I wanted to make a comment to the Minister but I was rudely interrupted by the Chair. I will overlook that today.
Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1998: Committee and Remaining Stages.
Question proposed: "That section 1 stand part of the Bill."
The Chair would never interrupt the Senator.
I accept that the matter of single seat constituencies will be before the Constitution Review Group, as the Minister stated. Recently I stated in regard to the Local Government Bill — Senator Ridge made the same point earlier — that if there is to be a different electoral system, we should start with the local electoral system. What better system is there than the single seat system because we want local democracy?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Senator, your comments are not appropriate to section 1. However, I will allow a little latitude
Thank you, a Leas-Chathaoirligh. In Dromahair, which I mentioned on the last occasion, there is an elected member per 960 of the population and the area which I represent has a member per 12,000 of the population. That is not local democracy. If there were single seats at local level, it would allow us to see how the system would work.
I support that.
I am not averse to that. Perhaps that is the way to start. Obviously with the boundary commission looking at electoral areas at present, I doubt it would be feasible for the next local election. However, it would be a good idea to start there.
I had toyed with the idea, which I did not share with my colleagues although somehow or other somebody read my mind at some stage, about doing it for the European elections. This must be done for the European election after next anyway because there is a commitment to single seat constituencies under a European directive.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Question proposed: "That section 3 stand part of the Bill."
My colleague, Senator Doyle, alluded to Dromahair. I am not sure if Senator Doyle is aware that I represent the Dromahair electoral area on Leitrim County Council. While I agree with the general thrust of what he said, I can assure him that in the total electoral area, which stretches for some 20 miles geographically, there are about 4,500 votes. While the quota of 600 may look small in Dublin terms, there is a great deal of gathering in 600 votes in that geographical area. I would be delighted to give him a tour of the area some time so that he could get a better view of exactly what we must go through. However, we all agree with his overall point.
Section 3 states that areas will be finally determined by the Minister. In the context of the independence of the commission, how flexible is the Minister in intervening in the conclusions or recommendations of the commission? All Members, not least the Minister, will be aware of a letter signed by a number of party representatives which appeared in The Irish Times yesterday. They are exercised by the commission which, they allege, ignored its terms of reference and did not implement them as it should. I am not sure if the Minister is aware of the particular letter but it relates to the Dublin South-West constituency, the Naas Road boundary and splitting communities and parishes. A first reading of the letter suggests to me that the committee did not act within its terms of reference.
One can extend that to the Longford-Roscommon set up, where there are two counties in separate provinces in which there is no cultural or social intermingling. As the Minister and members of all parties will be aware, there is no cohesion between the constituency parties in the two counties, which operate as independent republics. In that context, I am curious to know if the Minister has any flexibility once the report comes before him and under the terms of this Bill as it relates to electoral divisions, parts thereof and townlands thereof. I ask him to clarify the Minister's powers under this section and address the issues I raised.
Senator Mooney is really asking about section 3(2), under which a reference to any specified area must be construed by me and anybody else as a reference to that area as constituted on 1 January 1998. It is what is there and what is known already. Therefore, any alterations after that date in the name or composition of any area mentioned in the Schedule will not affect the area of the constituency as constituted by the Bill.
That subsection also gives power to determine if there is any doubt as to the constituency in which an electoral division or townland or any part thereof is situated. That is a standard provision in case there is a dispute.
I am not aware of the specific dispute to which the Senator referred and I will certainly have a look at it. I do not have wide and sweeping powers. That is the short answer to his question.
I take the Senator's point about Longford-Roscommon because there was huge controversy about that constituency the last time, but these exercises will never be perfect. That is what I was saying in reply to Second Stage. One will never achieve a perfect solution. The commission must have regard to the parameters spelled out in the Electoral Act, 1997. At the end of the day, having regard to all of those plus the submissions, they must make decisions. In this case, it is clear that while there were minor changes everywhere, the major changes took place in Dublin and the commission decided not to make any major changes elsewhere except those which were absolutely necessary. The Longford-Roscommon constituency, along with a constituency in Tipperary, generated the most controversy the last time but, on balance, the commission has done a good job and could not do much more to facilitate everybody.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 4.
Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."
We are all grateful for the breath of fresh air which the Minister introduced to this debate. He is the first Minister to grapple with the question of numbers and with the system. As he said, politicians of previous generations have shied away from it, perhaps because of Fianna Fáil's unsuccessful attempts to change the Constitution. It is a nettle which must be grasped.
It is reported in this morning's newspapers that our population is projected to rise to 4.4 million by 2026 and we could not possibly sustain the existing electoral system with that population. The Minister mentioned the thinking on the European constituencies and the terms of reference given to the independent commission. Many Members were surprised that the commission appeared to be providing for more three seat constituencies, especially in Dublin. Under previous commissions there was tremendous debate about the need to create more four and five seat constituencies because of the proportionality which was allegedly required to ensure a more democratic return by the electorate, but if the present trend continues the largest urban area in the country will consist solely of three seat constituencies. Is this an indication of things to come in that it will make the Minister's job easier — it is simpler to change from three seat to single seat constituencies, rather than from five seaters to single seaters — or is there any significance in the commission arriving at this recommendation?
One could read things into Senator Mooney's remarks which he did not intend.
Conspiracy theories abound.
He could have been suggesting that I had a longer term influence on the commission — the short answer is that I did not but I know that was not the primary motivation for his question. As I understand the reasoning behind the provision for Dublin, as outlined in the report and the press statement, I think the commission wished to establish physical boundaries, in keeping with its terms of reference. The Senator will note that in the Dublin area the M50 is generally used as a constituency boundary. I do not think the commission is moving toward providing for three seat constituencies where possible. I think it made a conscious decision — it may not have spelled this out but it did advert to it — to draw constituency lines in areas of Dublin experiencing rapid population growth, such as west Dublin. This was done on the assumption that after the next census, rather than having to redraw the lines, which is problematic for representatives, communities and parties, it may be possible to change the constituencies from three seaters to four seaters with minimal boundary changes. The commission was therefore taking a longer term strategic view.
It is argued that three seaters are less proportional than four seaters or five seaters and some submissions to the Constitutional Review Group argued that the most proportional size for a constituency is a four seater, because five seaters cause distortion by allowing for the election of people who would not normally become representatives. I do not think the commission is working towards providing for three seaters only — this was a specific set of circumstances involving rapid population growth.
The Senator's point about the projected population rise to 4.4 million is valid. There will have to be changes, if not in the electoral system then in the level of representation provided for in the Constitution.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 5 and 6 agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
To digress slightly, we overlooked to note that yesterday was the 200th anniversary of the death of Lord Edward Fitzgerald. This House was owned by the Fitzgerald family and we should acknowledge that tangible historic link with the patriots of 1798. In doing so we acknowledge all those who played a significant role in that great struggle.
I thank the Minister for attending. We got through the Bill in one sitting. I know there was agreement on all sides but perhaps we could consider a similar process for such Bills in the future.
It was because agreeable people were here today.
I thank the Minister for the Bills he has brought before the House. There is probably more legislation to come from his Department and we may welcome those Bills with even greater enthusiasm.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I know the Senator will play his part in Wexford in the commemorations during the coming months.
I thank you, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, and Senators for their assistance with this Bill. It contains the recommendations of the independent commission and there were few contentious matters but I am grateful to the House for facilitating the taking of all Stages. I also thank my staff and the staff of the House for the expeditious manner in which it was dealt with.
I thank the Minister and his officials for their attendance and the way they have conducted the Bill, and I thank the Opposition for its co-operation in allowing all Stages to be taken today. The Minister mentioned the report submitted to the all-party committee on the Constitution and the House would be grateful in the Minister could return here to discuss that matter.
I join in the vote of thanks to the Minister.
Question put and agreed to.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
When is it proposed to sit again?
Ag 2.30 p.m. Dé Máirt seo chugainn.