Abolishing Seanad

Reply to letter in the Irish Independent 5th January

I agree with John Murphy (Letters 5^th January) that the abolishing the Seanad would require the Constitution to be seriously altered but find that we need a solution to the problem now. I fully support the need for a new Constitution, as the current one is not fitting to our changing country. Why not instead of abolishing the Seanad, diminish it, albeit temporarily. Instead of writing a complex referendum to abolish it and change our political system to a Unicameral Oireachtas change the composition of the House, have a referendum that abolishes the voting of members to the House. Let the Seanad with a bare minimum of three members, appointed by the Taoiseach. The constitution would remain intact and all references to the Oireactas containing two houses remain valid. It in effect allows the Seanad to be defacto abolished. It solves the problem in the short term, A referendum could be held within a year or two to revitalise the upper house in a new form or hopefully to implement a new Constitution. The Seanad does have the power to really represent different sections of Irish life instead it currently and has been the grand old retirement home or crèche for career politicians. While the Dail is wholly representative of the electorate, it is very party political, the whips rule all, a radical reform in my view would be to remove this from a new Seanad and make it non-party. The University representatives that we have today are a step in the way of the ideal Seanad Composition. A body representative of for instance public sector workers should have a Senator, labour groups, employer organisations, emigrant communities, old age groups, students should all be able to contribute to the debating in the Oireachtas and this can be achieved through a reformed Upper House. The Seanad should represent a cross section of Irish life to fully review and recommend changes to legislation but importantly to avoid the pitfalls of party politics. This great Seanad debate should not be a mask though for the much more serious reform of the Dail. No matter what happens in the Seanad, the Dail is the power holder, an Upper House only supplements the Lower. That again is another reason for a new Constitution, changes to the Dail would again dilute the Constitution even more. I hope that the parties following the election rise above the previous hurdles and power struggles to implement real changes.