Seanad Éireann debate -
Friday, 5 Jun 1998

Vol. 155 No. 19

Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1998: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey)

The purpose of the Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1998, is to fix the total number of Members of Dáil Éireann and to revise the constituencies in respect of which Members are elected to the Dáil. The constituencies proposed in the Bill are those recommended by the 1998 Constituency Commission, the first established under the Electoral Act, 1997. The new constituencies will come into force on the next dissolution of the Dáil. They will not have effect in relation to any by-elections held in the meantime.

The constitutional requirements in relation to Dáil membership and constituencies are set out in Article 16. They may be summarised as follows: the number of Members must be fixed from time to time by law; there must be at least one Member for every 30,000 of the population and not more than one for every 20,000; the ratio between the number of Members to be elected for each constituency and the population of each constituency as ascertained at the last preceding census must, so far as it is practicable, be the same throughout the country; the Oireachtas must revise the constituencies at least once in every 12 years with due regard to changes in distribution of the population — the legal advice to the previous Government was that the Constitution requires revision of the constituencies whenever a census discloses substantial changes in population; and the number of Members to be returned for any constituency must not be less than three.

These constitutional provisions were 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. In neither of these cases did the courts quantify the precise degree of equality of representation which is required by the Constitution, although the judge in the O'Donovan case appeared to suggest that a departure of about 5 per cent from strict mathematical parity would be acceptable.

Dealing with the question of equality of representation in the subsequent reference case, the Supreme Court stated that it could not lay down a figure above or below which a variation from the national average is not permitted. The court stressed that the practical considerations which ought to be taken into account, and the weight that should be attached to them in departing from strict equality of representation, are primarily matters for the Oireachtas and should not be reviewed by the courts unless there is a "manifest infringement" of the relevant article of the Constitution. The court concluded that the test to be applied is whether the failure to maintain the ratio between the number of Members for each constituency and the population of each constituency involves such a divergence as to make it clear that the Oireachtas has not carried out the intention of the relevant constitutional provisions.

In each revision of constituencies effected between 1961 and 1974 the limit of 5 per cent, suggested in the O'Donovan case, was adhered to. However, more substantial departures from mathematical equality were provided for in the revisions carried out since 1974, based on the recommendations of independent commissions. The maximum departures in schemes recommended by non-statutory commissions were 7.6 per cent above the national average in the Louth constituency in 1990 and 7.9 per cent below the national average in the constituency of Mayo East in 1983. The proposed constituencies in the Bill are within these departures.

Part II of the Electoral Act, 1997, provides that, on publication of the census report, a commission must be established to review the constituencies for Dáil and European elections. The commission is chaired by a judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court nominated by the Chief Justice and the members are the Ombudsman, the Secretary of the Department of the Environment and Local Government and the Clerks of the Dáil and Seanad. The Act sets out the commission's terms of reference which, subject to the constitutional requirements, restrict total Dáil membership to the range 164-8. The commission is required to report to the Chairman of the Dáil within six months of its establishment. Reports of the commission must be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.

The terms of reference for Dáil constituencies as set out in section 6 of the Act provide that a constituency commission shall, in observing the relevant provisions of the Constitution, have regard to the following: the total number of Members of the Dáil shall be not less than 164 and not more than 168; each constituency shall return three, four or five members; the breaching of county boundaries shall be avoided as far as practicable, although this restriction does not extend to city boundaries or the administrative county boundaries in Dublin; each constituency shall be composed of contiguous areas and there shall be regard to geographic considerations including significant physical features and the extent of and density of population in each constituency. Subject to these provisions, the commission shall endeavour to maintain continuity in relation to the arrangement of constituencies.

Volume 1 of the 1996 census, published in August 1997, showed that two constituencies, namely, Cork North-West and Galway East, have fewer than the constitutional minimum of 20,000 population per Deputy. In other constituencies the number of persons represented by each Deputy varied significantly from the national average. The variance from national average representation in Dublin West was almost 16 per cent and in Kildare North was almost 11 per cent. Thus, a revision of Dáil constituencies is now mandatory under the Constitution.

The commission was established by order made on 30 September 1997 and presented its report to the Ceann Comhairle on 26 March 1998. In a press release issued to coincide with the publication of the report the commission outlined its overall approach to Dáil constituency review as follows:

The commission reviewed each constituency, having regard to the overriding constitutional requirements, its terms of reference and the submissions received. It gave particular attention to constituencies with variances exceeding 5 per cent from the national average representation. Where an adjustment was necessary, the commission examined the available options and recommended arrangements which it considers reasonable and practicable. No change in the total number of Dáil deputies is recommended.

The commission's approach to the Dublin area, having regard to its terms of reference, was to formulate coherent constituencies, bounded by readily identifiable physical features, which provide reasonable equality of representation and unite communities as far as practicable. The commission also endeavoured to match constituency size with the particular circumstances of each locality.

The commission's report was circulated to every Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas. I am sure Senators welcome the high standard of presentation of the report which make the proposed boundary changes very clear. I thank the chairman of the commission, Mr. Justice Richard Johnson, and the other members for their work. The commission carried out its task in a conscientious and impartial manner and it is right that we should record our appreciation of its report and work.

The principle of having constituencies drawn up by an independent commission has applied since the first commission was set up by a Fianna Fáil Government in 1977. Inherent in this approach is an implication that the commission's recommendations will be implemented in their entirety and this is what the Government is now proposing. Of course, under the Constitution the ultimate responsibility for the revision of Dáil constituencies rests with the Oireachtas.

The Bill provides that total Dáil membership will remain at 166 and increases the number of constituencies by one to 42. There will be 16 three seat constituencies, 12 four seat and 14 five seat constituencies. There are changes to 21 existing constituencies and the average population per Member ranges from 6.66 per cent above the national average in the Waterford constituency to 7.44 per cent below the national average in the Sligo-Leitrim constituency.

In the Dublin area, the existing allocation of 47 Dáil seats is retained, assigned to 12 constituencies. A new constituency is being created, namely, Dublin Mid-West, and there are boundary changes in all 11 existing constituencies. The seat allocation in five of the existing constituencies is being altered. Discounting the new constituency, there will be a transfer between Dublin constituencies of 97,000 population.

Outside Dublin, minor territorial changes are being made to ten constituencies, namely, four in Cork and the two constituencies in Counties Kildare, Galway and Limerick. These changes involve a transfer of 20,200 population. There is no change in the number of Deputies in any constituency outside Dublin.

The commission also had the task of reporting on the constituencies for the European Parliament, the next elections for which will be held on Friday, 11 June 1999, the same day on which local elections will be held. There are no constitutional provisions relating to the formation of European constituencies, but the commission's terms of reference require that there be reasonable equality of representation between constituencies. In addition, section 15 of the European Parliament Elections Act, 1997, requires that the Minister shall, having considered the report of the constituency commission, submit proposals for a review of European constituencies to the Oireachtas by 1 December 2003 at latest and subsequently at least once every ten years.

The 1996 census showed that the variances from national average representation in the existing four European constituencies ranged from minus 10.4 per cent in the Leinster constituency to plus 9.44 per cent in the Dublin constituency. In its report the commission indicated that most submissions made to it recommended no change in existing constituencies. The commission examined alternative arrangements but concluded that "no reasonable re-drawing of the constituencies would reduce the existing variances and result in coherent constituencies with which communities could identify". The commission's recommendation that there be no change in the current formation of the four European constituencies has been accepted by the Government.

To conclude, it is obvious from the report that the commission strove conscientiously to produce proposals in keeping with the Constitution and its terms of reference. Where a difficult choice had to be made, the commission marshalled the available options and made an informed and reasoned recommendation. While others might make a different choice, the commission carried out its appointed task in compliance with the guidelines given it and the Government believes its recommendations should be implemented in full. Accordingly, I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. J. Doyle

I welcome the Minister and thank him for his contribution which went into some detail regarding the recommendations of the commission. The purpose of the Bill is to revise Dáil constituencies in light of the 1996 census of population and to legislate for the recommendations in the report of the constituency commission, the first statutory commission established under Part II of the Electoral Act, 1997. Prior to this five non-statutory commissions reported on Dáil constituencies. I thank Mr. Justice Johnson and the members of the commission, including the Clerk of the Seanad, for their report, which is very readable and well presented. I also compliment them on the set of maps provided with the report which is of great assistance.

Under the Constitution the number of Members of the Dáil must be fixed from time to time by law and the constituencies for which Members are elected must be determined by law and revised by the Oireachtas at least once every 12 years. This is solely a matter for the Oireachtas. The function of the commission is an advisory one. Since the report of the first commission, set up in 1977, successive Governments have accepted the recommendations of commission reports without amendment. The last commission report recommended that an area in Dún Laoghaire in the constituency of Dublin South be annexed to Dublin South-East. Now the commission recommends that most of that electoral area be returned to the two respective constituencies. This is unfair to the elected members and to the electorate in general.

The role of politicians in multi-seat constituencies is becoming more difficult every day. First, members must compete within their own party; second, they must compete with other parties and, third, they must compete with constituency changes which may be recommended by the commission. Many public representatives who work hard on behalf of their electorate can find that a major part of their constituency has been moved to another constituency. The commission carried out its functions under the terms of reference given to it by the Government. However, the terms of reference are subordinate to the relevant constitutional provisions. Some Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas will be disappointed with certain aspects of the recommendations of the commission and others will be very happy. I have no doubt that the commission revised each constituency having regard to the overriding constitutional requirements and its terms of reference. Therefore, I support the Bill.

Mr. Walsh

It is fair to say that since the Minister for the Environment and Local Government came into office the Department has been very diligent in bringing forward much legislation.

I join with the Minister and Senator Doyle in complimenting the commission on its report and the professional manner in which it enables people to understand the changes that have been made. In 1977 Fianna Fáil when in Government decided that this exercise should be carried out on behalf of the Oireachtas by an independent commission. This may not have been a wise decision given the changes made by the previous Government under a Labour Minister from Minister Dempsey's constituency. That particular Minister did such a good job that I would have been inclined, as a member of Fianna Fáil, to have allowed the Labour Party continue to undertake this exercise on our behalf, hopefully with the same result as in 1977. However, a precedent has been established and it is the prerogative of the Oireachtas to finalise the recommendations of the commission. The changes in this report reflect the 1996 census and 166 Deputies will be returned following the next election.

The Minister has been very innovative and courageous in tackling the area of multi-seat constituencies. This reform will yield beneficial effects for local government in the future. Multi-seat constituencies have served us well but given the demands on people there needs to be a radical rethink. It is unfair in many respects, particularly to Deputies who may find themselves in internal competition and trying to serve a population of perhaps 100,000 people. The demands are such that it is becoming increasingly more difficult and unattractive for people to participate in the democratic process. It is very important that democracy is accessible and attractive so that there is competition during election time. This is when competition is required, not between elections. Many Deputies work until 10 p.m. or midnight in this House and must attend functions and meetings in their constituencies during the weekends. It is becoming a 24-hour day, seven day a week job. This puts enormous demands on Deputies and given the salary levels it is not seen as a very attractive career. This is unfair to Deputies and to their families. Everyone who participates in politics will realise that without the active support and understanding of their families it would not be possible to participate. This should not be necessary to the extent that it is.

It is also unfair to constituents because in many instances Deputies find themselves chasing one another into various parishes in their constituencies to hold clinics in order to keep their seats. While this is often criticised in the media, the criticism is totally unrealistic because if public representatives do not participate in this exercise their prospects of being returned to the Oireachtas are much slimmer and, given human nature, everyone endeavours to be successful in their chosen career. If one wants to be successful in politics, one must participate in what is effectively a political rat race. I believe this is unfair to constituents because, given the pressure of time and the number of constituents public representatives must serve, the attention to detail and the pursuit of various representations are not followed through as professionally as they might

I believe constituents would get a much better service if public representatives were serving 20,000 people in a single seat constituency rather than 100,000 people in a multi-seat constituency. It is also inefficient and unfair to the legislative process in that there is limited time and scope available to people to participate in examining and involving themselves fully in the legislative process. The more interaction there is between Members the better the quality of the legislation and the policies that will be produced. Deputies need to be allowed to target their time more towards the legislative and policy area than their representational role and I cannot see that happening unless we move towards single seat constituencies and the transferable vote system. This will need a degree of party consensus and it is something I would recommend as we move towards a new century and a new millennium.

This Bill will dictate how the next election is run but we must plan for the future. I know the Minister has a clear vision where he wants to go regarding national and local politics and I have no doubt he will address himself to every area within his remit. I look forward to a further debate on this matter in the future.

Dr. Henry

I welcome the Bill. As it has nothing to do with me, it would be extremely churlish to criticise it. I welcome it more than I welcome the Seanad Electoral (Higher Education) Bill, 1998, which suggests changes to the way university Senators are elected. It is a pity to single out one or two constituencies within the Seanad for electoral reform without looking at the Seanad as a whole. I would only be too delighted to represent Limerick University, Dublin City University or several institutes of technology. Perhaps we should look at the Seanad as a whole, as the Constituency Commission did, rather than selecting and trying to change parts of it. I compliment the Clerk for her involvement in the Constituency Commission.

To show that all politics is local, I would like the House to pay attention to a book launched this week by Professor Michael Laver from Trinity College Dublin called A New Electoral System for Ireland? He carried out a study in association with the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution. We have discussed for some time the possibilities of changing our voting arrangements from the single transferable vote to another system. Senator Walsh outlined some of the problems for people of the same party in multi-seat constituencies who compete with each other. This book addresses that issue and the Minister discussed it several times. People do not just compete with party members but with people in the same locality for the voting reasons mentioned by Senator Walsh. This book quotes from an article written by the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy O'Dea, in the Sunday Independent on 30 November 1997 about changing the single transferable vote system. It states:

. reality is the multi-seat constituency that forces politicians to expend energies locally rather than nationally; one that means the winning of a medical card for a constituent is more valuable to the politician than any finely-crafted or well-motivated speech in the Dáil . [m]any politicians spend more time going to local funerals than they do preparing for Dáil debates. This is not because they prefer to do so. It is because they know better than anyone the meaning of the old phrase "all politics is local" . . [I]n Ireland we have institutionalised this core reality into a straitjacket that binds politicians and constituents together. . [W]e need to devise a system that ensures . accountability without enslaving politicians to local, client-bound, pressures.

I am sure many Deputies who constantly deal with local issues — one recognises the great difficulties faced by Ministers — sympathise with the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea.

This book is interesting because it shows how we could easily transfer to the additional member system, such as that in Germany and New Zealand, and still have our transferable vote. There is a rub, however, for Fianna Fáil. If we establish single seat constituencies, the people most likely to be elected are members of Fianna Fáil. They, as well as a few well placed Fine Gael Deputies, would have to do the constituency work. The list system would bring forward people from Fine Gael, the Labour Party, the Progressive Democrats and Democratic Left. If there was strategic voting in the constituencies, the result would be almost the same as it is now. The only difference would be the loss of the Independent Deputies because it would be extraordinarily difficult for them to make their way up a list. They would have to form a political party.

This book should be taken seriously. Several senior politicians have written about this issue in the past, including Ms Gemma Hussey, Dr. Garret FitzGerald and Mr. John Boland. It is interesting to note they were all Fine Gael members who would have gained from losing a great deal of constituency work if such a system was put in place. We must take the report of the constitutional review group seriously when it is published.

The first past the post system is extremely unfair. I was interested to note that Professor Laver describes it as having been introduced in a pre-literate age when all one could hope for was that people would put an X on a piece of paper. I look forward to telling some of my colleagues on the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body that this is the basis for their system. Our system is extraordinarily sophisticated.

Professor Laver explains in great detail how strategic the voting would have to be in constituencies to get much the same result as we have at present. He shows how clever we are already at strategic voting and believes the electorate would have little bother in getting a 75 per cent strategic voting level. It is interesting to note that in the last election in the United Kingdom the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats managed to achieve a satisfactory level of strategic voting. That is one of the important reasons the two parties swept across the board and culled so many Conservative MPs from constituencies where they might have been considered more secure than they were.

I encourage everyone to read this book because the issues are clearly explained. There are huge benefits to be gained for everyone apart from elected members of Fianna Fáil who will have to redouble their efforts in going to funerals. According to the article written by the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea, in the Sunday Independent last November, an enormous amount of work seems to be done by Deputies and Senators who, despite being elected from panels, regard themselves as representing various constituencies.

I congratulate the Constituency Commission on its work which must have been extraordinarily difficult. I also commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Dardis

This is a straightforward Bill which arises from the report of the Constituency Commission. Like other Senators, I thank the Clerk for her input into this report and subsequent legislation. The Clerk's office is coming under increasing pressure because of the additional duties imposed on her not only in this context but in relation to referenda. Just as the Minister and others are overstretched, so also are the staff of the Clerk's office. They have an immense amount of work to do and additional burdens have been imposed on them without additional resources being allocated. That should be taken into account by the Minister, the Department of the Taoiseach or the Minister for Finance.

I welcome the people from the North Kildare constituency into the South Kildare constituency. I hope they do the decent thing on the day. This and other reports have had a strong impact on Kildare. In the earlier revisions places, such as Kilcullen, Ballymore Eustace and Castledermot in Kildare were included in the Wicklow constituency. It led to major problems from the point of view of the electorate knowing its TDs because at that time only one, Godfrey Timmins, was located west of the hills. The electorate had difficulty identifying TDs and there was confusion between the local authority areas where TDs, who were very familiar with the Wicklow local authority, had to deal with officials in the Kildare local authority areas with whom they had not built a relationship. There was the physical difficulty of servicing the area. Senator Ross and Deputy Jacob used to come to Kilcullen regularly and it was an onerous trek across the hills for them.

I accept the reality of having to abide by the constitutional imperative and I know the terms of reference say that, as far as possible, county boundaries should not be breached and that physical boundaries should be taken into account. I accept that and would not wish to see it changed. It is a more comfortable situation even if it is not helpful from a small party's point of view to have the county treated as a whole, to have two separate constituencies in a county and to have the revision maintain that county integrity, as it has done.

In counties like County Kildare — I am sure this applies to the Minister's county — there has been rapid population growth. The speed with which it will be required to change boundaries in those constituencies will lead to some difficulties and I do not have an easy prescription as to how it can be dealt with. Again, we come back to the constitutional imperative placed upon us. A factor which is somewhat relevant to that argument is the number of Deputies which would be elected. There have been calls in the past for a smaller parliament and I see certain merit in that. Given the growing number of the committees the Houses operate, it is becoming difficult for Members to service them properly. It is particularly difficult for small parties. I am a member of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, the SMI committee, the constitutional review committee, the Joint Committee on Finance and Public Affairs and probably another as well. I would need to have the capacity for bi-location. It causes problems. I welcome the creation of the committees and the Select Committees are a good way to deal with legislation, but there is a problem with manpower in terms of servicing them.

I sought to amend legislation on presidential elections so that the photographs of candidates would be put on ballot papers. I was told at the time it would lead to a beauty contest and that it was faintly undesirable. If people do not know what candidates look like by the end of an election, particularly in presidential and European elections, they are probably living on another planet. The beauty contest aspect does not arise. It is wrong for the so-called shouted vote to be used in the polling station, which I have seen happen. We must accept there is a considerable number of people who have difficulty reading or who are illiterate. They should not be precluded from the electoral system just as people with any disability should not be precluded. It should be as all encompassing as possible. It would be a good idea to put photographs on ballot papers. When the first South African elections took place not only were photographs put on ballot papers but the party logos were put opposite candidates names. That is to be commended, particularly given the technology available which would make it easy to do. It would not be expensive and should be closely examined.

We also need to look at opening times of polling stations. In the recent referendum, the polling stations in the North opened at 7 a.m. while ours opened at 8 a.m. Looking at the flow of traffic into Dublin in the morning, people are going to work much earlier than previously. If I had had to attend the Oireachtas that morning, it would have been very convenient to go to the polling station between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. and then travel on to Dublin. It would have been convenient for many people commuting from my area, from Newbridge and other parts of Kildare, to Dublin to go to the polling station at that early hour rather than have to do a day's work, return home and go back out to vote. It would lead to an increase in the number of people voting and it should be looked at. I accept there is a financial implication but I am sure it could be overcome. The turnout for the referenda on the British-Irish Agreement and the Amsterdam Treaty would have been higher had polling stations been open at 7 a.m. Some people turned up at polling stations at 7 a.m. because they had heard about the opening hours in Northern Ireland and assumed the same applied in the South, but it did not.

Another aspect, which we discussed when debating previous legislation of this nature, is Sunday voting. It should be allowed under the legislation but it does not necessarily have to happen. It would be nice on a Sunday morning to go to church, to vote and then go to see Kildare beat Dublin in Croke Park. That would be a perfect day.

Mrs. Ridge

I will ignore that provocative comment.

Mr. Dardis

I apologise for provoking Senator Ridge on this matter.

The objective should be to maximise the turnout, with which I am sure the Minister would agree. There is a financial implication and some people, albeit a small minority, might object to voting on Sunday. It happens in many European countries and I do not see why it cannot happen here, if so required.

Senator Henry referred to Professor Laver's report which was presented to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution during the week. Having looked at the report, I believe the present system is better than that proposed by Professor Laver who proposes the single seat constituency with the single transferable vote and in addition a lists system where parties acquiring more than a certain percentage vote would get seats. If the threshold was pitched at 5 per cent, the Progressive Democrats would have some difficulties. One could effectively exclude the Green Party, Democratic Left, the Progressive Democrats and other small parties. Obviously, if the threshold is at a lower level, there would be representation.

I am not so sure about the aspect of producing technocrats so to speak from within party ranks who would see themselves purely as legislators. I fully accept there are pressures put on Ministers, in particular, in trying to service their constituencies, fulfil their legislative duties and the serious obligations imposed on them as Ministers but there is a huge benefit in legislative terms in Members of Parliament being close to the electorate. That is one of the huge strengths of our electoral system. The point is made that people are regarded as messenger boys or girls and there is a down side to that, particularly in the case of Ministers. It is a huge strength not only in legislative terms but in electoral terms that there is a close relationship between the electorate and those who represent it.

The issue of intra-party competition has been raised and I am not sure it is unhealthy. I know it is pretty depressing for those who are at the centre of the storm, but competition is no harm. It leads to people with determination, energy and enthusiasm surfacing through the ranks. I have some reservations about the list in that if one had the ear of the leader or whatever body will decide on it, whether the national executive or council of a party, it would give one certain advantages. There would be as much competition in that context as in the existing one.

I am not convinced of the merit of Professor Laver's argument. It is a reasonable attempt at devising an alternative system but I am not sure it would be desirable. The conclusion that Fianna Fáil would get all the seats in single seat constituencies is based on the present system. However, if the electoral system was changed, the system of voting would change. People would not be happy with that degree of uniformity throughout the country and, as has occasionally happened in England, they would opt for strategic voting. People can be quite clever in how they use their preferences. There would be more diversity than is suggested by Professor Laver if such an electoral system were introduced. One need only reflect on the results of recent by-elections to understand how voting patterns can shift in different circumstances.

Senator Henry spoke about politicians attending funerals and securing medical cards for constituents. I see nothing wrong in seeking medical cards for constituents or in vindicating their rights to such cards. It is frequently suggested that people should not have to go to their public representatives, that if they have certain rights those rights should be vindicated without recourse to public representatives. The reality, however, is that in many circumstances people are not aware of their rights and the public representative is the person whom they perceive as having knowledge of what is available. There is nothing wrong with that, particularly if the public representative can be of assistance.

It is true the system leads to competition between public representatives and that there are constituents who will do the tour, as it were, of the clinics but if it results in people getting things to which they are entitled and which they would not get otherwise, there is nothing wrong with it. It is laudable and desirable that there should be ready access to public representatives. This is a small country and representatives should not live in ivory towers removed from the people.

Denis Healey, in his autobiography "The Time of My Life"— the same title as Gay Byrne's biography — wrote about how he had served the needs of his constituents in Leeds, a constituency he represented for more than 20 years. He said he had always returned to the constituency twice a month, a fact which he appeared to regard as exceptional. However, we are all aware of the probable consequences for Irish public representatives if they only returned to their constituencies twice a month. They would not profit at the next election. Nevertheless, Denis Healey had a successful parliamentary career, which indicates one of the differences between the two countries.

I commend the legislation and I am sure it will have a speedy passage through the Oireachtas.

Mrs. Ridge

I will ignore the taunting comments of my colleague with regard to the ability of the Dublin footballers. I expect him to eat his words next week.

The Minister appears to have developed the ability to walk on water, so to speak, because I cannot complain about this legislation or the boundary revision as it affects me. I wrote to the commission and it is nice to know one's views are heard. I have represented a split constituency for 13 years on a local authority. The previous boundaries had unhappy consequences for me and for the people of the greater Clondalkin area. The Minister will be aware that representations were made in this regard by Clondalkin Community Council and Ronanstown Development Centre.

The greater north Clondalkin area was built about 17 years ago and for those 17 years the area has been separated by a canal, railway and constituency boundary from its hinterland of greater Clondalkin. Indeed, Clondalkin became the tail end of the greater Dublin South-West constituency because Tallaght was the main population area in that constituency. It is only proper that there should be an additional constituency in this area. I do not know when a new three seat constituency was last established but it is nice to be around for the birth of this one. I hope to see it grow as, in view of the population trends in the area, it is possible that it might be made a four seat constituency in the near future. I hope I am not presumptious in hoping to be one of the Deputies who will represent the new constituency. However, that is for the electorate to decide.

I regret that Quarryvale and Palmerstown have been removed from the new mid-west constituency. The commission says it is necessary for the establishment of a new three seat constituency in Dublin West. It would be geographically perfect if the Naas Road and the Liffey were the constituency boundaries but this is an imperfect world and we must take what we get. In this instance, we are happy to run with what we have got.

I support the introduction of voting on Sunday. While it is not in the remit of the Boundaries Commission to decide if politicans' photographs should be put on voting papers, I believe they should be. Beauty is always in the eye of the beholder and political beauty is something everybody could argue about forever. That one might not be a Spice Girl or Paul Newman will not matter so long as the party logo is beneath the photograph because people tend to vote for parties.

I represent an area where electoral turnout has been as low as 23 per cent so I favour voting on Sundays. I also support the inclusion of candidates' photographs on ballot papers. Regrettably, despite the general improvements in society, there is a serious literacy problem and it is in the interests of the electorate and those who are seeking election that candidates be readily identified on ballot papers. I do not understand why that cannot be introduced. Claiming that it would result in a beauty contest is a spurious argument. I never previously heard so many objections to beauty contests.

I will comment briefly on the proposal for single seat constituencies. Local authority boundaries are being reviewed and I have discovered that I have the honour of representing 11,000 people in the three seat constituency of Clondalkin. This is due to rapid population growth in the area. There are 26 members on South Dublin County Council and it might be a valuable exercise to try out the single seat constituency system in that area. It would probably result in good representation. All systems require change and review and every electoral system in the world could probably be improved. The introduction of the single seat system in that local authority area might be carried out by way of a study to examine how representative it would be.

I thank the Minister for bringing this legislation before the House. I also congratulate the members of the Boundaries Commission. The review of constituencies was in excellent hands. Their efficiency and efficacy is reflected in the report and I look forward to the implementation of the new boundaries.

Mr. D. Kiely

I welcome the Minister. He is the busiest Minister I have encountered since I became a public representative and he is a regular visitor to the Seanad. I compliment him and his staff on the amount of new legislation they have introduced in the Oireachtas.

I also wish to be associated with the complimentary remarks for the Clerk of the Seanad and the Boundaries Commission. It is proper that an independent body should be responsible for constituency boundary changes and that no political party be able to interfere with or gerrymander such constituencies.

A number of Members have commented that politicians are messengers instead of full-time legislators. It is important that a politician be a messenger because in that way he or she meets the constituents and is made aware of their needs. He or she might thus become aware that changes are necessary in certain Departments or regulations. It is the people with problems who bring matters to the surface all the time. In turn, politicians can bring such matters before the Houses of the Oireachtas and enact legislation or change rules and regulations. The important aspect is that people who would not otherwise be aware of their entitlements are advised of them.

Remarks were made about the size of constituencies. Five seat constituencies are too large as they put too much pressure on politicians. Representing a five seat constituency one cannot devote the same amount of time and attention to the people one represents as in a three seat constituency. The entire system should be examined and there is much merit in the case to be made for single seat constituencies. Perhaps that system should be tried out at the next election. In any case, some commission could examine the matter.

It has been suggested that under such a system Fianna Fáil would take power by having complete control of single seat constituencies. However, one only has to look at the constituencies, for example, in my county, to realise that this will not be the case. At the last general election Fianna Fáil only won the last seat in North Kerry, which is a three seat constituency. If single seaters were introduced I cannot see how Fianna Fáil would take all three seats in North Kerry. I could say the same for West Limerick, South Kerry and practically all the rural constituencies. It is a different situation in Dublin but that would have to be examined also.

There is a case for single seat constituencies. If they were introduced, the elected representative could give much more attention to his constituents as well as devoting more time to being a legislator in the Oireachtas, rather than running around a large constituency attending all the functions and group meetings.

Mr. J. Doyle

Funerals.

Mr. D. Kiely

And funerals, which are very important. It is a tradition in Ireland that people attend funerals. One does not have to be a politician to attend one.

Mr. J. Doyle

It is a tradition in rural Ireland.

Mr. D. Kiely

I am only speaking for myself. If I go to the trouble of knocking on somebody's door to ask for a vote, the very least I can do, if there is a bereavement in that family, is to offer sympathy. It is only right and proper. It is part of our tradition. One gets to know people on a very personal level. Public representatives would be missed at funerals and questions would be asked as to why one did not attend.

I welcome the Bill. Much could be done in future about drafting new legislation to try to introduce new ideas into voting patterns.

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey)

I thank Senators for their contributions to the debate. I will try to deal with the main points raised. Many of them were not, strictly speaking, about the Bill but it is no harm to discuss these matters now and again.

The practice of appointing an independent commission to advise on constituency revisions was universally welcomed. Quite rightly, as Senator Walsh and others said, it was regarded as a great advance on the old unsatisfactory arrangement whereby the Government of the day drew up the proposals, although they did not always have the effect the Minister may have wished.

This system, which is statutorily based, is the product of an agreed process operated by an independent statutory body in accordance with accepted rules. As was mentioned by Senators, some people will always be unhappy with the proposals that emerge. Everyone looks to themselves and their own situations when changes of this nature are suggested. I am sure each and every one of us can sympathise with sitting Members and intending candidates when something unwelcome occurs. However, we must recognise the reality.

The Constitution requires that constituencies should be revised periodically. There has to be equality of representation and those revisions must take account of changes in the distribution of population. There is also an obligation to tie these changes to the last completed census. Unfortunately, in some cases, subsequent developments cannot be taken into account. If my calculations are correct, there has been an increase of about 8,000 people on the register of electors in County Meath this year. When one takes into account that there are probably inaccuracies in the region of 10 per cent in most registers, it is a phenomenal jump.

When those kinds of changes occur something has to give and somebody will be affected but that is the price we pay for a democratic representational system. We all agree that the job should be entrusted to a commission and that body has done the job in the way that suits it best. Perhaps a different independent commission would have come up with other changes but we should accept the report.

As regards the points made concerning the creation of new boundaries for three seater constituencies in Dublin, it was mentioned — either in the press release or in the report itself — that the commission was trying to delineate boundaries that would be fairly marked by physical features, as per its terms of reference. However, it also had an eye to the population changes taking place. What Senator Ridge said in relation to her area is a moot point: that if the population increases enough, the commission may be in a position the next time to increase the number of seats, rather than shifting boundaries which causes problems for everybody.

The commission must be commended for producing proposals which are fully in keeping with the Constitution and its terms of reference. In particular, where difficult choices had to be made, it set out the available options in each case and gave an informed and reasonable recommendation on why it should go in a particular way. That is helpful and gives people the comfort of knowing that, at least, the various options put forward were taken into account.

A number of Senators referred to the question of photographs on ballot papers and that matter is currently being technically examined in the Department. A strong wish was expressed in Committee, during the last Dáil, that that should happen. I do not hold with the argument that this might be viewed as some kind of beauty contest. A commitment was given by the previous Minister in this regard and I intend to honour that if possible. If it proves technically feasible, photographs will be included in the European election ballot papers. The Department is involved in the final stages of the examination of technical and other arrangements which may have to be made and I will inform the House of any developments.

Statutory periods are outlined for the declaration of European elections and significant advance notice of candidates can be given. It would not be as difficult to include photographs on a European election ballot paper as it would on a general election one as general elections can be called suddenly and the timeframe between an election being called and polling taking place might not allow that to happen.

Debate adjourned.