Are there any "thinkers" in the Dail

feicim

I was wondering if any of our current crop of politicians are intelligent enough to handle the complex issues that face countries today. i.e. globalisation, energy security, neo-liberalisation etc

My opinion is that we don't, and we are in the mess we are in today because we are cursed with politicians who can't see beyond the end of their noses and the who think the "bigger picture" is simply that, a bigger picture, like a really big photograph or something.

My fear is we just have a bunch of fairly thick, unscrupulous ego-maniacs who managed to mouth their way into a position of power within the party of their choosing. (I'm talking about all parties here).

China seems to have the ability to think longterm and more importantly to act to achieve longterm goals. Example 1 Example 2 (I'm not saying they're right though, but at least they are forward looking:))

Our lot either refuse to, or can't look beyond the next election.

Will this lack of foresight lead to more of the same economic misery for future generations?

Eliot Rosewater

A similar question would be "do the electorate want 'thinkers' in the Dail?" Imagine if a candidate went on the campaign trail talking about the complexities of foreign trade, and trying to argue the benefits of lower tariffs. The average Joe Soap, unable to grasp the argument, would probably get angry at his own misunderstanding, and vote against the candidate because he's intimidated by him.

The electorate want TDs they can go to the pub with. It is no surprise, then, that the Dail resembles a pub.

Dirk Gently

It's not just politicians. Citizens have to move beyond rewarding clientelism. It's a winning formula for politicians as they keep getting elected based on short termism and doing favours for constituents.

Not enough emphasis is put on local elections (councillors) and the TD, from the birth of the state has fulfilled the local role. Perhaps we need legislation actually limiting TD's from clientelism and focusing purely on national issues.

Eliot Rosewater

There is that old cliché "you get the government you deserve". And while, in terms of a whole country, it's generally true, I prefer Liam Byrne's twist on it: "you get the government somebody else deserves."

maynooth_rules

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

A similar question would be "do the electorate want 'thinkers' in the Dail?" Imagine if a candidate went on the campaign trail talking about the complexities of foreign trade, and trying to argue the benefits of lower tariffs. The average Joe Soap, unable to grasp the argument, would probably get angry at his own misunderstanding, and vote against the candidate because he's intimidated by him.

The electorate want TDs they can go to the pub with. It is no surprise, then, that the Dail resembles a pub.

Exactly, unfortunatly so many of the electorate in this country want to be represented by someone who can come out with nice little soundbytes.

clown bag

clown bag wrote: »

It's not just politicians. Citizens have to move beyond rewarding clientelism. It's a winning formula for politicians as they keep getting elected based on short termism and doing favours for constituents.

Not enough emphasis is put on local elections (councillors) and the TD, from the birth of the state has fulfilled the local role. Perhaps we need legislation actually limiting TD's from clientelism and focusing purely on national issues.

I was only thinking about this today. We should give our local councils more power and bigger budgets to facilitate local issues. Our national government would then be actually able to do just that, govern the country instead of pandering to the whims of it's local electorate.

I still think it a disgrace that people like Michael Lowry, Beverley Cooper Flynn and Jaclkie Healy-Rae should be representatives of our country. The first two would be barred from politics if I had my way and the third would be a councillor (and probably a very good one at that tbf).

We need to take out the local from the national elections. Focus on policy instead. The party that can guarantee bringing in an ethics code into the Dail will get my vote.

Dirk Gently

Papa Smut wrote: »

pandering to the whims of it's local electorate.

This flyer got past my "No junk mail please" signed letter box today. Thought you might enjoy it.
Noel ahern apparently wants to help me with my personal problems.






Like I said, clientelism is a winning formula to get elected, has been throughout the history of our state.

It kills me. That should not be his job. He should be working on getting this country back on it's feet. Not attending local clinics when there is work to do in the Dail.

Dirk Gently

The thing is though, if he doesn't do it it would be political suicide. Even if he genuinely didn't want to flute around with local issues he can't ignore it because we the people will vote for the local issue guy. To be fair every party does it, not just singling out Ahern here, his leaflet just happened to come through the door today.

I think legislation is the only answer. Like you say, empower the local councillors but as well as that limit TD's from interfering. That way when paddy and seamus go looking for a passport application or planning permission the TD will be forced to referer them to the proper channels and tell them they can't interfere. TD's caught playing parish pump politics should be reprimanded, fined wages, suspended etc. It's the only way to break the connection between gombeenism and voters. Voters are the ones who feed the gombeen at the end of the day.

No reason why they cant have clinics, once the clinics are used as a forum for local people to discuss national issues with their national representative. The pot hole and lamp post brigade can then be directed to their local councillor.

yahoo_moe

clown bag wrote: »

I think legislation is the only answer ... It's the only way to break the connection between gombeenism and voters.

Okay... but who's going to enact the legislation?

It'd be collective political suicide (or at the very least, a massive risk) by TDs to vote it through as they'd become targets for hungry, locally-focussed councillors. There'd need to be a huge clamour from the public, and that requires those who harrass their TDs to give up the option... which they won't.

southsiderosie

It could be part of an overall voting reform package, which could combine a shift to a national list-based voting system like they have in the Netherlands with a devolution of power and resources to local government. There is some incentive for parties to do this, as they would have more control over the electoral process. It would also solve the "missing seat" problem that currently exists in Donegal and South Dublin right now (and somewhere else, but I forget).

yahoo_moe

southsiderosie wrote: »

There is some incentive for parties to do this

Some, yes. But I don't see the incentive for the TDs specifically who'd have to vote on it. I'm not a huge fan of the current system but I can see why TDs who've built up huge reputations for 'delivering' for constituents are, and I don't see them willingly throwing themselves at the mercy of party bosses.

The other bye-election will be Waterford by the way (Martin Cullen's retirement).

PeterIanStaker

Anti - intellectualism is so rife that if a public representative was seen to be smart, intelectually capable and able to plan in the long term, there'd practically be a lynch mob after the person out of pure fear.

southsiderosie

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Anti - intellectualism is so rife that if a public representative was seen to be smart, intelectually capable and able to plan in the long term, there'd practically be a lynch mob after the person out of pure fear.

Who are you telling? I'm an American. Sigh.

imme

OP the issues you raise as pertinent to today are not new, do you think they are?

Energy security has been a global issue since the '70's, neo-liberalism has been an issue since the '80's if not before, globalsiation has been an issue since at least the '90's.

In Ireland we don't set the world thinking about what we are thinking about, in that sense we pretty much follow the herd. We don't bring global issues to the world for them to think about, or pretty much any issue. Unless you count Shannon Duty Free!

In terms of 'thinkers' do we need genuine thinkrs other than the historians that called for in your analysis, the thinkers I'm thinking or would be poets/ philosophers etc.

After all, we're more than economic units.

Generally politicians deal with issues as they arise, sometimes they can plan ahead, sometimes it's just not possible.

thebaldsoprano

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

A similar question would be "do the electorate want 'thinkers' in the Dail?" Imagine if a candidate went on the campaign trail talking about the complexities of foreign trade, and trying to argue the benefits of lower tariffs. The average Joe Soap, unable to grasp the argument, would probably get angry at his own misunderstanding, and vote against the candidate because he's intimidated by him.

The electorate want TDs they can go to the pub with. It is no surprise, then, that the Dail resembles a pub.

The two aren't mutually exclusive though, there are 'thinkers' who go to the pub and can relate to Joe Soap. Bringing complex issues into an election campaign needn't necessarily be limited by the public's understanding of them either. Raising some awareness and focussing on what the issues will mean for people's everyday lives may be enough. For example tariffs mightn't be much of an attention grabber, but the possibility of jobs created by changing them certainly would.

This does place an onus of good communication on a potential 'thinking' politician, but no more than anyone else, and looking at the current government's communication 'abilitly' they mightn't have too much to contend with!

imme

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Anti - intellectualism is so rife that if a public representative was seen to be smart, intelectually capable and able to plan in the long term, there'd practically be a lynch mob after the person out of pure fear.

I don't think you're right PeterIS. I think Irish people appreciate intelligence and ability.

I-Shot-Jr

imme wrote: »

I don't think you're right PeterIS. I think Irish people appreciate intelligence and ability.

I think we can find examples of both around the nation but my opinion leans towards that of PeterIS. Having witnessed first hand what a TD has to do to become elected (he will remain nameless) my experience has demonstrated to me that it will more than likely be a long time before TDs will be left to legislate and sort the country out instead of fulfilling the role of a glorified county Councillor. Its the exact same reason there was uproar about our eventual loss of an Irish European commissioner, people believed that they were there to represent Ireland's interest when in fact their role was to serve the entire union. This country amazes and confounds me. Our sharp wit and intelligence seems to go hand in hand with our backwards and misinformed opinions on what politics is supposed to be.

Darsad

No tinkers but plenty of expensive travellers !

PeterIanStaker

imme wrote: »

I don't think you're right PeterIS. I think Irish people appreciate intelligence and ability.

Individual people may appreciate it, but the electorate wouldnt. The depth of begrudgery knows no bounds.

thebaldsoprano

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Individual people may appreciate it, but the electorate wouldnt. The depth of begrudgery knows no bounds.

I'm not so sure, are there any examples where the fact that a politician is highly educated has been used against them? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

feicim

imme wrote: »

I don't think you're right PeterIS. I think Irish people appreciate intelligence and ability.

Why did the image of Bertie Ahern in a cupboard flash before my eyes when I read this ?

feicim

imme wrote: »

OP the issues you raise as pertinent to today are not new, do you think they are?

I know they are not new.

PeterIanStaker

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

I'm not so sure, are there any examples where the fact that a politician is highly educated has been used against them? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Garret Fitzerald (I'm no fan of his) comes to mind.

thebaldsoprano

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Garret Fitzerald (I'm no fan of his) comes to mind.

A quick search for Garrett Fitzgerald in a paper that's giving FG a particularly hard time right now would seem to point in the opposite direction though. These were the first five articles to come up:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fitzgerald-sued-by-his-secretary-2182092.html

Critical article about him being sued by his secretary, but quite complimentary about his academic ties.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/garretts-hedge-fund-suspends-investor-withdrawals-1503246.html

Critical article about a hedge fund he manages getting into trouble, but nowhere is he critisised for his academic credentials.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/garret-fitzgerald-funds-saved-from-liquidation-1605890.html

Another critical article about his hedge funds, similar to the one above.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/kerry-writer-honoured-in-bronze-126954.html

A short snippet in this article about him endorsing a senior counsel for a FG election nomination. Again, nothing attacking his expertise - if anything it's complimentary.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/going-from-messing-eire-to-mise-eire-1445627.html

The quick mention in this article is complimentary of him for taking a stand against republicans - no mention of his ties to academia either way.

If you could point me to some articles attacking his high level of education and expertise I'd be interested to see them. I suspect though that looking at the electorate rather than the candidates is taking the easy way out. Is the electorate really going to be intimidated by someone who's highly educated? There are likely many reasons why someone might vote for a particular candidate and some of these mightn't result in good politicians, but I doubt being a college dropout is one of them

PeterIanStaker

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/going-from-messing-eire-to-mise-eire-1445627.html

The quick mention in this article is complimentary of him for taking a stand against republicans - no mention of his ties to academia either way.

I just read four lines of a Harris article! Excuse me while I go projectile vomit.

thebaldsoprano

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I just read four lines of a Harris article! Excuse me while I go projectile vomit.

Well they were the first five articles that came up, I didn't say they were good

I'm still not buying this idea that the electorate will begrudge or be intimidated by a highly educated politician though.

PeterIanStaker

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

Well they were the first five articles that came up, I didn't say they were good

I'm still not buying this idea that the electorate will begrudge or be intimidated by a highly educated politician though.

I just have this gut feeling that an intellectual type, say a scientist or university lecturer who isn't a gombeen who got the pothole outside the church fixed, would not be understood or trusted (ha ha) by the electorate and most importantly the media, who unfortunately have a large input into elections.

Fergus

Part of the problem is certain individuals in the public service make arbitrary decisions from time to time, and one's only recourse is to petition their TD to get involved in their case.

mike65

John Kelly was probably the foremost "brain" to grace the Dail, and did he florish? Nope. A short lived stint at Trade, a temp position at Foreign Affairs. I dunno why he decided to retreat to the back benches but I imagine he felt he could only think clearly and speak out from there.

thebaldsoprano

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I just have this gut feeling that an intellectual type, say a scientist or university lecturer who isn't a gombeen who got the pothole outside the church fixed, would not be understood or trusted (ha ha) by the electorate and most importantly the media, who unfortunately have a large input into elections.

Well, Labour TD Mary Upton lectured in microbiology at UCD prior to becoming a TD and I doubt her profession hindered her election prospects. This is where it might help to look at the candidates rather than the electorate. Good people and media skills aren't a requirement to be a scientist or a university lecturer, they're not really a core part of the job. These skills are necessary for the usual suspects though - auctioneers, publicans, solicitors, teachers etc. And, they're also necessary to be a politician. That's not to say that there are no scientists etc with good people skills, but it's a fair bet that there'd be less of them. If a scientist ran for election and didn't have good media skills then yes, they'd likely be seen they'd likely be seen as an 'intellectual type' and mightn't get votes. However this doesn't mean that they're being discriminated against, it more likely means that they need to improve their communication skills. If they have these skills though, I don't see why they'd have a problem. The brief look at Garret Fitzgerald articles would seem to confirm this.

I do agree that gombeenism etc is a big problem, but it isn't one particular to more educated politicians. Maybe a list system would go some ways towards fixing this and might encourage more policy driven rather than people driven politicians.

PaulGogartyTD

Everyone in the Dail thinks. It's what they think of and whose interests those thoughts serve that is the more interesting question. And the answer is that while some are transparent, with others you will never really know.

flutered

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

Everyone in the Dail thinks. It's what they think of and whose interests those thoughts serve that is the more interesting question. And the answer is that while some are transparent, with others you will never really know.

i agree with you they are always thinking, but the future of mother ireland, seems to be fardest from their thoughts.

Dirk Gently

remember Paul, the character limit is a bit more generous on boards than on twitter. Don't be afraid to use it to illustrate and flesh out your responses.

PaulGogartyTD

clown bag wrote: »

remember Paul, the character limit is a bit more generous on boards than on twitter. Don't be afraid to use it to illustrate and flesh out your responses.

Fair point, and I hope to make use of it on Wednesday to the point of repetitive strain injury. But earlier after logging on I noticed that I had to make 25 posts to gain certain rights and rather than go looking for an exception to be made I decided to post in whatever threads took my fancy.

You can understand in these instances why abbreviation was the order of the day. But yes, Twitter may have messed up my prose.

At its best Twitter is to communications like Haiku is to other forms of poetry; at worst, it's the headline in the sleasiest of sensationalist stories in the rottenest of rags. From one's phone it's certainly impulsive and while it is easy to edit the message, it is far harder to stop issuing one or replying to one in the first place.