Madam, - The recent report from the Seanad Committee on Procedure and Privileges proves once again that it is virtually impossible to find a meaningful role for a second chamber in a unitary state.
Abolition may be a better option than reform.
Yet there is one concept associated with Seanad Éireann which should be explored and developed - that is, the vocational dimension envisaged in Article 18.7 of Bunreacht na hÉireann. How about replacing the Seanad with a consultative assembly directly elected by designated vocational organisations - an arrangement which, incidentally, could be used to confer a degree of legitimacy on social partnership?
Ireland would then have a unicameral parliament and an assembly which would have a constitutional right to be consulted on all legislation. - Yours, etc.,
T. O'CONNOR, Churchtown, Dublin 14.
Madam, - Though the issue of Seanad reform will no doubt snowball with enthusiastic aid from the opposition, Mr Ahern would do well to follow the old Irish tradition of parliamentary plagiarism. Like most democratic countries, Ireland has loosely based its lower chamber on the best working model of recent centuries, the British House of Common. But arguably the most constructive upper house in modern politics is that of Germany.
Put briefly, the German upper house consists of representatives from the regional Lander governments, which are entirely elected by universal suffrage. This gives them an electoral mandate to challenge the government's legislation, while combating the centralising tendencies of single-chamber government. Furthermore, the system gives up-and-coming politicians real parliamentary experience, the like of which Irish councils cannot offer.
The Seanad is an unproductive, inferior assembly, compared with many of its counterparts. Moreover, local councils have lost much of the enthusiasm of their early days. Perhaps both shortcomings can be put right with a radical revision along these lines. - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL KEARY, Monaleen Heights, Castletroy, Limerick.