Opinion:Our political system needs to change and that change will be worthwhile but difficult. However, in meeting that challenge, the reform of the Seanad as a viable political entity is a bridge too far.
It is clear that Seanad Éireann has a PR problem. Viewed as outdated, elitist, irrelevant and powerless, the essential connectivity between the elected and the electorate is questioned and the limited franchise is justifiably criticised.
The panel system from which most Senators are elected is certainly curious: for example the agricultural panel elects 11 members but the cultural and educational panel only elects five, illustrating an emphasis that is unbalanced and in tune with a different era.
However, it is unfair to paint the Seanad as the only entity which is unrepresentative of Irish society.
History has shown that politics is tailor-made for someone like me: male, white, Catholic, middle-class, able-bodied, settled and heterosexual. Dáil Éireann remains 87 per cent male, overwhelmingly white, Catholic, middle-class, heterosexual, able-bodied and from the settled community.
Is it any wonder that the vast bulk of legislation and budgetary measures disproportionately appease those who also fit into that demographic? It is still people like me who rule, and who have always ruled this State.
We must deal with the reality of this disconnection within Irish politics. A glance at the turnout in the last number of elections tells a sorry tale. The general election in February 2011, a mere three months after the arrival of the International Monetary Fund, had a turnout of only 70 per cent.
In Australia the dynamic of compulsory voting is a fascinating one. Political activism adds the same weight to the rich as to the poor, the young and the old, the powerful and the weak. If that were the case in Ireland, politicians would not pander to the type of lowest common denominator discourse we have heard too often in the past.
Allocation of resources
This discussion about allocation of resources is a crucial one. Research has shown the influence of early childhood expenditure has the longest, most profound and positive influence on an individual’s life and potential. However, we have neglected this area because perhaps the political imperative is to concentrate on those with voting power.
The Hart and Risley report in 1995 showed the vocabulary differential in three year olds from different backgrounds can be as high as 66 per cent. One in three children from disadvantaged areas has basic literacy problems. One-quarter of mothers in some deprived districts suffer from maternal depression.
We have too often neglected the needs of poorer children, and targeted investment was not made because there was limited political advantage. This is the cost of political disconnection, and the cost of an unrepresentative democracy. This is where our reforming zeal must be concentrated.
The role of the Seanad as scrutiniser of legislation could readily be taken on by an empowered Oireachtas committee system. There should be scope, as per the strategic policy committees of local authorities, to co-opt members of civic society to advise and give voice to the concerns of different interest groups.
The response of the State to our obligations under EU legislation is envisaged by Michael McDowell to be an important potential role of the Seanad. This role could readily be undertaken within the underburdened Oireachtas committee structure.
I reject the popular and lazy viewpoint that government is the problem – society needs controls, needs direction and needs regulation for the common good. Government must be the force that underpins the vision for the Republic we have inherited.
Politics is the art of that vision. Politics should not ever concede ground to the notion that economic theory should mirror the law of the jungle. But politics must always retain and enshrine what it does from the direct mandate of the people. One elected body can effectively achieve that goal.
We cannot be a loose alignment of parishes jousting with each other for resources. We must be a nation, and take the responsibility of living in that nation seriously. We need to maximise the relationship between our citizens, rights, responsibilities and aspirations.
The reform of local government is where the real battle lies. The connectivity between the local taxation citizens pay, the representation they receive and the public services they enjoy is one that has not been a feature of public discourse at a local level and has a disempowering effect on local democracy.
When reforming local government, it is the concerns of the community rather than those of the councillor that must prevail, just as in the Seanad debate it is the needs of the citizens that are paramount and not the needs of the Senators.
Michael McDowell has also put forward the contention that Seanad Éireann has a vital role in terms of safeguards, checks and balances. He essentially argues that we need an undemocratic body to save the democratically elected body from itself.
‘Mutilated wreck’
He also states that abolition of the Seanad would leave our Constitution a “mutilated wreck” because of the number of amendments that would be required. The recently established Constitutional Convention is already charged with radically overhauling the Constitution to make it more relevant to the modern era. Many amendments to the Constitution are likely to be put to the people at the conclusion of that process.
This predictably over protective, conservative and legalistic view of change must be challenged. We cannot shy away from change because it might be hard work – change is important precisely because it is so difficult.
Our democracy needs to be more representative, needs to base policy and allocate resources where the research demands, needs to connect more deeply with the electorate, and needs to assert the importance of the concept of a collective interdependent society, and of the role of government and politics as a force for good.
That authority comes directly from the people and not through a filter. I contend that a second chamber does not need to be part of that vision.
* Aodhán Ó Ríordáin is a Labour Party TD for Dublin North-Central. He is also vice-chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on Education and Social Protection