Rough sketch of a new voting system

AnonymousPrime

Hi Guys,

I had a dragons den style eureka moment involving an idea for a modified voting system, which could trim the fat from Leinster House.

So I'm bringing it to the dragons.......

The aims:
1. As I said: trim the fat. Get the bad politicians out
2. Reduce the power of (and possibly eliminate) independents, local politicians, constituency offices and anything which puts a local agenda above the national agenda. That is what local councils should be for.

Keep in mind, this is still a rough sketch and any hard figures reflect this.

So, firstly, there is NOT 166 good politicians in Ireland, so seats need to be dramatically lowered. If we need to hire more admin staff so be it, but there is no need to vote for a person who doesn't deserve a seat. I would guess at a cut of up to 1/3.

Secondly, each general election will consist of 2 separate elections, of which each citizen may only vote in 1.

Election 1: No change from the current system, constituency Y has X seats and so on. Election 1 is initially allocated all of the seats in parliament.
Election 2: All candidates from every constituency are also entered into a single election pool. This election carries NO SEATS....yet.

Enter the votes.
(I think it is easier to explain this next bit with an example)

The constituency of Meath East has 3 seats. Lets say for arguments sake it has only 3 candidates running and a population of 10.
One of the candidates is useless and only receives 1 vote (from himself), and under the current system (especially with STVs) he will get in.

However, in our example, lets say, 33% of the voting population did not vote in election 1, but instead decided to vote for a candidate outside of their constituency from election 2 (this is allowed, it is just a big pool).

That 33% have decided to give their dail seat to election 2, from which an outsider can be chosen. HOWEVER, they are giving their seat to the entire country, and now all citizens have an equal say in who gets the final Meath East seat.

This system will allow people to vote for the politicians who they feel are most fit to run the country, regardless of the constituency, and yet steer away from a European style corrupted party nomination system.

That's what i have so far.
I am now trying to work out:
1. A fair way of stealing seats from a constituency (as currently they are just being offered)
2. A better ratio for election1 results vs election2 results.
3. A way of transferring second choice votes between elections

Has anyone got to the end of this brain dump? And if so have you any opinions?

Cavehill Red

PRSTV plus a sort of list system? Presumably weighted by constituency preference rather than nationally?
And people say the current system is complicated!
Still, I can see the bones of something in there. A few questions:

1. Would someone elected from the national list-style election represent a constituency or not?
2. Would candidates have to run in a constituency or could they run solely in the list-style national election?

AnonymousPrime

In my mind, candidates chosen in election 2 would not be obliged to run a constituency. They were voted by the nation and are accountable to the nation.

However, each candidate would have to run in a constituency. My gut feeling is that this country does not want a list system, but I could be wrong.

Once again however, these and all other points are open to debate

Gulliver

Interesting idea. Why not just skip to election 2? All-Ireland election with local issues handled by councillors as you said. I mean just because Leitrim has one TD (just for example), it doesn't mean s/he can do feck all for the area.

I think anyone who actually wants to be a politician in Ireland should be instantly rejected. There are very few who (any?) are in it for the good of the country. The high money and expenses attracts too many self-serving wasters.

What about a mandatory service system like in the military in some countries. Everyone gives a year or two years to their country in return for the average industrial wage.

AnonymousPrime

Gulliver wrote: »

Interesting idea. Why not just skip to election 2?

Although this is a fantasy, I am trying to keep it as realistic as possible, and this system makes no change to the people who do not want change (i.e. those who want to vote for the TD because she called to their door in the rain)

Gulliver wrote: »

I think anyone who actually wants to be a politician in Ireland should be instantly rejected......

So true....so depressingly true

Gulliver wrote: »

What about a mandatory service system like in the military in some countries. Everyone gives a year or two years to their country in return for the average industrial wage.

Now that is interesting.
Maybe not everyone, only proven high flyers. The whole point is to keep useless people out, not force them in.
You would need real incentives but maybe having Taoiseach on your CV would be enough.

Gulliver

AnonymousPrime wrote: »

Although this is a fantasy, I am trying to keep it as realistic as possible, and this system makes no change to the people who do not want change (i.e. those who want to vote for the TD because she called to their door in the rain)

We have such a small population that we need to get out of this parochial mindset and look out for the country as a (w)hole

AnonymousPrime wrote: »

Now that is interesting.
Maybe not everyone, only proven high flyers. The whole point is to keep useless people out, not force them in.
You would need real incentives but maybe having Taoiseach on your CV would be enough.

Ok - do it like jury duty. Everyone HAS to attend, but the wasters are weeded out in rounds of interviews. Long-term issues and transitions between terms are handled by the people who actually implement the work (cos the politicians don't actually DO anything) - the admin staff and assistants.

AnonymousPrime

Gulliver wrote: »

We have such a small population that we need to get out of this parochial mindset and look out for the country as a (w)hole

I absolutely agree with you, but it will never happen.
It is also wrought with problems as list systems are at the mercy of party leaders....so talk about playing politics.

Gulliver wrote: »

Ok - do it like jury duty. Everyone HAS to attend, but the wasters are weeded out in rounds of interviews. Long-term issues and transitions between terms are handled by the people who actually implement the work (cos the politicians don't actually DO anything) - the admin staff and assistants.

On what level are you talking?
For example, what would be the highest and lowest level of responsibility which a "juror" would be required to assume?

Dorcha

AnonymousPrime wrote: »

Maybe not everyone, only proven high flyers. The whole point is to keep useless people out, not force them in.
You would need real incentives but maybe having Taoiseach on your CV would be enough.

"Maybe not everyone, only proven high flyers. The whole point is to keep useless people out, not force them in."

I wouldn’t agree with this. What is your definition of a “useless person”? I think that having "high flyers” govern the country (in other words, an "elite") would bring us to the exact same situation that we have at the moment – maybe even worse.


Certainly any government ministers should be concerned only with national issues. Local issues can be looked after by local government.


"You would need real incentives but maybe having Taoiseach on your CV would be enough."


You're joking, I hope. Certainly a lot of the taoiseach we have had in recent years would not have the trust of a lot of people nationally.

AnonymousPrime

Dorcha,

2 things of note.

1. I think you have misunderstood my interpretation of both items you have taken exception to.
A VERY small proportion of those who I would deem high flyers are the ones who have run this country into the ground. The vast majority are currently battling through this recesion with their successful businesses and corporations.
Also, you are telling me that you wouldn't like to have "2011 - 2016: Leader of Ireland" on your CV? That is waht I was refering to: an incentive.

2. Neither of these points are part of the system I have proposed. They are my musings on the ideas of another poster.
Once again, they are far too idealistic to ever be realised.

Dorcha

AnonymousPrime wrote: »

Also, you are telling me that you wouldn't like to have "2011 - 2016: Leader of Ireland" on your CV? That is waht I was refering to: an incentive.

Ah now, AnonomyousPrince, if I had done it to serve my country, instead of my own interests, I would certainly object to having anything like that on my CV.


I do agree that there is need for proper political reform, perhaps even a new system. I have my own ideas about that. The trouble is that the majority of the people of Ireland prefer the Devil they know to anything else, so there is small scope for real change. As for the politicians who are there at the moment – well, Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas, as the saying is, so any meaningful change could only come from outside the present political classes.

Gulliver

AnonymousPrime wrote: »

On what level are you talking?
For example, what would be the highest and lowest level of responsibility which a "juror" would be required to assume?

Ministerial level - the Civil Service is already in place, it just needs tweaking. Get the best and brightest from each discipline form them into "departments". The voter is then presented with this department and their credentials for say, finance, and the one who is elected becomes Minister for Finance. The next highest is kept on to assist the department as devil's advocate or "opposition". Treat the Taoiseach position as a management or CEO role. Same idea as above.

Even as a hypothetical exercise, this is doomed. Ireland fears change. Even a small change to the voting system (like changing to e-voting, for example - a working version obviously:o) would cause huge consternation.

AnonymousPrime

Dorcha wrote: »

Ah now, AnonomyousPrince.....

+

Gulliver wrote: »

Ministerial level - the Civil Serv...

Lots of stuff to talk about here but but I am afraid to reply for fear of pulling the thread waaay off topic.
It is also getting into an area which is a bit too opinionated (i.e. roles of patriotism) for my liking. I would guess we are about 3 posts away from just throwing generalizations at eachother.

MalteseBarry

as long as irish politicians see themselves as a mix of social worker and postman, serving an infantile electorate who keep voting for crooks and con men, and as long as the parliament is not able to hold the government to account, the method of election of the politicians would seem to be largely irrelevant.

HalloweenJack

Great idea for a thread. I think your idea is interesting and its refreshing to see new proposals to the voting system, not just bitching about the parties. Just one thing:

This system will allow people to vote for the politicians who they feel are most fit to run the country, regardless of the constituency, and yet steer away from a European style corrupted party nomination system.

Does this not mean some shining lights will get very high proportions of the vote and others will get very low, possibly not even making the quota?

I myself have been thinking about ways to break the local focus of Irish politics.

My suggestion is something of a list system:

1. Each constituency retains the same amount of seats. Instead of voting for candidates, the electorate vote for parties (i.e. they vote for the party the like, not the party members they like). Seats are allocated to parties in the same way as PRSTV.

2. Parties pick candidates for the seats they get. However, there are several conditions:
- Those taking seats CANNOT live/work in the constituency.
- They cannot hold a seat in a constituency for more than one term. Therefore if the party keeps picking them as a TD, they will never serve the same constituency twice. As there are presently 43 constituencies, there is very little chance of a TD serving in all 43 constituencies and going back to serve their first constituency a second time. In the unlikely event that should happen, the TD must retire.
- TDs who are unpopular (for whatever reasons, though, hopefully, incompetence) can be removed if a petition is signed in their current constituency by people who can prove they voted in the last election (there'd be a stamp or ticket to prove this). The petition will require a number of people matching that of the quota in the last election for the petition to be enforced. The TD then cannot be picked for a seat in the next general election.

3. Local issues are handled exclusively by county councils (which are filled using the same conditions for filling the general election constituency seats).

My idea would hopefully weed out the people who vote for the nice fella they know and "re-educate" (for want of a better word) them to think about policies and vote for the party they think represents those policies best.

This is a very rough idea and I'm sure a lot more thought should go into it.