Problems with the electoral system

Victor

I'm just wondering what problems people have with the electoral system.

This is what I can determine so far

• Condition of the Register of Electors. People registered in multiple places, bloated registers, etc.
• Privacy of the Register of Electors under the Data Protection Act. I can use http://www.checktheregister.ie/ to determine information about others, e.g. if I know someone's name and address, I can make deductions about their nationality.
• Relative size of Dail constituencies (more populous Dublin North has fewer seats than less populous Dun Laoghaire)
• Condition of electoral legislation, e.g. http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055009963 - this purports to be about e-voting in Meath, but well it can't be found.
• Inequity of the Seanad electoral system (the basic system).
• Ineqaulity in the Seanad electoral system (small councils are better represented than larger councils).

Many of the problems with the electoral system in Ireland are the result of bureaucratic/administrative incompetence that could be fixed, rather than inherent flaws in the system.

My major issue with our electoral system (PR-STV) is parochialism. TD's a lot of the time are elected on the basis of their views on local issues, even though the Dail is not the most effective avenue to deal with those issues. Generally resulting in a TD's acting in their local rather than national interest and everyone losing out as a result.

The lack of proportionality is also a problem. Considering the benefits of PR-STV as we have it here, over other voting systems, I still think it is the best option inspite of its flaws.

Victor

Deleted User wrote:

Many of the problems with the electoral system in Ireland are the result of bureaucratic/administrative incompetence that could be fixed, rather than inherent flaws in the system.

Indeed.

My major issue with our electoral system (PR-STV) is parochialism.

More a socio-political problem than an electoral one as such.

The lack of proportionality is also a problem.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Number of TDs is broadly in line with first preferences.

Macy

Surplus transfers should be addressed. Part of the problem with e-voting imo was/is that it didn't address this issue. It still maintained the random selection of the surplus to transfer, rather than do it based on the entire second (or whatever) preference. In fact I'd go as far as to suggest it was deliberate attempt by Cullen to make any possible hardcopy check null and void, since there'd be a different random sample every time.

Victor

Strictly speaking the same set of votes are meant to be reused in distributing surpluses. I can't remember what the story was with e-voting, but I think it was designed to mimic the legislation.

In Northern Ireland's PR-STV elections (EU + Assembly?) surpluses are ditributed on a proper PR basis.

Victor

There are 110,000 (Census 2006) people in Louth. About 28% (Census 2002) are under the age of 20. That should leave maybe 80,000 (69%) over 18. There are 92,000 on the register (not accounting for people not registered). Something is really wrong.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1103/electorate.html

Electoral Register is updated
03 November 2006 21:45

Tens of thousands of voters have been struck off the Electoral Register after a new register was compiled.

Meath County Council have said they removed around 23,500 people from the register, although they expect to add around 10,000 new voters.

In Louth, the numbers registered to vote rose to around 92,000, even though nearly 12,000 names were removed.

In Wexford, 1,700 voters have been struck off while in Kildare the number is closer to 8,500.

Local authorities in charge of compiling the registers are urging everyone to check the local register to ensure they are on it and will then be able to vote.

Copies of the draft registers are available in libraries, garda stations and civic offices.

Some local authorities have them available on the internet as well.

Voters have until the 25 November to ensure they are on the register.

If details are inaccurate or a person has been struck off they should contact their local authority as soon as possible.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/9234163?view=Eircomnet

Roche concedes electoral register 'a mess'
From:ireland.com
Saturday, 4th November, 2006

Minister for the Environment Dick Roche has conceded that the electoral register is "a mess" and has urged all Fianna Fáil party workers to check the accuracy of the latest list.

Speaking at the Fianna Fail Ardfheis in Dublin, Mr Roche said: "Everybody knows that our electoral register has become a mess. One commentator suggested that it contained as many as 800,000 errors."

Mr Roche said this year has seen the most comprehensive registration campaign in the history of the State.

"Over one and a quarter million houses have been visited at least once. Hundreds of thousands of houses have had two or more visits. 1,500 field workers have been leading this intensive campaign to put in place a comprehensive and accurate register."

The first draft of the updated register is now available, Mr Roche said, and he urged all party workers to check the draft.

"The efforts to radically reform a woefully inadequate register inevitably mean that some inadvertent deletions have been made. I ask you to use the next 3 weeks to ensure that people who should be on the register remain on the final register.

"This year's campaign is a first step in reviewing the way that registration is carried out in an ever-changing Ireland and I intend to introduce fundamental changes to the way we compile our register in the coming years."

Citizens can check that they are on the draft register on wwww.checktheregister.ie.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/9350586?view=Eircomnet

Roche extends electoral register deadline
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 22nd November, 2006

In a U-turn that follows mounting pressure from the Opposition, Fianna Fáil backbenchers and local authorities, Minister for the Environment Dick Roche last night announced an extension of the deadline for the completion of the electoral register.

The decision came as it emerged that thousands of voters who were removed from the register would have to have their names forwarded to an electoral "revision" court before they could be formally returned to the register next year.

Despite insisting 24 hours earlier that no extensions would be given, Mr Roche said yesterday he would extend by two weeks the date for the public to return their register correction forms, from November 25th to December 9th.

He will also give local authorities more time to complete their work on the register, which they now have to finalise by December 29th.

Mr Roche's decision follows requests from three local authorities - Monaghan, Clare and Kildare county councils - for an extension of the deadline.

Mr Roche said he had been advised by the Attorney General that it would not be possible to grant an extension by statutory order. Instead, he said, a change in primary legislation was required, and he would publish an emergency amendment to the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 2006, to this end next week.

Earlier this month it emerged that some 502,000 names were deleted from the old electoral register and 376,000 new names added as part of a €12 million updating exercise. A public information campaign advised people they had until this Saturday, November 25th, to correct the draft register. A new campaign advising of the extension is now to take place.

There is emerging evidence that thousands of legitimate voters may have been inadvertently removed from the register as they failed to respond to warning letters and notices posted through their letter boxes in recent months.

Dublin City Council estimates that up to 20,000 names may be added to the draft register, while Kildare County Council has already received 3,000 written requests from people wishing to be added to the draft register.

Yesterday the Department of the Environment confirmed that names could not be automatically added to the draft register and would instead have to go before an electoral "revision" court headed by the local county registrar.

Electoral guidelines stipulate that a request to be added to the draft register must be made in writing to a local authority. Local authority guidelines advise that any request "will be considered and decided on by the county registrar".

County registrars have the right to require additional information from an applicant. Local authority officials speaking on the condition of anonymity said such requests were extremely rare and that the courts would be likely to add names to the draft register based on advice from local councils.

The extension follows failed attempts by local authorities to publish lists of proposed deletions from the electoral register. It is understood they were advised in recent days that such a move could contravene data protection legislation.

Mr Roche conceded at a special meeting of the Dáil Environment Committee last week that the updating process had led to "inadvertent deletions", but he insisted at the time that it would not be "prudent" to grant a general extension to the deadline.

Yesterday he briefed the Cabinet and the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party on the proposed extension and said afterwards he had received requests from three county councils seeking more time to complete their work. He said rather than confine extensions to local authorities that requested them, he had decided to allow more time to every local authority.

antoinolachtnai

Macy wrote:

Surplus transfers should be addressed. Part of the problem with e-voting imo was/is that it didn't address this issue. It still maintained the random selection of the surplus to transfer, rather than do it based on the entire second (or whatever) preference. In fact I'd go as far as to suggest it was deliberate attempt by Cullen to make any possible hardcopy check null and void, since there'd be a different random sample every time.

Do you really believe this is an important issue? The effect of randomization is quite small. I did a quick calculation and I figured that the effect of randomization had resulted in one seat's difference in all the elections since the foundation of the State. It only effects 1 in 4 seats at all (i.e, the last seat elected) and it only has a very small effect, because it only applies to votes that have already been transferred (i.e., the first time votes are transferred, the votes are counted and transferred proportionately).

Unless the last seat is won by only two or three votes, it is unlikely to make a difference. Even then it has very little effect, because in most cases, the votes selected will be at least somewhat representative of the rest of the pile, because the votes were mixed at the outset.

In most elections, there seem to be about 20 or 30 disputed votes. The outcome regarding these probably has a far greater effect on the election than the randomization issue.