Seanad Electoral (University Members) Bill, 1937—Second Stage.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. O Ceallaigh)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. Article 18 of the Constitution provides that Seanad Eireann shall consist of 60 members, of whom 11 shall be nominated by the Taoiseach, and 49 shall be elected members. Of the elected members it is provided that:

(1.) Three shall be elected by the National University of Ireland,

(2.) Three by the University of Dublin, and

(3.) 43 shall be elected from panels of candidates.

This Bill provides the franchise and the machinery for the holding of elections of University members. The election of panel members is being dealt with in a separate Bill. The Constitution further requires that these elections shall be according to the principles of proportional representation and by secret postal ballot.

Part II of this Bill deals with the question of franchise and registration of electors. The franchise proposed in Section 7 of the Bill is that which has applied to universities in the Electoral Act, 1923. In the former Constitution university members were returned to Dáil Eireann, and the university franchise was a Dáil franchise. In accordance with the Constitution, the Electorcal Act provided that a person could be registered once only and in only one constituency. Thus a person who was a university elector had to choose whether he would be registered as a university elector or in respect of his residence qualification in a local area. The university franchise is now no longer a Dáil franchise, and a qualified person can be registered in the university registers and at the same time be registered as a Dáil elector. The Bill requires an annual register of electors to be prepared by each university.

Article 63, Clause 3, of the Constitution requires that the first assembly of Seanad Eireann shall take place not later than 180 days after the coming into operation of this Constitution. The necessity for holding an election within a limited time has to be taken into account with regard to registration of electors. There would not be a sufficient interval of time before the Seanad is to assemble to prepare a fresh register of electors and hold an election on that register. A register of university electors came into force, in accordance with the Electoral Act, on the 1st June, 1937, at the same time as the local constituency registers. Any person who was registered in the university register was, in accordance with special provisions, registered in the local register with a distinguishing mark to denote that he was a university elector. At the last general election those marks were disregarded, since at that time the university registers had ceased to have effect as Dáil registers. For the purposes of the first election of university members of Seanad Eireann it is proposed to revive the university registers which came into force on the 1st June, 1937, and to keep those registers in force until 1st June, 1938.

Part III of the Bill deals with the holding of elections of university members including by-elections. These elections will be conducted in the same manner and according to the like procedure as elections have hitherto been conducted. Part IV of the Bill contains special provisions with regard to candidates elected in different capacities. A person elected as a member by the two universities must declare, within one month after the first meeting of the Seanad, which constituency he will represent. If he does not so declare, he will be deemed to represent the constituency in which he received the greatest number of first preferences. If a person is elected as a panel member and as a university member, he must similarly declare the capacity in which he will sit in the Seanad. If he does not so declare, he will be deemed to be a university member. A member of Seanad Eireann, while retaining his seat, may not be a candidate at a university by-election. The expression "Seanad by-election" in Section 30 is defined in Section 1 to mean an election to fill the place of a university member.

Mr. Cosgrave

The Minister, in the course of his statement, said this register was in existence; it had been kept alive after the elimination of university representation from the Dáil. Now, the register was kept alive so as to provide for the possibility of a vacancy occurring in university representation in the last Dáil. The register which was in existence, and which presumably is the one to which the Minister now refers, was a register of persons who had elected not to vote in the constituency in which they lived. I take it from that, that those university electors who desired to vote in the constituency in which they lived were not registered on the university franchise. Consequently, the register which is now in existence would be a limited register of university voters. I wonder if the Minister can give the House any information on that point, as to whether that is so, and if any proposals have been under consideration for adding to the list of names that are already on the register those who had accepted the choice of being registered in their own constituencies and voting there.

In one section of this Bill which, I think, is mainly a machinery Bill, there is a reference to some evidence being prima facie. I cannot now remember the section, and the note I have on the paper appears to refer to a different section; but it appeared to me that there was rather a weakness in the clause as it was drawn. I may find it later on. There is one other point that struck me in connection with this prima facie statement. As I see it, the returning officer, or whoever is responsible, sends out ballot papers and, when the ballot papers are received, somebody's name is put to the slip of paper that is handed in by the postman and there the responsibility of the Post Office begins and ends, once they have the receipt for the paper. Now, it does not follow that the voter gets his ballot paper. At one election information was conveyed to me that in a certain institution those papers were duly signed for, but the persons for whom they were intended never got them and the votes were personated.

This Bill has been before the House for two or three weeks and when I read it first it struck me there was that weakness in it and that danger of personation. For example, in the case of a registered letter, whoever is at the door receiving it marks the slip. It is not incumbent upon the person to whom the postal packet is addressed to put his signature to it. Although it is a fortnight or three weeks since I read the Bill, it struck me that the same principle ran through this particular measure. If so, it might possibly be rectified so that whenever a ballot paper is sent by post the postman or the Post Office could refuse to accept any signature except that of the person to whom the ballot paper is addressed.

Professor O'Sullivan

The Minister will agree that in the Bill a last date for receiving nominations will be fixed. Can he say offhand is there a last hour on that date fixed in the Bill for receiving nominations?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Nominations for election?

Professor O'Sullivan

Yes, of course.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The hour of 12.

Professor O'Sullivan

That means there is only one hour given for withdrawal, so the whole thing may be done almost by post. In the case of the ordinary election, generally the candidate is present. In this instance he may be in some other part of the country and his nominators may put him on without full consultation. He may not know about that until the next day and he has no opportunity of withdrawing, because he has only one hour.

Mr. McGowan

I suppose we have got to have a Seanad, but I would like to point out one thing to the Minister. I think it is in Part II of the Bill where reference is made to people entitled to vote and it is set out there that they will include every person who has received a degree other than an honorary degree in the National University of Ireland. As we have become so very national in this country recently, is it not incumbent on the Minister to ensure that only citizens of this country should have a vote in electing this great body to be known as the Seanad? I think that according to this measure we would be in the unique position of having a Chinaman or a Turk, perhaps, electing this great body to be known as the Seanad.

Deputy Cosgrave has raised a point with regard to ballot papers that will be sent out in the post. I think it would also lead to an extreme difficulty if we are going to have non-nationals in China entitled to vote, because there would have to be a considerable extension of time. It is a matter that should be seriously considered by the Minister whether he is going to give non-nationals a vote in this election.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

There is, to a certain extent, some substance in what Deputy Cosgrave said about the present register on which it is proposed to hold the first Seanad election for university representation being a limited register. I think it is only to a small extent a limited register, because, so far as I know, while there are persons all over the country, I do not know in how many counties, who did elect to remain on the local register for Dáil purposes, the vast majority of persons entitled to be on the University register chose to be electors on that register. I cannot give the exact number; I do not know exactly how many persons entitled to be on the university register did elect to remain on the local voting lists, but the number, I gather, is not great.

I have got the figures for the last six years from the registrars of the Universities and these figures show that since 1932-1933 there has been a steady increase every year in the number of persons whose names were added to the University registers. In 1932-1933 the total number on the National University register was 4,655. By 1937-1938 the total number in the National University register had increased to 6,640, that is to say 2,000 have been added in these five years. A very large percentage—not the entire—of the total number of persons entitled to claim to be on that register have so claimed. I am sure there are people who are entitled to claim and do not claim to be on but who are on the local registers.

Mr. McGowan

Can the Minister tell the number on the Dublin University register?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Yes; the number on the Dublin University register in 1933-34 was 3,266 and there is now, in the year 1936-37, a slight increase to 3,329.

Mr. W. O'Brien

Could the Minister say how many of these are not resident in this country?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I could not say exactly but probably a close examination of the register would show that a small percentage on the register are not resident in the country. There are large numbers of graduates of the Dublin University who are entitled to be on the register but many of these live in distant parts of the world. They do not claim to be put on the register and are not there. The same applies also to a certain extent to the National University. Numbers of graduates on the register and who are entitled to vote are unable to vote because they could not get the ballot papers in time owing to the distant parts of the world in which they reside.

Mr. Cosgrave

In connection with the point I raised here in the course of this debate I have now found the article. It is in the Second Schedule to the Bill, paragraph 30 and reads:—

"The production by the returning officer of a ballot paper purporting to have been used at any election and of a counterfoil marked with the same printed number and having a number marked thereon in writing shall be prima facie evidence that the person who voted by such ballot paper was the person whose number on the register of electors was the same as the number so marked on such counterfoil.”

Having regard to what I told the Minister about one institution where the postman did not give these ballot papers to the person for whom they were intended, there is clearly a great weakness there.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

That is so, but in the previous elections arrangements for delivering the ballot papers did not specify that they should be sent by registered post. We propose by this Bill to send the ballot papers by registered post and in that way we hope to get over the difficulty that has been mentioned.

Mr. Cosgrave

There is a reference in one section to a ballot paper that does not bear the official mark. I suppose the Minister is aware of certain votes being disallowed because the ballot paper did not bear the official mark. Deputy Brennan had an amendment making it part of the duty of the senior officer of the Gárda to see that the returning officer would have the assistance of the Gárda in this matter so that a person who is perfectly entitled to vote would not because of the absence of the official mark on his ballot paper have his vote disregarded.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have not much intimate experience of running elections except in the City of Dublin. There I think it is known to all of us who are associated with this electoral work in Dublin that usually over a long number of years the same persons, persons of experience in the work, are employed by the returning officers. I understand that when new persons are being employed for this work they are drilled and given a lecture on the necessity and importance of the various functions they must perform including the duty of seeing that every ballot paper is properly stamped, so that the person receiving that ballot paper and voting on it would not be deprived of his vote owing to the failure of the presiding officer to do his duty efficiently. I cannot think of any other arrangement than the one at present in existence that could be adopted. I do not think that it would be a wise arrangement to have the Gárda or the police officer superintending the presiding officer. I think the returning officers in every constituency would object to anybody but themselves having authority over their officials. Generally speaking I think the returning officers employ competent presiding officers. Occasionally one does meet with a person who does not do his duty properly. When there is a lack of proper knowledge on the part of the presiding officer and when that is brought to the attention of the returning officer, such a presiding officer would not be appointed again. One or two people or more may have been deprived of a vote but I do not see how we can get over a difficulty of that kind.

Committee Stage fixed for Wednesday, 3rd of November.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 27 Oct 1937