It's too expensive to let all citizens have a vote in the Seanad Elections

Skid X

Allowing every citizen a vote in the Seanad elections would cost too much without a referendum, the Dáil has heard.

Minister of State Fergus O’Dowd said it cost €5.25 to post each ballot paper in the 2011 Seanad elections. Voting papers are sent by registered post to take account of the requirement for a secret ballot.

The price of running the election on a universal franchise “without a referendum to amend the secret postal ballot provision in the Constitution would be quite significant”, he said.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/universal-franchise-for-seanad-too-costly-at-5-25-a-ballot-paper-1.1742229

There you go, democratic elections would be nice but we can't afford it. So we'll stick with an archaic system of giving a minority of people a vote.

€5.25 per citizen is too expensive. Why don't they cut the outlandish fees and expenses paid to these part time Senators to fund a proper Election?

Mint Aero

Whoever he is, he likes the hospital trolley argument. He should probably resign now, what an embarrassment.

catallus

A valiant attempt to curb the malignant spread of Universal Suffrage, I say!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

If they wanted everybody to have a vote then just do it on the day of the general election in the poling stations and not by post. And if necessary amend the postal vote requirement the next time we're all going to the polls anyway.
Of 15 people I know off hand who have a Seanad vote 9 don't get their ballot anyway because they are sent to the address they had at college.

wazky

A fiver to post a sheet of paper?!, fcuk me.
No wonder I didn't get any Christmas cards this year.

Skid X

It's the sort of logic you only get in Government.

Too expensive to give everyone a vote.

Instead, we'll have an expensive referendum. Which will pass. Then we'll give everyone a vote.

goose2005

Skid X wrote: »

It's the sort of logic you only get in Government.

Too expensive to give everyone a vote.

Instead, we'll have an expensive referendum. Which will pass. Then we'll give everyone a vote.

The cost of voting is always a red herring, it's a tiny fraction of state spending and is necessary for a democratic society

And I don't know why he doesn't use the obvious solution if he wants to save money, i.e. elect Senators nationally on a list system.

Capt'n Midnight

An Post is state owned so the state doesn't loose all of the money spent on postage.

Couldn't the state tell An Post what the new rate for a registered letter is ?

Or if they can't get a reduction in price get a courier company to tender for it.



And yes it's a red herring. And a tiny drop in the ocean compared to mis-spending.

dxhound2005

Fianna Fail had 14 years in Government to introduce these changes. This is just a political stunt. And particularly galling coming from the party that tried to do away with PR and bring in the first past the post system for Dail elections.

Satriale

ill pay the 5.25 to vote in it. Bill me.

SEPT 23 1989

Could the government owned postal service not do a one off price for the election??????????????????????????????

Fr. Ned

Skid X wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/universal-franchise-for-seanad-too-costly-at-5-25-a-ballot-paper-1.1742229

There you go, democratic elections would be nice but we can't afford it. So we'll stick with an archaic system of giving a minority of people a vote.

€5.25 per citizen is too expensive. Why don't they cut the outlandish fees and expenses paid to these part time Senators to fund a proper Election?

I dunno....Enda was able to find €16 million for his brainfart idea of actually abolishing the Seanad.

Seems like there's money when it suits.......

tritium

Love the way the quoted article states something that was never actually said. Cue faux outrage.

Basically the comment was it would cost a lot of money or we could amend a part of the constitution that's not particularly important anyway (in my opinion). Could any of the outraged posters explain why exactly that puts Enda and co in the same space as Stalin and Mao?

Toby Take a Bow

tritium wrote: »

Love the way the quoted article states something that was never actually said. Cue faux outrage.

Basically the comment was it would cost a lot of money or we could amend a part of the constitution that's not particularly important anyway (in my opinion). Could any of the outraged posters explain why exactly that puts Enda and co in the same space as Stalin and Mao?

Complains about 'faux outrage' then claims that people are comparing Enda to Stalin and Mao. Hmmm.

renegademaster

Skid X wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/universal-franchise-for-seanad-too-costly-at-5-25-a-ballot-paper-1.1742229

There you go, democratic elections would be nice but we can't afford it. So we'll stick with an archaic system of giving a minority of people a vote.

€5.25 per citizen is too expensive. Why don't they cut the outlandish fees and expenses paid to these part time Senators to fund a proper Election?

didn't bother them much when they needed a yes vote for lisbon "2.0"

LoonyLovegood

I said it before and I'll say it again. Have the 10 Taoiseach's nominations, 3 elected from Dublin colleges, 3 elected from outside Dublin colleges. Include ITs, and anywhere that runs a Level 7. Then one senator from every constituency. BUT. Those with a level 7 can only vote in either their constituency or their college, NOT both.

Makes it fairer and means there'll still be the special knowledge that is in it now.

Toby Take a Bow

CTYIgirl wrote: »

Makes it fairer and means there'll still be the special knowledge that is in it now.

What's the 'special knowledge'? How about we just make it democratic: everyone gets the one vote.

dxhound2005

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

What's the 'special knowledge'? How about we just make it democratic: everyone gets the one vote.

Think of them more as an Irish House of Lords.

geeky

Skid X wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/universal-franchise-for-seanad-too-costly-at-5-25-a-ballot-paper-1.1742229

There you go, democratic elections would be nice but we can't afford it. So we'll stick with an archaic system of giving a minority of people a vote.

€5.25 per citizen is too expensive. Why don't they cut the outlandish fees and expenses paid to these part time Senators to fund a proper Election?

To be fair, it's not the cost of extending universal suffrage O'Dowd's objecting to; it's the cost of doing so with a ridiculously archaic system.

IMO, The Government is still figuring out what the hell to do about the Seanad now that its own big idea (abolition) has been scotched by the people.

Capt'n Midnight

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

What's the 'special knowledge'? How about we just make it democratic: everyone gets the one vote.

No.

Because then the Seanad would be like the other housel. If you think the Seanad has any role in balances and checks then you don't want it to dominated by Parish pump politics geared towards pleasing/fooling the average voter.

It's sad but true that to win half the seats you don't need even need to win half the voters that turn out. And you don't even need the average voter, the left hand edge of the bell curve will do fine. FF have bought many an election based on this.

astrofool

Utterly powerless institution, not worth voting on anyway.

NowThatsCool

Not if we tax 'em

NowThatsCool

Not if we tax 'em

anncoates

I have an inherently undemocratic and elitist Seanad vote that I don't bother using.

Plz PM me with offers.

Stavros Murphy

Letting the plebs vote on Seanad candidates would lower the tone. And the plebs wouldn't understand what they were doing anyway. Or so they reckon. The Seanad is a well-paid dumping ground for the unelected - a perk for those in the good lads club.

Toby Take a Bow

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No.

Because then the Seanad would be like the other housel. If you think the Seanad has any role in balances and checks then you don't want it to dominated by Parish pump politics geared towards pleasing/fooling the average voter.

There are different ways to (try and) prevent parish pump politics, and I think keeping the seanad as an undemocratic institution isn't a particularly good one. We could try and initiate a list system.

But yeah, I don't think the seanad should have a role in balances and checks on the dail, which is democratically elected. Reform that (and reform the local elections) would be preferable.

SEPT 23 1989

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Could the government owned postal service not do a one off price for the election??????????????????????????????

Postage isn't a profit based service (in fact, I think I heard somewhere that it runs a loss overall due to so much underpaid post being sent). So sure, they could send all the registered post for free, but to make up the funds needed to actually get it there (you know, like paying the postmen/women's wages, paying for electricity to run sorting machines, etc.) they'd then need to increase the postage rates for everyone else.

Capt'n Midnight

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

There are different ways to (try and) prevent parish pump politics, and I think keeping the seanad as an undemocratic institution isn't a particularly good one. We could try and initiate a list system.

Oh dear lord no,

the whole point is to try and make the seanad less party political, less like the dail

a list system means handing more power to professional politicians

we already have a house almost completely dominated by people toeing the party line

Hootanany

NowThatsCool wrote: »

Not if we tax 'em

You can say that again

kowloon

Democratic vote, offset by half a term and a massive reduction in numbers for both houses.
Ideal, but it'll never happen.

Toby Take a Bow

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Oh dear lord no,

the whole point is to try and make the seanad less party political, less like the dail

a list system means handing more power to professional politicians

we already have a house almost completely dominated by people toeing the party line

So the choice is between electing an undemocratic house or a replicate of the Dail?

Capt'n Midnight

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

So the choice is between electing an undemocratic house or a replicate of the Dail?

Having both houses elected the same way by the same people just means you will get the same class of politicians and the same problems.

The Seanad is undemocratic because it's supposed to be. It's not supposed to be dominated by the mob, or parties. It's supposed to (in an ideal world) be based on the best and brightest and those who are supposed to look after the interests of others hence the universities and five panels, though of course it's full of party members

People who don't understand that should not be allowed to vote in seanad elections.

expectationlost

funny john crowns seanad reform bill says to take the extra cost out of the senators pay http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2013/2113/b2113s.pdf

Toby Take a Bow

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Having both houses elected the same way by the same people just means you will get the same class of politicians and the same problems.

The Seanad is undemocratic because it's supposed to be. It's not supposed to be dominated by the mob, or parties. It's supposed to (in an ideal world) be based on the best and brightest and those who are supposed to look after the interests of others hence the universities and five panels, though of course it's full of party members

People who don't understand that should not be allowed to vote in seanad elections.

Oh, I understand the theory behind the seanad, but it's elitist snobbery of the highest order to think that the 'best' and the 'brightest' will elect a different type of person than the 'mob' (as you so eloquently put it) and, as you acknowledge, it's something that doesn't happen (the fact that the universities that I attended were essentially the kindergartens of our future politicians should tell you of how the 'cream' of society will vote in all future Seanad elections). I can vote in the Seanad (actually I am on the register to vote in two separate constituencies, as far as I can remember) but have never done so, and never will.

I understand, to a point, your concerns regarding the Dail following populist sentiment and being democratically deficient itself, but this won't be addressed by continuing on with the Seanad. We need a complete restructuring of how the Dail and the local councils operate. Checks and balances should be addressed by a judiciary able to rule on any populist referenda or agenda set by the Dail.