I move: "That the Dáil agree with the Seanad in the following amendment:—
In Section 1, lines 25-36, inclusive, deleted and the following substituted therefor:—
"The member of Dáil Eireann who is the Chairman of Dáil Eireann immediately before a dissolution of the Oireachtas shall, unless before such dissolution he announces to Dáil Eireann that he does not desire to continue to be a member thereof, be deemed without any actual election to be elected in accordance with this Constitution at the ensuring general election as a member of Dáil Eireann for the constituency for which he was a member immediately before such dissolution or, in the event of a revision of constituencies having taken place, for the revised constituency declared on such revision to correspond to such first-mentioned constituency. Whenever a former Chairman of Dáil Eireann is so deemed to have been elected at a general election as a member for a constituency the number of members actually to be elected for such constituency at such general election shall be one less than would otherwise be required to be elected therefor."
When this Bill left the Dáil, the position in regard to the Ceann Comhairle was that he would be automatically returned to the next Parliament following a general election as an additional member of the Dáil, and not representing any particular constituency. He would be a member of the Dáil but would be attached to no constituency, and would be a member over and above the number provided to form the membership of the Dáil. If he is re-appointed to the chair, the position would be the same as that in the previous Parliament, but if he is not reappointed he would be an extra member of the Dáil, not specially concerned with any constituency within the State and, presumably, on the look-out for a constituency for the purpose of the next following general election.
In the Seanad exception was taken to that position. The spare part aspect was drawn attention to — a member of the Dáil with a roving commission and assigned to no particular constituency. Finally, the suggestion embodied in this amendment emerged. That proposal has this advantage, that it is, in fact, the application to the proportional representation system of election of what takes place by agreement between the heads of parties in Great Britain. It ensures the return of the Speaker to the next following Parliament as a representative of the constituency which he represented in the former Parliament. Speaking of the system that obtains in Great Britain, I said that there was no way under proportional representation of securing that, that there was no way, with P.R. prevailing as an electoral system, of earmarking a particular seat as the Speaker's seat and reserving that for him.
This amendment of Senator O'Farrell's which was carried in the Seanad does, in fact, find such a way. It proposes to return the Speaker automatically to the next Parliament, representing his former constituency, and that the constituency elect one member less. Let us take the position of the constituency. A Parliament meets, a member is called from its midst to act as Ceann Comhairle, and for most practical purposes he ceases to represent his constituency in any active sense and he becomes the representative of the Dáil in effect. That position obtains throughout the lifetime of the next Parliament. After the next general election the former Ceann Comhairle returns to the Dáil deemed to have been elected as a member for his former constituency. Either he is reappointed to the Chair or he is not. If he is reappointed to the Chair the position of the constituency is, in effect, what it was in the lifetime of the previous Parliament. If he is not reappointed, the constituency has effective representation in the body of the House. It seems to me that the proposal secures all that it was sought to secure, all that was, in fact, aimed at by the Bill as it left the Dáil, and I recommend the acceptance of the amendment.
