The week the Seanad earned it’s keep
Posted by Maman Poulet on 09 Jul 2010 at 01:51 am | Tagged as: Irish Politics, LGBT, Same Sex Partnerships
For years this week will be remembered not only by lesbians and gay men and their allies but also by Senators past, present and future. It is popular to knock the upper house, it’s even popular to call for it to be scrapped. However for those of us who watch it on a regular basis it’s clear to see that many members are expert in issues and far more expert on these issues than their counterparts in the lower house. They also have more time to think and to talk. And for the past few days they have talked about love, about lesbians and gay men, about children, and living and let living.
It was far more powerful and meaningful than the Dáil debate and that was after a good quality debate at all stages in the lower house. The presence of opponents to the Civil Partnership Bill and the delaying tactics they used may have helped in terms of increasing the quality of the debate but even before it got testy there were some very moving second stage debates with 28 speakers (far more that the Dáil).
According to the authorities in the Oireachtas more people watched the Seanad online this week than ever before. It was an education for many and some may still not understand why a second house is needed and or what was actually taking place. But largely the debates were accessible and the members talked about things in human terms. And that maybe is what the role of the Seanad should be in the future – people elected by a wider electorate together with representatives of nominated bodies talking about the human and real face of legislation and probing and searching for answers and solutions. It should not be a mini-Dáil, a training ground for political pups or a retirement ground for the older mutts.
There is a lot written about Seanad Reform and many reports have been compiled. But it will be a long time before a debate such as the Civil Partnership Bill will take place again and the Seanad may not have that long to wait if Enda Kenny get’s his way and scraps it. Senators were also engaged online during the debate and I saw comments from a few that they felt pressure from being watched by people who were instantly reviewing online. This should always be the case. And if there is a wider electorate and more ownership of the upper house then the quality of the debate can only continue to improve.
As someone who regularly watches Seanad debates online this was a fine day and I’m sure we’ll be hearing about it for a long time. (Donie Cassidy must be thrilled!) I’m happy with the results of the debate and the forthcoming legislation (and retain some reservations on the effects on low income and unwaged people), but I feel it important to mention the contributions of Senators like Fiona O’Malley, (great chairing!) Lisa MacDonald, Geraldine Feeney, Jerry Buttimer and Ivana Bacik. Three cheers also to David Norris for being David, witty, sharp and nearly outrageous but also speaking very movingly. And a mention for Jim Walsh for his good wishes to lesbians and gay men in his speech at the end of the bill – this was very big of him given his fierce opposition to the bill and it won’t have been easy.
I got through all of that without mentioning Ronan Mullen eh? The next Seanad election on the NUI panel will be interesting. Maybe a florist can send him some flowers 
Wouldn’t have been so good without him either but not in the way he would appreciate.
It was a great day yesterday, and it very exciting watching it online, myself and my partner watched the final vote and there were a few tears. (Shhhh) Thanks so much for the liveblog. Will you keep telling us what is happening with the Bill over the next few months?
[...] Maman Poulet on the Merits of the Seanad-It really was wonderful this week [...]
[...] currency speculation or the punishment of bankers who impoverish people and their communities. Like Suzy, I think it is best if we observe the rigour of some of the parliamentary system as we have it [...]
I confess to being one of the “drunks and insomniacs” who regularly watches Oireachtas Report. I’ve also followed all stages of the the bill through the Dáil and Seanad online and ended up with the opposite view to MP.
Certainly, a number of the speeches were impressive, interesting and entertaining, but to what end? The government never had any intention of accepting any of the amendents and the majority of the time was spent dealing with issues not even relevant to the amendent being discussed – admittedly this was a deliberate tactic by some.
While the Dáil stages were less compelling, they at least dealt with the specifics. Their forensic analysis of the possible implications flowing from the bill was far more impressive and incisive than most of the contributions from the Seanad. There was also reasonably good give and take between the government and opposition benches, though not enough.
Yesterday confirmed for me that the Seanad is a glorified talking shop, which is in need of radical reform or abolition.
By the way, can anyone confirm whether Senator Quinn abstained or voted in favour of the bill? The report in the Irish Times suggests that nobody abstained but I’m not so sure.
There is something to be said in favour of a debating body which has real debate despite its lack of power. The Seanad should be changed to give representation to certain vulnerable groups such as the poor.
The university seats should be kept as they are held by people with diverse opinions and who express them often. The Seanad should also have more yet limited power. Dáil Éireann, as the more democratic chamber, should have the most power of course.
According to the debate record – Quinn voted in favour but was a teller for the Níl. Very bizarre http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=SEN20100708.xml&Node=H8&Page=17
[...] the aftermath of the marathon debates on the Civil Partnership Bill, and inspired by Suzy’s far more eloquent blog post on the same topic, I wanted to try and cobble together some thoughts on the Seanad and its [...]
The Seanad debate was actually much more intelligent, impressive, considered, impassioned, realistic then the Dail debate – Senators actually showed in this debate that they can grapple with the issues and analyse them in a much better way than the Dail – as well as that the Senate is most certainly not an old boys club – there were very impressive contributions from young senators and female senators. I disagree that it should be abolished but do think that radical reform is needed.
er what did they actually do ?
Yesterday was a very good day indeed, and I’m quite tired after being a politics geek.
I thoroughly enjoyed the debates in both houses, and have vague plans to write something sociological about them for posterity.
While the criticism of the Seanad has a place, i am not so keen to have a unicameral system of government with those FF keystone cops in power – they need to be watched by the other chamber. I think FG are completely wrong to call for the Seanad’s abolition; reform yes, abolition, no!
In terms of the debate yesterday, while Seal and Lurch et al weren’t going to win, it was important for people to see how toxic and insidious their purile views about ‘morality’ are.These views aren’t solely the purview of the American right like Governor Quitter Palin from Alaska and Glenn Beck – they are right here on our doorstep. They are dressed up as reasonableness, and we should never be lulled into a fake sense of security by their christian values.
Thanks again Suzy for organising this virtual communitas of LGBT folk and our friends. Activism can be fun!
The way Sen. Mullen was silenced is appalling.
Silenced? Angelo did you actually watch the debate-He was far from it-At one stage he took to reading irrelevant letters-He had plenty of time to put his argument forward.
Re Quinn it really is bizarre-I wonder is it the first time that someone who supported the Níl then voted against it. By the end of the debate i did wonder had Norris got to him? Strange indeed.
I watched the debate on-line and I was scandalised when they decided to guillotine it. It has never happened in the last 20 years in the Seanad. The establishment decided to kill any dissent. They knew the Bill would have passed anyway but could not stand more opposition.
Sen. Mullen is one of the few who has been chosen by the people, by a costituency of educated people. (Sen. O’Malley came 9th out of 11 candidates in first preferences in the last GE) You might like him not but expression of dissent is essential to democracy. Somebody said it was an historical day. Well, it would have been more remarkable if the arrogance of the winners didn’t humiliated dissenters imposing them silence.
Er, yeah right, Angelo.
Mullen knew the Bill was going to pass, so the tactic was to try to keep talking until the Oireachtas began the summer recess, and therefore hugely delay the Bill. (As he stated on RTÉ Radio 1 earlier in the week, this course of action was certainly on his mind.)
How is it possibly democratic for one man – elected by a particular cohort university graduates – to do that?
It was entirely right to circumvent his filibustering.
[...] Suzy Byrne on the week the Seanad earned its keep. [...]