No U-turn on ending Seanad: Sinn Féin
The party had wanted the Constitutional Convention, comprising politicians and citizens, to examine the chamber’s fate — but then backed abolition when the Government refused.
Sinn Féin finance spokesman Pearse Doherty said that, without significant reform being on offer, it was better to get rid of the “elitist” upper house.
“There can be no place in a real republic, based on equality, for an elected office to which only a tiny percentage of the population have the right to vote,” he said.
Sinn Féin senators David Cullinane and Katherine Reilly said they backed abolition, and had stood for the chamber as it needed a Sinn Féin influence while it existed.
Mr Doherty said the upper house was packed with Taoiseach nominees and Government supporters who refused to stand up against “the austerity agenda”.
“The cronyism and the elitism that are synonymous with the Seanad has fostered the type of politics that has brought this State to its knees,” he said. “In the last two and a half years, the Seanad has supported the government on every single occasion, including the introduction of the property tax; cuts to disability payments; and the promissory note deal which is costing the taxpayer €30bn.”
Sinn Féin said the system was an affront to democracy and open to “abuse”, with Senators being appointed for a few weeks by previous administrations allowing them “access to the Oireachtas bar and free parking for life” as a result.
The campaign puts Sinn Féin up against their rivals as main opposition party, Fianna Fáil, who have changed their stance to support the Seanad.
The party’s justice spokesman, Niall Collins, has demanded to know if Jobs Minister Richard Bruton, was aware that Labour Relations Commission chief executive Kieran Mulvey was going to be the spokes- man for an ani-Seanad campaign, One House.
“I find it very surprising that Minister Bruton is accepting the involvement of Mr Kieran Mulvey in what is essentially a political campaign,” Mr Collins said. “It is inconceivable that Minister Bruton or any of his colleagues would accept such involvement if he was working to oppose Government policy.”


