Why does the president not dissolve the Dáil?

iMax

According to the Citizen's Information website. The president has the power to dissolve the Dáil.

The Irish Constitution (Bunreacht na hÉireann) states that the Dáil (one of the houses of Parliament) shall not continue for a period longer than seven years. It also states that legislation can fix a shorter period for the duration of the Dáil. Since 1927, the law states that the maximum period for the duration of the Dáil is 5 years. This means that there must be a general election at least every 5 years. There is no minimum period for the duration of the Dáil.

The President of Ireland has the power to dissolve the Dáil so that a general election must be held. If the Taoiseach has the support of the majority of the members of the Dáil, and he or she advises the President to dissolve the Dáil, the President must do so. If the Taoiseach does not have the support of the majority of the members of the Dáil, the President may refuse to dissolve the Dáil.

The Constitution states that once the President issues a proclamation dissolving the Dáil, a general election must be held within 30 days. Legislation limits this further by requiring that the general election take place between the 17th and the 25th day after the dissolution of the outgoing Dáil.

After the President issues the proclamation dissolving the Dáil, a writ is issued to the returning officer in every constituency directing him or her to hold an election. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will then set the polling day.

So bearing that in mind. What are we paying our president (apparently the most powerful person in the land) for ? Is Madam President not remiss in her duties to the state ?

Scarab80

Eh, because the current dail is 3 years old and the taoiseach still has the support of a majority of members of the house?

FreudianSlippers

She can also refuse to allow the Daíl to be dissolved. Where the Taoiseach has "ceased to retain the support of a majority" of the Dáil he can essentially save his job by dissolving the Daíl, the President can stop this.

peasant

Maybe because she is just as unelected as the current taioseach ?

deise go deo

There would have to be be extremely serious grounds for this unprecedented action to be taken, What grounds are there now? Biffo not being popular? It is not the role of the president to Intervene in the affairs of government just because the government is doing badly in opinion poles. They have a valid mandate from the last election. Her hands are tied even if she wanted to.

Overheal

Scarab80 wrote: »

Eh, because the current dail is 3 years old and the taoiseach still has the support of a majority of members of the house?

Read it again: that conditional only means the president must dissolve the Dail, even if the President would rather not do so. But from the wording of the law, there is nothing from stopping the President from dissolving the Dail at any given moment. There is no minimum, so that 3 years is bull****, the President could dissolve the Dail after it's been in power for 3 Days if she wanted to.

copacetic

Overheal wrote: »

Read it again: that conditional only means the president must dissolve the Dail, even if the President would rather not do so. But from the wording of the law, there is nothing from stopping the President from dissolving the Dail at any given moment. There is no minimum, so that 3 years is bull****, the President could dissolve the Dail after it's been in power for 3 Days if she wanted to.

wtf? this is total rubbish. You are reading a webpage, not the actual constitution, or the legislation.

http://www.constitution.ie/reports/ConstitutionofIreland.pdf

2. 1° Dáil Éireann shall be summoned and dissolved by the President on the advice of the Taoiseach

the president only has discretion in refusing to dissolve the Dail if Taoiseach has no majority. Otherwise the president must do as the Taoiseach says

Overheal

Thats... broken. You essentially have no Executive Branch then, if the Executive has no Executive Power.

kaiser sauze

Overheal wrote: »

Thats... broken. You essentially have no Executive Branch then, if the Executive has no Executive Power.

Our Executive is actually our most powerful arm as it comprises Cabinet and, in a sense, The President.

The Legislative is our Dáil & Seanad (Oireachtas). It is just a place that Cabinet must show up in to read a few prepared speeches every now and then. The Executive completely control what happens in our Oireachtas.

The Judiciary of The Supreme Court is our final arm, and they do a good job when someone gets a case before them.

If you are saying our President should have more power, I am in full agreement with you. It is not as if our President inherits the position like The Queen; they are elected and, as such, should be available, and answerable, to the people. Our President needs to be able to exercise their own judgement, a judgement the people put them there to exercise.

deise go deo

Overheal wrote: »

Thats... broken. You essentially have no Executive Branch then, if the Executive has no Executive Power.

This isent a presidential democracy, its a parliamentary democracy, The power lies with the parliament. And more specifically the cabinet. The president is a figure head and has been since the position was created.

Philsopher

The President was a FF candidate and the Government are led by FF. What else is there to say?

Raging_Ninja

The Government has a majority, the present Dáil has not exceeded it's term of office. Why would the President dissolve the Dáil?

Maybe because she is just as unelected as the current taioseach ?

She was elected for her first term. None of the parties decided to field a candidate. Nobody gained the minimum constitutional requirements to run against her in 2004, and, as per the constitution, she was deemed elected for a second term. All perfectly constitutional. All perfectly legit.

In this country we don't vote for the leader of the country, we vote for our local candidates. The party members choose their leader. If a party gains the majority, that party can form the Government. The leader of that party becomes Taoiseach. Brian Cowen is no less democratically elected than any other Taoiseach this country has ever had.

Riskymove

Philsopher wrote: »

The President was a FF candidate and the Government are led by FF. What else is there to say?

that both were elected by the people?...they did not just appear there after all

kaiser sauze

Philsopher wrote: »

The President was a FF candidate and the Government are led by FF. What else is there to say?

This is true, but now that they are elected to that position they are bound by the constitution and you should know how little power the role really has.

PeterIanStaker

She doesnt want to cause controversy or draw attention to herself, as she no doubt has her eye on some UN job or other high powered number.

Raging_Ninja

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

She doesnt want to cause controversy or draw attention to herself, as she no doubt has her eye on some UN job or other high powered number.

Nah, the media just doesn't like her because she used to be a journalist and quit, saying something along the lines of it being a seedy business.

PeterIanStaker

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Nah, the media just doesn't like her because she used to be a journalist and quit, saying something along the lines of it being a seedy business.

Naw, the media dont like her because she's the wrong type of nordie for them.