Why do we need a president?

stripysocks85

So, with all the talk of presidential campaigns [seriously Gay Byrne is 77, why would we elect someone that old?] WHY do we need a president at all?

starbelgrade

stripysocks85 wrote: »

WHY do we need a president at all?

Because Ireland is a republic.

PseudoFamous

Who would shake hands with everyone and open stuff if we didn't have one?

ItsAWindUp

The real question is why is so much debate required. It's not like you need any form of special skill or talent to meet other heads of state and open nursing homes. Although, that said, at least we can elect our head of state, unlike the UK.

Manach

We need someone to thrash talk Prince Philip. Gaybo is the man for this.

stripysocks85

Couldn't it be one of the costs that could be cut though? I mean, I don't know exactly how much the president gets paid, but its got to be about 500k. Surely, we could get rid? Hell, even I'll open ribbons, and I'll do it for a whole lot less!

I do like Mary McAleese, as a person, but really don't see why we need a president at all.

ItsAWindUp

PseudoFamous wrote: »

Who would shake hands with everyone and open stuff if we didn't have one?

I'll do it!

stripysocks85

Oi! I've offered already! :P

Ally Dick

I don't see the need for a President. Any of the ones I remember have all been just mouthpieces for platitudes.

mikemac

Just give it to Martin McAleese

orourkeda

Because it's a constitutional prerequisite.

LighterGuy

Irelands president is just a figure head.

BluesBerry

Imagine having a president called Gay burn :eek: what will the other countries think ...... Those drunken Irish have done it again Gay (*sniggers*) Byrne

Solnskaya

we don't. And we don't need all those TD's, we don't need all those PS workers, and we don't need RTE. But, there are a lot of verry unimportant people who rely on these institutions for their living, and they are the egomaniacs you hated when you went to school with them-yannow, those lick ar5es at the front of the class with their orthodontists and their extra homework and no friends. Now they are the class with the power, and they ain't gonna let go, so, some obnoxious twat will be elected president, many obnoxious twats will be elected TD, and the little village that is Ireland will continue with the illusion that we are a major world power, with a need for all these twats.

DjFlin

stripysocks85 wrote: »

why would we elect someone that old

Why did people vote for Reagan a second time?

Its the presidency, not a beauty pageant.

opinion guy

mikemac wrote: »

Just give it to Martin McAleese

Actually thats the first suggestion I've heard I'd actually vote for.

stripysocks85

DjFlin wrote: »

Why did people vote for Reagan a second time?

Its the presidency, not a beauty pageant.

I'm not referring to his physical looks, never said that. However, I fail to see the purpose in appointing a president/a pope or anyone else in a position of 'leadership' when someone is of that age. Not like he needs the money.....

DjFlin

stripysocks85 wrote: »

I'm not referring to his physical looks, never said that. However, I fail to see the purpose in appointing a president/a pope or anyone else in a position of 'leadership' when someone is of that age. Not like he needs the money.....

Okay, then why exactly does age bother you?

stripysocks85

opinion guy wrote: »

Actually thats the first suggestion I've heard I'd actually vote for.

Yeah and they wouldn't have to move house at all then.

stripysocks85

DjFlin wrote: »

Okay, then why exactly does age bother you?

Well to me, a 77 year old could pop their clogs at any time quite frankly, plus I don't think a 77 year old should be 'working'. I'm not ageist, but they have a retirement age for a reason.

Solnskaya

gay byrne is a grumpy old sod who had a talk show. How in the name of feck could an embarrasing old throwback to the bad old days represent the nation if indeed we do need a "president" to represent us? Why not just select some army bod or a top civil servant and make it part of their duties? bobs saved, massively, puppet there to roll out, alls good. It's not like we all get to vote for them anyway, thats for our "betters" to decide.:rolleyes:

J K

Really the country could be run by a county council.
A few full time girls for the office. For typing and stuff.

DjFlin

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Well to me, a 77 year old could pop their clogs at any time quite frankly

Or they could live on to be 102. As I mentioned before, Ronald Reagan was in his 70's when he was running America, and he done a pretty good job.

stripysocks85 wrote: »

plus I don't think a 77 year old should be 'working'. I'm not ageist, but they have a retirement age for a reason.

Gotta love the "I'm not X, but Y" defence. :pac:

Dj Stiggie

DjFlin wrote: »

Or they could live on to be 102. As I mentioned before, Ronald Reagan was in his 70's when he was running America, and he done a pretty good job.



Gotta love the "I'm not X, but Y" defence. :pac:

You have to be trolling. Plus he had Alzheimer's while he was president.

Anyway, I can think of much better reasons than age as to why Gay Byrne shouldn't be president.

And with regards to the office, as far as I know, Ireland would be the only country in the world without an independent head of state

Fred Cohen

We need a President to ensure that if the government of the the day, serve'd the interests of the people and defend Irish soverntery ...

ok fnck

Solnskaya wrote: »

we don't. And we don't need all those TD's, we don't need all those PS workers, and we don't need RTE. But, there are a lot of verry unimportant people who rely on these institutions for their living, and they are the egomaniacs you hated when you went to school with them-yannow, those lick ar5es at the front of the class with their orthodontists and their extra homework and no friends. Now they are the class with the power, and they ain't gonna let go, so, some obnoxious twat will be elected president, many obnoxious twats will be elected TD, and the little village that is Ireland will continue with the illusion that we are a major world power, with a need for all these twats.

Help fight the format natzi's

fitzeyboy.

Holy Jebus people actually need to ask this question? :eek: . Lets wait until some reprehensible individual becomes Taoiseach with a single party majority. Sure let's leave em push through whatever legislation they feel like if it'll save a few quid. Even better we'll leave the Taoiseach be President as well. Last fella I heard of who held both at the same time got delusions of grandeur and started calling himself Fuhrer or some such nonsense.


*edit interchange Taoiseach with Chancellor for the pedants out there

later12

I'm interested in the Presidential election, but not because I give a damn about what the President actually 'achieves' (to stretch the verb) one year or seven years from now.

Like many Irish people, my interest in the election is purely down to psephology. I just like elections. I like polls, transfers, sweepers, recounts, tallies and all of the other electoral paraphernalia that enrich the Irish electoral landscape, courtesy of the Proportional representation/ single transferable vote system that we use in this jurisdiction.

I firmly believe that Irish people don't really care a great deal about the Presidency. But a sizeable cohort do tend to love politics, and love elections. I think that is manifested in the coverage that the Presidential election, like every other election and referendum, receives.

My name is URL

Hasn't it got something to do with our crappy constitution?.. The one that allows presidents to appoint and dismiss judges only on the order of government? Separation of powers I think they call it.. a big pile of ****.

Kojak

PseudoFamous wrote: »

Who would shake hands with everyone and open stuff if we didn't have one?

Maybe we could get someone from Bord Failte to do it instead - probably wouldn't cost as much for it I'd say.

fitzeyboy.

I can Imagine this exact conversation and the one about abolishing the Seanad (see: Upper House) taking place in a beer hall somewhere in 1930's Germany. Sure It'll save a few Reichsmarks and get rid of those layabout politicians.

kincsem

We need someone to lead us into battle against the English.

kincsem

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Well to me, a 77 year old could pop their clogs at any time quite frankly, plus I don't think a 77 year old should be 'working'. I'm not ageist, but they have a retirement age for a reason.

Who will be 84 at the end of the seven year term.

opinion guy

kincsem wrote: »

We need someone to lead us into battle against the English.

They seem to be doing a good job of battling themselves at the moment without anyone elses help

FGR

Why not abolish the position of Tánaiste. For argument sake make Enda Kenny the President and Eamon Gilmore the Taoiseach.

At least that way the office of President would be far more useful in this country.

PseudoFamous

kincsem wrote: »

We need someone to lead us into battle against the English.

No need, we just wait for them to demolish their own society, walk in, and steal all their women and biscuits. Revenge.

Son Of A Vidic

fitzeyboy. wrote: »

I can Imagine this exact conversation and the one about abolishing the Seanad (see: Upper House) taking place in a beer hall somewhere in 1930's Germany. Sure It'll save a few Reichsmarks and get rid of those layabout politicians.

We don't need a Seanad because it is nothing more than an expensive talking shop. That's if anyone bothers to turn up for Seanad sittings of course. We also don't need 166 wasters in the Dáil, half that number would be sufficient. We also probably don't need a President and those of you who cite the constitution, should take note of the special privileges and power granted to the Church of Rome. So shouldn't it be time perhaps to rewrite this outdated piece of paper?

mikemac

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

those of you who cite the constitution, should take note of the special privileges and power granted to the Church of Rome.

The special position was removed decades ago
So take note of what?

PseudoFamous

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

We also don't need 166 wasters in the Dáil, half that number would be sufficient.

We don't need ANY wasters in the Dáil, we need 50 highly efficient politicians, each representing a local government based on population rather than geographical borders, and we might get something done.

CramCycle

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Couldn't it be one of the costs that could be cut though? I mean, I don't know exactly how much the president gets paid, but its got to be about 500k.

Contrary to popular belief and what MS tells you, google is your friend: 325000 - the 10% paycut that was voluntary

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Well to me, a 77 year old could pop their clogs at any time quite frankly, plus I don't think a 77 year old should be 'working'. I'm not ageist, but they have a retirement age for a reason.

YOU ARE

fitzeyboy. wrote: »

Holy Jebus people actually need to ask this question? :eek: . Lets wait until some reprehensible individual becomes Taoiseach with a single party majority. Sure let's leave em push through whatever legislation they feel like if it'll save a few quid. Even better we'll leave the Taoiseach be President as well. Last fella I heard of who held both at the same time got delusions of grandeur and started calling himself Fuhrer or some such nonsense.there

Can legislation not be pushed through the courts should the president deny it (I could be wrong)?

PseudoFamous

CramCycle wrote: »

Can legislation not be pushed through the courts should the president deny it (I could be wrong)?

I'm nearly certain that the president needs to sign off on it, the courts hold little bearing.

Amirani

PseudoFamous wrote: »

I'm nearly certain that the president needs to sign off on it, the courts hold little bearing.

This is true. The president can only really refuse legislation that is unconstitutional though, not simply because they disagree with it.

Kev_ps3

stripysocks85 wrote: »

So, with all the talk of presidential campaigns [seriously Gay Byrne is 77, why would we elect someone that old?] WHY do we need a president at all?

So we can give lots of our tax money to some rich grey haired old man who we should look up to.

aquaman

So Why do we need a president??
I don't feel the OP's question has been answered..
If it's "because the constitution says so", the constitution is easily changed.
Is it to protect us in the event that the taoiseach decides to subvert democracy and rule as a dictator? In this case couldn't they arrange for removal of the president anyway.

I feel it's an overpaid worthless retirement number for former politicians/celebrities with over-inflated image of self worth and delusions of grandeour.
If I was a foregin dignitary visiting the country I'd hope to meet someone with power rather than someone living up in their own aras..

Richard Hillman

We need a high level official to visit countries and forge trade links and relations. If Enda Kenny did it, it would seriously hamper his job.

Herb Powell

Solnskaya wrote: »

we don't. And we don't need all those TD's, we don't need all those PS workers, and we don't need RTE. But, there are a lot of verry unimportant people who rely on these institutions for their living, and they are the egomaniacs you hated when you went to school with them-yannow, those lick ar5es at the front of the class with their orthodontists and their extra homework and no friends. Now they are the class with the power, and they ain't gonna let go, so, some obnoxious twat will be elected president, many obnoxious twats will be elected TD, and the little village that is Ireland will continue with the illusion that we are a major world power, with a need for all these twats.

What's wrong with you?

aquaman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

We need a high level official to visit countries and forge trade links and relations. If Enda Kenny did it, it would seriously hamper his job.

Yes we do but this is not the role of the president, this is the role of our minister for foregin affairs and the taoiseach.

Richard Hillman

aquaman wrote: »

Yes we do but this is not the role of the president, this is the role of our minister for foregin affairs and the taoiseach.

Would a country really give a toss about a foreign affairs minister visiting? If William Hague took a trip to Ireland nobody would blink and would barely make the news. If Queen Elizabeth visited...... well we all know how that went. Presidential visits are all about PR. A foreign affairs minister wouldnt make the news.

CramCycle

PseudoFamous wrote: »

I'm nearly certain that the president needs to sign off on it, the courts hold little bearing.

Apologies but I was sure there was a thread on this before about the president and what would happen if she refused to sign off on something (could have been the finance bill or something) and they all said that the Taoiseach could refer it back to the Dail and if it is still refused they could push it through the courts as the court could then decide if it was unconstitutional or not. If it was constitutional then it would go ahead w/o the presidents approval (or the courts would force her hand). I can't remember the specifics too well but it was something along those lines.

Napper Hawkins

Gay Byrnes age nor his utterly ridiculous name would not be the reason I wouldn't vote for him.

Apathy and laziness would be the reason or whatever shutup.

leahyl

stripysocks85 wrote: »

WHY do we need a president at all?

We don't - pure waste of money for a country our size but sure what can you do.....

aquaman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Would a country really give a toss about a foreign affairs minister visiting? If William Hague took a trip to Ireland nobody would blink and would barely make the news. If Queen Elizabeth visited...... well we all know how that went. Presidential visits are all about PR. A foreign affairs minister wouldnt make the news.

The recent visit to Ireland of the Queen of england is not a good example of the general case as it was a visit steeped in its own history and politics.
If you were a trade mission/leader of a country visiting say the united states, would you prefer to meet with some elected figurehead who has no power or their president who has significant actual power?

Secondly, who cares about the PR.. too much emphasis these days is placed on PR and spin instead of on the real politics and decissions.
The Irish presidency is a waste of money and resources weather it's gay byrne, gay mitchel or dustin the turkey in the park it will make no difference to how this country is run or to peoples lives other than that the headlines will be different in the papers.