Voters will remain in dark until real cost of Seanad is given

Former senator Joe O’Toole recently described the Government’s intention to abolish the Seanad as “power-grabbing”, suggesting that the concentration of power in Dáil Éireann was not just the inevitable result but actually the true intention of the referendum scheduled for this autumn.

The Government is committed to the abolition of the Upper House and intends to establish a new committee with a mandate to scrutinise legislation in its place. This committee would effectively act as an internal think tank comprised of members appointed by the Taoiseach himself.

The referendum put before the public later this year will be a straightforward choice between completely abolishing the Seanad and retaining it in its current form. However, without knowing exactly how much the Seanad is costing the taxpayer and where exactly this money is going, it is impossible to determine its value and argue for or against its retention on the basis of its ability or otherwise to provide a worthwhile return.

The official accounts of the Houses of the Oireachtas do not separate all costs between the Dáil and the Seanad, and thus a truly accurate account of Seanad costs has yet to be released by the Public Accounts Committee.

Citizens should have access to this information if they are being asked to make an informed decision on the worth of the Houses of the Oireachtas, and it is up to the Houses themselves to provide this information.

Pension entitlements
Our politicians accumulate a pension at a degree that is at least twice the normal rate of equivalent grade Civil Service employees. Senators are entitled to claim a full pension after 20 years of service, rather than the standard 40 years.

This means that in order to provide for each current and former senator’s pension, the Government must have in place a pension fund that is 40 times the annual pension payout to each serving and retired deputy. The 40 figure is based on an actuarial calculation of the amount of the pension pot required to generate an annual pension worth €x – ie one would require 40x in the notional pension pot, irrespective of how long the recipient might live.

Each senator’s annual contribution to their pension of 6 per cent (€3,937) was deducted during the annual notional contribution to pension fund calculations and is included. This breakdown does not include the termination lump sum payments equivalent to about two months’ salary, the series of up to 12 monthly termination payments and the non-taxable pension lump sum (calculated at three times the value of a deputy’s annual pension), which every senator is entitled to after three years’ continuous service.

Neither is the free car-parking each senator is entitled to included. This is estimated at about €150 per month based on the cost of parking space in the Merrion Square area. Unlike every other individual who receives access to free parking, senators are not required to pay any benefit-in-kind tax on this perk and therefore this too must be noted when determining the cost of each member.

The above assessment is an estimate based on most reliable information, and is potentially subject to correction. Only the Public Accounts Committee can calculate and release the absolute cost of the Seanad.

The Seanad may add value to Irish society, in which case these costs are entirely justified. Ireland may, however, benefit more from an Upper House resembling a leaner, reformed Seanad. On the other hand, it could be argued that politics would indeed work better with only one chamber.

Full consideration
Consideration of the merits of these alternative points of view is not fully possible, however, when there is no concise information about how much and where taxpayers' money is spent within the Seanad. Without this information, it is impossible to frame an argument for or against the value of the House.

According to Gary Murphy, a lecturer in government at Dublin City University, a straightforward abolition of the Seanad would require 75 changes to the Constitution. This is clearly not a decision to be taken lightly.

If this information is not provided, citizens will be expected to make a decision on whether or not to eradicate the Upper House of our national parliament based on incomplete information.

With the build-up to the referendum predicted to be characterised by political haranguing from both sides, the Houses of the Oireachtas must release a clear statement of all costs associated with the Seanad so that citizens can have a meaningful discussion around the House's continuation or abolition and make an enlightened, informed decision in this autumn's referendum.

Sarah O'Neill is chief executive officer of Dailwatch (dailwatch.ie), a website which seeks to open a line of communication between the Irish people and their elected representatives