Sir, – The people, we hope, are represented by the Dáil. So who would be represented by a reformed Seanad? Those same people? But it makes no sense for the same set of people to elect two separate chambers. Should the Seanad be there to represent the elite? But which elite? The political, the academic or the artistic? Or the economic? And who decides on membership of that elite? The Government? God forbid.
In federal countries, the second house represents the states, whose interests diverge from those of the central government on many issues. Non-federal countries don’t have second chambers. What would they need them for? (Except, of course, for a Britain still clinging to the vestiges of its class system.)
The Seanad is an artefact of post-colonialism, an attempt by the young State to emulate the British system. In the context of a small, non-federal, democratically governed republic, it just doesn’t make sense to have a second house. – Yours, etc,
Dr GERARD MONTAGUE,
Immenstadt,
Allgäu, Germany.
Sir, – I would like to thank the organisers of the Kennedy Summer School in New Ross who have done a great service to the democratic process in this country these last few days. How did they achieve this? Well, being people of immense common sense and unerring wisdom, they included a debate on political reform in their excellent programme of events. We were thus treated to the only debate between those parties intent on abolition and those who support retention and reform. What did I take from the debate? First, we are privileged to have people of integrity and intelligence such as Senator Katherine Zappone as members of our Oireachtas. Second, the Taoiseach is wise to avoid debating the issue with Micheál Martin, as the latter would run rings around his populist arguments.
This country would be better served by a reformed Seanad. People who share this view are not presented with any option by the Government to retain and reform. Thank you to the Kennedy Summer School for allowing that neglected voice to be heard. – Yours, etc,
GERRY KILRANE,
Hill Street,
Mohill, Co Leitrim.
Sir, – The Referendum Commission guide to the October 4th referendums adopts a useful format under the heading “If the Referendum Is Passed”. There should, however, be an additional section after page 8 as follows: “If the referendum is passed, existing Seanad voters resident in Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Down, Fermanagh, Tyrone and overseas will have no future vote in elections to the Oireachtas.” Its omission is notable and raises the question of whether this has been considered. – Yours, etc,
Senator SEAN BARRETT,
Seanad Éireann,
Leinster House, Dublin 2 .
Sir, – I assume this fellow Senator Windows, whose radio ads inspire Bernard Farrell (September 17th), is in favour of House improvement, not abolition. – Yours, etc,
JOHN O’BYRNE,
Mount Argus Court,
Harold’s Cross, Dublin 6W.
Sir, – It seems to me that, unlike those residing in the second chamber, “Senator Windows” appears to have a useful function. He prevents a lot of cold air coming in, whereas the Seanad has a lot of hot air going out. – Yours, etc,
GEOFF SCARGILL,
Loreto Grange,
Bray, Co Wicklow.