By Senator Feargal Quinn

When I first walked into Leinster House as an elected Senator some 18 years ago, I felt a sense of awe at the responsibility of the office. Now, almost two decades later, I still have that sense each time I enter the Seanad Chamber...

Originally the Earl of Kildare's ballroom back in the 1700s when the house was built, it is, after all, a magnificent room in its own right.

But it’s not about the beauty of the room. Rather it’s about the importance of what goes on inside it. And make no mistake about it, despite the fact that the Seanad is currently under attack as never before, there is vital work done within these walls. Yes, of course there are things about the Seanad that need to be changed but let’s not forget that this is a crucial and essential arm of our democracy. To abolish it would be to ignore the importance of the checks and balances that a second House brings to parliamentary democracy. To abolish it, in my view, would be folly.

The Seanad acts as a brake on the power of the Dáil. It is a forum for in-depth discussion and line-by line scrutiny of legislation.  In many cases, it is the only forum for such careful examination. If we abolish the Seanad, then we run the risk of the Dáil simply ‘signing off’ on legislation that has a profound effect on the citizens of this country.

During my time as a Senator, the Seanad has tabled thousands of amendments to improve or indeed change legislation.  Without the Seanad, our citizens would have been deprived of those improvements.

The Seanad also has the ability to exercise power and initiate legislation that is often not recognised. For instance, I am looking forward to the passing of The Construction Contracts Bill that I recently proposed. This legislation will bring considerable benefits to sub-contractors ensuring they are paid what they are due and introducing a swift adjudication process where there is dispute. I believe this legislation could have averted the loss of hundreds of jobs for sub-contractors recently in one company which went into liquidation, owing over €50 million to trade creditors, including more than 1,600 sub-contractors.  If the Bill is passed before the general election, it will illustrate the value of the Seanad and clearly demonstrate how the Seanad plays a crucial role.

There’s also my Seanad Private Member’s Bill on Presumed Consent, The Human Body Organs and Tissue Bill. This Bill is intended to save lives by providing for a presumption in favour of consent having been given for organ donation, unless it is expressly withheld.  Similar systems have been introduced in other EU countries such as Spain, France, Italy and Sweden that has meant that thousands of lives each year have been saved. Belgium introduced ‘presumed consent’ in 1986 and the national organ donation rate rose by 55% within five years.

The Seanad also keeps issues of public importance high on the agenda such as the rights of older people through Senator Mary White, gay rights and equality through Senator David Norris and public sector reform through Senator Eoghan Harris.The quality of debate, with Senators taking a national, rather than a local view, is one of the Seanad’s defining features. This is especially true in issues of vital national importance - legislation, for example, that has come before the House on the banking sector and prison reform.

There have been successes, of course.  One I clearly remember was when Senator Shane Ross discovered a flaw in an Election Bill that had been passed by the Dáil.  The Bill was dropped and never saw the light of day again.

However, in spite of our successes, we have, nonetheless, ended up with a Chamber that is not performing as well as it should because, to a very large extent, we now have political parties that do not give their members freedom to vote in the way they would like.

The Seanad does work that is both relevant and effective.  It lacks legitimacy, however, because of the way in which Senators are elected. The 1937 Constitution that established the Seanad had a worthy objective – to ensure Members had experience and expertise it established different vocational panels such as Agricultural, Labour, Industrial and Commercial.

This has not worked out as planned however as those elected are all political party representatives. It’s time to change the election system.

What we need are the opinions and expertise of different voices, especially those from the business and voluntary sectors. And while we are at it, let’s have the Seanad election on the same day as the Dáil election so we avoid ending up with Senators whose real ambition is to get a Dáil seat.

It’s often forgotten that two Ministers can be appointed to the Cabinet from the Seanad. Therefore, a Senator with real experience could be brought into Government. This has happened only a couple of times since 1937.  You’d have to ask why, because the attractions in increasing Seanad representation at the Cabinet table are obvious. There would be no direct answering to constituents. They would have the freedom to act in the best, long-term interest of the State, in the same way that somebody running a business acts in the best interests of its customers.

The stark fact is that we simply do not have enough people with real world experience at the Cabinet table. How advantageous would it have been to have had a banking expert like Senator Shane Ross helping to manage the banking crisis?

The Seanad has now turned into an easy scapegoat for political parties ahead of the general election but I believe we need a much more mature attitude. It has often been marginalised as successive governments have naturally wanted to curtail its ability to put a check on the Government.

This has to change but merely pandering to populism and abolishing the Seanad will simply weaken the ability of the Oireachtas to hold the Government to account.Some say that the Seanad is a waste of money yet its cost is relatively small. 

Should we prioritise cost-saving or improve accountability in the political process?

The Seanad is far from perfect and should be reformed and modernised.  But the current talk of shutting it down is merely a political smokescreen and a distraction from the very real financial and economic difficulties faced by the ordinary citizens of this country. Indeed, the debate about political reform should not focus solely on the Seanad but rather on how the Oireachtas as a whole can be improved and where Government can be made more accountable and transparent.

What we really need now is wholesale reform of the political system. We need patriotic politicians who will act in the national interest in our hour of need.

The Seanad, I believe, has a role to play in that.

This article was orignally published in The Irish Daily Mail.