Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 11 Dec 1973

Vol. 269 No. 10

Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1973: Second Stage (Resumed).

Mr. Lalor

When the debate adjourned on the last occasion I had outlined the manner in which I believed the Minister could have approached the revision of the constituencies. I set out, as I saw it, the way in which, if he were true to the principles he expressed here away back in 1968, he could quite easily have revised the constituencies with fewer incursions across county boundaries. I outlined the situation west of the Shannon. I pointed out that the Minister could have approached the revision of the constituencies west of the Shannon in a different way.

Deputy Molloy, our spokesman for Local Government and the former Minister for Local Government, said he saw no reason why the Minister had decided to take two Deputies out of the representation pool in the west. The figures for Connacht, together with Donegal and Clare, would justify, even on the present national average per head of 20, 123 the retention of 30 Deputies in that particular area.

I went on to suggest to the Minister, in his absence on very important business elsewhere now, reluctantly accepting the fact, and, from my point of view, it would not be accepted in a Fianna Fáil revision of constituencies, that there were only going to be 28 Deputies west of the Shannon. I pointed out that it was possible to have a situation whereby we could stick to the arrangement he had as far as Donegal was concerned, making it a five-seater, but he could have maintained Leitrim as an entity with Sligo. The population of Sligo-Leitrim is such that it would justify the creation of a four-seat constituency covering that area. The population of Sligo was 50,275 and Leitrim 28,360, making a total two-county population of 78,635. One must add 2,835 electors who were taken out of Donegal and this brings the gross totals for Sligo-Leitrim and portion of Donegal to 81,470. This would be the ideal figure for a four-seat constituency embracing all Sligo-Leitrim without the necessity of splitting Leitrim in two.

I went on to express my amazement —I will not say horror because after eight months I have come to realise what National Coalition compromise means—that the county of Leitrim was split in two despite the five year old protestations from the Coalition Deputies in relation to interfering with the county of Leitrim on the last occasion. Following the national average which the Minister for Local Government outlined, we would then have a five-seater in Mayo and a three-seater in Roscommon. This would involve a very small breaching —I understand this was what the Minister was anxious to aim at—of County Mayo to enable Roscommon to become a three-seat constituency.

I then dealt with the amalgamation of Galway and Clare. This was spelt out by Deputy Molloy at the opening of this debate. He said that more than 12,000 voters are being taken out of County Clare, and transferred into the constituency of West Galway in order to make it a four-seat constituency. The population of Clare is 75,008. If 2,000 people had been moved from Galway into Clare, instead of 12,000 being moved from Clare to Galway, Clare would have been made into a four-seat constituency.

Without any question of breaching the Galway county boundary, there is an area of Limerick on the Ennis Road end, where 2,000-3,000 voters live who could have been put into the Clare constituency to make it a four-seater. If this were done we would have a justifiable 29 seats in the region west of the Shannon. We could still retain the five-seat constituency in East Galway with a three-seat constituency in West Galway and four seats in Clare. The Minister obviously set out to leave the minimum number of Deputies to the Connacht western region. The reason is obvious. It permeates the whole Electoral Bill as far as the Minister for Local Government is concerned. If there seemed to be a prevalence of people who favoured the Fianna Fáil administration they were deprived of Deputies in order to build up the Deputy strength in the part of the country where the National Coalition felt they were strong or they might be able to scrape a seat.

My contribution last week was subjected to a considerable amount of interruption. I made a remark in the Minister's absence which I would like to make again as he is present. I drew attention to the fact that in the discussion on the Second Reading so far —I presume it has been reported— the Minister had in fact interrupted on 260 occasions.

Mr. R.P. Burke

Deputy Lalor's contribution deserves a quorum.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Lalor said all this last week. He is repeating himself.

Mr. R.P. Burke

261 interruptions.

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

Mr. Lalor

When I made reference last week to the 260—now 262—interruptions that have come from the Minister for Local Government in this debate I was told by Deputy Harte that they were not interruptions, that they were corrections. I had proceeded to deal with some of the corrections that have come by way of interruptions from the Minister. If I could develop that I would like to refer specifically to the comment the Minister made which gives the game away from the Government's point of view. Deputy Molloy, in his contribution on 15th November, at column 2010 of the Official Report asked:

Can the Minister state why he put a five-seater in mid-Cork, a good rural area, and why he put two three-seaters in Mayo, another good rural area?

The Minister, as I suggest, gave the game away when he said:

If that part of Cork could be moved to Mayo I would have given a five-seater there also.

That in its own way explains the thinking behind this National Coalition consolidation Bill. The situation is that while the Minister on the surface openly denies that this is what I have said it is—a Coalition consolidation Bill—in those little interruptions, by way of correction, as Deputy Harte suggested, he tells the true story. In fact, when Deputy Molloy was making reference to the fact that 12,000 Clare people were being transferred to vote in West Galway the Minister for Local Government interrupted to say:

The other alternative would be to lump 18,000 persons into Clare.

He then went on to say:

The Deputy should be able to count.

Is the Minister for Local Government going to give lessons in addition to his opposite number or anybody else on this side of the House? If he tells any Deputy on this side of the House that he should learn to count, I showed last week where the Minister had been wrong, very prominently, and had half apologised for his misstatement in this regard.

As I have already said, the population of Clare is 75,008 and a person would not need to be a genius to be able to establish that, taking a round figure, fewer than 80,000 will justify a four-seat constituency. The difference between 75,000 and 80,000 is 5,000. Nevertheless, the Minister for Local Government, at column 2011 of the Official Report of 15th November interrupted Deputy Molloy to say that the other alternative to taking people out of Clare would have been to lump 18,000 persons into Clare. He added insult to injury when he went on to say that the Deputy should be able to count.

Deputy Molloy said at column 2013:

... Not alone has the dagger been thrust in by the Coalition in depriving the West of any representation at Cabinet level but the dagger is now being twisted in the backs of the people in depriving them unnecessarily in this revision of two seats.

The Minister for Local Government, Deputy Tully, said:

It was placed there by the Deputy's Government the last time his Government were revising the constituencies.

I cannot understand what the Minister means. That western area was given 30 seats and the present rearrangement deprives the western area of two seats, without justification, because, as I have said already, the population of that western area would justify the return of 30 Deputies to Dáil Éireann.

Mr. Begley

Is there any hope of our hearing your own contribution?

Mr. Lalor

I am dealing with the corrections.

Mr. Coughlan

How many of them?

Mr. Lalor

There are 260.

Mr. Coughlan

Is the Deputy going to deal with all of them?

Mr. Lalor

Not every one of them was wrong.

Mr. Coughlan

The Deputy is bogging himself down.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must be allowed to proceed without interruption.

Mr. Lalor

I am showing where the Minister for Local Government bogged himself down in his justification for depriving Cork city of a seat. I suppose the population of Cork city is continuing to increase. According to the last census returns the population of Cork County Borough was 128,645 people, a number which clearly, justifiably and incontrovertibly merits a six-seat constituency. The population upon which the then Minister for Local Government was working in the creation of the two three-seat constituencies in Cork city under the 1968 Act was certified at that time as 122,146, well above the figure that would justify six seats in Cork city. Yet, the Minister for Local Government at column 2016, in reference to Cork city, said that it was gerrymandered to achieve that. The expert on gerrymandering made that type of comment. Another correction by the Minister for Local Government came later on.

Mr. Coughlan

This is a great intellectual contribution. If that is the argument the Deputy is putting up, he is absolutely immobile.

Mr. Lalor

I intend to render 20 Deputies on that side of the House immobile for the next few hours.

Mr. Tully

That is the whole point. The Deputy cannot get anybody to make a contribution, so he is going to stall as long as he can. He can stall until 10.30 p.m. and at 1.30 tomorrow I will get in.

Mr. Coughlan

If the Deputy was sent in to do a job like this, he deserves his place on the Front Bench.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair desires that Deputy Lalor be allowed to speak without interruption from either side of the House.

Mr. Lalor

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle.

Mr. Malone

He is glad of them.

Mr. Lalor

I am not glad of them because I have a constructive contribution to make.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

I have asked that interruptions should cease.

Mr. Lalor

One of the challenges made from the Government side in relation to the contribution by the Opposition to this debate was to ask, "What might you have done? Have you anything constructive to say?". I elaborated on the last occasion and again today on the manner in which that part of Ireland west of the Shannon could be redrawn with the same number of Deputies as the Minister wants to put into it—I do not agree with that—but to provide for 28 Deputies I have suggested that that area could be divided with three small incursions across county boundaries, which is very different from the manner in which the Minister for Local Government plans to do it in this Bill. I say quite justifiably that that is constructive criticism and I propose to proceed to make further constructive criticism. I was forced by heckling and ignorant interruptions to justify the criticism I made of the 260 interruptions by the Minister for Local Government during the course of this debate. Deputy Harte said that they were not interruptions, that they were intelligent observations and corrections. I had been drawing attention to a number of corrections by the Minister for Local Government. So far some of them have been blatantly unjustified interruptions. On the other hand, we had a priceless one from the Minister when Deputy Molloy was dealing with the constituency including County Meath. Deputy Molloy was drawing attention to the fact that that constituency had become a four-seater in order to consolidate the position of the Minister who had a very shaky election on the last occasion.

Mr. Tully

A thousand votes.

Mr. Lalor

That is not exactly what the Minister said on the last occasion. What he then said by way of intelligent, corrective interruption was: "I topped your man and that is not very shaky." That was the Minister's contribution on that occasion. It may be no harm to put on record how the present Minister topped our man. I do not know who the Minister meant by "your man". We had two men in that contest, Deputy Crinion, and our esteemed former colleague Deputy Hilliard. Deputy Crinion got 8,555 votes.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Lalor

At that time the Minister was in the happy position of being able to be a lone runner. It should be a very interesting contest when we get the National Coalition lone runners going.

Mr. Begley

First, second and third.

Mr. Lalor

Deputy Crinion got 8,555; Deputy Tully, the present Minister, got 5,824 and Deputy Hilliard 5,685. That was the first count result and if that is what the Minister means by saying: "I topped your man and that is not very shaky". I do not think that if that was my level of performance I would be blowing to any great extent about it.

Mr. R.P. Burke

That is why he made it a four-seater.

Mr. Lalor

In fact, working on the type of sum done by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach earlier when he talked about the price per seat that Fine Gael had to pay. I would point out that the price per seat in County Meath in the last election went as follows: it took 14,250 votes to elect the Fianna Fáil Deputy: it took 9,073 votes to elect the Fine Gael Deputy and 5,824 votes or 19.25 per cent of those who voted in Meath —one out of every five people—to elect the present Minister who is responsible for this Coalition Consolidation Bill.

Mr. Begley

That is not so. It was Deputy Colley who put you out and well you know it.

Mr. Tully

His colleagues during his period as Minister contributed; they had their share in it.

Mr. Lalor

On that further, corrective interruption by the Minister let me recall a quotation from the Minister's remarks. I am making these as I go along because the Minister is reminding me. The Minister, in his short speech earlier said:

...In bringing forward a constituency revision Bill at this stage——

I am quoting from column 1984 of the Official Report of 15th November, 1973——

therefore, we are continuing a process already started by the previous Government and there can, therefore, be no disappointment on this point...

I accept that. It was said on the Government side: "Why did you not change the constituencies when you were there? You had the opportunity." The constructive approach of the Fianna Fáil Government was that revision of constituencies was a secondary consideration by comparison with the country's other requirements. We had quite an amount of other legislation for the betterment of the country to which we gave priority rather than revision of constituencies that could be aimed at trying to consolidate the Fianna Fáil position. We are now in Opposition because of that.

Tomorrow night we shall have a debate on the Adjournment of the second session of the present Dáil and the only new legislation that was not prepared by the Fianna Fáil Government that has gone, or is going through the House is the Electoral Amendment Bill. Any other legislation that has been passed—in fact, I could nearly say that any other legislation mentioned or introduced—was legislation prepared by the former Fianna Fáil Government. The difficulty with the present Government and one of the reasons why we are fast going down hill economically and why the public failed very noticeably—the comparison is £8 million as against £27 million—to show their support and confidence in the present Government, is that the present Government have spent eight months doing nothing else since their election——

Mr. Begley

What about Monaghan, the first test of public opinion?

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Lalor

I am talking of doing something for the country.

Mr. Coughlan

When it was neither safe nor profitable we were there.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lalor without interruption, please. Will Deputies please have regard for the Chair?

Mr. Lalor

We were led to believe that the present Government when elected would immediately devote all their attention to devising legislation for major reforms in the social and economic structure. In fact, we have had no legislation of that nature but we have activity which has made a major difference in our social and economic structure in that there has been a tremendous falling-off in public confidence as shown by people's willingness to back confidence with greenbacks. This is the important type of confidence that is required.

Mr. Begley

We are back to the bags of money again.

Mr. Lalor

This is confidence required, the confidence that shows when a Government turn to the people and say: "We have a programme of improvement for the people and we want you to put up the cash." There was a complete breakdown and this is an indication——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is getting away from the Bill.

Mr. Lalor

I am sorry. Getting back to the Bill, having dealt with Connacht, I should like to move to the province of Munster. I want to draw the attention of the House to a few basic facts with regard to Munster, facts of which the Minister for Local Government does not seem to be aware. The population of the Munster area, excluding Clare which has been dealt with as being on the other side of the Shannon, was shown in 1971 as 806,994. According to the 1966 census the population was 785,737. Between the years 1966 and 1971 there was a population increase in Munster of 21,257. We know from the Minister that the national average is 20,123. Having regard to the increased population in Munster of 21,257 one would legitimately expect an increase in representation of one Deputy but as explained in the explanatory memorandum Munster, excluding Clare, will retain its present number of seats.

The Connacht area was victimised to the extent of two seats. This is all a build-up for Dublin, with which area I shall deal later. Although the population in Munster increased by more than 21,000 it will only retain the 40 seats it holds at the moment——

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

We are too far from Dublin.

Mr. Lalor

The reason is because of the high regard and esteem in which the leader of the Opposition is held throughout Munster. Because of this the Government, through the Minister for Local Government, ensured there would be no extra representation from that area.

Mr. Begley

Did the Deputy read what Deputy Chubb O'Connor said in Donegal?

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

Of course, most of the mongrel foxes were from Munster.

Mr. Begley

Does the Deputy know what Deputy O'Connor said?

Mr. Lalor

When I was serving my time as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, one of the first things I learned from my boss, Deputy Haughey, was to have manners in the House.

Mr. Tully

Look what happened to Deputy Haughey.

Mr. Begley

The Deputy is talking about Munster Deputies.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us not raise the temperature unnecessarily. Deputy Lalor should be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. Lalor

I am not speaking about Munster Deputies but about the Munster people and the number of public representatives to which they are entitled. I am surprised that a public representative from Munster deliberately subscribes to depriving them of the extra representation to which they are entitled. I should like to pay tribute to the ingenuity and the capacity of Deputy Coughlan and I am glad he is present to hear my personal commendation. I am referring to the way he handled not only the Minister for Local Government but the National Coalition in general. He deprived them of the possibility of being able to fiddle another seat out of Limerick by maintaining the four-seat constituency in East Limerick. I can assure the Deputy that Fianna Fáil will be forever grateful to him for ensuring that we maintain——

Mr. Coughlan

The Deputy's party should have thought about that in 1933. They were not so grateful to me——

Mr. Lalor

The Deputy did not do us such a good turn as on this occasion and we express our gratitude to him. I am glad to learn the Deputy got the message from the right quarter and did not allow himself to be nailed to the mast on the next occasion. I will not repeat the logical criticisms and arguments presented by Deputies Molloy and Wyse in relation to the hammering being given to Cork city and the disfranchising of a number of people in that area. The Minister for Local Government said that the city was gerrymandered on the last occasion in order to provide six seats. Taking a 20,000 population as the national average, any city with a population of 120,000 is a natural six-seat area. This is what happened in 1968 when it was made a two three-seat constituency.

I should like to quote from a very eminent gentleman, the former Deputy Stephen Barrett, now a highly esteemed judge in our courts. In 1968 he was very critical of the manner in which Cork city was dealt with. At column 1276 of the Official Report dated 27th November, 1968, he said:

On the last occasion the constituencies were carved up—and plainly in a spirit of gerrymandering which had no regard whatsoever for a portion of the constituency which, whilst it was then in the county, always looked upon itself as part of Cork city constituency— the Minister and his Party proceeded to carve up the areas of Blackrock and Douglas in such a way that an area of the city, within a quarter of a mile of the City Hall, was shifted into a constituency which sprawled itself away down through County Cork and on to the borders of County Kerry so that people actually living in an area which is portion of Cork City Borough were completely disfranchised so far as Cork city itself was concerned.

I do not need to add to that. If Mr. Barrett were still a Deputy I am sure he would be arguing solidly against the actions of the Minister for Local Government. The population of Munster has increased by 21,000 but has not got any recognition from the Government. In Cork city and county there was an increase of population of 13,180. The city area increased its population from 122,146 in 1966 to 128,645 in 1971, an increase of 6,499. A total of 128,000 people are living in the Cork County Borough area but only 100,000 will be represented in the new constituency while 28,000 are being flung into the Mid-Cork area. This matter has been dealt with by Deputy Wyse. As a result of Deputy Wyse's hard work which has made him one of the most popular men in Cork city, we have this measure taken by the Minister for Local Government. I do not want to quote but I remember reading a contribution made by Deputy Tully in the 1968 debate in which he criticised the then Minister for Local Government for having almost taken the toes off one of the Deputies in Meath. Here the Minister for Local Government comes within four doors of Deputy Wyse——

Mr. Tully

Six, actually.

Mr. Lalor

I am not worried about the Minister's interruptions because of the 146 I have not found one right.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy is 100 out.

Mr. Lalor

I am sorry, it was 260. It was 128 one day, 56 another and 76 the next.

An Ceann Comhairle

Back to the Bill, please.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

The Minister for Transport and Power swayed him there, of course.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Fitzgerald is not helping his colleague and he most certainly is not helping the Chair.

Mr. Begley

It will improve things for the Deputy.

Mr. Lalor

Let us hope the Parliamentary Secretary will improve. He would not have very far to go.

Mr. Begley

The Deputy is telling his own story.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us not get involved in personalities.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

He should have Deputy Wyse on his conscience.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is seeking to protect the Deputy's colleague from interruptions and the Deputy is not assisting the Chair.

Mr. Lalor

I think I should reiterate the point made by Deputy Molloy. The Minister justified the creation of three-seat constituencies in Dublin on the basis that it was a built-up area. I hope the Minister, when he is replying, will be able to justify the manner in which he dealt with Cork city. What mental process did he go through to arrive at the conclusion that the proper thing to do was to make Cork a five-seat constituency? There is no area in the country in which six seats were as justified as in Cork city. If he adopted the same system that he adopted in Dublin, it would appear that he should have taken a little bit from the county area and brought it into Cork city to make a four-seater and a three-seater. The Minister outstripped himself in relation to the Cork city area. He did such a double deal that I doubt if he knows whether he is coming or going. The members of his organisation in Cork city will have difficulty in knowing what his actual intention was. Anybody with a normal degree of commonsense will see the mess that is being made of the country. Here we have a five-seat constituency being created in Cork city and, shades of the late Deputy Casey, an impression is being created that a seat is being made by the Minister for a Labour man in Cork city. They have not a dog's chance.

On the other hand, I am sure the Minister has made the remnants of the Labour organisation in that city reasonably happy in so far as he has shown that he is trying to help them. I doubt, however, if he will be able to prevail upon Deputy Barry Desmond or the Minister for Labour, Deputy O'Leary, to go back to Cork to try to consolidate the position there. I think what he really intended to do, when lopping off this section of Cork city for Mid-Cork, was to consolidate the position of Deputy Mrs. Desmond. Fair dues to him. I hope he will not be caught up in the double deal when he attends some Labour convention in Mid-Cork and says this is why he did it and then goes, on the following night, to Cork city and says that the other reason was the one. Cork city has been messed about wrongfully, disfranchised and completely gerrymandered.

The Meath situation is very interesting. County Meath has a population of 71,729. The population of County Kildare is 71,977, slightly greater than County Meath. That being so, the proper procedure would have been to take from Meath and give to Kildare, which is the bigger county. Kildare justified this by having the greater population. The population in Kildare had increased since the last census by 8.4 per cent, whereas the population of Meath increased by 6.5 per cent. Both showed appreciable increases but it seems obvious that Kildare will reach a figure which would justify four seats much more quickly than will County Meath. Of course, if we have the National Coalition at that stage they may even disfranchise the rest of the Kildare people. I should like to draw a circle around Dublin. I am looking at the census figures and building up to the lack of justification for the increase in representation in Dublin city from 38 seats to 43. This has been done by robbing Kildare and Wicklow for short-term political advantage.

County Louth has a population of 74,951. The last census showed an increase in population of between 7 and 8 per cent on the figures for the previous census. This was lower than the Kildare increase but with a population of 74,951 they were justified in aiming at a four-seat constituency, although this is being done by way of a deliberate attempt to bring in a colleague with the Minister for Defence. The Labour Party boys in Drogheda and Dundalk are being persuaded that the purpose of the four-seater is to make room for them but we all know what will be the outcome of the exercise. We know, too, that the Minister for Defence, like his colleague the Minister for Local Government, had the degrading experience of being the last man dragged in at the last election and, presumably, he wants to have some sort of crutch to lean on on the next occasion.

Mr. Tully

Is the Deputy not a very petty little man?

Mr. Lalor

No, but I have already spent some time this evening endeavouring to draw the attention of the Minister to his own pettiness. One would have thought that early on in office the Minister would have learned the lesson that he endeavoured to teach the then Minister in 1968 when he told Mr. Boland that he would have every opportunity of replying if he could refrain from interrupting. Perhaps pettiness, of which the Minister accuses me, arises from the fact that I am merely quoting the Minister to himself. When I was on the other side of the House I sat and listened to quite an amount of abuse from across the floor.

Mr. Tully

Not from me.

Mr. Lalor

I took that abuse. However, the difficulty here is that nobody ever appears to be on the receiving end of abuse from the Minister because one gets from him the dagger and the smile simultaneously.

Mr. Tully

I have never engaged in the type of vulgar abuse that seems to be the stock-in-trade of the Deputy since he moved to the other side of the House. He was not a bad fellow when he was on this side.

Mr. Lalor

I shall leave it to the public to draw their own conclusions as to who is guilty of vulgar abuse in this regard. I am endeavouring to point out that this Bill is devised not from the point of view of giving fair play to the electorate but to consolidate the National Coalition Government against what obviously will be a major reaction from the general public at the first opportunity they are given.

Kildare is more entitled to have a four-seat constituency than is Meath and, consequently, the process should be reversed in regard to those two counties. When the last Electoral (Amendment) Bill was going through the House Deputy Tully said, as reported at column 1815 of the Official Report for December 8th, 1968:

At that time I challenged the Minister in this House to put my area in with Louth or in with Dublin. As a matter of fact, I particularly wanted him to put me in with Dublin. I said then, and I repeat it here now, that if he put me in with County Dublin where he is a representative himself he would not get things as cushy as he is getting them now.

There is no reason why the Minister should have changed his mind in this regard, no reason why, instead of robbing Kildare he could not have robbed a little portion of County Dublin. He could have done the same in order to serve the people of Kildare. He could have made Meath a four-seat constituency by encroaching on Kildare. In fact, he could do that also for Wicklow although their population is slightly less at 66,295 but I suppose that since it is less than the 70,000 mark they might not be justified in having four seats. On the other hand, with the exception of County Dublin as a whole, the area in Leinster of greatest growth between the years 1966 to 1971 was County Wicklow which showed a population increase during the previous five-year period of 9.7 per cent. Should Wicklow follow the same growth pattern during the next five-year period it will have reached a four-seat capacity. The population increases of 8.4 per cent in Kildare, 6.5 per cent in Meath and 9.7 per cent in Wicklow justify increasing those constituencies to four seats when propped up by borrowing from the County Dublin area and by the end of the next five-year period each would be in the position of being justified in having four seats without any help from other counties. No doubt the gerrymander of this area was undertaken deliberately in order to consolidate the position of the Coalition Government.

In dealing with the Dublin area I wish to draw attention specifically to the non-justification of the increase in representation to five-seat constituencies. Already I have pointed out that there was no need to deprive the area west of the Shannon of two seats. I have pointed out also, that the population in Munster has increased by more than 21,000, thereby justifying an additional seat but they are not to be given this. The population increase in the area of Dublin County Borough, Dún Laoghaire Borough and Dublin County increased between 1966 and 1971 by 57,171 but they are to get five seats extra. In other words, for little more than each 10,000—11,000 odd—the Dublin County area as a whole is to get one extra seat while Munster gets no additional seat for their extra 21,000 people and Connacht loses two seats, a loss for which there is no justification. This Bill is a clear indication of the veracity of our prognostication that this Government would be a Dublin city oriented Government. It is the first piece of legislation that has been prepared by the Coalition Government. Any other legislation introduced by them so far was prepared by the previous Administration but in this, their first effort, they show clearly that they are Dublin-oriented and we now have the situation where the average rural dweller is to be ruled at the whim and by the general over-all pullings and draggings that take place between Ministers representing, in the main, the city of Dublin. We will have that representation increased.

It must be accepted that the 57,000 extra people justify an increase in representation for the Dublin area of two or three Deputies. Instead of South County Dublin encroaching into Wicklow—and so far as I know there are two encroachments into Wicklow —and instead of the encroachments into County Kildare—and there are two, one from Meath and one from Dublin—if the increased numbers to justify a four-seater in Meath had been taken out of North County Dublin, if the increased numbers to justify a seat in Kildare had been taken from south or south west County Dublin, and if the increased numbers to justify an additional seat in Wicklow had been taken from the South County area, we would have a more realistic situation and we would have three extra rural Deputies and three less city Deputies. That could be fully justified.

The danger of that equitable distribution was that the Fianna Fáil Party might find it easier to take the reins of Government again. I am surprised at this display of a lack of confidence in themselves shown by the National Coalition. This is the first piece of legislation to which they devoted themselves. Deputy Tully's colleagues said to him: "We know we are very shaky."

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister.

Mr. Lalor

Because the Minister's colleagues were very shaky and because they were fully aware that naturally everybody expected this quickly thrust together Coalition to disintegrate, their primary purpose was to try to consolidate their position. They brought in this legislation to enable themselves, in the event of another election, to have a better than average chance of being returned as the Government. I will postpone that again, a Cheann Comhairle, and go on to the basic situation.

An Ceann Comhairle

Thank you.

Mr. Begley

And so say all of us.

Mr. Lalor

Maybe I am teasing or hurting or insulting the Minister.

Mr. Tully

"Amusing" is the word.

Mr. Lalor

When I see the Minister smiling I never know whether he is amused or preparing to throw another knife.

Mr. R.P. Burke

He has a fair few knives left.

Mr. Lalor

That is the side of the House for the knives.

Mr. Begley

They will be out over there shortly.

Mr. Lalor

There were only six together on that side of the House last year.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Lalor

When I need a prompt from the Parliamentary Secretary I will ask him for one. When the revision of the constituencies was being debated in 1968 almost everybody in the Opposition wanted a commission. I do not want to bore the House by going through all the Dáil Debates at that time to point out the number of occasions on which the then Minister was asked to hand this matter over to a commission. It has been said often in this debate that there was nothing genuine about the Opposition spokesmen at the time. I take it I must leave the Ceann Comhairle out of that.

An Ceann Comhairle

Very definitely.

Mr. Lalor

There was an almost unanimous request from the then Opposition spokesman for a commission to do an impartial job in carving up the country into constituencies. It is remarkable that we have heard no mention of that from the Government on this occasion with the exception of Deputy Desmond who gave a small hint. He said that he has not changed his mind. I am paraphrasing him and he said: "It would be as well to try to consolidate ourselves first and then we will talk in terms of a commission."

We have been asked for suggestions. I have spent the night making suggestions for the Minister's observations. I should like to hear the Minister justify the number of slices west of the Shannon by comparison with the three little incursions which were made previously. I think "incisions" would be a more appropriate word because a particular scalpel is used for that work and I take it the Minister is expert at it. I am suggesting rather neat incursions, one rather minor one, the one he already has made in Donegal, a minor one into County Mayo and a minor one into Galway and that finishes the west and leaves him with 28 Deputies. I am not saying that is acceptable to me but it is more acceptable than what he is proposing. If he is dedicated to giving the people west of the Shannon 28 Deputies I recommend this to him and he has it for free.

I will give another piece of information to the Minister for free. He will find that the figures I quoted are pretty accurate. They are not open to such criticism as I have found it appeal to the Minister not to recast but to set up a commission to make recommendations to the House. A commission looking objectively at the necessity to re-cast the constituencies would examine them from the point of view of what is to be learned from the percentage increase in population in the various areas.

If we are to have a revision of the constituencies after every census we could save a good deal of Parliamentary time if we had a commission. In the areas where the population was increasing substantially they could go below the average while keeping within the 1,000 limit. With a tolerance of 1,000 below and 1,000 above that is 8,000 in a four-seater. In a constituency where you have an expanding and growing population you could create a four-seat constituency. A four-seat constituency could be created there based on a figure slightly above the 19,123 figure in the knowledge that, while you have the accepted norm of population, at the end of the five year period it may not have gone up by 8,000 and therefore the constituency will not need to be revised. On the other hand, where you have constituencies in which the population does not fall within that projection, you could aim at it in the other way. I offer that for free to the Minister.

On the last occasion I said I wanted to refer to a contribution made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach in which he drew attention to how unfair it was, in his opinion, that in some isolated cases it cost poor Fine Gael 12,000 votes to get a seat while Fianna Fáil got a seat with 8,000 votes. I thought there was something false in this situation. I knew the Parliamentary Secretary was being factual in the examples he quoted and I knew he would not try to deceive the House, but the few examples he gave could create a wrong impression. They could give the impression that there was some over-representation by Fianna Fáil in relation to the number of votes they got nationally. It is no harm to spell out, therefore, quite clearly to the House how extraordinarily accurate the returns were from the point of view of the 1968 Act. The Minister for Local Government was heavily criticised; he was accused of gerrymandering. Every speaker on the Opposition benches argued that the whole thing was a gerrymander. In fact, the figures in the last general election show how fairly the constituencies were drawn from the point of view of representation and how, in that election, everyone got a fair opportunity of sending back to the Dáil his chosen representative because in that election Fianna Fáil obtained 46.24 per cent of the first preference votes and we got 47.9 per cent of the seats, 1 per cent higher than the number of votes we got. If we had a properly filled House I am sure Fine Gael would say how lucky we were.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy ought not to invite interruptions.

Mr. Lalor

Fine Gael got 40.05 of the votes and 37.5 per cent of the seats. On the other hand, the Labour Party, of which the Minister is a member, got 13.67 per cent of the votes and they filled 13.2 per cent of the seats. Surely that is an indication of how fairly the constituencies were drawn in the last revision despite the interminable criticisms to which the then Minister for Local Government and his Government were subjected.

I am pleased to see Deputy Reynolds in the House. With the exception of Deputy Begley, the Parliamentary Secretary, he is the only Fine Gael representative at the moment.

Mr. Reynolds

If the Deputy only knew the hardship he is creating.

Mr. Lalor

I know I am boring the Deputy. Deputy Reynolds shed crocodile tears on the last occasion.

Mr. Reynolds

Quote me.

Mr. Lalor

I am just about to do so. Deputy Faulkner quoted the Deputy.

Mr. Reynolds

He made a different statement.

Mr. Lalor

I said the Deputy shed crocodile tears for the people of Leitrim because of the way in which, according to him, the constituency was being carved up and suggested that the counties of Roscommon and Leitrim should have been put together. Fair enough. I have outlined how Sligo-Leitrim could be put together. I can see why Deputy Reynolds would not like that—a five-seater in Donegal and a three-seater in Sligo. The situation is that the population of Sligo of 50,275 would not justify a three-seater. Even with the addition of 2,835 odd votes from Donegal that still would not justify a three-seater. I examined the Bill to see could Deputy Reynolds be accommodated on the lines outlined by him in 1968 and I found what he wanted could not be done any more than it could be done by the then Minister for Local Government in 1968. There was, however, an opportunity on this occasion for the Minister for Local Government to make Sligo-Leitrim a four-seat constituency, keeping Leitrim intact.

I am pleased the Deputy from Leitrim is present and will make his contribution. I hope he will join with me in appealing to the Minister to do as I say, so that the appeals he made in 1968, in which I join with him now, will not again fall on deaf ears. He was worried at that time at the shifting of a number of pieces of nine counties by the then awful savage, the Minister for Local Government, in 1968. The extraordinary thing is that the present Minister in slicing up the constituencies proposes to take a bit from Donegal, take two pieces of Leitrim, take a bit from Roscommon, a bit from Clare, a bit from Cork, a bit from Wexford, two bits from Kildare, two bits from Wicklow and one bit from Monaghan—12 incisions into nine counties. There are 12 slices of nine counties being taken off there.

I have not checked the actual set up with regard to the number of counties which were being interfered with under the 1968 legislation. I am taking Deputy Reynold's word for it that nine counties were involved. He went on to say at column 1395, Volume 237 of the Official Report on 27th November, 1968:

As I have asked before, why has Donegal not been made a five-seater? Why has Sligo not been made a three-seater? It would have been quite easy to do this. Why could counties Roscommon and Leitrim not have been left together with five seats?

I can appreciate why Deputy Reynold, having had the privilege and honour of representing that constituency, would still like to represent it. I have a more pronounced feeling that despite his protestations of love for County Leitrim and his allegiance to it he would not want Leitrim to be consolidated and put in with Sligo. He then might not have the privilege of representing that constituency in the future, should the justifiable amalgamation of those two counties be brought about again. As he is proposing to speak, I do not wish to interfere with him in that regard.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach in his contribution referred to the slicing up of the constituencies. He said at column 2029, Volume 268 of the Official Report on 15th November, 1973:

In 1973, this was the situation in the constituency of Dublin Central, Dublin North Central, Dublin North East, Dublin North West, Dublin South Central, Dublin South West—I have omitted Dublin South East because it was a three-seater:

He was drawing attention to the fact that Fianna Fáil got more representation than their votes entitled them to. He went on to say:

Fianna Fáil won 85,534 first preference votes, while the figure for Fine Gael was 56,986 and Labour got 51,317 votes. With their votes Fianna Fáil returned 12 Deputies, Fine Gael returned seven and the Labour Party returned five. If one were to break down these figures into terms of cost per seat——

this is an academic exercise at which the Parliamentary Secretary is good; he picked out selected areas——

as any schoolboy might be asked to do, it would be seen that the cost per seat to Fianna Fáil was 7,128 votes, the cost to Fine Gael was 8,141 votes per seat and the Labour Party got their seats at a cost of 10,261 votes each.

The Parliamentary Secretary felt that that was a tremendous sacrifice. Dublin is being carved into three-seat constituencies in order to redress that imbalance as he sees it. He is a spokesman for the Dublin area. He sits in at Government meetings and listens to the Dublin slant in relation to this. He saw that this was a desperate thing, that the Fine Gael Party should pay 8,141 votes per seat and Fianna Fáil should get seats for 7,128 votes. In a North Kerry constituency a Fianna Fáil seat in the 1973 election cost 13,049 votes. The Fine Gael seat cost 50,530 votes and the Labour seat cost 5,856 votes. The total cost to the National Coalition for two seats was 12,386 votes, a lesser cost for two seats than it cost Fianna Fáil for one; 13,049 voters had to troop in in order to send one Deputy back and a total of 12,386 votes sent in a Fine Gael and Labour Deputy, supporting the National Coalition.

Mr. Begley

The Deputy should ask Deputy McEllistrim how that happened.

Mr. Lalor

I know how it happened. We do not have to go and take on certain areas.

Mr. Begley

Senator Ahearne could tell the Deputy all about it.

Mr. Lalor

I could go on ad infinitum on this. The Parliamentary Secretary was whinging about it costing Fianna Fáil 1,000 less votes than Fine Gael. I have gone into the total statistics across the board and it shows the actual percentages of votes as per return. It was quite equitable. This should be put on record.

The Minister for Local Government is swiping a part of Kildare and shoving it into Dublin for obvious reasons. It cost 15,233 votes to elect a Fianna Fáil Deputy in Kildare. A Fine Gael Deputy could be elected for 8,297 votes and a Labour Deputy for 6,971 votes. Again, the comparison is the same as in North Kerry. A total of 15,088 votes elected two National Coalition Deputies and it cost more than the combined votes to elect the Fianna Fáil man. There is a similar situation in my own constituency. It cost Fianna Fáil 10,197 votes to send in each Deputy and Fine Gael have three Deputies at a cost of 7,136 votes.

Mr. Begley

Good organisation.

Mr. Lalor

Where there is good organisation—the comment of the intelligentsia on the Front Bench— the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach seems to find that the good organisation of Fianna Fáil in Dublin is not entitled to any credit. During the course of my submission I have endeavoured to show two things. If the Minister for Local Government and the Government genuinely set out to be fair, it is possible to be fair. I have suggested the manner in which they could do this. It may be said that the Fianna Fáil spokesmen are wasting their time trying to get a message across.

There is no point in my repeating the comment or the appeals made by the people on the other side of the House five years ago. I find it remarkable that they can do a complete somersault, change the tone of voice, the overall approach and change their principles. On the first day two groups get together and decide to form a coalition, it is a necessary prerequisite to the emergence of a coalition that the two groups must be willing and prepared to sell their principles. We have in the Electoral Bill a fine example of that. I have no doubt that nobody wants to listen to me much longer. If I were to go through the Second Reading debate and draw the attention of every Deputy to his statements made at that time and compare how they fall in line with the presentation on this Bill, and with the statement of the Minister for Local Government in his introduction, and the statement of a silently contributing back bench group, all the Deputies who contributed at that time would be shown to be what they have proved to be since, sellers out on their principles. Let us hope that tomorrow's Adjournment Debate does not show further confirmation of that.

Mr. Reynolds

I listened this evening and on the last occasion that the Bill was before the House to Deputy Lalor with great interest. He opened his speech by saying that he would be quite critical and would show the Minister where the Bill can be changed. At the conclusion of his speech the Deputy was talking about coalition government. I am sure he is an authority on that subject because, as a former Minister, he served with one for some time and I am sure that he knows how it operates and experienced the difficulty of getting the dissidents into the lobby.

Mr. Tunney

We should have supporters of this Deputy to benefit from what he has to offer. May we have a quorum?

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

Mr. Reynolds

I am sorry Deputy Lalor could not wait. Deputy Lalor made reference to my having cried during the debate here in 1968. I asked him on numerous occasions to quote me. The only quotation he gave was that in my speech in the debate in 1968 I said that Roscommon-Leitrim should be a four-seater constituency and that Donegal should be a five-seater constituency. If anybody, to use the Deputy's words, has cried and whinged in this House about a constituency, it is Deputy Lalor. He was the best crier and the best whinger that I have listened to for some time.

The Deputy commenced by telling us that Donegal should be a five-seater. He said that he was going to give the Minister an alternative Bill but he did not say that there had to be a number of people moved out of Donegal in order to leave it a five-seater, nor did he suggest where they should be moved.

It is quite evident to anybody who looks at the figures that there is an over-population in County Donegal to justify five seats and that some people would have to be moved out. Perhaps the Deputy was hoping that in the future we would get them in from Derry. I do not know what he had in mind. It was a pity he did not say it.

The Deputy was quite annoyed about the loss of seats in the west of Ireland. Everybody knows that seats are based on population. Let us look at the population in the west of Ireland since Fianna Fáil came into office. The figures are rather interesting. I will take the figures for the past 30 years until Fianna Fáil left office nine months ago, with the exception of a very short period of six years. Prior to the advent of Fianna Fáil in County Leitrim alone the population was 55,907. In 1971, the last census year for which figures are available, the figure was 28,360 —a drop of 27,541. Let us move to County Galway. Listening to Deputy Lalor, one might get the impression that the population of these counties had increased. When Fianna Fáil came into office the population of Galway was 169,366. In 1971, the population was 149,223, a drop of 20,143. In Mayo, when Fianna Fáil came into office the population was 172,690. According to the 1971 census returns, the population is 109,000—a drop of 63,165. In Sligo, when Fianna Fáil came into office the population was 71,388 and in 1971 it had dropped to 50,275—by 21,113. In Roscommon when Fianna Fáil came to office the population was 83,556. It is now 53,509, a drop of 30,000. These figures that I have quoted represent a total drop of 162,000 in the population of the west of Ireland. Deputy Lalor should be ashamed to make the slightest reference to it.

Then Deputy Lalor spoke about the division of County Leitrim; the boundary should be here and the boundary should be there. Does Deputy Lalor forget that in the last Constituency Bill introduced in this House County Leitrim was divided into three parts, one of which went to Donegal, one to Sligo and another to Roscommon, that each part had approximately 7,000 voters and that the quota in any one of these constituencies was in the region of 8,500? It was the intention there that no Deputy from Leitrim should be or would be elected. It happened in the first election. It very nearly happened the last time. It just did not. If anybody was crying about seats inside or outside this House, it was not I and if there were some of the Fianna Fáil people crying and whinging, as Deputy Lalor said, I suggest that he should think of somebody other than me.

Let us consider the revision of the constituency as far as County Leitrim is concerned. Does Deputy Lalor know that one cannot leave south Leitrim and go to north Leitrim without going through either County Roscommon or County Cavan? The Minister for Local Government cannot be blamed for that any more than the former Minister can be blamed. There is a natural boundary. The part nearest Roscommon went to Roscommon and the part nearest to Sligo went to Sligo. It certainly is a move towards restoring to the county its identity. It is not divided into three parts; it is just divided and it was not done by any Minister. It is the county boundary. That is the situation in regard to County Leitrim.

It was also suggested that some Deputies in these constituencies did not want Sligo-Leitrim back as a constituency in case some Fine Gael Deputies might lose their seats. But in 1961 there was a bye-election in Sligo-Leitrim which was won by Deputy McLaughlin who beat the Fianna Fáil nominee by 2,000 votes. In October, 1961, there was a revision of constituencies and it was Deputy Lalor's party who did away with the old Sligo-Leitrim constituency, not the present Minister for Local Government. There is no point in Deputy Lalor saying we were afraid to do this or that; the Fianna Fáil Party created the situation.

I was rather amused the other day when he referred to what Deputy Andrews said. I quote from the Official Report of 5th December, 1973, where Deputy Andrews said that there seemed to be an unholy haste about the manner in which the Government are anxious to rush this Bill through the House. Perhaps that is wishful thinking. Can anybody recall the leader of Fianna Fáil being on Radio Éireann on a Saturday morning, I think, saying that the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party were too busy fighting about the Constituencies Bill to have any other work done? Shortly after that the Bill came. Now we are told this was haste and that we want to get it through the House, that we are afraid of this and that. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot have the party leader saying one thing and Deputy Lalor another. I do not know if these two people agree but they cannot have it every way. If they are to be an Opposition at least they must be honest with themselves. We do not have to account for this but they will ultimately have to account for this themselves.

As far as I and every other Deputy is concerned—Deputy McLaughlin is the other Leitrim Deputy—we are quite satisfied with the revision of constituencies. Deputy Lalor maintained we were silent, afraid to open our mouths. I am not and I congratulate the Minister for Local Government on his revision because it is a fair effort. It guarantees that each part of County Leitrim will have a representative in this House whether Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour.

Mr. Daly

We must recognise the difficulties of any Minister for Local Government who attempts a revision of constituencies. It is a very difficult job. It is practically impossible to satisfy each party much less individual Deputies. The mistake the Minister made was that he rushed into this Bill to prove that he could do this revision in a very short time. He has made very serious mistakes, the most serious being made in my constituency of Clare. He has revised it by chopping and changing. He has taken a bit away and put it into West Galway. He has given back a part that was part of Clare previously, the part around Tullow Feakle, Scarriff and Killaloe. He has taken away part that was around Lisdoonvarna, Doolin and Kilfenora and put this in to form a new constituency of West Galway. I think a Minister in a previous Coalition Government said at one time that he would bulldoze the Twelve Pins in Connemara into Galway Bay. I think the Minister has done a far more remarkable feat in that he has transferred the people from the famous Burren in County Clare into Eyre Square, Galway. He has succeeded in bulldozing the Cliffs of Moher into West Galway also. There was no need for this. It is like a game of snakes and ladders where you give back a bit to County Clare in East Clare and take away a bit in North Clare and put it into West Galway.

The Minister should have kept to the old administrative County of Clare and have four seats in that area. He could have done this and the revision should never have been made and, to be fair, neither should Clare have been divided in the previous Act. I opposed this at that time and I think many in the Labour Party opposed it and shed a lot of crocodile tears on the ground that Fianna Fáil in 1968 were trying to deprive the Labour Party in Clare of a seat. They made a great deal of noise about Fianna Fáil trying to deprive Labour of the seat in Clare held by the distinguished former Ceann Comhairle, the late Deputy Paddy Hogan. The Labour people in Clare particularly felt it was an attempt by Fianna Fáil to deprive the people of Clare of the Labour representation they always had in the constituency and prevent the Labour Party from ever winning a seat in Clare.

Obviously, the Minister has now let down the Labour supporters and his own party in Clare in an effort to facilitate people in West Galway who are anxious to win a seat for Labour there. It is pretty obvious that he was pressured by certain individuals in the Labour Party in Galway to take in part of the North Clare area to suit a particular individual in Galway who is a member of the Labour Party, who claims connections with Clare and who feels that if he got a sizeable number of votes from the Clare area it might help him to win a seat for Labour in West Galway. I do not know how the Labour people in Clare will react to this change but it is a retrograde step which should never have been taken, transferring part of Clare into West Galway, giving back the part around Tullow, Scarriff and Killaloe. I welcome this part back in to the constituency; it should never have been taken out anyway.

My one other complaint about the Bill is that the Minister has completely ignored the people he has taken into West Galway. I should like him to explain how he thinks the people of Lisdoonvarna, the Cliffs of Moher or Doolin or Kilshanny or Kilfenora can call themselves West Galwegians. He should at least recognise that they are Clare people and he should either call the constituency North Clare-West Galway or Clare-West Galway or North West Clare-West Galway.

The Minister has made a very bad mistake; he has made an unnatural transfer because the people of Lisdoonvarna and Doolin and Kilshanny and all this area naturally tend to move towards Ennis. Now he is putting them in with Clifden, an area with which they have no connection and he has completely ignored their wishes. If he will not facilitate them by leaving them in the old Clare constituency and giving us four seats in that area at least he should recognise they have some right to be called Clare people. He should bear this in mind when bringing in amendments which I understand he can do at a later stage. I hope he will be able to see his way to revising this area and calling the new constituency he proposes as West Galway either North Clare-West Galway or North West Clare-West Galway.

Mr. Leonard

In his speech on the Second Stage the Minister said:

In drawing up this proposal my objective was first of all to ensure fair and reasonable representation for the people of every area. This is what the Constitution requires. Secondly, as I have already stated, I endeavoured as far as possible to avoid breaching existing administrative boundaries and tried to ensure that natural communities were not split, unnecessarily, between different constituencies.

This is not so because the Minister did not adhere to county boundaries unless it suited him. He should have been consistent in his policies, whether with regard to five-seaters or three-seaters, but he has been playing the game both ways. He favours three-seat constituencies in Dublin which has a highly concentrated population because he thinks this will suit the Government, but in areas such as my own which did not give the Coalition Government a majority he tries to punish the electorate.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): They made up for it since then—they made restitution.

Mr. Leonard

This is an exercise in gerrymandering. We realise that the Government are greedy for additional seats but we thought that greed would have been restrained especially in Border areas such as Cavan and Monaghan. However, there appears to be no limit to the greed. The Cavan-Monaghan constituency was discriminated against by the Government because in the last general election, as in many other instances, Fianna Fáil got four out of the six seats. This area covers a wide district, extending westwards for about 70 miles, and it also has a long border with Louth. It would not be possible for a Deputy effectively to cover such a constituency; his only hope would be to concentrate on a particular area.

I appreciate that it was natural that the Minister would attempt to consolidate his position in Meath and I do not fault him for what he did. However, instead of making Meath a four-seater, of making Louth and a small portion of Monaghan a four-seater, and the balance of Monaghan with Cavan a five-seater, he could have retained four seats for Meath—thus safeguarding his own position—and he could have had three three-seat constituencies. If he did that none of the counties would lose their identity and the constituencies would have been of a manageable size. Since 1961 Monaghan has had a portion of west Louth and the Minister could have given sufficient to Monaghan to allow for the three three-seaters I have mentioned.

One has only to look at the map to realise that Louth, the smallest county in Ireland, is a four-seat constituency. It is a highly industrialised area and has a large population. On the other hand, the large sprawling, unmanageable, hilly part of Monaghan and Cavan has only five seats. The worst feature of this Bill is that it was introduced by a Minister who comes from a rural area, who realise how important it is for a Deputy to keep in touch with his constituents.

I have a criticism to make of the Minister's proposal to amalgamate most of Monaghan with Cavan. I have no objection to being linked with Cavan but I would like to point out that the constituency would be unwieldy. The Minister stated that he was endeavouring to avoid breaching existing administrative boundaries. Not alone has the Minister breached the boundaries but, to use Paddy Kavanagh's phrase, he has put some of the "stoney, grey soil of Monaghan" into the very fertile land of Louth. By doing this he has taken the birthplace and the resting place of Patrick Kavanagh—the only poet of note Monaghan has had—and transferred them to another constituency.

The Minister said that the Oireachtas could decide to wipe the map clean and draw up new constituencies without any regard to the existing situation but that this was neither practicable nor desirable and that any revision of constituencies must take account not only of the constitutional requirements but also of the size and shape of existing constituencies, of local administrative boundaries and of physical features. If this was the exercise he should have started in Donegal and continued on down. His exercise is not to be commended. The bulk of the representatives of Monaghan and Cavan seem to be in NorthWest Monaghan at present. I do not think that is what he had in mind when he drew up this five-seat constituency. Across the border in Cavan, a short distance away, we have another representative and we have a Minister representing that area of Cavan too. With the exception of one new Deputy, who seems to be moved to the far end of the constituency, they are all within a 13, 14, 20 mile radius. I do not think that is why the Minister instituted this operation. It is not a good job. I believe the Coalition themselves will regret this exercise. The people of Monaghan and Cavan will register their disapproval at the next opportunity. At the by-election we brought it to the people's notice that this was on the cards but I suppose they thought that the Minister might bring in some provision which would change this.

Mr. Tully

It has been on the cards a long time, before the Deputy came in.

Mr. Leonard

It may be that he will have another look at it. It may be that he will do as I have suggested and not give any of his beloved county to either ourselves or to Cavan. I would ask him to give serious thought to leaving those boundaries intact or practically intact.

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

Minister for Lands (Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick,

Cavan): Deputy Leonard seemed to suggest that a five-seat constituency consisting of Monaghan and Cavan was created by the Minister for Local Government in order to punish the people of Monaghan and Cavan who had three-seat constituencies since the last revision. I do not think the Minister would have any reason to punish either Monaghan or Cavan because in their two three-seat constituencies, created by the former Minister for Local Government, Monaghan and Cavan behaved very well so far as the National Coalition were concerned. In 1969 Cavan returned two Fine Gael Deputies and one Fianna Fáil, and Monaghan returned two Fine Gael and one Fianna Fáil. It is true that in the general election of this year the reverse was the case. Cavan returned two Fianna Fáil and one Fine Gael and Monaghan returned two Fianna Fáil and one Fine Gael. However, as I told Deputy Leonard, Monaghan was very quick to make restitution——

Mr. Wilson

Just about.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan):——and to undo the apparent wrong of earlier this year. Monaghan returned Deputy Toal in the by-election. Deputy Wilson has said “just about” and, indeed, Deputy Lynch said the same thing the other day. I should like to put it on the record of this House that I suppose it would be difficult to find a more typical cross section of Irish public life in any constituency in Ireland than in the constituency of Monaghan in which the by-election was held.

Mr. Wilson

Is there not always a cross-section in every constituency?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): There is a particular one here.

Mr. Wilson

I do not think so.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): There are the poor lands of Monaghan, the small farmers of Monaghan, a bit like Cavan, on the one hand. Thrown in with them there are the richer lands of Meath and of Louth. To get a further cross-section, there are 3,500 of the minority religion in the country who could be regarded as a conservative people.

Mr. Dowling

What difference does a man's religion make? A man's religion does not matter. They are all Irishmen, all entitled to equal rights.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am coming a wee bit near the bone now. This is a border constituency extending right along the Border from Louth down along Armagh, Fermanagh and Cavan where a few years ago a Sinn Féin Deputy was elected. There were conservatives on the one hand and extreme republicans on the other—Louth, Meath, Monaghan— surely the finest example of a cross-section of Irish life. Between February of this year and last month there was a swing of 6 per cent away from Fianna Fáil towards the National Coalition.

Mr. Wilson

That is not true. Fianna Fáil increased their vote heavily.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Deputy Wilson availed of the by-election to familiarise himself with County Monaghan but I suppose one could not fault him for that.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister is a Monaghan man but we took him into Cavan, welcomed him and fattened him.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Lands.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): As somebody behind me has said, the Deputy will miss north Meath.

Mr. Meaney

The Minister should thank Aontacht Éireann before he concludes.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister for Local Government would need to watch himself. We won in that part of Meath.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): There has been much moaning about the breaching of county boundaries. On the occasion of the last revision of constituencies I appealed to the then Minister for Local Government to put Cavan and Monaghan together because, as I told him, it was unreasonable to put Oldcastle in County Meath in with Cavan, to leave out Carnaross and to put Moynalty in with Cavan. That was the greatest piece of gerrymandering that has ever been done.

Mr. Meaney

What about West Cork and Kerry?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Lands.

Mr. Coughlan

The people of Meath like us.

Mr. Wilson

Deputy Coughlan has never seen the place.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is in possession.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The then Minister went to Monaghan and in order to get a constituency there had to take another bit of Meath as well as a bit of Louth. I remember telling the then Minister that if he created a five-seater constituency we would succeed in wining three of those seats and I followed this by telling him that if he created two three-seaters, we would win four out of the six seats and that is what happened.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister's party did not succeed in holding them. We will take three the next time.

Mr. Coughlan

Mea culpa, mea culpa.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is in possession.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): As I was saying before Deputy Wilson came in, Monaghan repented and made restitution.

Mr. Coughlan

And we did not give them any penance for their sins.

Mr. Wilson

Deputy Coughlan was not there.

Mr. Meaney

He is a sound man.

Mr. Wilson

Bring in the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Perhaps Deputy Wilson would like to tell us about Senator John Brennan. Why did the Senator absent himself from the count in Monaghan for the first time in 40 years?

Mr. Wilson

He was there.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): If so, he must have been under cover because he was not in the council chamber. I do not know whether Deputy Wilson has contributed to this debate but, if not, I am sure he will have an opportunity of doing so.

Mr. Wilson

We will get three out of the five next time.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister, without interruption.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The constituency of Cavan and Monaghan is a much neater constituency than a constituency of Cavan consisting of two bits of Meath and a bit of Louth or a constituency of Monaghan consisting of a bit of Louth, a bit of Meath and a bit of Monaghan.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister is a member of the Brefni Historical Society and he knows that the part of Meath around Oldcastle was part of the ancient kingdom.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Deputy knows Monaghan and Cavan have a number of things in common—for example, they have me. Deputy Leonard expressed concern regarding a representative's ability to serve a constituency of Cavan and Monaghan. There is no problem in that regard because it is quite a manageable one. The people of Cavan and Monaghan intermingle and even Deputy Wilson will agree that people from Meath rarely move towards Cavan.

Mr. Wilson

Nonsense.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): People from Oldcastle and Moynalty move towards Navan or Dublin.

Mr. Wilson

Oldcastle is part of the ancient kingdom of Brefni.

Mr. Tully

It will be part of the ancient constituency of Meath shortly.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Lands.

Mr. Coughlan

Fianna Fáil are part of the ancient history of Ireland.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): So far as Monaghan is concerned it must be conceded that very rarely do Louth people move towards Castleblayney or Monaghan town but on the other hand the people of the part of Monaghan—Inniskeen—that is now being put in with Louth—regard themselves as Dundalk people.

Mr. Wilson

It is two-and-a-half to one in Inniskeen.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am glad the Deputy is happy about the situation. However, Deputy Leonard is not so happy.

Mr. Wilson

We will win three out of five.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): If so, I ask the Deputy now as I asked his former friend on the last occasion, what is he whining about? Should he not be very happy?

Mr. Leonard

We won three out of five on 15 occasions out of 17.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Deputy's party were not split then from top to bottom.

Mr. Wilson

We are not split now either, as the Minister knows. This is more of the playacting.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Papers make queer reading these days. The Minister for Local Government is being accused by Fianna Fáil of tearing things asunder while Deputy O'Connor is up in Donegal trying to stitch things together. It is a queer mix-up.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Wilson

The Minister is much too genial a man for this. Why not bring in the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs who can do this sort of thing with far more poise and spleen?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs discovered three things in Monaghan, one of the most important of which was Senator Brennan's letter. I do not know whether Senator Brennan welcomed Deputy Wilson but because of what has happened since. I wonder whether Deputy Leonard is happy about the situation.

Debate adjourned.