Sir, - Perhaps you will allow me to reply to remarks made about me and the Senate by John Waters in his column of June 17th.
Mr Waters derides the Senate for its "anti-democratic nature" and "sheer uselessness", reserving particular scorn for the university seats (not surprising in view of his remark that "some of the most spectacularly ignorant people in this society have emerged from the university system"). This is a remarkable take on things as most commentators, both domestic and international, attribute much of the success of the Celtic Tiger to the excellence of the Irish educational system, including third level. However, at least it allows Mr Waters the solace of not having gone to either Trinity or the NUI.
I am perhaps more surprised by his lament that he "left school at 18 to work and pay taxes to subsidise the education of people attending university". I am not completely convinced of the grounds of complaint here. After all, virtually nobody stays in school after the age of 18, the real tragedy being those who leave or drop out of the system at 12 or 14 years of age.
Of course it is true that some of us chose to continue our education. But this is scarcely a crime. As for privilege, yes, it certainly was a privilege to attend the University of Dublin, but my mother was widowed when I was six and she paid for my education out of a widow's pension. There were virtually no grants in those days and although I had enough points in the Leaving Certificate for a county council scholarship, this could be held only at UCD and I wished to follow family tradition by attending Trinity.
I did, it is true, secure a major prize in the entrance examination and followed this up by becoming First Foundation Scholar in English Literature and Language, as a result of which my fees were paid and I was given rooms and a small salary.If this means I was part of an élite I am profoundly grateful for it, and I think it a pity that there is still in The Irish Times this note of begrudgery towards our third-level institutions.
As far as the extension of the suffrage of the university seats is concerned, your readers may consult the record of Seanad Éireann where they will find that I have consistently supported the extension of the right to vote to other third-level institutions such as DCU, DIT, the Limerick University, etc.
With regard to the alleged uselessness of the Seanad, I believe that I and my colleagues can reasonably rely on our record. I was myself responsible in the last session for a large number of amendments on matters such as the Competition Authority Bill and prior to that succeeded in amending the Dublin Transport Bill, leading to the establishment of the Metro in Dublin, as well as being responsible for the guardian ad litem clause in the Child Care Bill aimed at protecting the rights of children.
My colleagues Shane Ross and Joe O'Toole also had spectacular success in the last session, Shane outdoing the Dáil by forcing the Government to withdraw its Bill banning opinion polls, and Joe O'Toole making an unforgettable legislative impact on Mary Wallace's Education Disabilities Bill.
It is, however, both facile and fatuous to confine one's criticism to the university seats which are, after all, the only democratic element in the Seanad electoral system, since the ordinary members of the nominating bodies are themselves enfranchised. If this principle were extended to the other nominating bodies, virtually the entire population of the island would be included and I have also consistently pressed for this. Moreover, whatever the defects of the system, I secured my seat by placing my candidature before 40,000 graduate voters. Mr. Waters, on the other hand, pontificates from the safety of D'Olier Street without having been elected to anything. May I also point out that such is the openness of the university system one does not have to be a graduate to stand in the constituency. So perhaps it is not stretching political credulity too far to suggest that even Mr Waters might find among those 40,000 graduates the 10 necessary to secure a nomination to run himself, always supposing him to be serious about Seanad reform, which he could then attempt to effect from inside.
Perhaps the most serious allegation made by Mr. Waters is that the Seanad "is contributing to public cynicism by bringing the political system into disrepute".There are, as I have admitted, flaws in the Seanad electoral system. But I do not recall a single peep out of your columnist or his ilk when, at a previous election, persons were placed by the political parties in prominent positions in Seanad Éireann, having stood and been defeated first in the Dáil election, then in the European election, and finally in the Seanad election itself, requiring them to be nominated directly by the government of the day. Despite this, all we get is bellyaching about the university seats. In my opinion cynicism about politics is much more likely to be promoted in the public mind by ill-informed articles.
Mr. Waters concludes his attack on me by saying: "The problem is that in politics, 'élitism' does not translate as 'excellence' but as oligarchy, monarchy or dictatorship". A monarch - moi! Well, begod, the Waters is muddied indeed! - Yours, etc.,
Senator DAVID NORRIS, Seanad Éireann, Dublin 2.