Leanna Byrne | Editor
Seven months and fourteen days ago 1,240,729 voters gave two fingers to our Taoiseach Enda Kenny and his cohort in Government when the referendum to abolish Seanad Éireann was defeated by a margin of 51.7 per cent to 48.3 per cent.
The count played out like an orchestral climax, as politicians and political parties clambered to take the credit for the ‘No’ result once it was safe to call. On camera, a Fianna Fáil spokesperson humbly thanked voters for seeing through the “dishonesty” and “populist positions” of the ‘Yes’ campaign and even threw a bone to the “other civil society groups” that gave them a dig out during the campaigning period. No mention of Labour, naturally.
This was not a game of party politics, but the protection of an institution they cherish for its history
As the opposition parties and interest groups threw digs at Kenny and reveled in the embarrassment of the whole affair, the public looked fondly at the images of university senators Seán Barrett and David Norris jumping for joy at the announcement of the result. For them, this was not a game of party politics, but the protection of an institution they cherish for its history, traditions and, in the case of these senators, an independent voice.
Throughout the campaign, the six university senators notably outsmarted the ‘Yes’ side in Seanad debates, Dáil debates and arguments in the Dáil bar. However, there was a fear that their calls for reform, not abolition, from a group that are perceived to be elitist would fall on deaf ears. The existence of the university seats was part of the ‘Yes’ campaign’s long list of reasons why the Seanad should be abolished since they only represent a tiny percentage of the populace. An attempt to defend highbrow claims to seats in the Oireachtas and an Upper House that produced wind-bag politicians was expected to fall flat on its face – but it didn’t.
The Seanad referendum win is something Senator Seán Barrett still openly relishes in. Speaking to him for fifty-five minutes over the phone, the Trinity senator spoke fondly about the historical links between Trinity College and Seanad Éireann.
“You probably know about the Provost John Henry Bernard, predecessor of our own Provost Patrick Prendergast,” said Barrett.
Of course, I hadn’t a clue.
The Seanad is “very much a TCD creation”
“He would have been on the treaty negotiations. He suggested to Arthur Griffith that the Senate should be established to give unionists and Protestants a voice in the Irish parliament, to which Griffith said it was a splendid idea!”
Barrett is proud to say that the Seanad is “very much a TCD creation” with a history of giving a voice to minority groups. Yet, with the Seanad still standing and a demand for reform, the university seats are under scrutiny again as the Parliament seek to make the House more inclusive.
Last week, Senator Seán Barrett put forward a proposal to Seanad Éireann to open the house up to other third-level institutions and graduates by creating a new type of constituency through a split of the cultural and educational panel. By amending Section 52 of the Seanad Electoral Act and adjusting the numbers in the panels to put eight members on the cultural and educational panel, this would form a constituency “for the election of four members of Seanad Éireann to the educational constituency”.
If the proposal is taken on board, this would work towards eliminating the elitism of the university seats as Dublin City University, the University of Limerick, the Institutes of Technology, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and any institution that is recognised as a provider of the “Qualifications and Quality Assurance Authority of Ireland” (now known as the Higher Education Authority) would be eligible to vote in this newly created constituency.
These seats are important to keep so the Seanad does not evolve into another breeding ground for party politics
However, while this proposal may tackle the issue of exclusionary seats, some would argue that a reshuffle which gives more priority to culture and education is too idealistic and inefficient, and that perhaps the only way to open to the wider public is to scrap the university seats altogether. Senator Barrett disagrees, saying that these seats are important to keep so the Seanad does not evolve into another breeding ground for party politics.
“Young people want the Senate because they see it as being different to party politics. What the government proposes is a new constituency of about 800,000 voters. With that you will see the political parties taking over. The Senate would become Fianna Fáil or a Fine Gael house.”
Speaking on the plans to eighty-six the university seats, Barrett pointed out that the Taoiseach appoints eleven Senators to the Seanad, whereas “there are only six of us”.
“We’re the five best and we won the referendum. We make up about one-twelfth or 8 per cent of the house. The other 92 per cent of the Senate have no contribution to make to the reform, so they are the problem.”
According to Barrett, not only do the university seats protect the Seanad from dissolving into party politics, but connects the Oireachtas to third-level expertise without an agenda.
“Without us, the parliament is so under the thumb of the executive”
“Without us, the parliament is so under the thumb of the executive, and the executive is so under the thumb of the permanent government (i.e.: the Civil Servants).”
He went on to make a highly critical comment on the ‘permanent government’ stating that “they are not being reformed at all. They could make all the same mistakes again they made in 2008. It doesn’t matter to them that they banged up the place, they continue on with how they are regardless.”
“I [feel] sorry for Alan Shatter, but he shouldn’t have let those people carry on in the malfunctioning nature which is a large part of the permanent government in Ireland and this is very impractical.”
For Barrett, one of the issues with the Civil Service is that there has been no recruitment since 2008, eliminating the natural bubbling up of ideas that takes place. “Instead it’s the same old people who crashed the place that are now unchallenged by the younger generations.”
Although he apologised for his “the young generation is the future” cliché, Barrett is well known as a big advocate for students. Whether it’s taking his Transport Economics class to Brewbakers for coffee after his lectures, his 14 year tenure as Junior Dean or even sticking up for the student populace on the College Board, banalities like that seem a lot more convincing from somebody who believes in them.
“Meeting students is one of the key parts of my role here. That’s why I get on so well with Tom [Lenihan]. We saw, long before the majority on Board seemed to realise, the damage the identity crisis, or the ‘Identity Initiative’ as the Provost calls it, would cause. We are the two who opted out from the very beginning on its expenditure.”
“There is not enough emphasis on lecturing and an over-emphasis on research, particularly research that is funded by outside bodies”
Barrett also voiced his concern over the power of the administration, comparing it to a machine-like Minzberg creation rather than a student led institution. “There is not enough emphasis on lecturing and an over-emphasis on research, particularly research that is funded by outside bodies. I think universities have become compromised by that.”
As for the future of the Seanad? Well, apart from the reforms that he would like to see introduced, the future of the house lies with fresh-faced intellectuals roaming around our university.
“I did say when I was talking about the future of the Senate that when Norris and I are wheeled off out of here we’ll be replaced by better people and I look forward to that day.”
