I move amendment No. 217:
In page 45, line 40, after "orders" to insert "for a period of 3 years".
This amendment proposes that documents should only be retained for three years, which is a lengthy enough period. Court actions can only be taken after a limited period in relation to certain matters. Retaining documents for five, seven or ten years is a useless exercise.
Three years seems to be a reasonable period. I accept the amendment.
I move amendment No. 218:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
62.—Every statement furnished to the Public Offices Commission under section 17, 21, 32, 40 or 48 or regulations made under section 60 together with, where appropriate, vouchers which accompany such statement and every notification furnished to it under section 20 shall be retained by the Commission for a period of 5 years from the date on which it was furnished to the Commission.".
This amendment proposes the retention of documents for five years. I have accepted Deputy Dempsey's amendment providing for three years so I will withdraw this amendment.
I move amendment No. 219:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
63.—Where an offence under this Act which has been committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent of, or to be attributable to, any neglect on the part of any person being a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person purporting to act in any such capacity, that person as well as the body corporate shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence.".
This new section is a standard provision relating to offences by corporate bodies. It provides that where an offence which has been committed by a corporate body is proved to have been committed with the connivance or knowledge of a director or other employees of the body, that person as well as the corporate body, should be deemed guilty of the offence.
I move amendment No. 220:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
64.—The Local Elections (Petitions and Disqualifications) Act, 1974 is hereby amended:
(a) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (3) of section 4:
‘(3A) Where a petition alleges an irregularity or non-compliance with any provision of regulations made under section 60 of the Electoral Act, 1997 whether before or after the result of the local election was declared by the returning officer, notwithstanding the fact that another petition relating to the same election may have been previously presented or tried, the petition may be presented within the twenty eight days next after the laying of a copy of a statement of election expenses before each House of the Oireachtas as provided for in such regulations.'; and
(b) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (1) of section 5:
‘(1A) A local election shall not be declared invalid because of a non-compliance with any provision of regulations made under section 60 of the Electoral Act, 1997 or mistake in the use of forms provided for in such regulations, where it appears to the court that a candidate or party, as the case may be, complied with the principles laid down in such regulations taken as a whole and that such non-compliance or mistake did not materially affect the result of the election.'.".
I notice in this amendment the petition may be presented within the 28 days. I thought it was 14 days.
There are three regimes. It is 14 days for the Dáil election but for local elections it is 28 days, which we did not change. Does the Deputy have strong views on this?
No, not particularly.
I move amendment No. 221:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
65.—The Act of 1992 is hereby amended by—
(a) the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (1) of section 15:
‘(1A) (a) Notwithstanding subsection (1), sections 7(1)(b), 8(1) (b), 9 and 10, and Rule 1 (3) of the Second Schedule and subject to section 11(1)(a) and paragraph (c), a person who:
(i) was not ordinarily resident in a constituency or local electoral area, as the case may be, on the qualifying date for a register of electors and takes up ordinary residence in such constituency or local electoral area, as the case may be, after such qualifying date and is otherwise entitled to be registered as an elector under section 7, 8, 9 or 10, or
(ii) reaches the age of eighteen years after the date of the coming into force of a register of electors, may apply to the registration authority to have his name entered in the supplement to the register.
(b) An applicant for entry in the supplement referred to in paragraph (a)(i) shall satisfy the registration authority that he has taken up ordinary residence in the constituency or local electoral area, as the case may be, in respect of which the application applies and, in considering an application from such person, the registration authority may require the applicant to furnish a statutory declaration that he has taken up ordinary residence in the constituency or local electoral area concerned.
(c) A person referred to in paragraph (a)(ii) shall be eligible for entry in the supplement to the register on or after the day on which that person reaches eighteen years of age.';
(b) (i) the substitution for ‘twelfth' of ‘fourteenth' in subsection (5) of section 15; and
(ii) the substitution for ‘twelfth' of ‘fourteenth' in Rule 18 (1) of the Second Schedule in both places where it occurs;
(c) the insertion of the following sections after section 15:
15A.—(1) An elector referred to in paragraph (a) or (d) of section 14 or in section 52 of the Electoral Act, 1997 who is not entered in the postal voters list or the special voters list may apply to the registration authority to have his name entered in a supplement to the postal voters list which the registration authority is hereby empowered to prepare and publish.
(2) (a) The provisions of Part III (other than Rules 21 and 23 (3)) of the Second Schedule shall apply to an application for entry in the supplement to the postal voters list under this section from an elector referred to in section 14 (d) as if—
(i) references in that Part to "special voters list" were references to "supplement to the postal voters list";
(ii) the reference to "section 17" was a reference to this section and references to "section 17 (2)" were references to "section 14(d)";
(iii) in Rule 19 (d) "to the registration authority" was substituted for "so as to be received by the registration authority not later than the date specified in Rule 1"; and
(iv) in Rule 22 "at such times and places as are specified in a notice published pursuant to Rule 21," was deleted.
(b) The provisions of sections 53, 54, 55 (other than subsection (1)) and 56 (other than sub-section (3)) of the Electoral Act, 1997 shall apply to an application for entry in the supplement to the postal voters list under this section from an elector referred to in Section 52 of the said Act as if:
(i) references to "postal voters list" were references to "supplement to the postal voters list";
(ii) references to "section 52", other than those which occur in section 56 were references to this section;
(iii) in section 53 (1) (c), "to the registration authority" was substituted for "so as to be received by the registration authority not later than the last date for making claims for corrections in the draft register"; and
(iv) in section 55 (2), "at such times and places as are specified in a notice pursuant to subsection (1)" was deleted.
(3) A supplement to the postal voters list published by the registration authority under subsection (1) shall be deemed to form part of the postal voters list.
(4) An application by an elector to have his name entered in the supplement to the postal voters list, received by the registration authority on or after the fiftieth day before polling day at an election or referendum shall not have effect in relation to that election or referendum.
(5) As soon as may be after the date of the dissolution of the Dáil at a general election or the date on which the order appointing polling day at a Dáil bye-election, or at a presidential, European or local election or a referendum is made, the registration authority shall publish a list of the names of electors (if any) whose applications to be entered in the supplement to the postal voters list were received before the said fiftieth day before polling day and allowed by the registration authority.
(6) The list prepared under subsection (5) shall form the supplement to the postal voters list.
(7) The supplement to the postal voters list shall be in such form as may be directed by the Minister.
15B.—(1) An elector referred to in section 17(2) who is not entered in the special voters list or the postal voters list may apply to the registration authority to have his name entered in a supplement to the special voters list which the registration authority is hereby empowered to prepare and publish.
(2) The provisions of Part III (other than Rules 21 and 23(3)) of the Second Schedule shall apply to an application for entry in the supplement to the special voters list under this section as if:
(a) references in that Part to "special voters list" were references to "supplement to the special voters list";
(b) the reference to "section 17" was a reference to this section;
(c) in Rule 19 (d) "to the registration authority" was substituted for "so as to be received by the registration authority not later than the date specified in Rule 1"; and
(d) in Rule 22 "at such times and places as are specified in a notice published pursuant to Rule 21," was deleted.
(3) A supplement to the special voters list published by the registration authority under subsection (1) shall be deemed to form part of the special voters list.
(4) An application by an elector to have his name entered in the supplement to the special voters list, received by the registration authority on or after the fiftieth day before polling day at an election or referendum shall not have effect in relation to that election or referendum.
(5) As soon as may be after the date of the dissolution of the Dáil at a general election, or the date on which the order appointing polling day at a Dáil bye-election, or at a presidential, European or local election or a referendum is made, the registration authority shall publish a list of the names of persons (if any) whose applications to be entered in the supplement to the special voters list were received before the fiftieth day before polling day and allowed by the registration authority.
(6) The list prepared under subsection(5) shall form the supplement to the special voters list.
(7) The supplement to the special voters list shall be in such form as may be directed by the Minister.'; and
(d) the insertion of the following subparagraph after subparagraph (b) of paragraph (4) of Rule 14 of the Second Schedule:
‘(bb) one copy of the register for each Dáil constituency to each member of the Dáil for the constituency and each member of the Seanad resident in the constituency for use by a personation agent appointed by such member of the Dáil or the Seanad at a referendum.'.".
This amendment amends the Electoral Act, 1992, to provide for the inclusion of a supplement to the register of persons who reach 18 years of age during the currency of the register. Deputies find it frustrating that when the register is printed, there can be a long gap before an election and those who have reached 18 years of age in the meantime are disenfranchised. Persons who have moved house and are not registered at any address are also included in the supplement.
If someone is on a register in one constituency I do not propose that he or she has the legal authority to be doubly registered. However, some efficient election agents remove people they perceive to have a particular political disposition from the register as soon as he or she moves. Sometimes he or she cannot be included on a new register because he or she has taken up residence in his or her new home after the register has been completed.
The section also provides for the inclusion of a supplement to the postal voters list or the special voters list of persons who are not on either list and for the provision, on request and free of charge, of a copy of the register to each Member of the Dáil for a constituency and to each Member of the Seanad resident in the constituency at a referendum. When I went to my local county hall, despite my good relationship with the management there, they charged me for a copy of the register of electors, for use in a referendum. It is important that elected members of a constituency should have access to the register without charge during a referendum campaign.
In relation to people who, under the provisions of this amendment, will become eligible between the date on which the register is made, 15 February, and the date in that year on which the election is held, does the Minister feel it would not be possible, assuming there is an election this side of the summer, to put this is place for those who were 18 years of age on 16 February? Will he explain the technical problems involved?
I am at a disadvantage in that I can only speculate on the possible date of an election.
The Minister can assume for the purpose of a purely hypothetical academic exercise.
It would not be possible to have the Bill enacted and give suitable instructions with clarity in time to have an election in the time frame posited by the Deputy opposite.
I know it is important that we get everything right on the register of electors.
Four votes, as we know, can be very important.
Think of how the course of history could have been changed——
For the worst.
——if the bus did not break down in Rathkeale, County Limerick.
With regard to this amendment, I do not see a difficulty. There is now a provision to add people to the register of electors through this supplementary list and all we are providing for here is that when somebody reaches the age of 18, he can fill out the green form with his date of birth and send it to the county council.
I do not want to sound as if I am carping. I welcome this provision. A person should be allowed to vote as soon as he or she becomes eligible under the normal criteria, but one of the exercises in which we are involved at local level at present is pointing out to people who are not on the register that they can be registered up to 12 days before the election. We have found that in Navan, County Meath, for instance, a substantial number of people are not registered. In one small rural polling area of approximately 350 registered voters, one person, who spoke to a few of her neighbours, discovered that there were 15 unregistered people. The fact that people can register now is a help and I acknowledge that.
However, I do not see any difficulty in extending this facility to people who became 18 years old since February. There should be no difficulty about allowing a person who has reached the age of 18 to go into his local county council with his birth certificate and ask to be put on the register.
I know about the difficulties in the case of a change of address, and that is slightly more complicated. There should be a provision in this day and age whereby a person who changes residence in the middle of the year can remove his name from one constituency register and add it to another. The situation where a person is registered twice should not arise. We are heading some way down this road and I acknowledge that. We should cater for the situation where a person changes address but perhaps that cannot be done before the next election.
In regard to these amendments, we have a common purpose. They have been tabled because of the debate on this Bill and Deputy Mary Wallace's Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1996. I strove to meet the practical difficulties which have been encountered by the practitioners, that is, candidates and election workers. Our common objective, irrespective of our political persuasion, is to have the greatest possible number of people express a preference at an election.
It is frustrating at every election to have a loyal supporter frustrated because he or she cannot vote for some peculiar reason. This can occur for the most bizarre reasons. People who have not moved house for 30 years can find their names have been removed from the register. We have tried to address this and we have gone a long way in that direction with this amendment.
On the matter of the registration of 18 year olds, that is a practical measure which I would like to introduce immediately. The difficulty is that I cannot presume on the enactment of this measure either by this or the other House. There are practical difficulties in notifying returning officers, in amending regulations and advertising those amendments, in receiving submissions, etc. I asked my officials to discuss it with presiding officers around the country and I am advised it would occur in the middle of what may well be a very busy period for those charged with running elections and would lead to extra confusion. It is unlikely we could have it in place for an election which may fall within the coming weeks. I will keep myself advised on the matter. I will give the Deputy a commitment to introduce it as soon as it is practical to do so. If there is a practical gap, if the Taoiseach announces the election will be in October, I assure the Deputy we will put it in place.
On the matter of a change of address, I have gone as far as I can practically. We do not have the power to take people off the register. The difficulty with allowing people to re-register once they move house is that they would then be on two registers. That raises a number of issues. It inflates the register in a constituency and distorts the ratio of voters to Members and, of course, invites personation or double voting. We have gone a long way in this amendment, which carves out a new area of law where people can register in their new place of residence as long as they are not registered previously. The net point of whether we should look at a mechanism to give automatic rights to register on moving and automatic rights of deletion is something on which we must reflect further in a future Bill. We have gone a long way to meet the requirements in this amendment.
Perhaps the way to do this in this age of computers——
Spare me from them.
——is that the Minister might get the local government computer board to investigate a system which would marry all the registers.
Cross-reference them.
Yes. They might set up a central register of electors. I do not know much about computers but it should be possible to have one register. I presume An Post and the ESB have such systems for their customers and I am sure it would be feasible to devise some such a system.
Deputy Jim Mitchell took the Chair.
As it stands, the registers have been put on disk in the Dublin municipal areas.
In the case of individual constituencies.
It is possible to scan a whole constituency at this stage. It is simply a matter of extending it nationally.
It is something at which we will look. It is the next logical step to take.
I have come across a number of cases where people have moved house on 15 September, which is the qualification date for inclusion in the local register, but who are still registered in Dublin and are trying to register in my constituency. It seems unfair that they cannot re-register in the place where they live although they were there on the registration date, because the people who are de-registering in Dublin have not done their job.
I agree. Unless we have the power of automatic deletion we cannot address that anomaly. We will do it in the future.
Pressure should be put on the local authorities to include people who have reached the age of 18 since 5 February.
I will look at the matter. I am in the hands of the committee and, subsequently, the Dáil and Seanad as to when this measure will be enacted. If I have time I will consider this matter. I have had discussions with the registration authorities and they have expressed concern about the impact of these measures. I wish to alert the committee to a change I propose to make to accommodate the strong views put to me — in paragraph (b) of the new provision I propose to change the deadline for applications for entry into the supplementary list for elections or referenda from 12 days to 14 days. One will have to register 14 days before polling day under the proposed regime.
That may be the bureaucrats' point of view but what happens is that people only realise they are not on the register when the canvassers call around, which may not be until a week before the election when it is too late.
One has to print a supplementary register and ensure it is valid. On the basis of the Chairman's point many people will not discover it until the day before polling day or the day itself. We frequently talk of impossible burdens being placed on people. If we ask people to run an election we must give them guidelines which are workable. The worst result would be to facilitate personation or wholesale mistakes. A 14 day period is reasonable.
In the context of having the widest possible franchise and involvement, there is an onus on the citizen to ensure he or she is registered. I will undertake to widely advertise these provisions in national and local newspapers as soon as they are enacted so that people will be clear about the right to be included in the supplementary register and the timeframes involved.
This is a step in the wrong direction. We are facilitating the——
Has the Chairman seen the broad extensions we propose?
The notice of a general election is usually 21 days. Canvassing gets going a couple of days later and finishes a day or so before the election day. It is only during the canvass that many people realise they are not on the register. For many years candidates of all parties have wondered how it can be that people who have been on the register for years at the same address can be removed from the register. Before anybody is removed from the register a list of those to be removed should be published. That does not happen.
That will be done on my instruction henceforth.
For this election?
The register for this election is already in place.
It was not done for this register.
No.
We will face the same problem despite this matter being raised repeatedly.
I have given an instruction and anybody whom it is proposed to remove from the register will be informed in writing and will have an opportunity to respond. It will be a requirement.
Typographical errors can occur which lead to deletions. Human error can occur after every other procedure has been followed.
We cannot provide for every eventuality. The citizen has an onus. I have to admit that I did not check if I am on the current register.
The Minister will have a red face if he is not.
We all have a responsibility to check. We have the opportunity up to 14 days before the poll to ensure we are on the register. We will extend postal voting to a new category and will deal with people who become 18 years of age subsequent to the register being published. We are going a long way to meeting some of the anomalies that arise, consistent with not putting a burden on the registration authorities that would be too much to bear or would facilitate personation or serious mistakes.
I have had experience of people who have checked and found themselves on the draft register yet have not been included on the register. It is infuriating. The steps the Minister is proposing are backward steps. They may facilitate public servants who will work from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. but not the voter. In this era of computer technology these matters should be worked on overnight and we should reduce and not increase the time limit. Many more people will be disenfranchised.
Will the Minister undertake to advertise in simple form the existence of the supplementary register at the beginning of the election?
Yes. As soon it is clear that an election is to occur, whenever that may be, I will undertake to advertise in the national and local newspapers the existence of the facility to be included on the supplementary list, the criteria for eligibility and the mechanisms and timeframe for inclusion.
And the place where the voter can check his or her inclusion on the register?
Would it be possible to circulate all Members of the Oireachtas with a note on it?
I hope it will not be taken as an indication from the Department of the Environment that we are readying ourselves for an election but for the benefit of Members it would be useful to be advised of the supplementary list and on the full regime of registration in effect consequent to the Private Members' Bill passed just before Christmas, and the current law. The question is whether I should do that before this measure is enacted. I think I should wait until this measure is dealt with. If there is a timeframe in which to bring into effect amendment No. 221. I will do so.
Perhaps for the information of the committee its members could get a note on how matters stand at the end of Committee Stage. What are the arrangements for a person who becomes housebound between 15 September and the polling date?
During the debate on the Private Members' Bill, I undertook to reconsider the inclusion of persons not already on the list in a supplement to the postal voters or special voters lists. Having reflected on the matter, I propose to do that.
Will it be in time for this election?
If it is possible, yes, but my advice is that none of this is possible for an election in the foreseeable future. I cannot prejudge when the measure will be enacted by both Houses. I will consider it if there is time. I will take cognisance of the Chairman's view. We will enact as much of the Bill as it is reasonable to enact without causing disruption in the registration process.
Does the Minister wish to discuss amendment No. 222?
That amendment was discussed with amendment No. 73 and both amendments were withdrawn on the basis that I would introduce an amendment on Report Stage.
I move amendment No. 223:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
67.—(a) The Act of 1992 is hereby amended by the insertion in section 32, after subsection (1), of the following subsection:
‘(1A) The Minister for Finance shall, in respect of services and expenses which are not covered by the foregoing subsection, recoup to (or, where appropriate, pay on behalf of) every returning officer out of the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof the officer's reasonable charges in relation to every Dáil election in respect of which he is the returning officer. For the avoidance of doubt, the expenses which may be recouped under this subsection shall include expenses incurred by a returning officer in being represented at and meeting any damages and costs in legal proceedings (except where the court is satisfied that such officer has been grossly negligent in the discharge of the duties of the office). For the purposes of this subsection "legal proceedings" shall not include the trial of petitions presented in accordance with the provisions of section 132.'.
(b) The Act of 1993 is hereby amended by the insertion in section 11, after subsection (1), of the following subsection:
‘(1A) The Minister for Finance shall, in respect of services and expenses which are not covered by the foregoing subsection, recoup to (or, where appropriate, pay on behalf of) every local returning officer out of the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof the officer's reasonable charges in relation to every presidential election in respect of which he is the local returning officer. For the avoidance of doubt, the expenses which may be recouped under this subsection shall include expenses incurred by a local returning officer in being represented at and meeting any damages and costs in legal proceedings (except where the court is satisfied that such officer has been grossly negligent in the discharge of the duties of the office). For the purposes of this subsection "legal proceedings" shall not include the trial of petitions presented in accordance with the provisions of section 57.'.
(c) The Act of 1994 is hereby amended by the insertion in section 16 after subsection (1), of the following subsection:
‘(1A) The Minister for Finance shall, in respect of services and expenses which are not covered by the foregoing subsection, recoup to (or, where appropriate, pay on behalf of) every local returning officer out of the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof the officer's reasonable charges in relation to every referendum in respect of which he or she is the local returning officer. For the avoidance of doubt, the expenses which may be recouped under this subsection shall include expenses incurred by a local returning officer in being represented at and meeting any damages and costs in legal proceedings (except where the court is satisfied that such officer has been grossly negligent in the discharge of the duties of the office). For the purposes of this subsection "legal proceedings" shall not include the trial of petitions presented in accordance with the provisions of section 42.'.".
This amendment provides for the insertion in Dáil and presidential elections and referendum law of a provision in relation to expenses of returning officers corresponding to a provision in the 1997 legislation relating to European Parliament elections. The measure being inserted provides that, in the case of electoral expenses for which a scale of maximum charges cannot be fixed in advance, the Minister for Finance shall recoup from the Central Fund the reasonable charges of returning officers and local returning officers.
Amendment No. 224 and amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 224 are related and may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 224:
In page 45, before section 62, to insert the following new section:
68.—(a) The Act of 1992 is hereby amended by the substitution in section 57(1) of ‘household in the constituency' for ‘person on the register of Dáil electors for the constituency or to any combination of such persons,'.
(b) The Act of 1993 is hereby amended by the substitution in section 32(1) of ‘household in a constituency' for ‘person on the register of presidential electors or to any combination of such persons,'.
(c) The Act of 1997 is hereby amended by the substitution in rule 22(1) of the Second Schedule of ‘household in the constituency' for ‘person on the register of European electors for the constituency or to any combination of such persons,'.".
I move amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 224:
Between paragraphs (a) and (b) to insert the following:
"(b) The Act of 1992 is hereby amended by the deletion of subsection (4) of section 57.".
The Minister's amendment proposes that the free post, which at present is delivered to each voter on the register, should be delivered to each household. The current arrangement under section 57(4) of the 1992 Act is that where there are two or more candidates at a Dáil election who are candidates of the same political party, they are deemed a single candidate and there is only one letter. The Minister said one of the purposes of the Bill is to ensure a level playing pitch for all candidates. If that is the case, candidates of the same party should have the same right as candidates outside a party to dispatch a communication. The purpose of my amendment is to delete that specific subsection.
All practical politicians are now questioning the electoral usefulness of the free post and the issuing of an election address. A cascade of mail on the same day from every political party is counterproductive. If there are five or six voters in a household, I want to move away from the position where each of them receives literature from each party.
If there are a number of candidates from one party, it would just increase the cascade if each candidate also sent literature. Perhaps it is the homogeneity of the Fianna Fáil organisation in my constituency but there has never been individual literature from Fianna Fáil candidates. They all have a common platform in terms of an election mail shot in Wexford.
Is it holding this time?
It held under much more stressful conditions than those which currently prevail. There were cases of fisticuffs on the street but they still had the one piece of literature. With regard to the Fine Gael Party, my dear Government colleagues, the Minister of State, Deputy Doyle, and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates, are civilised candidates in Wexford.
Does the Minister not think Senator D'Arcy is civilised?
They and Senator D'Arcy will work a cohesive and co-ordinated campaign. However, parties will not print 80,000 leaflets for each candidate. That would be extraordinarily wasteful and an imposition on electors. In addition, it would not be desirable in terms of the environment.
The Minister is providing for a division in four. It would not be a huge concession to allow an additional communication for each candidate. It puts an independent candidate at a considerable advantage over a party candidate because a party with two or three candidates has only one communication. That does not appear to stand up in the context of what we have been told about the McKenna judgment.
There must be a case for getting rid of all the postal communications and printing a booklet to which each candidate and party would submit information. The solution would be such a booklet because there would be only one communication to post and it could be sent to every voter.
The problem would be who got the front pages.
There would have to be a lottery for the sequence of the front pages. I am not sure the Deputy's suggestion would be acceptable to most people. What is the usual practice in the Deputy's party? Is it usual for individual candidates to print 80,000 mail shots? It is not the practice of his party in my constituency.
It is common in urban constituencies for candidates in parties to print substantial amounts of literature.
Is free postage used for it?
They could not use free postage by definition because the subsection states that the party has only one communication.
What is the practice now?
They are circulated by hand because it would be too expensive for most candidates to circulate them through An Post.
The law at present is that the party can only send one piece of literature. Deputy Lenihan's suggestion is that each candidate could choose to send his own literature. I accept the Minister's point about the practicalities. However, a constitutional question arises in terms of disadvantaging a candidate because he or she is a member of a political party. If a person took a constitutional action on those grounds, he or she would probably win.
I understand that An Post will have great difficulty complying with the provision. It has been in contact with the Department and various parties about this matter. It will arise particularly in urban constituencies where the boundaries are different from postal districts. Will the Minister elaborate on the reservations expressed by An Post regarding the workability of this provision in terms of changing the current position by sending the post to households in constituencies? I heard rumours that An Post were less than happy with the proposal.
One reason is that it will lose money. What is the definition of household?
It is an identifiable place of residence, a defined address. Deputy Lenihan seeks to amend existing legislation — which was introduced by one of his colleagues — whereby parties would have access to a single paid post to each elector in the constituency, which I consider a reasonable view. For commercial reasons An Post would prefer to be paid by the State for literature going to every elector rather than every household because it would be much more lucrative. We would be required to have discussions with An Post about this matter. Although it takes time to do it, many of my colleagues with computer systems already reduce the mailshot electoral register to households on the basis that it is a more efficient way of transmitting one's message. If five or six copies of the same piece of literature arrive in the post on the same day they are a source of nuisance and annoyance. I will reflect on this because there is no benefit to the electoral system in sending literature cascading through the post on a set day from all parties and candidates to every elector. The rational approach I suggest is a good one.
If six nuns live in one household, would they receive one message between them? If four nurses rent a house, is that one household? If two or more families live in one house — for instance, a son-in-law living with a mother-in-law — does that count as one household, even if they do not speak to each other?
Many communications are addressed to the residents at an address. There is nothing wrong with that.
An army barracks is a household for that purpose also. There may be something to be said for the booklet idea.
Not in the context of this Bill but it is something for the future. We would have to debate it with our colleagues.
I agree that the cascade of literature is a problem.
It is a problem because An Post refuses to deliver separately. The company itself is responsible for the loss of business because it will only deliver these items on the same day. Who wants six items delivered at the same time?
Will this amendment affect the election?
No. I do not want to disrupt An Post's expectations of resources but I would need time to discuss it with them.
