Retain The Senate.

Xenophile

The Senate can and does play and important part in our legislature in the framing of our laws. In common with many developed democracies the second house is a watchdog where proposed bad law can be amended before it is enacted and also new legislation can be introduced in the second house.

Given the economic and other crises that the country is facing and taking into consideration the shortage of competent and talented people in Government, possibly as a result of opting for careers outside politics during the boom years and also the political scandals of those years did nothing to enamor this way of life to decent, idealistic people of integrity well motivated people, who felt that they had a contribution to make to society whether at local or national level, and yes this caliber of person still exists, the climate for entering into politics in many ways was either laughable or derisory. Of course in the good times the attitude of “I’m all right Jack” was widespread as the focus was on moving up the property ladder or the bigger car, etc. We can see now that the good people who did nothing are also suffering now, not all but mainly young professionals who find themselves in deep negative equity with less career prospects.

To conclude retain the Senate, reform it by all means and most importantly use the house as a vehicle to bring as many talented and visionary technocrats into Government. We can talk and talk about the need for radical change. It’s time for a cabinet reshuffle with changes such as mentioned above.

I for one will be voting no to any proposal to abolish the Senate, it’s just a lazy option from politicians who I hope will be prevailed on to become creative in their approach to running our country.:)

Noreen1

Well said.

The senate is badly in need of reform.
I think it was Shane Ross who called it "The most exclusive gentlemans club in the World".

That's a very far cry from being the what it was originally intended to be - The balance that could prevent any autocratic moves by a hostile Government.

I have little doubt that any power-hungry Government would love to abolish the Senate.

After all, if the Senate were ever to work properly, it could prove an enormous thorn in the side to a Government that, provided it maintained a majority, could pretty much pass whatever law it chooses, whenever it chooses, since the electorate have no power to recall the Government.

I'm in favour of reforming the Senate, and would agree that some technocrats would be beneficial. However, I would like to see some "ordinary Joes" there to maintain balance - purely in the interest of preventing yet another elite group with extraordinary powers.

The main reform I would like to see, however, is in the method of election.
I see no logical reason why the selction process should be limited to the select few.
Senators should be elected by the public whom they represent, and should be free to stand for election in the same manner as TDs, imo.

The loss of a properly run Seanad Eireann would be a huge blow to Civil liberties in this Country.
I will also vote No to any proposal to abolish it.

goose2005

Xenophile wrote: »

The Senate can and does play and important part in our legislature in the framing of our laws. In common with many developed democracies the second house is a watchdog where proposed bad law can be amended before it is enacted and also new legislation can be introduced in the second house.

On whose authority, though? The Dail is elected by suffrage of all adult resident citizens. The Seanad is elected by a byzantine structure of certain university graduates, local councillors and Taoiseach's buddies. Why should such a motley crew have any authority at all to oppose the people's parliament?

Manach

Whilst I'd favour a retention of the Seanad, albeit in a enhanced more democratic fashion to supervise the executory powers of the sitting government - to slightly disagree with the OP I'd go open source for legislation. In other words that many people looking at basic legislation before it is passed will be better, to spot flaws and improve it - instead of relying on a class of technocrats that are divorced from the reality of common life. So publish bills on a wiki and allow people to make changes/observations to see what happens.

gmurphy70

I would vote yes to abolish the senate in its entirety. There is 166 elected TD's in Dail Eireann from all over the country.Ministers and Taoiseach office have a huge number of staff on its payroll. In comparison to the UK we have more elected parlamentarians per population. 166 elected to our Dail is more than adequate numbers to provide us with the changing of legislation.To suggest that the senate would act as a watchdog is ludicrous. We are a small broke nation,The Senate has no power and its just a home for failed TD's and hencemen. We cannot afford to pay the ridiculus salaries to Senators for this reason.One senator in my own county claims more expenses than her salary. She failed to get elected to the Dail and she was offered a place on the senate as compensation from her party. WHY???? We do not need the Senate and its one Bill that can be scratched off the eschequer's list.Its one big quango and certainly not needed in the current scheme of things.

doomed

Xenophile wrote: »

The Senate can and does play and important part in our legislature in the framing of our laws. In common with many developed democracies the second house is a watchdog where proposed bad law can be amended before it is enacted and also new legislation can be introduced in the second house.

Given the economic and other crises that the country is facing and taking into consideration the shortage of competent and talented people in Government, possibly as a result of opting for careers outside politics during the boom years and also the political scandals of those years did nothing to enamor this way of life to decent, idealistic people of integrity well motivated people, who felt that they had a contribution to make to society whether at local or national level, and yes this caliber of person still exists, the climate for entering into politics in many ways was either laughable or derisory. Of course in the good times the attitude of “I’m all right Jack” was widespread as the focus was on moving up the property ladder or the bigger car, etc. We can see now that the good people who did nothing are also suffering now, not all but mainly young professionals who find themselves in deep negative equity with less career prospects.

To conclude retain the Senate, reform it by all means and most importantly use the house as a vehicle to bring as many talented and visionary technocrats into Government. We can talk and talk about the need for radical change. It’s time for a cabinet reshuffle with changes such as mentioned above.

I for one will be voting no to any proposal to abolish the Senate, it’s just a lazy option from politicians who I hope will be prevailed on to become creative in their approach to running our country.:)

Nice thought but this is Ireland.

It would be great if you had a senate that was filled with talented and visionary people but there are two major problems. First, who are they?
Not everyone has the same view as regards talent and vision and some of the things that have happened suggest a shortage of both. If we did this 5 years back people would be holding up Sean Fitpatrick as the sort of visionary business leader we need. Sean Quinn anybody? Maybe Bono?

The second problem is the democratic bit. Who will pick the visionaries? Politicians? Will they pick themselves? Would the Irish people elect such talented people? We generally don't.

spank_inferno

I would also vote yes.

I agree with the "No" opinions above, however none of us are naieve enough to think the necessary reforms needed to have a worthy upper chamber will ever be implemented.

Therefore without any real hope of improvement.... get rid.

johnnyskeleton

Since the main reason to abolish the seanad is thr cost, why not make it an unpaid position? It would thus be open to people who genuinely care about national issues.

invinciblePRSTV

Whats the point in retaining a senate to pack with 'technocrats'? surely what you're arguing for is a retention of a body which is fundamentally undemocratic in how it elects its membership?

There have been many and are many technocrats from the worlds of commerce and other disciplines in the current and previous Senate's. They made little or no difference as the Seanad was and is a pointless talking shop which doubles up as a handy number for political party hacks and self important people from the social partners and Taoiseachs nominees.

The Seanad serves little purpose and should be abolished ASAP. It is an affront to the senses that this 'rotten' parliament and its primitive method for electing its members is still in existence, it would not surprise me to see the coalition retaining it given their ability to role back on their election campaign promises.

Ellis Dee

Abolish it! Although a few talented and decent people have had seats there down through the years, most have been placemen, arselickers, clowns that the electorate have rejected and various other riff-raff, who are an affront to democracy and trough-snouters of the first (and worst) water. How can anyone take the likes of, for example, Own Arse seriously. A political whore who has aligned himself with virtually every party in the political spectrum except the Levitating Neo-Feminist Treehuggers, someone whom many see as clinically insane, but who was appointed to that lucrative post by a crooked Taoiseach? Anyone who has something to offer the nation and society should have to put their arguments to their employers, the people, and stand for election to the post they want.:)

Look at two of the most successful countries in the EU, Sweden and Finland, both of which always feature near the top in the Transparency International table of countries with good administration and low rates of corruption. One abolished its upper house some years ago, the other never had one in the first place.:D

Sovereignty belongs to the people, and they should choose EVERYONE in their legislature.:cool:

Sulmac

I support abolition of the Seanad only if there is major Dáil, local government and cabinet reform.

Dáil reform would include giving committees real powers (to introduce legislation, call witnesses, and so on), allowing the chamber to set its own agenda (not the government) and having a real separation of powers by not allowing Ministers to sit as TDs (but still being allowed to sit in the chamber to introduce legislation and answer questions, but with no vote).

Local government reform would include devolution of certain powers, changing the boundaries and layers (abolish the city/county councils as well as the town/borough councils and start again with a region-based system), accountable executives (either directly or indirectly elected mayors, none of this 'county/city manager' rubbish) and (probably most importantly) giving local government the power to raise their own revenue (the imminent property tax and water charges would probably be the best way).

Cabinet reform would include proper separation of powers (no Ministers as TDs, as said above), having a mechanism to bring in outside experts (possibly after being vetted by the appropriate committee in the Dáil or the Dáil as a whole) and making it smaller (say around 7-10 Ministers, to reduce 'turf warfare'). Also, locate them all in the same building (sounds stupid, but I've heard arguments that this would improve co-ordination) - apparently one of the Nordic countries does this (but I'm not 100% on that).

Abolishing the Seanad just because (and with no other reform) would be utterly pointless and further reduce government (and Dáil) accountability.

Xenophile

goose2005 wrote: »

On whose authority, though? The Dail is elected by suffrage of all adult resident citizens. The Seanad is elected by a byzantine structure of certain university graduates, local councillors and Taoiseach's buddies. Why should such a motley crew have any authority at all to oppose the people's parliament?

Indeed the Senate does need reform. In my opinion anyone who applies for a franchise to vote in Senate elections should be given one.

Xenophile

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Whats the point in retaining a senate to pack with 'technocrats'? surely what you're arguing for is

Good and very talented, honourable, technocrats of the highest integrity to be appointed to Government cabinet positions through the Senate route. Idealism still has a place and a function to fulfill in Ireland .

astrofool

If the Senate rubber stamped the bailout and NAMA, then there's nothing they can prevent the Dáil from doing. The Dáil is not going to give the senate more powers, making it an utterly worthless entity, and should be abolished.

Reform of the Dáil will not happen without revolution occurring, in the mean time, we can at least save the salaries paid to has-been politicians on the gravy train.

waitingforBB

while the senate as a theoretical entity outlined above would and should be an invaluable part or our democracy, fact is that in Ireland it isnt.

With the current set up its a joke. I can regrurgitate the arguement that its a retirement home for failed TDs and wannabe TDs, but whats the point, we're all aware of that. If you did a favor and didnt get elected, then you'll get into the seanad..Very little democratic input to who is there.
And who is there defines what it can do..
Abject failure in my view so it should be abolished unless its populated by universal suffrage...

Why should the failed attempted public representatives or the favoured few of the selected institutions represent me?

Sand

The Seanad only exists as an excuse not to reform the Dail. The Seanad is a powerless talking shop - if we want a higher form of representation then we should have it where it counts, in the Dail. The abolition of the Seanad will require reform of the Dail - abolition of the Seanad without reform of the Dail is constitutionally impossible. I'll happily see the back of the Seanad, but only as part and parcel of significant reform of the Dail.

Xenophile

It is believed Mr McDowell will operate in tandem with the respected veteran independent senator Feargal Quinn, who will be "the de facto spokesman of the civic campaign". Mr McDowell will in contrast provide the Seanad 'Confederates' with legal advice on issues such as how Seanad abolition is "a charter for a possible future elective dictatorship".

The return of the former PD leader was signalled by his attendance at a recent "private" gathering of anxious senators, where he is believed to have claimed that any attempt by Enda Kenny to abolish the Seanad would "go down in flames".

See more: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-mcdowell-in-comeback-bid-to-save-the-seanad-2977104.html

Sierra Oscar

Xenophile wrote: »

It is believed Mr McDowell will operate in tandem with the respected veteran independent senator Feargal Quinn, who will be "the de facto spokesman of the civic campaign". Mr McDowell will in contrast provide the Seanad 'Confederates' with legal advice on issues such as how Seanad abolition is "a charter for a possible future elective dictatorship".

The return of the former PD leader was signalled by his attendance at a recent "private" gathering of anxious senators, where he is believed to have claimed that any attempt by Enda Kenny to abolish the Seanad would "go down in flames".

See more: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-mcdowell-in-comeback-bid-to-save-the-seanad-2977104.html

This should be interesting - I wonder what platform he will use to campaign considering he no longer has a party behind him?

Although I guess he is a character who will be able to get airtime either way.

Xenophile

Shane Ross and An Seanad

THE DÁIL IS SET to vote next week on a motion which will ask government TDs whether they want to abolish the Seanad entirely, or whether they still want to consider reforming it first.

Independent TD and former Senator Shane Ross has tabled a motion, set to be voted on in the Dáil next Tuesday, which would put a roadblock on the Government’s plans for abolishing the Seanad until they first deal with plans reforming how it is elected.

If passed, Ross’s motion would deny the Dáil from holding even a single vote on whether to progress the Thirty-second Amendment to the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill.

The motion is an unusual parliamentary manoeuvre, designed to ask government TDs whether they are fully committed to abolishing the Seanad entirely, before entertaining proposals to overhaul the way in which Senators are appointed.

Ross has proposed legislation identical to a Bill currently before the Seanad itself, tabled by Katherine Zappone and Feargal Quinn, which would extend voting rights in Seanad elections to all Irish citizens, including expatriates.

It would also enforce gender equality among the five ‘panels’ from which members are elected, extend graduate voting rights to all third level graduates, and allow the public to force items onto the Seanad’s agenda through a petition of 1,000 citizens.

Quinn and Zappone’s Bill made it past the first hurdle last month, when the Government decided not to contest a vote – amid suggestions that some Labour backbenchers would have sided with the opposition and forced it through anyway.

Because any meaningful Seanad reform would also need the approval of the Dáil, however, Ross has tabled the same legislation there, hoping to get the Bill onto the Dáil’s agenda.

Ross’s move is unlikely to be passed – but it will test the mettle of government backbenchers who have spoken out in favour of reforming the Seanad, giving it another chance to redeem itself, before it is killed off for good.

It may therefore force some anti-abolition backbenchers within Fine Gael and Labour to vote against party lines, and therefore see them lose the party whip before a more traditional vote on whether to progress the Bill into committee stage where the first amendments can be tabled.

Xenophile

My thanks to everyone who voted NO in the Seanad referendum. A good days work. Thanks also to all who participated in voting. Keep democracy alive and well.

spank_inferno

Aah well..... the one chance in my lifetime I got to have a say on the upper house & it came to nothing.

Thats democracy for you.

Mabey my grandchildren will one day get a similar oppertunity.

Sand

Xenophile

My thanks to everyone who voted NO in the Seanad referendum. A good days work. Thanks also to all who participated in voting. Keep democracy alive and well.

spank_inferno

the one chance in my lifetime I got to have a say on the upper house...... Mabey my grandchildren will one day get a similar oppertunity

I await the governments plans to reform the Seanad with much anticipation. Maybe my grandchildren might hear of them.

Xenophile

Sand wrote: »

I await the governments plans to reform the Seanad with much anticipation. Maybe my grandchildren might hear of them.

I await with even more interest on Dail reform. Given that the Government gave no commitment on Seanad reform. What a foolish solo run by Enda Kenny, maybe if he had first introduced Dail reform he would have had some chance of getting his referendum through. Perhaps your grandchildren might thank us for defeating this badly thought out referendum.

Sand

With Seanad representation of the calibre of Donnie Cassidy (and lets not forget Eoghan Harris) I sincerely doubt my grandchildren will think fondly of the (most assuredly unreformed) Seanad as they pay for its bills.

As I pointed out in my earlier post on this thread, abolition of the Seanad at least had the attraction of making Dail reform constitutionally inevitable. Preserving the Seanad does not.

Xenophile

Sand wrote: »

With Seanad representation of the calibre of Donnie Cassidy (and lets not forget Eoghan Harris) I sincerely doubt my grandchildren will think fondly of the (most assuredly unreformed) Seanad as they pay for its bills.

As I pointed out in my earlier post on this thread, abolition of the Seanad at least had the attraction of making Dail reform constitutionally inevitable. Preserving the Seanad does not.

No point in telling them about the people you mention above, rather tell them about the people who won the battle against all the odds, Michael McDowell and Fergal Quinn for example who have and had very successful careers outside of politics. This will inspire them more.

By the way I have no longer any urge to continue this debate any further, as for now the matter has been settled by the people of Ireland.

Sand

At least you held true to the old adage: always leave them laughing. Michael McDowell, ex of Gonzaga College. Yeah, his life story truly is an inspiring struggle from humble beginnings against all the odds.

No surprise that the "reform the Seanad" agenda disappears as soon as the Seanad is retained though.

Xenophile

Yes, and I suppose blame McDowell for the fact that his grandfather was Eoin Mac Neill while we are at it.

Eoin MacNeill (Irish: Eoin Mac Néill; 15 May 1867 – 15 October 1945) was an Irish scholar, nationalist, revolutionary and politician.[1] MacNeill has been described as "the father of the modern study of early Irish medieval history."[2] A key figure of the Gaelic revival, he was a co-founder of the Gaelic League, to preserve Irish language and culture. In 1913 he established the Irish Volunteers (prompted and encouraged by the Irish Republican Brotherhood),[3] and served as their Chief-of-Staff. Though he held this position at the outbreak of the Easter Rising, he took no role in it or its planning, and even went so far as to try to prevent it. He was later elected to the First Dáil as a member of Sinn Féin.

Sand

Oh, you're back? That's surprising.

You cant blame a man for who his grandfather was, but neither is it a credit to him. Though McDowell does seem to be gathering more fame for hampering efforts to achieve an Irish republic worthy of the name so perhaps there are themes shared with his grandfathers life which explain why you felt the need to describe it.

Either way, McDowell and Quinns support for the Seanad do nothing to combat the belief that the Seanad exists as a form of social welfare for unemployed insiders and failed and retired politicians. Painting either of the them as "the people who won the battle against all odds"...

Well, like I said - thanks for the laugh.

Xenophile

So, I will leave you laughing.

jonsnow

Sand wrote: »

Oh, you're back? That's surprising.

You cant blame a man for who his grandfather was, but neither is it a credit to him. Though McDowell does seem to be gathering more fame for hampering efforts to achieve an Irish republic worthy of the name so perhaps there are themes shared with his grandfathers life which explain why you felt the need to describe it.

Either way, McDowell and Quinns support for the Seanad do nothing to combat the belief that the Seanad exists as a form of social welfare for unemployed insiders and failed and retired politicians. Painting either of the them as "the people who won the battle against all odds"...

Well, like I said - thanks for the laugh.

McDowells grandfather helped found the Irish state and McDowell believes that that gives him and the wider Mcdowell family some sort of higher claim to being "guardians of the Republic" than other less patrician families.

jonsnow

Sand wrote: »

At least you held true to the old adage: always leave them laughing. Michael McDowell, ex of Gonzaga College. Yeah, his life story truly is an inspiring struggle from humble beginnings against all the odds.

No surprise that the "reform the Seanad" agenda disappears as soon as the Seanad is retained though.

Reform the Seanad? Why would McDowell want to reform any institution in Ireland. Everything's being working out splendidly for the Mcdowells for generations under the current system.

K-9

Sand wrote: »

At least you held true to the old adage: always leave them laughing. Michael McDowell, ex of Gonzaga College. Yeah, his life story truly is an inspiring struggle from humble beginnings against all the odds.

No surprise that the "reform the Seanad" agenda disappears as soon as the Seanad is retained though.

I find it strange that you aren't surprised that the reform the Seanad campaign disappeared so quickly, yet you seem to think Dail reform after the abolishment of the Seanad was inevitable. The party whip system isn't going to change, we've had a number of TD's kicked out of political parties in the biggest Government majority in the history of the state, for not toeing the Government line. I don't understand people who think abolishing the Seanad will mean some reform to that.

Sand

Reform of the Dail was constitutionally inevitable with the Seanad gone because the Seanad was mentioned several dozen times in the constitution. With it gone, there would be a question of what should replace the reference to the Seanad.

Removing the Seanad was attractive as part of a package of reforms (including but not limited to the party whip). I don't believe anyone apart from Enda Kenny ever submitted that removal of the Seanad was the solitary reform required in the Irish state. Even without a wider package of reforms it is still useful to remove the Seanad - the removal of the Seanad removes one more fig leaf that serves to hide the sham of electing TDs to a whipped Dail. At the very least it would be a cost saving - the Seanad is entirely powerless and useless. If people want a powerless talking shop discussing the affairs of the day as they affect Ireland, they should sign up to Boards.Ie which has the benefit of being entirely free for the Irish taxpayer, pretty transparent and freely accessible within certain rules.

K-9

Sand wrote: »

Reform of the Dail was constitutionally inevitable with the Seanad gone because the Seanad was mentioned several dozen times in the constitution. With it gone, there would be a question of what should replace the reference to the Seanad.

Removing the Seanad was attractive as part of a package of reforms (including but not limited to the party whip). I don't believe anyone apart from Enda Kenny ever submitted that removal of the Seanad was the solitary reform required in the Irish state. Even without a wider package of reforms it is still useful to remove the Seanad - the removal of the Seanad removes one more fig leaf that serves to hide the sham of electing TDs to a whipped Dail. At the very least it would be a cost saving - the Seanad is entirely powerless and useless. If people want a powerless talking shop discussing the affairs of the day as they affect Ireland, they should sign up to Boards.Ie which has the benefit of being entirely free for the Irish taxpayer, pretty transparent and freely accessible within certain rules.

The problem was we didn't vote on a package of reforms and as you pointed out with the slow movement of talk about Seanad reform since the referendum, how are we to know what type of reform of the Dail is envisaged?

The Dail already is a talking shop as the abortion debate showed. I mighn't agree with Creighton and Matthews but I'll defend their right to voice an alternative opinion, and I find expulsion from the party for expressing their views morally abhorrent, especially taking account the huge majority the Government had. Why would anybody trust a Government on parliamentary reform after that show of Haugheyesque power grabbing?