Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Jun 1980

Vol. 94 No. 11

Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1980: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment (Mr. Connolly)

This Bill proposes to fix the total number of Members of Dáil Éireann and to revise the constituencies for the election of Members to the Dáil.

The Constitution requires, that the number of Members of Dáil Éireann be fixed from time to time by law and that the Oireachtas shall revise the constituencies at least once in every 12 years with due regard to changes in the distribution of the population. The Bill is similar in form to the other Acts for revision of the constituencies which have been passed over the years but it differs from those other revisions in one important respect. The difference lies in the fact that, for the first time, the scheme of constituencies contained in the Schedule to the Bill has been drawn up by an independent commission. In setting up the Constituency Commission to advise on the formation of Dáil constituencies the Government were fulfilling the undertaking to that effect given before the last general election.

A detailed explanatory memorandum has been circulated with the Bill. A set of maps illustrating the proposed constituencies has been lodged in the Oireachtas Library and I have arranged to have a set of maps on a smaller scale provided for each Deputy and Senator. I do not think it is necessary for me, therefore, to comment in any detail on the provisions of the Bill.

As regards the sections of the Bill, these are similar in form to the corresponding sections of previous Acts for the revision of constituencies. The sections contain the standard provisions of a Bill of this kind, including a designation of the constituency for which the Ceann Comhairle may be returned unopposed at the next general election and the usual provisions for adaptation of the register of electors and for the treatment of split polling districts.

The most significant provision in the Bill is section 2 under which overall membership of the Dáil is fixed at 166, an increase of 18 on the present membership and two fewer than the maximum number permissible under the constitutional provisions on the basis of the 1979 census returns. The Government, in setting up the Constituency Commission, indicated in the terms of reference that the number of members to be provided for should be not less than 164 and not more than 168. In the event, the commission recommended an overall membership of 166 for the reason that that number best facilitated the formation of a county-based scheme of constituencies. While the total membership proposed is the largest since the foundation of the State and 18 more than that of the present Dáil, there is, I think, general agreement that the increase is fully justified by the increased population and by the heavy workload which is placed on Deputies in modern times.

As regards the Schedule to the Bill, which contains the details of the proposed constituencies, these are identical with those drawn up by the Constituency Commission. The Government's position is that the recommendations of the commission constitute a package which they have decided to accept and to recommend to the Oireachtas.

The scheme of constituencies proposed is largely a county-based one, involving only three breaches of county boundaries. I feel sure that Senators will regard this aspect of the proposed constituencies as particularly satisfactory.

I would like to draw the attention of the Seanad to the question of the variation in the population-Deputy ratio in the proposed constituencies. At each revision of constituencies since the High Court ruling in the O'Donovan case in 1961, the Budd judgment, the variation in the population-Deputy ratio from constituency to constituency was restricted to 1,000 persons, or about 5 per cent above or below the national average. In the scheme of constituencies now before the Seanad, the variation from the national average exceeds 5 per cent in the case of five constituencies. The variation ranges from +6.28 per cent in Carlow-Kilkenny to -6.42 per cent in Mayo East. Senators will find a discussion of this matter in chapter 3 of the commission's report. It will be noted that the commission came to the conclusion that there is no rigid tolerance level and that the test in every case must be the one referred to in the Supreme Court judgment in the case of the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1961, namely, whether "failure to maintain the ratio between the number of members for each constituency involves such a divergence as to make it clear that the Oireachtas has not carried out the intention (of the relevant part of the Constitution)".

In conclusion, I would like, on behalf of the Government, to place on the record of this House our appreciation of the manner in which the commission have performed their task. I am sure that Senators will wish to join with me in expressing thanks to the members of the Constituency Commission—to the chairman, Mr. Justice Walsh and to the other members, Mr. Healy, Clerk of the Dáil and Mr. Meagher, Secretary of my Department—for the thorough and expeditious manner in which they did their work.

Mr. Cooney

This is the first opportunity I have had of welcoming the Minister to this House and I gladly do so. In connection with this Bill, I exempt him from the charge I made earlier in regard to Ministers of State coming in here with Bills in which they have no interest or knowledge. I exempt the Minister with regard to this Bill in common with every other politician who will look at the Electoral (Amendment) Bill because they all have a deep interest in it and some knowledge of the subject.

I should like to echo the Minister's words of gratitude to the members of the commission. They undertook a novel task, novel in the sense that they were dealing for the first time with the revision of Dáil constituencies, though they had a precedent from their distinguished predecessors who dealt with the European constituency boundaries and the ice to that extent was broken. They had the more delicate task of revising the boundaries of the Dáil constituencies. The fact that they have discharged this task in a way that has received, acclamation is too strong a word, but certainly outstanding and nearly unanimous approval from a sensitive body of people whose future could have depended on their work, is an indication that they discharged that work in a very sensitive way. It is quite an achievement to carry out that task and to please so many people nearly completely. They also have to be complimented for the speed with which they produced their report. In that connection one would be tempted to remark that the Government have maintained that level of speed in the way the Bill has been processed from drafting stage to Report Stage through the other House, and has come hot foot from the other House into this House. I think the Bill appeared in the Dáil only yesterday. Whether there is any political significance in the fact that the Bill has appeared the very next morning in the Seanad as top of the bill I do not know but we can make our own interpretation.

I am glad to see in the Bill that the number of five-seat constituencies is increased, because it is a recognised fact that proportional representation works best in the larger constituencies. Obviously the more five-seat constituencies there are the greater will be the accurate application of proportional representation. It is a pity that they are confined to the cities but, for reasons of geographic spread and the distance and inconvenience that would follow for rural Deputies, I suppose it is a matter of common sense that they would be confined to city districts. There are a number traditionally outside the cities where that tradition existed and people were used to working on the basis of a five-seater. I am glad to see they have been maintained.

There has been some criticism that the commission recommended an increase of 18 in the number of Deputies. The Minister makes the point that there is general agreement that the increase is justified because of the increase in population and because of the increased workload Deputies have to bear. I go along entirely with the Minister's thinking in this regard. The workload Deputies have to bear is increasing all the time because so much of a Deputy's work is—to use the modern jargon—at the inter-face between the State and the individual. As the State is impinging more and more at the request of the individual, there will be more room for the Deputy to act at that particular point of contact. There are more State schemes and more opportunities for Deputies to become involved where citizens come in contact with the State in some form or another.

There is a feeling of hope among some Deputies that the appointment of the ombudsman is going somehow to lift this burden. I do not think that is going to happen. It is a misunderstanding of the role of the ombudsman in relation to what the Deputy must do in his daily grind. There was also a feeling that if citizens' advice bureaux or similar offices could be set up all around the country they also would remove much of the burden of constituency work from Deputies. Many of these have been set up, and possibly they have taken some work from Deputies, but by and large people regard these offices or bureaux as another manifestation of the State. The motivation that drives them to a Deputy in the first instance is the very thing which would stop them from seeking the help of these offices which they regard as State offices. They come to the Deputy because they feel there is a certain sense of obligation due from him to them, and principally because he is a familiar figure and they can rely on him to deal for them with the strange faceless creature known as bureaucracy.

Ruairí Brugha

Do they not come to Senators too?

Mr. Cooney

Occasionally, but they are not encouraged. The work load of constituency business is going to continue to increase. But even worse than that, I find—I do not know if others in the Oireachtas share my experience in this—that Members of the Oireachtas in their own constituencies are actually in competition with each other to get constituency work to do. When one hears Members of the Oireachtas crying about all the work they have to do I think they are shedding crocodile tears because much of this is self-inflicted. It is not just a question of members of different parties busily competing with each other for constituency business; members of the same party are competing with each other for constituency business. This is happening all over the country. It has reached this pitch in Roscommon. There are two Fianna Fáil Deputies in Roscommon, Deputies Leyden and Doherty, who regularly review the planning permissions that have been granted by the county manager. Each of them then has a set letter which he writes to the successful applicants congratulating them on their success and saying if they can be of any further help in the future they will be glad to do so, implying——

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator is going outside the scope of this Bill by mentioning Deputies.

Mr. Cooney

I will not mention particular cases. I will deal in general terms with the work load of Members and the need for extra Members. I gave that as an example of Deputies putting work on themselves. Deputies are constantly complaining they have not time to do research in order to contribute to Dáil debates, that they need more secretaries and more research facilities, and they spend all their time literally chasing constituency business. There are instances—and these I can quote if the Chair will permit me—where a particular matter was taken up by a public representative of one party. The citizen met a public representative of another party and made the query "How is that thing going?". The second public representative obtained an answer and told the citizen who, in due course, met the first public representative and mentioned to the first public representative that that citizen had seen another public representative who had finished off the matter, to be met by an indignant barrage of abuse from the first public representative, "How dare you change your business from me to that other fellow". That is the level to which this business of representation has come and that is possibly the reason why we now need an extra 18 Members in Dáil Éireann, not to process legislation more thoroughly, or in greater depth, or more expeditiously or more efficiently, but to ensure that the messenger boy role will be done. This messenger boy role unfortunately is one consequence of PR, although not entirely a consequence of PR because in the United Kingdom where they have single seat constituencies it is still a large part of Members' work, but not I am sure under the same pressure. There is competition between parties and within parties; there is a strong desire for Members to show they are prepared to go to all lengths to represent people in the most menial and trivial way.

Much of the constituency work is necessary and much of it has to be done to try to ease the bureaucratic clogs that occur sometimes and prevent a citizen from getting what he is entitled to, or getting it on time. The elected representative has a very useful and real role to play in that regard. I am not saying all constituency tasks Members get to do are pointless or unnecessary. A good number of them are, and a good number of the things Deputies and Senators intervene in would happen in any event without their intervention. But there is a certain fraction of cases where intervention is necessary, where the Deputy can explain in more detail to a Government Department or a local government office in the country the particular circumstances which perhaps a constituent did not explain adequately and can clear a bureaucratic clog. That is a perfectly acceptable and proper role for a Deputy or public representative to play. I accept that entirely as part of the democratic process. What I said earlier is not to be taken as in any way denigrating that role but unfortunately, because of the pressures of PR, Deputies have gone further than that and are now literally seeking out cases in which they can make representations.

As long as we have PR, that will continue to be the case and so long as that continues to be the case there is reason to increase the number of Deputies by 18. The commission deserve great credit for the way in which they have managed to preserve county boundaries. County boundaries are of long standing and had such tribal tales in Irish life that they should and have to be preserved because to breach them upsets people unduly and out of proportion to what a stranger might imagine should be the consequence of breaching them. The commission were sensitive to this and observed county boundaries by and large. Some people, a minority of Deputies, will be dissatisfied and will feel that the commission came down hard on them. That is inevitable because one change has a domino effect throughout the country. Having regard to that consequence of changing, the commission have done a remarkable job in disturbing the present position so little. I would like, in conclusion, to congratulate them once again and to thank them for their work.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment (Mr. Connolly)

I thank the Seanad for the way it received this Bill and I thank Senator Cooney for his remarks. When the commission were set up to carry out this task it was as a result of an undertaking that we gave before the last election. The Government accepted the report as it was given to them by the commission. It will be hard to please everybody on all sides of the House: some will not be happy; but, taken all in all, the commission have done a very good job. Everybody knows that it is the people who will decide who will be the Government of the day. We have seen over the years when governments altered constituencies, the people decided who would rule and who would not rule.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the Members of the House, the judge of the Supreme Court and the two distinguished public officials. I would like to record my appreciation to all the staff who helped the commission in their work of amending or revising the constituencies.

Senator Cooney referred to the work load on public representatives. I agree with him that it is increasing: people have got more demanding, they know their rights now and rightly so. If there is clogging up in the process in various Departments people think public representatives will be able to help them. I am glad to say that Members of the House have been more than helpful. Taking everything into consideration, I am happy that the commission have carried out this task in an exceptionally good manner. When the Bill becomes law I have no doubt that people will decide who should be in Government. I would like to thank all the Members for their co-operation.

Question put and agreed to.