OPINION:JOHN LENNON said Elvis died when he joined the US army. From being a symbol of cultural transformation he became part of the establishment, writes Deaglan De Breadun.
You couldn't say the Progressive Democrats had much in common with the King of Rock and Roll except for this: the PDs died when they went into government with Charles Haughey. So the final obsequies of the PDs which took place over recent months were a mere formality. Whatever the role and contribution of individual members, as a party they had been dead for years.
However there are some elements of their legacy which should be preserved. I found myself in difficulty on the Vincent Browne show on TV3 recently trying to assert that the PDs weren't all bad. Former Fine Gael Young Tiger that he is, Vincent wasn't having any of it.
It was barely a blip in PD history, but back in January 1988 the party published a document entitled Constitution for a New Republic. A slightly-abridged version is available in The Irish Times digital archive for January 14th, 1988 - it's well worth a look in the light of today's problems.
The document was ahead of its time with regard to removing the ban on divorce. In dropping the claim to the North, it was well-intentioned but premature because Articles 2 and 3 proved an important bargaining chip in the Good Friday negotiations.
The most revolutionary proposal was that: "The Oireachtas shall consist of the President and a House of Representatives to be called Dáil Éireann." What, no Seanad? The document also provided for a reduction in the number of TDs.
Whatever about the detail of these proposals, it is time for a serious look at parliamentary reform. There is a strong argument that savings can be made as an overdue austerity measure. Could we live without the Seanad? Political life would be the poorer without the more colourful and outspoken senators who are like a breath of fresh air through the portals of Leinster House. But they are a minority.
Getting rid of the Seanad entirely, as the PDs advocated, would not benefit our democracy. But it must be asked whether we really need 60 members in the Upper House. At a salary of €70,000 each, this amounts to a total of €4.2million.
Consider the fact that the combined total in cutbacks on the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission was €2.9 million. That's just short of the salary cost of 42 senators.
Could we survive with just 18 senators - let's say 20? How many would notice the difference? I recall the late Pat Lindsay of Fine Gael once telling me that the Seanad was "a haven of failed politicians and political eunuchs".
Do we really need 166 Dáil Deputies? What are they all for? Wouldn't 120 be enough in a State as small as ours?
Then we have what can only be called the scandal of the junior ministries. Thankfully Bunreacht na hÉireann restricts the number of full Cabinet posts to 15 but there are now 20 ministers of state. Given the proliferation of committee posts in the Oireachtas, genuine backbenchers are in danger of becoming extinct.
It's not so long ago that there were only seven ministers of state and they had the modest title of "parliamentary secretary".
There is what the Americans call a disconnect between the public and the political system. Whatever one thinks about the result of the last Lisbon referendum, the fact that so many people ignored the advice of their political leaders is an ominous development.
The upheavals in Greece and Thailand show that political stability cannot be taken for granted. We don't want similar disturbances here and genuine parliamentary reform should be part of the strategy for avoiding this type of upheaval. But on a seasonal note, do turkeys ever vote for Christmas?
Deaglán de Bréadún is political correspondent with The Irish Times