Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 27 Mar 1968

Vol. 233 No. 9

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).

Debate resumed on the following amendment:

Go scriosfar na focail go léir i ndiaidh "Go" agus go gcuirfear ina n-ionad:—

"ndiúltaíonn Dáil Éireann an Dara Léamh a thabhairt don Bhille ar an bhforas gur togra atá neamh-dhaonlathach go bunúsach an togra sa Bhille suas le 40 faoin gcéad de bhreis ionadaíochta sa Dáil a thabhairt do roinnt saorá-nach thar mar a thabharfaí do shaoránaigh eile."

To delete all words after "That" and substitute:—

"Dáil Éireann declines to give a Second Stage Reading to the Bill on the grounds that the proposal in the Bill to provide some citizens with up to 40 per cent greater representation in the Dáil than other citizens is fundamentally undemocratic."

—(Deputy Cosgrave).

Dr. O'Connell

We must realise that Britain is geared to the straight vote and that to introduce anything else into the British electoral system, even proportional representation, would create confusion. By seeking to introduce the straight vote system into this country, the Government are obviously endeavouring to create political confusion. The Taoiseach has given no sound reasons for the necessity for this change. He cannot point to instability of government. He cannot show that proportional representation has held up any important legislation. When the Government wanted to introduce what they considered important legislation, the turnover tax, they found the means to do it. If they could do that with a majority of one, then one might well contemplate with fear what they could do with a substantial majority.

We must realise that proportional representation was introduced in the 20th century. John Stuart Mill was an advocate and exponent of proportional representation. I have here a copy of his book Representative Government. He made the point that, in a really equal democracy, every and any section would be represented proportionally. He said the majority of electors would always have a majority of representatives and a minority of the electors would always have a minority of the representatives. He said that, man for man, they would be as fully represented as the majority and, unless they are, there is not equal government but a government of inequality and privilege where one part of the people rule over the rest. He pointed out that in such circumstances, there is a part of the people whose fair and equal share of the things in the representation is withheld from them, contrary to all just government but, above all, contrary to the principle of democracy which professes equality as the very root of its foundation.

Continuing, he said that the injustices of the violation of principle are not less flagrant because those who suffer from them are a minority. In advocating proportional representation, John Stuart Mill felt that, without it, any government would ride roughshod over liberty-loving people. The evidence is there.

We have had a modification of proportional representation. If the Government say that, in essence, proportional representation is not good they cannot doubt that a modified form of proportional representation can assure the Government of majority government. There can be no question but that there can be a parliamentary majority for a government with this modified form of proportional representation. Having been in office for so long, Fianna Fáil cannot say that proportional representation has produced unstable government. People are suspicious that the Party which has benefited most by this modified form of proportional representation want to change it in favour of this complete majority system in order to consolidate their position. There can be no other motive behind the present proposal to change our electoral system.

The Taoiseach said we do not want a multiplicity of Parties and a series of coalition governments. If that had been said 20 years ago, the situation would be different but there is no question of a series of coalition governments today nor is there any question of a multiplicity of Parties at the present time. Our modified form of proportional representation is already very heavily loaded against the smallest Party in the Dáil.

The Taoiseach points to the success of the straight vote system in the United States, which is a very unfair comparison. The United States is a very large community and is far from being homogeneous racially, culturally, socially or economically. Therefore, it is admirably suited to the straight vote system. Our people, however, have been moulded by history into a unified pattern of life which is ideally suited to the proportional representation system. The altered form of proportional representation which we have is really extraneous to the country and its homogeneous nature.

The Taoiseach said this Bill provides more definite guidelines, that the bar of resort to the courts has been removed and that the Dáil may amend the Commission's report by a simple majority. The Taoiseach must have a very poor opinion of the mentality of the Members of this House. This means a simple Fianna Fáil majority. He says "a simple majority of the Dáil". Under the straight vote system, the simple majority will be Fianna Fáil majority—and it will be used.

The Taoiseach speaks in vague generalities of the reasons proportional representation has not worked. He says people become confused with the number of names on the ballot paper. Nowadays, with the mass media educating the public, I do not think this arises. The public are becoming more and more informed. The Government want to step in now to prevent the expression of individual thought and to get the majority before the public become sufficiently informed to make up their minds on what they want. That seems to be the only conclusion any sensible person can reach, that it is an effort by them to seek dictatorial powers before the people can decide for themselves.

They realise that nowadays people are giving a lot of thought to politics and the nature of governments: people want more and are exercising their rights to a greater extent. The Government realise this and see what one might describe as the writing on the wall and want to do something to consolidate their position. No other motive can be ascribed to their present proposals. The people are not enthusiastic about any change. They are very definite in their decision to vote "no" in this referendum. I think it will be quite a set-back for the Government and the Fianna Fáil Party when they realise that once again the people will say "no". We should like to be assured by the Government that this proposal will not be brought before the Dáil again for at least another 20 years.

Mr. S. Collins

The time has come for a realistic assessment of what is behind the two Bills now before the House, widely divergent in their constitutional conception but designed to serve the same purpose as Fianna Fáil have in mind. We must first ask ourselves who sought this constitutional change. From where did the clamour come? What is the ultimate hope behind it? When Fianna Fáil suggest that they are doing something for the benefit of Fine Gael, it gives me the pip because I know their mentality always runs in the direction of what is good for themselves and nobody else. When you come to grips with the question of who wanted the change, you find no section of the community made any demand for it, and when the referendum ultimately goes to the people, Fianna Fáil will get a very salutory indication of that in the defeat they will suffer.

I want to nail some stupid statements and deal with the kind of vague, malicious, semi-nationalistic aura that Fianna Fáil have tried to create around their present catastrophic stupidity. We are told that this was a system imposed by the British, and the fugitive Minister for External Affairs, of course, had to revert to the Civil War period to make a completely irrelevant, unjustifiable and unsustainable statement. Whether we like it or not, PR was the conception of Griffith and other Sinn Féin leader. As Deputy O'Connell said it worked here remarkably well over the years. It was not imposed on us by the British but it was brought into the Constitution and copperfastened into it by the man who lead the opposition to the Treaty. The sooner the Tánaiste assesses the facts and looks at the reality of the situation the better for himself.

When one realises how right we have been proved and that we had the courage to accept, to build and develop on the Treaty, we contest the sincerity of the Fianna Fáil approach. The clamour for the change comes from a little power-drunk group in the Fianna Fáil Party who think they can now set semi-dynastic proportions to their control and it is because the cold breath and whisper of defeat is around the corner that we get this sudden embullient anxiety to get rid of a system that has properly been described as indigenous to us. It is because the Irish people, becoming adult and experienced in politics, are beginning to see the real value of PR and use it effectively that the Government are getting the tremors and delirium from which they are suffering.

What is behind the clamour for change? One of the avowed aims of the Government is to eliminate and virtually annihilate the Labour Party. I want to go on record here as deliberately and positively describing that as a dastardly bit of political chicanery because, whether I go the whole of the road with the Labour Party or not, it is time the House realised that the establishment of the House and all the principles of democracy on which we build our Parliament and Government owe much to the courage and effort of the Labour Party. It would be a shocking thing for the country if a group of power-lusting young men were to get their way and eliminate from our political life the type of contribution that has been helpful and effective throughout the years.

They will not get rid of Fine Gael— they have been trying to do that in every possible way since the establishment of the State—but, thank God, we are a healthy, robust Party still, giving Fianna Fáil the fright of their lives now because young people are flocking to where tradition and service are appreciated.

Mr. Lalor

Where is the evidence of that?

Mr. S. Collins

Have a look at Wicklow. Interruptions will not put me off.

Mr. Lalor

One swallow.

Mr. S. Collins

I know how thin-skinned some of the Fianna Fáil Party are. Blisters of uncertainty afflict many of their members and right down the middle the Fianna Fáil Party are in trouble.

Mr. Lalor

You have been playing that game for 30 years.

Mr. S. Collins

You are hopping balls now and they will hop back on you. Wait for the results of the referendum—if it is ever held. I believe the greatest tactical exercise possible is going on now to see how they can get out of it and save their faces.

Mr. Lalor

Ask Deputy Oliver Flanagan what he thinks.

Mr. S. Collins

And you should ask Deputy de Valera what he thinks and he bears an ancient and honoured name on the crest of your organisation. To me who has experienced what freak results can be got under PR, it still presents the only reasonable way of getting a representative parliament and a representative government. Nobody can query my experience, because my experience was that somebody who got nearly 2,000 votes fewer than I did succeeded in getting my seat on one occasion. He is now eliminated from public life, but just because I might have been the victim does not alter the fact that we have to take this objectively and see what is the nature of our country's body politic and what is the system that is likely to give us effective representation and ultimately government.

We have in this country a very definite type of outlook that revolves in the main around agriculture in the rural and semi-rural areas and to a certain extent around industrialisation in the big centres. We have a good deal of vocationalism running through our whole economic and social background. We have of necessity a variety of organisations that are entitled to a voice and representation in proportion to their importance within the Assembly here. If the Government were to get away with this gimmick of the straight vote, their design and purpose, in spite of the platitudinous boasts of the Minister for Education today about a new type of democracy, would be one thing only, to use the new system to create confusion and to create a situation in which they will be able to grab a dictatorial majority here and use that majority to design the type of voting and parliamentary control that would suit themselves. There is no other purpose behind this. The Government Party feel that if they could get away with it— after a long period in Government getting an effective majority and showing the arrogance that they are already starting to display again—they would be able virtually to use intimidation for the purpose of stultifying political development, methods not unknown to them in the past.

One must look very carefully into the background of this organisation. Even though the Minister for Education frankly admits that power is their aim and power is their game, we in this country will have to come to grips once and for all with this domineering arrogance that gives them the right, according to themselves, to govern for all time. This is political chicanery at its best, and no matter how they try to sugar-coat the pill, we refuse to swallow it. The issue is clearly knit, whether we are going to accept a change of system that must in the immediate future lead to a tremendous majority and the capacity to use their power effectively to repel for at least a generation any development other than sycophancy to a Government.

What has gone wrong all of a sudden with PR that the Government want to change it? Out of the 40-odd years of home government, and in particular from 1932 to now, Fianna Fáil have had a monopoly of government and the country a succession of economic crises. We have this political gambit at a time when the nation has many problems and great stress to face up to. We are in a situation where we have to gear our whole economy to new types of competition. We are in a situation where we have difficulty in industrial relations at home. We are on the brink of a national crisis, with blackouts and shutdowns threatening a vital national State-sponsored organisation. In such a situation the time of this House and the consideration of the people are directed to what I call gimmickry. This is merely a red herring to cover up the many debacles for which the Government have been responsible and to divert the minds of the people from the economic difficulties that abound around us, whether in agriculture or industry, whether it is rising unemployment and the difficulties arising from various redundancies and the switching of personnel to new types of industry.

These are all matters of immense consequence that are being pushed aside and not being dealt with while the Government take it upon themselves to try and change the system of voting for no more elevated purpose that their own aggrandisement and the increase of their own power. They are not going to get away with it. Let us again ask why we have suddenly to get rid of PR. As I said, over the past 36 or 37 years Fianna Fáil have had more than 26 years of government. At present they enjoy a supreme majority. Remember, if Fianna Fáil believe that the will of the people must prevail, under the PR system if you get enough votes you must prevail, but because Fianna Fáil know that there is no prospect of a majority vote under PR in the future, they are making this desperate bid to get through the direct vote for the purpose of trying to manipulate on a 35 or 40 per cent vote, the greatest possible number of seats for themselves. You may talk about commissions or anything else being set up but if Fianna Fáil got away with this effort to gerrymander, they would be capable of it and they would leave the North of Ireland trotting after them.

Mr. Lalor

You are accusing the judges now.

Mr. S. Collins

Do not worry; we all know what you would do. It has been done before very effectively. Added to that, in case they would not be able to manipulate well enough in some of the more populous areas where their bluff would be called, they want another amendment to the Constitution to give a tolerance that would create a situation in which two votes west would be equal to three votes east. It is no use wagging your head; that is what the Bill proposes to do.

Mr. Lalor

Six per cent.

Mr. S. Collins

If we add the two, we get a very simple result. You think that where you have introduced mendicity and grants for unfortunate people, you will be able to cow them and bend them to your will. The Fianna Fáil methods are well known to us all. Fianna Fáil are a full time political organisation and a tough, ruthless one. The Minister for Education indicated quite clearly today that power is their object, that they want power and they want to hold on to power. That is the sole motive activating the Fianna Fáil Party. It is not power for the benefit of the nation but for the aggrandisement and development of their own Party, with all the consequential and attendant difficulties. Their capacity for patronage and bestowing largesse, they feel, will ensure, if not a loyal support, a support of necessity from vast sections of the community. There is no doubt that any major contract, any big escalation in building or in any other industry for some strange reason always arrives on the table of the supporter, whether he is a member of Taca or otherwise.

That is the type of system which can subvert and stultify democracy, the type of system which it is our duty to prevent continuing. That is why there is going to be such a vigorous and sustained fight against this proposal. If we can, we will not allow this Government to try to differentiate in an advantageous way to themselves between the votes of one section and another. We are going to stop if we can this philosophy of divide and conquer which you are trying to impose with the straight vote: we will exercise the tolerance where it is in our favour and we will use the upper limit in the populous areas to defeat whatever large majority may tend to show its head. That is the proposal.

Cutting out all the verbiage, this is what it amounts to: we want to get control of Parliament and we are going to do it if we get away with the straight vote and the assistance of this tolerance suggestion. That is the blunt reality of the avid power-lust that is now apparent in the new minions of the Fianna Fáil Party who want to ensure that in their time they will grab hold of whatever position they can. They feel that if they can get the people away from their now adult concept of the use of PR, they will be able to do extraordinary things in the ballot box in the next election. We have to come down to the interests of minorities of the people. No matter what words are used there are definite sections in the community who have representation and, even though they may be small, they can be vociferous and effective. I am warning those people that the intention of the Government is the strangulation and annihilation of all that kind of independent thought in public life.

Mr. Andrews

That is just not true and the Deputy knows it. It is rubbish.

Mr. S. Collins

What is wrong with having representation of smaller groups here?

Mr. Andrews

Smaller groups integrated in big Parties.

Mr. S. Collins

You will get your opportunity to speak. I do not interrupt you and—

Mr. Andrews

Do not lecture me; I am putting you on the right lines.

Mr. S. Collins

The Deputy could not put anybody on the right lines. I am going to continue speaking, whether I am interrupted or not. Every time you get under a Fianna Fáil man's skin, he starts to squeal and the Deputy is as good a squealer as the rest. These people are perfectly entitled to representation and at present the enthusiasm the Fianna Fáil Party have for Independents is nauseating. When the chips were down only a few short years ago in this House their devotion and their energy at wooing certain individuals was quite fantastic.

Mr. Lalor

Bosh.

Mr. S. Collins

Bosh? The Parliamentary Secretary was not here.

Mr. Lalor

I was here.

Mr. S. Collins

His colleague up at the back is only a fás aon oíche. Why are Fianna Fáil anxious to eliminate opposition? Why are they afraid of representation of the ordinary Irish people who have a right to a voice in their own affairs? The purpose of an election is to elect a representative Parliament. Parliament elects a Government. Fianna Fáil have been in office for 31 of the past 37 years. What complaint could they have about representation? They have been able to carry on with an effective Government. At the moment they are running at a higher level of effectiveness than ever before. Why do they want to change? Because they want to ensure an even stronger position for their Government. Is that not the answer? Is that not what they want: to hell with the Irish people; they will look after Fianna Fáil. Is that not what you are saying? Is that not what you and the pipsqueak behind you are saying? Is that not the purpose of this referendum?

Mr. Geoghegan

Whom did the Deputy call that?

Mr. S. Collins

Deputy Geoghegan may rest assured it is not addressed to him. I know you are getting a bit hot under the collar because these questions are pertinent questions and demand an answer. Your whole purpose and design is the aggrandisement of the Fianna Fáil Party.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would ask the Deputy to address the Chair.

Mr. S. Collins

I am sorry. With respect, we are entitled to inquire into the motives behind these two pieces of legislation. Even though I may have been a little provocative, we have at least discovered the philosophy behind this legislation. I think the Parliamentary Secretary will agree with me, and readily at that, that there are matters of very serious import which should be occupying the time of the Government and of this House. We should not be here debating electoral reforms when it is common knowledge that the only people who want these reforms are the Government themselves and the Fianna Fáil Party; and the only reason they are seeking them has been candidly admitted now. The purpose is to strengthen themselves.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. S. Collins

Mark you, if this referendum goes through, Deputies on the Opposite benches may be amazed at the number of their own who will not be here any longer to support them. Deputy Andrews' face may be very red by the time the referendum is over. The Irish people will be left under no delusion as to the real purpose behind this proposed referendum.

Reference has been made to the position in Britain and the Tánaiste. no less, talked about proportional representation being imposed upon us by the British. The alternative he himself wants to impose on the country is the system that operates in Britain. We know the skulduggery and the graft in the Fianna Fáil organisation. If they got away with the straight vote, they would not only eliminate the Labour Party, but they would try to eliminate us. And then we have all the blandishments and the crawthumping about the great democracies here, there and everywhere else.

One cannot compare this country, with its small population and its vastly different economy, with Britain. One certainly cannot compare the electoral system in the United States of America and argue that it would suit our condition here because, even though there is a two Party set-up there, there is a completely different type of government. To begin with, there is an executive president who carries tremendous executive power. This is a two-headed penny Fianna Fáil apparently want to keep.

Reference has been made to Article 12 of the Constitution and the manner in which the President is elected. Apparently that system of election is not to be changed. It must be satisfactory enough from the point of view of the Government. Why change the system for election to Parliament? What is wrong? How can we support two different systems of election to public office? There has been no reference to any change in the system of election to local authorities. Apparently the Government will try one gimmick first and, if they succeed in that, they will carry out further experiments, experiments in which the people will have no say.

This is a haphazard approach to legislation. No really serious thought must have been given to the matter. There must have been no real analysis of the general framework of our electoral system. We can only be suspicious and we become even more suspicious when we are lectured by Fianna Fáil spokesmen about how good it would be for Fine Gael.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. S. Collins

I can assure you that he, too, will give of his loyal best to support and endorse the decisions of his Party.

Mr. Booth

In spite of his convictions.

Mr. S. Collins

It does not matter. The thing that is wrong with the unfortunate Fianna Fáil Party is that they are not allowed to have convictions.

Mr. Andrews

Twenty-five to twenty-six, that is what it was.

Mr. S. Collins

Your arithmetic is bad, gassoon. I will give you 5,000 to one against your proving that dastardly lie. You will be able to repeat the figure of 36 to 40, led by Deputy de Valera and Deputy Colley.

Mr. Andrews

Twenty-five to twenty-six.

Mr. S. Collins

You know as much about the Party as you do about politics, you raw gassoon. I am getting a little salt into the blister.

Mr. Andrews

I am giving the facts.

Mr. S. Collins

Again we have to come to the basic problem. The big problem Fianna Fáil had recently was the old men in the Party whom they were trying to shift.

Mr. Lalor

You got over that one.

Mr. S. Collins

I know you did, and I know how.

Mr. Lalor

I said "you did".

Mr. S. Collins

Most of them now have carrots dangled before them. If you do not get rid of them, they will be running anyway because the Irish people will not be lulled into gentle acquiescence to the will of Fianna Fáil. We have a responsibility in Opposition to throttle this effort at petty dictatorship and to tell the people in the plain unvarnished reality of truth that this is only a sordid, sorry political effort to achieve power for no other purpose than that of government by your Party.

Mr. Geoghegan

Nonsense.

Mr. S. Collins

I will keep telling this to the Irish people until they are sore listening to it and they will realise that this is exactly the position and the object of this gimmickry.

Mr. Geoghegan

We will carry it in West Cork.

Mr. S. Collins

You did not the last time.

Mr. Geoghegan

We will carry it now.

Mr. S. Collins

You did not, and will not carry either the referendum or the President then or now. We will give you a hiding in West Cork again and I will lay you 20 to one against, anytime you like to take it.

Mr. Geoghegan

I will be down there.

Mr. S. Collins

We had a by-election there in 1949 and we beat you by 29,000 to 9,000, and you have never forgotten or forgiven it. We have never shouted "Up Dev" down there, and we never will. If you think you will get away with this highwaymanship, you are mistaken. Fianna Fáil have lulled themselves, in their arrogance, into the belief that they are omnipotent on the Irish scene. They never yet had a majority vote of the Irish people and when they go with the referendum, they will be staggered at how their effort to reach even parity will fail. Mind you, in the subsequent general election, the realisation of their weakness might come home to roost—the salutary lesson they will get from the Irish people. There is nothing wrong with the PR system if it is worked as PR.

Mr. Geoghegan

Why are you afraid of it, then?

Mr. S. Collins

Furthermore, there is no doubt that the Irish people, if they want to express a substantial endorsement of Government policy, can do it simply by giving the Government their votes. If Fianna Fáil get a majority vote under PR, they must be an effective, strong Government, but what Fianna Fáil are trying to do is to use less than a majority vote to make them a dictatorial, dominant Government and to try to disfranchise the majority of the people, to bend their will to theirs and their efforts to the whim and caprice of Fianna Fáil arrogance, stultification and degradation in government. Too long we have suffered the incubus. Come on with your referendum until you get a salutary lesson.

Mr. Geoghegan

You are holding it up.

Mr. S. Collins

Then, as the political situation clears itself up and as the Irish people realise the empty nature of your Government and your policy, we shall be able to ensure that the principles for which so many people died, the democracy so reasonably developed in a parliamentary manner by all the people who contributed to our Parliament—be they Fianna Fáil, Labour, Fine Gael, Farmers or Independent groups who all made a contribution to the building of this democracy—are maintained. I am giving you due warning. Hands off the free will and the rights of the Irish people. Continue your exercise and see if you can get out of the mess you have laid yourselves in.

Mr. Andrews

As one who did not have the opportunity to speak on these proposals the last time they arose, in 1959, I should like emphatically to state my support of them on this occasion. I am sorry to see Deputy Collins leaving the House. He spoke about grave national issues which should be discussed in place of these proposals and it sounded very shallow coming from a man who appears in the House once a month. I consider these proposals as important now as they were in 1959. Deputy Collins referred to gerrymandering at some length and compared us unfairly and dishonestly with the situation which prevails in Northern Ireland.

As he well knows, if and when these proposals pass through the House and are acceptable to the Irish people, there will be a Commission set up under an independent judge to ensure that the constituencies are evenly, equally and equitably divided. Of course, Fine Gael are great people to tell us about the independence of the judiciary. I accept unequivocally the independence of the judiciary. Fianna Fáil are giving in to them on this point and are appointing a judge as head of this independent Commission. There will be no question of gerrymandering, therefore, and comparisons with Northern Ireland are somewhat invidious.

Yesterday we heard a rather garbled historical lecture here from Deputy Hogan of South Tipperary. He spoke of the history of PR, which, as the House knows, was mooted in the middle of the last century by a gentleman in England and a citizen of Denmark. John Stuart Mill was its great protagonist in the middle of the last century in England. There was a society set up here in 1911 with which, I understand, Arthur Griffith had something to do. Then it was introduced effectively in this country in 1918 in the Sligo Corporation elections of that year. The reason it was introduced at that time was to ensure that ratepayers and other minority interests would get representation on Sligo Corporation. In fairness to the system at that time it was introduced on that basis to ensure the rights of minorities. I am now challenging any Member of this House to point out to me a case in recent history where the rights of the minorities were overridden, where there was any abuse of the rights of our so-called minorities. I do not think such a case can be produced. There is no question about it at all.

There is then this dishonest comparison with Northern Ireland. Proportional representation was abolished in Northern Ireland in 1929. The suggestion is being made by Opposition speakers that various Parties will be wiped out. This was shown to be very far from the truth in the North. Before 1929, the Nationalists had 12 seats in Northern Ireland and in the subsequent election under the straight vote system, they had 11 seats, so that effectively the situation was more or less the same. I do not find the Northern Ireland electoral situation very acceptable but I do not think the same position would prevail here in the 26 Counties as prevails, certainly in some instances, in Northern Ireland. I think we have become mature and civilised enough to recognise and to accept that, if the straight vote system is introduced into this country, it will be operated equitably.

Another point I would like to make on these proposals relates to the alternate vote or the straight vote itself. Quite frankly, I would of course prefer the first past the post system but if the alternate vote is acceptable to the House, fair enough by me. I am, as it were, anxious that the country has a series of single-seat constituencies. That is all. What system of election is produced when this debate concludes is immaterial. I believe that, if the single-seat constituency is introduced, it will benefit the people living in the constituency which I represent and will benefit the country as a whole. Apart altogether from the well-worn arguments about competition between Deputies of different Parties, and indeed Deputies of the same Party— all, by the way, totally true—in the same constituency, one point has been missed. This is the question of final responsibility in relation to a given situation or a given problem in relation to a constituency under proportional representation.

At the moment the position in the constituency which I represent, for instance, is that there are four Deputies representing 104,000 people. That is 26,000 people per Deputy. This of course would be a 61,000 electorate. Effectively, in real terms, it means that each Deputy represents 104,000 people because his responsibility extends over the whole area of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. If a situation or a controversy arises in that area, which Deputy and which Party is responsible for its solution? In theory and practice, the four of us are —two Fianna Fáil and two Fine Gael Deputies. There are no Labour Deputies in this constituency at the moment. This brings me to another point.

I believe that under the straight vote system the Labour Party would get a seat in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. If the area is small and we have one Deputy for the area in which the problem arises, he is responsible for the solution to the problem and no one else. Consequently the idea of final responsibility in a problem, local or national, is at the door of the one Deputy elected for that area. If something occurs at the moment, the responsibility is disparate and we all share in the blame or the praise even having had nothing to do with it. All the representatives are responsible in a given situation for the solution of a particular problem.

This is what I find distasteful. As a reasonably young Deputy and newly elected to this House, I feel that young people want responsibility, but at the moment as a Deputy I find myself running around in all directions, not knowing what I am responsible for, not knowing where I am being blamed or being praised for something I have had nothing to do with at all. This, Sir, is the reason why if the single-seat constituency is introduced, assuming I am re-elected under this system, if something occurs in the constituency which I represent, I will be the one who will accept the blame or the praise and will be responsible for the solution of a particular problem.

Some Deputies have suggested that it is too soon to place the single-seat constituency proposal before the people again. Apart altogether from the fact that many young people have come of age, electorally speaking, who should be given the opportunity of expressing their views, many Deputies opposite have changed their opinions over a reasonably short period.

Mr. L. Belton

What about your side?

Mr. Andrews

I do concede that a number of Deputies have not changed their opinions on this particular issue at all. Deputy Cosgrave, whose opinion one respects——

Mr. L. Belton

Deputy de Valera.

Mr. Andrews

——although not necessarily agreeing with him on all expressions of opinion, has come out in favour of the single seat, first past the post system. I have genuinely got great sympathy with the man in his present predicament. Here is one Member who has openly expressed his opposition to a proposal being put forward by his own Party. His position is all the more invidious because he is the leader of the Party who are putting forward this proposition in which he does not believe.

Deputy Dillon, of course, the respected Fine Gael Member for the interests of the Party opposite in Monaghan, would appear to have changed his opinion. I would refer the House to the Official Report of 12th November, 1947. At column 1714, Deputy Dillon said:

Personally I think proportional representation is a fraud and a cod, and that it ought to be abolished.

At column 1715, he said:

Proportional representation is, in fact, as we all know in our hearts, the child of the brains of all the cranks in creation.

I have a little note after that: "Poor Miss Lakeman".

He went on:

So far as this country is concerned, it was tried out on the dog. I doubt if any other sane democratic country in the world has put it into operation in regard to its Parliament.

Later on, he said:

It was foisted upon us by a collection of half-lunatics who believed that they had something lovely that would work on paper like a jig-saw puzzle.

He ended by saying that he looked forward to the day when

... we may provide our people with an opportunity of getting sick of this fantastic system and hasten the day by which we will return to a normal system devised to ascertain the will of the people....

So much for a change of opinion. The year 1947 is not, historically speaking, a very long period of time. I do not suggest to the House that 1959 is such a long period of time, historically speaking. I suggest it is not too much to ascertain the will of the people at such a reasonable period of time on the basis that we all have changes of opinion and we all have changes of mind, given changed circumstances and a change in situation.

I see nothing wrong with Deputy Dillon changing his opinion and I see nothing wrong in Deputy Cosgrave maintaining his opinion. Equally, I do not think it is wrong to go to the Irish people nine or ten years later and ask them if they have changed their opinion. That is effectively what we are doing. I hope the referendum will be conducted in a civilised manner and that it will show if the people have changed their opinions. It is not the Government who will be deciding this issue; it is the people. That is what this is all about. I often wish that on other issues more referenda were taken to ascertain the will of the people on them.

Deputy O.J. Flanagan is a well-known opponent of PR, as his act on the Late Late Show showed. It is an expression of opinion completely acceptable to me because I agree with him. As I say, it is important to remember that it is not the Government who bring about the change on the referendum; it is the people. They, in the final analysis, have the final say. Deputy Hogan in his long speech, not altogether uninteresting, last night and today stated that recently on television we had some professor propounding the theory that if the straight vote single-seat constituency were introduced, Fianna Fáil would get 93 seats. Of course, this academic theory suits them. I notice a lot of academic sooth-sayers coming into political life recently. This decent man produced this figure of 93 seats for Fianna Fáil under the straight vote system. He produced impressive drafts on television to prove his case.

The professor based his figures on the local election results and the highly academic assumption that in a straight vote single seat in a general election, there would be the same variety of candidates as in a local election. I know in my own constituency in the Dún Laoghaire section of it in Ward 2 or Ward 3—I am not sure which—in the last local elections, there were some 21 candidates. We had to decide who out of those 21 people would take over the five seats. It was a five seat ward with 21 candidates. It is really a crazy system.

Now, to get back to the professor's hypothesis, the whole point, as I say, of the single-seat constituency is that there are fewer candidates and the Opposition is vastly superior. This leaves me to believe that PR is an intellectual's paradise. I would like to know how those professors from UCD and from Trinity—there seems to be a great anti-Government move in both of those colleges—arrive at their figures. I would like them to be good enough to come out and say whose side they were on, whether on the side of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour, and we could deal with them as political professors, if of course we bothered to deal with them at all.

Those hypothetical propositions are produced so that the arguments are based on entirely faulty assumption. There is nothing incorrect in the question of the changing attitude in regard to the straight vote system and the PR system. I believe there is nothing wrong in going to the people ten years later on the same issue. We can witness the Taoiseach's statement on the proposed package deal in connection with the two proposals before us. This change of attitude—again this is a personal opinion—was brought about by public opinion and nothing else. The Taoiseach received praise and admiration for this and there is nothing to be ashamed of coming to the decision to which he came. Public opinion is what the Government is all about. Public opinion is what politics is all about.

Mr. L. Belton

We might get you to withdraw the proposals.

Mr. Andrews

Public opinion is what the Dáil is about and public opinion is what Deputies are elected on. Public opinion is what the referendum is about. When we talk about the Government interfering in this or coming to a decision, when we are dealing with a referendum, we are dealing with public opinion. It is public opinion which governs everything that happens in this country. That is the way it is and as long as I am in Fianna Fáil, I sincerely hope that is the way it will always be.

The matter of disfranchisement was also mentioned by Deputy Hogan, who, with no disrespect to the man, used the word incorrectly. Disfranchisement is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as a denial of the right to vote in an election. It has been said that if PR is abolished, this situation will arise. That is not so. People will still have the right to vote and elect the Party they want. The principle of one man, one vote is maintained in its real form.

The PR system of voting is unreal because if you have 15 candidates going for four Dáil seats, how can you really go through the 15 candidates and then say afterwards that you voted for the man who possibly got in or that you voted for the man who failed to get in? It is so incredibly confusing that I challenge most Deputies, and myself included, that if somebody came up to one of us in the morning and asked us to explain PR, I genuinely could not answer him. I believe 98 per cent of Deputies could not give the answer. They do not know how it operates. They do not know how to go in and vote for 15 candidates, and neither do the people. Do they just mark their papers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and so on?

We know that if you go outside the House, stop somebody in the street and ask what PR is, he will tell you he does not know. Such a person will not know what you are talking about. I know this is not the case with everyone. If you go to a person and ask him what PR is, he will say: "Yes, I do; it is a form or system of election". Ask that person to explain it and I very much doubt if he would be able to do so.

The corollary to all this about disfranchisement is that some people vote for A and B is elected. Consequently those who voted for A will not be represented. That is not so because the Deputy elected in the single-seat constituency will have a responsibility to the whole population of his or her area, irrespective of class, creed or otherwise. His responsibility in that particular area will be total. I suggest it is somewhat similar to saying that because under 21's do not vote, they have no rights under PR. They may have no constitutional right to vote but they have an inalienable right to representation, and that is the situation, as I envisage a civilised and mature single-seat constituency.

In my experience when someone calls to my door, or calls me on the phone or drops me a note, my immediate reaction is not to ask him to produce a Fianna Fáil membership card and to examine this card to ensure that his subscriptions are fully paid up. I listen to people's problems, and do what I can. If I cannot do anything, I tell them and that is the end of it. I never ask anybody what his or her political affiliations are. I think it would be impertinence to do this. I live in Blackrock and I have not a flag saying: "Fianna Fáil supporters only welcome here." All are welcome.

That is so much about disfranchisement. I cannot understand this line of argument. I am sure we are all sufficiently mature and civilised to recognise the fact that if I am elected for Fianna Fáil, the suggestion is that the Labour supporters and the Fine Gael supporters will be disfranchised, to use the word incorrectly again. That is not so. People can rely on any Member of this House elected under the single-seat system to represent the overall and individual interests in the constituency, irrespective of religion, class, or Party political affiliations. That is the way I would want it and that is the way I am convinced the single-seat constituency is the best.

This again brings me along to Miss Enid Lakeman and her Electoral Reform Society. Her plank is this whole question of disfranchisement if proportional representation is abolished. This is rubbish. That society has an address at Westminister and I wish it would cease meddling in the affairs of Ireland. We are mature enough to go our own way and settle our affairs without these ivory tower merchants talking down to us from a distance.

The minority groups have been put forward as an argument here for the retention of PR. As I said at the beginning, I challenge anybody to produce a case in recent Irish history where a religious or other minority suffered as a result of any action of this House. We are mature enough to recognise our responsibility to all sections of the community. As we all know, the most any parliament can do is to pursue policies that are generally acceptable. I should now like to deal with another matter brought up by Deputy Surgeon Hogan.

Mr. Corish

What did Deputy Farmer Corry say or Deputy Barrister Andrews?

Mr. Andrews

I was not here when Deputy Corry spoke, and I do not know.

Mr. Corish

Are you not a barrister? I could be Deputy Clerk Corish.

Mr. Andrews

Deputy Hogan mentioned that the Fine Gael Party were looking around for some Party with which to coalesce when they had the general election. I again challenge any member of the Fine Gael Party to announce that they will form a Coalition Government before we go to the people on this referendum. If you tell the people frankly and openly that you are prepared to form a Coalition Government. you will get the greatest hammering of your life. You have not announced how you are to form a Government, nor has your leader. On the basis of what Deputy Hogan said, with Ireland following a traditional pattern of voting, Fine Gael have no hope of forming a Government on their own. How will they get power? I suggest the only way is to coalesce with the other political Parties.

Tell the Irish people this before you go to the nation in the forthcoming referendum, whether in June or in the autumn. I do not know when it will be; it depends entirely on how long we continue this debate. That is briefly my reasonably short contribution. I should like to thank the House for the manner in which they have listened to me.

Mr. L. Belton

Listening to the Government's attitude towards this referendum, I find it amazing and amusing. It is amazing in the complete change of their present leaders compared with the founders and the former leaders of the Fianna Fáil Party: and it is amusing in the fact that Deputy Booth told us that he thought there should be a very strong safe Government here—as a matter of fact, he wanted it to be so strong that there would be an opportunity for the Government Party even to criticise their own actions. That is the type of strong Government he wanted and why he wanted a straight vote. On the other hand, they have been telling us it is to have a strong and viable Opposition that they are introducing the straight vote. How can anybody tell me you can increase a Government majority and increase an Opposition, in spite of the fact that the Government have said that there will be no increase in Deputies?

It is amusing to know how they will do this. I cannot understand it. Deputy Crinion got up and tried to make a case for the straight vote. He told us the straight vote was simple and people understood it. It was not as complex as PR but then he more or less put his two feet into it when he tried to defend the defeat of the referendum in 1959. He said that although the referendum resulted in a defeat by 33,000 votes, there were approximately 39,000 spoiled votes. These are his words. I do not know whether that is true or not. He said that in a normal election in any constituency under PR there are about 200 spoiled votes. That would make a total of 7,600 in the 38 constituencies. In the case of the referendum, it was a straight vote, for or against, and according to Deputy Crinion, there were 39,000 spoiled votes. That would indicate that instead of simplifying the issue for the electors, there would be confusion. The electors seem to have understood PR much more clearly than they understood the simple vote in the case of the referendum. The Deputy then started to blame the Labour Party and said that the Labour Party had not always advocated PR. I am not saying whether they had or had not: I do not know. The Labour Party are well able to defend themselves on that matter, I am sure.

Mr. Kyne

The Deputy may be quite sure of that.

Mr. L. Belton

He asked why did not Labour go out in the last by-elections, why did they wait until now, to tell the people that they were for PR He suggested that they should have done it long ago. I am not saying whether that is true or not, but if it is true, as he alleged, is it not also true that Fianna Fáil have not yet started to tell the people that they are in favour of the straight vote? In the recent by-elections, did they tell the people of Clare and Wicklow that they wanted only a straight vote and that nothing else was of any use to them? I do not think they did. I was not in Clare during the by-election there and did not see much of what happened there. I do know that prior to the election I saw on television the Fianna Fáil candidate who, I am glad to see, is here now as a Deputy.

When he appeared on television, did he tell the people of Clare that he wanted to represent only a small section of Clare? Did he tell them that, if elected, he would do everything in his power to see that he would represent only a small portion of Clare? My recollection is that on television, he presented a picture of a man who was ready, able and anxious and who would spare no effort in travelling the length and breadth of Clare to represent the people. If my memory serves me right, he used the phrase that he would represent the people from Loop Head to Lough Derg. He is here now. I think he used that phrase. That did not indicate that he would represent only one section of the people of Clare.

I was in Wicklow. In Wicklow, they did not ask the people to vote only No. 1 or that No. 1 was the only thing Fianna Fáil were looking for. I do not know whether or not the Parliamentary Secretary, who is here now, asked the people of Wicklow for No. 1 only, but a voter told me that a certain Fianna Fáil Deputy, who spent quite an amount of his time in Arklow, canvassed very hard for a No. 1 vote and the woman in question replied that she wanted to be truthful, that she had promised her No. 1 vote and could not give it to Fianna Fáil and that he then asked if she could not give Fianna Fáil her No. 1 vote, would she give the Fianna Fáil candidate her No. 2 vote. This woman, who lives in a remote part of the country, was quick enough to reply: "I thought that according to you people there should be no such thing as a No. 2 vote". They did not tell the people there that they did not want their second preference votes.

Mr. Nolan

Was it not lucky for you that there was a second preference in Wicklow?

Mr. L. Belton

It was, and we are fighting hard to ensure that there will be always a second preference. Definitely, we want to retain that and we want to retain, third, fourth, fifth and sixth preferences. I wonder what the founder of the Fianna Fáil Party must think if he listens to the arguments being put forward here. We are told by the Taoiseach that PR was a 19th century development. If it was a 19th century development, I wonder why the then Taoiseach wrote it into the Constitution of 1937, a time which was well into the 20th century. At that time, he thought it right and proper to write into the Constitution that the method of election should be PR. Despite that, the Taoiseach now says that it was a 19th century development, and this evening the Minister for Education told us that all that PR produces is parish pump politics. I wonder what the founder of the Party would think of that.

Deputy Booth treated at length with the faults of PR. The main fault he had to find in it was that it led to coalitions and, according to him, coalitions were to be avoided at all cost. Which was the first Party in the State to look for coalition? Fianna Fáil have gone back to tell us what Cumann na nGaedheal had to say about coalitions many years ago and have even reproduced newspaper cuttings about what was said by Cumann na nGaedheal in regard to the faults of coalitions. This led me to wonder why Cumann na nGaedheal should talk about the faults of coalitions and to wonder was it just that they stated in this House or issued statements to the press condemning coalitions for no apparent reason. I have discovered that their reason at that time was that Fianna Fáil were planning a coalition. I do not know how many of the Deputies here now ever heard of a former Leader of the Labour Party, Tom Johnson. At one time Fianna Fáil were so anxious to form a coalition that they were willing to appoint Tom Johnson as Taoiseach—the term was not in use at that time—Leader. Fianna Fáil at that time favoured coalitions.

Mr. Nolan

Would the Deputy put on the records of the House that he can prove that Fianna Fáil ever formed coalitions? Never in the history of the State.

Mr. L. Belton

It depends on your interpretation of the word "coalition".

Mr. Nolan

Tell me your interpretation.

Mr. L. Belton

My interpretation is where one or more Parties elect a Government.

Mr. Nolan

My interpretation is where two Parties come together to give ministerial posts all over the House.

Mr. L. Belton

That is inter-Party government.

Mr. Treacy

What about Frank Sherwin?

Mr. L. Belton

I will come to him in a minute. We are told by Fianna Fáil about the dangers of coalitions, the bargaining it leads to, how each Party stands out and says: "If we do not get this, we will not support the Government". The advent of Fianna Fáil to Government took place in 1932. They came in on the support of the then Labour Party. I admit that the Labour Party had the right to vote for whatever Party they liked. That is their prerogrative. They are entitled to do that. However, Fianna Fáil came in with the support of Labour. That is an undeniable fact. That is how they came to government. They told us then that they were not satisfied, that they wanted one-Party government. They got away with it on a couple occasions, but in 1951, Fianna Fáil held on with a collection of Independents in this House, a rather varied assortment of individuals, none of whom had anything particular in common, but yet they supported Fianna Fáil and Fianna Fáil were very glad to carry on with them. They did not tell us then of the dangers of not having a safe Government majority. They told us that everything was safe, the Government was stable.

I come now to what Deputy Treacy reminded me of, 1961. This beats all. From 1961, the Government held on for practically four years with the support of two Independents. Again we were told there was safe, strong Government. Everything in the garden was lovely. Fianna Fáil were satisfied, despite the fact that they had to depend on the whims and fancies of two Independents. Talk about the bargaining that went on among the Parties forming a Government. I wonder what bargaining went on with those Independents? We never will know the truth of what happened, but one fact was unmistakable, that one of them has been rewarded by a seat in the Seanad. He joined Fianna Fáil, I grant you, but he was not very long with Fianna Fáil. Prominent members of Fianna Fáil even here in Dublin who were defeated in the General Election of 1965 tried hard to get into the Seanad but failed. Why did the Taoiseach not nominate them among his 11? I wonder why he went to one man who was, if you like, only a wet-day member of Fianna Fáil? He was hoisted into the Seanad. It just shows that several other bargains may have been struck of which the people were not aware and of which, I suppose, we never will be aware.

Fianna Fáil have told us that PR was a British imposition. At the moment they themselves seem to be willing to take the present British system. If PR was a British imposition, why was it written into the Constitution of 1937? We were told that the 1937 Constitution was going to rid us of everything British and that all ties with Britain would be gone. Introducing these Bills, the Taoiseach told us that Fianna Fáil had always stood for the straight vote. I do not know how long the Taoiseach has been associated with Fianna Fáil. Not long after he became Taoiseach, somebody hinted that at one stage he had aspirations to join another Party. He denied that. He said his only recollection of politics was running along the Mardyke in Cork beside the car of the then Taoiseach. Although the Taoiseach may be a relatively young man, he surely remembers 1937? He surely knows that the Party he now leads did not favour a straight vote at that time? There is no doubt about it. Fianna Fáil were in power from 1932. While they were in power and felt PR suited them, they adhered to PR. It was the perfect system of election. Lest there be any doubt about it, they wrote it into the Constitution of 1937. That continued from 1937 to 1947. Then they were put out of office, but they did not decide immediately to change PR. However, when they discovered they were put out a second time, they began to realise that they could be put out of office under PR. The last time they were put out of office was, I think, 1957.

Mr. G. Collins

1954.

Mr. L. Belton

It was only in the Fifties they began to think to themselves—

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted, and 20 Members being present,

Mr. L. Belton

As I was saying, it was only when Fianna Fáil realised that they had been defeated twice under PR and an alternative Government formed that they began to think to themselves that under PR, they were not safe. They then began to think what was the best way of consolidating their position.

In 1959, we had this first attempt to do away with PR. Government speakers have reminded us of people on this side of the House who thought the straight vote was the proper method of election. They have gone back over the years to recall what different Deputies said in different years, but I would remind them that the founder of Fianna Fáil, now the President, said at one time that PR has served us well as a system and that it is a system we have a lot to be thankful for. PR, he said, is a system we have a lot to be thankful for and a system from which we should not lightly depart. Those were his views. If it was no harm for such an illustrious man as the President to change his mind, surely it is no harm for Deputies on this side to change their minds? If that were not enough, until very recently the last Taoiseach, Deputy Lemass, said that while we had PR, it was not possible to gerrymander. That is worth noting. Under PR, it is not possible to gerrymander.

Mr. Geoghegan

When did he say that?

Mr. L. Belton

I cannot give the exact date. I am speaking from notes. If the Deputy wants the reference, I can get it.

Mr. Geoghegan

The Deputy should have it.

Mr. L. Belton

We will get it. I did not say I was quoting, but I can get it. It is true.

Mr. L'Estrange

He said that.

Mr. L. Belton

I wonder if he still believes it is not possible to gerrymander under PR? Maybe that is the reason for the change, that Fianna Fáil want to gerrymander. I am referring to a former illustrious member of the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Dowling

We are all illustrious members of the Party.

Mr. L. Belton

Another former member of the Party now deceased, Mr. S. T. O'Kelly, said that PR had served us well, that he always stood for PR, and that he would vehemently oppose any attempt to abolish it.

Mr. Geoghegan

When did he say that?

Mr. L. Belton

Before he died. Those were the views of the leaders of the Party and I am sure that at that time when they were expressing the view that PR was a perfect system, they would not have dared to say the people did not understand it, that it was too complicated. I doubt if any of those illustrious men would have put forward that argument. Deputy Andrews now says that if you asked practically any Member of the House about PR, he would not understand it.

Mr. Geoghegan

Why does the Leader of the Deputy's Party say PR should be done away with?

Mr. L. Belton

When did he say that?

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Geoghegan should allow Deputy Belton to make his speech.

Mr. L. Belton

The Deputy asked me for day and date, and I am now asking him for day and date.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. L. Belton

Was the Deputy at a Party meeting? We know what happened at our Party meeting.

Mr. Dowling

Was that the one at which there was a row?

Mr. L. Belton

The Deputy is thinking of the succession stakes. He is getting mixed up.

Mr. L'Estrange

What about the time Deputy Hillery said to the Taoiseach: "Will you lead?"

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputies please allow Deputy Belton to make his speech?

Mr. L. Belton

I wonder if the leaders who advocated PR would be pleased to think that the present members of the Party do not understand it. Perhaps there was something in what the Taoiseach said about better Deputies, that the straight vote would produce better Deputies. Naturally, he has a better knowledge of Deputies of his own Party than Deputies on the other side of the House, and perhaps he recognised that the standard of Deputies on that side was not very high. In 1937, PR was fully understood by the people over there. We are supposed to be advancing as the years go by, and yet 30 years later Deputy Andrews tells us that practically none of them understands it. Surely that is an indication that there is a deterioration among Fianna Fáil Deputies? There might be something in the Taoiseach's desire to improve the standard of Deputies.

The Taoiseach and different members of the Government have become accustomed recently to visiting the North. There was an old saying in this country at one time that some of the English who came here and settled became more Irish than the Irish themselves. I am beginning to wonder have the Taoiseach and the Fianna Fáil Party become more English than the English themselves, because they seem to be adopting everything British. Many years ago, with flag waving and ballyhoo, we were told to burn everything British except their coal, that they were our traditional enemy, and that we were traitors if we advocated trade with Britain. All that is in the past now. Now Britain is a lovely place and the British are lovely people. They have gone so far now that they want this British system.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. L. Belton

The Taoiseach did not once mention the Irish term for a Member of this House, Teachta Dála. He did not use the word "Deputy". He used the word "Member". That sounds anglicised to me. I wonder will he go further and have himself described not as Taoiseach but as Prime Minister.

Mr. Geoghegan

He has the Irish language, and I doubt if the Deputy has it.

Mr. L. Belton

Tá sí agam.

Mr. Geoghegan

Níor chuala me an Teachta ag labhairt as Ghaeilge sa Teach riamh.

Mr. Cluskey

Have a bit of sense. You have finished codding the people with that nonsense.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

The Irish language does not arise.

Mr. L. Belton

It was Deputy Geoghegan who introduced it, not I.

Mr. Geoghegan

It was the Deputy who introduced it.

Mr. L. Belton

Unlike Deputy Geoghegan, I am not a native speaker, but I went to the trouble of learning the Irish language, and I have a reasonable knowledge of it. I advocate the use of Irish.

Mr. Corish

We had to learn it the hard way.

Mr. Geoghegan

I am sorry Deputy Belton does not use it, if he has it.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. L. Belton

It occurred to me to wonder since the words "Teachta Dála" were being cast aside whether the word "Taoiseach" would be abandoned and we would have a Prime Minister, and a Deputy Prime Minister instead of a Tánaiste. This seems to be the result of the visits of the Taoiseach and other members of the Government to the North. They want everything British.

Mr. Dowling

So the Deputy objects to co-operation between North and South?

Mr. L. Belton

No.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputies allow Deputy Belton to make his speech?

Mr. L. Belton

I am sorry if I am interrupting them. I think Deputy Dowling misunderstood me. I was not in any way faulting co-operation. I was lamenting that Fianna Fáil did not realise this about 30 years ago.

Mr. Dowling

A pity they did not realise it in 1925.

Mr. Corish

The Deputy's Party would not come into the House to vote against the Boundary Commission Report in 1925. We voted against it.

Mr. Cluskey

They were busy plunging the country into civil war.

Mr. L. Belton

Deputy Dowling referred to 1925. I do not like going back to 1925.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. J. Gibbons)

It is only 43 years.

Mr. L. Belton

I think the Fianna Fáil Party then regarded this place as an illegal assembly.

Mr. Dowling

They were not in existence then.

Mr. L. Belton

1926. How can an illegal assembly pass a law making itself legal?

Mr. J. Gibbons

The Deputy is making the speech: tell us.

Mr. L. Belton

I am asking the Parliamentary Secretary—

Mr. J. Gibbons

Ask me at Question Time.

Mr. L. Belton

I must remember that.

Mr. J. Gibbons

I am sorry: I was not following what the Deputy was saying.

Mr. L. Belton

Of course, Fianna Fáil can do anything to meet a changing situation. They told us they did not come into Dáil Éireann because of the Oath: it was as big as Mount Everest. It debarred any Irishman from coming into this Parliament. Suddenly, when they decided to come in, the Oath became a molehill, just an empty formula, nothing at all: they could walk in and there was no hind-rance in doing so. Then, as soon as they were in, this little molehill again assumed the proportions of Mount Everest. They abolished the Oath. A thing can grow to giant proportions when it suits them and it can vanish into oblivion when it suits them. They are experts in both cases.

The present proposal of the Fianna Fáil Party is the straight vote system for election to Dáil Éireann, the first past the post system, which I prefer to call the British system of election. It is a carbon copy of what we have in Northern Ireland. Fianna Fáil spent many a year bewailing and lamenting the loss of our brethren in the North—they were gerrymandered; they were being deprived of their rights and deprived of their representation there. Fianna Fáil's last Leader, Deputy Lemass, says it is not possible to do that under proportional representation. Now, Fianna Fáil want to have the straight vote system. I think certain people cannot be blamed for wondering if Fianna Fáil want to gerrymander with the same system as is practised in the North.

On the issue of tolerance, they told us they are worried about the West. Back in 1927, Fianna Fáil told us they were worried about the West: that is 40 years ago. I do not think they have done much for it since then. They have spent the past 40 years being worried. Have they done anything practical to try to help the West? It is a sad reflection that, 40 years later, they are still worrying about the West, so much so that now they want to make any two votes in the West or in the rural areas—when I say "the West" I include all that area from Donegal to Kerry that has become depopulated— equal to three votes in Leinster. They are worrying about them and they want to make any two votes down there equal to any three in, say, Dublin, where the population is.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin): That is not right.

Mr. L. Belton

I saw a heading in the paper the other day to the effect that the North had rejected the idea of one man, one vote. When I saw that heading, I began to wonder if it was something akin to what Fianna Fáil are attempting to do here. I began to wonder if it was the case that Fianna Fáil had rejected the idea of the one man, one vote principle and considered that it should be abandoned. Fianna Fáil are now trying to make two votes in the West equal to three votes in the Dublin area. They want any two votes in the depopulated rural areas to have as much say in the election of a Member to this House as three votes in Leinster.

Mr. Dowling

Who told you that? The Fine Gael Party have a great imagination.

Mr. L. Belton

It is not half equal to yours. We have not such flights of imagination at all.

Mr. Tracey

He was marching down Broadway when the Bill was drafted.

Mr. Gilhawley

Tammany Hall.

Mr. Dowling

I was not in Moscow.

Mr. Treacy

Who was?

Mr. Corish

Fifty years out of date. You have not very many arguments.

Mr. Cluskey

You have not much imagination.

Mr. Corish

Does Deputy Dowling know where Senator Boland went?

Mr. L. Belton

With the Russian Crown Jewels.

Mr. Corish

That is right.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Belton must be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. Corish

If you got an invitation to Russia would you go, too.

Mr. Dowling

I would not.

Mr. Corish

Why? It is a wonder Deputy Aiken sits with them in the United Nations Assembly.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps we could hear Deputy Belton, please.

Mr. L. Belton

I am sorry to interrupt Deputy Dowling. It might be interesting, when we think of the Fianna Fáil worry—

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

These interruptions must cease. We must have order at this stage to carry on the debate. I am calling on Deputy Belton to proceed.

Mr. L. Belton

It is very interesting to note that, despite the Fianna Fáil worry over the rural areas and the flight from the land since 1927—which is now over 40 years—their constructive achievements in those areas are noticeable by their absence. I happened to find the figures for Donegal. In Donegal, in 1932, the voting strength was 72,000: at present it is 54,000.

Mr. Coughlan

Fifty of them belong to Mafia.

Mr. L. Belton

Despite all the great work Fianna Fáil have done—they have been in office practically all that time—the number of voters on the register in Donegal has dropped from 72,000 to 54,000.

Mr. Cluskey

They must all be visiting Russia.

Mr. L. Belton

That is a drop of exactly 25 per cent. It is fairly significant. It does not speak too well for the Fianna Fáil attitude towards those rural areas. No wonder they are getting a bit worried now. I suppose it explains their idea of trying to make two votes there equal to three, say, in Dublin. They hope that will justify the same number of Deputies up there as they have had all along. Actually, in a national school there in 1936, the number of pupils on the roll was 164: at the moment, it is 38.

Mr. Dowling

They are all going to secondary schools.

Mr. Corish

And no children are being born.

Mr. L. Belton

The children are not going to secondary school at the age of nine or ten.

Mr. Geoghegan

What is the school?

Mr. L. Belton

Termon: I do not know if the Deputy knows it.

Mr. Coughlan

Does Deputy Dowling know where Donegal is?

Mr. Dowling

I do; do you?

Mr. Corish

Why do you not ask him where Moscow is?

Mr. Coughlan

I am a Muscovite. Does Deputy Dowling know what that means? You will have to find another one in Limerick very soon.

Mr. Cluskey

You try to be a Parliamentary Secretary with that nonsense.

Mr. Treacy

You will have to put up a better smear than that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I wonder who is speaking at this stage? Deputy Belton, to proceed, please.

Mr. L. Belton

It is clear that the present effort of Fianna Fáil to introduce this straight form of voting is motivated by their realisation that having being beaten twice by PR, they could possibly be beaten again and indications are that under PR it will not be very long until that happens. If they were to be honest with themselves and the country, they would realise that any Party getting a majority of the votes can form a Government.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin): A majority of the seats.

Mr. L. Belton

No, a majority of votes is sufficient. If the Deputy will look at the percentage of votes Fianna Fáil got down the years, he will find they succeeded in forming Governments on several occasions and rarely—perhaps once or twice—did they exceed 50 per cent of the votes, which proves that if you get half the votes or a little less, you can form a Government. What they are attempting now is to make sure of forming a Government with little more than one-third of the votes.

Mr. Dowling

That gives the Opposition a great chance.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Dowling and Deputy Coughlan are out of order.

Mr. L. Belton

I have heard of the intention of Deputy Norton to introduce an amendment to provide for single seats but allowing what is incorrectly described as PR to continue.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I must remind the Deputy that there is no amendment at present before the House. It may be discussed on the Committee Stage but not now.

Mr. L. Belton

I am only discussing his intention, not the amendment itself. It has been announced in the press that such an amendment has been introduced. I wonder who prompted it? I think everybody in the House, Labour Deputies and even Fianna Fáil themselves, will have noticed the friendly terms that seem to exist between Deputy Norton and the Fianna Fáil Party. I wonder when this amendment comes in, will it be stamped "Déanta in Mount Street" because possibly that would be the correct stamp. Or is there any truth in the rumour that this kite which is being flown to try to fool Members of the House was found by Deputy Norton on his way here along the Naas road and that it may have come from the Potez factory? It may be an indication that Potez still have hopes of fulfilling the purpose for which they were established.

Mr. Dowling

I would not talk too loudly about airplanes.

Mr. L. Belton

I do not like talking about them. This unfortunate accident we had does not encourage it. I think Deputy Dowling will realise that.

Mr. Dowling

The Deputy's Party sold the airplanes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would Deputy Dowling cease interrupting and allow Deputy Belton to proceed?

Mr. L. Belton

Talking about this amendment, no less a member than the new Minister for Education spoke about it this evening and told us that when it came before the House, every Deputy should consider it seriously.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Coughlan

Did he not tell us on television that it would be a package deal?

Mr. L. Belton

That is gone. He said that every Deputy should consider this amendment seriously. Deputy Booth was flying the kite in another form the other night. He was anxious to have single seats, but on the question of PR, he said he would not worry too much, that he would be willing to accept PR, as long as we had single seats. We had him telling us that he would really come down in favour of the amendment about to be introduced, and we had the Minister for Education saying that every Deputy should seriously consider it. Does this indicate that Fianna Fáil realise they will be defeated, if not annihilated, in this effort? Is this a way out? Are they going to turn about face? It would not be the first time they did so.

Mr. Geoghegan

If we are to be annihilated, is that not a chance for you to get in and prove your worth?

Mr. L. Belton

We hope you will not accept this amendment and will go ahead with the idea of single seats and the first past the post system.

Mr. Cluskey

Did he not plant the other idea?

Mr. L. Belton

I do not know, but judging by the indications given by Deputy Booth and the Minister for Education, it sounds as if they favour it. I should not be surprised if they did accept it. It seems to be the only way left. In the first instance, when the Minister for Education flew the kite about the package deal, there was no doubt about it: it was a simple "yes" or "no". In a short time he realised that would not pay off. The kite was shot down.

Mr. Geoghegan

Deputy Treacy shot it down.

Mr. L. Belton

Public opinion and the newspapers shot it down, and then the Taoiseach shot it down. There was no need for us to do so. They realised that there is no hope of that getting through. I wonder if they are now looking for some escape hatch. There is no doubt that if they go for the straight vote and the single seat, they will be beaten and they will be beaten in the following general election. Fianna Fáil are careful manoeuverers. They are beginning to realise this and they will seek any way out. The election in Wicklow gave them an idea, too. They realised, with the fall in their vote in Wicklow, that the people were not kindly disposed towards this idea of abolishing PR. With all these signs on the horizon, they are thinking, and thinking strongly, about the best way of getting out of the awkward situation in which they find themselves.

They tell us that certain Members on our side of the House favour the straight vote and that this will help the Government. I wonder what they think of the very many Members on the Fianna Fáil side who are afraid of their lives PR will be done away with. There are plenty of them over there. I do not know how Fianna Fáil control their Party meetings. Whether Deputies are allowed to express freely their own opinions or what opinions they expressed at the meeting at which the decision was arrived at, I cannot say, but a very short time elapsed from the time Fianna Fáil made their decision and announced they were going for the single seat, straight vote, to the time of the meeting at which the Fine Gael Party decided what their attitude was to it. At that time I myself was approached by several members of the Fianna Fáil Party to know what was our attitude, because they thought there was a danger that Fine Gael would go with the Government.

Mr. J. Gibbons

There was a very big danger.

Mr. L. Belton

No, there was not. For the Parliamentary Secretary's information, the ratio in our decision was about the same as when he sponsored a likely Taoiseach candidate who was defeated.

Mr. Geoghegan

Red herring.

Mr. L. Belton

It is no red herring. We were in the same numbers——

Mr. J. Gibbons

Which side was the Deputy on?

Mr. L. Belton

I was on the side of the retention of PR, because I believe it is a fair system that gives representation to all Parties.

Mr. Geoghegan

The Deputy had a narrow escape, if he was on that side.

Mr. L. Belton

Fianna Fáil Deputies were also asking us what would be the Fine Gael attitude to the single seat with the transferable vote. They were anxious to know this because they were afraid of their lives that PR would be abolished. I am sure at the moment I am speaking to some of them on that side who were hoping earnestly that PR would be retained.

Mr. Cluskey

I am looking at a couple of them over there.

Mr. Dowling

The old coalition tune: altogether now.

Mr. L. Belton

You were the first Party to participate in coalitions, and you coalesced with very doubtful elements at different times. Do not talk about coalitions.

Mr. Dowling

You will be together again.

Mr. Cluskey

Did you ever have an original thought? Certainly you have never expressed it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Evidently the Chair is not being addressed at all. The Chair is being ignored at the moment.

Mr. L. Belton

I have not the slightest doubt, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that if Fianna Fáil have the courage to stick to their guns and put the referendum to the people—they will certainly carry it in the House by the weight of their majority—going all out for the straight vote, single seat, they will get their answer well and truly from the Irish people. Not alone will they be fighting Fine Gael and Labour and the other different groups in the country, but they will be fighting many of the Fianna Fáil Deputies. I do not blame Fianna Fáil Deputies for subscribing to the idea of the 1937 Constitution.

Mr. J. Gibbons

We will have Deputy Cosgrave in with us.

Mr. L. Belton

We will have some of the present Ministers.

Mr. Geoghegan

Not one.

Mr. L. Belton

Who was the Minister who, when the Taoiseach was hesitant about this, called on the Taoiseach to lead or let somebody else lead? Who is that Minister?

Mr. Cluskey

It was the Minister for Labour, Dr. Hillery. He told the Taoiseach to lead or get out.

Mr. L. Belton

I have not named him.

Mr. Cluskey

He said: "Lead or get out."

Mr. L. Belton

There are several would-be Taoisigh within the Fianna Fáil Party. Of course, the present Taoiseach was only a compromise Taoiseach.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would Deputy Belton please address his remarks to the Third and Fourth Amendment of the Constitution?

Mr. L. Belton

It is very hard at the moment. Let Fianna Fáil stick to their guns and not seek refuge in this amendment which will be brought before the House, although it should make Deputies on this side of the House feel very doubtful as to what their attitude will be, seeing that the Minister for Education and Deputy Booth have emphasised that it merits serious thought. It shows that they anyway are satisfied that this amendment is not to be lightly dismissed and that it might be considered seriously. If they recommend to Deputies that they should consider it seriously, I suppose it is not out of order to think that the Minister himself is prepared to consider it seriously.

Mr. Geoghegan

We are an honest Government: we consider everything.

Mr. L. Belton

So are we all, all honest men.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. L. Belton

The Government seeing their strength dwindle and already having been put out of office twice under PR are trying to ensure that, with a minority vote, they will not be put out again. They tried to tell us they are worrying about Fine Gael and Labour. Why are they not truthful?

Mr. J. Gibbons

We stay up nights worrying about you.

Mr. L. Belton

The Fine Gael Party do not want Fianna Fáil to worry about them, and neither do the Labour Party require Fianna Fáil to lose any sleep over them. The Labour Party are quite capable of looking after themselves. Perhaps Fianna Fáil are worrying in a different direction. However, they need have no worries about Fine Gael because Fine Gael are perfectly satisfied with the present system and will fight for its retention. They only hope that the Government will be brave enough to go forward with the amendments they have proposed.

Mr. Geoghegan

Are you not holding them up? Why do you not let us go to the country?

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

What amendments have the Government proposed?

Mr. L. Belton

The Amendments to the Constitution.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cluskey

If you think you are going to win the referendum, it will be a matter for St. Jude, who caters for hopeless cases.

Mr. L. Belton

This evening, the Minister for Education said that when the amendment comes before us, it should merit serious consideration by everybody.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

As all amendments should.

Mr. L. Belton

I have no doubt that if he says every Deputy should seriously consider this, he will seriously consider it himself. The only thing that worries me is that Fianna Fáil have realised that they have no hope of getting this proposal through. I hope that they will not seek a way out now, but that they will go ahead and be well and decisively beaten in the referendum, and that the people will show them that, having voted against it in 1959, they do not want it again and that they object to the useless spending of some £150,000 on a question on which they decided only nine years ago. Nobody asked for this referendum; there was no need for it. Fianna Fáil realise that they are slipping down the slippery slope and to retrieve their position, they want on a minority vote of anything up to 40 per cent to cement themselves in office.

Mr. J. Gibbons

We keep on winning by-elections.

Mr. L. Belton

You have not won one outside Munster yet.

Mr. J. Gibbons

Five out of six.

Mr. L. Belton

You have not won one outside Munster yet.

Mr. J. Gibbons

That is a very subtle point.

Mr. L. Belton

Even the ones you won, you won with a reduced vote.

Mr. G. Collins

That is not true.

Mr. Coughlan

We must congratulate Deputy Collins on his maiden speech.

Mr. G. Collins

Do not worry; you will be hearing plenty from me.

Mr. L. Belton

In the Taoiseach's constituency, the fact that he is Taoiseach should be worth a couple of thousand votes, but yet in the by-election in that constituency, they lost 3,000 votes.

Mr. J. Gibbons

You got the moral victory, and we got the seat.

Mr. L. Belton

In Wicklow, you got the moral victory and we got the seat.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

How do we stand in Clare?

Mr. L. Belton

In Clare? It is like the Eskimo who when the war was over, still did not know years afterwards that it was over. Nobody thinks seriously about Clare. In Wicklow, they brought in their big guns. Down the years when there were two by-elections being held, two Ministers took charge, one for each by-election but it was very significant that in Wicklow there were two Ministers in charge.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

No, three.

Mr. L. Belton

Two of the leading Ministers. I know that the Minister for Education presided in Arklow for a while. I hope that the Government will go ahead, and with support from the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and all right-thinking people and associations who are opposed to the abolition of PR, and the passive support of quite a number of Fianna Fáil Deputies, there is no doubt what the result will be. Although he bears the name of the man who tried to do away with PR before, Deputy de Valera was right when he said: "Fine Gael were right in 1959 and they are absolutely right now".

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): The first question we must ask ourselves is: is there a necessity for a referendum? The people are entitled to be consulted occasionally, but it seems to be the view of the Opposition that the public should never get an opportunity to decide how the Constitution should be changed. People have a right to change their minds, and what the Opposition members or people on this side of the House said ten or 20 years ago is not relevant to-day. People have a right to change their minds in changed circumstances and that is why we should have this referendum. The people have a right to change their minds and so have politicians. I have no doubt that people who were in this House and left it would state, if they were here to-day, that we should have a referendum and that we should abolish PR. For that reason we are going to give the people this constitutional right. It is no prerogative of politicians in the Dáil to try to manipulate the Constitution if they do not——

Mr. Treacy

What section of the people, however minute, asked for this referendum?

Mr. J. Gibbons

The Ard Fheis.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): It is our obligation because we have been returned by the majority——

Mr. Harte

You have not. You have not a majority of votes.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We have a majority of seats——

Mr. Harte

But not a majority of the people.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central):——and we are obliged to decide what is good for the people.

Mr. Treacy

Would the Deputy name one individual, one group or one association who asked for the abolition of proportional representation and tell us the reason why they did?

(Interruptions.)

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

The Fianna Fáil Ard Fheis told us to do it.

Deputies

They did not.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Again, at this stage, I must ask for a hearing for Deputy Fitzpatrick.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I believe the people have this right and it is our obligation to give them the opportunity of exercising it. Surely we have no right to deprive the people of their right to express their opinion of the Constitution?

Mr. Coughlan

They did not ask for it. They have been looking for employment and houses for the past 15 years and Fianna Fáil did nothing to provide either for them.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): The problems the Deputy speaks about were not put to ballot. These are the ridiculous arguments put up in this House. I think it is a disgraceful state of affairs.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order. At this stage, the Chair will have to insist that the Deputy in possession be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We should discuss an important issue like this in a calm, detached atmosphere. It should go before the people as a constitutional and not as a political issue. This has no bearing on Government policy. Irrespective of whether we win or lose the referendum Government policy will remain unaffected.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): This is a constitutional issue divorced altogether from Government policy and we should discuss it on that basis. It has nothing to do with the economics of the country. It has a bearing only on the Constitution.

Mr. Coughlan

It is going to cost enough money anyway.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): This is a democratic exercise which takes place every ten or 15 years.

Mr. Harte

Manoeuvre is the word, not exercise.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Furthermore, a great many people who voted in 1959 are not on the register now. They have passed on. We have a group of young people— probably 15 per cent of the present electorate—who had no vote at that time and we should like now to know what they think about proportional representation.

Mr. Coughlan

And the unemployed.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I do not think that is relevant.

Mr. Coughlan

It is much more important.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): It may be, but times have changed. People change their minds, as they are entitled to do. I see nothing wrong in putting this issue to the people again to find out what they think about it. People are becoming more intelligent. A great many young people are interested in politics and we do not know what they think about the present electoral system. We are, I believe, right in putting the issue to the people to let them decide.

By and large, we recognise we cannot have a referendum unless we have a majority in this House. If we failed to get a majority in the next general election and subsequent elections, it would not be possible to give the people a chance of saying what they thought about proportional representation. People change their minds. The Church has changed its structure. When we go into the EEC, it is possible we will have to have referenda on various aspects of the Constitution. We will have to have a revision of constituencies before the next general election and surely this is the most appropriate time to consider the single-seat constituencies? We all realise that practically every constituency will have to be changed before the next election.

Mr. Harte

Can the Deputy explain why the referendum is being held separately?

An Ceann Comhairle

I must point out to Deputy Harte that interruption is disorderly.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Practically 24 constituencies will have to be changed at the next general election.

Mr. Coughlan

It is a different problem altogether.

Mr. Harte

Not only constituencies, but the Government will have to be changed.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Surely, if we have to revise constituencies, it is only right that we should draw up the constituencies in single seats. I have no doubt that there are many Deputies on both sides of the House who have no idea where their constituencies will be at the next general election.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): West Limerick will have to get 2,749 electors in the next general election. Constituencies will have to be rearranged. I think that is a good reason why we should change to the single-seat constituency now. People may ask why do we not concentrate on social and economic policies.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Remember, social and economic policies run concurrently when there is stable government.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Unless you have stable government, you cannot have sound social and economic policy. I am sure Deputy Harte is well aware of that. We need only go back ten or 15 years——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We know what stable government is capable of doing. We need only go back to the Coalition in 1954 and 1955 to find out what unstable government brought the country. We had practically 100,000 unemployed and houses in Dublin empty. That is why it is so necessary to have a stable government. That has a bearing on this referendum.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We are the choice of the people. A stable government and a strong economic situation have a bearing on this proposed referendum. That is why we want to ensure that no matter who is in Government they will have a majority in this House sufficient to control it. It is for that reason that it is necessary to give the people the choice——

Mr. Harte

Heads we win, tails you lose—that is the choice.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): ——it will give stable government, a strong Opposition and it will make for simple voting procedure. Nobody will disagree with these three principles. It will also mean smaller constituencies.

Mr. Harte

What does Deputy Fitzpatrick mean by smaller constituencies? What smaller does he want than he has? Why is a Dublin Deputy talking about small constituencies? A 2d. bus ride would get you from one end to the other of any constituency in Dublin.

Mr. Lalor

Deputy Ryan does not agree.

Mr. L'Estrange

Deputy Colley is in favour of PR.

Mr. G. Collins

Say it when he is back in the House.

Mr. L'Estrange

I have said it.

Mr. G. Collins

He will answer you back.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would Deputies cease interrupting from both sides of the House?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): The decision to have single-seat constituencies was unanimous in our Party.

Mr. Harte

Unanimous? I have already asked a Fianna Fáil Deputy about that and he ran away from it. Are you pledging your word of honour——

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Yes, of course I am.

Mr. Harte

Deputy Booth did not do so.

Mr. L'Estrange

Deputy Lemass spoke against it. The former Taoiseach spoke strongly against it.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

Where?

Mr. L'Estrange

At the Fianna Fáil Party meeting.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): No, he did not.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputies will have to cease interrupting.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): There was a complete majority in our Party.

Mr. Harte

You said it was unanimous.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

Absolutely unanimous.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): Absolutely—no question about it. You are trying to mislead the House. We all know that PR, by and large, means instability. That has been proved in many countries in Europe and now very few countries operate under this system.

Mr. Harte

In how many has it proved a failure?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): In three.

Mr. Harte

Give us the examples.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): In roughly three countries.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will Deputy Harte please allow Deputy Fitzpatrick to make his speech? Deputies have been ignoring the Chair completely. Will they please address the Chair?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): No doubt we shall have a long lecture from Deputy Harte.

Mr. L'Estrange

Tomorrow, with God's help.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

Intelligently, coming from Donegal.

Mr. L'Estrange

Where Deputy Blaney comes from.

Mr. Harte

I do not like to hear personal abuse from Deputy Lenihan. I regard him as a friend of mine.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We have three Parties in the House. The system has worked reasonably well and I cannot see how there would be much of a change under the straight vote system. I am sure Deputies would not like to see a situation in which there would be a breakdown in government every five or six months. I do not think that is the wish of Deputies.

Mr. Treacy

Where are the signs?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): In various countries in Europe. We have to go back only ten or 15 years.

Mr. Harte

Under proportional representation we have reduced the number of Parties to three.

Mr. L'Estrange

All Deputy Fitzpatrick's people are Fine Gael. They canvassed and worked for Fine Gael.

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

Blueshirts.

Mr. L'Estrange

Deputy Lenihan was a member of the Free State Army

Mr. P.J. Lenihan

I fought with General Collins when you and your bloody people——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will Deputy L'Estrange and Deputy Lenihan cease being disorderly?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I am not going back that far. I am trying to keep to the question before the House. I do not see why members of either Fine Gael or Labour should have any fear of standing in a single-seat constituency. Are they saying, in effect, that they are inferior to a Fianna Fáil candidate? Is that what they are implying? What are they implying?

Mr. L'Estrange

That the present system is fair and let well enough alone. Why do you want the change?

Mr. Lalor

That is what is wrong with Fine Gael——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I ask Deputy Fitzpatrick and other Deputies please to address their remarks to the Chair.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I cannot see why either Opposition Party should object to the straight vote. They will get as much opportunity as I in a single-seat constituency. I am new in the House and I did not get a big vote in the last election but I am prepared to take my chance in the next election.

Mr. Lyons

We are talking about the people, not Deputies.

Mr. Harte

Is the amendment before the House dealing with the single-seat constituency or the straight vote?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I am talking about the time when we shall have the single-seat constituency. I believe in the single-seater with the straight vote.

Mr. Lyons

For yourself or for the people?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We all realise there can be no such thing as PR in a single-seater. Anyone who tries to put that over to the people is trying to fool them.

Mr. Treacy

Therefore, Deputy Norton's amendment has no chance?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I am talking about PR. I am not talking about transferable votes, alternative votes or anything else.

Mr. Treacy

They speak in divers tongues.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I am speaking about PR and we cannot have PR in a single-seater. We are all agreed on that. We are all enlightened people.

Mr. Coughlan

What about Wicklow?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): That is no criterion for a single-seat constituency. We have nothing to say against PR. It has served us well.

Mr. Treacy

You can say that again.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): A lot of people on this side of the House can thank PR. However, we are looking to future stability in the country. Deputy Harte has a vested interest—he is thinking about his own seat.

Mr. Harte

I have confidence in the will of the people.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): We have been in Government for a considerable time.

Mr. Harte

Too long.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): If we had a vested interest, we would stick to PR because under it we must be the biggest Party during the next 20 years. Neither Labour nor Fine Gael have any hope of becoming a major Party under PR and I am rather surprised that the Labour Party have not realised this.

Mr. Treacy

Why are you trying to do away with PR, so?

Mr. G. Collins

We want to give you a chance.

Mr. Treacy

You want to give yourself the power but you will not get away with it.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): It was under the straight vote that the Labour Party came to power in Britain, and if the Labour Party here take the enlightened and forward view, they will find that it is their only hope of ever forming a Government.

Mr. J. Gibbons

They are not a bad little Party.

Debate adjourned.