Party Whip

Triangle

From my understanding of them the system seems anti democratic.

Each party has elected Representatives but they can't voice their own opinion. They have to toe the party line..... surely this isn't right.


In a vote, each Representative should be allowed to vote with his/her morals/judgment. If they can't why do we have these people anyways - robots would do just as well.

or have I missed an important point in our political system?

Red_Marauder

They don't have to tow the party line, they either agree with the party on policy issues or they do not.
Some TDs do veer away from the party from time to time and get by just fine withiout major castigation.


But I don't see the problem in general. What's the point of being part of an organisation and then breaking its rules?

The_Minister

Whips exist in most democratic countries, it is not an Irish idea.

expectationlost

ah thats not what he's saying, forcing tds to vote with the party is more strict here then a lot countries

P. Breathnach

I believe in the idea of political parties, while being somewhat unimpressed with the parties that we actually have. I want to vote in what I believe is good for us collectively, and a party manifesto gives me some basis for making my choice. That's the main reason why independents tend to fall towards the bottom of my ballot paper.

In general, when TDs break the party line, it is for local electoral reasons, and not for high principles. I don't want to governance of Ireland to be subverted because some backbencher sees more votes in the campaign to save the local hospital than in keeping a collective promise to which he or she signed up.

Triangle

I'm not a complete follower of Irish politics, but over the last number of years I do try and keep an eye on the goings on nowadays.
So maybe it's a perception thing, but it seems to me that the entire political spectrum seems to sell itself short time and time again.

I just don't see the majority of TD's standing up for their morals or using their brains. Instead I see bickering people playing games in the Dail and when major items need voted on, most toe the line without using their brains and thinking for themselves.

Take for instance the NAMA debate (I am undecided on this at present). But in the vote for it - how many FF/Greens voted against it?
I don't feel that TD's use their own judgement. It's like they don't want to get involved in the bigger picture and just follow the leader.

And I mean the majority of TD's - some i actually have respect for.

PS: I agree with you P.Breathnach with your last point, but a part of my voting decision is on the person that wants my vote. I'd prefer and honest and honurable person to be in the Dail over someone who's in politics for the wrong reason I still hold on to a dream.

DeVore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I believe in the idea of political parties, while being somewhat unimpressed with the parties that we actually have. I want to vote in what I believe is good for us collectively, and a party manifesto gives me some basis for making my choice. That's the main reason why independents tend to fall towards the bottom of my ballot paper.

In general, when TDs break the party line, it is for local electoral reasons, and not for high principles. I don't want to governance of Ireland to be subverted because some backbencher sees more votes in the campaign to save the local hospital than in keeping a collective promise to which he or she signed up.

Ok... but then why do we have candidates for the parties at all... why not simply tick a box that says Fianna Fail or Fine Gael or whatever... and list the independents as well....

The OP's point (and I cant understand it too) is what do these people really matter because when push comes to shove they arent going to against their parties, regardless. The parties pay for their election campaigns and they arent going to go against that!

I think the idea of a party whip is anti-democratic as it thwarts the expression of the will of the people and causes a conflict of interest in the politicians.

DeV.

P. Breathnach

DeVore wrote: »

...I think the idea of a party whip is anti-democratic as it thwarts the expression of the will of the people and causes a conflict of interest in the politicians.

It's actually our parliamentary system that creates the conflict of interest, because TDs are seen both as representatives of their constituency and as having a national role as legislators and scrutineers of the executive.

Most voters give primacy to the local interest, and so TDs respond to that. I happen to be in that minority who would prefer the national interest or the general good to have primacy.

mdebets

I do think the Whip system is needed, especially in Ireland.
We have already TDs interfering in local politics, e.g. writing letters for constituents, and looking often more after local then national issues.
Imagine now what would happen if the government would have to convince each TD to vote for them every time. I could see every TD trying to get paid for this vote, by demanding things for their constituency (don't close our hospital, buiklt this bypass). Things would be unworkable.

nesf

DeVore wrote: »

I think the idea of a party whip is anti-democratic as it thwarts the expression of the will of the people and causes a conflict of interest in the politicians.

Not really. The whip system is only a product of the conflict of national and local issues endemic to our political system. Replace it with a list system instead of our present PR set-up and we'd have far less conflict since local issues wouldn't dominate so much and we wouldn't have so many private deals with independents which give their constituenices massive overrepesentation in terms of political capital.

P. Breathnach

Imagine what it would be like trying to run a government in a Dáil where every member is running a Jackie Healy-Rae agenda: the cart before the horse every time.

Triangle

Cheers lads - i can see why this is needed now

I'm not too sure if i like it though....leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I'd prefer the debates to be held between individuals who look after the country and not their parish!

nesf

Triangle wrote: »

I'm not too sure if i like it though....leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I'd prefer the debates to be held between individuals who look after the country and not their parish!

It's an ugly solution to an ugly problem. The only real solution is to implement a list system and not have people elected by constituencies but my national polls but the problem with this is that there is not enough representation of rural areas and similar and their wishes could be downtrodden by the wishes of the large urban area dwellers.

Red_Marauder

DeVore wrote: »

The OP's point (and I cant understand it too) is what do these people really matter because when push comes to shove they arent going to against their parties, regardless. The parties pay for their election campaigns and they arent going to go against that!

The parties may partially pay for campaigning (the tax payer foots a large bill as well), but in fact that is not significant.
What matters is voters in the constituency, and it doesn't matter if you spend ten thousand on a campaign or a hundred thousand, if you have a bad name for delivering within the constituency, or putting the party before the constituency, you simply will not get re-elected.

And that is what politicians are afraid of and that is why some level of control is needed through the whip system.

Liam Byrne

Red_Marauder wrote: »

if you have a bad name for delivering within the constituency, or putting the party before the constituency, you simply will not get re-elected.

Not true. O'Dea got elected despite shafting the mid-west on numerous occasions.

And for the record, I'm defining "shafting" as promising to act towards one goal and then voting against it.

If he'd said up-front that it was a non-runner and that he wasn't going to support it then I might have a modicum of respect for him.

But for some reason, Ireland doesn't like politicians like that. The best example was McDowell who - even though I disagreed with about half of what he said - I would gladly vote for because I knew where I stood and because of the half that I did agree with.

Of course, then he went and blew that up by not doing the right thing when Ahern was found out. So I guess even the most straight politician gets infected by our system.

expectationlost

well i think what he's suggesting is that you probably couldn't remove the strict whip without also reform the dail, ie less tds etc,and various ways to force them to be national politicians, which would lessen the problem about client voting in the dail, they would have to propose legislation good enough that the opposition votes would sometimes be required to pass it.

we just need a broader, more varied view within the parties.

i think rejecting his suggestion by bringing up someother inadequecy of politics isn't very fair,its regressive, stick with the status quo, you should be saying well if we did A and B then maybe yes we could improve things.

Red_Marauder

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Not true. O'Dea got elected despite shafting the mid-west on numerous occasions.

And for the record, I'm defining "shafting" as promising to act towards one goal and then voting against it.

You could not have picked a worse example.

I didn't mention shafting, I said either not delivering or else putting national politics before constituency work. From medical cards to housing schemes, and of course an avid interest in funeral masses, O'Dea was a very local minister in a way that did not resemble a national legislator, and that is my point. And as such, he is very vehemently re-elected.

The best example was McDowell who - even though I disagreed with about half of what he said - I would gladly vote for because I knew where I stood and because of the half that I did agree with.

Of course, then he went and blew that up by not doing the right thing when Ahern was found out. So I guess even the most straight politician gets infected by our system.

You think that's why McDowell wasn't re-elected?
As someone living in that constituency, I don't think that people in Dublin South East are as concerned with local politics as those in rural constituencies. However, McDowell was certainly not a strong local performer and was very much a national parlimentarian more interested in governance of the entire country than making sure the old dears in Ranelagh had enough coal in the coal bucket.

expectationlost

so you still think the strict whip is good idea even after our ombudsman pointed at it for the main reason for holding back the process of weeding out corruption?

i think supporting the whip as it is now is incredibly lazy

how does one judge a td (or compare two within a party) on the national issues if they all vote the same?

we can't even get this degree of differentiation http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mpsee.php

one can look at what they talk about and how often, but its very hard to quantify their position at the end of the day
http://www.kildarestreet.com/td/joe_carey/clare