Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 23 Feb 1927

Vol. 8 No. 7

PUBLIC BUSINESS. - CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL, 1926—REPORT.

Mr. O'FARRELL

I beg to move the following amendment which stands in my name:

Section 1. To add at the end of the Section a new sub-section (3) as follows:—

(3) If a revision of constituencies as effected in accordance with Article 26 of the Constitution should result in a change in the boundaries of, or the number of members for, the constituency for which the member so elected was last elected to Dáil Eireann, the Oireachtas shall determine which constituency shall be deemed for the purpose of the preceding sub-section to be the constituency which last elected the said member to Dáil Eireann.

The amendment is not vital to the Bill, but is merely consequential to amendments that were carried in the Committee Stage. The Minister on that occasion pointed out that in the event of a revision of constituencies it might happen that the outgoing Speaker might find that he had no constituency owing to the fact that the constituency which had last elected him to the Dáil had been incorporated in some other constituency or had been divided up amongst a number of constituencies. This amendment proposes to deal with a situation such as that. It merely provides that in the contingency which I have mentioned, and which was the principal objection put up by the Minister, that the Oireachtas shall itself decide which constituency shall be deemed to be the constituency which last elected the Speaker of the Dáil.

Mr. FARREN

I second.

MINISTER for JUSTICE (Mr. O'Higgins)

I have here an amendment which has been drafted by the Parliamentary draftsman. The effect of it would be to achieve all that Senator O'Farrell desires to achieve, but to achieve it perhaps in a better form. This amendment reads as follows:

Section 1.—Delete lines 25 to 33 and substitute the following words:—

The member of Dáil Eireann who is the Chairman of Dáil Eireann immediately before a dissolution of the Oireachtas shall, unless before such dissolution he announces to Dáil Eireann that he does not desire to continue to be a member thereof, be deemed without any actual election to be elected in accordance with this Constitution at the ensuing General Election as a member of Dáil Eireann for the constituency for which he was a member immediately before such dissolution or, in the event of a revision of constituencies having taken place, for the revised constituency declared on such revision to correspond to such first-mentioned constituency. Whenever a former Chairman of Dáil Eireann is so deemed to have been elected at a General Election as a member for a constituency, the number of members actually to be elected for such constituency at such General Election shall be one less than would otherwise be required to be elected therefor.

That amendment, together with the deletion of Section 2 of the Bill, achieves everything that Senator O'Farrell is anxious to achieve. I would suggest that if the Seanad adheres to its view that the principle in Senator O'Farrell's amendment accepted on the Committee Stage is sound, that then it should accept this amendment which has been prepared by the Parliamentary draftsman as an alternative. In fact, it is the same in substance as Senator O'Farrell's amendment and perhaps somewhat more elegant in form.

Mr. O'FARRELL

The amendment read by the Minister seems to me to cover all the points dealt with in my amendment. It has been prepared by the Government draftsman, and I am prepared to accept it. I do not know whether it deals with university constituencies as defined under Article 27 of the Constitution.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

It covers Article 27.

Mr. O'FARRELL

If that is so, I am prepared to move the amendment that has been read by the Minister.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

The amendment covers every alteration of the Constitution that is necessary.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The position now is that Senator O'Farrell is not moving his own amendment, but is moving in lieu thereof the amendment submitted by the Minister. I now put this amendment.

Colonel MOORE

I suggest that the amendment submitted by the Minister and now before the House should be altered to read: "One more" instead of "one less." In that way the constituency will not be defrauded of one of its members. As the amendment now stands, with the words "one less" it is really defrauding the constituency of one of its members.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I am afraid if that were done you would be altering the Constitution in that respect. The Constitution provides for the number of Deputies that are to be elected.

Colonel MOORE

This particular Deputy does not belong to anything.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The effect of the amendment is to make him belong to something.

Mr. McLOUGHLIN

If the amendment had the effect of reducing the People's Party by 50 per cent. it would be very serious indeed.

Colonel MOORE

The Senator is personal whenever he possibly can.

CATHAOIRLEACH

But always good-natured though.

Colonel MOORE

No, never.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

This amendment is merely supplementary and consequential to the amendments that are on the Order Paper to-day in the name of Senator O'Farrell, and to the amendment that the Seanad passed in the Committee Stage.

CATHAOIRLEACH

Senators, I think, quite understand that. This amendment will be inserted in lieu of the amendment that was moved and carried in the Committee Stage on the motion of Senator O'Farrell and will incorporate the two amendments on the Order Paper in his name to-day. As a matter of procedure, I think it would be better if Senator O'Farrell now moved the deletion of his amendment that was carried the last day in the Committee Stage of the Bill.

Mr. O'FARRELL

I move that motion accordingly.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I am anxious to have the matter put in proper form. The effect of the motion now moved by Senator O'Farrell is to delete his former amendment and to substitute in lieu thereof this new section which has been submitted in the form of an amendment.

Colonel MOORE

I do not know whether I am in order, but it seems to me that if I am it will be much more in consonance with the distribution of the Deputies if this particular constituency were given what is nominally an extra member. I do not see how that would violate the Constitution. The Constitution lays down the proportions for the election of members, but these cannot be carried out to the letter. They can only be carried out approximately.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I certainly would not rule out your amendment as infringing the Constitution without further consideration. Assuming that it is not infringing the Constitution, then I think your amendment is in order.

Colonel MOORE

There is not much more to say about the matter. It is only a question of whether Senators consider it would be better to have one more instead of one less. Certainly I think the present arrangement precludes that constituency from electing one of its members, because the constituency does not elect that particular member who does not belong to that particular party. He does not belong to any party.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I think there is a difficulty under the Constitution. It is in Article 26, which says "the number of members shall be fixed from time to time by the Oireachtas," and the Oireachtas has fixed the number. Then the Article goes on to say: "provided that the proportion between the number of members," and so on. It is provided that the proportion may be altered and that the Oireachtas shall revise the constituencies at least once in every ten years. The present membership is fixed, and fixed according to this Article of the Constitution. Therefore that principle could not be altered without an Act of the Oireachtas.

Colonel MOORE

Would not this be an Act of the Oireachtas?

CATHAOIRLEACH

It would, but I am not quite sure it contemplated fixing it in this particular way. This amendment is, as it were, changing the number already fixed by the Oireachtas by what I might call a side wind, not that I am suggesting that your amendment is a side wind, but in so far as it would affect the existing number fixed at the moment it would be an infringement of the Constitution unless you persuade the Oireachtas to agree to it.

Colonel MOORE

The Constitution has been broken and changed so often by the Minister that I do not see that another little change makes much difference.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I will not prevent you moving it if you wish.

Mr. BENNETT

I beg to second the amendment.

Mr. O'FARRELL

I do not know if the House really appreciates the position. There was a full dress debate here on the Committee Stage as to whether what Colonel Moore now suggests should be the position, and the Bill was amended. The Seanad, by a majority—Senator Colonel Moore voting, I think, in the majority— decided as the Bill now stands. Notwithstanding that, the Senator now expresses surprise, for the first time, that the position is as we find it. There may be a danger in this amendment unseating a present member of the other House, but I can frankly say that I was convinced that the present Ceann Comhairle represented another constituency at the time. He was elected for South Dublin and for the National University, and I was under the impression that it was for South Dublin he was sitting. At any rate I would not be influenced by that. I would be influenced by the general interest and by the general principle rather than the interests of any Deputy or Senator, and I do ask the Seanad not to make itself look rather ridiculous by turning down to-day something that they did after much consideration on the last day. In connection with this amendment I must say that no arguments have been advanced in favour of it. All the arguments that could be advanced were advanced on the last day, and the Seanad in its wisdom decided by a majority to insert the amendment in the Bill.

Mr. KENNY

The Constitution contemplates the revision of the constituencies in a certain time, once in every ten years. The basis upon which the present maximum number of representatives has been arrived at is the basis of population. We have the figures—a certain maximum and a certain minimum of population. The maximum shall not be more than one member for each 20,000 of the population, and the minimum not less than one member for each 30,000 of the population. Now, that ten years' period was put there with the idea or with the expectation that ordinarily our conditions would improve, the population would increase and that the electorate would increase. It was made possible for constituencies to be subdivided. It was contemplated that the 153 Deputies should be reduced or increased by revision in that sense. But this proposal of Senator Moore's at the moment, I submit, is not brought forward in that sense at all—with regard to any change that has taken place in the population. I am inclined to think that the amendment proposed by Senator Colonel Moore is not in accordance with the Constitution.

CATHAOIRLEACH

On reconsideration I am inclined to think that there is a great deal of force in what Senator Kenny has said. From the brief opportunity I have had of considering the Article I think what it means is this: "That it shall be fixed by the Oireachtas having due regard to the areas of population." The Constitution gives power to revise the number of Deputies from time to time. But apparently that revision is only to take place once in every ten years. No change made now in the Article could come into operation during the lifetime of the present Dáil Eireann. That is expressly provided for. On the whole, therefore, I am afraid that Senator Colonel Moore's amendment is not in order, and I rule it out of order. I now put the amendment which Senator O'Farrell had adopted on the suggestion of the Minister.

Question put and agreed to.

CATHAOIRLEACH

Senator O'Farrell will have to move to delete Section 2.

Mr. O'FARRELL

I move the deletion of Section 2 of the Bill.

Sir THOMAS ESMONDE

I second.

Amendment put and agreed to.

Question—"That the Bill be received for Final Consideration"—put and agreed to.