Reforming Irelands Electoral System

Sand

Its probably indisputable that the Irish electoral system, for whatever merits it might have (?), has resulted in a bunch of parish pump auctioneers, teachers, publicans and farmers trying to run a country ( as small as Ireland is, its still an actual nation-state) in the modern world. If were lucky, one or two of them are gifted amateurs who can keep the moronic, populist backwoodsmen ( see the by now legendary Fianna Fail ard Fheis ) under control and limit the damage they do.

But this is something we cant rely on. Nor can we rely on the native intelligence of the Irish voter, given they consistently re-elect idiots and thieves ( Is there any excuse for Bev Cooper Flynn?).

Clearly, where there is the option to vote in some gob****e campaigning on the basis of "better the divil you know!" or some local issue best dealt with by a county councillor the Irish electorate will turn out in their droves to support said campaign.

So we need to remove personality from the electoral process. Why not a list system whereby the parties publish their manifestos, and secretly register a list of their intended candidates prior to the election in order of preference. Constituencies are removed [ to completely kill local issue candidates ] and instead votes are totalled and divided out on a national level, with parties gaining seats based on their % of the vote.

We cant trust the Irish voter to differentiate between the candidate and the manifesto, we cant even trust the Irish voter to understand what they are voting on ( most people thought the Lisbon treaty was a referendum on Fianna Fail, some people are arguing the Libson II will be a referendum on Fianna Fail...).

Probably unrealistic given the Dail is controlled by turkeys, but seriously we have to break this curse of Irish politics.

Dean D

Why not a list system whereby the parties publish their manifestos, and secretly register a list of their intended candidates prior to the election in order of preference. Constituencies are removed [ to completely kill local issue candidates ] and instead votes are totalled and divided out on a national level, with parties gaining seats based on their % of the vote.

They use this system in Israel. The problem is that it diminishes democracy. A party could, for example, keep choosing candidates that the electorate find unpalatable.

Removing the dual-mandate was supposed to remove local politics from national elections. It's a step in the right direction, but what we need is to give local government more power. The whole system of local government needs reform.

dizzywizlw

Don;t you think it would be a hell of a lot simpler just to make a Voter aptitude test? If you dont want to take an interest in the issue then I will gladly do it for you?
Anti-Democratic, yes it is but it would make sense

Mind you, if I found out that my vote had elected somebody who hold many opposing beliefs to myself I'd be pissed off. It should be like EU Commissioners, who represent the collective interest, I'm looking at you
Healy-Rae!

Sand

The problem is that it diminishes democracy. A party could, for example, keep choosing candidates that the electorate find unpalatable.

Yeah, it diminishes peoples ability to elect local village idiots.

Vote on the basis of the parties manifesto. If the manifesto is unpalatable, dont vote for them. If they dont hold to their manifesto, dont vote for them. It will be an amazing experiment where Irish people vote on the basis of politics as opposed to who they think they could have a pint with.

r0nanf

Sand wrote: »

... vote on the basis of politics as opposed to who they think they could have a pint with.

That's a long way away. I remember watching John Stewart before the American election during the Republican party's taunting of Obama as "liberal elite", and he asked why elections were now more about voting not for the exceptional candidate and instead for whoever you identified with. Obviously Obama is a smart, sharp character who is highly educated, considerate and well informed. Why should that have been a perceived weakness? Bush was the classic "guy next door" and popularity for the most part of his tenure was high.

It got me thinking about our government (at the time Bertie was still in power) and it dawned on me that Ireland hadn't elected an exceptional candidate for a long time. Even within the cabinet appointments Bertie consistently picked morons, and Cowen has been no better. As you rightly pointed out they're mostly parish politicians moonlighting as informed statesmen. You have to have one from every major urban centre plus traditional high poll regions for the party. Can you imagine any business in the country allowing the likes of Michael Martin or Martin Cullen to remain in highly paid positions of power after the litany of cock ups they've had?

Unfortunately Ireland will always be about doorstep politics, because at root we are a parochial society that ultimately couldn't give a fiddlers about national politics - provided it doesn't affect our pockets. Watch the curve again: FF wipeout in June, alternative government by the end of the year who'll drag us back to fiscal reality, then FF populism and our goldfish memories will allow the same f*cktards back in to wreck the economy again.

Dean D

Sand wrote: »

Yeah, it diminishes peoples ability to elect local village idiots.

de Tocqueville said that “in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.”

lostexpectation

i'd prefer to know which idiots im not voting for, how do they keep the candidates secret

Sand

That's a long way away. I remember watching John Stewart before the American election during the Republican party's taunting of Obama as "liberal elite", and he asked why elections were now more about voting not for the exceptional candidate and instead for whoever you identified with. Obviously Obama is a smart, sharp character who is highly educated, considerate and well informed. Why should that have been a perceived weakness? Bush was the classic "guy next door" and popularity for the most part of his tenure was high.

Its still a candidate driven process than a process driven by politics though. Sure, Bush appealed to voters based on a personal level. Obama did the same. Their appeal was on a different levels - Bush, the man's man, Obama the great public speaker but it was still a very personality driven contest, with relatively little political debate as such.

de Tocqueville said that “in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.”

Some of the people do. The rest are locked in for the ride.

i'd prefer to know which idiots im not voting for, how do they keep the candidates secret

Yeah, considering that its effectively impossible to keep the list secret - it will be leaked, and someone has to do the canvassing in particular areas.

However, with the constituencies removed and a simple national vote local candidates with no national mindset will lose their attractiveness: If theres no local constituency, then the local candidate cant deliver it. Parties will have to concentrate on differentiating themselves to the public based on the national politics as opposed to their parish politics approach - voters in Galway arent going to care less about Fianna Fail getting an A&E clinic brought to Waterford...they'll want to know about FF plan for the health service as a whole.

Either way, to fix Irish politics, to improve the quality of representitive we need to break the link between local big men winding up struggling to deal with national and international issues that are far, far above their capabilities to handle.