“While it is true that there has been justifiable public dissatisfaction with the effects of party political dominance in the Seanad, and while it is also true that reform of the Seanad has been more spoken about than acted on, we believe that a serious reform of the Seanad done in time to take effect from the next general election would be greatly preferable to simple abolition entailing, as that would, 75 separate amendments to the Constitution including the deletion of entire articles.”

– extract from an open letter in opposition to the abolition of the Seanad signed by former members Maurice Hayes, Mary Henry, Mary O’Rourke, Brid Rogers, John A Murphy and TK Whitaker in February .

Seanad abolition is short-sighted, reactionary and populist

THE PROPOSED 23rd Amendment to the Constitution will require 75 deletions to our Constitution alongside side the deletion of Article 27, entitled “Reference of Bills to the People”, containing a reference to both Houses of the Oireachtas. Article 27 is an innovative provision that permits legislation to be permitted, it gives power to the people to express their views on each piece of legislation which contains a “a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained”.

Seanad abolition will render our Constitution devoid of democracy, arguments for Seanad abolition are completely short-sighted, reactionary and selfishly populist. A reformed Seanad has huge participative, representative, expert and oversight potential.

Whip system shows why we need to keep the Seanad

The Seanad costs less than €5 million per annum, accounting for approximately 1 per cent of Dublin City Council’s budget, its abolition will be at the price of democratic accountability, public scrutiny and legislative checks. The stringent vicious whip system that our representatives in Dail Eireann are subjected to and is demonstrative why we need to keep the Seanad; although many Labour and Fine Gael members do not agree with this Referendum, they are forced to suppress their own opinions and sacrifice their constituents democratic rights.

Abolition will close down debate and reject legitimate challenge. In the lifetime of this Oireachtas, the Seanad has made 529 amendments to Bills which have been passed by the Dail in an inadequate manner and form.

I, along with fellow members of Democracy Matters and Lawyers for Seanad Reform, believe that the Seanad’s electoral system once reformed, would add more to the standing of democratic politics in the eyes of the people and to the effectiveness of the Oireachtas.

We need an innovative, non-elitist and modernised Seanad

I am scathing at the Seanad’s importance and value, even in its present form, I see the Seanad’s abdication in its responsibility for scrutinising national and EU legislative proposals, a power the body specifically inherited after the passing of the Lisbon Treaty. Our Seanad Reform Bill provides for an innovative, non-elitist and modernised Seanad.

This Referendum can very easily be classed as farcical – the choice we get is abolition or nothing, neither the Seanad or the Dail gets reformed, everything just stays in its present form. The Government continue to stay silent on the question; why can we not choice reform? Why can we not have a reformed Seanad and reformed Dail? I, along with my colleagues in Lawyers for Seanad Reform do not disagree that the Seanad requires reform – everything needs modernisation and updating after 90 years.

This Seanad Reform could easily be achieved through legislative enactment, our proposed Seanad Reform Bill demonstrates this. If our proposed Bill for Seanad Reform was introduced the Seanad could claim a greater democratic mandate to go about its business. For the first time in Irish politics there will be gender equality as the the Seanad Reform Bill includes a gender quota. At present Ireland’s rate of female representation is 15.67 per cent, a new record high, but lagging behind the world and our EU Member State counterparts.

In the coming months to the Referendum we welcome, and indeed urge, a considered, inclusive and informed public debate on the Seanad, its functions and its reform, to ensure Irish citizens, in north and south alike, consider the full implications of this anti-democratic constitutional proposal for Seanad abolition.