Sir, – Ted Smyth is correct to ask “why not adapt the Seanad composition to include four representatives to be elected by Irish citizens overseas to a new international panel” (“Is it time we had some more emigrant Senators?”, Opinion & Analysis, May 9th). Seanad Éireann was never meant to be a copy of the Dáil, and its membership was not intended to mirror that of the Dáil. Instead, the Seanad was to be a chamber of experts and minority voices to provide a platform for all sections of society on this island and expertise to identify potential flaws in proposed legislation from the Lower House.
In that respect, the current Seanad – and previous 20 or more – has not fully met the purpose of our Upper House.
Seanad Éireann must be reformed to provide for its initial purpose. This would include the election, through democratic voting of the people, of representatives for Northern Ireland, particularly where that corner of Ireland lacks input into European Union activities which impact the entire island now; representatives of the diaspora around the world; representatives of those living in Ireland for many years but denied citizenship – possibly due to cost – and therefore a voice in the Dáil; representatives for the disabled; representatives from the Traveller community; and youth representatives – until such time as young people themselves are afforded a vote in local, European and Dáil elections.
The Seanad can stand as a meaningful representation for all parts of Ireland and can, if reformed correctly, engage many more people in political life and civil society activity, which would only be a deeply positive development for us all. – Yours, etc,
Ann Ingle: Deliberately going out of my way to move for no particular reason has never appealed to me
Gerry Thornley: How about an alternative look at Ireland’s Six Nations win over England?
Is Ireland anti-Semitic, an outlier of tolerance or in the middle ground?
How risky is it to buy a second-hand EV?
TOMÁS HENEGHAN,
East Wall,
Dublin 3.
