What sort of Politics do we want

While watching the Meath east by election I noticed that the Sinn Fein candidate was a Parliament assistant to Sinn Fein in other words a professional in politics as opposed to a voluntary amateur, i.e. the sort of candidate who maybe started off getting involved in a local issue and ends up standing for election

I know the general consensus is that the country would be better off run by profession administrators rather that by amateurs but I don't know about that.

I for one would be put off by a parliamentary assistant standing for election. I am also put off any candidate that is always slick and on message.

Thought?

I do not want this to be about nepotism family names etc.

ednwireland

i dont want career politicians for sure, i personally think politicians should be restricted to two terms in office and be forced to not stand after that. i certainly wouldnt vote for a 26 year old career politician with very little rela world experience into the dail (having seen how out of touch mary coughlan is)

Sleepy

I'd like to see qualified legislators: people not being allowed to stand for election until they'd completed a degree level qualification comprising of economics, governance, a course in how to interpret data, our legal system, management theory etc. This should improve the quality of those elected to the Dail, which by extension, should improve the calibre of our cabinet (which, unless we remove the whip system, is all that matters in reality).

Of course this raises questions of accessibility: would it result in excluding the disadvantaged from being able to take part in government? TBH, it's a bit of a red herring as this is pretty much already the case and that, while admittedly difficult to do so, it is still possible to get oneself through college in Ireland without any personal wealth or parental support (part time job, grant, free fees, student assistance funds, scholarships, frugal living etc.).

Irish Steve

Interesting thoughts, I might allow a back bencher to serve more than 2 terms, maybe 3 consecutive, but yes, ministers should be out after 2, and without the plethora of pensions and allowances that they get at present.

The big issue, and I doubt that we can solve it in this thread, or any other, is about accountability, and more often than once every 5 years, there needs to be a way for "joe public" to be able to say to the politicians, "yes, we voted for you, but we didn't vote for what you're trying to do now on this", whatever this is.

If there was a way for "the people" to be able to say "NO" and mean it, not just "NO" until you change the formula, as has happened several times in recent years, we might respect our politicians more.

The way we've been treated with contempt by them in recent years, and have had to sit back unable to do anything about their abuses of the system, including pay, pensions and all the other issues like expenses abuse, has ended up with a situation where too many people despise them in a way that is becoming bad for the overall concept of democracy.

The other thought is that local politics should be stronger, and better funded, and national politicians should not be involved in local issues in the way they have been in the past, and certainly not involved in local planning and the like, as that has led to way too much of the parish pump mentality, and to a bad national level of government, as too many compromises to ensure local support end up distorting the national picture.

Problem with that is for the overall size of the state, our number of state employees is already too high, so I don't know how we square that circle.

ardmacha

Problem with that is for the overall size of the state, our number of state employees is already too high, so I don't know how we square that circle.

Is this just your opinion, or do you have any objective basis for saying this?

Sleepy

Irish Steve, tbh, I think in addition to the elements of direct democracy you seek you're also raising the issue of who should be allowed to vote. The people get the politicians they deserve and, tbh, shouldn't be electing people who don't act in a fashion they support (e.g. no matter what the local Labour/FF/FG back-bencher said before the election, cuts were always going to have to be made and taxes were always going to have to rise to narrow our structural deficit and no matter what SF / ULA say now, there's no way they'd be able to implement any of their hair-brained schemes should they find themselves clutching the levers of power - they'd find themselves cut off from credit and having to try to balance the budget overnight).

In my own opinion: if you don't understand the policies of the party the person you're voting for and the likely repercussions of those policies, you shouldn't be entitled to vote. All these numpties voting for "the man not the party", "xyz's son because his father was a decent sort" or the local independent because of "single policy 123" are the reason we have such poor representatives and the reason they're so unaccountable: we, the Irish public, don't seem to understand our own system of governance, or if we do, we don't vote accordingly.

jimmycrackcorm

I thought that Helen McEntee also worked in the Dail as an assistant to her father. Does that make her a professional too?

The reason this interests me is because I am in interested in how ideas arise in society.

About a year ago a friend was telling me how her son wanted to do a masters in political communications with the intention of getting involved in politics as a career, now he comes from the sort of background where in former time he would have become a Barrister or maybe involved in journalism. I do not think politics should be seen as job in that sense.

I do think we should have the passionate amateur as our politicians however they should be backed up by senior professional civil services, the type of people who are brilliant in their field and alway have been.. first class degrees etc, it should be a well paid career so it attract the best of the best.

The only down side I can see is that we would end up with a two tier civil services a small well paid elite who would be in charge.

Sleepy

What makes you value a passionate amateur over someone qualified for the job?

It wouldn't make sense in any other profession...

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

Is this just your opinion, or do you have any objective basis for saying this?

The governments plan is to continue to reduce numbers. Whether you agree with them or not, it would appear that someone in government had the opinioni that we can reduce the number of state employees

Sleepy

Sleepy wrote: »

What makes you value a passionate amateur over someone qualified for the job?

It wouldn't make sense in any other profession...

That is my exact point politics is not like any other profession so it should not be seen the same way as other professions.

The professionalising of politics would also narrow and restrict the type of people entering politics.

Sleepy

Why is it no different than any other position?

Ultimately, the only positions I'd care about would be those in the cabinet. These are effectively senior managerial positions and, frankly, shouldn't be carried out by the "ordinary joe(anne)". The back-benchers are utterly irrelevant and the less of them we have, the better (unless we eliminate the whip system).

The shadow cabinet of the opposition should, ideally, understand enough about economics and management to intelligently question cabinet decisions and/or propose alternatives (or bills which might find cross-party support).

I don't see how amateurism helps any of this. A broad section of the population in Dail Eireann is not necessarily a good thing: a perfectly representative Dail would, by definition, be constituted of 49% of it's numbers of people below average intelligence, 49% below average education levels, average levels of criminality, alcoholism, drug abusers etc.

We should seek to put the brightest and best section of the (honest) population in power, not the everyman with all his faults.

ednwireland

ednwireland wrote: »

i dont want career politicians for sure, i personally think politicians should be restricted to two terms in office and be forced to not stand after that.

The problem with that is that they will have even shorter term goals as a result. Do their job, fcuk up if they like, pass the buck to the next group.

That or try and strongly influence who's in next... Putin, anyone?

Icepick

less government & less bureaucracy

Rightwing

Politics is a farce.

Give to the people and you be popular
Take from the people and you hated.

Bit like a zookeeper.

Give a banana to the monkey and he'll like you, don't try and take it back though.

hyperborean

I would love to see the whip system dumped,