Skip to main content
Normal View

Constitutional Convention Membership

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 9 October 2012

Tuesday, 9 October 2012

Questions (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

Micheál Martin

Question:

1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the reason the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network were not included in the membership of the Constitutional Convention; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38804/12]

View answer

Joe Higgins

Question:

2. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on any recent developments regarding the establishment of the Constitutional Convention. [38950/12]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on arrangements for the Constitutional Convention. [40263/12]

View answer

Gerry Adams

Question:

4. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress he has made towards the establishment of the Constitutional Convention. [40452/12]

View answer

Gerry Adams

Question:

5. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the first meeting of the Constitutional Convention will be held. [41486/12]

View answer

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

6. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the latest arrangements for the Constitutional Convention; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41632/12]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

7. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the date on which the Constitutional Convention will meet for the first time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42656/12]

View answer

Oral answers (75 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, together.

As Deputies will be aware, the Dáil and Seanad passed resolutions prior to the summer recess approving the setting up of the constitutional convention. The issues to be considered by the convention go to the heart of Irish life and are of enormous importance to all our citizens. They include reducing the Presidential term of office to five years and aligning it with the local and European elections, reducing the voting age to 17, reviewing the Dáil electoral system, giving citizens resident outside the State the right to vote in Presidential elections at Irish embassies or elsewhere, making provision for same-sex marriage, amending the clause on the role of women in the home and encouraging greater participation of women in public life, increasing the participation of women in politics and removing the offence of blasphemy from the Constitution. The resolutions also noted that following its completion of the above reports, the convention can consider other relevant constitutional amendments that may be recommended by it.

The Government took the view that the convention should be composed solely of members of the public and elected representatives. That is the approach set out in the resolutions passed by the Houses. We are conscious of the view that has been expressed to the effect that interest groups or specific sections of society should be represented at the convention. Interest groups such as the Gay and Lesbian Network will be able to interact with the convention, for example by making submissions. Indeed, I expect the convention will be anxious to hear from a broad spectrum of opinion in carrying out its work. Since the resolution was passed, much of the necessary preparatory work has been put in place by the secretariat to the convention, which is funded from my Department’s Vote but operates independently. I understand those arrangements are nearing completion.

The final step in the establishment process is the appointment of a chair. This is a key role which is essential to the success of the convention. The Government is continuing to give it careful thought, although it has yet to make a final decision. I am grateful to the Opposition parties for the suggestions they have made for the position of chair. The names submitted are among those under consideration. I will brief the Opposition party leaders in advance of making an announcement on the appointment. Given the sensitivity of the position, it would not be appropriate for me to enter into speculation on any of the potential candidates or the final outcome.

I do, however, hope that an announcement can be made shortly and that the inaugural meeting of the constitutional convention will take place very soon thereafter.

Finally, it is important to recall that the Government has already put four separate proposals to amend the Constitution to the people in the last 12 months - on judges’ remuneration, on Oireachtas inquiries, on the EU stability treaty and, currently, on the rights of children. This is an impressive pace of constitutional reform by any historical standards. I am confident that this pace will be maintained throughout the lifetime of the Government, both through the implementation of our programme for Government commitments and in response to proposals to be put forward by the constitutional convention. That is why I committed to the House that the Government will respond to any proposals within four months. The people have supported two of the proposals we have put to them to date. I am hopeful that on 10 November they will support the historic proposal on the rights of our children.

Government sources are indicating to the media that people have been turning down the offer of chairing the convention. Will the Taoiseach comment? This might indicate the general sense out there that the Government's attempt to limit the work of the convention has essentially dampened a lot of interest in it. It has lacked credibility from the off and this may be a restricting factor in people deciding not to become involved. It is clear to everyone that the Government's basic objective with this constitutional convention is to talk about radical reform but, in reality, to limit any chance that radical reform will actually be proposed.

In his reply, the Taoiseach went through the specific items that have been chosen by the Government, so I will not go over them again. He might indicate to us whether he believes in a specific way there is a likelihood of further referendums emanating from the work of the convention. Will he clarify for me before the convention starts whether, if the convention recommends that a referendum be held on another matter such as the membership and powers of the Government, he will allow such a referendum to be held? Will he give a commitment to support the holding of referendums on all recommended topics, not just those he or the Government agrees with? It is important that he give this commitment. If he does not, I suggest he should save the time and expense of the convention because it is not good enough that we will only be allowed to vote on what the Government decides we should be allowed to vote on. What would be the point of establishing the convention in the first instance if that were to be the case?

I asked a question on the marriage equality issue. The Taoiseach said he had not stated his personal opinion because he did not wish to pre-empt the convention. I respectfully suggest this has not stopped him from giving his opinions on a whole range of other issues that are going before the convention. Many people see the movement of that issue into the convention as a way of preventing Fine Gael from having to take a stance for as long as possible on the issue of marriage equality. I do not think the Taoiseach needs a convention to tell him what he believes on a basic human matter such as this.

The reason I tabled a question on the participation of the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, GLEN, is that, given that we have decided to put the issue before the convention, the Government has an obligation to make sure those affected by the ban on marriage equality can participate in the discussion. The only group in our society whose rights are being considered by the convention should, in my view, be represented. It is a fair point. The Taoiseach has made a special case of it by kicking it to the convention. He should make a special case now and allow GLEN to be represented. GLEN is a long-established, highly professional representative organisation and it should be accorded the right not only to be heard by the convention but to actually participate in it. I would appreciate it if the Taoiseach would give serious consideration to the position I have put to him.

I do not intend to comment on any speculation about persons wishing or not wishing to chair the constitutional convention. It requires a particular kind of person with experience. For that reason and, as I said in my reply, given the consideration of all of the names submitted by Opposition parties and others, I hope we can conclude that fairly soon. I will advise Opposition leaders in advance of making an announcement about it.

With regard to the response from the Government, what I have said is that when the convention starts its work, it will look first at two issues. It is not that there are no exceptionally difficult constitutional issues, but the aim is to see how the constitutional convention will actually operate and whether it can do its work effectively. These meetings will take place on Saturdays, although that may change depending on what the constitutional convention group wants to do, with a lot of other work done in between by the backup system of the administration to the convention.

What I have said is that the Government will respond within a four-month period. I will not give Deputy Martin a blanket guarantee that everything that comes with a positive recommendation from the constitutional convention for a referendum will be accepted by the Government. Nor do I want to say that this is a process of having discussions after which recommendations come out one way or the other and, if they are positive, they might or might not be accepted by the Government, while, if they are negative, the Government might still go ahead and hold a referendum on a particular issue. I foresee a number of other referendums in the period ahead. As I said, the constitutional convention itself can decide, after doing its body of work, that there are a number of other areas on which it would like to make recommendations to the Government, and it is fully free to do that.

With regard to the possibility of the gay and lesbian group being represented at the constitutional convention, we took a clear decision, which I outlined to Opposition parties, that we would confine this to citizens, taken in a proper format from the electoral register, as well as public representatives from both the Oireachtas and the parties and from among those represented in the Northern Ireland Executive. Of course, that does not mean somebody who is a gay or lesbian person cannot attend the convention, cannot send in submissions online - a facility that will be available - or cannot attend as a group to make a case to the constitutional convention, comprised of public representatives and citizens, so that this can be heard. That was a deliberate decision in order that we would not have a long list of organisations and groups saying "Well, if one is represented, we should also be represented". The point the Deputy makes applies across the board to any group or organisation, which would be entitled to attend, send in submissions to or give evidence for consideration by the convention. From that point of view, we were clear in making the decision that, rather than letting in any one group or organisation, we would allow them all to send in submissions, evidence and so on. It may well be, in the selection of the 66 citizens, that persons from that list - although I have absolutely no control over that - are representative of different organisations, views, sectors or groups in society in general.

I would argue that this is a very special case. The first two items are a change in the voting age from 18 to 17 and the term of the Presidency. Clearly, no NGO groups are needed to consider those and, in fact, most people think it is a waste of time discussing those issues in a convention. They cannot fathom it at all and think it extraordinary. It really goes to the heart of the lack of credibility with which the convention is starting off that these two items have been listed as the top two priorities. Be that as it may, that is what the Taoiseach has decided-----

I have other Deputies waiting.

I appreciate that. My point is that there is a clear case for allowing the people whose rights are being considered to participate, even in the section dealing with the issue of marriage equality. Also, I am disappointed with the Taoiseach's response that he will not give a blanket guarantee on the holding of referendums that the convention may recommend.

What is the point of it all if only a few items are put before the convention and we end up with an expensive talking shop that produces nothing and leads to no recommendations? The Taoiseach must firm up on what will emanate from the work of the convention itself.

Could the Taoiseach outline when he expects the convention to begin its work? Will it have its first meeting before Christmas and when does he expect a chair to be appointed? The issue has been dragging on for a long time. The pace is extraordinarily slow, from the time the Taoiseach mooted the idea, to the announcements before the summer, the rushed consultations before the summer recess and, as I expected, very little happened during the summer and right up to now. Will the Taoiseach give a sense of the timeline for the convention?

I always give Deputy Martin real, tangible and clear responses. The reduction of the voting age to 17 and the reduction of the period of presidential service from seven years to five years are not extraordinarily difficult. They have been chosen deliberately-----

Very deliberately.

-----in order to see how the constitutional convention will work. We should be clear that we have a constitutional convention and we hope it will operate effectively. What I have said to representatives of Fianna Fáil and other parties is that I want to assess how the convention does its work. The National Forum on Europe, for instance, was a good concept. It held meetings around the country, some of which were only attended by five or six people, and eventually became packed by parties, groups or organisations who wanted to make a particular point. That is not the kind of situation we want for the constitutional convention. The intention is to have two clear cases, namely, whether one agrees with reducing the voting age to 17 and whether the presidential term of office should be reduced from seven years to five years and for the presidential election to be co-ordinated with local and European elections which are on a set basis-----

I do not. Absolutely not.

-----and to examine what one would have to do to achieve that in terms of a constitutional bridge for the period. In those two cases the convention, composed of citizens and public representatives, should be well able to arrive at a conclusion one way or the other inside a specified period. We would then assess whether the convention has worked effectively. If it is deemed not to be working effectively then we must change it to make it work effectively so that when it moves to more complex constitutional or legalistic arguments that it will at least have the facility and capacity to do its work well. The first point is to set up the constitutional convention but there is no point in having it if it is not going to work effectively.

Deputy Martin indicated that the gay and lesbian group should be allowed to participate. They will be allowed to do so. I have no doubt the chair of the convention will be more than anxious to hear from particular sectors of society and that the gay and lesbian sector will be entitled to go before the constitutional convention to put forward its case. We were clear at the outset that we did not want individual organisations or groups represented on the convention. The citizens selected may well be representative of individual organisations but we are not having representation from specific sectors such as the gay and lesbian group or other group. Citizens and public representatives will be involved but those who represent sectors and groups are fully entitled to go before the convention to make their case.

I wish to make two points in answer to Deputy Martin’s question. On whether the convention will be able to work effectively, I hope the first meeting will take place well before Christmas. We had intended that the convention would sit by the end of September but to be honest with Deputy Martin, it is important to get a person to chair the convention who understands its range and remit. I hope we can do that reasonably quickly.

Why on earth does the Taoiseach need a constitutional convention to deal with reducing the age of voting to 17 and reducing the term of the Presidency to five years? I suggest the discussion on both issues would take one hour each. The Taoiseach should just do it. The age should be reduced to 17 or even 16 since young people are, unfortunately, increasingly victims of the policies of Government, the bailout and austerity.

That is if there are any of them left in the country.

The issue is easily dealt with. Of course the term of the Presidency should be five years. Is it possible that the convention could examine the Presidency more fundamentally? For example, one could ask whether we need a Presidency, which is a bauble, a luxury that is ill-afforded. The mechanism for the selection of a President is undemocratically rigged to suit the establishment political parties. Will the convention examine the issue, and if we are to retain the Presidency, discuss whether it should be opened up to any citizen to go forward and democratically put his or her name in front of the people and have a real democratic contest, as opposed to the rigged contest we have seen up to now?

Some of those issues are important but why is the constitutional convention not going to the heart of much more fundamental issues in society? Why is it not dealing with the massive inequality of wealth in society, for example, where a tiny elite controls such massive resources and the majority do not have access on an equal basis?

The Deputy is straying a bit.

Why does it not consider meaningful rights such as the right to work, the right to decent accommodation without being held to ransom by landlords and rights that would make life easier and more fruitful for people? Should those much more fundamental issues not be considered rather than the more superficial issues, especially the first two?

In politics, as Deputy Higgins is well aware, it is never as easy to do things as one might imagine. Deputy Higgins is aware of that in terms of holding his party together. It can break up sometimes and even he cannot stop it. That is something he might have wished to do but certain things are outside his control.

We will all still be voting the same way on the budget.

If one were to take a vox pop in the House on the seven-year term one might get very different results. As I said to Deputy Martin what is at issue is how the convention will work effectively.

No one believes it. It is a joke.

Deputy Martin does not agree with examining the presidential term but Deputy Higgins does. One could find differing views throughout the House.

Why does the Taoiseach not just put it to the people?

That is the point of the constitutional convention.

Who raised the matter with the Taoiseach? No one ever raised it with me.

Two other Deputies have tabled questions and they have not had a chance to speak yet.

Of course they did not raise it with Deputy Martin. That is precisely the reason to have a constitutional convention; to make recommendations to put issues to the people. The Government can agree to have a referendum on a certain issue and we will give a response within four months.

As to why one needs a Presidency, I support the concept of the Office of the Presidency. President Higgins is in South America at the moment on a visit allied to trade issues. Such visits are important given that that Continent will explode economically in the next 20 years and it is important for this country to be involved.

It is perfectly open to the convention to say it regards the selection process for presidential candidates as one it should examine. I have already set that out in the terms of reference. If the constitutional convention and its chairperson decides it will examine the matter then the convention has freedom to do so and to make its recommendation.

The issue of inequality, the rich and the poor, taxation thereof or otherwise, are matters for Government and the budgetary process and will take up a great deal of the Government's time as we prepare for budget 2013. That is the story in so far as there are opportunities for the convention to look at areas that are not specifically mentioned. I refer to those first issues on which we wanted to reflect.

I assure the Taoiseach there is no party of break-up. Tá an Páirtí Sóisialach faoi lán seoil. Let the Taoiseach not worry.

Tá an páirtí taobh amuigh den Bhlascaod Mhór.

A little bit of ice cracking off the edge does not sink the iceberg.

The other issue relates to representation. Assuming the Government is to go ahead with the constitutional convention, how will proper representation on it be guaranteed? Apart from people who give submissions, how will the members be representative of society? Deputy Martin's question related to the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network. Sexuality is a fundamental issue in any human society. How can we be sure the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, or LGBT, sector of society will have people there who appreciate their position? One could name other sectors of society in the same way. There is a need for people on the convention who will understand the issues in question and can put them to the forefront of discussion.

I reiterate there will be 100 members, including a chairperson who, as I pointed out to Deputy Martin, must be a person of experience and ability and have a high degree of public acceptability. There will be 66 ordinary citizens and the remaining 33 will be drawn from Members of the Oireachtas and will include one parliamentarian from each of the political parties in Northern Ireland, to which invitations have been extended. The 66 persons will be recruited through the engagement of a bona fide polling company, will be selected from the electoral register, and will act as citizen members. The selection will therefore be as representative as possible in terms of gender, age, social class and region. The selection process will be overseen by the chairperson of the convention. It is proposed that the involvement of citizens from Northern Ireland and Irish people abroad will be facilitated by electronic means, social media and other web-based innovative technology. Such technology can also help citizens at home. Provision will be made by the secretariat for the establishment of a ready-to-go website with the capacity to disseminate information widely, provide interactivity with citizens at home and abroad and broadcast proceedings on-line as required.

That is what is going to happen. Let us see how effective it can be and if it is not as effective as it should be we can change it.

Sinn Féin proposed a constitutional convention a long time ago but since then Irish society has been changing - as a result of the impact of the economic crisis, changes within other pillars of the establishment and because of the peace process in the North. The best recent example of this type of convention was the constitutional convention, or conference, in South Africa when that country came together to form a new republic. We need that here but it looks to me as if we are going to get some kind of focus group, as opposed to something that can actually inspire Irish people. Whatever their party political allegiance is people here want to have some stake in and some sense of a real republic. A republic is not static; it must be an organic and ongoing voyage for us throughout this island.

I and Sinn Féin are disappointed in the way the Government has limited the remit of the convention, and also at the delay. The Taoiseach said in July it would happen in September but we do not have a starting date. What the Taoiseach read out to Teachta Higgins was the initial letter, or statement, on this issue. There are many questions. Why do we not have a starting date and why is there a delay? What will be the format of the first day? I wrote to the Taoiseach asking about that. Will the Opposition parties have an opportunity to speak on that occasion? Will the Taoiseach publish the names of individuals or groups on the expert advisory group? Those are some very practical points - date; format for the first day; the reason for the delay; and the list of individuals or groups who will form part of the expert advisory panel.

I agree with the Deputy that the real republic is not static. That is why the issues mentioned in the earlier part of the reply, concerning Questions Nos. 3 and 5, and looking forward also to Question No. 8, refer to the start of a process by which the constitutional convention can decide there are much more compelling matters from its perspective that need to be reflected upon and recommendations made. It is fully entitled to do that.

There are also the questions on the referendums on child protection and the abolition of the Seanad. The first will go ahead on 10 November and is an important referendum, being a statement about the value of our children. That was decided upon and it was agreed it would not be part of the remit of the constitutional convention. Neither is the question of the abolition of the Seanad, which will be put to the people and whose fate will be in their hands.

I can tell the Deputy that a polling company was engaged, has done its work and has identified 66 citizens. Their names and their acceptance will be ratified by the chairperson of the convention. All is ready to go except the identification of an appointee who will do a first-class job in that regard. As I noted to Deputy Martin, I hope this can be up and running before Christmas. I had thought we might get it under way by the end of September. We are now in the second week in October so it is not far beyond the date intended. All the backup work has been done. When we identify a suitable chairperson I will inform the leaders of the other parties and get it under way.

The first meeting will be held in Dublin and thereafter the chairperson can decide where meetings should be held. Costs will be kept to a minimum. The moneys voted for this come through the Department of the Taoiseach and have already been identified.

One must almost become a forecaster to try to get some sense out of the answers given. The Taoiseach did not even try to tell me the reason for the delay. He has already given the points he has just made in other meetings I have attended on this issue. He entirely avoided the issues of the format on the day, whether Opposition parties will have the opportunity to speak and the list of individuals or groups who will form part of the expert advisory panel. I do not understand why he does that. I do not understand why he just does not stand up and give us the answers. These are not State secrets.

There are two other issues I wish to mention, with the indulgence of the Ceann Comhairle. I welcome that the convention will move outside Dublin. It is crucial that it go into rural Ireland, however that is done, but it is also crucial that it should go into the North. This is an island we are on; this is one country. There is an enormous number of people from both traditions who would love to be part of this process of change across the island.

I was in Quinnipiac University in Connecticut two weeks ago at the opening of the museum of An Gorta Mór, a wonderful project. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar was there, too. I was a bit like John the Baptist in that he was there shortly after me. It is a brilliant initiative by the diaspora and Irish America, an example of the great contribution they make to the culture, life, history and knowledge of our nation.

However, we have not been informed what role they are going to play. Neither have we been informed what role they have requested to play. Some members of the diaspora have stated the Government wants their money, wants them to attend The Gathering and bring jobs to Ireland, but that it will not give them a say. The three questions I have asked - whether the convention will extend into rural areas, whether it will extend to the North and what role the diaspora will play - are additional to the ones the Taoiseach did not answer earlier.

I am not sure about the context of the Deputy's comment on John the Baptist. From my recollection of the Bible, John came first; then the Lord arrived and John baptised him.

That is correct. Leo arrived after me.

Therefore, the Deputy is referring to himself as John the Baptist.

This has implications for Leo.

Where was Salome?

Deputy Gerry Adams should not project too far ahead in this matter.

Did the Deputy baptise Leo?

In any event-----

I answered the Taoiseach's question very clearly.

I thank the Deputy. The delay in the convention commencing operations is due to the appointment of a suitable chairperson. People have submitted names and the relevant individuals are being considered. Someone who has experience, will be acceptable to the public and understands what is involved is required to fill the position. That is the only reason for the delay.

As stated, the relevant citizens have been selected by the polling company engaged to fulfil this task. I do not have a list of the names of those involved. They will have to be ratified by the chairman of the convention, the first meeting of which will take place in Dublin and its purpose will be to bring everyone involved together in order that they might understand what it is they must do. The intention is for the convention to meet on a Saturday. Whether such meetings take place once or twice a month will be the subject of a decision by the chairman and the members of the convention. I expect that the convention will extend into rural areas and it will be a matter for the chairman and the members to decide whether they wish to visit Northern Ireland. Members of the convention will not be travelling abroad. However, members of the diaspora - from Australia to America and all points in between - will be able to engage with the convention on-line. People will be able to submit their comments, on a regular basis, via social media and by means of the convention's website. As will be the case with young people, the diaspora will, therefore, be fully informed and engaged through the mechanism of social media.

I hope I have given clear answers to the Deputy's questions. As soon as a person who is suitable to serve as chairman has been identified, I will inform the Deputy and others of that fact in order that we might proceed.

Is the Constitutional Convention not a complete, utter and deliberate distraction from the real issues about which people are concerned? It is mere window-dressing to distract from the Government and the troika careering ahead with wholesale privatisation, cuts and austerity. The Constitutional Convention is supposed to deal with political reform. Given that the Government is privatising, slashing or cutting everything that moves, one is obliged to wonder what will be left for any political structure to govern in the future. By the time the Constitutional Convention has the opportunity to discuss matters, everything will have been either outsourced or privatised. That is, of course, if it ever gets to discuss anything of a serious nature.

If there was any serious intent behind what was envisaged, the one action that would have been taken would have been removing all of the political hacks from the equation. In the context of what is supposed to be a serious attempt to engage with the public on the need for political reform, I do not understand why there will be 33 politicians as members of the convention. Why are they needed? Why not have just one or two from each party, North and South? Why is it necessary for politicians to comprise one third of the members of the convention? What is the point in that? If there are sectors of civil society which are not represented at the convention and which want to be involved with it, why not remove some of the politicians and make it more representative of civil society? The criteria for selecting random members of the public from the electoral register are too limited and based on region, gender and age. What about social class and social and economic background, which are extremely important considerations? There is a need to broaden civil representation at the convention. We could do so if we removed some of the politicians and made provision for a broader cross-section of society to be represented.

Why will the Government not allow the convention to set its own agenda? Why are politicians dictating what its agenda will be in advance? Why not allow it to meet and then decide - on day one - what it wants to discuss? If it was allowed to do so, the convention might have a very different set of priorities - in the context of what it might wish to discuss - than those set for it by the Government. If the convention was a serious attempt to engage with the people on the need for political reform, the Government would allow it to set the agenda. I urge those opposite to do precisely that rather than having a stage-managed, choreographed, contained and controlled convention which will discuss what the Government wants it to discuss and which will avoid all the substantial issues of concern to people.

I do not know whether the Deputy ever played a team game. If he did, he does not understand the dynamics of team effort. He is the so-called proponent of the People for Profit brigade. He referred to the Constitution which gives people the right to engage in legitimate protest. Last week, however, his people prevented the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs from doing their jobs.

Absolutely not true. The Taoiseach should read the report in The Irish Times.

Therefore, the Deputy denies all involvement with the incident.

Does the Deputy deny all involvement with it?

With what? Is the Taoiseach referring to the aggressive behaviour that occurred?

Yes. Such behaviour previously occurred in Galway. The Deputy speaks about political reform and other issues.

The Taoiseach should read the report in The Irish Times.

We can conduct our business in a very understanding way.

The Taoiseach should read The Irish Times.

We might have strong differences of opinion, but people should not attack the State. It is perfectly legitimate to engage in protests, but it is not legitimate to stop people going about either their constitutional or ordinary business.

The Taoiseach is referring to the wrong party. He should withdraw that remark.

The Taoiseach has the wrong party.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett should bear in mind what I have stated when he next discusses this matter with his serial marchers.

Citizens will outnumber politicians at the convention by a majority of two to one. Some 66 members of the public have already been selected - by a proper, efficient method - to discuss the range of issues involved. I accept that there will be other matters which they will wish to discuss. The Deputy is also wrong when he states social class has not been taken into account. If he had been listening to the comments I directed to Deputy Micheál Martin, he would be aware that I indicated that gender, age, social class and region had been taken into consideration in respect of the 66 citizens chosen to represent society at the Constitutional Convention. I do not at all accept the argument to the effect that we are engaging in choreography. What we are discussing is a serious issue which relates to Bunreacht na hÉireann. Perhaps the Deputy does not think it is a serious document. However, the issues outlined for the Constitutional Convention to discuss and make recommendations on relate to the living, changing Republic, society and that which will evolve as time passes. The chairman and members of the convention will have the opportunity to decide which other issues they would like to consider and make recommendations on to the Government. On the next occasion on which the Deputy is talking to his people about constitutional change, he should remember that the Constitution guarantees the right to engage in legitimate protest. It also guarantees people the right to go about their business.

I remind the Taoiseach that the State came into being as a result of protest and the mass movement of ordinary people. He should not be so quick to dismiss the idea of ordinary people taking to the stage of history and making vociferous demands for change.

Will the Deputy, please, adhere to the matters relating to the questions asked? We do not want a history lesson.

For the record of the House, if the Taoiseach had read the report in The Irish Times from an independent journalist who was present, she made it absolutely clear that members of People Before Profit stood back, protested peacefully and were not involved in the activities to which the Taoiseach refers.

The Deputy should stick to his supplementary question.

The Taoiseach should make it clear for the record of the House. Is it not the case that the Taoiseach is trying to predetermine the agenda of the constitutional convention and steer it away from any of the serious and substantial issues about political reform that need to be discussed by deciding in advance what issues it will discuss and what shall be at the top of the agenda, rather than allowing the members of the convention decide the agenda? I asked the Taoiseach to reduce the number of politicians involved. Why should one third of the membership be dominated by political parties which will have an advantage over just random individuals who are selected, in that they will be organised and subject to political whips? This will allow them to manipulate the debate if they wish in their particular favour. They should be given the same footing at the convention as every other individual who is present. On the question of social class being adequately represented, the fact that the members of the public are being selected from the electoral register will disadvantage people from less well-off and poorer areas because they are disproportionately badly represented on the electoral register. The electoral register is not the best basis from which to select the public members of the convention.

Deputy Boyd Barrett seems to imply he should have a list of members of the People Before Profit organisation and that he should select them for the convention.

(Interruptions).

Please allow the Taoiseach to give a reply to your question, Deputy Boyd Barrett.

The electoral register has been out of line for quite a number of years but it is the official register of all those who are entitled and registered to vote. People pass away or others have emigrated. Ordinary people will comprise the 66 citizens who are selected from the electoral register by age, gender, social class and region.

If I understand the Deputy correctly, he has condemned in his comment the activities of those persons who last week prevented the Tánaiste and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs from doing their job. If that is what he means then I am happy to hear him say it. I hope that none of the serial marchers whom you urge on occasionally are involved. I might say to you, Deputy Boyd Barrett-----

I refuted your allegation that we were involved. You should be gracious enough-----

Please stop shouting across the Chamber.

-----that this is about making recommendations by means of a process so that the Government can respond and put questions to the people on changes to our Constitution. The constitutional convention has that remit in a number of areas which I have outlined and in additional areas which are at the discretion of the chairman and members of the convention.

Political reform is also a matter for the Government and the programme for Government. This is the reason the number of Dáil Deputies will be reduced. The question of the abolition of the Seanad will be put to the people. The next week to ten days will see the publication of probably the most radical restructuring of local government since the foundation of the State-----

Is it being abolished or privatised?

The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government has introduced penalties for parties that do not measure up when selecting women candidates to bring more women into politics. The regime has been changed with regard to corporate donations and all that area. These are matters of political reform and there is more to follow. However, the convention is about making recommendations on issues that will have to be put to the people by way of referendum because they involve changes to the Constitution. The Government will continue with its programme for political reform, some aspects of which I have outlined for the Deputy.

May I ask a supplementary question?

No. We have spent 48 minutes on this group of questions and Deputy Martin has two questions to come in the next group. There will be no time for the next group of questions. I suggest he asks a supplementary question somewhere else.

Top
Share