Seanad referendum - Abuse of the system must be reformed

Senators will get generous severance packages if the electorate votes to scrap the Seanad in this week’s referendum. Some of the payments are an insult to the electorate.

In a republic, all people supposedly have equal rights, but politicians have been flouting this concept. It is a recognised part of the capitalist system that different kinds of work are valued differently, but on retiring all people make essentially the same contribution to society.

Questions should therefore be asked about why retired politicians should receive payments that are denied to other segments of society, especially to people who may have served three or four times as long in their jobs as the politicians.

If the electorate votes this week to abolish the Seanad, the 60 senators will continue to serve until after the next general election, which could be 2016. Under the current rules, they will be entitled to special severance packages with three sets of payments, in addition to what they may get in an annual pension.

They will get a termination lump sum payment, 12 monthly termination payments for all those who have at least three years’ continuous service, and a tax-free lump sum pension payment for those who had already reached the retirement age of 65. The others will receive the tax-free payment when they reach retirement age. Redundancy payment will be determined by their salary, which varied if they undertook special roles in the Seanad. The average package for senators is estimated at €81,000. In the case of one senator, the severance pay-off will be over €250,000 in addition to an annual pension of €54,574.

Such special termination arrangements for politicians inevitably anger workers who have lost their jobs without any redundancy payments. The politicians are being paid even though most of them effectively failed miserably when it came to protecting the economy.

There is a danger that public anger could provoke a backlash that may undermine the Government’s plans to eliminate the Seanad. Some may argue though, that the way the politicians have abused the system in their own favour, society will be better served by the elimination of this stratum of politician.

Such issues should have been debated earlier, rather than being sprung on the electorate in the week of the referendum. Such a debate would, of course, have highlighted what is essentially an abuse by all of the politicians, not just members of the Seanad.

There was a good deal of public unease about the way so many politicians, especially former ministers, abused the system with exorbitant payments to themselves after they lost their seats in the last general election. The system was crying out for reform, but now we find that there has been little real reform.