Accountable Politicians

PDD

Just outta curiosity does anyone know of any polician who was serving in office that was held accountable for a mistake that happened on their watch and what action was taken? Oh and while were at it lets make a list of all political cluster ****s that have taken place say over the last year just for ****s and giggles.

Zombrex

PDD wrote:

Just outta curiosity does anyone know of any polician who was serving in office that was held accountable for a mistake that happened on their watch and what action was taken? Oh and while were at it lets make a list of all political cluster ****s that have taken place say over the last year just for ****s and giggles.

The most likely way a politican is held "accountable" for a mistake or bad performace to be removed from cabinate. Its happened too many times to list here.

PDD

PDD wrote:

Just outta curiosity does anyone know of any polician who was serving in office that was held accountable for a mistake that happened on their watch and what action was taken? Oh and while were at it lets make a list of all political cluster ****s that have taken place say over the last year just for ****s and giggles.

yes

banning of magic mushrooms

DublinWriter

PDD wrote:

Just outta curiosity does anyone know of any polician who was serving in office that was held accountable for a mistake that happened on their watch

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no.

constitutionus

to my knowledge , NO ONE beens held accountable for a cluster**** in their dept. but im open to correction. please supply names and reason of more than 5:D

ateam

constitutionus wrote:

to my knowledge , NO ONE beens held accountable for a cluster**** in their dept. but im open to correction. please supply names and reason of more than 5:D

Politicians are held accountable at election time by the voters.

LostinBlanch

Not in this government, except for Ivor the Engine; and that was for stealing Cowans budget thunder.

Apart from him no. Next you'll be expecting FF/Pds to actually govern i.e. make decisions for the common good and not just ones that are likely to benefit them/their supporters (financial and otherwise) and or cronies.

The_Minister

It is done quietly when it is done. Don't forget that most of the mistakes lie with civil servents and consultants. Ministers guide the pain is in the detail.
Most of this years mistakes would have taken place in a corresponding form if different policies had been enacted by a different government.

PDD

ateam wrote:

Politicians are held accountable at election time by the voters.

Now thats optimisim for ye! Im sorry to have to say this but as a wise man once said "Democracy doesnt work!" - well not in its current form anyway.

PDD

Does anyone else think that politicians should be of a higher calibre and held to higher standards? My own personal view is that you if you expect this from people who are professionals (the most obvious being doctors but I wont rant about those closed ranked everythings fine here, dont investigate to improve just sweep **** under the carpet bastards) then is it not reasonable to expect it from people who are being asked to be put in power to run the country? I wouldnt let any gob****e operate on me, yet without higher standards you'll inevitably have unqualified and inept politicans dealing with issues that they are not qualified to understand let alone deal with and will make a complete cluster ****s of the decisions! Would you let any Joe Soap off the street whos not a mechanic dismantle your car and not put it back together again? Eh no I didnt think so and thats an example that puts a handful of lives at risk (yours and whoever you crash into etc) yet politicians / civil servants do this with whole departments and government infrastructures like a health service. Where's the accountability?

Zombrex

PDD wrote:

Where's the accountability?

Don't vote for them then. You wouldn't go to you know is crap doctor, ask him to remove your kidney and then be surprised when he removes your balls by mistake (graphic I know).

The accountability in a democracy is the voting system. Any other system to remove members from the Dial based on performance would be largely undemocratic.

PDD

Unfortunately like the rest of democracy its a nice idea but when put into practice it just falls flat on its arse. The reality is that people dont vote esp young people (I personally think there should be a system in place that penalises those that dont vote something similar to whats in place in Australia) and worse than that people who do vote are voting for possibly one major issue and a handful of smaller issues not to mention the fact that people may not be able to fully grasp what the issues that are swaying them. These could be anything from long term economic propsects to issues on the larger european stage.

For example how many people here know how and why America is so dependent on oil?

Zombrex

PDD wrote:

Unfortunately like the rest of democracy its a nice idea but when put into practice it just falls flat on its arse.

True, but its better than any alternative people have come up with (to paraphrase Churchhill)

PDD

And unfortunately Churchills spirit of never surrender hasn't been applied to democracy either. It will never get better if people dont try to make it better and try different idea's. Although its hard to have any derivative of democracy when you have the US acting as world police. If its not to their liking its gone, I have a vague recolection of a Latin American or possibly Carribean state attempting a form of democracy mixed with communisim and the CIA were sent in to wreck the elections and plunge the country into war.

Democracy in its current form doesnt work but its a good start, all we have to do now is find out a practical way to implement it and I think comptuers form an essential part of this.

ISAW

PDD wrote:

Just outta curiosity does anyone know of any polician who was serving in office that was held accountable for a mistake that happened on their watch and what action was taken? Oh and while were at it lets make a list of all political cluster ****s that have taken place say over the last year just for ****s and giggles.

I can name a few who lost ministries but probably were net accountable. The Brendan Smith Affair saw the whole cabinet all lose their Ministries based on whether the Taoiseach knew about Smith on a Tuesday or a Wednesday (the inherent allegation was he knew about something and covered it up or ignored it and did nothing). A HUGE head of steam built up and Reynolds government collapsed. It turned out after an exhaustive investigation that Reynolds knew nothing about the issue and did not cover it up.

Recently another minister made a fool of himself with a drunk driving incident but in the past he lost a Ministry before he even got it! Jim Mc Daid was being appointed as Minister of Defence. A constituent of his had been ACQUITTED of being involved with Republicans ( i think he was charged with membership of an unlawful organisation i.e. the IRA anyway the charge didnt stick). Mc Daid went down to the four Courts and shook the ACQUITTED guys hands. The INDO put it on the front page. Again this was a FF/Lab government. Now Mc Daid did nothing wrong or illegal but ws dumped that afternoon from Defence.

In the same government (i think) A minister (Stagg) was arrested for activities related to procuring rent boys in the Pheonix Park. He was stopped with a young man (17 year old I believe) in his car and the 17 year old was a rent boy. Anyway he remained in cabinet but as a junior minister and the matter was declared (unlike Mc Daid) "an internal matter for the Labour Party". M G Quinn, minister of justice subsequently lowered the age of consent for homosexuals to 17. Before she did it was illegal sex with a minor.

Do any of these count as "mistakes while in office"?

Zombrex

PDD wrote:

Democracy in its current form doesnt work but its a good start, all we have to do now is find out a practical way to implement it and I think comptuers form an essential part of this.

I'm not sure if you are talking about this or not, but the whole opinion poll, asking the people what they want directly has been a bit of a disaster (just ask New Labour), because unfortunately most people are morons and will want too contractory things if you ask them the same question twice.

The problem with democracy isn't democracy itself its humanity. The problem with any political system is the people that make it up. And unfortunately there isn't a whole lot you can do about that. People in general morons, and probably always will be.

Nuttzz

LostinBlanch wrote:

Not in this government, except for Ivor the Engine

so is that a yes then?

LostinBlanch wrote:

Apart from him no. .

so this that a yes also????

ISAW

PDD wrote:

And unfortunately Churchills spirit of never surrender hasn't been applied to democracy either. It will never get better if people dont try to make it better and try different idea's. Although its hard to have any derivative of democracy when you have the US acting as world police. If its not to their liking its gone, I have a vague recolection of a Latin American or possibly Carribean state attempting a form of democracy mixed with communisim and the CIA were sent in to wreck the elections and plunge the country into war.

What is a "better" democracy? tyeh best definition I ever came across was from an American. You recollections muct be very vague. I think you perhaps refer to the contras but given the US record it could be one of several states in Central and Southern America. Possibly including even Texas or New Mexico!

Democracy in its current form doesnt work but its a good start, all we have to do now is find out a practical way to implement it and I think comptuers form an essential part of this.

The problem with this analysis is that Democracy is always in its current form. and what do you mean by "doesn't work"? what other system worked in the same country?

If you think there is some sort of idealised democracy that allplis to all cultures everywhere then you have a problem. People change the systems under which they live. the idea that one can "implement" democracy smaks of both the beaurocrat and the dictatorial idealist. It is a facist sort of thinking the sort entertained by the marxists and the far right which engendered this false option for democracy.

PDD

Funny that you mention the best definition of democracy comes from America because I think right now its the best example of how democracy is a farse and how easily corruptable it is.

I dont believe that there is an idealised version of democracy but right now I know of no progressive democratic countries that are trying to implement changes such as having a qualification or specific skills set before you are allowed to be in public office.

Zombrex

PDD wrote:

I know of no progressive democratic countries that are trying to implement changes such as having a qualification or specific skills set before you are allowed to be in public office.

Because that would be, by definition, undemocratic.

When ever these types of discussions come up on Boards.ie the answer to "fixing" the problems with democracy normal end up be completely undemocratic.

constitutionus

Wicknight wrote:

Because that would be, by definition, undemocratic.

When ever these types of discussions come up on Boards.ie the answer to "fixing" the problems with democracy normal end up be completely undemocratic.

true, but i do have to ask the question why NO ONE is given a copy of the constitution in school. ye think having a country full of people who know their constitutional rights would be a GOOD thing for democracy and prehaps actually resulting in a more actively engaged electorate, unless of course they dont WANT us to know em but that cant be it, perish the thought )

ISAW

PDD wrote:

Funny that you mention the best definition of democracy comes from America because I think right now its the best example of how democracy is a farse and how easily corruptable it is.

I referred to Lincolns "by the people for the people from the people"

I dont believe that there is an idealised version of democracy but right now I know of no progressive democratic countries that are trying to implement changes such as having a qualification or specific skills set before you are allowed to be in public office.

Why should anyone have to have such qualifications? The only qualification necessary is that people vote for you. I do not consider having necessary qualifications should be a pre requisite. the intelligentia are not necessarily better at running any country. Constantine united the Roman empire and highly praised education. He was a scholar. Yet with his reign the "dark ages" began! And while constantines son could write at five, Charles the Great (Charles le magne) was I believe illiterate as were many nobles.

an economist is not necessarily the best Finance Minister. Nor a sicentist the best science or education minister. One should not have to be a soldier or a farmer to head up deefence od Agriculture.

democrates

Dear God.
The Swiss have been using direct democracy or centuries, constantly in the top ten richest nations, the cantons no longer at war.
Must be staggered at the vista of neanderthal skull scratching over the predictable failings of representative democracy. Vote for some gits and hope they do as they promised? Good luck.

ISAW

democrates wrote:

Dear God.
The Swiss have been using direct democracy or centuries, constantly in the top ten richest nations, the cantons no longer at war.
Must be staggered at the vista of neanderthal skull scratching over the predictable failings of representative democracy. Vote for some gits and hope they do as they promised? Good luck.

What the Swiss do is their business. But it is only a sort of direct democracy. Ideally ALL the people come and vote on everything. this is currently practically impossible (except on Big Brother or Who Wants to be a Millionare )

And they have not had their system for "centuries" as you claim. Women were excluded up to 35 years ago and people aged 18 to 21 were excluded until 15 years ago. New Zeland awarded women the vote long before that.

ISAW

constitutionus wrote:

to my knowledge , NO ONE beens held accountable for a cluster**** in their dept. but im open to correction. please supply names and reason of more than 5:D

Michael Lowrey also springs to mind as someone who made a mistake but NOT in his department. Mind you the Minister is only PART of the hierarchy of the Department. Secretaries general and Principal Officers also make up the hierarchy. Take any department. Start maybe alphabetically. Agriculture and Food - One minister, two Junior Ministers of State, (three private secretaries - these couls be counted on the ministers side maybe but they are civil service) one Secetary general (he also has a private secretary), nine assistant secretaries general, 35 principal officers (and at the same level or higher/similar - a chief forestry inspector, chief economist, head of legal services, chuief livestock inspector and deputy chief, director of agricultural appeals. There are loads of Assistant Principles so i wont include that level.

Thats Six for the political side and 52 for the civil servants. to give you an idea of pay Principal officers are about the same as TD's. In 2003 there were (full time equicvalent) 17 Secretaries general, 3 deputy secs, 134 assistant secs and 591 principal officers. There are 15 ministers about 25 juniors and whatever left from 166 TD's.

About 500 Civil servants get more than 80,000 a year. Secretaties general gt about 200,000 deputies about 150,000 assistants up to 120,000 and principals a mere top pay of about 100,000.

To rephrase the OP's question : How many of them have been sacked when they made a mistake? I really cant think of any can you?

ISAW

constitutionus wrote:

true, but i do have to ask the question why NO ONE is given a copy of the constitution in school. ye think having a country full of people who know their constitutional rights would be a GOOD thing for democracy and prehaps actually resulting in a more actively engaged electorate, unless of course they dont WANT us to know em but that cant be it, perish the thought )

One can lead a horse to water. What makes you thing giving everyone a copy of the constitution means they will know their rights or even that they will read it? aslo, the constitution is more than rights. finally, one might open the door to "why are not all school books free and provided by the state?" exposing the possible existance of a textbook scam.

Mind you if you made everyone PAY for a copy then they might read it!

democrates

ISAW wrote:

And they have not had their system for "centuries" as you claim. Women were excluded up to 35 years ago and people aged 18 to 21 were excluded until 15 years ago. New Zeland awarded women the vote long before that.

Direct democracy in Switzerland has in fact been evolving for centuries:

Switzerland is a federation of relatively autonomous cantons, some of which have a history of confederacy that goes back more than 700 years, arguably putting them among the world's oldest surviving republics.

The date any particular law was adopted witin it is a seperate question.

constitutionus

ISAW wrote:

One can lead a horse to water. What makes you thing giving everyone a copy of the constitution means they will know their rights or even that they will read it? aslo, the constitution is more than rights. finally, one might open the door to "why are not all school books free and provided by the state?" exposing the possible existance of a textbook scam.

Mind you if you made everyone PAY for a copy then they might read it!

did i say it should be for free? , the gov. dont want us to know our rights because they know we'll start looking for em. worse we might decide to stand for elections ourselves instead of joining their organisations, costing them seats
the constitution is the supreme law of the land the idea of it not being taught in schools when a near dead language is FORCED down our throats is disgraceful. by your analogy its better to let the horse die of thirst than bother to bring it to water and thats nuts, you may as well give up on everything with that mentality.

for gods sake this wouldnt even be a matter for discussion in america and hardly anyone bothers to vote there

democrates

Constitutionus is right, I've had a copy of Bunreacht na hEireann for as long as I can remember, and it's been most enlightening. Just reading it elevates your understanding and expectation of what a community of people in a particular geographical area coming together can aspire to.

How we can best achieve that is through democracy, but not a watered down representative democracy, I firmly contend that the best democracy in the world is the Swiss system, not the American. American representative democracy is a charade and an insult to Americans, just as the Irish equivalent insults the Irish. The fact is 'representative' politicians largely end up serving the brown envelope elite, with just enough placation of the masses to retain power.

In America, Ireland, and most of the 'free' west, you can vote for people to do jobs, from president down to the local dog-catcher. But unless it's a constitutional amendment, you don't get to vote on any policies. All you can do is vote for a person, and hope they implement the policies they promised in their largely privately funded election campaign. Shag that! This is our country, we should be able to decide our policies directly.