SENATE TO BE AXED? WHEN?

jakdelad

whats all this talk of senate reform etc etc
were the irish people not promised by fine gael and labour
the senate would be abolished??/gone, finished, bye bye

seems from the media
they{the unelected} are jockying already for senate seats

have i missed something?

gandalf

They have to call a referendum so we vote on abolishing it. They cannot do it themselves. So the Seanad will exist for a couple more years at least.

jakdelad

gandalf wrote: »

They have to call a referendum so we vote on abolishing it. They cannot do it themselves. So the Seanad will exist for a couple more years at least.

you r not serious oh no,
well can they not suspend it till then
due to the fact we cannot afford it?
dont think you would hear any complaints from joe public
about a suspension
everyone knows the senate is as usefull as a trapdoor in a canoe

well there wont be any recount on that vote

ISAW

jakdelad wrote: »

you r not serious oh no,
well can they not suspend it till then

No they cant.

due to the fact we cannot afford it?

Actually it costs something like 10 million a year. the Aviva stadium or Croke park costs half to one million every day it opens for a match.

The national gallery costs 8 million. what would you do with the 115 people ( Table 6) you lay off to close it?

dont think you would hear any complaints from joe public
about a suspension
everyone knows the senate is as usefull as a trapdoor in a canoe

I disagree. where is you r evidence that everyone knows?

ShooterSF

gandalf wrote: »

They have to call a referendum so we vote on abolishing it. They cannot do it themselves. So the Seanad will exist for a couple more years at least.

Years? It's not a complex piece of legislation we're talking about. Surely something could be done sooner.

Unless they are looking to a complete overhaul of the constitution, something I wouldn't mind!

Overheal

why do you need to abolish your senate?

calm_bull

jakdelad wrote: »

you r not serious oh no,
well can they not suspend it till then
due to the fact we cannot afford it?
dont think you would hear any complaints from joe public
about a suspension
everyone knows the senate is as usefull as a trapdoor in a canoe

well there wont be any recount on that vote

i dont think it should be abolished i think it should be an elected upper house, any thoughts?

ISAW

ShooterSF wrote: »

Years? It's not a complex piece of legislation we're talking about. Surely something could be done sooner.

AFAIK it will require changing 15 articles in the constitution to abolish it. Reform e.g. extending constituencies overseas or to all universities would only require legislation to do so.

Unless they are looking to a complete overhaul of the constitution, something I wouldn't mind!

So you would like to reverse every supreme court decision since 1937?

ISAW

Overheal wrote: »

why do you need to abolish your senate?

We don't but I guess people think drastic action actually achieves something.

We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. Presumably the plans for our employment were being changed. I was to learn later in life that, perhaps because we are so good at organizing, we tend as a nation to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.
Charlton Ogburn, "Merrill's Marauders", Harpers Magazine, January 1957

Overheal

Precisely how I feel about it, though put in much better terms.

The driver sucked, so lets re-invent the car.

Dirk Gently

is abolishing the seanad considered to be reform? If you want to do it to save a relativly insignificant amount then fair enough, but don't call it reform. It smells of a populist move to deliver a few heads on platters without actually reforming anything. I'd be more interested in making the seanad relevant and strengthening the balance of powers than doing away with it and claiming somehow that actual political reform occurred. I'd be much happier with a relevant seanad with real power and real expertise, one which wasn't just a runner up prize for party members who failed to get elected to the Dáil, than no Seanad at all.

Dáil reform is the big issue for me. We basically pay 166 TD's in what essentially is a rent a vote as their only real function outside of cabinet is to vote according to the whip. Even reducing TD's to 100 from 166 is irrelevant without actual real reforms. We'll just have 100 rent a votes as opposed to 166 rent a votes. I don't even understand why any Dáil time is required let alone increase sitting hours as is proposed as another token "reform". It's just more time literally sitting there going through the motions of "show debates" until the whip tells them to press their buttons and vote accordingly. At least if we allowed TD's to text their vote in on their phones from home we could save on a bit of light and heat in government buildings.

bamboozle

FG's suggestions are to reduce Dail seats by 20 and to have a referendum to abolish the seanad.

i've emailed my local FG TD and councillor to ask them when we can see the process of implementing the above plus their much publicised govt car pool scheme...which may see Bertie having to re-apply for a driver's license.

ednwireland

i thought they couldnt abolish it until the end of the next session s, so it will be around for a few more years yet

whippet

What's this? Election hype and promises might not be as clear as when first presented during an election campaign ? ...shock horror ....

the amount of people I met who said they were voting FG as they will abolish the senate as soon as they are elected along with reducing the number of Dail Deputies was mental !! .... having no concept as to the mechanics of making such changes.

Mind you, this election and the problems we are facing as a nation has attracted more interest from the ordinary joe soap than ever before, there is a massive interest from people who never took any notice prior.

It has to be a good thing, it might have a bit of a learning curve for those who are new to watching politics but eventually it will mean a more clued in electorate who might be able to ignore meaningless spin a bit easier.

When the coffee lady in my office is talking about the yields on our soverign 10 year bonds you know there is a sea-change taking place.

ISAW

clown bag wrote: »

is abolishing the seanad considered to be reform?...It smells of a populist move to deliver a few heads on platters without actually reforming anything. I'd be more interested in making the seanad relevant and strengthening the balance of powers...

Dáil reform is the big issue for me. ....

http://www.tribune.ie/article/2009/apr/05/pensions-for-ex-tds-senators-cost-state-8m-in-2008/
Pensions for ex-TDs, senators cost state €8m in 2008

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/other/2009/boirdsnippap09/finhousoir.pdf

137 Million to run the Oireachtas!

24 Million Salaries - 59 million admin

The Civil servants cost twice what the TD's cost!

166 TD 479 Civil servants plus 331 other public servants = 810 staff.

ShooterSF

ISAW wrote: »

So you would like to reverse every supreme court decision since 1937?

I would like to start again from scratch. I'm not saying everything should be reversed but our constitution is horribly out of date.

Also the reason people are taking a disliking to the seanad recently is that we don't buy the idea of unelected people of authority who are handed an advisory role based on their standing in society.
It still has the whiff of doctors and priests dictating to you because of their position of authority that happened in 50's Ireland.

TheGodBen

ShooterSF wrote: »

Years? It's not a complex piece of legislation we're talking about. Surely something could be done sooner.

The Seanad is firmly established within the constitution, removing it would require a significant overhaul of that document. Constitutional amendments are never something that should be rushed into due to their importance, even small constitutional amendments can sometimes take years to draft to make sure that there's no unintended misinterpretations of the text. A mistake in a piece of legislation can be quickly remedied in the Dáil, a mistake in a constitutional amendment could cause problems for generations.

Just look at America, they still argue over their 2nd amendment centuries later due to the placement of a comma. Ireland is in an even more precarious situation because we have 2 constitutions, one in Irish and one in English, with the Irish language version taking precedent.

jakdelad

Overheal wrote: »

why do you need to abolish your senate?

well now let me see????????
oh yeah they leave the lights on all night...............


fine gael PROMISED to get rid of the senate
unless i missed something??
am i the only one in ireland understands this

the senate is about as usefull as tits on a boar,,,,,,,,,,,

its in endas five point plan an election to get rid of the senate.
cant wait to put my x on that sucker
and get all the useless fukks out of there

NWPat

jakdelad wrote: »

well now let me see????????
oh yeah they leave the lights on all night...............


fine gael PROMISED to get rid of the senate
unless i missed something??
am i the only one in ireland understands this

the senate is about as usefull as tits on a boar,,,,,,,,,,,

its in endas five point plan an election to get rid of the senate.
cant wait to put my x on that sucker
and get all the useless fukks out of there

No they didn't, they said there would be a referendum on reform of the system.

ISAW

ShooterSF wrote: »

I would like to start again from scratch. I'm not saying everything should be reversed but our constitution is horribly out of date.

If you start again from scratch you are throwing out every Supreme court decision since that court is the final arbiter in interpreting the constitution.

Also the reason people are taking a disliking to the seanad recently is that we don't buy the idea of unelected people of authority who are handed an advisory role based on their standing in society.

Thats total rubbish!

Most Senators are elected!
Only 11 are appointed!

In fact this is exactly what reform policy politics is pushing i.e. that even more unelected people be made nominees rather than elected.

In fact the Dermot Desmond " reform policy" publicshed in the Irish times and packaged in neat powerpoint presentations and glossy brochures with bar charts was cut and pasted by the political parties without actually asking their own grass roots members wht they thought.

That policy suggests UNELECTED people be made Ministers.

And whats this about a secret ballot for Ceann Comhairle?

I mean why should we not see how our constituency TD votes?
What is such a big deal about a secret ballot for it?
But the parties really made a big deal out of this nonsense!

We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. Presumably the plans for our employment were being changed. I was to learn later in life that, perhaps because we are so good at organizing, we tend as a nation to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.
Charlton Ogburn, "Merrill's Marauders", Harpers Magazine, January 1957

ejmaztec

What say has the public in the appointment/election of senators?

One of our local FF Senators in North Kerry, Ned O'Sullivan, said on Radio Kerry today, that the government was going to be too busy with other things to get on with abolishing the Seanad, and as far as he was concerned, it was going to be business as usual.

A failed Kerry-North FF TD, Tom McEllistrim is applying for the Seanad, but even his supporters consider him to be less than useless. Why would someone as useless as he ever be considered, least of all be elected?

ISAW

ejmaztec wrote: »

What say has the public in the appointment/election of senators?

Of the University Senators? - about 200,000 irish citizens have a say and maybe half of them are outside Ireland unlike the Dail it gives votes to Irish emigrants and to people in the North so more have a say than in the Dail.

Of the panels ? - it is indirect people elect councillors TD and Senators who then vote on the Senate panels. But the Taoiseach is also elected in this way!

One of our local FF Senators in North Kerry, Ned O'Sullivan, said on Radio Kerry today, that the government was going to be too busy with other things to get on with abolishing the Seanad, and as far as he was concerned, it was going to be business as usual.

so much for the promises made by Enda then?

A failed Kerry-North FF TD, Tom McEllistrim is applying for the Seanad, but even his supporters consider him to be less than useless. Why would someone as useless as he ever be considered, least of all be elected?

Anyone can run for election it is their democratic right. why should you be able to exclude them?

gimme5minutes

For god sake, this country is only the size of a average city. We dont need another house full of wafflers, we have enough of them in the dail already. At the least the public has a say on what spoofer they want representing them in the dail, whereas 95% of people have no say on the wasters that end up in the Senate.

It would have zero negative effects if the number of TDs was limited to 100 and the Senate was abolished. On the contrary, it would save a lot of money and make the whole legislative process more efficient. This was one of the reasons I, and many others, gave my first preference to FG - if they dont follow through on their promises regarding political reform they will be taking a step towards FF-style contempt towards the electorate and will piss alot of people off.

I am sick to death of looking at these Senators milking the taxpayer dry with their ridiculous expenses. Forget reforming it, we have tons of TDs, civil service and county/city councillors in this country, there is absolutely no need for these 60 twats in the Senate.

Here's the daily routine of a senator - http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/tdssenators/senators/

A typical day involves:

* debating and voting on legislation, (waffling - these twats have never blocked any legislation)
* statements on matters of national importance, (spoofing)
* serving on and attending Committee meetings, (and getting paid extra for it no doubt - milking the taxpayer)
* providing important contributions and expertise. (more spoof)

Overheal

gimme5minutes wrote: »

For god sake, this country is only the size of a average city.

An "average city" in a large country, governed in many cases by a house, senate, and executive. Hummer, Full-size sedan or Cooper Mini: They all still need a steering wheel and 3 mirrors.

Einhard

Overheal wrote: »

An "average city" in a large country, governed in many cases by a house, senate, and executive. Hummer, Full-size sedan or Cooper Mini: They all still need a steering wheel and 3 mirrors.

Iceland, Israel, South Korea, New Zealand, and Norway seem to get along just fine with a unicarmel parliament...

Eliot Rosewater

Einhard wrote: »

Iceland, Israel, South Korea, New Zealand, and Norway seem to get along just fine with a unicarmel parliament...

What do you mean by "just fine"? An outside observer might have looked into Ireland during the boom and thought our decision making processes were "just fine".

bamboozle

ejmaztec wrote: »

What say has the public in the appointment/election of senators?

One of our local FF Senators in North Kerry, Ned O'Sullivan, said on Radio Kerry today, that the government was going to be too busy with other things to get on with abolishing the Seanad, and as far as he was concerned, it was going to be business as usual.

A failed Kerry-North FF TD, Tom McEllistrim is applying for the Seanad, but even his supporters consider him to be less than useless. Why would someone as useless as he ever be considered, least of all be elected?

here's a quote from an email i received yesterday from a FG TD re the seanad

'Fine Gael will introduce a referendum on the abolition of the seanad within 12 months. The reduction in the size of the Dail will be implemented at the next Dail election. It will have to be preceded by a boundary review setting new boundaries for a smaller dail'

gimme5minutes

Overheal wrote: »

An "average city" in a large country, governed in many cases by a house, senate, and executive. Hummer, Full-size sedan or Cooper Mini: They all still need a steering wheel and 3 mirrors.

Yes, they all need a steering wheel and 3 mirrors because they are critical component necessary for the operation of a vehcile. They don't need expensive such as need heated seats, leather trim or 20 inch alloys. That kind of stuff is pure indulgence, just like the Senate. Especially for our little banjaxed Fiat Punto of a country, we have no need for fancy luxuries like a Senate. We have way more than enough TDs, CS and country/city councillors running this tiny country as it is.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

What do you mean by "just fine"? An outside observer might have looked into Ireland during the boom and thought our decision making processes were "just fine".

So your logic is that there is no point saying any country looks 'just fine' because an outside observer might have thought we were just fine if they looked at us a few years ago...? Well in that case how can you evaluate any country? To me, Germany, Canada and Switzerland for example look just fine. Do you have an issue with this evaluation?

Eliot Rosewater

gimme5minutes wrote: »

So your logic is that there is no point saying any country looks 'just fine' because an outside observer might have thought we were just fine if they looked at us a few years ago...?

Not really. Nearly every time this discussion crops up someone says that a specific country with a unicameral parliament looks fine, or looks grand, or something like that. I'm just curious as to how they come to the conclusion.

Take a person on an Norwegian Internet forum discussing parliamentary issues. It would be the equivalent of them saying that during the boom Ireland's decision making process "looked fine". However the decision making processes were not fine. In my opinion, any political system that results in proliferation of give-away budgets has something wrong with it. But someone on a Norwegian Internet forum would probably not realise that.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Well in that case how can you evaluate any country? To me, Germany, Canada and Switzerland for example look just fine.

Well, why do you believe that to be the case?

thebman

whippet wrote: »

What's this? Election hype and promises might not be as clear as when first presented during an election campaign ? ...shock horror ....

the amount of people I met who said they were voting FG as they will abolish the senate as soon as they are elected along with reducing the number of Dail Deputies was mental !! .... having no concept as to the mechanics of making such changes.

Mind you, this election and the problems we are facing as a nation has attracted more interest from the ordinary joe soap than ever before, there is a massive interest from people who never took any notice prior.

It has to be a good thing, it might have a bit of a learning curve for those who are new to watching politics but eventually it will mean a more clued in electorate who might be able to ignore meaningless spin a bit easier.

When the coffee lady in my office is talking about the yields on our soverign 10 year bonds you know there is a sea-change taking place.

Ha ya ran away with yourself way too fast there because FG stated before the election, it would require a referendum and never made out it was easy.

ISAW wrote: »

If you start again from scratch you are throwing out every Supreme court decision since that court is the final arbiter in interpreting the constitution.

Thats total rubbish!

Most Senators are elected!
Only 11 are appointed!

Most senators are elected by people who graduated from selected universities, not by the general public. To add insult to injury, 11 are appointed.

To make this even funnier, those appointed have many times in the past, failed to be elected and were rejected by the people. They are political favor positions.

In fact the Dermot Desmond " reform policy" publicshed in the Irish times and packaged in neat powerpoint presentations and glossy brochures with bar charts was cut and pasted by the political parties without actually asking their own grass roots members wht they thought.

That policy suggests UNELECTED people be made Ministers.

And whats this about a secret ballot for Ceann Comhairle?

I mean why should we not see how our constituency TD votes?
What is such a big deal about a secret ballot for it?
But the parties really made a big deal out of this nonsense!

Who cares what Dermot Desmond thinks? FG's reforms were published before his article in the Irish Times as best I remember and I remember it being mentioned before his article was published, a couple of times that they would look at abolishing the Seanad.

ejmaztec

bamboozle wrote: »

here's a quote from an email i received yesterday from a FG TD re the seanad

'Fine Gael will introduce a referendum on the abolition of the seanad within 12 months. The reduction in the size of the Dail will be implemented at the next Dail election. It will have to be preceded by a boundary review setting new boundaries for a smaller dail'

It was Ned O'Sullivan making an off-the-cuff assumption that nothing would be done, and I hope he's wrong. I'm sure that he would like to go back to teaching, or doing inside-leg measurements in his Gent's outfitters shop.

As for the McEllistrim guy, he delivered nothing when he was a FF TD, so he'd deliver even less as a senator. His grandfather was in the right place at the right time in 1922. He may have achieved something, as may his son, but the grandson has achieved diddly-squat.

If a referendum does decide to keep the Seanad, I think that we'd all appreciate its members being capable and worth the tax-payers' cash thrown at them. It shouldn't be a retirement home for failed TDs.

bette

NWPat wrote: »

No they didn't, they said there would be a referendum on reform of the system.

Extract from
The 5 Point Plan

Abolishing the Seanad – Reforming the Dail
Fine Gael has taken the lead in calling for the abolition of the Seanad. Since Enda Kenny first called for
a referendum on the issue in 2009 other parties have either adopted Fine Gael’s proposal or are actively
considering doing so. But Fine Gael has always believed that the Seanad’s abolition can only be one part
of a wider reform package, including Dail reform.

Abolishing the Seanad
If a new constitution was being drafted today would a second house be included? Fine Gael believes the
answer is no. Ireland is the only small, unitary state in Europe with a second house. Other small European
countries, such as Sweden and Denmark, have abolished theirs. Globally the great majority of small
nations do not have second houses.

This will recede into the Irish Political wilderness the same way as the Great Planet Gormley Speech. You have been duped again! :P

Seanchai

ISAW wrote: »

We don't but I guess people think drastic action actually achieves something.

We do, but I guess "people" are too uninformed to appreciate that blindingly obvious fact.

Try the following words: elite anti-democratic electoral system, Eoghan Harris, Mary O'Rourke, Ivor Callely, Donnie Cassidy, obscene expenses, obscene salaries, jobs for the boys, talking shop, jobs for the boys, redundant due to the Oireachtas committee system, jobs for the boys.

There is not a single rational reason why that institution, which allows me to vote but not my parents who funded all my education, should be propped up any longer. Offensive and insulting in equal measure. "Reform" is a joke propagated by people who wish to be one of the recipients of that "jobs for the boys" institution. The Third Estate is at the gates.

imme

Seanchai wrote: »

We do, but I guess "people" are too uninformed to appreciate that blindingly obvious fact.

Try the following words: elite anti-democratic electoral system, Eoghan Harris, Mary O'Rourke, Ivor Callely, Donnie Cassidy, obscene expenses, obscene salaries, jobs for the boys, talking shop, jobs for the boys, redundant due to the Oireachtas committee system, jobs for the boys.

There is not a single rational reason why that institution, which allows me to vote but not my parents who funded all my education, should be propped up any longer. Offensive and insulting in equal measure. "Reform" is a joke propagated by people who wish to be one of the recipients of that "jobs for the boys" institution. The Third Estate is at the gates.

the impetus to do away with the Seanad didn't come from any popular movement. It was seen as populist by politicians, that's all.

The present Seanad is from another era, it's corporatist makeup is from the 1930's. It is too full of cronies to be anything but worthless.

The biggest mistake the outgoing Senators made was to seek to confront those in the media who were making an issue of its existence and worth.

henryporter

The Seanad in its current form should be done away with. However I do believe there is a need to have someone looking over the shoulders of the lower house representatives to ensure proper legislation is made.

There are a number of problems with the current Seanad - its too big, its full of failed FFers and FGers, its elitist and its party oriented. The biggest single problem is that the entire idea or philosophy of an Upper House has been destroyed by FF and FG.

bamboozle

if there were more Fr. Peter McVerry's, Constantine Gurdgiev, David McWilliams, Paul Sommervilles etc etc and less Donnie Cassidey's it could be justified.

In its current state as a td retirement home which hasnt rejected a dail bill in 47 years(the pawnbrokers bill in 1964- this vote was only rejected as it took place at 10.30pm by which time all the FF senators had gone home!!)

jacool

ISAW wrote: »

Most Senators are elected!
Only 11 are appointed!

One of those was just sneaked in by Biffo as well. He put in a Dub seeing as how FF were hammered there. I'm sure he'll achieve loads before April's election!

jakdelad

does anyone know if the ivor is seeking
to get back to the senate,considering all he has been through
its a tough world is politics.
also what slogan would one want to have
for keeping the senate going
when the referendum to get rid of it comes???

THE SENATE WHERE IT ALL HAPZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
SNORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

ISAW

Seanchai wrote: »

We do, but I guess "people" are too uninformed to appreciate that blindingly obvious fact.

Try the following words: elite anti-democratic electoral system,

What? the Only electorate allowing Nordies and emigrants and Irish abroad to vote?

Eoghan Harris,

gone.

Mary O'Rourke, Ivor Callely, Donnie Cassidy,
[/qoute]

All elected to the Senate at one time. Callelly got an appointment only the last time. as was O rourke the time bofer that but both had been elected to the Senate before.

obscene expenses, obscene salaries,

SAme as an Assistant Principle officer. ther are over ten AP's for every Senator.

, redundant due to the Oireachtas committee system, jobs for the boys.

The Seanad is part of the Oireachtas.