Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill 2023: Second Stage

Senator Sharon Keogan

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

I am sharing time with Senator Craughwell.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Naughton, and thank her for being here for this debate. The Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill 2023 will be a significant step towards recognising the exceptional contributions made by women and men all over this country and around the world to the continued prosperity and culture of Ireland and the civic health and well-being of its people. While we, as a country, certainly celebrate such people, there has never been a formal mechanism for recognising the achievements of Irish citizens or others within our borders who make a great contribution to the State or our society in general. As we continue with the decade of centenaries, harking back to the formation of the State, my colleagues and I considered now to be a fitting time for Ireland to begin jointly celebrating the people who go above and beyond in helping to make this country a better place to live in and belong to.

We can go no further without acknowledging that this Bill is the singular vision of the late, great former Senator Feargal Quinn. He introduced the Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill 2015 just four years before his passing. Everybody in this House is aware of how great a politician former Senator Quinn was. He was also a great businessman and, above all, a great man. Admired by most and respected by all, Feargal was a genuine lover of people, which is surely the partial genesis of this Bill. He was a prolific legislator, authoring 17 Private Members' Bills during his time in this House, thereby leaving his indelible mark on Irish law. From the Irish Nationality and Citizenship and Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Bill 2003 to the Construction Contracts Bill 2010, Feargal was constantly at work to improve the running of this country and the lives of the people in it.

The precursor of this Bill lapsed in 2016, with the dissolution of the Dáil and Seanad. Feargal never got to see it progress through the Houses. Today, I, along with a selection of my colleagues from the Seanad Independent group, put before the House a Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill that is adapted in a minor way, in which we seek to realise Feargal's vision of an Irish State that explicitly celebrates the selfless contributions made every day by good people serving their communities. When it comes to recognising the achievements of citizens and others, we should not be dependent upon the grace and generosity of other nations to award Irish people who do something exceptional, including something exceptional for the State. The purpose of the Bill is to provide a mechanism to enable the State, in appropriate circumstances and using the very strict criteria laid down in the Bill, to honour, in a public and dignified way, not only the achievements of its citizens, but also the achievements of people from other nations.

I understand the Taoiseach has expressed concerns regarding the constitutionality of the proposed gradam an Uachtaráin honours system on account of Article 40.2°, which provides that "Titles of nobility shall not be conferred by the State". Former Senator Quinn addressed this point seven years ago through a short history lesson. In December 2015, on Second Stage of his Bill, he said:

It has been pointed out by Mr. Jim Duffy that the drafter of the Constitution, Mr. John Hearne, was careful, on Éamon de Valera's instructions, to leave open the possibility of the introduction of an honours system - that is totally unrelated to titles of nobility. Rather than ruling out an honours systems, the Constitution left the door open for a system and it could be argued that it was almost expected that an honours system would be introduced at some point. This distinction between titles of nobility and an honours system is made clear in the subsequent article 40.2.2° which clarifies that, "No title of nobility or of honour may be accepted by any citizen except with the prior approval of the Government". One of the effects of this provision is to impose a restriction on the right of a citizen to accept an honour and it makes the acceptance of an honour subject to the Government's approval. Section 11 of the Bill gets over this constitutional hurdle by giving the Government the power to accept or reject, in full, the list of candidates proposed by the awarding council.

The late Senator Quinn also rejected the notion that a republic's own honour system would in any way rehash the giving of titles by a monarch, clearly stating "the public recognition of achievement does not compromise or dilute the values of a republic".

I will now outline some of the key aspects of the Bill. Section 2 defines the terms "Awarding Council" and "Minister", which are used in the Bill. Section 3 enables the Minister to make regulations for a variety of purposes. Section 4 provides for the establishment of an honours system to be known as Gradam an Uachtaráin, GU. The system would enable the State to recognise the exceptional achievements of its citizens and the outstanding contributions of others to the State.

Section 5 provides that the recipients of honours would be presented with a medal that may be worn on formal occasions and a lapel button. The section also provides that a person awarded the honour of Gradam an Uachtaráin may use the combination of letters “G.U.” after his or her name to indicate the honour has been conferred on him or her. This section also provides that the medal and lapel button must be of a design selected by the Minister following the holding of a public design competition.

Section 6, according to the explanatory memorandum, states the honour shall only be conferred upon a maximum of 12 people per year and that in any one year, a maximum of four of the awards may be awarded to persons who do not hold Irish citizenship.

Section 7 sets out the six broad areas of achievement in respect of which the awards may be conferred, namely, social and community affairs; education and healthcare; arts, literature and music; science and technology; migrant and minority communities; sport; and leadership and business.

Section 8 states the decision to award the honour of Gradam an Uachtaráin shall be solely at the discretion of the Gradam an Uachtaráin awarding council and that no outside influence or interference will be entertained.

Section 9 provides that the Gradam an Uachtaráin awarding council will have nine members. The section specifies the officeholders who are to be appointed by the president of the awarding council.

Section 10 states members of the public may nominate persons to receive the honour of Gradam an Uachtaráin. To preclude the possibility of political interference, as well as perceived or actual bias in the selection of candidates to receive the honour of Gradam an Uachtaráin, section 10 states a serving Member of the Dáil or the Seanad must not engage with any member of the awarding council with the intention of influencing the making of a decision on the selection of a candidate. The appropriate offence is provided for in section 10 to ensure such unwelcome lobbying is minimised. Together, these provisions are intended to prevent Gradam an Uachtaráin from falling prey to cronyism, as we seek to steer clear of the favours-for-friends models of honours systems seen in other jurisdictions.

Section 11 indicates the criteria that the awarding council will be required to apply when considering the nominations it has received. The awarding council will be required to satisfy itself that a proposed recipient of the honour has demonstrated exceptional achievement at a high level or has made a valued contribution and one above what might be reasonably expected in respect of one or more of the six broad areas of achievement listed in section 7.

In deference to the requirement contained in Article 40.2.2° of the Constitution, a list of the proposed candidates selected by the awarding council to receive an award will be submitted to the Government for approval. The Government will not have the power to make or suggest amendments to the list of proposed candidates. Instead, it will have the power to accept or reject in full the list of candidates proposed by the awarding council.

Section 12 establishes January 2024 as the time of the inaugural awarding of Gradam an Uachtaráin.

As Senator Quinn said some years ago, "I am open to my Bill being improved upon in order that we can agree to a sensible honours system that is acceptable to all and one that will reflect the modern and confident society we now have". I hope that all Senators will engage fully on Committee and Report Stages so we can pass the best Bill possible.

Senator Gerard P. Craughwell

The Minister of State is welcome to the House. I congratulate her on her appointment as Chief Whip. I am sure it is a difficult job.

I am seconding this Bill in loyalty to the late Senator Feargal Quinn. In 2015, when the Minister of State was a Senator, Mr. Quinn laid out its rationale. It was not to see the bourgeoisie of Irish society having more accolades bestowed upon them on top of what they already have; it was an effort to identify and reward citizens of this country who went above and beyond. These would include the likes of Ms Catherine Corless from the Minister of State's county, Galway; Ms Vicky Phelan, who in giving her life did a wonderful service to this country; our retained firefighters, who are currently struggling to obtain recognition; and members of voluntary organisations, such as the Irish Red Cross and the Irish Coast Guard. Others will argue that we already have systems in place and do not need a new system. We have honorary degrees, but these are managed by the bourgeois, and we also have freedom of cities, but this is generally managed by politicians. The proposed system takes politics out of the system.

The Bill itself requires significant amendment as it passes through the House to make it what we truly want it to be, namely, legislation that recognises citizens, not the bourgeois or those who can get accolades in other places. I would never subscribe to the UK system, which is repugnant to anybody who lives in a republic, but I feel it has great merits. I compliment my colleague Senator Keogan, who was the one with the courage to introduce this Bill. I am happy to second it on the basis that it will require sitting down with officials from the Department of the Taoiseach, I assume, and working through the objections. There will be many objections to the final Bill if it passes through both Houses. Both Senator Keogan and I, in addition to others who have examined this Bill, are 100% ready to accept a discussion and debate on how it might be improved. Overall, however, what is proposed would be good for citizens who go above and beyond the ordinary within their communities. For me, it should be community-based.

I intend to make some amendments myself. I remember saying to the late Feargal Quinn that I would have difficulty with the awarding of the GU to people who are not citizens of the State. I do not want Ireland to become like the UK, where awards can be pushed out as some sort of thank you for coming along. In that regard, I will be tabling amendments on Committee Stage. Senator Keogan will be open to anything we want to discuss and the Government, if it is willing to run this through, will want to make significant changes. I am seconding the Bill on that basis.

Senator Shane Cassells

I welcome the Minister of State. I commend all the Senators who have worked on the Bill, including Senator Keogan, and commend them on honouring the late Senator Quinn and re-introducing his proposals to the Chamber for debate. It is an interesting week in which to have a debate about an honours system, given some of the debates elsewhere.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I know. What a pity. This is Ireland.

Senator Shane Cassells

From my 24 years in politics at both local and national levels, I believe Senator Craughwell is correct that we do already have a system in place to honour people at local level. One of the first things I did as a councillor 24 years ago, in 1999, was make Pierce Brosnan the first freeman of Navan. Then we made Seán Boylan the first freeman of Meath, so he could graze his sheep on the Hill of Tara. We even created a life-size bronze statue of the man, in Dunboyne, such was our dedication to him and all he has done for Meath. My point in citing these examples is that it is important to have an avenue to recognise the achievements of internationally renowned actors such as Pierce Brosnan, national sports heroes like Seán Boylan and all of their ilk when they achieve success nationally or internationally.

It then is a question of looking at the mechanism for doing so. When one looks across the water, the honour and gravitas of having an honour system and what that does is notable. The system is well regarded by those who receive it and by society in general. I am struck by the proposal and, as has been said by Senator Craughwell, those of us who come through the local government system have had systems in place where we honour people. Other aspects of our society honour people in their way. The Catholic Church also honours people. In my home town, I have seen people such as John Howard received the Knight Commander of the Order of St. Gregory the Great, the highest order from the pontiff. There are aspects of society where people honour those who have distinguished themselves in their role. What is unique about this is that we would have an honouring of people across society, disciplines, codes of sport and business and leaders of societal life.

I like the concept of the presentation of the medal, with the initials of "G.U." to be worn. It brings a certain gravitas to the honour conferred on those persons selected. Regardless of the mechanisms that already exist, it is certainly worthy of debate and consideration and quite distinct from the peerages of our next door neighbour, such an award would very much be in tune with the republican ethos of our country and would recognise those who contribute to civil and sporting society. I thank Senator Keogan and her colleagues for bringing this towards the House.

Senator Michael McDowell

I thank my colleagues for tendering this Bill for consideration by the House. I have a problem with it and I am opposed to the principle of it. Under our Constitution, the greatest honour any of us has is that of being a citizen. There are no grades of citizenship and there is no need for an honours system among citizens. My view is a simple one. Those people in our society who are honoured are recognised by a variety of institutions. Mention was made by Catherine Corless. She has an honorary doctorate from UCD and a major award from the Irish Red Cross. Likewise, the late Vicky Phelan, received a number of honours from academic institutions. People are honoured by being included in institutions such as the body for artists and by the Royal Irish Academy. I notice that the Bar of Ireland honoured Catherine Corless.

However, the real question is whether the State should be involved in honouring a shortlist of 12 people every year, which is composed by a committee, as envisaged by Fergal Quinn's legislation and that now tendered by Senator Keogan. I look at the people who are supposed to be on the committee, among whom are the secretary to the President and, I think, the chancellor of NUI, who is referred to as the "President of the National University of Ireland", and the head of IBEC. The committee does not include the head of any trade union or a number of other institutions. It includes the Irish Countrywomen's Association. Senator Keogan's version of the Bill has added two local authority members to this body. In essence, what the Bill proposes is that the members of the public should be able to write in nominations on a form to be provided with information, all of which should then be considered by this committee. The Bill proposes the committee should then decide on a list of 12 people, of whom not more than four can be non-Irish citizens and send that list to the Government. The Government has to take the whole list, lock, stock and barrel, and accept or reject it.

I know there is no constitutional issue in the President conferring an award, providing it is done on the advice of the Government, because the Constitution insists that should be done, but the real issue is that if there is somebody in the list of 12 that the Government thinks is inappropriate, for whatever reason, the Government is forced into the position of saying "No" to all 12. That is not an acceptable situation for any Government to be in, that either it takes or rejects the whole dozen and there is nothing else it can do about it. The power of the President under the Bill, which is both in Fergal Quinn's version and Senator Keogan's Bills, is to nominate two members, which the President has appointed to the Council of State, to serve on this committee. Even in that choice, the Constitution requires that the Government must advise the President as to which two members the President nominates. That is what the Constitution says. The President, exercising any power other than specified powers in the Constitution, must solely act on the advice of the Government.

The real question is that we have survived 100 years without this system. If we have a system of this kind, the result will be controversy about people who were proposed for it and not short-listed, or the Government deciding it is unhappy with the whole list, because of one person's name was on the list, not considering it appropriate to honour the whole list and not being able to take the person's name off. We will also have controversies with regard to people whom The Ditch finds out something about afterwards and then we are told they were unworthy to receive it in the first place or, alternatively, we will have situations where people say and do things after their appointment which brings them into controversy. Will we do what the British have to do, that is, strip people of their knighthoods, orders of the British Empire and the like?

We are better off without this. There is no person in this House of whom I was fonder than Feargal Quinn. He invited me to stand in his place in 2016, when he realised his health was not up to another term. He signed my nomination on a hospital bed. I know that Feargal Quinn is somebody who I admire, but the principle of this Bill is to create "an honours system". Ireland does not need such a system. I do not think Ireland needs it. We get on perfectly well with our multiplicity of freedoms of cities, honorary doctorates, awards and all the rest of it. We do not need to involve the political system, which will necessarily be involved if the Government is given a choice, in creating a two-tier citizenship. I am against this Bill and I will vote against it.

Senator Tom Clonan

I support this in principle, although I will echo what Senator Craughwell said, in that the Bill would require significant amendment. Positive reinforcement is the most powerful learning tool for us as a species. In Ireland, as a republic, we should be confident enough to recognise the outstanding achievements of our citizenship. One of the ways I suggest the Bill be amended is to ensure it is not the usual round of grandees and apparatchiks who are honoured in Irish society, by way of honorary doctorates and recognition. Very often, by sheer virtue of appointment to a position in Ireland, such recognition follows automatically and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I would like to see the outliers in Irish society recognised and rewarded, including our whistleblowers who are almost universally reviled and repudiated, despite the incredible contribution they make to Irish society. I think of people like Maurice McCabe, who have done the State some considerable service but in doing so, have experienced and suffered the most hostile scrutiny and acts of reprisal and retaliation. There is an opportunity for us in this Bill, sufficiently amended, to recognise people who are carers, people who prevail despite being disabled citizens in a State that places so many cruel, idiosyncratic and capricious obstacles in their path. That is the community of awardees that I would like to see recognised and rewarded. To that end, we would have to revisit the constitution of any committee that would make those decisions. If we had whistleblowers during the intellectual and ethical failures of the Celtic tiger in banking, finance, property development and so on, and if they had been free to stand up and call out wrongdoing, then perhaps we would not owe €64 billion and would not have had to bail out banks and the international financial services sector.

My support for this Bill is predicated on the idea that we can have a robust discussion and conversation on it and introduce amendments to it. I am delighted to note that members of a technical group in this Chamber who are not ideologically aligned, do not all think the same way and do not have the same philosophical or ideological principles can have a frank exchange of views that is respectful, open and collegial. Disagreement in Irish society is a good thing. It is not a bad thing and it is the most powerful engine for arriving at the truth. That said, 100 years on from the establishment of the State, we should have the self-confidence to have a system that rewards and recognises our disrupters, our provocative citizens, people who contribute to knowledge, who challenge the status quo and who help us to progress as a republic.

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome our colleague and friend, Senator O'Loughlin, who is joined by Councillor Noel Heavey and members of the Newbridge community group. You are all very welcome. Senator Horkan has friends in the Public Gallery as well and I want to welcome them too.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I also want to take this opportunity to welcome my own colleague and friend, Councillor Anthony Waldron. I also welcome Professor Pat Guiry, the president of the Royal Irish Academy; Councillor Noel Heavey; and our other visitors to the Chamber.

I want to acknowledge the work that my colleague Senator Keogan and other members of our technical group have put into this legislation. I have not put a lot into it but agree there is merit in having a special award bestowed on people by the President of Ireland, an office that is very dear to the citizens of this country.

I am a former member of the board of Gaisce, The President's Award, on which I served two terms. I worked very closely with two Presidents in relation to those awards and both of them took an enormous personal interest in them. Indeed, I spoke with our former President, Ms Mary McAleese, briefly this morning in relation to another matter and mentioned that this debate was coming up. I saw the benefits of the President presenting the Gaisce awards. Later we adopted a policy of also having the Duke of Edinburgh awards which meant that citizens of this country could opt for the Duke of Edinburgh award or the Gaisce award. This reflected the new maturity and reality of the island of Ireland.

For those who do not know about Gaisce, the award is the highest that the President can bestow on a citizen in this country. There is a gold, silver and bronze Gaisce award. The award brings people together, particularly young people. It embraces inclusivity, positive community work and endeavour and is a source of great pride. People come, meet the President and receive their award. I see the benefits of recognition by the non-partisan and non-political President's office. I am also conscious that former Senator Feargal Quinn, who I knew very well and who nominated me to contest my first Seanad election, was passionate about an honours system. I took the time over the last few days to look at some of the transcripts of debates on this issue and was particularly taken by some of the debates in the Seanad. The former Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú said that if any proposed awards system was either tainted or divisive, we should not go any further. It needs broad political buy-in. I understand that the Government is not opposing this Bill at this stage. I ask the Minister of State to confirm that as I came late to this debate because I was attending a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine.

When I speak of awards, I am thinking of Irish citizens and Irish people who have gone abroad to the United States, Europe and elsewhere, as well as those living on the island of Ireland. In terms of our place in the world, it is clear that we excel in sport, literature, good works of charity, education and many other spheres that I do not have time to go in to now. The Minister of State knows what I am talking about. We are good at doing things. We are good at sport, literature, the arts, charitable works and education. We are leaders and we are supporters. We have many unsung heroes. Earlier today we had a debate on the mother and baby home redress scheme and throughout the day I have met at least ten or 15 people who were involved. Some of them were great heroes. They went way beyond the supports that they had themselves. They dug deep into themselves and gave something back. They were exemplary in the areas for which they advocated and championed. I am not suggesting that we can give everyone an award because we cannot.

This Bill proposes a mechanism based on independent due diligence and validation in relation to the criteria and the people who would be suitable for consideration for awards. An honours system is important, not just for the recipient but also because it designates role models and we need role models in our society. Many of us came into politics as a result of our admiration for people in political life and leadership. We were motivated to follow through, come in and go on a journey and follow a road or a vision based on their leadership. I see the value in recognising many of our unsung heroes but it has to be done in a professional manner.

Having listened to a number of the previous contributors, I accept that this legislation needs fine tuning. It is not totally right but is the basis for something we can get right. If we are to be successful, we have to work together collaboratively. No one political group or segment of a political group owns this proposal. There is a real need to work together and to collaborate on it. I hope that after today we will refocus and those of us who are interested in this legislation will work to see how we can improve it by engaging with people on it. Perhaps we can look to international experience in this area.

It is important that we wholeheartedly embrace this. I understand that the Government is embracing it to this point while recognising the importance of fine tuning it. Hopefully we can work on it with the support of the Government. I thank the proposers but accept that the Bill needs fine tuning, adjustment, further engagement and consideration.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Gerry Horkan)

Before the Minister of State responds, I want to welcome a group of young people from Dublin Mid-West Ógra Fianna Fáil. We also have the Polish ambassador, Ms Anna Sochaska, in the Public Gallery. You are all very welcome this evening.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Hildegarde Naughton)

Is cúis áthais dom é a bheith anseo chun labhairt faoin mBille seo ar son an Rialtais. I thank the House for the opportunity to come before the Seanad on the Private Members' Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill 2023, which has been proposed by Senators Keogan, Craughwell, Clonan, Mullen and Boyhan.

I note that this Bill is largely the same as the Bill of the same name tabled by the late Senator Feargal Quinn and debated in this House in 2015 before lapsing on the dissolution of the Houses for the general election in 2016. It is pleasing to see his work being remembered, and I thank Senator Keogan and her colleagues in the Independent Group for re-introducing the Bill and enabling a debate on this topic. The late Senator Quinn was not only known as a successful businessman but he served in this House with distinction for over 20 years, and I was honoured to serve with him. He always saw the role of a Senator as that of a legislator before all else.

The purpose of this Bill is to provide a mechanism to facilitate the conferral by the State of an honour, to be known as Gradam an Uachtaráin, to recognise the exceptional achievements of its citizens and the outstanding contributions of others and to provide for related matters. The Government is not opposing this Bill, but that is not to say that the Government accepts all the detail of the scheme as set out in the Bill. The House will be aware that Article 40.2.1° of the Constitution provides inter alia that titles of nobility shall not be conferred by the State, but I am advised that this does not prevent the award of honours otherwise. This provision had its origins in Article 5 of the 1922 Constitution and was carried forward, in a slightly different form, into the 1937 Constitution.

It was conceived in a different era, fresh from a War of Independence, with a State still raw from the exercise of British rule and the tumult of separating from it. We have journeyed far over the past 100 years as an independent and sovereign nation to the strong, modern and multicultural State we are today. Last December, the centenary of the foundation of Seanad Éireann provided an opportunity to reflect on how the Seanad has provided a forum for open and robust debate, for the exchange of ideas and the development of plurality and diversity over those 100 years. The Bill before us proposes the establishment of an honours system, which would be awarded by Uachtarán na hÉireann and marked by the presentation of a medal which the recipients might wear on formal occasions, and a lapel button. The award recipients would be entitled to use the letters "G.U." representing Gradam an Uachtaráin after their name as a mark of distinction.

The question of establishing an Irish honours system has been considered on a number of occasions in the past and efforts were made to see if there was political consensus on it. However, none of these efforts met with any success. As far back as 1963, the then Government approved in principle the idea that a State decoration of honour would be instituted. However, general consensus on the matter was not reached and it was not pursued. Since the early 1990s, taoisigh of the day have contacted party leaders on four separate occasions, in 1994, 1999, 2007 and 2015, to establish if all parties would be willing to engage in discussions on a national awards scheme or similar, although without consensus being established. Previous taoisigh have indicated to the House that all-party support would be required before considering an award scheme, and that approach continues to recommend itself strongly, for self-evident reasons.

There are already in existence a number of award schemes, which Senators have highlighted, whereby the State recognises and awards merit, distinction or bravery in particular areas. Gaisce - the President’s award - is a self-development programme for young people aged 14 to 25, with personal, physical and community challenges. It is a challenge from Uachtarán na hÉireann to young people to realise their potential. There are three levels to the Gaisce award: bronze; silver; and gold. In 2012, the Presidential Distinguished Service Award for the Irish Abroad was introduced. The award is presented by the President to people living abroad - primarily Irish citizens, those entitled to Irish citizenship and persons of Irish descent - who have made a sustained and distinguished service to Ireland or Irish communities abroad. Some ten of these awards are made each year by the President.

Aosdána is a scheme to honour artists whose works have made an outstanding contribution to the arts in Ireland and it assists members in devoting their energies fully to the practice of their art. Members of Aosdána may receive the further honour of Saoi from their peers for singular and sustained distinction in the arts. The President confers the symbol of the office of Saoi, the gold torc. Not more than seven members of Aosdána may hold this honour of Saoi at any one time. Comhairle na Míre Gaile, the national recognition of deeds of bravery awards, was established in 1947, and recognises acts of bravery from all walks of life and all sections of society from persons who attempt to save a life. The annual Volunteer Ireland Awards are presented to recognise people who are unsung heroes and have given time volunteering throughout Ireland. The President is patron of these awards. In addition, as the House will be aware there are many other awards schemes and ceremonies in a range of sectors of society and the economy which recognise contributions to sport, the arts, business and charities. Examples include the Irish Film and Television Academy Awards, the Irish Times Innovation Awards and the RTÉ Sports Person of the Year Award. Ireland has always celebrated its successes, with many well attended receptions at national and local level over the decades.

While the Government will not oppose this Bill, I should note that this would not necessarily imply acceptance of all the detail of the Senator's Bill and there are elements of the proposal as is on which we would have some reservations. For example, consideration would have to be given to the membership of the awarding council in order to give confidence that any such council could be said to be properly representative of all strands of modern society. I would note also a likely constitutional difficulty that would need to be addressed arising from the provisions of Article 13.11 of the Constitution, referring to the exercise of powers conferred on the President by law. At a minimum, the Bill would need to be amended in respect of the process of appointments to the proposed awarding council in order to be compliant with the Constitution. I reiterate also the Government’s view that all-party consensus on such a proposal would be an essential feature of developing such a scheme. I thank the House again for the opportunity to have this interesting debate on the topic, and I thank Senators for their contributions.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I thank the Minister of State for not opposing the Bill. I do not believe the Bill we have put down is anything near what it should be but nevertheless, as a tribute to Feargal Quinn it was worth resurrecting it. Ireland has evolved so much over the last 20 to 30 years and we are ready for that conversation now. These are not awards that can be given at the Volunteer Ireland Awards or any of the other events mentioned. These are exceptional and extraordinary contributions that are made to our society, and they could be given to people like Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who is an astrophysicist, for her contribution to astronomy. It could be people like Sonia O'Sullivan, Fr. Peter McVerry, Katie Taylor or Garry Hynes with her contribution to the arts. These are people who have given extraordinary time and effort over many years to their roles, whether it be in business, the arts, working with migrant groups or working with minority groups.

I thank the Minister of State. I wanted to lock the door today and not let Senator McDowell in.

The Seanad adjourned at 6.50 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 15 June 2023.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 14 Jun 2023

Gradam an Uachtaráin Bill 2023: Second Stage

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 Jun 2023