A chara, - James McDermot (January 11th) misses my point entirely. So far, only one argument has been advanced by Mr Noel Dempsey for replacing our present multi-seat/PR system with a single seat and party-list arrangement. That is, that it would reduce the burden of constituency work on TDs and release them for increased legislative activity.
But is it necessarily good for democracy that contract between the electorate and the elected should be reduced? The wealthy and privileged will always have access to the powerful, no matter what the electoral system. They meet socially. They hire PR agencies and consultants. They will never have to queue in a TD's clinic.
But for the poor it is a different matter. Their only source of political power is their vote and their only way of influencing policy matters is by direct contact with their elected public representatives.
Why should Mr Dempsey want to reduce this contact? Do we not have enough people in public administration who are out of touch with the public, without adding another elite of party-picked "list TDs", who will not have to bother about the everyday concerns of individual people?
Much of a TD's constituency work is indeed tedious. But it is a daily reminder for all of us of the tedium and hardships of many of our constituents. Let us reduce poverty and we will have fewer constituents with worries about medical cards, social welfare payments and public housing! - Yours, etc., Eamon Gilmore,
TD, Dail Eireann, Dublin 2.