They can come in on both sides. There has been during the course of the discussion on this Bill practically no sound argument advanced in support of the proposal to leave Senators in their office for a period of nine years. The fact that the Government has recognised that the period of twelve years at present provided for in the Constitution is too long is in itself an indication that they were thinking on the right lines. Unfortunately, however, they do not appear to have studied the matter sufficiently seriously or given it the attention which a matter of this magnitude requires, or they would have, I think, realised that as a change was to be effected a much shorter period than a period of nine years would, in fact, have been better. It is quite obvious that a person elected for nine years must feel himself independent of public opinion. A Deputy elected to this Dáil, knowing that the maximum period of his office will be five years, feels himself bound, if he wishes to secure re-election at the end of that period, to devote himself to the interests of his constituents, to pay attention to his duties, to attend regularly here at the meetings, and to take an active interest in the business of the House. A person, however, elected for a longer period, say, nine years, would feel that the period in itself is sufficiently long to enable him to neglect any of the work of the assembly which he was elected to do except, perhaps, if he wishes to secure election again, during the last two or three years of his term of office. We have had already raised for discussion in this House the question whether or not Senators are elected as a reward for the services rendered or because they are the best men to do the work which it is the duty of Senators to perform. It is becoming more obvious as the discussion on these Bills proceeds that the attitude of the Government is that individuals are elected to the Seanad, not because they serve a useful purpose there, but because it is the most convenient form of rewarding them for actions which they took in the past in support of the Government, or in support of the party that sent the Government here. Those who have examined the conditions prevailing in the country and who have glimpsed some of the difficulties under which the present Government are endeavouring to work must realise that one of the major difficulties with which they are faced is the fact that they have been forced to place into responsible positions, not merely in the Government, but also in the administration, individuals who are unfitted for the posts, but who had to be provided for at the behest of the organisation which elected the Government.
We have had what were called indications of appreciation placed into various positions and when there now exists, and it is proposed to continue, an institution the very purpose of which is to provide an easy means for giving political awards to supporters of the Government, we think it is up to those in this House who have some respect for the machinery of democratic Government to protest. The Seanad has been under discussion from various angles here lately, and we must consider the proposals contained in this Bill in relation to the proposals contained in the various other Bills which came before us and which will come before us in the following week. The men whom it is proposed to have elected for a continuous period of nine years will exercise considerable power in relation to the Acts passed by this House. They will have power to suspend legislation for a period of over twenty months, and when we consider that the men who will exercise that power are men elected in this manner, as a reward for services rendered, we must say that we are taking liberties with the structure of the State that may lead to very serious consequences. If it was proposed to have the Second Chamber composed of experts in various subjects, of highly trained men, of men capable of seriously considering Bills passed by this House and pointing out defects in them, some argument could be advanced in support of that, but when instead we are proposing to give that power to a House, the only justification for whose existence is that some easy means must be provided to the Government for rewarding their friends, then it is obvious we are doing something which represents a victory of expediency over sound governmental principles.
That House of Senators, independent as they are of public opinion and elected for a period of nine years, might very easily interfere seriously with the interests of the Irish people by holding up Bills which this Dáil considered necessary to be passed in the interests of the people. We must remember also that the system of election is probably the most undemocratic system which could be devised, election in part by the Seanad itself. The combined votes of the members of the Dáil and Seanad are to decide who are to compose that Chamber. Those outgoing Senators who may be re-nominated will have the right, if they so wish, to vote for themselves, to vote themselves back into office for another period of nine years. Even if this proposal to give a period of nine years of office to Senators was combined with the proposal to alter the system of election so that the will of the people could act directly on the Assembly there might be something to be said for it, but not merely is the election by the Seanad to take place in that undemocratic manner, but those who will be placed into the Seanad will be placed there for a time which will make them independent of those who put them there, and members of this Dáil, who will have the responsibility of putting a number of them into office, should ask themselves seriously whether they can select a group of individuals on whom they could rely for a continuous period of nine years to give close attention to their duties and carry out the wishes of those who gave their votes to them. I do not think we could.
We have, I think, enough experience, learned in the recent history of the country, to realise that there can be very few men in the State who can be trusted to go straight in the interests of the State for nine years. Why then take the risk of giving these powers to people who will have a very strong temptation to act in a manner that would not be in the best interests of the State? The Bill itself is similar to other Bills which were introduced here recently. It is drafted in the most involved manner possible. It provides for the insertion in the Constitution of one section which will cease to have effect practically after the next election to the Seanad is concluded, and it seems to us that if the Government had any respect for the Constitution they would not be putting into it purely temporary provisions of this nature. They would have provided that the term of office for Senators elected this year would be fixed by law, for example, so that those who wish to get some idea of the structure of the State and who would read the Constitution for that purpose would not have to wade through a lot of dead Articles for the purpose of discovering it. The attitude of the Government in relation to all these Bills is shown very clearly. They think no more of the Constitution than, in fact, we on this side of the House do. It is something which they maintain when it is useful to maintain, and something which they alter when it is necessary in the interests of their Party that it should be altered.
So long as the Constitution is something which gives them power to work their will with the people they support it. If and when the Constitution becomes an impediment to their progress, then the Constitution will go by the board. We think perhaps that in the particular circumstances of this nation, and particularly with relation to the very nature of the Constitution, it is useful that the Seanad should be regarded in that manner, and no other, as something that should be kept so long as there is no harm in keeping it and as something to be abolished by the enactment of law when it is necessary to abolish it. If the Constitution was a representation of the traditions and ideals of the Irish people and if it could be regarded seriously as the fundamental law of this State, even these frivolous alterations of it could be regarded as of importance, but as it is not we must regard amendments to it as we would regard amendments to any other Act, something to be discussed on its merits and, in this case, to be rejected on its merits.
I would like to ask members of Cumann na nGaedheal in this House whether they do not think that much better service would be secured from members of the Seanad if they had to justify their work in that House once every five years, for example. Do they not think that even in their own interests it would be better to reduce the period of office from nine years? They want a Seanad and they profess that they want a good Seanad. They even pretend to believe that the Seanad is capable of serving some useful purpose. Arguing from that basis, I think that they will be able to see for themselves that the utility of the Seanad would be greatly increased if this Dáil retained to itself a greater measure of control over them than this Bill would indicate that the Government wishes it to have. If we could remind Senators that, if they neglect their duty, their period of office is likely to conclude at the end of the four or five years for which they would be elected, it would be, perhaps, possible that they would be more attentive to their duty, but when Senators know that they cannot be interfered with for the entire period of nine years, they can afford to laugh at any representation which would be made to them by the Dáil, because the Dáil that elected them will have gone out of existence long before their period of office will have concluded. The members of the Dáil who will elect Senators here next November may not be here at all when the term of office of these Senators expires. It is quite possible they will not. A great many changes have taken place in this country during the past nine years and there is still ground for hope that even more important changes will take place during the next nine years.
In that connection it might be no harm to say that it is rather unfair to those who will go forward for election to suggest to them or leave them under the impression that they may be in office for a period of nine years. They may make business arrangements calculating upon that fact. They may alter the tenor of their lives to provide for the fact that they will be in a certain position for nine years, when every Deputy in this House knows that long before that period of nine years has expired, there is bound to be an alteration in the majority of this House and consequently a termination of the Seanad altogether. In fairness to those individuals who are so busy canvassing in the Lobbies for some time past, it would be no harm to remind them that, no matter what the Bill says, their period of office is much more likely to be less than the nine years mentioned here. I would suggest seriously to members of Cumann na nGaedheal if they do want to keep the Seanad there, they ought to constitute it in such a way that they will be able to convince those who vote for them in elections that it is worth keeping there. They will not be able to convince them of that if they are going to make the Seanad a place of rest, as it has been described by some Deputies, for discredited politicians. I have seen Senators who, no doubt, take their duties very seriously. We meet them in the Lobbies carrying attache cases, containing probably several back numbers of the "Irish Times" and looking as if they took their duties seriously, but there are several Senators whom we have never seen here.
It would be no harm if a list of attendances at the Seanad were provided. If that was done we would find that there is a very large number of them with less than 10 per cent. attendances. It is to people like that that we propose to give continuity of office for nine years. When you have elected them, when next November you elect 20 of these individuals to that House, you will not be able to interfere with them, by any means or under any power under this Constitution, for the full period of nine years. The only way you will be able to get rid of them will be by voting for Fianna Fail at the next election and I know that there are some opposite who would rather cut off their right hand than that it should have to write No. 1 after the name of a Fianna Fail candidate. You may be faced with the situation in which that may be the only way out of the difficulty; think of the horror when such a drastic step would have to be taken in order to undo what you are proposing to do this evening. I hope therefore that the small majority by which Deputy de Valera's amendment was defeated will be reversed when the vote on this Bill takes place and that there will emerge at long last from the ranks of Cumann na nGaedheal two or three honest individuals who will realise where the Government is going and who will be prepared to call a halt by voting against this Bill.
