Fast track to political reform ?

CelticRambler

The way things are at the moment, legislation is passed in the Dáil if there's a majority of 1 or more, then goes to the mostly un-elected Seanad for a token quality control check.

Being the embodiment of just 0.6% of the people's choice, it seems immensely unfair that one deputy can be the deciding factor in a vote so close that a controversial measure can be imposed on 49.7% of the population against their wishes. Recent times have shown that the Seanad can't be counted on to block this kind of legislation.

So how about getting rid of the Seanad entirely and requiring all votes in the Dáil to gain the support of say 60% of the house to pass into law?

The Taoiseach similarly would have to have the support of two thirds of the elected representatives (and by implication, the people) and have his cabinet approved the same way. In a country with three main parties + miscellaneous others + maybe a significant proportion of independents come March, this would more accurately give "the government we voted for".

Apart from being "more fair" it would also make it less susceptible to dubious you-scratch-my-back negotiations with individual TDs, and would force those introducing new legislation to make a determined effort to come up with a proposition that had a real chance of getting passed.

In the longer term, it could also be helpful in breaking the traditional party model where TDs have to accept the whole package in its entirety - it would be easier to break ranks (even become independent) knowing that you could truly work "in the country's interest" and still have a chance of being a minister or Taoiseach in the fullness of time.

RobbieTheRobber

Wouldnt having a government that required more independent backing give more power for them to tade support for issues in return for local issues?

Messers healy rae and lowry im looking at you!

CelticRambler

That's what they have at the moment isn't it? Where "The Party" (or minority or in coalition) already has almost, but not quite, enough seats to force through an unpopular Bill, all they need to do is promise new wheels for the local hospital trolleys and a certain breed of independent will give them whatever they want. If they had to satisfy the demands of a far greater number of independents, that would be far harder to achieve.

The party structure could be used to sponsor new recruits, guarantee their deposit in their first few elections, allow politically ambitious individuals to mix with and learn from their elders (' mistakes!) and develop their own identity. Later they could loosen those ties. Aren't there plenty of comments on here along the lines of "[so-and-so] has been great as a local councillor, but I could never vote for his party in a general election".

Overheal

Reform takes time, not haste. You can't just impatiently obliterate 1/3 of the constitutional judicial process overnight and think it will make everything better.

Revolution, on the other hand - but you probably don't want to go down that road. That road could easily lead to civil war, potentially the loss of your International Sovereignty recognition, and even if you avoid both you have to then build an entirely new political and legal system essentially from the ground up, and there's nothing fast about that.

Oasis_Dublin

The elected representatives are not individual voters so it would still all come down to party politics.

We need to reform the Seanad, not get rid of it. We also need to reduce the number of TDs but I don't know how this will be possible; if 20 TDs are to be gotten rid of after the general election, how are the 20 chosen?

For every piece of legislation that passes by a majority of one, there are 10 pieces of legislation that pass by a majority of 15 or more. If every piece of legislation has to receive a 60% approval rating in the Dáil, then absolutely nothing would get done. It would have to see the introduction of FPTP for that idea to work and I'll be damned if we're to introduce an electoral system that would guarantee FF unbroken rule.

In order to get to 60%, many dubious "you support me on this vote and I'll support you on another" could be made between TDs.

Benito

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

The elected representatives are not individual voters so it would still all come down to party politics.

We need to reform the Seanad, not get rid of it. We also need to reduce the number of TDs but I don't know how this will be possible; if 20 TDs are to be gotten rid of after the general election, how are the 20 chosen?

For every piece of legislation that passes by a majority of one, there are 10 pieces of legislation that pass by a majority of 15 or more. If every piece of legislation has to receive a 60% approval rating in the Dáil, then absolutely nothing would get done. It would have to see the introduction of FPTP for that idea to work and I'll be damned if we're to introduce an electoral system that would guarantee FF unbroken rule.

In order to get to 60%, many dubious "you support me on this vote and I'll support you on another" could be made between TDs.[/QUOTE

Was looking at The dail report thingy. Pearse Doherty was being attacked by FG Barret regarding no amendments to the finance bill. So, it is a complicated issue in regards to 'bills'. Reform of both houses needs a referendum. As far as I can see, no manifesto is being prepared by any party to change the Constitution. (I like the idea of a list system)

If anyone does propose this it's likely to be very far down the list on the election spam, behind all of the normally expected promises/ aspirations, etc. But, this is not, to my mind, a very hot topic. I'm aware of 'Constitutional' changes being proposed by the Germans in respect of 'fiscal solidarity/ cohesion'. Seen a thread on this on another forum.

My twopence worth, we need a change of our electoral system. Unfortunatly, I don't think Lab, FG, FF want this. We vote locally as we have always done as this is the way and will untill the economy defaults and our system falls apart.

Oasis_Dublin

I think debate on Constitutional change is a waste of time, for the moment anyway. There are bigger fish to fry (the economy and all its implications) and we should worry about changing the Constitution if/when the economy has picked up again.

Saying that, I believe Bunreacht na h-Éireann is a fine constitution, no need to change it really.

The Germans have proposed writing in figures into the constitution over which a country cannot go eg the constitution says that the deficit can only be 3% so anything more than that is unconstitutional or illegal. It's a pretty foolish suggestions as the last few years have shown. France famously demanded similar legislation and then went over its maximum deficit % the very next year.

I'm personally indifferent to the List System. We need a smaller lower house, more efficient and powerful upper house and stronger committees comprised of experts. So David McWilliams and Michael O'Leary can actually do something instead of talking and arguing respectively.

Benito

I don't think debate on Constitutional change is a waste of time. If it is, we shall be replacing one block Government ( weak or strong by House and whip vote ) with another. For four to five years like the last with a carte-blanche mandate? That is until a junior partner bails out?

I agree that the German pro posal is foolish but, that dosen't mean it won't be agreed to here. No IMF/Commission/ECB bailout...Yes IMF/Commission/ECB bailout!!!!!

If we had a list system now, we would not have 2 back-woodsmen deciding the fate of a four year deal based soley on parish pump issues. Just think of this disgrace!

Good voices in the Dail, McWilliams, Somers, Somerville, Ross? look what happened to George...Whatshissurname fella?

Like you, I'm a citizen who's still working ( you too?) who has one say every four to five years. If I vote wrong, I'll have another chance to gamble in ...2..3...4, you see where I'm going?

Oasis_Dublin

Where does the present constitution fall short, may I ask? Apart from your desire for a list system.

Block voting is how politics works. That won't ever change. It would be a mad house if everyone was an independent.

aftermn

We are a small country. We are a trading country. We need a small tight government and parliament. We certainly need to look after our own, but our own includes all our citizens.
Politics is difficult. Success should be celebrated, and failure declared for what it is. We are coming out of 13 years of failure.
To the new government, it is your duty to try harder. Half the number of seats in the Dail, open the Seanad to all commers rather then scrapping it, but with no salaries. True proud Irishmen will be happy to contribute, others we can do without.
We have learned that debt makes slaves of our people. Let's not go there again. It may take time, but we can be debt free. Make it happen.

Benito

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Where does the present constitution fall short, may I ask? Apart from your desire for a list system.

Block voting is how politics works. That won't ever change. It would be a mad house if everyone was an independent.

I never said the present Constitution has failed or fallen short.

My desire for a list sytem stems from a desire for qualified people to be intrusted (and mis-trusted) to head Government departments and committees.

Block voting exists when you have a majority. Democracy works when the minority also have a say in a proper debate.

I don't want a house (parliament?) full of independants

We have voted through a finance bill ( first part of four) and afterwards we shall be allowed an election to decide which party or coalition shall continue the other 3 parts......There might be more.

I wish to dissent from this 'block' of a majority of 166 individuals vote as I have only a single transferable vote, sometime in February to say ya or nay, just like you...To a Fait à Compli....Or whatever the spelling is, to OUR Government policy that will decide my Families fortune for the next..........Whenever.

CelticRambler

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

For every piece of legislation that passes by a majority of one, there are 10 pieces of legislation that pass by a majority of 15 or more. If every piece of legislation has to receive a 60% approval rating in the Dáil, then absolutely nothing would get done.

You've just proved my point - a 15-vote majority is well on the way to 60%, so most of the Dáil business would not be affected. The one- and two-vote majorities introduce pieces of leglislation that are (arguably) the most ill-considered ...

Oasis_Dublin

CelticRambler wrote: »

You've just proved my point - a 15-vote majority is well on the way to 60%, so most of the Dáil business would not be affected. The one- and two-vote majorities introduce pieces of leglislation that are (arguably) the most ill-considered ...

The Dáil is already highly inefficient. Slowing bills because they need to be approved by a 60% majority is not good. It also doesn't guarantee that the bill will be any less ill-considered than a bill that passes with a 60% majority. I think there are more important things to be done, and they can be done within the confines of Bunreacht na h-Éireann. Namely, introducing proper committees, reducing the number of TDs.

Oasis_Dublin

Benito wrote: »

I never said the present Constitution has failed or fallen short.

My desire for a list sytem stems from a desire for qualified people to be intrusted (and mis-trusted) to head Government departments and committees.

Block voting exists when you have a majority. Democracy works when the minority also have a say in a proper debate.

I don't want a house (parliament?) full of independants

We have voted through a finance bill ( first part of four) and afterwards we shall be allowed an election to decide which party or coalition shall continue the other 3 parts......There might be more.

I wish to dissent from this 'block' of a majority of 166 individuals vote as I have only a single transferable vote, sometime in February to say ya or nay, just like you...To a Fait à Compli....Or whatever the spelling is, to OUR Government policy that will decide my Families fortune for the next..........Whenever.

I never said that you said it falls short! It seems to me that you are looking for electoral reform and not constitutional reform i.e. you are happy with the articles of Bunreacht na h-Éireann but that you want to change how the Dáil is elected. That is more electoral reform than anything else.

Qualified people could be placed into a committee system, possible under Bunreacht na h-Éireann if the political will is there.

Government policy will decide what the government does for the next 5 years, yes. I'm not sure what else you could propose as a means of ruling 4+ million people.

Proper debate? You'll have to tell me what you mean here.

Uriel.

In my opinion, a serious debate on constitutional change is extremely important and I would love to see it as one of the priority agenda items for the next Government.

We know that the economic and employment situation and (to a lesser extent) health require immediate attention. But, we'll ride the storm of economic woes and in time we will be back in a boom situation again (maybe not to the extent of the Tiger years). The economy will, go through peaks and troughs forever and we will deal with these things as best we can when they arise.

But political and governance reform, I feel is needed as prioirty for the long-term health of the nation. I think it is one of the most importance factors that will ensure future generations have a system in place that can better manage these crises.

For me, I favour a move towards a system such as this:

1. Remove The position of the Toaiseach or the Presidency and empower the remaining (in a similar fashion to the US Presidency). Where the empowered position is elected every 4 years through a National Vote.

2. TDs elected on a national list system basis

3. Local Authorities given greater empowerment and flexibility over running their areas. Local Councillors given more power and each Authority appoints a "mayor" / "Governor" similar to the US - this person would be elected by the people of the authority.

4. At present I am leaning on the side of Seanad abolishment but I have not made a final decision on same.

There are plenty more issues that I would like to see addressed and the above is just a general overview of what I would like to see - there are plenty of specific issues that need to be addressed under each of the above but you could write all day about them.

I doubt you would ever see such a system developed in Ireland and even if a Government was seriously considering same and the people favoured it I think it would take a couple of decades for the transition to take place effectively.