Boards.ie Seanad Referendum

oppenheimer1

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum? I decided not to give an option for reform because its not on the ballot paper.

I personally am against abolition and would like to see it kept as it is a worthwhile institution. It gave reformers, such as Norris and Robinson an initial platform for real change in the past. Ideally would like to see a reformed house, with a much wider franchise.

Miss Mayhem

I don't think it should be abolished. I just think they should replace the eijets that are on it that don't have a clue what they're doing with intelligent qualified people that do.

mikemac1

Probably a lot of NUI graduates here!

Gloomtastic!

A world with less politicians has got to be a better one!

The fact that they're increasing the number of Dublin City Councillors by 50 seems to have slipped peoples' attention unfortunately!

Days 298

Only 3% of the population can vote in it. Its a joke house filled with elitism. The carry on during the abortion shows how ridiculous and pointless it is. Abolish it. I don't care if it costs money to get rid of it. Our politicians cant wipe their own backsides without receiving expenses, nevermind reform a political system filled with their friends and failed wannabe TDs. If a senator is any good at amending legislation like they claim, they can run in front of all the people for a Dail seat.

BRYAN Is Ainm Dom

Abolish. Useless muppets, everyone of them, had plenty of time to reform and they didnt do it.

hfallada

I think there was far more important things to vote on than abolishing the Senad. Such as bringing Irish divorce law into the 21st century or allowing same sex marriage. Something that will benefit tens of thousands people lives greatly. But imagine its policatial sensitive atm. As politics in ireland is like most countries, which is about doing what will get you reelected and not what is right. I imagine the turnout of it will be ****.

irishfeen

Definitely should go, no need for the privileged to have their own ineffective house.

tolosenc

Reform it, don't abolish it.

We need a radical reform of the entire political system. As it is, we have 2 of the 3 parts of the Oireachtas who in effect, do nothing. We need to make them relevant.

oppenheimer1

Days 298 wrote: »

Only 3% of the population can vote in it. Its a joke house filled with elitism. The carry on during the abortion shows how ridiculous and pointless it is. Abolish it. I don't care if it costs money to get rid of it. Our politicians cant wipe their own backsides without receiving expenses, nevermind a political system filled with their friends and failed wannabe TDs. If a senator is any good at amending legislation like they claim, they can run in front of all the people for a Dail seat.

You make a good argument for reform, rather than abolition. I thing running to get rid of it is a mistake. If we had meaningful Seanad reform of the kind that was recommended in countless ignored reports then perhaps it would be more useful. If meaningful reform failed to make it more relevant, then there would be a strong argument for abolition.

The Seanad needs to be changed not abolished.

Cody Pomeray

I wouldn't like to see it abolished, it has a reasonable amount of potential.

However, there is an unfortunate tendency for the Yes side to over-egg the pudding, which weakens the validity of their points during a debate.

I am going to vote No, but not because I think the Seanad is a fantastic, saviour institution. It's because I think non-elected dissenting voices aid the legislative process, and there is at least a chance that better progress might be made in that direction.

woodoo

I say get rid of it. We don't need it. Reform the Dail and strengthen local government instead.

keith16

irishfeen wrote: »

Definitely should go, no need for the privileged to have their own ineffective house.

No point in throwing the baby out with the kitchen sink.

Pride Fighter

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

A world with less politicians has got to be a better one!

The fact that they're increasing the number of Dublin City Councillors by 50 seems to have slipped peoples' attention unfortunately!

Not true, there are 52 people on Dublin City Council and it is going up to 63 for the next election.

irishfeen

keith16 wrote: »

No point in throwing the baby out with the kitchen sink.

Its the most undemocratic part of our political system... no need for it.

athtrasna

In 1979 a referendum was passed by the people to give other third level graduates a vote in Seanad Elections. Successive governments failed to implement this. I don't see how it can be legal to vote to abolish it now, having disregarded that referendum for 34 years!

athtrasna

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I wouldn't like to see it abolished, it has a reasonable amount of potential.

However, there is an unfortunate tendency for the Yes side to over-egg the pudding, which weakens the validity of their points during a debate.

I am going to vote Yes, but not because I think the Seanad is a fantastic, saviour institution. It's because I think non-elected dissenting voices aid the legislative process, and there is at least a chance that better progress might be made in that direction.

Voting yes is voting to abolish it though?

JONJO THE MISER

I will be voting no, it has always been there since the foundation of the state and its part of tradition plus it doesn't cost that much money.

keith16

irishfeen wrote: »

Its the most undemocratic part of our political system... no need for it.

I know, babies can't even vote!

My name is URL

hfallada wrote: »

I think there was far more important things to vote on than abolishing the Senad. Such as bringing Irish divorce law into the 21st century or allowing same sex marriage. Something that will benefit tens of thousands people lives greatly. But imagine its policatial sensitive atm. As politics in ireland is like most countries, which is about doing what will get you reelected and not what is right. I imagine the turnout of it will be ****.

That's pretty much how I'm looking at it right now too. Just seems like too much of a power play at this point in time.

I don't understand why strong reforms are not being presented as an option before abolition. Numbers in both houses should be reduced, imo, and appointment to the Seanad should be either through a rotating / lottery system or direct public vote.

I don't particularly need an undersheet on my bed, but it's a good idea to have one nonetheless.. if it gets too hot I'll have an option besides laying there and taking it, and exposing myself to the elements =p

Cody Pomeray

athtrasna wrote: »

Voting yes is voting to abolish it though?

woops. i can see I'm going to need to rehearse this.

Boom__Boom

Out of the 60 current senators, at least 34 have previously failed in a bid to get elected to the Dail.

So over half of the Seanad is made up of folk that the public deemed not up to the mark to be TDs

Think about the quality of the those who managed to get elected to the Dail ;

Now think about those who were held in less esteem by the public ;

and now think about these folk who were rejected by the public picking up a basic salary of €65,621 plus allowances (for sitting on various committees) plus extremely generous expenses plus pension plus perks like a parking space in city centre Dublin.

Then balance that against what we lose if we get rid of the Seanad.

Ronin247

Boom__Boom wrote: »

Out of the 60 current senators, at least 34 have previously failed in a bid to get elected to the Dail.

So over half of the Seanad is made up of folk that the public deemed not up to the mark to be TDs

Think about the quality of the those who managed to get elected to the Dail ;

Now think about those who were held in less esteem by the public ;

and now think about these folk who were rejected by the public picking up a basic salary of €65,621 plus allowances (for sitting on various committees) plus extremely generous expenses plus pension plus perks like a parking space in city centre Dublin.

Then balance that against what we lose if we get rid of the Seanad.

Some of those who failed to get elected as TDs failed because they were not part of the party system. We will never have a taoiseach who is anything but Fianna Fail or Fine Gael and this referendum smells like a naked grab for power by Enda Kenny. The Seanad didnt get us into the mess we are in at the moment it was our duly elected TDs who did that to us and then promised they would burn the bondholders and instead stuck more debt on us.

Lets have a reform of our whole political system with term limits and no Nepotism allowed

Days 298

Ronin247 wrote: »

Some of those who failed to get elected as TDs failed because they were not part of the party system. We will never have a taoiseach who is anything but Fianna Fail or Fine Gael and this referendum smells like a naked grab for power by Enda Kenny. The Seanad didnt get us into the mess we are in at the moment it was our duly elected TDs who did that to us and then promised they would burn the bondholders and instead stuck more debt on us.

Lets have a reform of our whole political system with term limits and no Nepotism allowed

How can you grab power from an ultimately powerless entity?

athtrasna

Ronin247 wrote: »

Lets have a reform of our whole political system with term limits and no Nepotism allowed

I actually think family members following into politics has an unfair bad rep. I have a friend who wants to do just that. He knows his Dad was never around, he knows that people call to the house day and night, that your time is never your own. But he still wants to go into politics to help people and to make a difference. To me that's better than someone with a huge ego and ambition who has no idea what political life entails and how it impacts others in your life.

uch

athtrasna wrote: »

In 1979 a referendum was passed by the people to give other third level graduates a vote in Seanad Elections. Successive governments failed to implement this. I don't see how it can be legal to vote to abolish it now, having disregarded that referendum for 34 years!

Not true

Mickey H

Abolish it I think.

Annasopra

uch wrote: »

Not true

Yes it is

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

ArmaniJeanss

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes it is

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

Its not really.
The initial poster gave a very loose interpretation of what the referendum entailed.

Boom__Boom

Ronin247 wrote: »

Some of those who failed to get elected as TDs failed because they were not part of the party system.

Nope. Every one of the 34 is a member of a political party.

Ronin247 wrote: »

We will never have a taoiseach who is anything but Fianna Fail or Fine Gael and this referendum smells like a naked grab for power by Enda Kenny. The Seanad didnt get us into the mess we are in at the moment it was our duly elected TDs who did that to us and then promised they would burn the bondholders and instead stuck more debt on us.

Lets have a reform of our whole political system with term limits and no Nepotism allowed

Voting No will do nothing to achieve the reforms you are looking for - term limits and no nepotism.

Reform of the Seanad isn't going to happen if there is a NO vote because in order to have any sort of meaningful reform there would need to be another referendum and there is no way that is going to happen in the next 10 years if this referendum is defeated. Personally I would be surprised if anything actually happened in the next 20 years at best.

If the referendum is defeated we simply remain with the status quo, there will be no serious reform. (There might be some minor tiny adjustments but without a further referendum those will be window-dressing, so that the issue can be put to bed) The vote is one between getting rid of the Seanad or keeping it as is. Reform isn't an option.

You're right in that the Seanad didnt get us into this mess but it also did nothing to stop it. It is a powerless body so I really don't see how getting rid of it is a power grab. Basically we shut down a talking shop for failed TDs who don't really contribute anything very significant in terms of running the country and save some money.

It won't achieve anything massive but it would send a message to Irish politicians that the public doesn't want them spending/wasting money on politicians who add little or nothing to the running of the country.

Consider the situation if the referendum is defeated; the message that Irish politicians will take is that the public is fine with a system where failed TDs who are well connected/in favour with the various political parties will have the backup of the joining in the Seanad if/when they fail to get enough votes to get elected to the Dail on a generous salary.

Overall getting rid of the Seanad would be a more positive step than keeping it.

uch

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes it is

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

No It's not, I'm talking about the successive Governments failure to Implement it. I worked on Norris' behalf in the Seanad elections in the 00's

jobeenfitz

Reform it? This is just a ploy to save it. If it is retained then they will probably thinker around the edges with reforms. Don't be hoodwinked, abolish it. It has no power and no real function and that will not change, ever!

Oakboy

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum? I decided not to give an option for reform because its not on the ballot paper.

I personally am against abolition and would like to see it kept as it is a worthwhile institution. It gave reformers, such as Norris and Robinson an initial platform for real change in the past. Ideally would like to see a reformed house, with a much wider franchise.

Abolition is extreme short sightedness, and for what savings? People in favour of abolition need to get past their "hurrr hurrr rabble politicians salaries and it a recession huurrrr hurrr rabble" silly thinking and realise that it is an institution that can be very valuable. It is ridiculous at the moment and I know reform is not on the ballot but if it is abolished then that is it gone for good.

It needs to be ran like a general election (where the whole voting population can vote) in the middle of the Dail term so a proper check and balance system can operate.

The only valid reason for getting rid of it would be the end of that horrible cretin Ivana Bacik

BuilderPlumber

I think all politics needs major reform in Ireland. Mainly because they are just lazy, incompetent and self serving.

Look at how a minor financial crisis was turned into something much worse mainly due to politicians' incompetence and a negative media. Their incompetence caused mass unemployment, unnecessary bailouts, the IMF to come in, etc.

Now, what if some REAL crisis hit Ireland? Like, Sellafield blew up, a civil war, an invasion, a terrorist attack, etc. I could not trust our leaders to look after us since they did so poorly with the current situation. The iodine tablets handout in late 2001 would give us an indication of how they would act if a terrorist attack or nuclear accident was to occur.

With this in mind, I would preferably like to see the Seanad and all forms of government reformed. Incompetence, lack of action, poor judgement and corruption have collectively failed Ireland and many other countries too. Irish and world leaders need to learn from their mistakes and poor performing politicians who break their promises should have no place in any nation calling itself a democracy.

theLegion

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Now, what if some REAL crisis hit Ireland? Like, Sellafield blew up, a civil war, an invasion, a terrorist attack, etc. I could not trust our leaders to look after us since they did so poorly with the current situation. The iodine tablets handout in late 2001 would give us an indication of how they would act if a terrorist attack or nuclear accident was to occur.

Well you'd be begging for iodine tablets if a radiation leak did indeed occur.

One overlooked item in this referendum:

Referral of Bills to the People

The Constitution provides that Bills may be referred to the people for a referendum if a majority of members of the Seanad and not less than one third of the members of the Dáil ask the President not to sign a Bill because it contains a proposal of such national importance that the decision to have such a law should be made by the people. The President may agree or disagree with this request.

If this referendum is passed:

This possibility of the reference of Bills to the people by the President will be removed from the Constitution.

http://referendum2013.ie/the-seanad-other-changes/

Not that this option was ever used...

I'm torn on how to vote.

Lando Griffin

Stinks to the high heavens from a time gone by. An old school establishment that liked to be in bed with De Valera like the Cathloic church and the Gardiand RTE.
Needs to be abolishd and the numbers of TDs cut in half.
Joke of a country.

Hitchens

it can't go soon enough imo

Muise...

if the referendum is defeated I might apply for a vote -I never bothered with it, but I have degrees from both DU and NUI - maybe I'll get two votes and spoil them both.

Idbatterim

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

Hitchens

Idbatterim wrote: »

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

the senate is just social welfare for the well off........and the well in

Nodin

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum? I decided not to give an option for reform because its not on the ballot paper.

I personally am against abolition and would like to see it kept as it is a worthwhile institution. It gave reformers, such as Norris and Robinson an initial platform for real change in the past. Ideally would like to see a reformed house, with a much wider franchise.

I'd keep it and reform it. In its current form its not worth a ****.

Mr. G

No. Its my opinion that the TDs just want to get rid of the Seanad to make the IMF happy and to keep their jobs secure.

I think a second voice is a good thing.

Mr. G

I'd keep it and reform it.

Days 298

Idbatterim wrote: »

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

Cant really complain about the big cutbacks if the small ones are treated as shure thats nothing. Id rather see a load of rubbish go than cut services and still be left with the rubbish after this mess. Should have been the first to go. How many people currently servicing are any good? If they are any good why don't they run for the dail where things actually happen. It's a gravy train albeit small still a gravy train.

Technoprisoner

im voting to keep it....if enda is worried he cant provide a good enough argument to abolish it, in a live debate then it has to be worth keeping.

Zebra3

I'll be voting to get rid of this undemocratic gravy train.

How many times will we be voting on it though? :rolleyes:

theLegion

Technoprisoner wrote: »

im voting to keep it....if enda is worried he cant provide a good enough argument to abolish it, in a live debate then it has to be worth keeping.

Can you name 5 current senators? It has served no real benefit. It acts as a power outlet for councillors who vote in much of the senators promoting croynism and nepotism.

Wilberto

As mentioned previously, a reformed Seanad can prove to be a very useful "tool". However, I think two major changes need to happen:

1. The party affiliations of the Senators in the Seanad need to be eliminated. Why not have independent intellectuals in the House debating the legislation that has been passed by the Dáil. Let them have the power to either pass it to the President, or make recommendations, or possibly even veto proposed legislation. The Party whip system works well in the Dáil but it has no value in the Seanad apart from rendering the upper house effectively useless.

2. The election of Seanad members also needs to change. However, I'm still not convinced that allowing everyone that is entitled to vote in the General Election to vote in the Seanad Elections is the way to go. This could just lead to "a second Dáil". Although, if point 1 is implemented fully then this probably shouldn't be an issue. I'd like to see the Univerities element possibly getting a larger share of the seats, with the voting eligibility widened to far more universities, and even IT's.


I know that, as a consequence of point 1 being implemented, the legislative process would be slower, with pieces of legislation travelling back and forth between the two Houses but at least when it does get passed, the general public will know that it has been through some rigorous "testing".


Also, if Fine Gael don't reform the Seanad should the referendum be defeated you can be damn sure that the likes of Micheál Martin, Pierse Doherty, Mary Lou, etc. will make sure that the public remember that come 2016! It'll be just one more bullet that Enda Kenny will have to dodge.

pajor

That poll needs Atari Jaguar.

It's what I'll probably vote. :pac:

zl1whqvjs75cdy

What do Sinn Fein want, I'll probably vote the opposite of that.

In all seriousness I do think it should be kept but massively reformed. I think if we vote to keep it there will not be any reform however so I'm a bit torn about it.

Days 298

Trevor Enough Rawhide wrote: »

What do Sinn Fein want, I'll probably vote the opposite of that.

In all seriousness I do think it should be kept but massively reformed. I think if we vote to keep it there will not be any reform however so I'm a bit torn about it.

So you're voting with Fianna Fail :pac: