I second Senator Darragh O'Brien's motion. I compliment Senator Hayden on her sterling performance on RTE radio's politics programme last night. She made, however, one mistake. The Bill concerning the abolition of the Seanad contained no reference whatsoever to a referendum, nor was it mentioned in the explanatory memorandum. The whole thing was a fix up. I called on Members on the other side of the House to vote against the Bill because it was about the extinction of the Seanad and nothing else.

That leads me to the squalid matter of the by-election. Nothing could focus the minds and attention of the Irish people on the necessity to reform the Seanad more than this exposure. There are 225 votes and the Government side will be whipped for a candidate who is not eligible. I wonder why those in charge of the inquiry, in particular the judge, did not question the matter of Mr. McNulty's membership of the board or his attendance-----

That is not a matter for the House.

It most definitely is. It is a matter for the election.

The 1947 Act sets out how elections are conducted. There is a process which the Clerk of the House------

I am saying it is appropriate for Members of the House to discuss the procedures for the election.

The returning officer has a role and there is a judicial review process.

We must be able to question the procedure. The system is rotten. Deirdre Clune was elected in a sham of an election, but at least it was better than this one will be. In regard to the appointment of Mr. McNulty to the board, I do not believe there has been or will be a board meeting held at all during the course of his tenure of the office which he will have to leave the minute he is elected here. It is an utter sham. He will not attend a board meeting and prating on about how his commercial expertise will be valuable to IMMA is incorrect. How will it be valuable if he is not at a board meeting and is only on the board for two weeks? It is a grotesque farce.

The only response of the Taoiseach was that it his right and entitlement to make such an appointment and that he can do what he wants. This matter has completely exposed Fine Gael - I do not speak of my colleagues in the House and I know their attitude towards this - in terms of reform of the Seanad. This is a ridiculous by-election and nothing could more clearly demonstrate how utterly inappropriate the methods of election to this House are.

The Taoiseach, in response to his defeat in the referendum, had undertaken to reform the university seats, the only democratic element in this House. He is leaving untouched the entire area which he, by his actions, has exposed as a sham and a collection of rotten boroughs. I do not think the Irish people will take to a piecemeal reform of Seanad Éireann. We now have, accidentally but clearly, a classic case for complete reform of Seanad Éireann, including its methods of voting, election and nomination. This must now be up for grabs. We cannot put up with a piecemeal approach with a vindictive and spiteful attack on the university seats and an attempt to delete them because we are the most annoying part of Seanad Éireann.

I reiterate what I say yesterday, namely that anyone who runs his or her own business is competent to be appointed to any State board because such people are involved in hiring staff-----

He will be there for two weeks. Give me a break.

I did not interrupt you.

The Senator without interruption, please.

Could Senator Burke explain how running a shop provides one with expertise in modern art?

Senator Burke without interruption, please.

I will jump up and say it is a perfect answer.

Senator Burke without interruption, please.

Running a business and being self-employed qualifies anyone to be involved in a board. He is an appropriate appointment to the board. In this House we seem to have forgotten that the Taoiseach appointed more Independent Senators who were not involved in any political party to this House than any previous Taoiseach.

That is totally irrelevant.

I did not interrupt anyone here.

Senator Burke without interruption, please.

The Senator could have; I do not mind being interrupted.

In fairness to the Taoiseach, he has appointed people who are independent of politics and have made a fantastic contribution to this House. Let us give credit where credit is due. Mr. McNulty would have qualified for the Cultural and Educational Panel with or without the appointment to the board, and that is now quite clear. This is a technical issue. I recently heard of someone who wished to run on the Agricultural Panel but did not qualify, and bought a greyhound when then qualified the person to run on the Agricultural Panel.

The Senator is exposing more of the corruption. We should do away with this corruption and create a proper, democratic Seanad Éireann.

Senator Norris you have spoken already. Senator Burke without interruption, please.

I agree with Senator Norris that there is a need for reform in how we elect Senators. I am one of those who agree with him because the current panel structure comprises technical procedures and nothing more.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

My points are in response to what has been said. There are a lot of allegations flying around. Individual panels are of a technical nature and some have questioned whether someone is fit to sit in the House. Anyone who is over 18 years of age is fit and qualified to sit in the House no matter what his or her background is, and Mr. McNulty is suitably qualified to be in the House. I look forward to his arrival here.

Senator Burke could defend the indefensible. He must have been a very good lawyer. I hope he still practices because he is certainly very persuasive. I hope the greyhound he bought was a good runner. The media are very interested in this issue, and rightly so. Today "Liveline" will probably be full of calls from middle Ireland. This difficult situation and complicated issue may have an effect on the by-elections in Dublin and Roscommon-South Leitrim.

That this is regarded as an unseemly affair will probably push our candidates over the line. It is on the same day-----

What has this to do with the Order of Business?

It is only right that we should add my voice to this. The point is that the closing of the ballot is on the same day as the by-election, namely, 10 October. The reaction of the people will be quite interesting. It will really be a vote on the reaction to this matter.

We are not discussing that. Has the Senator a question for the Leader?