We don’t need an even more expensive Seanad

Your editorial on March 21 tells us that the referendum to abolish the Seanad was defeated when 52% voted against abolition and 48% for abolition. Your editorial also says that the fact that only 39% of the electorate bothered to vote at all ‘showed how relevant ... the Upper House is’.

Relevant or irrelevant, however, you declare that the Seanad is ‘crying out for reform’.

The truth is that this recently bankrupt country has more politicians relative to its population than comparable countries. The recent referendum, therefore, did the ordinary people of this over-borrowed country a disservice. It succeeded in maintaining the Seanad as an expensive talking shop for the insider elite and their cronies. But the influential pro-Seanad lobby are not even satisfied with its retention.