Madam, – May I endorse part of Jason FitzHarris’s comment (January 6th)? He states: “Arguing that because other countries also have senates, Ireland should too, ignores that some are federal or highly devolved countries which use their senate to provide equality of representation for their constituent regions. Others are monarchies or former monarchies where the senate represents, or used to represent, the aristocracy or intellectual elite.”
In the Free State Senate, before the war, there was a liberal sprinkling of various earls, counts, etc, which harked back to the British system.
However, the idea that a concept which works in one country will necessarily work in another, somewhat similar country, is nonsense, and displays only a lack of capacity for original thought.
In fact, the British House of Lords has become largely redundant, strewn as it now is with slithery appointees. One imagines it only continues because of the grand chamber that would be made obsolete if it didn’t. A senate is meant to be a forum, ruled by principles rigorously extruded from the mass by the keen, collective intellect of its members, with the rule of thumb detachment; its governance, that of reason, unsullied by ambition. Any senate not characterised thus hasn’t much use. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Jason FitzHarris wants the multi-seat electoral system “changed to a list system to remove the clientelist, parish-pump, coffin-chasing gombeens and allow . . . more talented people to enter public life” (January 6th).
This type of pejorative description of our electoral system totally ignores reality.
It was not the people around the parish pump who have bankrupted the country. It was the most powerful in the land, ie, the so-called “talented” people around the Cabinet table and on the boards of banks and building companies.
Changing the electoral system to a single-seat constituency and/or list system will enable a small number of insiders to determine who represents us. It will, therefore, increase the power of the very people who largely contributed to our problems in the first place. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Fine Gael/Fianna Fáil plans to abolish the Seanad are akin to the Catholic Church abolishing Easter in the face of science proving the non-existence of God. It is a pathetic red herring and the first sign that our political classes know that their number is up.
The people of this country are beginning to demand real, root- and-branch political reform and won’t be fooled by this political sleight of hand. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I wish to support the all-party proposals for fundamental reform of the political system in Ireland – it is long overdue. I do not, however, feel that reform of the political system and abolition of Seanad Éireann are the same thing. I feel that instead of a knee-jerk reaction to what all right-thinking citizens see as a very expensive gravy train,there should be a more considered debate on how all political structures, including Dáil Éireann, borough and county councils and town councils could be reformed and made more efficient. If the abolition of Seanad Éireann is accomplished what will have been achieved? Will the unicameral Dáil adequately protect the citizens of this country from a potentially oppressive and totalitarian Government? I don’t think so.
We need more accountability at all levels of politics, that is certain, but I feel that abolishing the Seanad on its own might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We will save some money but at what ultimate cost? A debate please! – Yours, etc,
Madam, – The popular view is that the Seanad is a colossal waste of money, but before we tear it down let us remember that it has given us Douglas Hyde, WB Yeats, Jennie Wyse Power, Garret FitzGerald, Mary Robinson, Noël Browne, Mary Henry, Feargal Quinn and David Norris. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Political-speak: It’s unlikely that we could have a referendum on the Seanad at the same time as the election; legislation to deal with the Seanad is complex .
English-speak: Don’t rush to abolish this. We need somewhere to hang out (at taxpayers’ expense) after the election when we lose our seats. – Yours, etc,