REPORT OF COMMITTEE RE PROCEDURE FOR TRIENNIAL ELECTIONS.

Friday, 19 June 1925

Seanad Éireann Debate
Vol. 5 No. 10

First Page Previous Page Page of 9 Next Page Last Page

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Perhaps the House will allow me to say a few words with regard to this Report, as I was Chairman of the Committee from whom these recommendations are issued. What I wish to call attention to is this, that under normal procedure some Senator would move that the Report be adopted, that would be seconded, and then the Report would be open to general discussion. It seems to me that that would be a very inconvenient method of dealing with this Report, and, if there is no objection from any part of the House, I think the more appropriate course would be to consider it as if we were in Committee and allow me to put each paragraph to the House. May I also say that as I do not regard it as a controversial matter I should like to refer to two essential matters in the Report, not for the purpose of influencing the House but for the purpose of explaining the views of the Committee upon it. We were of opinion, rightly or wrongly, with regard to the out-going Senators that we should either place them all on the list or place none. That is to say, whatever action was taken with regard to the nineteen out-going Senators, they [612] should either all be placed on the list of proposals or none should be put on the list, and should be left to their automatic right under the Constitution.

Our idea was that it would be regarded as an invidious thing and, perhaps, as a slur upon out-going Senators whom we failed to put on our list and the selection would be invidious. There fore, there were two ways of dealing with them, either that they should all be placed on the proposal list or, alternatively, that they should not be eligible for proposal, as they had their automatic right under the Constitution of joining the Panel after the Panel is completed. There is a good deal to be said for both views. I think that the real persons to be consulted are the out-going Senators. If there is any expression of opinion on their part that they would prefer to be left alone and be committed to their rights under the Constitution I am quite sure that the Seanad will respect that view. On the other hand, the alternative proposal is that of the Committee which is before the House. It is not a matter of controversy and I am sure it is a matter upon which we will all agree whatever the views of the out-going Senators may be. There is another small matter which I want to mention. At the time these recommendations were drafted we were under the impression that Wednesday, 24th, would be the last day that would be convenient for allowing the handing in of proposals.

Considering it since then, I do not see the necessity for fixing such an early date, for this reason. The voting is not to take place until the following week, that is, on the 1st July. Between the conclusion of the nominations and the actual voting all that has to be done is preparing the ballot papers, and that cannot take a very long time. Seeing that we altered our date of meeting to Thursday, it seems to me that there is no reason why the date should not be extended to Thursday and, if the House approves, I suggest that it be extended to 12 o'clock on Friday. That would give ample time to do everything that has to be done between Friday and the 1st July, as all that has to be done in the interval is the preparation of the ballot papers. There is just one other [613] matter. You will see that one of the recommendations provides that the proposal of candidates is to be in the form in the schedule. The moment you arrive at a conclusion, if you adopt the form in the schedule, that form will be available after the sitting of the House, as forms have been printed in anticipation of the decision of the House. If you look at the form you will find that at the end there is a provision made for the signature by the candidate of his desire to have his name put forward.

I pointed out the other day that if that was the only way in which the candidate could notify his assent it might cause considerable delay in passing the proposal form backwards and forward between the candidate himself and the Senators who nominate him. I suggest that this form should not be taken away but that there should be an alternative recommendation or paragraph in the Report allowing any candidate, instead of having to send this particular form, simply to send within the stipulated time a statement under his hand that he consents to his name being put on the list. That would be an alternative to the other form. He could sign the proposal form in the schedule, but if he found that inconvenient he should not be prevented from sending forward under his own hand to the office here a consent in writing to have his name put on the list. If it is the wish of the Seanad to adopt the suggestion I have made and to treat this Report as if it were in Committee I will take the recommendations paragraph by paragraph and put them to the House.

Paragraph No. 1 put and agreed to.

All outgoing Senators, who signify in writing their consent, shall be proposed by the Leas-Chathaoirleach or other Senator authorised by him. All other candidates must be proposed by not less than two Senators, with due regard to Article 33 of the Constitution, in so far as it enacts that special reference is to be had to the necessity for arranging for the representation [614] of important interests and institutions in the country.

Mr. BENNETT: Information on Thomas Westropp Bennett  Zoom on Thomas Westropp Bennett  In connection with this paragraph it appears that outgoing Senators may be nominated by the Leas-Chathaoirleach or another Senator authorised by him. In the event of the Leas-Chathaoirleach or another Senator proposing such Senators, would they still have power subsequently to nominate another candidate?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  What the first three lines mean is this. If the House prefer that the outgoing Senators should be proposed en bloc instead of leaving them their right of having their names put ultimately on the Panel, the method to be adopted is indicated in the first four lines of paragraph No. 2. That is to say, the duty is imposed on the Vice-Chairman or, if he finds he cannot attend, upon some Senator authorised by him to propose these names en bloc. That, of course, does not interfere with the Deputy Chairman's power of nomination as to others; it would not go outside that.

Mr. NESBITT: Information on George Nesbitt  Zoom on George Nesbitt  Supposing one or two Senators had not signified their intention in writing, then ipso facto the Leas-Chathaoirleach cannot propose them.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  No. To meet that, Senator Douglas has prepared and will send out if the paragraph is carried in this form a notice to each outgoing Senator asking if he wishes to have his name proposed in that way. If the House adopts this method we thought it fair that each outgoing Senator should be expressly notified that this is going to be done, if it meets with his approval, because some out-going Senators may not be here to-day.

Mr. O'FARRELL: Information on John Thomas OFarrell  Zoom on John Thomas OFarrell  It is well that the House would realise the implications of this paragraph. If it is adopted as it now stands it means that the whole of the outgoing Senators can, if they so desire, waive their constitutional rights of going automatically on the Panel and instead——

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Not exactly.

[615]Mr. O'FARRELL: Information on John Thomas OFarrell  Zoom on John Thomas OFarrell  I mean to waive it for the time being or take advantage of submitting their names to a vote of the whole Seanad instead of taking advantage automatically of the constitutional right of going on the Panel. The advantage of that is that at least a number of the outgoing Senators would be absorbed in that way on the Panel of the 19 elected representatives of the Seanad and it would restrict the numbers on the final Panel which may be 76, or in certain circumstances may be as many as 79. If the whole of the outgoing Senators who desire to go forward are absorbed in the Panel formed by the Seanad and the Dáil, then the number on the final Panel should not be more than 57 which would still be numerous enough. There is in adopting this of course a certain amount of disadvantage to certain sections of out-going Senators. There are, for instance, a few people going out who are probably not attached to any particular group in the House and who could hardly hope to get sufficient preferences to place them on the Panel at all, although they might, if placed on the Panel, get a good following in the country. They might reasonably object to submitting themselves to an unfair test instead of exercising their undoubted constitutional rights.

There are also a couple of groups, say 5, three of whom are outgoing, and if these three in each case desire to go forward for election here, they could not possibly hope from their own supporters to be elected on the Panel. To that extent they would be turned down and if afterwards they exercised their constitutional right, it might be reasonably argued that they were more or less injuring themselves morally before the electors in being turned down by the people in this House who ought to know them best. That is inevitable because of the constitution of the House. That is, practically half the House represents a particular section of the community who are not affected by this election at all or who are affected to a very limited extent. They can put forward new nominations on the panel of 19, seven or eight of which may not be in respect of outgoing Senators. I do not think it is desirable that all out-going [616] Senators should be placed on the Panel of this House. It would be well to understand therefore that if the whole of the outgoing Senators who wish to go forward allow themselves to be nominated in the manner suggested they are, with their eyes open, of course, submitting themselves to a test which may be considered an unfair one from their point of view and that in the event of their being turned down, that is not an indication that they do not command the confidence of those whose confidence they might reasonably hope to command. I think the effect of these resolutions would be that any Senator who so desires could have himself nominated by the Leas-Chathaoirleach or alternatively he can avail himself of the opportunity of being nominated by two Senators as provided in a subsequent paragraph of this report. In either way he would be eligible for the election of the 19, or alternatively he could refuse to go forward in either way and merely exercise his constitutional right. That is only a permissive arrangement. It does not make it compulsory for any Senator to submit himself to that fair or unfair test. It leaves it open to him, if he desires to reduce the number of the Panel from being unwieldy, and to avail himself of the ordinary method of nomination and election when this final election comes along on the 1st July.

Colonel MOORE: Information on Maurice George Moore  Zoom on Maurice George Moore  First I have the complaint, the usual complaint, that this thing has been rushed on us in such a way that hardly half the Senators know what they are doing. This Committee was appointed on the 30th April last. It did not meet until the 3rd June. During all that time, as far as I know, they might have met to consider these things during the summer months, and they might have sent out their proposals to Senators some time ago. It is a matter that concerns very particularly a certain number of Senators. It concerns us all in a general way. It concerns the whole country, and I think it is a most unreasonable way for the Committee to have acted as they did. This morning Senators were talking together, and one-half of them did not understand this particular matter. [617] Now there is a question of restriction. This Constitution has been drawn up, and published, and the people of Ireland understood that the election to the Senate was going to be open competition at the end of the three years. It is now proposed to limit it.

The Senate is making certain arrangements by which this is to become a close borough, on which the other people of Ireland are not allowed to enter. That may be the result of this Resolution. If the Senate agrees to this Resolution you may have that result. If all these retiring Senators are proposed by anybody, by, say, An Leas-Chathaoirleach or anybody else, and if the Senate agree to put these nineteen retiring Senators on the Panel, that would thereby exclude everybody else—that is, if they make these nineteen Senators the nominees of the Seanad-the nineteen nominees which the Seanad are entitled to have. That will exclude nobody else that comes along, at all events from the Seanad. I am talking with a certain amount of ignorance that most people here have on this matter, and I am not very definite about it. Nobody knows the result. On the other hand, if one votes for that, one is put in the position of practically limiting the Constitution and going out of his way to arrange the thing in a way that was not thought of by those who drew up the Constitution —that is, limiting the number of these that are to be put on the Panel.

On the other hand, one is put in the position here, if one does not agree with that, of voting practically against certain Senators with whom we have been sitting here, who are friends of ours, and whom we would be reluctant to vote against for personal reasons. It would be an invidious thing if some of us would stand up and say: “We will not agree to this Resolution, we will nominate our own batch.” That means voting against these people. It puts us in an invidious position, and into a position in which people do not like to be put. We all ought to know that the Constitution lays down the class of people who are to be elected on the Seanad. We know there are a certain number of people outside who have [618] complied with these conditions and provisions.

In one paragraph it is laid down that those who have done great work for the country should be put on the Seanad. Therefore, we can hardly assume that we have here all the talent of Ireland. People outside might reasonably expect to be given a chance to be put forward for election. If we agree to this clause, or to the part of it that I have pointed out, we are putting ourselves in the position of being criticised by the whole country People would say: “Here are Senators who were elected themselves, not by the votes of the people, but by the Dáil, and they are making it a close borough. No one else is allowed to go up for election but these.” It may be said that only those who have a claim to be elected on the Seanad would go on the list proposed by An Leas-Chathaoirleach. The Senate may unanimously vote that that is their panel, and that they will have no other panel. I think that in the interests of the Senators this clause is undesirable. That is a matter entirely for the Senate, and I have no right to dictate to any Senator going out what the advantage or disadvantage is. I am only pointing out the view that will be taken by the critics in the country, if we adopt a certain measure. It seems to me that we would be in a better position by allowing these candidates to go forward and take their chance with the country, as every one of us will have to do sometime.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I just want to say, by way of explanation and answer to two points that have been raised by Senator Colonel Moore, that at the time this Committee was appointed, they were of opinion, and were so advised by me, that under the Constitution this election could not take place until after the 7th December. The Executive Council, apparently, were of a different opinion, but they have come round now to the view that that is the proper time and the legal time under the Constitution. Consequently they have introduced a Bill to enable them to carry out this election in October. Of course, had they followed the course which seems to be implied by the Constitution, [619] June would have been ample time for the Committee to meet. It was not until it met that it was ascertained that the Government had come to this decision that the election should take place in October in anticipation of the vacancies in December. That explains why the Committee did not meet until June. At the same time I might also remind the House that I called attention to this matter fully six months ago, and suggested the formation of a committee. But no action was taken on it until very much later. Then with regard to the other matter that Senator Colonel Moore suggested, that this election should be held on the principle known as the principle of “go as you please,” and that there should be the fullest opportunity for everybody being nominated, I should remind him that the Constitution provides to the contrary. The Constitution provides: “The method of proposal and selection for nomination shall be decided by Dáil Eireann and Seanad Eireann respectively.”

Colonel MOORE: Information on Maurice George Moore  Zoom on Maurice George Moore  Yes. The method but not the fact.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  The Constitution contemplated that there would have to be an elaborate provision made both in the Dáil and Seanad for the purpose of the carrying out of the provisions of the Constitution dealing with this election. These are only matters of order that have been raised that I wanted to dispose of. I want to get rid of the suggestion that there has been any delay on the part of your Committee. The moment that they ascertained that the Government proposed to have this election in October they did not lose a moment. We took every opportunity of getting in touch with the Executive Council, and also with the Committee of the Dáil who are dealing with the same subject matter. The Seanad has approved of my suggestion, that we take these paragraphs separately. If, on each paragraph, we are going to roam over the whole question we would never arrive at any conclusion. [620] It is quite pertinent for any Senator to deal with No. 2.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  To the extent that the suggestion is that An Leas-Chathaoirleach should propose, en bloc, the names of the retiring Senators or such of them as give their consent in writing, I wish to say that anything that would have a tendency to create in the minds of the people any feeling that this House, in its rules or in laying down any method of selection, wanted to restrict in any way the choice of the people in the election of Senators, any such suggestion that a Senator has his name put forward in that way, would have a bad effect. The people, of course, will have the ultimate decision in this matter. We should do nothing here to give the impression that we are trying to establish a close borough, and we should do nothing here that would, in any way, prejudice, favourably or unfavourably, the chances of any retiring member of this House.

To that extent it is fettering the free choice of the people. Supposing that a member was turned down in this House, it goes without saying that that turning down would prejudice his election by the people. There will probably be from 57 to 80 candidates. People far away in the west, the south, or the extreme east, would know only men prominent in public life, men whose names have appeared frequently in the Press. The people at the time of the election will harp back to anything the Dáil or Seanad may have done with regard to certain members of the Seanad here. If they find that the Seanad has turned down certain members that will be a little pointer for them, and in the absence of any knowledge they would say that they were turned down by their own colleagues, and that would prejudice them. I think we ought not to do anything that would in any way limit or influence the ultimate choice of the people, or let the impression go abroad that we were in any way trying to give any undue advantage to any retiring member of the present Seanad.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Are you moving any amendment to this clause, [621] or are you simply asking the Seanad to reject it?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Yes; I am asking the Seanad to reject it.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Are you suggesting any substitute?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  No; the retiring Senators have a constitutional right to go forward.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  That would leave us in the strange position that we would have no machinery then for dealing with the nominations.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  An Leas-Chathaoirleach has the privilege of nominating all the retiring members. That could be exercised, and all the members could be proposed.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Are you proposing to strike out that?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Yes.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  But you said that you were not.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  I propose the elimination of the first five lines.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I understand that that is not what you said originally, Senator.

Mr. BENNETT: Information on Thomas Westropp Bennett  Zoom on Thomas Westropp Bennett  Senator Colonel Moore desired to create the impression that the committee wanted to make the Seanad a close borough. The suggestion was that by getting, or attempting to get, 19 on the panel a free choice was prevented. This proposal does not suggest that the 19 members should be the sole selection. The only thing it tries to do is to prevent a Senator from proposing 100 candidates, and in that way probably having as many as 3,000 candidates to select from, which is a thing, I am sure, nobody desires. In addition to the 19 names, you would have probably 30 other persons selected. That would be two for each member of the Seanad. That would be a selection of 49 from which to select 19. In addition, there would be 38 selected by the Dáil, so there is no reason why a prominent citizen of the Saorstát should not have the opportunity [622] of having his name submitted on the Panel.

Mr. de LOUGHRY: Information on Peter De Loughry  Zoom on Peter De Loughry  A good many feel that it will be a disadvantage if names are sent in only to be turned down. I think if the outgoing Senators entered an agreement not to have their names submitted in this way it would be the better course. The only effect of the proposal would be to increase the number on the ballot paper.

Mr. DOUGLAS: Information on James Green Douglas  Zoom on James Green Douglas  Senator de Loughry has stated exactly the position. The only effect of the proposal that the An Leas-Chathaoirleach should nominate the names in the way proposed is to make it easier for any person willing to submit his name to the Seanad. If you delete this without doing anything else then you will place the outgoing Senator in the position that he may fail to get a nomination. If he wishes to submit his name to the Seanad he will have to find two Senators to sponsor him, but after this proposal he is placed in a better position than any other form of nomination, for he can easily have his name put forward if he so wishes.

Colonel MOORE: Information on Maurice George Moore  Zoom on Maurice George Moore  With regard to the Senator's amendment, and to what Senator Douglas has said, if the first 4½ lines are cut out, it will not necessitate any of the retiring Senators getting two people to nominate them. They will come on the panel automatically.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  There is confusion, and I am not surprised, as the matter is complicated. I quite agree that the Seanad has been more or less rushed in this matter, but this is not the Seanad's fault. I think I can make it quite clear to the House, if they will allow me. We are dealing with two separate lists. The first is the original list. That is the list of Senators proposed as candidates for the outgoing vacancies. If you keep before your minds that that is the proposed list, as distinct from the selection or panel list, then you will see, I think, the difference. There is nothing whatever that indicates, by putting a man on or off the candidates' list, if he is an out [623] going Senator, that the chances of his election to the final panel are in any way prejudiced. The difficulty of the position that faced the Committee in making a recommendation was, we felt that it would be a very invidious thing to leave it to the chance that some Senators would propose for the proposal list one or more of the outgoing Senators, and that some of the outgoing Senators would not have their names proposed on the proposal list. We thought that would be an invidious task for the Seanad itself, and it would be an invidious matter for the outgoing Senators whose names were not put forward for the proposal list. Accordingly we came to the conclusion that it would be desirable, if possible, to arrive at one course or other, and either to provide that they should go on the proposal or preliminary list automatically if they so consented, or that it should not be in the power of the Seanad to put on one or more of them, and in that event they should be left to their automatic right of joining the second list, that is, the Panel under the Constitution. That is the sole object we had in our minds.

Mr. de LOUGHRY: Information on Peter De Loughry  Zoom on Peter De Loughry  Did I understand you to say that it was the idea of the Committee that the nineteen should be put forward or none at all?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  The matter primarily concerned them, I am sure, [624] and the Seanad will pay great attention to their wishes. That provision should not apply to outgoing Senators. Outgoing Senators should not be entitled to have their names on the preliminary list, and in view of the fact that the Panel is formed, they have the right to have their names on the Panel. If you once open the door for the selection of outgoing Senators you are penalising those who are not proposed for the preliminary list. Therefore, the obvious course is to provide that no outgoing Senator shall be eligible for the proposal list. Then you leave him his automatic right under the Constitution of joining the Panel when he is finished.

Mr. DOUGLAS: Information on James Green Douglas  Zoom on James Green Douglas  Either this plan is fair or the other plan of “none” is fair.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Is it the wish of the House that the plan provided in the first four lines of No. 2 should be omitted and in lieu thereof there should be inserted “no outgoing Senator should be eligible for nomination on the proposed list”?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  I withdraw my proposal in favour of that.

Mr. PARKINSON: Information on James Joseph Parkinson  Zoom on James Joseph Parkinson  I second that.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Then I shall direct this resolution to be amended accordingly.

PARAGRAPH 3.
Déanfar gach iarrthóir nách Seanadóir a bheidh ag dul as oifig do thairisgint ar fhuirm fé leith a bheidh sna téarmaí atá curtha síos i gCuid II. den Sceideal a ghabhann leis seo, agus ina mbeidh na mion- innste a héilítear leis sin. Every candidate, other than an outgoing Senator, shall be proposed on a separate form which shall be in the terms set out in Part II. of the Schedule hereto, and shall contain the particulars required thereby.
Ní bheidh teideal ag aon tSeana- dóir chun níos mó na aon iarrthóir amháin do thairisgint. No Senator shall be entitled to pro- pose more than one candidate.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  No. 3 will be all right except we will leave out the words “other than an outgoing Senator.” I will make a consequential alteration if necessary.

PARAGRAPH 4.
Cuirfidh an Cathaoirleach fé ndeár go dtabharfar páipéirí tairisginte [625]d'aon Seanadóir go dteastóid uaidh le linn na tréimhse a thosnóidh nuair a glacfar leis an Rún so agus a chríochnóidh ar a 12 a chlog, meadhon lae, an 24adh lá de Mheitheamh, 1925, tréimhse dá ngairmtear anso “am an roghnu- cháin.” The Cathaoirleach shall cause proposal papers to be supplied to [626]any Senator requiring the same during the period commencing at the time of the passing of this Resolu- tion and ending at 12 o'clock noon on the 24th day of June, 1925, which period is herein referred to as the “time for selection.”

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  With regard to No. 4 I propose that the 24th June be changed to the 26th June. That would extend the time during which nominations might be handed in from Wednesday, the 24th, to Friday, the 26th.

Mr. BARRINGTON: Information on William Barrington  Zoom on William Barrington  Do I understand that Section 3 is subject to your suggestion?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Yes; the alterations in No. 2, which are consequential, shall be put in. I mentioned I would fix the hours from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., and from 2.30 to 5.30 every day in the interval between now and the 26th, except Sundays, when the office will be closed, and on Saturdays, when the hours will be from 10 to 1. With regard to No. 5, I want Senators to see that it leaves open to them a method by which they can deliver their papers. While that allows them to send them by post, they will understand that they do so at their own risk. A similar proposal to this has been adopted by the Dáil.

Mrs. COSTELLO: Information on Eileen Ellen Costello  Zoom on Eileen Ellen Costello  This has no reference to the concluding part of Section 2. Does it give you any power to say we have already one representing the second interest?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  That is on the technical form of the papers, and I will not go into that abstruse question. We have extended the time for receiving proposals up to the 26th. From No. 8 to No. 16 the sections deal with machinery.

PARAGRAPH 18.
Sa Rún so, ach amháin i gcás sighnithe Seanadóirí a dhéanfidh na hiarrthóirí do thairsgint agus na n-iarrthóirí a thoileóidh leis an tairisgint sin, signithe nach foláir a bheith i lámh-scríbhneoireacht na ndaoine a bheidh i gceist, folóidh focail le n-a dtagartar do scríobha, folóid clóbhula, clóscríobha, agus slite eile chun focail do thaisbeaint nó do thabhairt amach í bhfuirm shofheicse. Save in the case of the signature of Senators proposing the candidates and of the candidates consenting to such proposal, which signatures must be in the handwriting of the persons concerned, expressions in this Reso- lution referring to writing shall in- clude printing, typewriting, and other modes of representing or re- producing words in visible form.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I altered No. 18 because, as it originally stood, it provided that everything that was to be in writing under those resolutions might be carried out by typewriting or devices of that kind. I thought that should not be applied to the signature of the Senators proposing, or the signature of the candidate testifying his consent. That is approved of.

SCEIDEAL. SCHEDULE.
CUID I. PART I.
1. Is do réir na rialacha so a leanas a déanfar an roghnú. 1. The selection shall be conducted in accordance with the following Rules:—
[627]2. (1) Aon vóta ion-aistrithe amháin a bheidh ag gach toghthóir. [628]2. (1) Every elector shall have one transferable vote.
(2) Le linn do thoghthóir a vóta do thabhairt— (2) An elector in giving his vote—
(a) caithfe sé an figiúir 1 do chur ar a pháipéar vótála os coinne ainme an iarrthóra go vótálann sé leis; (a) must place on his voting paper the figure 1 opposite the name of the candidate for whom he votes;
(b) féadfa sé ina theanta san an figiúir 2 no na figiúirí 2 agus 3, no 2, 3 agus 4 mar sin de, do chur ar a pháipéar vótála os coinne ainm- neacha na n-iarrthóirí eile in ordú a rogha. (b) may in addition place on his voting paper the figure 2 or the figures 2 and 3, or 2, 3 and 4, and so on opposite the names of the other candidates in the order of his preference.
3. Siad na fuirmeacha atá i gCuid II. den Sceideal so, no fuirmeacha sa chéill chéanna a húsáidfear chun na gcrícheanna go n-abartar gur chúcha iad. 3. The forms contained in Part II. of this Schedule, or forms to the like effect, shall be used for the purposes to which they are expressed to be applicable.
4. Beidh gan bhrí agus ní comh- reofar páipéar vótála 4. A voting paper shall be invalid and not counted—
(a) ná cuirfear air an figiúir 1 ina aonar chun céad rogha d'iarr- thóir amháin éigin do theasbáint; no (a) on which the figure 1 stand- ing alone, indicating a first pre- ference for some one candidate, is not placed; or
(b) ar a gcuirfear, os coinne níos mó ná ainm aon iarrthóra amháin, an figiúir 1 ina aonar chun céad rogha do theasbaint; no (b) on which the figure 1 stand- ing alone, indicating a first prefer- ence is set opposite the name of more than one candidate; or
(c) ar a gcuirfar, os coinne ainme an iarrthóra chéanna an figiúir 1 ina aonar chun céad rogha do theasbáint agus figiúir éigin eile ina theanta; no (c) on which the figure 1 stand- ing alone indicating a first prefer- ence and some other number is set opposite the name of the same candidate; or
(d) atá gan mare air, no gan éifeacht toisc dabhata. (d) which is unmarked, or void for uncertainty.
5. (1) Diúltóidh an Ceann Comh- rimh d'aon pháipéirí vótála atá gan bhrí. Gheoghaidh an Ceann Comh- rimh amach ansan an uimhir de Chéad Roghanna do breacadh do gach iarrthóir ar na páipéirí vótála, agus cuirfe sé ansan na hiarrthóirí ar liost (dá ngairmtear ina dhiaidh seo “an t-Ordú Rogha”) in ordú uimhir na gCéad Roghanna do breacadh do gach iarrthóir, agus an t-iarrthóir gur breacadh an uimhir is mó de Chéad Roghanna dho i dtosach. Más có-ionnann an uimhir de Chéad Roghanna do breacadh d'aon bheirt no do níos mó iarrthóirí (dá ngairm- tear ina dhiaidh seo “iarrthóirí có- ionannacha”) gheobhaidh an Ceann [629]Comhrimh amach na Dara Roghanna do breacadh do gach iarrthóir có- ionannach ar na páipéirí vótála uile agus cuirfe sé san Ordú Rogha 'na mease féin na hiarrthóirí có-ionnan- nacha in órdú na Dara Roghanna do breacadh do gach iarrthóir díobh san, agus an t-iarrthóir gur breacadh an uimhir is mó de. Dhara Roghanna dho i dtosach. Más có-ionann an uimhir de Chéad Roghanna is de Dhara Roghanna do breacadh d'aon bheirt no do niós mó d'iarrthóirí có-ionan- nacha, gheobhaidh an Ceann Comh- rimh amach sa chuma chéanna uimhir na dTreas Roghanna do brea- cadh do gach iarrthóir có-ionannach díobh san ar na páipéirí vótála uile. agus socróidh sé na hiarrthóirí sin san Ordú Rogha dá réir, agus mar sin de, chun go mbeidh na hiarrthóirí uile curtha in órdú san Ordú Rogha. Más có-ionann Céad Roghanna, Dara Roghanna, Treas Roghanna agus na roghanna eile go léir do breacadh d'aon bheirt no do níos mó iarrthóirí có-ionannacha, socróidh an Ceann Comhrimh le crannchur an t-órdú ina gcuirfear na hiarrthóirí sin san Ordú Rogha. 5. (1) The Returning Officer shall reject any voting papers that are in- valid. The Returning Officer shall then ascertain the number of First Preferences recorded on the voting papers for each candidate, and shall then arrange the candidates on a list (hereinafter called “the Order of Preferences”) in the order of the number of First Preferences recorded for each candidate, beginning with the candidate for whom the greatest number of First Preferences are re- corded. If the number of First Pre- ferences recorded for any two or more candidates (hereinafter called “equal candidates”) is equal, the Returning Officer shall ascertain the [630]number of Second Preferences re- corded on all the voting papers for each of the equal candidates, and shall arrange the equal candidates as amongst themselves on the Order of Preferences in the order of the Second Preferences recorded for each such candidate, beginning with the candidate for whom the greatest number of Second Preferences is re- corded. If the number of First and Second Preferences recorded for any two or more equal candidates is equal, the Returning Officer shall, in like manner, ascertain the number of Third Preferences recorded on all the voting papers for each of such equal candidates, and arrange such candidates on the Order of Prefer- ences accordingly, and so on until all the candidates are arranged in order on the Order of Preferences. If the number of First, Second, Third, and all other preferences recorded for any two or more equal candidates is equal the Returning Officer shall de- termine by lot the order in which such candidates are to be arranged on the Order of Preferences.
Cuirfidh an Ceann Comhrimh fé ndeár ansan na páipéirí vótála le n-a bhfuil brí do shocrú i mbeartanna do réir na gcéad roghanna do breacadh do gach iarrthóir. The Returning Officer shall then cause the valid voting papers to be arranged in parcels, according to the first preferences recorded for each candidate.
(2) Chun gur bhfusa do bhéanfaí an obair a leagann na Rialacha so amach, tuigfear gur fiú míle gach páipéar vótála le n-a bhfuil brí (2) For the purpose of facilitating the processes prescribed by these Rules, each valid voting paper shall be deemed to be of the value of one thousand.
(3) Déanfaidh an Ceann Comh- rimh an uimhir pháipéar atá i ngach beart do chomhreamh, agus do réir fo-ailt (2) den Riail seo cuirfe sé i leith gach iarrthóra éifeacht na bpáipéar le n-a bhfuil brí agus ar ar breacadh céad rogha don iarrthóir sin. (3) The Returning Officer shall count the number of papers in each parcel, and in accordance with sub- section (2) of this Rule credit each candidate with the value of the valid papers on which a first preference has been recorded for such candi- date.
6. Ansan cuirfidh an Ceann Comh- rimh éifeachtaí na mbeart go léir le chéile agus déanfa sé ranna den uim- hir iomlán le huimhir a bheidh aon thar an uimhir fholúntas atá le líona. Isí an uimhir a bheidh aon thar tora na roinne sin, ach gan iarsma briste do bhae, an unimhir is [631]leor chun iarrthóir do roghnú. An “quota” a tugtar ar an uimhir sin anso. 6. The Returning Officer shall then add together the values in all the parcels and divide the full total value by a number exceeding by one the number of vacancies to be filled. The result increased by one, any fractional remainder being dis- regarded, shall be the number [632]sufficient to secure the return of the candidate. This number is herein called the “quota.”
7. Ar dheire aon chomhrimh no ar dheire aistriú aon bhirt no fho-bhirt iarrthóra do cuireadh as, más có- ionann leis na más mó ná an quota an éifeacht a cuirfear i leith aon iarrthóra, tuigfear an t-iarrthóir sin do bheith roghnuithe. 7. If at the end of any count or at the end of the transfer of any parcel or sub-parcel of an excluded candidate the value credited to a candidate is equal to or greater than the quota, that candidate shall be deemed to be selected.
8. (1) Ar dheire aon chomrimh má's mó ná an quota an éifeacht a cuirfear i leith aon iarrthóra, aistreo- far an fuighleach do réir forálacha na Rialach so go dtí an t-iarrthóir leanúnach no go dtí na hiarrthóirí leanúnach a teasbeántar ar na páipéirí vótála atá i mbeart no i bhfo-bheart an iarrthóra do rogh- nadh, do réir na gcéad roghanna eile breacuithe ortha atá ar fáil. 8. (1) If at the end of any count the value credited to a candidate is greater than the quota, the surplus shall be transferred in accordance with the provisions of this Rule to the continuing candidate or candi- dates indicated on the voting papers in the parcel or sub-parcel of the selected candidate, according to the next available preferences recorded thereon.
(2) (a) Más as bun - vótanna amháin a thagann an éifeacht a cuirtear i leith iarrthóra roghnuithe, scrúdóidh an Ceann Comhrimh na páipéirí uile atá i mbeart an iarr- thóra roghnuithe go bhfuiltear chun a fhuighleach d'aistriú, agus socróidh sé na páipéirí ion-aistrithe i bhfo-bheartanna do réir na gcéad roghanna eile breacuithe ortha atá ar fáil agus déanfa sé fo-bheart fé leith de sna páipéirí neamh-ion- aistrithe. (2) (a) If the value credited to a selected candidate arises out of original votes only, the Returning Officer shall examine all the papers in the parcel of the selected candi- date, whose surplus is to be trans- ferred, and shall arrange the trans- ferable papers in sub-parcels accord- ing to the next available preferences recorded thereon, and shall make a separate sub-parcel of the non- transferable papers.
(b) Más as bun-vótanna agus vótanna aistrithe no as vótanna astrithe amháin a thagann an éifeacht a cuirtear i leith iarrthóra roghnuithe, scrúdóidh an Ceann Comhrimh na páipéirí atá sa bhfo- bheart is déanaí fuair an t-iarrthóir roghnuithe, agus déanfa sé a thuille fo-bheartanna de sna páipéirí ion- aistrithe atá ann do réir na gcéad roghanna eile breacuithe ortha atá ar fáil, agus déanfa sé beart fé leith de sna páipéirí neamh-ionaistrithe. (b) If the value credited to a selected candidate arises out of original and transferred votes, or of transferred votes only, the Return- ing Officer shall examine the papers contained in the sub-parcel last re- ceived by the selected candidate, and shall arrange the transferable papers therein in further sub- parcels according to the next avail- able preferences recorded thereon and shall make a separate sub- parcel of the non-transferable papers.
(c) In aon de sna cásanna dá dtagartar i míreanna (a) agus (b) sa bhfo-alt so, gheobhaidh an Ceann Comhrimh amach uimhir agus éifeacht iomlán na bpáipéirí atá i ngach fo-bheart de pháipéirí ionais- trithe agus i bhfo-bheart na bpáipéirí neamh-ionaistrithe. [633](3) Más có-ionann an fuighleach, no más mó é ná éifeacht iomlán na bpáipéirí atá i bhfo-bheartanna na bpáipéirí ionaistrithe, aistreoidh an Ceann Comhrimh gach fo-bheart de pháipéirí ion-aistrithe go dtí an t-iarrthóir leanúnach atá teasbeánta ortha ag an vótálaí mar a chéad rogha eile ar fáil, agus sé éifeacht gach páipéir le linn aistrithe ná an éifeacht do bhí leis nuair do tugadh é don iarrthóir go bhfuiltear ag aistriú a fhuighligh. (c) In either of the cases referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) in this sub-section, the returning officer shall ascertain the number of papers and their total value in each sub-parcel of transferable papers and in the sub-parcel of non-transferable papers. [634](3) If the surplus is equal to or greater than the total value of the papers in the sub-parcels of trans- ferable papers the returning officer shall transfer each sub-parcel of transferable papers to the continuing candidate indicated thereon as the voter's next available preference, each paper being transferred at the value at which it was received by the candidate whose surplus is being transferred.
Nuair is mó an fuighleach ná éifeacht iomlán fo-bheart na bpáipéar ion-aistrithe, tuigfear go bhfuil deire le brí na bpáipéar neamh-ionaistrithe, agus cuirfear i leataoibh iad ar éifeacht a bheidh co-ionann leis an difríocht atá idír an fuighleach agus éifeacht fho-bheart na bpáipéar ion- aistrithe. When the surplus is greater than the total value of the sub-parcels of transferable papers the non-trans- ferable papers shall be set aside as not effective, at a value which is equal to the difference between the surplus and the value of the sub- parcels of transferable papers.
(4) Más lú an fuighleach ná éifeacht iomlán na bpáipéar ion- aistrithe, aistreoidh an Ceann Comhrimh gach páipéar sa bhfo- bheart san de pháipéirí ion-aistrithe go dtí an t-iarrthóir leanúnach atá teasbeánta ortha ag an vótálaí mar a chéad rogha eile ar fáil, agus gheobhfar amach cad is éifeacht gach páipéir aistreofar, ach ranna do dhéanamh den bhfuighleach le huimhir iomlán na bpáipéar ion- aistrithe agus gan na hiarmhair bhriste fhanann do bhac, ach amháin go ndéanfar nóta ar Leathán an Tora i dtaobh an chailliúint éifeachta do thárla dá dheascaibh. (4) If the surplus is less than the total value of the transferable papers, the returning officer shall transfer each paper in such sub- parcel of transferable papers to the continuing candidate indicated there- on as the voter's next available pre- ference, and the value at which each paper shall be transferred shall be ascertained by dividing the sur- plus by the total number of trans- ferable papers, fractional remainders being disregarded, except that the consequential loss of value shall be noted on the Result Sheet.
(5) Fuighleach a thárluíonn ar dheire aon chomhrimh, roinnfear é sara roinnfear fuighleach a thár- lóidh ag comhreamh 'na dhiaidh. (5) A surplus which arises on the completion of any count shall be dealt with before a surplus which may arise at a subsequent count.
Nuair a thárluíonn dhá fhuigh- leach no níos mó de bharr an chomh- rimh chéanna, sé an ceann is mó a roinnfear ar dtúis agus roinnfearr na einn eile in órdú a méide. When two or more surpluses arise out of the same count the largest shall be first dealt with and the others shall be dealt with in the order of their magnitude.
Más có-ionann an fuighleach ag beirt no ag níos mó iarrthóirí de bharr an chomhrimh chéanna, roinnfear ar dtúis fuighleach an iarrthóra gur cuireadh an éifeacht is mó 'na leith ag an gcomhreamh ba thúisce nár chó-ionann na héifeachtaí do cuireadh i leith na n-iarrthóirí seo. If two or more candidates have an equal surplus arising out of the same count, the surplus of the can- didate credited with the greatest value at the earliest count at which the values credited to these candi- dates were unequal shall be first dealt with.
Nuair is có-ionann na héifeachtaí [635]do cuireadh i leith na n-iarrthóirí sin ag gach comhreamh, roinnfidh an Ceann Comhrimh ar dtúis fuigh- leach an iarrthóra gur breacadh san órdú rogha gurb é dó fuair an uimhir ba mhó de chéad roghanna. Where the values credited to such [636]candidates were equal at all counts, the Returning Officer shall deal first with the surplus of the candidate recorded in the Order of Preferences as having received the greatest num- ber of first preferences.
9. (1) Má thárluíonn ar dheire aon chomhrimh, ná fuil fuighleach ag aon iarrthóir agus go bhfuil folúntas amháin no níos mó le líona, déanfaidh an Ceann Comhrimh an t-iarrthóir go bhfuil an éifeacht is lú 'na leith do chur as agus a pháipéirí d'aistriú go dtí an t-iarrthóir leanúnach no na hiarrthóirí leanúnacha atá teasbeánta ag an vótálaí mar a chéad rogha eile ar fáil ar na páipéirí vótála atá i mbeart no i bhfo-bheartanna an iarr- thóra do cuireadh as, agus cuirfe sé éifeacht na bpáipéirí aistrithe i leith an iarrthóra leanúnaigh no na n-iarr- thóirí leanúnacha. 9. (1) If at the end of any count no candidate has a surplus and one or more vacancies remain unfilled, the Returning Officer shall exclude the candidate credited with the lowest value and shall transfer his papers to the continuing candidate or candidates indicated on the voting papers in the parcel or sub-parcels of the excluded candidate as the voter's next available preference, and shall credit the continuing candidate or candidates with the value of the papers transferred.
(2) (a) Aistreofar ar dtúis an beart 'na bhfuil bun-vótanna, agus is é éifeacht aistrithe gach páipéir ná míle. (2) (a) The parcel containing original votes shall first be trans- ferred, the transfer value of each paper being one thousand.
(b) Aistreofar ansan na fo-bheart- anna 'na bhfuil vótanna aistrithe san órdú agus ar an éilfeacht gur tugadh iad don iarrthóir do cuireadh as. (b) The sub-parcels containing transferred votes shall then be trans- ferred in the order in which and at the value of which the excluded candidate obtained them.
(c) Chun a shocrú pe'ca iarrthóir leanúnach iarrthóir no nach ea tuig- fear gur comhreamh fé leith aistriú gach birt no fo-bhirt. (c) For the purpose of determin- ing whether a candidate is a continu- ing candidate the transfer of each parcel or sub-parcel shall be regarded as a separate count.
(3) Le linn gach beart no fo-bheart d'aistriú, déanfar fo-bheart fé leith de sna páipéirí neamh-ionaistrithe, agus cuirfear iad san i leataoibh ar an eifeacht ar ar tugadh iad don iarrthóir do cuireadh as. (3) In the transfer of each parcel or sub-parcel a separate sub-parcel shall be made of the non-transfer- able papers which shall be set aside at the value at which the excluded candidates obtained them.
(4) Má thárluíonn, nuair is gá iarr- thóir do chur as fén Riali seo, gurb é an éifeacht chéanna atá i leith beirte no níos mó iarrthóirí agus gurb iad is lú, féachfar chun iom- láine éifeachta na mbun-vótanna do cuireadh i leith gach iarrthóra dhíobh san, agus is é an t-iarrthóir ag a bhfuil an éifeacht iomlán is lú a cuirfear as, agus nuair is có-ion- ann na héifeachtaí iomlána, féach- far chun na n-éifeachtaí iomlána do cuireadh i leith na n-iarrthóirí seo [637]ag an gcomhreamh is túisce nár chó-ionann a n-éifeachtaí, agus is é an t-iarrthóir ag a raibh an éifeacht is lú ag an gcomhreamh an a cuir- fear as. (4) If, when a candidate has to be excluded under this Rule, two or more candidates are each credited with the same value and are lowest, regard shall be had to the total value of original votes credited to each of those candidates, and the candidate with the smallest total value shall be excluded, and where the total values are equal, regard shall be had to the total value credited to those candidates at the earliest count at which they had unequal values, and [638]the candidate with the smallest value at that count shall be excluded.
Má thárluíonn do bheirt no do níos mó iarrthóirí bheith ar deire agus gurb é an éifeacht chéanna do cuireadh i leith gach duine aca, ag gach comhreamh, déanfidh an Ceann Comhrimh an t-iarrthóir gur breac- adh san órdú rogha go bhfuair sé an uimhir ba lú de chéad roghanna do chur as. If two or more candidates are lowest and are each credited with the same value at all counts, the Re- turning Officer shall exclude the candidate recorded on the Order of Preferences as having received the smallest number of First Prefer- ences.
10. Pé uair a déanfar aon aistriú fé aon cheann de sna Rialacha roimhe seo, cuirfear gach fo-bheart de phái- péirí aistreofar ar bharr an bhirt no an fho-bhirt, má bhíonn ann, de pháipéirí an iarrthóra gur chuige a déanfar an t-aistriú, agus cuirfear éifeacht a gheobhfar amach do réir na Rialacha so i leith an iarrthóra san. 10. Whenever any transfer is made under any of these preceding Rules, each sub-parcel of papers transferred shall be placed on top of the parcel or sub-parcel, if any, of papers of the candidate to whom the transfer is made, and that candidate shall be credited with the value ascertained in pursuance of these Rules.
11. (1) Má thárluíonn ar dheire aon chomhrimh gur có-ionann na hiarrthóirí roghnuithe agus uimhir na bhfolúntas atá le líona, nó déan- far aon aistriú eile. 11. (1) If at the end of any count the number of selected candidates is equal to the number of vacancies to be filled no further transfers shall be made.
(2) (a) Nuair is có-ionann uimhir na n-iarrthóirí leanúnacha agus uimhir na bhfolúntas atá gan líona, tuigfear ansan go bhfuil na hiarr- thóirí leanúnacha roghnuithe. (2) (a) When the number of con- tinuing candidates is equal to the number of vacancies remaining un- filled, the continuing candidates shall thereupon be deemed to be selected.
(b) Nuair ná fuil ach folúntas amháin gan líona agus gur mó an éifeacht atá curtha i leith iarrthóra leanúnaigh amháin ná iomlán na n-éifeachtaí atá curtha i leith na n-iarrthóirí leanúnacha eile, mar aon le haon fhuighleach nár haistríodh, tuigfear ansan an t-iarrthóir sin do bheith roghnuithe. (b) When only one vacancy re- mains unfilled and the value credited to some one continuing candidate ex- ceeds the total of the values credited to the other continuing candidates, together with any surplus not trans- ferred that candidate shall there- upon be deemed to be selected.
(3) Nuair is féidir na folúntaisí deireanacha do líona fén Riail seo, ní déanfar aon aistriú eile. (3) When the last vacancies can be filled under this Rule, no further transfer shall be made.
12. Breacfidh an Ceann Comhrimh iomlán na n-éifeachtaí a cuirfear i leith gach iarrthóra ar dheire gach comhrimh. Beidh so bhreaca san— 12. The Returning Officer shall re- cord the total of the values credited to each candidate at the end of every count. Such record shall include—
(i) Eifeacht na bpáipéar neamh- ionaistrithe go bhfuil deire le n-a mbrí; agus (i) The value of the non-trans- ferable papers not effective; and
(ii) An chailliúint éifeachta toise gan iarmhair do chomhreamh [639]agus féadfaidh an breaca san bheith do réir na fuirme atá i gCuid II. den Sceideal so, no i (ii) The loss of value owing to disregard of fractions, and may be [640]in accordance with the form set out in Part II. of this Schedule, or in a form to the like effect.
13. Tuigfear na hiarrthóirí do bheith roghnuithe san órdú inar hais- tríodh a bhfuighligh. 13. he candidates shall be deemed to have been selected in the order in which their surpluses were transferred.
Iarrthóir go gcuirfear ina leith ar dheire dhómhrimh éifeacht atá dír- each có-ionann leis an quota, tuigfear gur aige a bheidh an fuighleach is lú ag an gcomhreamh san chun críche na Rialach so. A candidate credited at the end of a count with a value excatly equal to the quota shall be regarded as hav- ing the smallest surplus at that count for the purpose of this Rule.
Nuair a tuigfear beirt no níos mó d'iarrthóirí bheith roghnuithe fé Riail 11 (2) (a) tuigfear na hiarrth- óirí sin do bheith righnuithe do réir órdú na n-éifeachtaí do cuireadh ina leith fé seach ag an staid sin, an t-iarrthóir gur cuireadh an éifeacht ba mhó 'na leith ag an staid sin, tuigfear é bheith roghnuithe ar dtúis imease na n-iarrthóirí sin agus mar sin de, agus má cuirtear éifeachtaí có-ionannacha i leith beirte no níos mó d'iarrthóirí ag an staid sin, gheobhfar amach órdú roghnúcháin a leithéidí d'iarrthóirí có-ionannacha ar an gcuma chéanna do gheobhfaí amach órdú a leithéidí d'iarrthóirí do chur as fé Riail 9 (4), leis an difríocht so, gurb iad a tuigfear bheith roghnuithe ar dtúis imeasc na n-iarrthóirí có-ionannacha san ná na hiarrthóirí is déanaí do cuirfí as fén Riail sin, agus gurb é an t-iarrthóir is túisce do cuirfí as an t-iarrthóir is déaní a tuigfear bheith roghnuithe. When two or more candidates are deemed to have been selected under Rule 11 (2) (a) such candidates shall be deemed to have been selected in the order of values credited to them respectively at that stage, the candi- date credited at that stage with the greatest value being deemed to have been the first selected of such candi- dates, and so on, and if two or more candidates are credited with equal values at that stage the order of selection of such equal candidates shall be ascertained in the same way as the order of exclusion of such candidates would be ascertained under the Rule 9 (4), with the difference that the candidates who would be the last to be excluded under that Rule shall be deemed to have been the first selected of such equal candi- dates, and the candidate who would have been the first to be excluded shall be deemed to have been the last selected.
14. Sna Rialacha so— 14. In these Rules—
(1) Cialluíonn an abairt “iarr- thóirí leanúnacha” aon iarrthóir ná tuigtear bheith roghnuithe ná curtha as. (1) The expression “continuing candidates” means any candidate not deemed to be selected and not excluded.
(2) Cialluíonn an abairt “céad rogha” an figiúir 1 ina aonar; cial- luíonn an abairt “dara rogha” an figiúir 2 ina aonar i ndiaidh an fhigiúra 1, agus cialluíonn an abairt “treas rogha” an figiúir 3 ina aonar i ndiaidh na bhfigiúirí 1 agus 2 os coinne ainme aon iarrthóra, agus mar sin de. (2) The expression “first prefer- ence” means the “figure 1” stand- ing alone; the expression “second preference” means the “figure 2” standing alone in succession to “figure 1,” and the expression “third preference” means the “figure 3” standing alone in succes- sion to the “figures 1” and “2” set opposite the name of any candi- date, and so on.
[641](3) Cialluíonn an abairt “an chéad rogha eile ar fáil” dara rogha no rogha do thagann ina dhiaidh a breactar ar órdú uimhreach i ndiaidh a chéile d'iarrthóir leanú- nach, gan comhreamh do dhéanamh ar an gcéad rogha eile thagann in órdú ar an bpáipéar vótála d'iarr- thóirí go dtuigtear cheana iad do bheith roghnuithe no curtha as. [642](3) The expression “next avail- able preference” means a second or subsequent preference recorded in consecutive numerical order for a continuing candidate, the preference next in order on the voting paper for candidates already deemed to be selected or excluded being ignored.
(4) Cialluíonn an abairt “páipéar ionaistrithe” páipéar vótála ar a ndintear, tar éia chéad rogha, dara rogha no rogha ina dhiaidh sin do bhreaca ar órdú uimhreach i ndiaidh a chéile d'iarrthóir leanúnach. (4) The expression “transferable paper” means a voting paper on which following a first preference a second or subsequent preference is recorded in numerical order for a continuing candidate:
(5) Cialluíonn an abairt “páipéar neamh-ionaistrithe” páipéar vótála ná fuil aon dara rogha ná rogha 'na dhaidh breacuithe air d'iarrthóir leanúnach: (5) The expression “non-transfer- able paper” means a voting paper on which no second or subsequent preference is recorded for a continu- ing candidate:
Ach tuigfear gur páipéar neamh- ionaistrithe páipéar— Provided that a paper shall be deemed to have become a non-trans- ferable paper whenever—
(a) nuair atá ainmneacha beirte no níos mó d'iarrthóirí (is cuma iad do bheith ar leanuint no gan a bheith) marcálta leis an uimhir chéanna agus gurb iad is túisce arís san órdú rogha; no (a) the names of two or more candidates (whether continuing or not) are marked with the same number, and are next in order of preference; or
(b) nuair a marcáltar ainm an iarrthóra is túisce arís san órdú rogha (is cuma é do bheith ar leanúint no gan a bheith)— (b) the name of the candidate next in order of preference (whe- ther continuing or not) is marked—
(i) le huimhir ná leanann i ndiaidh a chéile uimhir éigin eile ar an bpáipéar vótála; no (i) by a number not following consecutively after some other number on the voting paper; or
(ii) le dhá uimhir no níos mó; no (ii) by two or more numbers; or
(c) nuair atá sé gan éifeacht toisc dabhata. (c) it is void for uncertainty.
(6) Cialluíonn an abairt “bun- vóta” i dtaobh aon iarrthóra, vóta do fuarthas ó pháipéar vótála gur breacadh céad rogha air don iarr- thóir sin. (6) The expression “original vote” in regard to any candidate means a vote derived from a voting paper on which a first preference is recorded for that candidate.
(7) Cialluíonn an abairt “vóta aistrithe” i dtaobh aon iarrthóra, vóta do fuarthas ó pháipéar vótála ar ar breacadh dara rogha no rogha 'na dhiaidh don iarrthóir sin. (7) The expression “transferred vote” in regard to any candidate means a vote derived from a voting paper on which a second or subse- quent preference is recorded for that candidate.
(8) Cialluíonn an focal “fuigh- leach” an uimhir thar an quota in éifeacht iomlán na vótanna, idir bun- vótanna agus vótanna aistrithe, a cuirtear i leith aon iarrthóra. (8) The expression “remainder” means the number by which the total value of the votes, original and transferred, credited to any candi- date exceeds the quota.
[643](9) Cialluíonn an focal “comh- reamh”— [644](9) The expression “count” means:—
(a) gach ní is gá do dhéanamh i geomhreamh na gcéad roghanna a breactar d'iarrthóirí; no (a) all the operations involved in the counting of the first prefer- ences recorded for candidates; or
(b) gach ní is gá do dhéanamh chun fuighleach iarrthóra rogh- nuithe d'aistriú; no all the operations involved in the transfer of the surplus of a selected candidate; or
(c) gach ní is gá do dhéanamh chun vótanna iarrthóra a cuirtear as d'aistriú. (c) all the operations involved in the transfer of the votes of an excluded candidate.
(10) Isé brí na habairte “tuigfear bheith roghnuithe” ná go dtuigfear bheith roghnuithe chun críche an chomhrimh, ach gan dochar do thóra an roghnúcháin d'fhógairt. (10) The expression “deemed to be selected” means deemed to be selected for the purpose of counting, but without prejudice to the declara- tion of the result of the selection.
(11) Cialluíonn an abairt “socrú le crann-chur” i Riail a 5 socrú do réir na dtreor so leanas:— (11) The expression “determined by lot” in Rule 5 means determined in accordance with the following directions:—
Scríobhfar ainmneacha na n-iarr- thóirí le n-a mbaineann sé ar bhlúirí páipéar có-mhar a chéile, agus fillfear na blúirí chun ná haithneofar iad thar a chéile, agus meascfar iad agus tarraiceofar iad gan ordú gan eagar; déanfar na hiarrthóirí le n-a mbaineann sé do chur ar an Ordú Rogha do réir an órdú 'na dtarraiceofar na blúirí ar a bhfuil a n-ainmneacha ag tosnú leis an iarrthóir go mbeidh a ainm ar an mblúire a tarraiceofar ar dtúis. The names of the candidates con- cerned having been written on similar slips of paper, and the slips having been folded so as to prevent identification and mixed and drawn at random, the candidates con- cerned shall as amongst themselves be arranged on the Order of Pre- ferences in the order in which the slips containing their names are drawn beginning with the candi- date whose name is on the slip drawn first.

[645][646]

[647][648]

[649][650]

[651]AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  We now come to the Schedule, and I am not going to ask the Seanad to go through it. I confess I do not understand it, and I doubt very much if any Senators understand it. I ought to mention that your Committee had the advantage, and a very great advantage it proved to be, of having the assitance of Mr. Wilfred Brown of the Local Government Department, who has had long experience in connection with this matter. That experience was also placed at the disposal of the Committee of the Dáil. What is contained in the Schedule is an exact reproduction of what the Dáil agreed to on the subject. The regulations do not differ in many respects from those adopted by the Dáil. As to the counting of the votes, etc., we have, I might say, and I think wisely, followed the procedure fixed by the Dáil.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Do these profess to be a copy of the stereotyped regulations?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  There are no stereotyped regulations, but there are certain provisions in the Electoral Acts. They are not included in these, because, if you refer to the Acts, this machinery, which is delicate machinery, is applicable solely to this particular matter of the election for 19 vacancies in the Seanad. It is to be done on the principle of Proportional Representation, which has been followed all through. There are certain methods of dealing with transfer votes and so forth, and arithmetical calculations of the most minute kind, which, as I said, I do not profess to understand, and that I suggest the Seanad might wisely leave alone.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Is it set out specifically under what circumstances a voting paper shall be declared invalid? Take a case where you had a voting paper marked 1, 2, 3, then a break, and a mark opposite the sixth name. That paper would be valid up to number 3, but after that would be invalid.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Will not the question of the validity of the paper be determined by the returning officer?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Quite so.

[652]AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Which regulations are you speaking of now?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Of the regulations ordinarily observed under Proportional Representation. Under the Rules laid down ——

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Laid down where?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  Under Proportional Representation.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  Where are they laid down?

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  In the Act, copies of which were furnished to all officials for the past few years.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  If they are in the Act they will be observed.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  You say that these are regulations for observance apart from the others.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  They are supplementary.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  That is not so stated.

Mr. BROWN: Information on Samuel Lombard Brown  Zoom on Samuel Lombard Brown  I do not think the Electoral Act applies to this proceeding by the Seanad at all.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I was going to point that out. We have absolute control.

Mr. BROWN: Information on Samuel Lombard Brown  Zoom on Samuel Lombard Brown  It may be some consolation to some Senators who, like myself, do not understand the details, to know that this voting was actually put intoo practice by the Dáil when the Dáil elected the Seanad.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  I want to ask your advice, sir, for the benefit of the Seanad. In the case of a paper where the figures 1, 2, 3 are marked opposite names, and where a gap follows until the paper is again marked 6, 7, or 8, will you declare that paper a valid paper, and would it count for the candidates before whose names the figures appear notwithstanding the break in continuity? My experience is that the paper would be reckoned valid so far as the continuity of the figures went but invalid after the break.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I will answer [653] that with great caution, but as far as I can see if you look at page II. of the Report you will see that that particular matter is dealt with where there is reference to non-transferable votes.

Mr. de LOUGHRY: Information on Peter De Loughry  Zoom on Peter De Loughry  The rules that applied in Parliamentary elections under Proportional Representation should be followed. The votes marked 1, 2, 3 would count as good votes but the votes after the gap would not count.

Mr. O'FARRELL: Information on John Thomas OFarrell  Zoom on John Thomas OFarrell  Senator Kenny has not pointed out in what way the regulations violate Proportional Representation. He simply says that certain things should be done but he has not pointed out anything which shows that they are not to be done. As far as I can read it the report provides for the ordinary and elementary rules being adopted.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  I think what I mentioned is provided for and I apologise to the Seanad.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  It is quite reasonable that you should make these points. The position is not only very complicated but is thrown at our heads, if I may say so, in a comparatively hurried manner.

Mr. FARREN: Information on Thomas Farren  Zoom on Thomas Farren  It occurs to me, in view of our earlier decision reagrding the question of proposals, that there are 19 outgoing Senators. I apologise for going back on this question, but as it is important, I ask leave to refer to it. The proposals, under the rules that we have agreed on, will mean that at least 38 Senators must exercise their right to propose candidates for the election. It may not be possible for 38 Senators to exercise their right under that, and in that event we would be placed in an awkward position if we had not 19 nominations. This House must select 19 names. I suggest that we alter the regulations so that each Senator could make a nomination, and that we abandon the regulation requiring the nomination to be made by two Senators. If we make that change, and if 38 Senators exercise the right I have reffered to, then we will ensure that we shall have the requisite 19 names that this House must select.

[654]AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  There is great force in what Senator Farren has said. The Committee's recommendation was that the 19 outgoing Senators should have their names automatically placed on the list so that we would start with a list which had 19 names on it. We then considered that it would not be right to have more than the maximum of 30 additional names. In other words to have 49 names upon our nomination panel, but you see we had come to the conclusion that the 19 names were not to go on it in any shape and what the Seanad agreed to was that each Senator could only propose one candidate. In that event there would only be a maximum of 30 on your proposal list, and that is what Senator Farren has called attention to. He says that assumes that all the Senators will exercise their right to nominate, but he points out that supposing only 38 Senators exercised their right to nominate then you will have only 19 candidates proposed for the 19 vacancies.

Mr. FARREN: Information on Thomas Farren  Zoom on Thomas Farren  Failing the 38 you will not have your Panel complete.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  What the Senator desires is, I think, well worthy of consideration. I think you should still adhere to the necessity of having each candidate proposed by not less than two Senators, but you might alter the provision which says that no Senator shall be entitled to propose more than one candidate—you might alter the one to two. No Senator shall be entitled to propose more than two candidates. If you make the change proposed, I do not think it will give you an unduly large Panel. It is well, of course, to keep in mind that no Senator will be at liberty to propose more than one candidate, and so long as you require that each candidate is to be proposed by two Senators, the most that can be proposed under these Rules, assuming that the whole Seanad should vote, is 30. That would have been all right if you had retained your provision about putting on the 19 outgoing Senators automatically, but you rejected that proposal. Therefore, you have got to form your Panel without regarding the names of outgoing Senators, [655] and in that connection I think recommendation No. 3 ought to be altered so as to read instead of each Senator having the right only to propose one candidate, he or she should have the right to propose two.

Mr. FARREN: Information on Thomas Farren  Zoom on Thomas Farren  I formally move that that change be made.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  With regard to the voting papers, it is laid down, I see, that a paper shall be invalid if the figure 1, indicating a first preference, is set opposite the name of more than one candidate, or if that figure 1 is not placed opposite the name of some candidate. You, sir, I think, made a suggestion with regard to that which, I think, might be made a supplementary rule.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I would not like to put that in. That resolution might break the Rules in the Schedule in the Electoral Act, and I would not think of asking the House to take the responsibility of putting it in. I do not know how far these Rules in the Electoral Act are made part of the Statute, that is to say, obligatory, as regards the clause in the Constitution which gioves to the Seanad and the Dáil respectively power to prescribe the method of election. I do not think it would entitle them to go behind these rules.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  But you laid it down.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I am laying down nothing with regard to these Rules.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  The Rules are laid down here for our acceptance, and paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) in Section 4 to the First Part of the Schedule lay down the conditions under which a ballot paper shall be deemed to be invalid. I think all these things would be covered by the suggestion you made earlier, and that it ought to be made supplementary to these Rules.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  I do not know to what tortures I would be exposing [656] the unfortunate voters if I were to do that.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  There would be just the same torture as they are exposed to under the existing Rules.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  To the same degree, yes, but not in principle. You want to add to the existing Rules.

Mr. KENNY: Information on Patrick W Kenny  Zoom on Patrick W Kenny  I have looked into this matter, and I think all would be settled if your suggestion is accepted. It may very well happen that you will arrive at a crux in your elections for which no provision is made.

Mr. BROWN: Information on Samuel Lombard Brown  Zoom on Samuel Lombard Brown  We are making rules for ourselves, and surely we are intellignent enough to understand it. These are for our own voting.

Mr. O'FARRELL: Information on John Thomas OFarrell  Zoom on John Thomas OFarrell  Senator Kenny is budgeting for a stupid marking of the ballot paper. Well, if a Senator is not intelligent enough to mark his paper he deserves to lose his vote.

Mr. BENNETT: Information on Thomas Westropp Bennett  Zoom on Thomas Westropp Bennett  The paper does not make any provision for the nomination of ladies.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  We have it on very high authority that man embraces woman. I think you may assume that the Electoral Act provides for this and that it includes persons of both sexes. I think the House should agree that the recommendations in the report of the Committee, as amended, be adopted, because if that is done now we could get the amendments made this evening and the actual corrected copy can be sent out to each Senator to-night. I think a formal resolution should be passed adopting the report of the Committee as amended.

Colonel MOORE: Information on Maurice George Moore  Zoom on Maurice George Moore  I beg to move:—

“That the report of the Committee dealiing with the forthcoming Seanad elections, as amended, be adopted.”

Mr. FARREN: Information on Thomas Farren  Zoom on Thomas Farren  I beg to second the resolution.

Question put and agreed to.

Mrs. COSTELLO: Information on Eileen Ellen Costello  Zoom on Eileen Ellen Costello  When will the proposal form be ready?

AN CATHAOIRLEACH:  It is ready now.


Last Updated: 16/05/2011 17:59:10 First Page Previous Page Page of 9 Next Page Last Page