I welcome the Minister of State to the House. This business is to conclude after 90 minutes if not previously concluded.
Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2023: Committee and Remaining Stages
Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3
Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 4, lines 1 and 2, to delete “the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage”and substitute “An Coimisiún Toghcháin”.
Senator Ruane can speak to amendment No. 1 and I will speak to amendment No. 2.
There might have been some confusion that someone would not make it to move the amendment. We will figure it out. Senator Sherlock has moved amendment No. 1. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 seek to address an issue that was raised by Deputy Bacik in the Dáil. Section 3(2) currently provides that an area specified in the Schedule shall be taken to be that area as constituted on 1 October 2023, but if any doubt arises as to the constituency in which any electoral division or part thereof, or any townland or part thereof is included, the doubt shall, subject to section 1(b), be determined by the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The issue here is that where there is a doubt as to the constituency boundary, the Minister would be the one who makes a determination as to which constituency the relevant area is in. Points were made in the Dáil that given we now have an independent Electoral Commission, that power should reside with it rather than the Minister. Amendment No. 1 proposes the substitution of the Electoral Commission for the Minister in this subsection to transfer that power.
My amendment is an alternative to amendment No. 1, which I would urge the Minister of State to accept. It would provide that prior to making a determination, where doubt arises as to what constituency an area sits in, the Minister would have to consult with the Electoral Commission. This is a reasonable compromise. The Minister stated in the Dáil that he does not see a role for the Minister of the day in this. What our amendment does is balance this with the role of the new commission. I urge the Minister of State to accept this amendment.
I thank the Senators for raising this issue. Amendment No. 1 proposes to amend section 3(2) by substituting An Coimisiún Toghcháin for the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Amendment No. 2 similarly seeks to amendment section 3(2) by inserting "following consultation with An Coimisiún Toghcháin" after the reference to the Minister. Section 3(2) is a standard provision that has been inserted into constituency revision Bills dating back to 1923. It provides a means of resolving disputes over which constituencies contain particular townlands or electoral divisions. The legislation is framed in such a way as to preclude any such doubt but because neighbouring townlands or electoral divisions can have identical or similar names, the possibility of confusion cannot be ruled out. While a Minister has not had to exercise his or her function under analogous sections in previous enactments in living memory, it is nonetheless desirable to retain the proposed provision in case a genuine doubt arises. Ultimately, this provision provides for the removal of any doubt that might arise as to whether an electoral division or townland or any part or parts thereof is included in a particular constituency. It is not intended to provide for amending any of the constituencies as set out in the Schedule.
The practical effect of the proposed amendments would be to provide that an coimisiún, rather than the Minister, would be the adjudicator if any such doubt arises or alternatively, it would be the Minister in consultation with an coimisiún. While I accept that the proposed amendments are well intentioned and acknowledge that the establishment of a permanent and independent electoral commission with a statutory responsibility for constituency reviews does change the field in this matter, I would nonetheless make the case that there is still merit in this function remaining with the Minster for a number of reasons.
First, the Minister is responsible for the development of policy and legislation in connection with the holding of elections and is the sponsor of the Bill. The retention of this function is consistent with the Minister's responsibilities on elections and electoral law more generally. An Coimisiún Toghcháin makes recommendations in respect of constituency boundaries. After that, it is a matter for the Minister to bring forward legislative proposals for the consideration of the Oireachtas just as we are doing now with this Bill. Second, while an coimisiún may be well placed to clarify any doubts relating to the description of constituencies as set out in the Schedule on the grounds that it mirrors the recommendations set out in the constituency review report of 2023, matters relating to the precise boundary of an electoral division or townland may more accurately fall within the remit of the national mapping division of Tailte Éireann. Third, I believe that in the unlikely event that a doubt may arise as to whether an electoral division or townland or part or parts thereof is included in a particular constituency, in practice, the Minister in situ would consult with all relevant bodies including An Coimisiún Toghcháin and Tailte Éireann in advance of making a determination on the matter. For these reasons, I do not support amendments Nos. 1 and 2.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 4, line 2, after “Heritage” to insert “, following consultation with An Coimisiún Toghcháin”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 3 has been ruled out of order as it is not relevant to the subject matter of the Bill.
Amendment No. 3 not moved.
Section 3 agreed to.
Section 4 agreed to.
NEW SECTIONS
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 4, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:
“Research on revision of Dáil constituencies
5. In relation to the revision of Dáil constituencies, An Coimisiún Toghcháin shall, within 24 months of the passing of this Act, conduct research and make such recommendations as it considers appropriate to Dáil Éireann on—
(a) the abolition of constituencies returning three members, and
(b) the specification for an indeterminate period of the number of members of which Dáil Éireann is to be composed and of the constituencies to be represented by the members, while varying from time to time the number of members to be elected for each such constituency having regard to changes in the distribution of the population throughout the State.”.
This is a very simple ask. It is merely asking for research to be conducted. Various political parties have a different perspective regarding the appropriate size of Dáil constituencies. If I recall correctly, both the Minister of State's and my party would have particular views on three-seaters. In the spirit of the Bill, we are asking for research to be undertaken by An Coimisiún Toghcháin, particularly with regard to three-seat constituencies. We do this, mindful that there have been proposals in the latest boundary redraw for a number of three-seaters across the country. There are very serious questions to be asked about the equity and representation that is afforded to a constituency with three seats. We ask for the Minister of State's support in this.
On a separate topic, I wanted to ask why there was not six-seater constituencies in the first instance.
In respect of local boundaries, my parish is small but is divided into three different electoral areas, much to the dismay of a lot of people there. The importance of keeping communities together is affected by that division. People have to drive 20 miles to vote rather than 3 miles to vote for a guy across the road from them. There are three houses together, which vote in three different electoral areas. That does not bring communities together.
I want to talk about the voting age. The programme for Government committed to an examination of the Scottish experience of reducing the voting age to 17 to draw conclusions. Many of our European neighbours have gone down the path of lowering the voting age and have not looked back. For local and regional parliamentary elections, Scotland, Wales, Estonia, Switzerland and some states in Germany have lowered the voting age to 16. In Austria, the voting age is 16 for all elections. For European elections, Austria, Germany, Greece, Malta and Belgium have lowered the voting age to 16. The Minister has spoken positively about this in the past. He was one of those driving the lowering of the voting age.
The effect of these changes have been overwhelmingly positive. One study examined the effects of lowering the voting age to 16 in 2014 on voting habits in the 2021 Scottish parliamentary elections. For the cohort that voted at 16 or 17, the authors found that socioeconomic turnout inequalities were reduced. That is of paramount importance. We want everybody at every level of society to come to the polling booth. Lowering the age increases the chance of that happening and demonstrates that it is important for our young people to have a voice no matter what socioeconomic background they come from.
For those who claim that allowing 16-year-olds to vote would compromise their childhood, their futures have already been compromised by their parents generation's inaction on climate and biodiversity. I do not accept that argument. We all know our young people are more concerned than ever about climate and biodiversity, as well as other issues. Why not give them a voice? Those who are 16 can be employed, pay tax, leave school and join political parties. Surely to God if they are able to do all those things, we should acknowledge that they have the intelligence to be able to vote.
I have worked with teenagers for more than 15 years. They are eloquent and we can learn so much from them. It is important that we get that across the line as soon as possible. We committed to examining it in the programme for Government. We need to give our young people under the age of 18 the right to vote. We can register them to vote in secondary schools. We have made it much simpler to register to vote; you simply go to register.ie and can do it in a few seconds. We need to acknowledge the ability of young people to understand the political system. We need to give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote.
I agree it is very important. Before I ask the Minister to respond, I want to welcome a Belgian student and guest of Senator McGreehan, to the Gallery today. You are very welcome to the Seanad.
I will address some of the points raised by Senator Garvey before coming to the amendment, in particular the voting age. My view is that I would like to see the voting age in Ireland reduced. It is included in the draft research programme for An Coimisiún Toghcháin. I am more than happy to consider the issue once the recommendations have been issued by the commission. I hope the research comes back in a timely manner ahead of local and European elections so we can make an informed decision on it.
We want to examine the Scottish experience, in particular. The Senator mentioned Scotland. A number of the jurisdictions I had a look at had a very positive experience with reducing the voting age. We received representations. On a number of occasions I met the Irish secondary school students association and other youth organisations that have advocated for a reduction in the voting age. The matter was raised directly with me by members of the Children and Young People's Assembly on Biodiversity Loss. They feel they need to have a vote. That is important. There are other opportunities for young people to participate in our democracy through Comhairle na nÓg, Foróige and other outlets, but voting is a basic constitutional right. Young people have the responsibility and many feel they want to have the right to vote. We look forward to the report coming back from the commission in that regard.
The location of polling stations is probably a matter for local authorities and returning officers. It is something that can be discussed locally.
In my response to amendment No. 4, I will refer to six-seat constituencies. It is a Government decision not to go through three, four or five-seat constituencies in the terms of reference for the commission in drafting the boundary recommendations for the next general election. In terms of representative democracy, six-seat constituencies are more balanced and provide for the opportunity for more diversity to emerge from elections. It is something we will be in agreement on. It is in the draft programme. That has addressed the issues the Senator has raised.
Amendment No. 4 proposes to insert a new section 5 to require An Coimisiún Toghcháin to undertake detailed research within a period of two years from the enactment of the Bill on the abolition of three-seat constituencies and on a system that has a fixed sized Dáil and a fixed number of constituencies, with the number of Members to be elected for each constituency to be changed from time to time so as to be aligned with changes in the distribution of population throughout the State. I am supportive of independent and objective research being carried out to strengthen and promote Ireland's democracy and electoral processes. That is why we established An Coimisiún Toghcháin and assigned it a very specific function to carry out research on electoral matters.
While I accept that the amendment is well-intentioned, I do not propose to accept it. Senators will be aware that early last month, An Coimisiún Toghcháin published a draft research programme 2024-2026 setting out a number of items it intends to research. It also announced a public consultation on this draft research programme, inviting all interested parties to make submissions, including any additional research projects that might be considered important to promote and enhance Ireland's democracy and electoral events. I understand the deadline for the receipt of submissions is 12 January 2024. I urge parties and individuals to make submissions over the Christmas pudding. It is a period of downtime for us all, but it is important that we help to shape the research programme.
Notwithstanding the current public consultation process, An Coimisiún Toghcháin is required, in accordance with its obligations under the Electoral Reform Act, to consult, among others, the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage in preparing and finalising this draft research programme. In light of the public consultation process under way and the requirement for An Coimisiún Toghcháin to consult the committee, it is not necessary to legislate for a specific item of research to be provided for in the Bill. The inclusion of the proposed item of research in the commission's research programme can be considered during the discussions that will take place during the consultation between the committee and An Coimisiún Toghcháin. I again urge Senators to make their submissions to the commission ahead of the 12 January deadline.
The House might also wish to note that An Coimisiún Toghcháin signalled in its recent draft research programme that it intends to carry out research into the issue of representation on the manner in which the overall number of TDs is determined in the context of the rising population and current constitutional and legal provisions in this area, as well as research on constituency magnitude, including the merits of constituencies larger than five seats. Accordingly, in light of the fact that An Coimisiún Toghcháin is committed to undertaking research on the future size of Dáil Éireann and the possible future make-up of Dáil constituencies, I do not believe it is necessary to legislate for these items of research to be provided for in the Bill. For that reason, I oppose this amendment.
I thank the Minister. Before I go back to Senator Sherlock, I welcome members of the Department of children and equality network. They are welcome to the Gallery. I hope you enjoy your stay in the Seanad. How stands the amendment?
I will press the amendment.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 5 in the names of Senators Hoey, Moynihan, Sherlock and Wall is out of order. It is not relevant to the subject matter of the Bill. That brings me to amendment No. 6 in the names of Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn.
On what basis has it been ruled out of order?
I will get a note for the Senator.
The note will state there is a cost on the State.
I think it is because Seanad Éireann is included in-----
No, I will read out the reason as requested. Amendment No. 5 relates to the publication of candidates' postal addresses on ballot papers at elections. The topic strays too far wide of the provisions of the existing Bill, which relate to Dáil and European Parliament constituencies and their reconfiguration on foot of the recent reports of the Electoral Commission. The amendment must be ruled out of order, in accordance with Standing Order 154, because it is not relevant to the subject matter of the Bill.
Because it mentions the Seanad.
Amendment No. 5 not moved.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 4, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:
“Report on number of members to be returned for Dáil constituency
5. The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage shall, within 1 year after the dissolution of Dáil Éireann that next occurs after the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas outlining the manner in which the number of members allocated to each constituency of Dáil Éireann has affected the following in representational terms:
(a) gender equity;
(b) diversity of political views;
(c) diversity of race and ethnicity;
(d) diversity in respect of disability;
(e) diversity in social class;
(f) diversity in respect of sexual orientation and gender identity; and
(g) diversity in political parties.”.
Amendment No. 6 would require the Minister, within one year of the dissolution of Dáil Éireann that next occurs after the passing of the Act, to lay a report before the Houses of the Oireachtas outlining the manner in which the number of Members allocated to each constituency of Dáil Éireann has affected gender equity; diversity of political views; diversity of race and ethnicity; diversity in respect of disability; diversity in respect of social class; diversity in respect of sexual orientation and gender identity; and diversity in political parties in representational terms.
On Second Stage, I raised how the terms of reference given to the Electoral Commission, as set out in section 57 of the Electoral Reform Act 2022, were quite short-sighted and specifically, that the requirement under subsection (2)(b) that "each constituency shall return 3, 4 or 5 members" lacked foresight both in terms of population growth and our broader goal of electing a more diverse Parliament. There were clear and concrete calls for the abolition of three-seat constituencies and an allowance for the creation of six-seat constituencies, and the opportunity was not taken. I also cited forthcoming research by Dr. Claire McGing, on behalf of Women for Election, which notes that the presence of PR-STV in Irish general elections will strongly influence decisions about candidate selection and party strategies, and has gender defects. Dr. McGing further notes that while constituency magnitude does not influence women's Dáil representation to the extent the political science literature would suggest, the effect is strongly mediated by individual political party strategies. This report finds that three-seat constituencies are less favourable to women than those electing four and five Members. Dr. McGing concludes that the research to be carried out by the Electoral Commission on six-seat constituencies must have a stronger gender lens, and that as the gender quota threshold rises to 40% at the next general election, parties should use larger constituencies as an enabling tool for effective quota implementation, while simultaneously ensuring that new women are selected to run in winnable seats, and not just to make up numbers alongside any favoured candidates.
The reasoning for our amendment is that research on constituency size needs to look to other issues, including diversity of political views, race and ethnicity, diversity in respect of disability and social class, LGBT diversity and diversity in political parties. We live in an unfinished republic and an unfinished democracy, and there is a huge body of work ahead of us in the realisation of the true democratic principles where political representation is available to everyone. These Houses do not reflect or represent the lived experiences of many in our country, and this needs to change. Working-class voices, Traveller voices, disabled voices, ethnic minority voices and trans voices are too few, as I said on Second Stage, and in many cases, they are completely missing in these Houses. Our group looked forward to raising these points in our submission to the Electoral Commission's research programme, but we should also be including it in the legislation, as it cannot be some sort of thought exercise for the future. It must be a radical and urgent change that we enact now.
Amendment No. 6 proposes to insert a new section 5 into the Bill to require the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage to lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas within a period of one year from the enactment of the Bill, setting out the impact that the number of Members allocated to each Dáil constituency may have on delivering a more balanced representation in our Dáil Chamber. Essentially, the proposed amendment would require that the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage to carry out a particular piece of research on the impact of forthcoming constituencies on Dáil representation. While I accept the good intentions of this amendment, I nevertheless draw the attention of the Houses of the Oireachtas to the Draft Research Programme 2024-2026, published by An Coimisiún Toghcháin on 9 November 2023, and to the accompanying public consultation inviting all interested parties to make submissions on both the draft programme and on any additional research projects that may be considered important to promote and enhance Ireland's democracy in electoral events.
In light of the public consultation process that is now underway, and the fact that An Coimisiún Toghcháin has been assigned an explicit research function under the Electoral Reform Act 2022, I believe it is not necessary to legislate for a specific item of research to be provided for in the Bill. The inclusion of the proposed item of research in an coimisiún's research programme can be considered over the course of the consultation that will take place between the committee and An Coimisiún Toghcháin. In this context, I urge the Senators to make a submission, particularly in relation to this matter. It is a hugely important matter and I agree wholeheartedly with the intent behind the amendment.
There is also a significant responsibility on political parties to ensure that they are not just attracting candidates for winnable seats, but attracting candidates from diverse backgrounds. Certainly, we are making a concerted effort in our own party to ensure that we have a 50:50 gender mix for the local elections next year, that we attract candidates from minority backgrounds and put in place the supports for them to participate and hopefully win seats for us. That is our party's responsibility but I think there is an onus on all political parties to do that. It puts quite a degree of responsibility back on the parties themselves to ensure that. I agree that six-seat constituencies would certainly give a greater chance of candidates successfully emerging out of an election and hopefully populating our Dáil with people from diverse backgrounds. I think we would all like to see that. However, it is important to note that there are a lot of strands to the research programme, including a blue-sky strand. There are a lot of additional, creative pieces of work that the commission could include in the research programme that could give effect to trying to support exactly what the Senators are trying to achieve, which is greater diversity in Irish politics.
Going back to the point about the onus on political parties, it is important to ensure, particularly for next year's local and European elections, that we are making a concerted effort to ensure that we have candidates from more diverse backgrounds. As I said, I think the research programme is the opportunity to try to help shape that in the future. The supports that are put in place and the education and awareness part of it is built into the function of An Coimisiún Toghcháin as well. There is quite a bit of work to be done in terms of promotion and awareness in supporting candidates in electoral events.
Is the Senator pressing the amendment?
Yes.
Amendment put:
The Committee divided: Tá, 12; Níl, 27.
Tá
- Black, Frances.
- Boyhan, Victor.
- Boylan, Lynn.
- Clonan, Tom.
- Craughwell, Gerard P.
- Flynn, Eileen.
- Keogan, Sharon.
- Moynihan, Rebecca.
- Ruane, Lynn.
- Sherlock, Marie.
- Wall, Mark.
- Warfield, Fintan.
Níl
- Ahearn, Garret.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Burke, Paddy.
- Carrigy, Micheál.
- Cassells, Shane.
- Chambers, Lisa.
- Clifford-Lee, Lorraine.
- Conway, Martin.
- Crowe, Ollie.
- Cummins, John.
- Currie, Emer.
- Daly, Mark.
- Davitt, Aidan.
- Doherty, Regina.
- Dolan, Aisling.
- Fitzpatrick, Mary.
- Gallagher, Robbie.
- Garvey, Róisín.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lombard, Tim.
- McGahon, John.
- McGreehan, Erin.
- Murphy, Eugene.
- O'Reilly, Joe.
- O'Reilly, Pauline.
- Seery Kearney, Mary.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Lynn Ruane and Marie Sherlock; Níl, Senators Robbie Gallagher and Joe O'Reilly.
Pursuant to Standing Order 57A, Senator Alice-Mary Higgins has notified the Cathaoirleach that she is on maternity leave from 19th June to 19th December, 2023, and the Whip of the Fianna Fáil Group has notified the Cathaoirleach that the Fianna Fáil Group has entered into a voting pairing arrangement with Senator Higgins for the duration of her maternity leave.
Amendment declared lost.
I welcome a guest of Senator Garrett Ahearn to the Public Gallery, Colin Harding from Cashel. Colin is very welcome. Thank you for being here today. I hope you have a pleasant visit.
Amendments Nos. 7 to 9, inclusive, in the names of Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn are out of order.
Amendments Nos. 7 to 9, inclusive, not moved.
Question proposed: "That section 5 stand part of the Bill."
I have sympathy for the Labour Party amendment No. 5, which was ruled out of order. It suggested that the electoral area would suffice for the address that goes on the ballot paper. I note in his contribution on Committee Stage that the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, said there was latitude in the process for returning officers to facilitate that. It is important that a note is made that the person is in a certain electoral area in a constituency for the purpose of the ballot paper. I ask the Minister of State to comment on the possibility of issuing a circular to the returning officers in advance of the local, European and general elections next year stating that the electoral area will suffice as an address. This is an issue for some and it can be a cooling off factor for some people in their consideration of whether they want to stand for election, given the recent protests we have seen outside people's homes. I ask the Minister of State to take that on board. I have sympathy for the Labour Party suggestion.
I thank the Minister of State and the Department for the work in bringing forward the legislation. The issue raised by the amendments proposed by the Labour Party Senators is one that we discussed at the committee. We have discussed many matters about our electoral activities but I will try to confine my comments to the Bill and come back to the Minister of State on other issues, such as the integrity of our democracy, the ballot paper and the votes that are being cast, which is critically important. There are some grave concerns about that, which we discussed at a recent meeting of the joint committee.
Considering the climate that we are living in and the visible levels of aggression and attacks, whether on social media or in real life, on public figures of all descriptions, we have a responsibility, in arranging and conducting elections, not only to protect the individuals contesting who are brave enough to put themselves forward but also the integrity and security of the democratic process. This is a real point of concern. It is not imagined, contrived or in any way fabricated. It is a real concern. Public representatives at all levels in our democracy are under daily threat. That is unacceptable. It is a matter for the Department of Justice, and for the police force to prosecute. It is a matter for the Department to take reasonable and responsible steps to protect the safety of those who live in our democracy and to ensure they are not unnecessarily exposed to risk. Sadly, that is the current situation. I hope that, in his work with the Department, the Minister of State can take steps to address that security issue before the next local, European and Dáil elections.
I thank Senators Cummins and Fitzpatrick for their contributions. We are disappointed that we did not get a chance to debate this amendment. If the amendment was deemed to be too broad, then our disappointment is with the Government for not tabling an amendment to deal with some of these issues. We have been a bit bewildered by some of the response, notwithstanding some of the Minister of State's positive comments.
When this Bill is passed, we will not have a consistent approach across all returning officers. We will not have hardwired into our legislation a very basic protection, as we see it, for candidates. We all exist in an atmosphere where it is not just about us as public representatives but about our families as well. There are lessons to be learned from what has happened in the UK. In some ways, it is a miracle that a TD, Senator or councillor, or a family member, has not been seriously attacked or indeed killed given the assaults and protests outside individuals' houses.
Much needs to be done to try to send out a message that those putting themselves forward for election or fortunate enough to be elected to represent their communities in this country are safe, particularly when we are trying to encourage people to run, especially women. We know about the conversations right across the Chamber, particularly with young women but also young men. There is already so much exposure on social media and whatever else. Basic things like protecting candidates' home address should not be too much of an ask. We believe it should be in the legislation. It is a source of great disappointment that the Government has not seen fit to take up what was discussed in the Dáil by making those amendments here in the Seanad. It is to benefit us all, both those who are already elected and those who we want to put themselves forward for future elections.
In light of the elections that will take place next year and in the years afterwards, the time to react is now. I reiterate that this is one of many measures that need to be taken, but it is a serious and important measure. I do not know whether the Government can bring forward an amendment on Report Stage.
The Minister of State will have our wholehearted and full support if he does. Otherwise, we will be left bewildered and very disappointed if nothing is hardwired into the legislation after the conversation.
I will not detain the House for long. I fully support the Government on this but we probably should have another look at the Labour Party amendment. There has been a complete sea change with regard to the families of politicians in urban and rural areas. When family members hear on television or radio that TDs and senators cannot get in or out of Leinster House because of a protest, they phone or text to ask whether we are okay. At this point, they are worried. I had a different view on this two or three years ago but I have completely changed my mind. Quite a number of families have had to deal with protests outside their homes. Any politician who has raised this matter, and we are all concerned, did so not because of themselves as such but because family members are suffering greatly. This is why so many people tell family members not to get into politics. That is a pity. I will support the Fianna Fáil and Government line on this but we should give heed to what was in the Labour Party's amendment. We have to address this issue. The public understands that we have to address it.
I have given latitude to Members on this issue because it is so important. Some of what has been raised is not entirely relevant to the Bill but perhaps the Minister of State would like to respond.
I would like to do so and I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach. I know we are discussing an amendment that was ruled out of order but it is important to spend a bit of time on the matter. I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment behind the amendment. The Bill is to carry out a specific function, which is to address the boundaries and give effect to the recommendations of an coimisiún in its boundary review. Notwithstanding this, the issues raised by Senators are of paramount importance.
I have stood in several electoral events down the years. Thankfully, I never had any real trouble at my family home. That is not to say that circumstances have not changed dramatically over recent months. Not only do we see the rise of the far right but, in tandem, we see disinformation being put online and not being challenged. Social media companies came before an Oireachtas committee in recent weeks. I met them in the run-up to the development of the Electoral Reform Act, particularly with regard to how we challenge misinformation and online political advertising during electoral events. It is clear there is a significant challenge there. I am conscious, as is the Government, that we want to encourage people to participate in politics. We want more women involved in politics and we want to get greater diversity in politics. We want to ensure that people feel safe and supported if they put their names on a ballot paper and that they will not be threatened or have that threat brought to their family home. That is the last thing any of us wants.
Senator Fitzpatrick spoke about having a consistent approach and ensuring we protect our democracy. We have a very good democratic system but democratic systems are under threat throughout the world. That is why the commission exists. It is one of many reasons we established an independent electoral commission for Ireland.
Specifically on the amendment, I assure Senators that an coimisiún will issue guidance to returning officers and local authorities in advance of electoral events. That is very important.
Will it be the commission or the Department?
The Department. The vagueness about addresses could mean that a constituency office or party headquarters could be used. There is flexibility already there about what can be included with regard to the address on a ballot paper. The Department will issue a circular to returning officers to ensure that if this flexibility is required by a candidate, it will be given effect to and supported. That flexibility already exists in terms of what can be put on a ballot paper with regard to address. I hope this gives some assurance on what Senator Sherlock was trying to achieve.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 6 and 7 agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.
When is it proposed to take Fifth Stage?
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Question, "That the Bill do now pass", put and declared carried.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 1.47 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 2.30 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 1.47 p.m and resumed at 2.30 p.m.