New Constituencies Proposed

mike65

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0621/constituency-commission-tds-constituencies.html

The proposal to reduce the number of TDs by 8 is very modest, what will no doubt cause no end of whining and moaning is the redrawn boundaries, most constituencies will be tweaked - some quite substantially.

The PDF is huge and as I type taking an age to transfer.

Sligo/Leitirm/part Cavan/part Donegal looks ungainly.

Donegal becoming a single five seat constituency will be interesting.

I'd say Luke Flanagan will be happy with the inclusion of east Galway with Roscommon.

Fr Tod Umptious

It will be intersting to see if Kenny will allow part of Mayo to go to Galway and the reaminder be reduced to 4.
Michale Ring will certainly kick up a storm.

As will Mr Healy Rae in Kerry

VinLieger

Well the stink from this should be interesting

the groutch

looks like Dun Laoghaire is getting screwed again.
last time out a small few areas the Stillorgan side of the N11 were moved to Dublin South, and it got reduced to a 4 seater.
now those areas are being brought back into the Dun Laoghaire constituency, but it's being kept as a 4 seater.

matthew8

I hear Dublin South is becoming a 3 seater. I'm furious. We should be doing away with the 3 seater, it's ridiculous. My guess is what we give to DL is taking one seat, and we're giving some more to Dublin South-West for another one.

ardmacha

ooks like Dun Laoghaire is getting screwed again.

The number of TDs is being reduced. In this context it is pointless to talk about any one constituency being screwed.

bijapos

the groutch wrote: »

looks like Dun Laoghaire is getting screwed again.
last time out a small few areas the Stillorgan side of the N11 were moved to Dublin South, and it got reduced to a 4 seater.
now those areas are being brought back into the Dun Laoghaire constituency, but it's being kept as a 4 seater.

matthew8 wrote: »

I hear Dublin South is becoming a 3 seater. I'm furious. We should be doing away with the 3 seater, it's ridiculous. My guess is what we give to DL is taking one seat, and we're giving some more to Dublin South-West for another one.

DL and Dublin South are two constituencies where the two main parties tend to lose seats to "different" candidates, they both tend to be a bit volatile. In the past few elections they have elected candidates as diverse as Independents, PBP, PD Greens and so on.

This new 3 and 4 seater means that FF-FG have a better chance of getting more seats percentage wise than they normally would.

There ahould be a minimum of 6 seats per constituency, 8 would be better IMO. Reduce the number of TD's to 80-110 by referendum and have 40-50% of them elected by list system. It would go a long way to getting rid of parish pump politics in the Dail.

washman3

Who were the members of the commission that came up with this proposal.?

Silvio.Dante

A whole 8 seat reduction. Wow really revolutionary.

But it will be fun listening to them whine about it...:)

reppin

Am I the only one who thinks that the report of the Commission and it's recommendation to redraw some constituencies and reduce the number of T.D.'s is a joke. Were we not promised real reform and the best they can offer is reduction of the T.D. numbers by 8. Some time back I heard Minister Hogan say that the number of T.D.'s could be reduced by only between 8 and 13 but no more than that under the constitution.Surely the constitutional representation should be voted upon and the strength of the Dail reduced to reflect the size of country and population. I don't like to make comparisons but if the UK had the same level of M.P.'s based on our figures the number of M.P.'s would be in the region of 2,500. Similarly based on their figures the number of T.D.'s here would be about 40. Mr. Kenny promised the abolition of the Seanad when he came to power, I would disagree but again but I would limit the number to 20 Senators. As for County Councillors well that's another story, now do we really need them at all? At present Waterford is a very good example of the excess of representation, there are 4 T.D.'s, 2 Senators and between city and county there are 38 councillors, representation or what? My whole point is we seem to have no choice but to put up with less teachers, gardai, doctors, nurses, civil servants but we will only lose 8 T.D.'s. If Mr. Kenny and his cabinet is serious then we must have real reform after all the country is in receivership! Maybe no one sees it as I do but I had to leave of a bit of steam when I read the report, if anyone cares to comment I will be delighted but please if you have a relation, husband, wife or sweetheart in the houses of the Oireachtas or sitting in a county council somewhere please temper your comments accordingly:mad:

Paarthurnax

They should just cut each exising constituency by one seat for a start.If that unconstitutional, amend the constitution. I can already see the huge saving made by this massive 8 seat reduction already being blown on more commision reports, border realignments etc.

argentum

Have to say I'm very pissed off over this ,I'm being moved from Dublin south to Tallaght ffs.
Now I have a f**king SF TD Jesus wept

antoobrien

reppin wrote: »

Am I the only one who thinks that the report of the Commission and it's recommendation to redraw some constituencies and reduce the number of T.D.'s is a joke.

They have to work within the current constitutional framework, not some hypothetical future one. That means that they need to leave leeway for population growth in the representation ratio so that it doesn't break the constitutional limits.

It can be argued that it doesn't go far enough e.g. they could have taken 5 more but that would leave them almost certainly reviewing things again after the next census. Instead of attacking it as not enough I think of it as the first step.

There are other things happening, such as the proposed constitutional commission. We could decide to make a change there to the voting system to use a UK style first past the post system, or a list system.

If some of these things were to happen, doing something for the sake of being seen to is just a waste of time & money.

antoobrien

Don't know why when changing Galway they didn't decide to go to a 3 seat city & 5 seat county constituency instead of pushing parts of Mayo into Galway West & Galway east into Roscommon.

BOHtox

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

A whole 8 seat reduction. Wow really revolutionary.

But it will be fun listening to them whine about it...:)

It's a 5% reduction which is hardly minuscule to be fair.
Also that with the abolition of the seanad will mean that the oireachtas will be reduced by 30%.
That's big change!

Victor

Deleted User wrote: »

Sligo/Leitirm/part Cavan/part Donegal looks ungainly.

Yes, but it's a difficult situation that would end up with lots of moaning no matter what you did.

the groutch wrote: »

looks like Dun Laoghaire is getting screwed again.

Nobody got screwed. DLR is entitled to 7.102 seats, it is getting 7, a variation of 1.46% from the national average. The variation in other constituencies varies from −4.94 to +4.93. How would you have it? Can we have a copy of your submission?

matthew8 wrote: »

I hear Dublin South is becoming a 3 seater. I'm furious. We should be doing away with the 3 seater, it's ridiculous. My guess is what we give to DL is taking one seat, and we're giving some more to Dublin South-West for another one.

No, while approximately one seat moves from Dublin South to Dublin South West, so does the population. The reality is that population growth in most of the rest of the country has been higher than that in DLR. You lose nothing - you simply aren't entitled to it. People have votes and land, constituencies and counties have none.

bijapos wrote: »

DL and Dublin South are two constituencies where the two main parties tend to lose seats to "different" candidates, they both tend to be a bit volatile. In the past few elections they have elected candidates as diverse as Independents, PBP, PD Greens and so on.

This new 3 and 4 seater means that FF-FG have a better chance of getting more seats percentage wise than they normally would.

In the context of FF having something like 21 seats and the huge number of non-FG/Lab/FF TDs, I'm not sure that applies. What will be gained in one place is likely to be lost in another. Where voters perceive an imbalance, shifts are made. Swings. Roundabouts.

There ahould be a minimum of 6 seats per constituency, 8 would be better IMO. Reduce the number of TD's to 80-110 by referendum and have 40-50% of them elected by list system. It would go a long way to getting rid of parish pump politics in the Dail.

A different day's arguments.

washman3 wrote: »

Who were the members of the commission that came up with this proposal.?

2.2 Commission membership and meetings
Mr. Justice John D. Cooke, of the High Court, was nominated by the Chief Justice to be chairman of the Commission. The other members are: Mr. Kieran Coughlan, Clerk of the Dáil; Ms. Deirdre Lane, Clerk of the Seanad; Ms. Emily O’Reilly, the Ombudsman; Ms. Geraldine Tallon, Secretary General of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The Commission held 11 meetings.

Victor

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

A whole 8 seat reduction. Wow really revolutionary.

You might be on the wrong thread. Constituency commissions don't do revolutions.

antoobrien wrote: »

Don't know why when changing Galway they didn't decide to go to a 3 seat city & 5 seat county constituency instead of pushing parts of Mayo into Galway West & Galway east into Roscommon.

Given that Galway county has the population for 8.6 seats and what is happening in surrounding constituencies, some border crossing was inevitable.

Breaching of county boundaries was inevitable in Mayo as it had too many seats for it's population. It would have been ludicrous to have a "Sligo-Leitrim-Part Mayo-Part Donegal-Part Cavan" constituency. That said, Mayo-Roscommon might have been possible, if rather elongated. I don't particularly like the shape of Galway East, with 'bites' taken out of it on both sides.

The Commission’s terms of reference, set out in section 6 of the 1997 Act (as amended), are
as follows:
‘‘. . . a Constituency Commission shall, in observing the relevant provisions of the Constitution in relation to
Dáil constituencies, have regard to the following:
...
(c) the breaching of county boundaries shall be avoided as far as practicable;
(d) each constituency shall be composed of contiguous areas;
(e) there shall be regard to geographic considerations including significant physical features and the extent
of and the density of population in each constituency; and

...’’.

To have a 'county' constituency would have stretched the concept of contiguous areas, given that you would have to go from Connemara to East Galway via other constituencies. Lough Corrib is a rather significant physical feature and the distance from Inis Bofin to Gort, Portumna and Clonfert isn't exactly inconsiderable.

To avoid extremes of sizes, 5-seat constituencies are better for areas with higher population density and 3-seaters to areas of lower density.

Victor

reppin wrote: »

Am I the only one who thinks that the report of the Commission and it's recommendation to redraw some constituencies and reduce the number of T.D.'s is a joke. Were we not promised real reform and the best they can offer is reduction of the T.D. numbers by 8. Some time back I heard Minister Hogan say that the number of T.D.'s could be reduced by only between 8 and 13 but no more than that under the constitution.Surely the constitutional representation should be voted upon and the strength of the Dail reduced to reflect the size of country and population.

You are confusing two separate projects. The commission has done the job it was asked to do and which is a constitutional imperative. The commission can't call a referendum - that's the government's job and there are other pressing issues.

I don't like to make comparisons

Then don't.

but if the UK had the same level of M.P.'s based on our figures the number of M.P.'s would be in the region of 2,500. Similarly based on their figures the number of T.D.'s here would be about 40.

With 10-15 ministers, how would you run parliament? Every minister would need to be in the chamber all day for fear of losing every single vote.

Mr. Kenny promised the abolition of the Seanad when he came to power, I would disagree but again but I would limit the number to 20 Senators.

A different day's argument, but I think a fixed 150 TDs and fixed 50 senators might be useful.

As for County Councillors well that's another story, now do we really need them at all?

Would you really concentrate all the power into the hands of ministers, the likes of Haughey, Ahern, Flynn, Lowry, etc.?

At present Waterford is a very good example of the excess of representation, there are 4 T.D.'s, 2 Senators and between city and county there are 38 councillors, representation or what? My whole point is we seem to have no choice but to put up with less teachers, gardai, doctors, nurses, civil servants but we will only lose 8 T.D.'s. If Mr. Kenny and his cabinet is serious then we must have real reform after all the country is in receivership!

A slightly different argument. I think it is important to have enough public representatives, but not too many. Indeed, I berated one TD for telling us that our local potholes were being dealt with, that being the week the IMF were called in.

bijapos

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

A whole 8 seat reduction. Wow really revolutionary.

But it will be fun listening to them whine about it...:)

The government had a chance to introduce a referendum to reduce the number of TD's before the new boundary commission started work. They failed to do this and so the commission was left with a max reduction of 13 instad of reducing by 40-60 seats.

BOHtox wrote: »

It's a 5% reduction which is hardly minuscule to be fair.
Also that with the abolition of the seanad will mean that the oireachtas will be reduced by 30%.
That's big change!

5% is in my book miniscule, also the Seanad can only be abolished by referendum, we were promised one within 12 months of FG coming into power, we shall be waiting a long long time I fear. In fact I think Kenny and Hogan will use this as a stroke and have a referendum nearer the date of the next election to show how reform friendly they are.

Victor wrote: »

You might be on the wrong thread. Constituency commissions don't do revolutions.

They can only work on the material they are given, as I said above if they were given a new option after a referendum to divide the country up for 90-110 TD's they could be revolutionary.

To avoid extremes of sizes, 5-seat constituencies are better for areas with higher population density and 3-seaters to areas of lower density.

3 and 4 and to a lesser extent 5 seaters are better for FF and FG and worse for the smaller parties, like I said, we need larger 7,8 and 9 seat constituencies and abput half the TD's elected on a list system.

thebman

reppin wrote: »

Am I the only one who thinks that the report of the Commission and it's recommendation to redraw some constituencies and reduce the number of T.D.'s is a joke. Were we not promised real reform and the best they can offer is reduction of the T.D. numbers by 8. Some time back I heard Minister Hogan say that the number of T.D.'s could be reduced by only between 8 and 13 but no more than that under the constitution.Surely the constitutional representation should be voted upon and the strength of the Dail reduced to reflect the size of country and population. I don't like to make comparisons but if the UK had the same level of M.P.'s based on our figures the number of M.P.'s would be in the region of 2,500. Similarly based on their figures the number of T.D.'s here would be about 40. Mr. Kenny promised the abolition of the Seanad when he came to power, I would disagree but again but I would limit the number to 20 Senators. As for County Councillors well that's another story, now do we really need them at all? At present Waterford is a very good example of the excess of representation, there are 4 T.D.'s, 2 Senators and between city and county there are 38 councillors, representation or what? My whole point is we seem to have no choice but to put up with less teachers, gardai, doctors, nurses, civil servants but we will only lose 8 T.D.'s. If Mr. Kenny and his cabinet is serious then we must have real reform after all the country is in receivership! Maybe no one sees it as I do but I had to leave of a bit of steam when I read the report, if anyone cares to comment I will be delighted but please if you have a relation, husband, wife or sweetheart in the houses of the Oireachtas or sitting in a county council somewhere please temper your comments accordingly:mad:

I think you are new to forums:
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p31/phoenixtrilobite/whatnottodo4rw.jpg

I don't see the problem with the constituency report, seems like small changes.

ArmaniJeanss

I'm surprised so many people consider it a given that a referendum on reducing the number of TDs to 100 or 120 would be passed.

Because ultimately, whilst people think there are too many TDs, very few actually appear to want their own personal representation to be diminished.

The people of Constituency X may think there are too many in the country overall, but when they realise that voting Yes will mean that Constituency X will only have 2 or 3 TDs instead of 4 or that Constituency X may no longer even exist but get merged with constituency Y; well then suddenly its a whole new ball game.

And then when (correctly) the independents point out that they are the ones most likely to suffer under any reduction, the people will most likely decide that they quite like having local single issue nutters representatives 'keeping an eye on that lot up in Leinster House' and 'looking out for the needs of the people of county Z'.

I'd have any such referendum as about 1/3 to fail, 9/4 to pass.

Victor

Some analysis. Number of seats per constituency.

Victor

Under / Over Representation. Red indicates relative under representation.

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE:

Threads merged.

the groutch

Victor wrote: »

Under / Over Representation. Red indicates relative under representation.

no surprise at Mayo's over-representation :rolleyes:

matthew8

No, while approximately one seat moves from Dublin South to Dublin South West, so does the population.

Is this any different to what I said? At all?

The reality is that population growth in most of the rest of the country has been higher than that in DLR.

But why are we being turned into a 3 seater, something that was only invented to keep CNaP out of getting seats 70 years ago yet now it's being forced upon Dublin Rathdown (and Rathdown isn't even in Dublin Rathdown, something the people who drew up this map don't seem to have copped. What the heck is Rathdown anyway? Dumb name).

You lose nothing - you simply aren't entitled to it. People have votes and land, constituencies and counties have none.

Just because we aren't entitled to 5 seats doesn't mean we're not losing 2 seats. 5 TDs are from the Dublin Rathdown 3 seater. That is terrible planning and it's going to cause a huge in-fight at the next election between Peter Mathews and Alan Shatter.

As for the other constituencies, what the heck is the point in moving a few thousand people to a different constituency when they know nothing about the politicians there just to make a round number? It's not worth it. Not one bit. It seems like the guys who drew up this map just looked at the numbers and county boundaries without bothering about where the TDs are, and they couldn't even get that right. If I could get an interactive map to draw constituencies I would be delighted. I'd also need the location of the support base of all the TDs too though.

Sponge Bob

In the case of Galway IIRC parts of Mayo were in Galway West before ( or vice versa) and Galway East -Roscommon have merged and demerged in the past. So the commission was mindful of precedent there and as Victor said there were 8.6 TDs worth of people in Galway so something had to come ( or go) and it happened to be a bit of both.

I still think Meath and Kildare are statistically unrepresented.

oscarBravo

the groutch wrote: »

no surprise at Mayo's over-representation :rolleyes:

Why?

ArmaniJeanss

matthew8 wrote: »

As for the other constituencies, what the heck is the point in moving a few thousand people to a different constituency when they know nothing about the politicians there just to make a round number? It's not worth it. Not one bit. It seems like the guys who drew up this map just looked at the numbers and county boundaries without bothering about where the TDs are, and they couldn't even get that right. If I could get an interactive map to draw constituencies I would be delighted. I'd also need the location of the support base of all the TDs too though.

I'd expect that this was outside their remit, and correctly so.
Where the TDs currently are should not be a factor.

Victor

the groutch wrote: »

no surprise at Mayo's over-representation :rolleyes:

Really? It will be under-represented under this scheme.

matthew8 wrote: »

Is this any different to what I said? At all?

But why are we being turned into a 3 seater, something that was only invented to keep CNaP out of getting seats 70 years ago

Are we sure? CnaP held a seat when Dun Laoghaire and Rathdown was formed as a constituency in 1948.

yet now it's being forced upon Dublin Rathdown (and Rathdown isn't even in Dublin Rathdown, something the people who drew up this map don't seem to have copped.

Pardon?

What the heck is Rathdown anyway? Dumb name).

Rathdown is / was a barony on the Dublin/Wicklow border. http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,720098,725382,3,7

Just because we aren't entitled to 5 seats doesn't mean we're not losing 2 seats. 5 TDs are from the Dublin Rathdown 3 seater. That is terrible planning and it's going to cause a huge in-fight at the next election between Peter Mathews and Alan Shatter.

So you would like a special arrangement for two politicians?

As for the other constituencies, what the heck is the point in moving a few thousand people to a different constituency when they know nothing about the politicians there just to make a round number? It's not worth it. Not one bit. It seems like the guys who drew up this map just looked at the numbers and county boundaries without bothering about where the TDs are, and they couldn't even get that right. If I could get an interactive map to draw constituencies I would be delighted. I'd also need the location of the support base of all the TDs too though.

So you want it done to facilitate politicians instead of voters?

People tend to vote for parties, not candidates.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

I still think Meath and Kildare are statistically unrepresented.

Not really, if you look at my map, Kildare and Meath East are within 1% and Meath West is slightly over-represented.

matthew8

Where the TDs are should be a factor because if you're an elected politician there should be a certain dignity that goes with the job that you're not going to have to turn on your closest colleague just to get re-elected. It's like in America, where a map was drawn in Pennsylvania in which 2 congressmen of the same party were put in the same district had to fight each other to even get on the ballot. What were you asking me what I was sure about? And what about the people of central Cavan who have absolutely nothing in common with the rest of the constituency?

DLR should be made one 7-seater constituency or at least a 5 seater while shaving off the northern parts of the constituency to give to the city seats.

Sponge Bob

Dont see any reason why DLR should be a 5 seater never mind a 7 seater.

I do see a reason why we should have 120 TDs no matter what the population.

I also feel that they should be in 10 x 10 seaters with STV and with 20 elected from national party lists with a 5% national vote threshold and no transfers.

That would be fair and equitable.