I welcome the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government and his officials and invite him to make a brief opening statement.
Electoral (Amendment) (Dáil Constituencies) Bill 2012: Committee Stage
The purpose of the Electoral (Amendment) (Dáil Constituencies) Bill 2012 is to provide for the number of Members of Dáil Éireann, to revise the constituencies in the light of the result of Census 2011 and to provide for the number of Members to be elected for such constituencies. The Bill provides for a total number of 158 Members of the Dáil, delivering on the Government commitment to reduce the number of Deputies for the 32nd Dáil. In debating and deciding upon the Bill, the Oireachtas will meet its constitutional obligation to review and revise constituencies, with due regard to changes in the distribution of population.
We had a good debate on the Bill on Second Stage, over five separate days. There was a general understanding of the need to respect the independence of the Constituency Commission and accept its recommendations. Many Deputies raised concerns that relate to political reform in a wider and more general sense. However, this legislation does nothing more nor less than comply with our legal and constitutional obligations for the provision of the legal mechanism in respect of the independent commission that has reported to us.
Sections 1 to 6, inclusive, agreed to.
SCHEDULE
Amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 7, column 1, lines 40 and 41, to delete “Dublin Bay South” and substitute “Dublin South East”.
I do not challenge the independence of the commission or the outcome with regard to the boundaries and the number of Deputies. However, I wish to challenge the change made by the commission in its report of the name of the constituency from Dublin South-East to Dublin Bay South, and I do not believe this challenge undermines the independence of the commission. Dublin South-East was established in 1947 by the 13th Dáil. It is a constituency made up of well-known townships and includes Ringsend, Sandymount, Donnybrook, Rathmines and Terenure among others, and all have a sense of place in the constituency. The area the furthest from Dublin Bay is 6 km away and the constituency has only approximately 2 km of seafront.
If we wanted to change constituency names, perhaps Carlow-Kilkenny could be named river view. It has more kilometres of a river view than Dublin South-East has of Dublin Bay. Ingrained in the proposed constituency name change is the suggestion that Dublin South-East does not have a sense of place, but it has. I know the Minister believes strongly in county jerseys. Dublin is made up of several communities with clear identities, but this proposal does not recognise the identity Dublin South-East has and its long association with that name. The constituency had two former Fine Gael taoisigh, John A. Costello and Garrett FitzGerald. It also had Noel Browne and former party leaders, such as John Gormley, Ruairí Quinn and Michael McDowell. The area has a very strong identity and no submission was made to the Constituency Commission for a change of name.
The only criteria for changing the name to Dublin Bay South seems to be to provide a balance between the north side of the city and the south side. If that was the case, the constituency of Dún Laoghaire should be called Dublin Bay South. Dublin South-East has a stronger affinity with Dublin Central. The Minister needs to show some flexibility on this. My amendment is a common sense amendment that recognises the feelings of people living in Dublin South-East and their sense of identity. The commission recommendation rides roughshod over that. My colleague here grew up in Dublin South-East and probably understands the strong affinity to the name. I urge the Minister to reconsider the issue and accept this minor amendment.
I support Deputy Humphreys. Dublin Bay North is an amalgam of two old constituencies and one way or the other, it is a new constituency. Therefore, I understand the need for a new name for it. However, Dublin South-East has featured as a constituency for many years. The coastline of the constituency is relatively small and as Deputy Humphreys pointed out, there is more bay in Dún Laoghaire than there is in the Dublin South-East constituency. For the sake of continuity, we should retain the name of the constituency as it has been.
It might not be a great idea to have similar names because people will use a shortened version. When people refer to the Dublin Bay constituency, we will not know whether they mean the north one or the south one. I do not accept that it cannot be changed. The independent commission decides on the composition of the constituencies and the number of Deputies in each constituency, etc. It is right that it is independent. Ultimately, the naming of the constituencies is a matter for the Legislature. It would not be an interference with the work of the commission if we were to name the constituency Dublin South-East. I support Deputy Humphreys.
I remind the Deputies that we are discussing amendments Nos. 2 and 3 with amendment No. 1.
I am sure the Minister is aware that my colleague, Councillor Richard Humphreys, has made a strong presentation on the proposal to change the name of the Dublin South constituency. I will leave it at that.
The Minister is aware that Mayo people take great pride in County Mayo. The Taoiseach, the Minister of State, Deputy Ring, Deputy O'Mahony and Deputy Mulherin will be well able to explain that to the Minister.
I am sure Deputy Calleary would not be too far behind.
He is not in government. It is fair to say that there is disappointment among people in south Mayo that they are being put into the Galway West constituency. It is not that they have anything against Galway. They have a very strong county identity. Over 10,000 people in a considerable slice of south Mayo, stretching from just north of Headford to just north of Ballinrobe and from Cong almost to Claremorris, are being put into Galway West. I am suggesting that we recognise their Mayo identity by calling the constituency "Galway West-Mayo South". I think it makes sense. The people of west Galway do not mind and the people of south Mayo who are being moved from the Mayo constituency would be very pleased to be recognised in the name of the constituency. There is a precedent in the Roscommon situation. It would not be without precedent.
I can appreciate how the people feel because I have experienced the same thing in the area of north Tipperary that is being moved into the new Offaly constituency.
I thank the Deputies for their contributions. The commission has always named the constituencies as well. That has been part of its remit even though it is not in its terms of reference, which have never been changed. I am sure Deputy Ó Cuív would not like Ministers to be interfering in various matters of this nature. I would certainly be criticised for doing that. I have a certain sympathy with what Deputy Humphreys has said about the way his constituency has been renamed in the commission's report. It is somewhat at variance with the reality on the ground, but that is what the commission has decided. If I opened the floodgates, I would have to deal with a number of issues. I will indicate some of them in response to Deputy Cowen's amendment. I want to take this opportunity to express my sympathy to Deputy Cowen on his bereavement. Deputy Ó Cuív has spoken about Deputy Cowen's proposal that the name of the Galway West constituency be changed to "Galway West-Mayo South". If I were to accept this amendment, perhaps I would have to agree to rename the proposed Sligo-Leitrim constituency "Sligo-Leitrim-Cavan-Donegal". I would point out that the Cavan population being transferred to this constituency is greater than the Mayo population being transferred to Galway West. Similarly, the Meath population in the Louth constituency is greater than the Mayo population being transferred to Galway West. The word "Meath" does not feature in the name of the Louth constituency. The new Offaly constituency comprises County Offaly and part of County Tipperary. I received representations in this regard some months ago. The Tipperary population to be included in the Offaly constituency is greater than the Mayo population to be included in Galway West, but the word "Tipperary" does not feature in the name of the Offaly constituency. If I was to accept an amendment in one case, I suppose I would have to-----
A small part of County Kildare is going into the Laois constituency.
Yes. The word "Kildare" does not feature in the name of that constituency. I suppose we could give many examples, in addition to those covered in these amendments, of constituency names recommended by the commission that could be changed in this way. If I were to do it in one case in response to an amendment, I would have to do it in many other cases. Therefore, the easiest way to-----
The Minister can deal with the amendments that are tabled only.
I could introduce my own amendments in order to be fair. For the reason I have given, I cannot accept these amendments.
I am not suggesting that the Minister should change the name of anything. I am suggesting that the Oireachtas should agree to change the name of the constituency. I think there is a huge difference between the two. I am asking the Fine Gael Party to vote in favour of such a change. There are no other proposals. Therefore, the analogies drawn by the Minister in speculating about all the other constituencies do not hold. The people of the areas in question must be happy with the names proposed for the new constituencies because they have not asked any Member of the Oireachtas to table an amendment to those names. The only possible legal changes that can be made, if changes are to be made, are those proposed in the amendments before the committee today. The acceptance of these amendments would not involve anything more than what is set out in the amendments. We would be saying that the democratically elected representatives of the people are not seeking any changes other than in the constituencies specified in these amendments. As I pointed out, Galway has been included in the name of the Roscommon constituency. I do not believe the Oireachtas is precluded from making a change of this nature, either in law or in practice. As the Minister has said, this is not part of the terms of reference of the commission. When I was in the Cabinet, we discussed the possibility of changing the names of constituencies that were inappropriately named.
Why did the Cabinet not do it at that time?
We did not give them more appropriate names because a majority at Cabinet did not feel that the names were inappropriate.
I see.
On consideration, I think we were right.
That Cabinet was always right.
We were. If a different name is appropriate or if there is a demand from the populace for a change, I think it should be considered. The suggestion that elected people cannot amend this Bill to change the names of the constituencies amounts to no more than hiding behind the commission, which did not have any terms of reference in relation to the naming of constituencies. I ask the Minister, out of deference to his Taoiseach's love of County Mayo, to consider this proposal. I know the Taoiseach and the Minister of State, Deputy Ring, would be very supportive of this. They tend to receive the most votes in that part of County Mayo. I know my colleague, Deputy Calleary, supports this amendment. I ask the Minister to honour the fantastic county loyalty of those politicians by including "Mayo South" in the name of this constituency.
Each constituency commission is established by the Government and is accountable to the Government and, by extension, the Houses of the Oireachtas. When the commission's recommendations are brought before this House, and it is the wish of Deputies that the name of a constituency should be changed, I think that should be done. At the end of the day, the commission's role is to produce a report. I would not have any fears if we were to make an amendment of this nature. In my constituency, we are delighted to be getting a piece of the Kildare South constituency. I thank the commission for that. The Carlow-Kilkenny constituency is staying intact, whereas the Laoighis-Offaly constituency is being butchered. The new Offaly constituency will extend as far as the edge of Nenagh.
They are happy about that.
I would say the Acting Chairman is delighted.
I am not, but the people of Offaly are.
I know it is a difficult task. It is like being handed a jigsaw with rules that mean it is hard for one to make all the pieces fit, so one takes out a Stanley knife or a sharp blade and starts cutting up the pieces of the jigsaw. I have told the Minister previously about the terrible thing about it from my point of view. I recognise that it is difficult to stick within the county boundaries, where possible. At the very least, one should try to keep some link between local authority boundaries and Dáil constituencies. I am dealing with three local authorities at the moment. That is very difficult. I have the authorities in the Laoighis-Offaly constituency and I will have the authority in Kildare.
The Deputy will have to deal with fewer local authorities next year.
That is when the change is made. I have often had to telephone Carlow Town Council as well. That brings me on to my next point, which I will make briefly. The Minister and I have something in common in this regard. The location where I hold my clinic is actually in the Minister's constituency by approximately 100 yards.
Is this on the amendment?
The swimming pool is close to the Numbers estate in Graiguecullen, in the Minister's area. Half of the Numbers estate is in Laois and half is in Carlow-Kilkenny, so I have it in the swimming pool, which is the most identifiable point in the area - not in the pool itself, I would add, but in the community rooms in the old school beside it. There is also a crèche there and the Department of Social Protection has an office.
There are actually three boundaries at this point - the county boundary, the Dail boundary and the local government boundary - and a review of the local government boundaries is under way at present. One of the problems is that a large section of Graiguecullen votes in local authority elections for candidates for Carlow Town Council, yet the road in Rossmore View was recently upgraded by Laois County Council. I had to make representations to get that done, as I had told the residents I would get it done if I was elected. It was done this year under a community involvement grant, with €60,000 spent on the work, including drainage. The people of those estates cannot vote for Laois county councillors so the Laois county councillors, understandably, will not take a huge interest in it. Unfortunately, the local councillors, who are mainly Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, have to then represent the area and pass budgets that include these estates, yet they cannot get a vote from them and cannot even go in to canvass them. There needs to be an alignment between the boundaries of the county councils and the Dáil.
The Deputy has made his point, which is not related to the amendment.
The Minister and I are on opposite sides of the fence and I am sure-----
The Deputy should have a word with the Minister after the meeting. I am sure he will get a positive response. I call Deputy Humphreys.
I thank the Minister for his response. I can understand the difficulty in that he does not want to reopen this issue given, as he said, it is like Pandora's box and he would be lobbied on many other cases. I point out to the Minister that when this went out for consultation, it was not in people's minds that there would be a change. Normally, up to this point, we would have been talking about substantial changes in boundaries whereas Dublin South-East is quite a minor change. This concerns the power of association and it would have some impact on turnout as well, given that name recognition has been building up in Dublin South-East over a number of years. I ask the Minister to reconsider. There was only one submission in regard to Dublin South-East that actually mentioned the name, where a group from Terenure wanted the area to be moved to Dublin South-East.
They wanted to join the upper echelons of society.
No, it is nothing like that, or perhaps it was a little like that, but it needs to be explained. Until recently, Terenure was split down the middle, with nine Dáil Deputies and some ten councillors all representing one area. If there was a meeting, there were almost more public representatives at it than community groups. I recognise there was a certain logic in the commission's changing of the boundary. However, the fact there was no public appetite to change the name is very clear within the submissions. If at all possible, I ask the Minister to see whether he can relent.
There is a lesson to be learned in that, when the next Constituency Commission is formed, it should be flagged that there could possibly be a change of names, and to welcome submissions on names while we can have that public engagement in regard to the naming of constituencies. We can certainly learn from the past.
I concur with Deputy Humphreys' point that, for future commissions, names should be taken into account and submissions sought. It does have a strong bearing with the public.
This commission has reinstated the county boundary of Waterford. As the Vice Chairman knows, the northern part of County Waterford, which is in the local authority area of Waterford, was in the Tipperary South constituency. I welcome the fact this part of County Waterford has been reinstated. There are swings and roundabouts, and while some will feel they have lost, others will feel they have gained. On this occasion, Waterford has certainly gained given the fact the county boundary was reinstated and the local authority areas are now fully aligned with the Dáil constituency area, which I welcome.
The Déise had its way. My experience is that in the last boundary revision, part of Laoighis-Offaly, namely, south Offaly, came into Tipperary North. The people of south Offaly and north Tipperary decided on the name of the constituency, and everybody in the media and the public referred to it as north Tipperary-south Offaly because that was the point made by the public. Irrespective of what name the commission or anybody else puts on it, the people will decide what they call their constituency, and rightly so. We should bear that in mind. I support the point with regard to future commissions that the titles of the constituencies should be looked at, and commissions should take on board the opinions of the people.
As I indicated earlier, I have sympathy for the issue of titles of constituencies where it comes as a surprise at the end of the process. I acknowledge that Dublin South-East was a particular surprise. I am sure the Taoiseach thought it a surprise that one seat was taken out of Mayo as well, which shows how independent the commission was. It is the first time in the history of the State the Taoiseach's constituency lost a seat, which is worth noting and to which I draw the attention of Deputy Ó Cuív. The independence of the commission is beyond reproach and it has demonstrated as much on this occasion more than any other occasion, from that point of view.
It is very difficult to align county boundaries when there are legal and constitutional requirements on the population numbers needed for a seat. When the number of Deputies is being reduced, it is even more difficult. The people of west Cavan and south Donegal did not expect to be in the Sligo-Leitrim constituency, even though Leitrim is put back together again. It was purely on the basis of getting the numbers to coincide with our legal and constitutional requirements. There are swings and roundabouts, as Deputy Coffey said, and sometimes we win and sometimes we lose. As the Vice Chairman said, the people themselves, anecdotally and in practice, will be able to articulate where the geography of a particular constituency is, irrespective of how it is named in the commission's report.
I do not believe turnout is affected by the way a constituency is named. People are going to vote for a party or a candidate.
There is an association and an affinity with a community.
I doubt it. I noted recently an article in one of our national newspapers about the very low turnout in many constituencies in Dublin. Community identification has been a problem for a long time in Dublin.
There was quite a significant increase in turnout within areas, certainly within one of the areas in my constituency.
Generally, across Dublin, there is a significant reduction in turnout, which has nothing to with the names of constituencies and has to do with other factors.
Deputy Stanley's comments concern a separate issue of local government, of which I am very mindful, as I am mindful of the county boundaries.
If the Minister had to deal with a huge heap of amendments for Report Stage and we intended to make changes all over the place, he would have a point. However, if he was to think on this before Report Stage and there are still only three amendments, it would show he could make everybody very happy with a very minor adjustment and without in any way interfering with the terms of reference of the commission, as he said himself.
With regard to the Mayo situation, we knew Mayo could not stay as a five-seater unless it got a big slice of Galway, Roscommon or Sligo because once the number of representatives was cut to 158, no commission, within its terms of reference, could have left Mayo as a five-seater because the population does not justify it.
They put a bit of Galway in there before, did they not?
They did. None of us foresaw the proposal the commission came up with because Galway West looked fairly intact.
It had enough numbers without the extra people. It was a big surprise to us. I am not complaining in particular. I happen to live very near the added area so I do not have any complaint but I know the people on the ground are very disappointed that they are being called Galway West. I never saw a county in Ireland with as much county loyalty as Mayo.
I am sure the Deputy knows he would have to flag his amendments today if there were to be further amendments on Report Stage other than the ones tabled.
So anybody could come in here and flag them?
It was discussed on this occasion in the same way as it was discussed in Deputy Ó Cúiv's time in Cabinet. The outcome is what I am declaring today. I do not propose to depart from the recommendation of the Constituency Commission for any constituency in any way.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 2 not moved.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 11, column 1, line 11, after "West" to insert "-Mayo South".
Title agreed to.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Schedule agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.