Before the debate was adjourned, I was seeking to alert the people to the importance of the referendum issues: the abolition of PR, and the attempt to confer votes on the stones in the west of Ireland. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. All sections of the Irish people should beware at present. This is the second attempt within nine years by Fianna Fáil to secure a modus operandi, by reason of a referendum, which would rivet them in power for an indefinite period of time. It is not sufficient that they have enjoyed being the Government for the past 30 years. They want power eternal in this land. They still think they have a Divine right to govern here, and no one else dare gainsay them. Whenever they see the writing on the wall, or any danger to their position, any weakening of the flag, they immediately have the audacity to change the rules so that their position may be safeguarded. There is a saying that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Private Members' Business. - An Bille um An Tríú Leasú ar an mBunreacht, 1968: An Dara Céim (Atógáil). Third Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 1968: Second Stage (Resumed).
Where did I hear those words before?
Their tendency towards outward corruption is amply manifest in their condonance of the previous speaker, the Minister for Local Government, and his approval of the businessman's organisation, Taca, which is there for the purpose of financially supporting the Government Party. This is a new get-rich-quick element in our society. They have banded themselves together to provide financial aid and comfort for the Government Party, on the understanding and stipulation that they will be well paid for their efforts by way of helps, grants, aids, stimulants. In all that is going, they expect to get first preference—preferential treatment for this small core of rich people in our society who can contribute £100 per plate to the coffers of Fianna Fáil. I assert that this is an outward naked exhibition of corruption, and Tammany Hall politics at its worst.
What about Liberty Hall?
Liberty Hall has struck terror into the hearts of Fianna Fáil. I am talking about corruption and about the Tammany Hall politics which shook the entire world in its time.
This is an exhibition of corrupt tendencies, because it is clear that anyone who contributes a large sum of money like £100 to the coffers of a political Party expects something in return, and gets quite a lot in return. It is tantamount to the acceptance of a bribe, on the understanding that political advantage will be conferred on the person concerned. It is also fair to assert that the people who pay the piper are entitled to call the tune. The more this element of Taca get a grip on the Government Party, the more they will be able to influence the Government in respect of their designs, in respect of jobs and positions in industry, grants, helps, aids and stimulants of all kinds.
Planning permissions.
Or refusals.
We now have a situation which is an absolute mockery of the principle of equal rights and equal opportunities enshrined in our Constitution. Other high-sounding sentiments like cherishing all the children of the nation equally are falling on very barren ground when we see these signs in our time. This is the first time in the history of Irish Governments that we have seen a condonance of political patronage of this kind, and an attempt being made to condone jobbery and nepotism of a very dangerous kind.
It is right, therefore, that our people should be alerted to this tendency and made to realise what is likely to happen in the event, God forbid, of PR being abolished and this régime being copperfastened in power for an indefinite period of years. I hate to think the kind of things which this Government would impose upon our people if they got this unbridled liberty which they are now seeking, and if there were not the kind of restraint which an effective Opposition have provided and maintained. If they got the massive majorities which the political experts, the professors of political science indicate they could and would secure on the straight vote system, a massive majority of 40, 50 or 60 seats in this 140-seat assembly——
Good.
Is that what the Deputy wants?
I assert that that régime would ride roughshod over the minority Parties and over every respectable element in our society, and corruption would be the order of the day. That is not going to happen. We have had a foretaste of their arrogance, their hostility and their disdain for the rights of ordinary people in recent months. I am not very long a Member of this House. I came in as a young Deputy in 1961 but in that short period of time, I have seen legislation being sought to be enacted here which undermined the fundamental rights of our people.
I say to the Irish working-classes, the people for whom I speak: beware of Fianna Fáil if they get the majority they are now seeking. I say this to the Fianna Fáil worker in particular who looks on us Labour men—even though he does not vote for us—as the watchdogs at local authority and national parliament level and who is the first to accuse us if we go slightly wrong in respect of labour matters. These people would never dream of voting for me but they would have the audacity to take me to task in respect of what I say here. Yet they exonerate their own members who bring in anti-working-class legislation of a thousand kinds, destroying their opportunities in life, dragging down their standards, and impeding them from having the full life for which we in the Labour movement stand.
I say to these workers, and the Fianna Fáil working-class in particular, who have been fooled and deluded into giving support to this régime, that Taca is now in charge of the Fianna Fáil Party; big business is the order of the day and big business will certainly be influencing legislation in the future. We had a foretaste of that in recent legislation and there is other legislation on the stocks of which we are aware. We have seen signs of this type of legislation in the ESB Act which proscribed strike action, denied the right to withdraw labour to these particular categories of workers and asserted the right of the Legislature to impose heavy fines and imprisonment on these workers if they dared to defy the Government by withdrawing labour, irrespective of rotten conditions of employment or the kind of wages they were paid in the ESB.
We also know that there is legislation on the stocks designed to make the Labour Court a court of law, a court of arbitration instead of conciliation, whose findings will be binding on the parties concerned, workers and employers, thereby destroying the conciliatory nature of the court. Again, we would have penal clauses and repressive legislation indicating the fines and the imprisonment involved for workers if they dared challenge this new Labour Court, this new creation of Fianna Fáil-ism designed to subordinate the workers. We know there is also industrial legislation on the stocks waiting until they get the kind of majority or backing they are hoping for, to implement it against the workers in respect of trade union law. We know they are seeking to take unto themselves the right to decide what unions will come into being or go out of existence.
On a point of order, is it proper for the Deputy to refer to legislation which is proposed and of which he knows nothing?
The Parliamentary Secretary is rattled now.
Anybody could stand up and speak——
The Deputy does not like the truth but he will get it from me whether he likes it or not.
I am asserting that we shall have anti-working class government if PR is abolished and Fianna Fáil secure their election on the basis of the single-seat constituency and the straight vote and the gerrymandering and injustice and lack of fair play which accompanies this system. I am asserting that there is legislation on the stocks——
In regard to proposed legislation or legislation in the course of enactment, the Deputy is not entitled to discuss it unless it is before the House.
Some of these measures are on the Order Paper, or were, up to the Christmas Recess.
An opportunity will be provided for the Deputy to debate the future legislation when it comes to the House.
I accept your ruling, but I was hoping I should be allowed to conjecture on the kind of society we would have under a régime that came into power under the straight vote.
So long as the Deputy keeps to that point, he will be in order but not if he discusses proposed legislation.
We also have the arrogance, the hostility, disrespect and disdain shown to other sections of the community, apart from the working classes. We had an example of the treatment given to the NFA in recent months, the refusal of the Minister for Agriculture to treat with them in respect of their agricultural problems. We had the spectacle of farmers sitting on the Minister's doorstep in abominable weather for several weeks, receiving no recognition. We had all the unrest, the marches, the blockages and dislocation of traffic and all these things indicating grave unrest in a most important facet of our society. If our Ministers show that disdain with a very slender majority in Government, what would they do if they got the overwhelming majority they are seeking now?
It will be going up by two more shortly.
They have been doing very well on PR. I must congratulate them on that. It astonishes us that they have decided to change horses in mid-stream.
It is the people who want this change.
Fianna Fáil have been brought back here for 30 years under PR. They have been winning by-elections under PR and yet they are afraid of PR.
It is the people who are doing it.
It is the rivers, the mountains, the fields and the stones.
Fianna Fáil want to change the system because they are afraid of PR.
We are not afraid of the people.
They must be, because otherwise they would not be afraid to continue the system that has been in vogue since the inception of the State. Obviously they are afraid of the people——
No, but the Deputy is afraid of them.
They want to adopt the system which the experts predict would confirm them in power.
Is there any significance in the fact that the only four Deputies behind the Minister are Deputies who want to be elected by sheep and bullocks?
Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,
Before a House was called, I had been seeking to demonstrate that what we require is not strong government but good government.
That is what you have.
Obviously, it is not strong enough, not good enough, because they want to change from PR to the straight vote. They have not got enough power. They want more.
I have been alerting our people to the real prospect that if the present regime got the kind of power which they could secure if the people were foolish enough to vote for the abolition of PR we would have penal legislation of a most vicious and repressive kind, battening on the backs of various sections of our people, working class people, farmers and businessmen. I have referred briefly to the incontrovertible fact that there is anti-working class legislation lined up which seeks to take from the working class people the fundamental right to strike, to withdraw their labour——
On a point of order. Is this in order?
I have already asked the Deputy to refrain from dealing with legislation which is proposed.
I shall deal then, if I may, with legislation which has been passed. I refer to the ESB Bill.
Do you want to leave the country in the dark?
That Bill took from these people the right to withdraw their labour irrespective of the conditions obtaining on the job. I assert that the fundamental right to strike is something which Fianna Fáil or any other régime will never take from the Irish working classes. It is too precious. It was dearly won for our people and it will never be filched from them. We will fight them in this House and in the streets, if need be, to defend that fundamental right, because, the difference between the free man and the slave is that the free man has the fundamental right to withdraw his labour. Take that right from him and you relegate the free man to the realm of the slave.
I have also indicated, speaking in terms of previous legislation, that we have had repressive legislation of other kinds when wages were frozen, and the like. Workers must cease to be complacent and alert themselves to the prospect of what is likely to happen in the event, which God forbid, of PR being abolished. I have said that our farmers have suffered severely at the hands of Fianna Fáil in recent times.
Wrong.
The NFA and the recent history of that organisation of farmers is proof of that. The treatment meted out to them on the streets of Merrion Square was such as was not meted out to Irish farmers under the Black and Tan régime.
And you still want fewer rural Deputies in the House?
We want democracy to prevail in this country. We do not want our people to have to live under a tyranny, under a dictatorship as ruthless, as overbearing and as oppressive as the régime which has dominated the life of our people in North-East Ulster since the inception of our State in 1922.
Are you voting for the millions of pounds to the farmers?
I wonder on what side of a cow Deputy Lemass would sit down to milk.
I would vote for the money for the farmers.
The cow would be in a very bad way.
You learn the methods of jackboot government from the Craigavons and the O'Neills.
Take it easy. There is plenty of time.
This is the kind of government they want to impose on our people and they have had the audacity to infer that PR was a British system, introduced by the British.
Baloney, of course.
On the other hand, they want to impose upon our people the Orange system. The minds of all fair-minded people throughout the world have been outraged by reason of the iniquitous system imposed on our people in North-East Ulster.
There are no interruptions now, Noel.
I was not listening.
Fundamental principles are at stake in this debate. It is not that there is a possibility of this Bill being passed into law but the people have been outraged at the very audacity of the Government in contemplating it.
God help Ireland if the Labour Party were ever to get into power.
God help the working classes if they give to the likes of you the power you are seeking in this despicable measure. You have the same regard and love for the working classes as the greyhound has for the hare. If you got a big enough majority in this House I know where the working classes would be. You would have them in Tintown. My friends of Fianna Fáil have been very fortunate, indeed, that in the past 30 years during which they have dominated our people and particularly in the past ten years, there has been a number of safety valves, slipways, at Dún Laoghaire and Rosslare to allow the exodus of our people, in particular to Britain, in order to get the livelihood that you denied them.
Especially in 1956.
Otherwise, we would be literally eating each other with the hunger in this country and revolution would be the outcome.
You drove them out.
Would Deputies cease interrupting and allow one Deputy to speak? Other Deputies can contribute later.
They cannot take it: it is rough.
I have referred to the kind of treatment meted out to our farmers, this important section of the community, by the Government Party in recent legislation, in respect of the marts legislation, in respect of the creation of the National Agricultural Council, this political junta of Fianna Fáil boys, which is the negation of democracy. It is sheer effrontery to suggest that this council represents in any shape or form the views, hopes or aspirations of the farmers of this country. It is simply a council established by the Minister for Agriculture, Deputy Neil Blaney, that he not merely sits on but sits on top of and dominates in every sense of the word. It is indicative of the kind of things which are in store for the Irish farming community in the event of these people getting the kind of majorities they are now seeking in this legislation.
It is likewise in respect of our business community. We have now the invidious position of preferential treatment being given to a small section of our business men and women enshrined in a political group to aid and give comfort to the Government Party.
That is unworthy of the Deputy.
Preferential treatment is given to one small category of business men, and this must be to the disadvantage of all the other categories of business people in the country. If you are not in the circle, you have had it.
Has the Deputy any evidence of that?
This is the kind of Government we have.
It is easy to say it. Has the Deputy any evidence?
You accept that Taca is in existence, a group of businessmen who subscribe to your funds?
Some are businessmen.
To acknowledge that fact——
Produce your evidence or say it outside the House.
To acknowledge the existence of Taca as an organisation providing an immense amount of money for the maintenance of the Government Party is to condone something tantamount to Tammany Hall politics, which is the acceptance of bribes on the understanding that favours will be granted. Let there be no ambiguity about that. This the Irish people understand quite well. The amazing feature about the whole thing is that the Government have had the audacity to condone this situation. It is an indication of things to come. I deplore this emergence of Tammany Hall politics, of political kudos and the condonance of the policy of jobs for the boys, unbridled nepotism and political patronage naked and unashamed in this country in 1968. We have to face this whole question of the abolition of PR and the possibility of a junta getting into power in the southern portion of the country which would be as ruthless as that which has dominated the North since 1922; may I say here that the junta in the North is so entrenched, backed by armed force, that opposition cannot and does not prevail against it. The gerrymandering that goes on with the single-seat constituency there is such that very many of these constituencies are not contested at all. It is futile even to put up candidates in opposition to Unionists entrenched in quite a substantial number of the constituencies in North-East Ulster.
This is the system Fianna Fáil want us to apply here in Southern Ireland, and I want to assert that the system which they want us to apply here is even more ruthless than the Northern system, because be it said in fairness to the system in the North that there you have a postal vote. If you are registered there at a given time you are entitled to a postal vote in England. I challenge the Government to include in this measure a postal vote for the Southern Irish in England. Let us have here what is enshrined in the North-East Ulster system, the postal vote and let us see the outcome. Why is it not here?
Because the committee which investigated it did not recommend it, and it was an inter-Party committee.
There was no recommendation about that.
Thousands of Irish people are obliged to leave this country and they go over to England with a hearty distaste for all that Fianna Fáil stands for and, more regretfully, with a chip on their shoulder and a disdain and disregard for our society at large, perhaps our religion and our culture, all that we hold dear. Were they to be given the postal vote they would be rid of you in the morning. If we are to have the British system, the North-East Ulster system, I challenge you to include in it a postal vote as well.
I say these things in the knowledge that this issue will not pass, that it is defeated from the very start, if one is to judge by the lack of appreciation and enthusiasm with which the Taoiseach's speech was received by his own Party members last week. If one is to have regard to the poll taken by the Sunday Independent you are in for a terrible beating. It is indicative of things to come.
Do you buy that paper?
I read them all. I am not a bigot, and I do not believe that the Irish Press or the Sunday Press have in them the truth in the news either. One must look elsewhere for truth in this country—the Irish Times which has been slandered by the Minister for Local Government for the past few weeks, the voice of liberality and truth. I have indicated as best I can the kind of legislation which is likely to come under strong government of the kind which could emerge if PR were abolished. I have said there is no likelihood of that. At the same time, one must question the ulterior motive which prompted the Government to bring it back as an issue in public life at this juncture. One must question the reason for the establishment of the Constitution Committee. I am glad the Minister for Industry and Commerce is in the House because he was the Chairman of the Constitution Committee, an all-Party body set up to review the Constitution.
Certain organs attached to the Government are now seeking to purport that the Constitution Committee recommended the abolition of PR. This is utterly untrue. There is no foundation in fact for that; on the contrary, all the indications are that this whole matter of the abolition of PR was completely glossed over. I think it true to say—the Minister can correct me if I am wrong—that the ex-Taoiseach, Deputy Seán Lemass, who was a respected member of that body, is on record as saying that the fact that PR was an issue in 1959, the Government could not again make it an issue after such a short duration of time, it having been rejected by the people, and that the proposition to abolish PR and establish single-seat constituencies and the single non-transferable vote could not, he said, again be put to the people at the present time. Far from condoning or indicating that this should be an issue now, the main Government spokesmen on this Committee disavowed any notion that PR could be made an issue once again and indicated that alternatives would have to be proposed—the single-seat constituency with the transferable vote might be put forward but to put the same issue as was put in 1959, Deputy Seán Lemass indicated, was something which the Government could not justify.
That is not correct.
It is correct, and the members of this Party of ours who were members of that Committee will show that it is.
Give the quotation.
Get up and speak for yourself.
I am waiting to.
He will not delay the House because he is a gentleman.
That is why we are here—we are not.
Exactly— you said it; I did not.
I have been seeking to demonstrate that this attempt to abolish PR was defeated in 1959 in the most favourable circumstances for the Government Party, in that they were running at that time for President Mr. Eamon de Valera, the acknowledged leader of their Party. Their chances were never so good at abolishing PR and copperfastening themselves in power as they were then under the leadership, the mantle, the mystique of Eamon de Valera. They have no chance whatsoever of abolishing it under the leadership of Jack Lynch. They know that now and I am sure they regret deeply ever having made this an issue.
I believe—it is a personal opinion— that the Government were prompted to attempt to abolish PR, in the mistaken belief that on this occasion, they would be getting the support of Fine Gael or an important section of that Party, and that by so doing, they would annihilate the Labour Party. Let it be said it is the Labour Party you seek to destroy in this proposition and we are in no doubt and under no illusion about that proposition. I want to alert the workers of this country to the fact that this is what they seek to destroy. The emergence of Liberty Hall in this city has struck terror into the hearts of Fianna Fáil. The emergence of a strong and virile labour movement here, the swing of votes towards labour in the city, has panicked the Fianna Fáil Government. They have seen the resurgence of labour and they are seeking now to nip this upsurge of labourism before it disbands them and throws them out of office, and they were prepared to row in with anyone——
Who were prepared to row in, the Labour Party?
——and they were sorely disappointed when Fine Gael did not row in with them on this occasion.
Sir, I said earlier, and I repeat that, we are for PR in this country, not as a matter of political expediency because at the present time we happen to be a relatively small political Party but by conviction and on principle, and if we were in Government in the morning——
Some day.
——and we will gravitate towards Government despite the designs of Fianna Fáil or anybody else——
Not under PR, you will not.
Not under PR.
You have abandoned your principles, and your policy and your programmes are surely in disarray.
I think the Deputy is asleep.
I am very much awake.
Will you advocate the introduction of PR into the trade unions?
Why not?
Will you do that?
We will, yes, and the commercial travellers, too. The Deputy will not be elected.
Fair enough.
They made a mistake which they regret and it would be far more honourable for them to admit that it was a mistake and withdraw these despicable measures because the Irish people may be fools some of the time but they are not so foolish as to give a mandate to Fianna Fáil to rule indefinitely. They have not taken leave of their senses and you will have to do a lot better before you convince the Irish people that they should give you this unbridled right to govern, and govern ruthlessly, for an indefinite period of time to come. I am not worried about these measures in the sense that they are defeated already but we are concerned about the audacity and the ulterior motive and the totalitarian ideas behind them.
Our people are too wise in their generation and we do have a half million young voters coming on the register since 1959, young people who are asserting themselves, challenging, demanding, liberal in their outlook, conscious of their rights. They are no fools. They know Fianna Fáil too well to trust them with this power. They see the tendencies towards oppression and this younger generation would not dream of supporting this idea of the abolition of PR and allowing into existence here a régime which could and would be as oppressive as the régime has been in North-East Ulster and would probably last as long. There would be stirrings in our society; there would be the emergence of the dissident elements in our society; there would be the assertion of rights; and my fear is and the fear of my colleagues in this great democratic Party of ours—and let it be said here and now that in the trade union movement, in the labour movement, industrial and political, is enshrined the bulwark of democracy in this country, the only Party in the State who are truly sincere in respect of the assertions of fundamental rights under PR, and this cannot be gainsaid——
There is only one Party.
If Fianna Fáil got away with this and became an oppressive tyranny as I believe they would become it would transpire that even those of us who believe in the democratic way of life and the method of the ballot box in aspiring to Government, the decent elements in our society, would be forced underground and you would have in this country revolution not for the first time brought about at the behest of Fianna Fáil. Fianna Fáil should realise that when they seek unbridled power of this kind, it may well transpire that they are the dragon's teeth which might well emerge as armed men.
What kind of men?
Armed men, demanding their rights and asserting their rights and you may well be responsible for tearing down the pillars of our democratic society by this proposal, if, God forbid, it passed this House and passed the country, because I assert that our people, with their long tradition of freedom for which we fought for seven hundred years, would not accept from an Irish régime that which we did not accept from the British. Any diminution of our rights, our duties and our responsibilities would be opposed and if we were muzzled in parliament, these rights would be asserted in the streets of this city. The Labour movement would be in the forefront of any such campaign as it was in the early part of this century. We are conscious of the fact that it was our martyred founder and leader, James Connolly, who marched out from Liberty Hall, which is the object of sarcasm from Fianna Fáil at the present time, under the flag of the Citizen Army to the GPO to assert our rights to freedom. He did not have on his forehead the badge of Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael. He was Labour and the acknowledged founder of our Party. The same courage and determination is in our people today, as was there then, to uphold the fundamental rights of our people. No régime, native or foreign, can filch those rights from us.
I want to say in respect of this challenge to fundamental rights that one of the most unsavoury things which has happened in recent times is the attempt by Fianna Fáil to suppress freedom of speech and fair reporting of the facts of life in this country. We have reason to believe that attempts are being made to suppress the dissemination of the facts from Radio Telefís Éireann. It has been adverted to in this House in recent days and it surely is a portrait of the kind of jackboot police state we would live in if PR is abolished. In the past few weeks, an ultimatum was issued by a chief in Radio Telefís Éireann to certain responsible men in respect of the dissemination of news. The head of news indicated: "We are not to give the pro or contra views of PR, no matter who puts them forward." The most vital issue that has come into this House for a long number of years, an amendment to our Constitution, the abolition of PR, the lifeline of the people and of Deputies who enter this House, is not to be reported on. PR is about to be abolished and a junta in Fianna Fáil issues instructions on this vital issue.
It is not true.
Come outside the House and say it.
I said it at Clarecastle last weekend and I will say it again.
It is easy to say this. Produce some proof.
Order.
This document was handed to the Taoiseach.
It came from the Government. The word was tipped to Tod Andrews.
What are you afraid of?
Do not mind them at all. I will deal with them. You make your own case and I will deal with them later.
There is not one of them would intimidate me.
You make your case.
Unfounded assertions are easy to make.
This is an authoritative document. I will hand it to the Minister.
I have seen it.
The Head of News has indicated: "We are not to give the pro or contra views of PR, no matter who puts them forward". It is indicated here——
Read it out for them.
I place this on the record of this House forever more as an indication of the tyranny in Fianna Fáil and how they would interfere with the dissemination of news and with factual reporting. We might as well be in Russia if they get the power they are looking for. "Pravda" has more power than Telefís Éireann at the present time. We know that this medium is a hotbed of Fianna Fáilism, but thanks be to God, there are men there of such principle that even Fianna Fáil cannot dominate them. I take my hat off to them and I say on behalf of the Labour Party that if there is a hair of the head of one of them touched, it will be a long day and many before it is forgotten.
We know the kind of things you would like to do to men of that character.
Whatever Fianna Fáil open we will close.
That is democracy.
The police state jackboot government is what you want to introduce into this country. I have sought to convey to the House and to the country the kind of régime which we would have to live under if these measures pass. We know as politicians in the country at large the kind of intimidation that is adopted by Fianna Fáil against all sections of the community. Insidious threats and pressures are exerted on our people. We know of the attempt being made by Fianna Fáil agents to dominate the lives of our people by threats and intimidations. The threats and intimidations are in certain cases of a most scurrilous kind in many parts of the country. I have evidence of that in my own constituency. There is a threat to the old age pensioners that if they do not vote for Fianna Fáil, they will lose their pensions. There is also a threat to the unfortunate widow, the unemployed, the poor old warrior with an IRA pension that if he does not do what the Party expect him to do, his pension will be in jeopardy.
What was he expected to do?
I have evidence of that in my own constituency and all over the country.
It is against the people's rights.
He is confused about the people who wanted to opt out without paying their levy.
He is not.
He is. He does not know what he is talking about.
Sit back and keep your mouth shut. You are not going to stop Seán Treacy talking.
They are trying to put it over to the country that Fianna Fáil gives them everything, and if those people do not vote Fianna Fáil, Fianna Fáil will ruin them and ruin them quickly. I want to assert on behalf of the Labour Party that our people have rights and that Fianna Fáil will not be allowed to intimidate them in this matter. Our people will not be bribed, bullied or intimidated. We have a right in this parliament to protect our people. They need not have any fear of those threats. They are wholly unjustified and our Government, no matter what Government it is, have the right, the duty and the responsibility to give our people those things in respect of work, in respect of welfare, in respect of health and all those other services. They owe these not to the Fianna Fáil Party or anyone else. They are their birthright—the right to work, the right to a decent pension, the right to health services and all these things— not from Fianna Fáil but as the birthright of any people, and they must not be cowed or intimidated on that account.
These are the sentiments I want to express on this vital issue, if this is the kind of legislation we anticipate and these are the measures they anticipate if a majority of the kind intimated is secured. They have mentioned once again the necessity——
Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,
In my earlier remarks——
On a point of order, Sir, I observe that there is only one Fine Gael Member present.
It is the Government's duty to maintain a quorum.
That is not a point of order. Deputy P.J. Burke will resume his seat. Deputy Treacy.
In my earlier remarks, I asserted that the hierarchy of the Fianna Fáil Party were not always hostile to PR. Indeed, on the contrary, it was always condoned, approved and ratified on many occasions by no less a personality than Eamon de Valera, and Deputy Seán Lemass. Certain Deputies of the Fianna Fáil Party challenged me on that statement and said that was not so. Therefore, I deem it necessary for their education and for the records of the House that I should now prove that Eamon de Valera was in love with PR and, indeed, regarded it as the most effective system, a system we knew, which worked well and which was best suited to this country.
He looked into his heart.
I quote the President of our country who was then Taoiseach, in his speech in the House in 1937. He said——
Would the Deputy give the reference?
It is from Volume No. 171, page 1059. He said:
The system we have we know; the people know it. On the whole it has worked out pretty well.
The Deputy may say that again.
Order.
Please allow me to say what Eamon de Valera said in respect of PR. He went on:
The system we have we know; the people know it. On the whole it has worked out pretty well. I think that we have a good deal to be thankful for in this country; we have to be very grateful that we have had a system of PR here. It gives a certain amount of stability, and on the system of the single transferable vote you have a fair representation of Parties....
The then Taoiseach, Eamon de Valera, went on to say:
I think we get, probably, in this country more than any other country, better balanced results from the system we have. If you take the countries where PR exists you get better balanced results than you get in other countries.
Again, the Taoiseach added:
I think we get the benefits of PR in reasonably balanced legislation here better than in any other country I have read about or know anything about.
Therefore, the system you are asserting as being British in design imposed on us by the British is something else which has got the blessing of your acknowledged uncrowned king, Eamon de Valera. He gave it his blessing on many occasions as you can see from these reports, and for the second time in nine or ten years, you now seek to throw overboard all these high sentiments on PR by Fianna Fáil spokesmen of the most important kind; you have turned a somersault and so you are now opting again for the straight vote.
The Taoiseach mentioned many countries. When speaking on the pros and cons of PR, he omitted to mention that in the highly progressive countries of Europe, in Sweden, Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, Holland and Norway, with the PR method of election——
That is not completely true. There is the list system.
All those countries, which have had stability of government, which have attained rising standards of living——
There is no Belgian Government—none at all—because it has broken up. That is stability.
——full employment and a rising standard of living while we, under Fianna Fáil, have to crawl along on our bellies, economically decrepit——
Crawl, crawl, crawl.
——a country under-developed to meet its obligations to its population, a by-word for degeneracy. The countries I have mentioned have progressed to the highest standard of living.
If the Deputy is claiming these benefits for PR in those countries, he should be consistent in relation to this country.
Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,
I wish to place on the records of the House the point of view of Eamon de Valera when condoning and approving PR. He said it was the system we knew best, the system best suited to our people's needs. Now we have Deputy Lynch, his successor as Taoiseach, saying the very opposite. He is trying to find all kinds of serious difficulties in PR. He said the number of candidates was too great and the people were having difficulties as to whom to vote for. Did you ever hear such nonsense, as if the Irish people have not their minds made up before they see the ballot paper, no matter how great the number of personalities that are on a ballot paper? Our intelligent people always had their minds made up as to whom they will vote for and to suggest that they find difficulty in finding names on a ballot paper is an insult to our people's intelligence.
Deputy Healy wants to interrupt.
That is another indication of the intolerance of Fianna Fáil. I am only a humble Deputy speaking here and I have been subjected to all kinds of interruption, even by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach.
Inferiority complex.
This is an indication of the brash arrogance of Fianna Fáil, of the kind of tyranny they would impose on us if they had their way. But the Irish people are too wise. You made a bad mistake and you would be far better off to withdraw this despicable measure now before it is tested, because you will be sorry.
The democratic Labour Party: Noel Browne's grave.
The Connemara bus. You wanted Basil Phelan but Deputy Paudge Brennan got you Miss O'Neill.
Would somebody slap that child? They are not like they used to be in the West of Ireland.
Íosagán.
I have been comparing the views of the ex-Taoiseach, Éamon de Valera, on the merits of PR and the views of his successor, Deputy Lynch, on its demerits. I know this hurts but we must have it on the records of the House.
Be careful. Deputy Corish—Deputy Seán Dunne has come in.
Will Deputy Treacy be allowed——
I have been doing my best. I remind Deputies that this is the National Parliament, not the cross-roads.
On a point of information, I understand Standing Orders protect this House against repetition.
Is that a challenge to the Chair?
It is criticism of the Chair from a bold child, a bold boy.
Deputies are entitled to ask the Chair at any time——
Bí ciúin, a Íosagáin.
He thinks he is the Chair. It is hurting them and they think it is repetitious.
You are welcome to it at any time.
You snigger when Deputy Lynch's name is mentioned.
You would not be here only for his umbrella.
This is indicative of the kind of treatment that would be meted out to a Deputy elected here if Fianna Fáil had the kind of massive majority which experts on political science indicate they could have if they got away with this despicable measure. They could have up to 90 seats in this Assembly and I fear greatly——
Political gurriers being brought in to interrupt, muck rake and all the rest.
All petty gauleiters.
You can blame the bell ringer, Deputy Donegan, for bringing us in.
I thought you would behave yourselves.
I remember the Fianna Fáil promises to bring back the emigrants from America.
We brought back some of them.
You did, and sent more than a million away.
Would Deputies please allow Deputy Treacy to make his speech?
I was trying to illustrate the unfairness of the straight vote, the single-seat constituency and the kind of situation which we could have in this House and in the country if Fianna Fáil got away with this despicable trick, although there is no prospect now of their getting away with it. However, we must expose their ulterior motive in introducing this measure. Their real intent is to get power—ruthless, arrogant power.
Rubbish.
The real intent is to dominate our people and to copperfasten themselves in power as Craigavon and O'Neill have dominated the people in the north-eastern part of the country.
The Deputy has gone over these points before.
One hundred times.
I cannot reiterate these sentiments often enough so that the people will be alerted to the attack which is being made upon their fundamental liberties by this power-crazy régime. It may have been well illustrated by other people but there is very little democracy about the system which they now propose. We know that a Party who secured as little as 35 per cent of the votes cast could secure the seat, even though 65 per cent of the people voted against the candidate. We would have government by the minority. We would have a Deputy representing a single seat constituency for whom 65 per cent of the people did not vote, who most probably hated his guts and would not touch him with a 40 foot pole in respect of making representations in regard to their needs or making requests of any kind such as Deputies are used to nowadays. This individual would purport to represent all the people in his constituency. Even in the areas where Fine Gael or Labour have strong prospects of winning under the single seat system, you would gerrymander the constituency in the way it is done in the North and see to it by a manipulation that your man got in by a fraction. Fianna Fáil would get there every time, and once you get there, you will copperfasten him and see to it that it would be futile ever again for anybody to dare——
I thought you were putting a man on the Commission to——
The Commission is the greatest fraud of all. I am glad the Deputy reminded me of the dirty pretence of establishing a Commission which allegedly will give fair play in regard to the designation of electoral areas. I am not casting any aspersions on the Bench, but we know full well that it would be the designs of Fianna Fáil, and of Fianna Fáil alone, which would emanate from this Commission. What Fianna Fáil want in any constituency would be what would prevail and it is the Fianna Fáil Deputies, or those fortunate enough to get themselves nominated, who would have the say and very largely carve up this area——
If the Deputy has some constructive suggestion, the Government would be very happy to listen to him.
We have no regard for the juntas you establish because they are there to maintain Fianna Fáil rule and when they deviate from that, they are ignominiously removed from office. We have had evidence of that in Radio Telefís Éireann. We know the results we can get from this system and how we can have minority representation for our people. We know that this proposal would very largely disfranchise our people. The Taoiseach has sought to establish merit for the single-seat constituency and the single representative in the area by referring to the better service the representative would give, the greater attention he would be able to devote to his work here in the national Parliament, the fact that he would be "the" man—and the word "the" is underlined in his speech—in his constituency. He would be all things to all men and all men would be obliged to go to him for their needs and for their wants. He would be the father of them all. Imagine that. At present we have a choice, and if we do not like the Fianna Fáil man, we can go to the Fine Gael man, or to the Labour man, or possibly to an Independent. This is only right. People have a choice and no one individual is foisted on them. You may well have a situation in the single-seat constituency where the individual concerned is so disliked by the mass of the people that they would not go to him with their representations, and they would be obliged to cross into the neighbouring constituency to have——
How did he get in?
In the same way as a lot of you got in. You ask the question and you get the answer.
We know all your little tricks, particularly in the remote part you come from.
We could have the situation in which the Fianna Fáil Deputy was elected with 35 per cent of the votes, even though 65 per cent voted against him and did not want him. This is not democracy as we know it. We could also have a situation in which the Fianna Fáil candidate got 30 per cent of the votes, the Fine Gael candidate got 25 per cent of the votes, the Labour candidate got 23 per cent and, say, an Independent, or a Sinn Féin candidate or a Liberal, got 22 per cent, and the Fianna Fáil candidate would get the seat, although 70 per cent of the people had voted against him. This is minority representation. If in the country 51 per cent of the votes are conferred on the Government candidates, the Government get all the seats, even though 49 per cent voted against them who get no representation whatsoever in the national Parliament. We have seen the vagaries of the system too often in other parts. It is a system alien to our way of life. As I said, it is not because we are a small Party and it is not for any ulterior motive of political expediency that we are fighting for the retention of proportional representation. We are fighting for its retention on the principle that it is both fair and just. It gives the right of representation to minorities. If we deviate from that, we shall move gradually towards domination of a tyrannical dictatorial kind, again something alien to our way of life. We will undermine the pillars of our democratic society and way of life by tampering with the present system.
With regard to the Commission which it is proposed to establish, we in the Labour Party can have no confidence whatsoever in any such Commission. We do not believe it would give us the fair play we would hope for in regard to the revision of constituencies. We are concerned about the principle of one man, one vote. It would be possible under this proposed measure to elect a representative in the western counties with fewer votes than it would take to elect a representative in the eastern or southern counties. That is wrong. If the population in the West has fallen, that is the fault of Fianna Fáil. The people do not want favours of this kind conferred on them. They want work. They want dignity. Thirty years of Fianna Fáil Government have been responsible for the denudation of the West and the haemorrhage of emigration from that area. Remember the pretence of anxiety to revive the language. The Gaeltacht was allowed to die. It is not votes the people want; it is not Fianna Fáil Deputies. They have had enough of them and little good they did them. They want a square deal. They want work.
That does not arise on this debate. The question of economics does not arise on this debate. This debate deals with the Constitution.
The disparity in votes for the people of the West, the East and the South is important. I do not want to be in conflict with the Chair but it is my duty to point out that there is no good reason why the west of Ireland, or any other part of the country, should have preferential treatment meted out to it in relation to variation in the voting system.
An urban bias, an urban Dáil.
We say, give votes to the people of the West who are in Manchester and Coventry and London.
If we are to have the Orange system here of the straight vote, let us at least have the Orange system of the straight vote and the gerrymander which, at least, confers on the people the privilege of the postal vote. I am all for the postal vote, the vote for the emigrants. If they had the vote, we would have good government very quickly in this country. Not one of the Deputies on the Government benches at the moment would hold his seat for 24 hours and damn well they know it.
Conferring votes on a geographic basis means votes for the stones in the West as distinct from the people. That is wrong. It is undemocratic that it should take three votes to elect a Deputy in our constituencies when it will require only two votes to elect a Deputy in the west of Ireland. We do not think that conducive to an improvement in the low standard of living of the people of the West. It will be of no benefit to the people. It will mean no improvement in their way of life, no better prospect of a job. This is proposed for the sole purpose of maintaining Fianna Fáil representation in the West by fair means or foul, and these are essentially foul means. In equity and justice, when a population declines, the number of representatives should fall proportionately. It is not the fault of our Party that the people have run out of the west of Ireland. They ran out of it under the First Programme of Economic Expansion.
The Deputy may not raise the question of economic expansion. It does not arise.
They ran out of it under the Second Programme and they are still running out of it, and the Second Programme lies in rags and tatters.
That does not arise, and the Deputy should relate his remarks to the Bill.
It is characteristic of small men to rule by arrogance. Small men beware. It is proposed to confer this tolerance of 16 per cent one way or the other by way of preferential treatment on the west of Ireland.
Perhaps the most laughable comment in the Taoiseach's statement was his statement that proportional representation leads to a tyranny by a majority. Where? When? How ? On the contrary: it is the straight vote and the single seat which creates the dominating, overbearing tyranny; that is illustrated very clearly by the Stormont régime. The old cliché about strong government being stable government was mentioned. This, again, is quite audacious——
That is the sixth time the Deputy mentioned that.
Order.
I was talking about the stupid, foolish statements of the Taoiseach. His speech was the most puerile, feeble effort I have ever listened to in this House.
The Deputy never heard himself.
Order.
There was not a semblance of enthusiasm when he sat down. There is not a snowball's chance in hell of these two measures succeeding, and well the Government and the Fianna Fáil Party know it, and gratified you are, Iosagáin, and others with you, to know you will not have to stand the test under the straight vote.
It is a mockery when we hear the Taoiseach talking about respecting county boundaries in the new carving up that will take place in the months ahead, if PR is abolished. We have evidence of that prior to the 1961 general election. I was a victim of it myself. I stood in the then constituency of South Tipperary, which comprised then the southern part of Tipperary, and Tipperary only. In the gerrymander and carving up Fianna Fáil did at that time—perhaps it was done by a commission presided over by an honourable judge or maybe the Minister for Local Government himself—I do not know—they made a damn good job of it. Talk about having respect for county boundaries and the traditions of the people, they brutally carved up this area and tacked on to my constituency a big slice of West Waterford stretching from Ballymacarbery to the bridge of Youghal. At present mine is a very difficult constituency to operate. It commences near Thurles and goes down to the very bridge of Youghal. This is the manner in which Fianna Fáil carved up the historic counties of Waterford and Tipperary in the last piece of gerrymandering we witnessed in 1961. They showed a complete disregard for the wishes of the people of the Déise, a proud people—the people of Waterford—in respect of their traditional boundaries.
They did when they put you in.
They did put me in. This is the area in which I stood in 1961. I want to assert that the then Fianna Fáil Deputies were brought in on this gerrymander and consulted. The man responsible, in the main, for carving up the counties of Waterford and Tipperary was the then Deputy Loughman. It is a fact that it was he who held the knife and carved the boundaries in the belief that he was going to annihilate Deputy Kyne in Waterford and destroy my chance of being elected in South Tipperary. The result was that Deputy Kyne, the man they wanted to put out by this gerrymander and brutal carving up of these natural boundaries, was elected at the head of the poll and I was elected at the head of the poll in my constituency of South Tipperary. The Irish people can smell a despicable trick a mile away. This backfired badly on the then Deputy Loughman and was responsible for sweeping him into the political oblivion from which he has never emerged and never will.
Except he gets the single seat.
Any comment on that?
We do not want to interrupt the Deputy.
And you have not been doing that all evening?
We have seen the gerrymandering. In the recent talks with Captain O'Neill, the Taoiseach must obviously have consulted him about his methods and means of staying in power so long in the North-East in order that the modus operandi be applied here. It will not work.
They did away with PR in 1929.
He is much closer to Mr. O'Neill than he is to Mr. Wilson.
We know that if PR were abolished, effective opposition in this House would be wiped out. It could not prevail against the gigantic force and domination and ruthlessness of the Fianna Fáil Party. But that will not happen. If it did come to pass, it would be a sad day for this country. In the early stages of our history, before I was born, we had in 1922 a situation where brother was put against brother. We had bloody fratricidal strife.
What has this got to do with the debate on the amendment of the Constitution?
The régime which forced that same conflict we would fight in the morning in the defence of our essential rights and liberties——
The Deputy has said that about five times already and the Chair is getting tired of it.
I believe if the Chair had its way, I would not be speaking here in my rightful role in succession.
The Chair has been very indulgent with the Deputy who has repeated himself on at least four or five occasions.
This is a very important piece of legislation and it is right and proper that we should debate it——
Under the rules of order of the House.
——section by section, inch by inch, to drag out the real intention behind this legislation. Frankly, I should not be taking up the time of the House on this measure. We know it has no chance of passing. Nevertheless, there devolves on Labour in particular the obligation to defend democracy and liberty and that is what we are doing on this measure. The Chair will bear with me in respect of the points I have to make in that regard.
I will bear with the Deputy if he makes his point once, but not four or five times.
I listened to the Minister for Local Government for the previous hour and a half.
That has nothing to do with this measure.
I have never listened to so much drivel and waste of parliamentary time.
That has nothing to do with this measure.
The Minister for Local Government is on record as saying he is usurping the time of the House in this regard and merely wasting time speaking in respect of planning. Yet this Deputy is shouted down when he comes to speak in defence of democracy.
The Minister even said when he started that he was going to take up the entire Private Members' Time talking about this Bill.
I will now ask Deputy Treacy if he has nothing further to say to resume his seat.
Shame!
I have plenty to say.
I have not heard him repeat himself.
This is another indication of the arrogance of Fianna Fáil to silence the voice of a Deputy on this vital issue.
To obey the rules of the House.
Even the Chair has usurped its rights to shout down a Deputy in this House. I have a lot to say if I am given the protection of the Chair. I will not be cowed down by the type of little tyrants sitting here or elsewhere. I was saying what might occur if PR was abolished. I adverted to what happened in my own constituency in 1961. I have no intention of repeating myself.
You can go through the whole 38 constituencies. It is a bit off to be telling him to sit down after the first warning.
It was not the first warning.
It was.
Do not worry about the Chair. We will deal with the Chair.
Deputy Corish should behave himself.
I will, if the Chair does.
If the Chair wants to get tough, we will deal with the Chair.
They have a small majority in this House now and we have witnessed here tonight their arrogant attempt to silence the voice of an ordinary Deputy on a vitally important issue. What would it be like if they got the majority some professors of political science say they could get with the abolition of PR?
However, I want to advert to what the Taoiseach said. He commented on the county boundaries and he also adverted to the accountability of Deputies and implied that Deputies were guilty of unfair practices in relation to one another. This does not affect Labour Party Deputies because, unfortunately, as yet, we are not in the happy position of having more than one Deputy in any given constituency. Therefore, we are not worried about unfair practices such as poaching. We know this goes on, and we know the Taoiseach is worried about it, and many other Deputies as well. There is this pretence that they are doing things for people to which the people are entitled by right. The Taoiseach is correct in saying that, but he is indicting, in the main, Fianna Fáil Deputies. It is a well-known fact that they are running around the constituencies pretending that they and they alone can do things of this kind, that Fianna Fáil were sent from Heaven to govern the Irish people, and that anything we have was conferred on us by Fianna Fáil: our jobs, our health services, our houses, our pensions. These things are ours by right and not by reason of the generosity of Fianna Fáil or anyone else. I know there are many Deputies in the Fianna Fáil Party who are what my friend Deputy Dunne would refer to as the parish priests in the constituencies and who want to get rid of the curates.
I thought it was the parish priests who were to be got rid of.
You are out of touch.
We are not red on this side.
That does not work any more.
Deputy Molloy has cast many aspersions on the Labour Party this evening. He has been most vocal in the smear campaign. He mentioned the word "red" but that has been spun out long ago. It does not work any more. People are wise in their generation. A man called Pope John put an end to it, and immediately the Taoiseach, Deputy Lemass, decided to go left. Do you remember that?
He did not consult Iosagán about it.
He went so far left that he has gone extremely to the right.
The further left he went, the more he got away from you.
That is indicative of the directorships he got——
He came down to Waterford Glass.
He feathered his nest all right.
I am dealing with the accountability of Deputies and I appreciate the reason for the Taoiseach's remark. He also mentioned the desirability of having a better quality TD. Again I feel that was a serious inindictment of the calibre and ability of the people in his own Party.
He was right, too.
I do not wonder that they did not rise to the occasion and applaud vociferously after his puerile speech the other day when he commented upon his desire for a better quality TD. That is indicative of the fact that a lot of the dead wood of the Fianna Fáil is being collected and would be quickly removed. The straight vote system and the safe seat system would entitle the Chief to impose his Deputy on the people. These Deputies see the writing on the wall and when the test comes, they will not be all that active in the campaign. Indeed we know that the last time they were whispering to their friends: "Make sure you do not vote for that." We know the lack of enthusiasm there is for this venture.
The Taoiseach maintains that under his proposal the people will have a more effective choice not only in the selection of candidates but also in the selection of the Government. Again, this is a lot of drivel. There is no logic, no sense, in that sentiment. Indeed, the opposite is true. Under PR, the electorate have a choice, and they can exercise that choice and vote 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on, in the order of their choice. Likewise, they have a choice in relation to the Government. They know the Government Party and they know the alternatives. It is wrong for the Taoiseach to suggest that under PR, the voters have no means of voting for a Government. The fact that they have been in power for so long is proof of that. They got back into office time and time again. They have been able to govern successively for the past ten years.
Successfully.
He said successively.
Fianna Fáil have been in power for the past 30 years under PR and that is an indication that the people exercised a choice. They did not do much when they had this power.
They did a good deal for their pals.
Abuse of power was the order of the day. I believe that the real feeling behind this move is an ingrained appreciation that power is slipping from them, that in the next general election they will be thrown out of power. That is the full reason and the only reason why this attempt is being made, for the second time within the past nine years, to abolish PR. It is a great effrontery to our people that the Constitution should be trifled with in this way. I have said that the Constitution Committee was nothing less than a gigantic fraud. I believe that Deputy Colley, Deputy Lemass and other Fianna Fáil Deputies wanted to create the impression that it was a committee to amend the Constitution. It was designed primarily to give an aura of respectability but the ulterior motive was to use it as a basis to abolish PR. They were never serious about amending the Constitution in the many ways in which it needs to be amended.
Deputy Dunne and Deputy Tully of the Labour Party and members of the Fine Gael Party time after time gave assiduously of their energy and efforts and talents to amend our Constitution in a rational way, but I believe these honourable gentlemen, these colleagues of mine, were used by Fianna Fáil as dupes and tools. Their brains were picked and from the word go Fianna Fáil had predetermined that this was the means to abolish PR, and bringing in questions like divorce and other things was only by the way. The real motive was to attack our civil liberties again and pretend that this was a recommendation from the Constitution Committee.
Who said that?
This is the impression Fianna Fáil created.
No member of Fianna Fáil has given that impression, or has said or implied it. Deputies on the other side have said it.
Why did the Minister want the report in an awful hurry one night?
I have explained that. The Government were bringing in proposals anyway and Deputy Corish knows this.
He does not and never did know it. There was no suggestion of that kind from the Minister or the Government.
If he consulted with his colleagues, he would know.
On a point of order, I think this is important. The Minister has made a statement here that members of the Constitution Committee were informed that the Government were going to make a decision on this matter, whether the report came out or not. I have no recollection of the Minister now sitting here ever making any such statement at a meeting of the Committee.
The Deputy knows this is not a point of order but he also knows that I told the Committee that I wanted to get the report forward as fast as possible because the Government were bringing in proposals in relation to the electoral system and I wanted whatever views the Committee wished to express to be before them. The Deputy will also remember that at one stage I endeavoured to get the section of the report dealing with the electoral system only because, I explained, the Government were bringing forward certain proposals anyway.
Why did you want it when you had your mind made up?
That is not the way it was put to the Minister.
There was no indication from the Minister that that was coming anyway.
The Minister said he did not want the Committee to be in the position that proposals were brought forward and the views of the Committee disregarded.
You were trying to cod them.
I am asserting that the Constitution Committee which purported to amend the Constitution, in the strict sense of that word, had little or no regard to the question of PR which had been decided by the Irish people in 1959 and which an honoured member of the Committee, a Fianna Fáil member, Deputy Seán Lemass, said it was not intended, and was never intended, he said, to put that proposal in that form again.
He did not say anything of the kind.
I defy contradiction.
He indicated that the thing was not worth talking about.
Whatever he said, he did not say what Deputy Treacy has said.
Would Deputies allow Deputy Treacy to make his speech?
Deputy Lemass said that it was unthinkable that the question of PR could be put to the people again——
He did not.
——in the form in which it was put in 1959. Despite that firm conviction of this old warrior and wily politician, the Taoiseach has had the foolishness to put it in that form which is doomed to an ignominious failure.
I am asserting that the formation of that Committee and the utilisation of the time, talents and energies of Members of the House over a period for the alleged purpose of amending the Constitution was a gigantic fraud perpetrated on the House and the country and the ulterior motive was to fasten on to this idea of abolishing PR and find some ways and means of copperfastening themselves in power by this unfair method.
I sought to prove also that far from being the British system of election, PR is an Irish system approved and ratified by the father of Sinn Féin, Arthur Griffith, approved and ratified also by Eamon de Valera and Deputy Seán Lemass and others, adopted by the people of Sligo in the early part of this century, facilitated admittedly, by a British Act of Parliament. It was the wish of the people of Sligo that this be their system of election, the then method of election, the straight vote, having brought bad results so far as that small community was concerned, and it clearly did not give fair representation on that corporation to the various minority interests in their society.
I now want to quote the views which Fianna Fáil expressed when the present system of the straight vote and single-seat constituency was introduced in Northern Ireland. Fianna Fáil were most irate and denunciatory in their pronouncements at the time of the Orange Order and the unfairness of the imposition this would be on the minority, the Nationalists and Catholics of Ulster. Again, I quote from volume 171, column 1071, the views expressed by Fianna Fáil when the Stormont Government abolished PR. The Government here protested, and I quote the statement issued at that time. They said:
This is to smash minorities and this is to deprive people of their electoral rights; this is to weaken and to retard the anti-partition groups in the Six Counties; this is typical of the Orange dictatorship complex which operates in the Six Counties.
Fianna Fáil said it was unfair and unjust to have done that then. Now they are seeking to do it themselves, seeking to place themselves in the same position with the same dominant influence enjoyed by the Orange Order North of the Border.
I have expressed most of the sentiments I wanted to voice on these measures. I deem this an important historic occasion. I might not have wasted breath on the subject; I might be regarded as wasting my sweetness on the desert air because, thank God, these measures will not pass into law. Despite that, I would be failing in my duty to the sentiments prompting me to react in this way at the attempt to dominate by clique in this country if I did not express these views. It would be a sad day if, due to complacency on the part of the electorate, in the mistaken belief that this measure is going to be defeated by a sweeping majority such as the Sunday Independent indicated, people refrained from voting.
My main purpose in speaking and speaking at such length is to alert our people to the risk there is that Fianna Fáil might get away with this. I am well aware of the tremendous political force they are and that there are no depths to which they will not sink in an effort to achieve their designs. I am concerned that our people might be complacent, and that by any freak of fortune the Government might get away with these designs. It would be a retrograte step. It would mean the end of democracy in this country, possibly for all time. Only a revolution of a bloody kind would arrest the situation. This is why I have in particular addressed my voice to my fellow workers in the country at large. I am not unmindful or ungrateful of the magnificent, herculean part played by the trade unions in 1958-59 to save PR. To them in very large measure lies the credit for saving our way of life, our rights, our liberty. Our democratic way of life was saved by Congress, by the unions, by the magnificent fight made in 1958-59. They are with us again, bigger and better and more united than ever before. In Congress, in labour, industrial and political, there lies the bastion, the last defence of democracy in this country, not as a matter of political expediency but on principle alone.
I believe our workers are wiser now. I especially address my remarks to the Fianna Fáil supporter workers, misguided as they have been. Having regard to the things which Fianna Fáil has in store for them if they get the power they now seek, they will regret it all the days of their lives. They will be relegated to slaves in their own land. Legislation in regard to essential rights, such as the right to strike, the right of negotiation between employer and employee, fundamental rights attached to the Labour Court, decisions as to what unions will come into being and what unions will go out of existence—all these fundamental pieces of legislation in respect of industry, the Labour Court, and so on—are likely to come in very soon and backed now by the sinister influences of the new unscrupulous executives in Taca. The people ought to be more wary than ever before of giving to this Government that kind of power which they seek because we know full well that that power would be abused. We know full well that Fianna Fáil as at present administered at the top cannot be trusted with power of that kind and that our people will quickly find themselves living in a police state under the jackboot. That is why we in the Labour Party challenged this issue from the word "go", challenged its First Reading, challenge it at every stage, challenge it in this House, challenge it in the country, at the hustings and if, which God forbid, this were to be passed, we would challenge it in the streets as well in more determined fashion.
There is a great deal that we hold precious in our Constitution, which was given to us by Fianna Fáil and they should be the last to seek its amendment by trifling with the method of election. It was they who gave us this Constitution in 1937. A majority of our people voted for it on the advice of Eamon de Valera and Eamon de Valera included in that Constitution at that time and it was ratified by the Irish people that the method of election shall be that known as proportional representation. I have quoted the high sentiments expressed by that man in respect of PR : it was a system we were used to; it had worked well; it was peculiarly suited to our way of life; gave adequate representation to minorities. It has been very good to Fianna Fáil. Outside of the Iron Curtain, outside of Russia and its satellites I do not know of any party which has ruled for so long in a democracy as Fianna Fáil. Ours is a young State, established in 1922, and under PR the people gave to you the responsibility to govern, the destinies of our country, for over 30 years. You have been out of office for approximately only ten years. Was that not stable government? Was that not a fair opportunity to govern, to rule? Is that not sufficient for you? Do you now seek to arrogate to yourselves the right to govern always?
I believe that if PR were abolished, you would take about yourselves quickly all the unsightly things that one associates with dictatorship. No one would be free to express a point of view contrary to Fianna Fáil. We have seen your arrogance in the past years in respect of our workers, our farmers and businessmen. We have seen the arrogance and disdain which you show for certain newspapers, for certain viewpoints expressed in certain newspapers, the arrogance and disdain of the Minister for Local Government who has reflected in a very lamentable way on one of our best media of objective news reporting. I refer to the Irish Times. He has utilised the time of this House to make a constant attack upon this paper. I have already adverted to the attempt to deny mention of this debate on this great national issue, the pros and cons of PR, whether or not PR should be abolished, to the audacity of Fianna Fáil agents to instruct those responsible for the dissemination of news on Radio Telefís Éireann that the pro and contra in regard to proportional representation were not to be referred to, adverted to in any way, from either side. This was clearly to the advantage of the Government Party. They set out deliberately here to silence the voice of all opposition. This, again, has fearful portent for the Irish people, if they will examine it in minute detail.
I believe that if Fianna Fáil got the kind of majorities of 40 or 50 seats they would snap their fingers at the Opposition. We would be of no avail here and they would with disdain do these things: they would control Radio Telefís Éireann; they would suppress the Irish Times and all other newspapers that had a contra point of view. We would have jackboot government in every sense of the word. The signs are all there. The people can read them. Worst of all, there are now the signs of outright, naked corruption, condoned by the establishment of Taca, granting approval and licence to nothing but a bribe for political patronage.
That is about the fifth time round in this speech.
I am sorry for the Minister. He is somewhat too decent for his colleagues. I believe he did not agree with the establishment of Taca.
I am referring simply to the fact that Deputy Treacy has talked the same points over at least five times since I came in.
I recognise that this is a sore point with the Minister. I know the Minister would like to suppress the points of view we have to express here, and even after we express them here, he would like to ensure that they never appear in any public organ, that the public never heard the defence we made of human rights and dignity in this House. I know the tendencies of the Minister and his Party towards totalitarianism, and even at the expense of being wearisome to the Minister by repeating myself——
Out of order.
If repetition is required to alert our people to what you are trying to put across on them, I make no apology for it. The choice is a simple one for our people. Perhaps they have already made up their minds. To deny the principle of one man, one vote and to abolish PR—that is something I believe the Irish people will never do. The Government will get their answer in June or July when they put this issue to the test. It may well transpire that, when they realise what little chance they have of stuffing this issue down the necks of our people, they will withdraw these proposals. However, whether they withdraw them or not, I want to assert again that this is in the main the action of a cowardly Government who have lost their political nerve and realise that they are going to take a terrible beating from the people at the polls in this referendum and at the next general election. Thank goodness, there is an alternative for the Irish people when they are put out of office.
I hope I have said sufficient to convery how strongly we in the Labour Party feel in regard to these matters. The time for battle has already arrived as far as we are concerned, and we intend to fight this issue every inch of the way. We hope to alert our people against apathy or complacency so that this terrible Bill is not passed into law, because eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, and the Irish people must recognise that now as never before.
I should like to commence by congratulating Deputy Treacy on a reasonably effective fili-buster. I would, however, point out to him that with the strain of having to keep going and of repeating the same points over and over, he may not have paid too much attention to some of the things he said, but in particular, I hope he did not really mean what he said for about the fifth time when he threatened that if this referendum should be carried by a majority vote of the people, he and his colleagues were going to oppose it on the streets in civil war. I feel sure he did not mean that and that when he thinks it over, he will realise that that is a sentiment that, given thought, he would not like to put forward, and that, furthermore, it negatives his whole posture and that of his Party as being the defenders of democracy.
They would not defend your overbearing régime in any circumstances.
If the people vote for you, that is all right, but if they vote against you, that is another matter. The majority do not count.
Shades of 1921. You started a civil war in 1921.
That is a clear procedure to determine the majority views of the people. Deputy Treacy spoke, or purported to speak, on behalf of his Party. I do not believe he was speaking either on his own behalf or on behalf of his Party.
He talked about civil war, but I do not think he really meant it, and I am sure the other members of the Labour Party will make clear that this is not what they stand for.
The Labour Party did not engage in the last one.
I refer to this merely to illustrate a point.
I have nothing to retract.
The Deputy said it many times. There is no doubt about what he meant. The point I want to make is that we are dealing with two very important measures at the moment. The Taoiseach in introducing the Second Stage, approached these Bills in a calm, non-dramatic way. Because he did so, he is being accused of not having enthusiasm for the legislation and of not having enthusiasm behind him in the measures. I think that if the Deputies want really to do a service to the people, they will discuss these very important measures as objectively as any of us can, realising that none of us can be truly objective; each of us has a certain axe to grind. I do not think it helps the debate in this House, nor does it help the understanding by the public at large of the issues here, to suggest that, on the one hand, you have the defenders of democracy and, on the other hand, people who want to set up a dictatorship in this country, to silence the newspapers, to silence all communications media. This does not help. Everybody knows that this just is not true.
It is happening.
It is not true and the Deputy knows it, and he is not convincing anybody. I do not know whether it does him good and brings his adrenalin forward to talk in this way, but it does not help the debate.
(Cavan): Withdrawal of advertising from The Farmers' Journal—is that not an attempt to suppress?
No, that is another matter. The point I want to put to the House is this. We are talking about the electoral system: the two points at issue are the tolerance and the single seat with the straight vote. It seems to me that there is plenty of time for argument, particularly on the question of the straight vote, plenty of time for legitimate argument by people as to the respective merits of our present system versus the proposed system. I think people can argue in good faith on various points that can be put forward. Anybody on this side of the House will admit that there are merits in the present system which would not exist in the system we propose. Furthermore, they would claim, and I think with reason, that there are merits in the system we propose which do not exist in the system that we have. The issue as we see it is to weigh up the merits and the demerits of the various systems and to decide and to ask the people to decide, having weighed up these merits and demerits, what is in the best interests of the country, having regard to the future as we see it shaping up.
I would suggest that quotations from past speeches, whether made on this side of the House or on the other side —because each side can make quotations from the leaders of the other side on this question which will suit the situation—are missing the whole point. People may be scoring debating points here but what we are concerned with is the future of this country and what the people of this country want; how they see our community developing; in particular, what the young people of this country want and are the young people of this country who are going to carry on satisfied that the present system is the one most suited to give us an effective political system or can we improve that system and are the proposals being put forward by the Government now designed to improve that system. I suggest that they are, and I suggest also that it is on this basis that the debate should be conducted and that the posing of people as defenders of democracy and presenting their opponents as jack-booted Nazis just is not helping the debate at all and is not helping the people.
The truth of the matter is that we have not been inclined, I think, to talk in public realistically about the situation in politics in this country under our system of PR. Any realistic assessment of the present situation will reveal that we in Fianna Fáil have been in power for a very long time under PR; that if we ever go out of office under the PR system, almost inevitably we are going to come back at the next election, and furthermore anybody who is honest and realistic about the situation will admit that under PR neither Fine Gael nor Labour have any hope of forming a Government on their own.
Hear, hear.
Why not?
If Deputy Kyne does not know that, he surprises me because whatever may be said in public, and I can understand that the leaders of those two Parties——
May I ask a question? Why not Fine Gael with the support of Labour or Labour with the support of Fine Gael?
Yes, but that is what I said—neither on their own.
Is that not democracy?
Of course, but what I am saying is that neither Fine Gael nor Labour have a hope of forming a Government on their own.
Who votes for whom for Taoiseach?
Is the Deputy talking about the Fine Gael Party getting the support of the Labour Party?
I am suggesting that if Deputy Cosgrave were proposed here as Taoiseach after the next election and Deputy Lynch then, a majority of the Dáil would decide who would be Taoiseach and that would decide who would be Government, but it is not an inter-Party Government in that situation.
I agree, but in those circumstances you will have a minority Government.
Which you had for 24 years out of 41.
No, we did not.
Yes—Fianna Fáil ruled in a minority position aided by the spoiled five in 1951, and one of them is still getting the pay-off as Chairman of the Hospitals Commission, and he is the former Deputy Ffrench O'Carroll.
I am talking about the situation in this country. Deputy Cosgrave and Deputy Corish necessarily, in order to keep up the morale of their Parties and their followers, have to talk about the prospect of their Party forming a Government after the next election, but we know and Deputy Cosgrave knows and Deputy Corish knows that this is just out as far as their single Parties are concerned.
That is not true.
The only possibility of Fianna Fáil going out of office under PR is by some combination of Fine Gael and Labour, be it a Coalition or support of one Party for a minority Government from the other.
Or a swing against you, and there are 78 more Fine Gael county councillors than there were before the last elections and we control a majority of the councils. Therefore, if that trend is continued at the next general election you go out.
If we go out, we go out to some combination of the other two Parties and we go back at the next election.
On the basis of the county councils, that is not so.
On the basis of PR, and PR is designed to prevent any large-scale swings. If any one of the Parties in this country has a reason for holding on to PR, it is Fianna Fáil. Look at the situation in the past. No Party have done as well as we have. Deputy Donegan is about to say to me: "Wait for the next elections".
Yes, and look at the county council elections.
Let me remind Deputy Donegan of one thing—when the referendum was being held——
You lost votes in every by-election. I have the figures here and I will prove it.
At the last referendum people from the Opposition Parties were saying: "Eamon de Valera is leaving Fianna Fáil. Fianna Fáil are going to collapse and this is why they are trying to introduce the straight vote because they think it will keep them in power. Otherwise they will collapse." This was the argument used up and down the country.
And the people said no.
Some people were persuaded that this was so.
Thirty-three thousand.
There was a relatively small majority. Some people were persuaded this was true and I can understand that they might think this was possible, but that is now a long time ago and since then, it has been demonstrated that Fianna Fáil are stronger than ever and let us be realistic about the situation.
I will lay you a bet of two to one that you will be defeated at the referendum.
And I will give you a bet.
I will take you on at any money you like: two to one.
I am talking about general elections and the formation of Government. This is what we are talking about on this issue.
I think we ought perhaps keep to the Bill.
I am suggesting that we in Fianna Fáil have more reason, from a Party point of view, to hold on to PR than any other Party and in particular, the Fine Gael Party have every reason to want to get rid of it. I think that Deputy Cosgrave and Deputy Flanagan and a number of other members of the Fine Gael front bench are quite realistic in their approach to this when they say: "If Fine Gael are to have any hope of office, we must seek the end of PR."
(Cavan): What does the Aiken-Molloy-Colley faction of Fianna Fáil think of this? They are in the House now.
Thirty-five members of your Party voted against it.
Back benchers of Fianna Fáil are not allowed to speak.
The Minister should be allowed to make his contribution.
I know the Fine Gael Party do not like to hear this, but I said we should be realistic and I think I am being realistic in what I am saying. This Party, from a purely Party point of view, are utterly crazy to get rid of PR.
Except for the county council election results.
Never mind the county councils. You know what is going to happen at the next election under PR.
I got 13 county councillors in Louth; Fianna Fáil got ten. Do you think the Tánaiste has a hope of getting his seat there when he was elected last at the last election?
Does he still represent Louth?
You can indulge in wishful thinking but let us be realistic. You know it as I know it. The truth and the fact is that if Fine Gael were realistic, they would be looking for this system and we in Fianna Fáil, if we were thinking only of our Party, would be totally opposed to it. That being so, we have a kind of paradox here which I think could be pursued a little further with advantage.
You are not a politician at all.
As far as we in Fianna Fáil are concerned and as far as I am concerned in particular, I am not prepared to yield to any man in admiration for the achievements of Fianna Fáil or for the character of the men the Party has had as leaders who have represented the Party in Dáil Éireann, but having said that, I must also say I do not think that we in Fianna Fáil are supermen.
Hear, hear.
If we are not supermen, some other reason must exist for our being in office so long. I suggest that if the Opposition accept, as apparently they do, that we are not supermen, they must agree that the reason we have been in office so long and are now stronger than ever is that the system of PR is designed to ensure that there can be no great swing one way or the other.
Hear, hear.
That being so, if we want to see in this country a situation in which the voter has a real choice, a choice between Fianna Fáil in Government at the moment and a viable alternative Government, if that is what the voter is to have, I believe that is what he can never have under the PR system. The only choice he has is Fianna Fáil or some unknown combination of Fine Gael and Labour, the details of which he will never know until the results of the election are known.
Why not? There are only three votes between the Government and the Opposition. Why are you talking like that? You know there are only three votes. If Deputy Finucane were not sick and if Deputy Sheridan——
As I said, the situation, therefore, is that any realistic assessment of the situation will show that there can be no alteration in the political system in this country under PR except Fianna Fáil going out to some kind of combination of Fine Gael and Labour and we know that in the next election Fianna Fáil will come back again. I am human enough not to want to see Fianna Fáil going out of office but I am also sufficiently concerned with the welfare of my country to know that for any Party, Fianna Fáil or any other, to be in office forever would be a disaster for this country. That being so, it seems to me that the obligation we have when we are considering the question of our electoral system is to try to devise a system that will give the kind of choice I am talking about, an effective Opposition in office as a viable alternative Government.
This is something this country has not had except when Fianna Fáil were in Opposition. When Fianna Fáil were in Opposition, we had an effective Opposition and we had a viable alternative but apart from those periods since 1932, we have not had an effective Opposition. I suggest that the young people of this country are not satisfied with the political set-up in this country. They are not satisfied with the fact that there is no effective Opposition in Dáil Éireann and that there is no viable alternative Government. They are entitled to get that.
That is right.
The only way they can get it is to change to single member constituencies. If we want to discuss this issue on the basis of what is good for our country, we have also to admit and declare that this could be against our own interests as a Party. I have endeavoured to suggest that although it has been argued that the Fianna Fáil interest is to have straight vote single member constituencies, it is in the Party's interests to retain PR. Whatever number of seats we might get under the straight vote single member constituencies—whatever number of seats we might get—and of course the things that are being quoted in this House about that are completely untrue, but if they were true, the point is that under that system you could with a relatively small swing in support put the Government out and put another Government in, which is something which can never happen under PR.
Look what happened in the North?
How does the Minister calculate that?
Surely Deputies know very well that the situation in Northern Ireland is quite different? Why get up here and tell us about the dictatorship we would have in this country? Why do they not have dictatorship in Britain, Canada, the USA with this system of election? This kind of thing is not helpful.
Do not lose your head. If you can convince me, you have one convert.
I am not losing my head. All you have to do is listen to the Leader of your Party. He told you. You did not listen to him, or maybe you did.
You had to have four meetings before you could decide.
The Deputies must cease interrupting and allow the Minister to make his contribution. They can make theirs afterwards.
On a point of order, could the Minister explain this in greater detail?
That is not a point of order.
The Deputy does not need to have it explained to him. I think it might be interesting to examine why it is that the Fine Gael Party, for instance, are not looking for the single member straight vote system. It would be very interesting and revealing if one could only find out. It is clear that some members of the Fine Gael Party, and particularly front bench members, want this system. That is not denied. If you look at the people concerned, you will find they are people in the main—not entirely—who have been carrying the burden of the Fine Gael Party in Opposition in this House, such as it is, over the years. They are the people who really oppose and who try to oppose effectively. Then look at the people who take the other view, which is clearly contrary to the interests of their Party. They are concerned with their own personal position and they do not apparently feel sufficient confidence in their Party and policies to feel that in a fair fight under the system if they do not win this time, they will win the next time.
It would not be a straight fight.
I will come to the Labour Party.
Were you for the retention of PR at your Party meeting?
Of course I was not.
You certainly were.
Let me say this quite categorically——
You know you were.
Deputies will have to cease interrupting. The debate cannot proceed on the basis of shouting.
I want to say, without further interruption from Deputy L'Estrange, that, first of all, Deputy L'Estrange does not know what happened in the Cabinet.
We do.
Secondly, I am going to tell him that nobody in the Fianna Fáil Cabinet was in favour of the retention of PR, not one.
You were, and you know it.
I categorically deny to Deputy L'Estrange that that is true.
(Cavan): Since the Minister is prepared to discuss it, will he tell us how many in the Cabinet were against what is now proposed?
I do not think there were any. My own view of it was that the alternative that might have been available would have amounted to the same thing. It was really a question of change for the most viable proposition.
Why did you take four Cabinet meetings to decide?
Nobody in the Fianna Fáil Cabinet said: "I want to retain PR".
Certainly they did.
Did not some of your Ministers try to find out what our reaction was?
That is not true. However, I know the Deputies across do not like what I am saying.
The Labour Party like to pose as the defenders of democracy against the big bad wolf of Fianna Fáil. I suggest that the objective voter who wants to assess the situation and who is a little confused by all the very confusing situations that arise in people who should be on one side of the debate being on the other side, and so on——
Of the Civil War.
——should ask himself to whose benefit is the position being taken by each Party. Let us look at the situation of the Labour Party. To whose benefit is it that the Labour Party should take the attitude they do? Is it not quite clear that it is to their benefit because they believe that if this system is adopted, the Fine Gael Party will become the effective Opposition Party and provide the Government of this country. It is legitimate for the Labour Party to argue that this should not happen. Let them be quite clear that they are looking after their interests, not the interests of democracy. If they were looking after the interests of democracy, we would not have Deputy Treacy telling us that if the people were not in favour of this, he will be in favour of fighting it in a civil war.
Would the Minister allow me to ask a simple question? Do you want Fine Gael to be the main and total Opposition?
I want an effective Opposition in this country and I do not care who it is. The people of this country deserve better than they are getting.
You really have said that you want Fine Gael to be in total Opposition.
I do not care whether it is Fine Gael or Labour or anyone else: I do not care who it is.
Do not dodge. You have said you want the Labour Party out and that you want Fine Gael.
I wonder could we get back to a rational debate?
I have made my point clearly.
The Party have clearly demonstrated that the desire to rule is with Fianna Fáil and I do not think the Opposition would protest against that. The desire to rule is the desire to serve and that is what this Party is all about. I am talking realistically. What this country needs is a Party with the same desire to rule and serve, and then the people of this country can have an effective system, and the young people can have an opportunity to get into politics and do something worthwhile. With single member constituencies, you know the young people will get a chance but the conservative Parties over there do not want to give the young people a chance. They want to keep their safe seats.
Might I ask the Minister one question? You are looking for youth. Then, how did you select your candidate in Wicklow?
I guarantee to Deputy Harte that we have constituencies in this country where the young people will get a chance that they did not get——
Without being personal, how do you explain your status in Wicklow?
Is this supposed to be a debate?
Deputy Aiken whispered to the Minister what to say. I heard him.
Yes, it was a very good point. I know these Deputies do not want to hear what is to be said but they might let me say a little more. Reference has been made to the Constitution Committee. References have been made in the Dáil, in the newspapers and outside, and I want to make it clear that there was no suggestion whatsoever by any Fianna Fáil speaker —that he did not say, did not imply— that the proposals now before the House originated with or came from the Constitution Committee's provisional report, or arose out of it.
Indeed it did.
The Members of the Opposition who are members of that Committee know that fact because I, as chairman of the Committee and as a member of the Government, told them that the Government were contemplating proposals in regard to the electoral system.
What about the Lemass system? Tell us that.
I wanted to ensure that in considering those proposals, the Government would have available to them whatever views the Committee had to express on the electoral system. I proposed to the Committee that a section of the Committee's report dealing alone with the electoral system might be made available to the Government, because I did not think that the report as a whole would be available, but I made it clear that these proposals were going to be considered by the Government, whether they got the report or not.
Of course, we know that; that was a hook.
If the Opposition knew that, how could they contend that this Committee was used as a smokescreen? The Opposition are saying this, not the Government. This proposal originated with the Government and nobody else.
Could the Minister say what purpose this Constitution Committee achieved at all?
I can.
Tell us.
We thought you were referring to the 12-year revision of constituencies.
Except to be used as a platform to attack Fine Gael.
I also want to say something about Deputy Seán Lemass and myself in the Constitution Committee. If you look at the remarks that have been made by Deputy——
James Tully.
——Deputy Dunne, Deputy Sweetman and, I think, Deputy T. F. O'Higgins, you will find that they tried to convey to the public that Deputy Seán Lemass had said he was against the straight vote.
Hear, hear.
And some of them tried to say that I said the same thing. That is not true.
Why?
What was said and it is being attributed to Deputy Lemass, as far as I can recall it, was that he wondered whether this was a proposition at this time. The only question was timing.
After nine years.
That was a few weeks ago.
At no stage did any Fianna Fáil member of that committee say he was against the straight vote. I want to nail those lies which have been perpetrated by some members of the Opposition, who were members of that committee deliberately setting out to mislead.
Do not be so silly.
On a point of order, is the Minister in order in attributing lies to Members of this House?
I withdraw the remark and substitute "these tissues of inaccuracies". I believe that the essence of democracy can have various trappings. The essence of democracy is that the people should have a reasonable opportunity of changing the Government and that you will get this under the straight vote and that under PR your chances of doing this are much less.
Order.
You might have all the trappings of democracy but if you cannot have a real opportunity of changing the Government as is the position of Northern Ireland, as has been mentioned earlier, you have not real democracy in my opinion. We are getting close to that system here because of PR and the way it has worked out. I say that the people of this country deserve better, particularly the young people, and I want to do as much as I can to ensure that the young people will get an opportunity to have an effective political system in which they can participate and in which they can contribute to the future welfare of this country.