The Seanad was "elitist, undemocratic and unacceptable as an institution of the State", Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams told the Dáil.
He said the Seanad was created by the 1937 Constitution and, in the decades since, with a few honourable exceptions, it had become synonymous with cronyism, on the part of Fianna Fáil in particular, but also Fine Gael and Labour.
“It has been used as a form of safety net for those who fail to get elected to the Dáil, and there have been incidents in which senators were stood down, particularly by Fianna Fáil, just weeks from a general election, to be replaced by others just for those few weeks,” he added.
"Such a brief sojourn in the Upper House would secure entitlements such as lifelong parking at Leinster House."
Mr Adams was speaking during a debate on a Sinn Féin Private Member's motion calling for direct election by way of universal franchise to the House, as well as representatives from the North and the diaspora, representatives of marginalised groups and 50 per cent representation for women.
Worthy in principle
Rejecting the motion, Minister for the Environment
Alan Kelly
said that while it was worthy in principle, many aspects lacked the substance to make them workable. There were policy and constitutional issues which had not been addressed.
Mr Kelly said he was committed to seeing the House play a full and effective role in the democratic system, but proposals for reform had to be credible, substantial, detailed and have the potential to be effective.
He added that whatever the merits of the proposal, it needed to be acknowledged that when the Constitution was framed, provision was not made for elections to the Seanad by universal franchise.
“If this had been the intention, the constitutional provisions on the election of members of Seanad Éireann would have mirrored those of the elections of this House,” Mr Kelly added. “That was not the case and we must deal with this fact,” he said.
He said the Constitution stipulated that members of the Seanad were elected by secret postal ballot, which could not be changed without a further constitutional referendum.
Consequences overlooked
“The consequence of this provision, and of not amending it, are sometimes overlooked when Seanad reform is addressed,” Mr Kelly said.
Tom Fleming (Ind) said nothing had changed in 75 years, during which there were 10 separate reviews and reports on the Seanad. "The need for reform is evidenced by the state of the economy and its mismanagement in the so-called boom years of the Celtic Tiger," he added. "At the time inadequate policies were not adequately challenged by the Opposition, which is equally deficient under the current system."
