I'm delighted to see that in the two weeks since my campaign got off the ground, other candidates seem to have come on board with my ideas. Peter Mooney et al have mooted an anaemic rehash of my proposal for Seanad reform in their letter in yesterday's Irish Times.
Universal suffrage, with each citizen having one and only one vote for Seanad Éireann, is a no-brainer in a democracy but their suggestion about a "gender-balanced" Seanad is patronising (or should that be matronising?) nonsense. The best person for the job, in the judgement of the voters and regardless of gender, should be elected. The representation of Irish emigrants in Seanad Éireann is an excellent idea and it was just as good when I first publicly suggested it two weeks ago. It's nice to know that Peter and the boys were listening!
Peter, Robin and Seamus don't tell us how they plan to elect Senators nationally when the current political oligarchy is broken up, while their prohibition on candidates standing for both houses of the Oireachtas needs to be much more specific. The current panel system can be broadly retained, as long as the franchise is widened; this has the added advantage of ensuring that the pre-eminence of Dáil Éireann is not challenged. The double or triple votes of some electors needs to go, e.g. a graduate of two universities who is also a TD. A candidate needs to be restricted to standing for one house of the Oireachtas in each election cycle. A vague commitment to a "set number of years" means little; we need to ban this years failed Dáil candidates from landing a "consolation prize". They have been rejected by the people and thus have no place in this Oireachtas.
The biggest challenge is not "gender-balancing" or "strengthened powers" but breaking the stranglehold of the political class on an entire house of our national parliament. Until Peter and his colleagues tell us how exactly they plan to do this, the rest of their plan is moot.
No comments:
Post a Comment