Seanad doing its job for once!

RandomName2

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/seanad-shows-its-teeth-as-government-defeated-608883.html

Okay it took government members being absent, but could this signify an actual use for the upper house? (I didn't even know they could propose legislation!) :pac:

Skid X

A bit late in the day,

if they had any balls they would have voted against the government, not abstained.

The Big Smoke

...and so close to the vote! What a coincidence!

RandomName2

Skid X wrote: »

if they had any balls they would have voted against the government, not abstained.

How so?

Cody Pomeray

Very interesting that three Labour and two Fine Gael Senators were otherwise engaged.

Where were they during the cuts to the mobility transport allowance, or the bank guarantee?

I'm in favour of a reformed Seanad but moves like this make me question the integrity and value of its current membership.

Stinicker

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Very interesting that three Labour and two Fine Gael Senators were otherwise engaged.

Where were they during the cuts to the mobility transport allowance, or the bank guarantee?

I'm in favour of a reformed Seanad but moves like this make me question the integrity and value of its current membership.

It's a dumping ground and crèche for Fianna fail cronies, these are the scum that wrecked this country, Vote Yes to get rid of it and let them see what it is like to be out of a job like countless others have experienced.

Vote Yes to punish these Fianna Fail traitors.

Stinicker

Why should the reviews be banned? Is it not a matter between people agreeing a contract together? Or is it trying to dissolve existing upward only rent contracts?
And if it's illegal does it matter what they voted anyway

Stinicker wrote: »

Vote Yes to punish these Fianna Fail traitors.

That's a pretty bad reason to be voting anything
Except maybe "vote FF out of office in a regular or seanad election"

Ush1

The Bill now goes to committee stage next week, and could be sent to the Dáil by the end of the month

Can't the Dáil at this stage choose not to pass it?

RandomName2

bluewolf wrote: »

Or is it trying to dissolve existing upward only rent contracts?

I got the impression that that was the intent of the motion, or at least to dissolve the upwards-only aspect.

Ush1 wrote: »

Can't the Dáil at this stage choose not to pass it?

I believe so. I mean, in all honesty the seanad is pretty useless at the moment, but the incident *might* hint that it could have a role if it were reformed. Big "if" though.

Ush1

RandomName2 wrote: »

I believe so. I mean, in all honesty the seanad is pretty useless at the moment, but the incident *might* hint that it could have a role if it were reformed. Big "if" though.

So tantamount to boards.ie having a vote against something the government wants and us "defeating" the government by voting against on here.

Brings to mind Aesop's Fable;

"THE HARES harangued the assembly, and argued that all should be equal. The Lions made this reply: "Your words, O Hares! are good; but they lack both claws and teeth such as we have."

Cody Pomeray

Ush1 wrote: »

"THE HARES harangued the assembly, and argued that all should be equal. The Lions made this reply: "Your words, O Hares! are good; but they lack both claws and teeth such as we have."

Well that's a good point but it raises, in favour of Seanad reform, the issue of Tyranny of the Majority.

We need to be grown up and recognize that The People is not a perfect sovereign. In the interests of stability and justice, we must have some control to stop, or to slow down, the indulgent and rapid adaption of populist or unjust measures.

Ush1

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Well that's a good point but it raises, in favour of Seanad reform, the issue of Tyranny of the Majority.

We need to be grown up and recognize that The People is not a perfect sovereign. In the interests of stability and justice, we must have some control to stop, or to slow down, the indulgent and rapid adaption of populist or unjust measures.

Only if the Dail is considered a tyranny, because while they might be elected, the senate is not.

I think a second voice is a good thing(isn't that what the opposition is supposed to be?) but it has to be a relevant second voice, and brings problems of it's own as often instead of working with government it will be in competition with it.....hence this rather meaningless article in the OP.

Jimoslimos

bluewolf wrote: »

Why should the reviews be banned? Is it not a matter between people agreeing a contract together? Or is it trying to dissolve existing upward only rent contracts?
And if it's illegal does it matter what they voted anyway

How do upward-only rents work in a free market, surely they would or should be illegal as they are an artificial control acting against true rental prices?

Cody Pomeray

Ush1 wrote: »

Only if the Dail is considered a tyranny, because while they might be elected, the senate is not.

But that's the point.

We need to move beyond the idea that the public know everything, and that their every stupid desire and irresistible urge be satisfied, and that the public can do what they want via the Oireachtas at any one time.

One important control of democratic despotism is Seanad Éireann. It exists not so much to extinguish the blaze of public foolishness or tyranny as to dampen it.

Most democratic states recognize the need to shield society from its own powers and whims.

That's why we, the People, gave ourselves a constitution but not a constitutional initiative.

That's why we have an non-democratic judiciary.

And it's also why we need a Seanad, or at least some chamber or council to review legislation.

Ush1

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

But that's the point.

We need to move beyond the idea that the public know everything, and that their every stupid desire and irresistible urge be satisfied, and that the public can do what they want via the Oireachtas at any one time.

Who needs to move beyond it? You don't think the government should be the will of the majority of the people? While I might not disagree, democracy is what it is.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

One important control of democratic despotism is Seanad Éireann. It exists not so much to extinguish the blaze of public foolishness or tyranny as to dampen it.

Most democratic states recognize the need to shield society from its own powers and whims.

That's why we, the People, gave ourselves a constitution but not a constitutional initiative.

That's why we have an non-democratic judiciary.

And it's also why we need a Seanad, or at least some chamber or council to review legislation.

As I said, a second chamber can be useful and it can be ineffective. It can work with government and it can work against a government.

My opinion of the Seanad is that it's ineffective and I'm jaded to the term reform when it comes to politics in this country.

Beano

bluewolf wrote: »

Why should the reviews be banned? Is it not a matter between people agreeing a contract together? Or is it trying to dissolve existing upward only rent contracts?
And if it's illegal does it matter what they voted anyway




That's a pretty bad reason to be voting anything
Except maybe "vote FF out of office in a regular or seanad election"

I dont remember voting anybody into the seanad. Isnt that part of its problem?

Jimoslimos

Jimoslimos wrote: »

How do upward-only rents work in a free market, surely they would or should be illegal as they are an artificial control acting against true rental prices?

I'm not sure how they even work in this market, hence my questions.
Are they just individual landlords saying this is the kind of contract you have to sign if you want my property? All people would have to do then is say "eh no", landlords get no rent, stop insisting on upward only ones
Assuming my understanding of them is correct anyway. Nothing artificial about rental contracts I suppose

Kev.OC

Beano wrote: »

I dont remember voting anybody into the seanad. Isnt that part of its problem?

In my opinion, no. I could be completely wrong, and I hope I'm corrected if I am, but my understanding of having an unelected upper house is that they are free to focus on legislative issues without having to worry about popular opinion.

Have you ever watched a Dail session? I've only seen a few myself, but no matter what issue I've seen them talking about, it has always turned into a point-scoring shouting match. I've seen 8 year olds having more civilized arguments. The upper house not being elected is (in theory) supposed to allow it to be free of that petty bickering.