise the franchise and, after all, these people are mentally balanced. They are doing a very important job in the community. They are affected by the laws of the country, the same as every other citizen, and, still, that body of people were not permitted to cast their votes and take part in the elections. If Civic Guards are not permitted to vote, there is a very weak case in favour of allowing mental patients to vote.
I do not think there has been agitation or pressure by mental patients for the right to exercise the franchise. I do not think any number of them felt they had a grievance because they could not vote and could not participate in the elections. In accordance with our democratic outlook, we have decided to give these people a right and a facility which they did not ask for. Everybody must look at this in a humane manner and agree that we must be fair to these people. We must respect the fact that they are suffering from a mental illness but this is an illness that deprives them of the power to make a decision—at least that is the view of sane people. Sane people believe that mentally ill people cannot make a sane decision and yet here they are being given an opportunity to participate in the election of Members of the Dáil and Seanad. That is why I think this Bill is a mistake and that what we are doing today is not the answer to the problem, and that if we are anxious to give votes to these people, it is because they are aged over 21 years and are in good physical health. We decide, then, to give them a vote. I think it is not the answer because there are different degrees and different types of mental illness.
It will be difficult for the RMS to decide, on the day of a general election, that, when the patient is marking the ballot paper, he is sane. He might or might not be sane on the day he was marking the ballot paper. Therefore, the RMS will have a very big job in this matter, apart from deciding whether or not he can release patients from the institution in order to vote from various addresses. Senator Sheldon has made very effective points in that connection that should carefully be considered by the Minister and his officials. I am very unhappy about the proposal to give these voting powers to mental patients. When we were quite satisfied to leave the Civic Guards without the right to vote, being sane persons, there is no reason to worry too much about ensuring that people who are physically fit and mentally ill will have a right to vote in these elections.
I feel, too, that this Bill does not go far enough in the matter of postal voting. I hope that this is only a temporary measure and that the Minister will bring in a new Electoral Bill to meet modern conditions and modern circumstances. Travel is very easy at the present time and we know if an election occurs during the holiday time when people are likely not alone to be away from their ordinary addresses here in this country but to be away on continental holidays and elsewhere, they do not get an opportunity to vote. Those people are away from the country for a matter of a few weeks only and when they come back, they are subject to the laws and participate in the various forms of taxation imposed upon them as citizens. Still, just because they were away on holiday on election day, they do not get an opportunity to vote for or against a particular policy in the light of their own opinions.
People who find it necessary to be away on the election day, whether it be on holiday or for business purposes— commercial travellers and various other classes of people—should not be deprived of the right to vote because they are unable to be present at the booth for the purpose of marking the ballot paper in the area in which they are normally resident. The Minister might consider, for instance, the possibility of giving those people proxy votes; in other words, that they could instruct members of their family to cast the vote for them. Possibly they could give a member of their family a document which could be brought to the booth and which would enable that person to cast the vote for them. I feel it is a great mistake in this day of easy travel, where people can be long distances from their normal residences on the day of the general election, that those people are deprived of the right to cast their votes.
It was mentioned in relation to mental patients, that a number of them are quite sane and have been left in institutions by their families. Surely it is up to the RMS of a mental hospital to certify that a person is not mentally ill and he should then be removed from the mental institution to some other type of home for sick people. Surely it is not right to keep in a mental hospital a person whom the RMS is in a position to certify as not being mentally ill. With regard to this point about sane people being left in institutions by their relatives— if it is a fact—I feel there is a job there for the Minister for Health, to ensure that that practice will be discontinued and that those people will be put into a proper place and not detained in mental institutions if they are not mentally ill.
