Dublin Bay South By-Election

PommieBast

schmittel wrote: »

I get it makes sense for them to do so, but is there an actual law (like in the UK) that to stand as a candidate in a constituency you have to have an address within the constituency?

When did the UK bring that in? Far as I am aware only the nominators have to be within the constitiency..

Sam Russell

schmittel wrote: »

Do candidates for the by election actually have to live in the constituency?

I get it makes sense for them to do so, but is there an actual law (like in the UK) that to stand as a candidate in a constituency you have to have an address within the constituency?

No, in Ireland constituency boundaries change often, and even change names. So the candidate could live in the constituency but in the next election, it may have changed from a 5 seater to two three seaters, or from three seater to a larger four seater, or even a tranche of voters moved to or from a constituency. A candidates support base could be halved and split between constituencies.

All makes for politics being a blood sport.

Tyrone212

schmittel wrote: »

Do candidates for the by election actually have to live in the constituency?

I get it makes sense for them to do so, but is there an actual law (like in the UK) that to stand as a candidate in a constituency you have to have an address within the constituency?

Mark Durkan stood for FG in Dublin a couple of years ago, pretty sure he wasn't living there.

KevRossi

You don't have to live in the constituency, nor hold and address there. Some candidates run in multiple constituencies in each election. Peter Casey ran in Donegal and Dublin West in the 2020 General Election.

There are also several high profile politicians over the years who represented constituencies in which they did not live. Mary Hanafin represented Dun Laoghaire, she lives/lived in Rathgar.

blackwhite

L1011 wrote: »

Its a four seater... the 'working class vote' is even smaller when you consider that.

Brain-fart there - bad considering it was where I voted for 10 years

hometruths

Thought ti was odd so many names bandied around for a constituency, makes sense if you can just parachute in from anywhere!

Brussels Sprout

schmittel wrote: »

Thought ti was odd so many names bandied around for a constituency, makes sense if you can just parachute in from anywhere!

Chu, O'Connell and Creighton have all either ran their before or run in wards within it i(n Chu's case).

Bacik I'd say is not based there since she ran previously in Dublin Central and Dún Laoghaire and tried to run in Dublin-South-East.

Lynne Boylan probably isn't either since she lives with Eoin O'Broin and he's a TD for Dublin Mid-West.

L1011

I think Bacik does live in the constituency, at least if wikipedia is right (Portobello claimed) - but she definitely didn't live in Dublin Central that time and I suspect not DL either!

KevRossi

Claire Byrne running for the Green Party nomination. Heading Hazel Chu off at the pass. She should get the nomination as she'd have Eamon Ryan's backing. She's also been around the GP a long time, so the more established members will favour her.

https://twitter.com/CByrneGreen/status/1388488365192908801

L1011

If Byrne gets the GP nomination, I suspect that's the end of Chu in the Greens - Soc Dems (damaging to them if they take her...) or Independent.

Larbre34

They will pick Byrne, but shes politically weak and anonymous.

Eamon Ryan will be cursing Eoghan Murphy (probably calling him a stinky poo poo head), because whatever the Greens decide to do here is damaging to them and their obvious growing schism.

golfball37

Despite Eamon’s vote I don’t think there’s 2 seats there for Greens in a GE. If big Jim gets the FF leader job then he’ll be safe. Always at least one FG there too.

KevRossi

Larbre34 wrote: »

They will pick Byrne, but shes politically weak and anonymous.

.

But in that way she's a good candidate for the GP. She's well known in her ward, easy on the eye, good speaker and won't get elected but won't destroy the GP vote either.

They don't want a TD elected here, it means two running next time out, they run the risk of splitting the vote and neither her nor Eamon Ryan getting in.

There are other parties like SF or FF who probably aren't too keen on winning the seat as it means running two candidates next time out. I don't see any party winning two seats there in a GE at the next election. It's well split in demographics.

factnee

Larbre34 wrote: »

Eamon Ryan will be cursing Eoghan Murphy (probably calling him a stinky poo poo head),

LOL - Brilliant

JPup

I live in her ward and Byrne comes across as a good councillor. There aren’t two seats for the greens here so if she is the green candidate for the by election it might be more with an eye to building up her profile as Eamon’s eventual successor.

I suspect he won’t be leader of the Greens after the next general election and that he would be unlikely to stand again in the following election if that’s the case given he’d be in his mid 60s by then most likely.

coylemj

L1011 wrote: »

If Byrne gets the GP nomination, I suspect that's the end of Chu in the Greens - Soc Dems (damaging to them if they take her...) or Independent.

+1 Chu's problem is that she will finish her term in the Mansion House two years after the local elections (2019) and one year after a general election (2020). It's finally dawned on her that the timing means she can't make much electoral capital out of the job. Throw in the lockdown (no high visibility events) and her stint as Lord Mayor will return her little or no political dividend.

Which probably explains why she decided to run for the Seanad and why she may throw her hat in the ring for the GP nomination for DBS. Her desperate scramble for exposure will be her downfall, she's making enemies at every turn.

mikemac2

schmittel wrote: »

Do candidates for the by election actually have to live in the constituency?

I get it makes sense for them to do so, but is there an actual law (like in the UK) that to stand as a candidate in a constituency you have to have an address within the constituency?

By the gods I am shocked the Brits have such a rule

Peter Mandelson of London ran for Hartlepool for no other reason then it was a "safe" seat.

The Brits love to parachute candidates into an area they know nothing about but the colour of their rosette will see them elected

There are faults with the Irish electoral system but parachuting candidates in is vigorously disapproved

Beechwoodspark

Get the sense the bould hazel will be lucky to secure a nomination let alone win the seat

Sam Russell

mikemac2 wrote: »

By the gods I am shocked the Brits have such a rule

Peter Mandelson of London ran for Hartlepool for no other reason then it was a "safe" seat.

The Brits love to parachute candidates into an area they know nothing about but the colour of their rosette will see them elected

There are faults with the Irish electoral system but parachuting candidates in is vigorously disapproved

The big difference is that 'local' candidates can still run because of the multiple seat constituencies, while a UK parachutist displaces any locally selected candidates.

Beechwoodspark

L1011 wrote: »

I think Bacik does live in the constituency, at least if wikipedia is right (Portobello claimed) - but she definitely didn't live in Dublin Central that time and I suspect not DL either!

Ivana B lives in portobello

Larbre34

Chu refused to be drawn today on the speculation, but an announcement is expected tomorrow. Looks like it'll be down to herself V Byrne for the the nom. I don't think James Geoghegan will be afeared of either.

blackwhite

Kate O'Connell remaining very quiet regarding seeking the FG nomination.
Might be holding her fire until next GE when FG might have a run at two seats in the constituency again?

Larbre34

blackwhite wrote: »

Kate O'Connell remaining very quiet regarding seeking the FG nomination.
Might be holding her fire until next GE when FG might have a run at two seats in the constituency again?

My own suspicion is that shes probably done with it, for the moment anyway. Young family, busy business, not to mention the opprobrium she fielded while in the Dáil.

I think she'd be in the Seanad otherwise.

blackwhite

Larbre34 wrote: »

My own suspicion is that shes probably done with it, for the moment anyway. Young family, busy business, not to mention the opprobrium she fielded while in the Dáil.

I think she'd be in the Seanad otherwise.

She went after a Seanad nod at the time, and seemed fairly peed off when she wasn't nominated. Looked suspiciously like she was passed over in favour of those who hadn't been as vocally anti-Varadkar during the FG leadership campaign.

I've a suspicion that following the Seanad snub she might wait for a change in leadership in FG before stepping forward again

hometruths

Anybody got any insight on whether it is likely to be summer or autumn?

Reckon that is a tough call for the government (FG).

Larbre34

schmittel wrote: »

Anybody got any insight on whether it is likely to be summer or autumn?

Reckon that is a tough call for the government (FG).

Won't be the summer anyway. With the pandemic abating, they'll be waiting as long as possible to hold a poll. Not to mind that turnout in summer is always poor.

We could see a referendum date in October or early November for a number of outstanding matters, with the DBS by-election held on the same day.

hometruths

Larbre34 wrote: »

Won't be the summer anyway. With the pandemic abating, they'll be waiting as long as possible to hold a poll. Not to mind that turnout in summer is always poor.

That was my initial thinking but there was a piece in the Examiner suggesting they might go sooner rather than later:

Sources within the party have surmised that Fine Gael's quick process may be due to a possible intention to call the election sooner rather than later, with August mooted as a possibility.

I guess the logic would be if ever there was a year to buck the poor summer turnout trend, this would be it with no foreign travel! They might get a covid bounce if vaccinations largely complete and country open up again.

Does higher turnout help or hinder FG chances?

Larbre34 wrote: »

We could see a referendum date in October or early November for a number of outstanding matters, with the DBS by-election held on the same day.

What are the outstanding matters?

L1011

schmittel wrote: »

Does higher turnout help or hinder FG chances?

I'd expect their voters to be more in the base that turn up regardless, with a higher turnout tending towards others.

schmittel wrote: »

What are the outstanding matters?

"Womens place in the home" issues (that'll pass), voting age (that probably won't!), possibly a ban on privitasation of Irish Water (that'll pass), very slight chance of some emigrant voting rights (haven't seen polling on that)

hometruths

L1011 wrote: »

I'd expect their voters to be more in the base that turn up regardless, with a higher turnout tending towards others.

That would be my thinking too, maybe favouring them to call a summer election.

KevRossi

Slightly off tangent, but this would be a good opportunity to trial early voting and expanded postal voting.

Does this need new legislation, or can it be ordered by the Returning Officer for the constituency?

Larbre34

KevRossi wrote: »

Slightly off tangent, but this would be a good opportunity to trial early voting and expanded postal voting.

Does this need new legislation, or can it be ordered by the Returning Officer for the constituency?

As someone who has worked elections for 22 years, I don't believe that is a good idea.

The postal voting, perhaps, but not early voting. Having filled ballots sitting around for weeks on end is inherently bad for vote integrity, in my opinion.

I'd almost be going the other way. This nonsense of 'coming home to vote' of non-residents, when they really had no right to do so, was a massive compromise of electoral law and that should be tightened up.

Oymyakon

Seems a bit unfair that Non-Irish citizens who may have been living and working here for years don't get a vote in the generals, is this similar across the EU?

Sam Russell

Oymyakon wrote: »

Seems a bit unfair that Non-Irish citizens who may have been living and working here for years don't get a vote in the generals, is this similar across the EU?

They do not vote in referendums or presidential elections either. Why would they? They can vote in local elections though, and stand in them too.

Oymyakon

Sam Russell wrote: »

They do not vote in referendums or presidential elections either. Why would they? They can vote in local elections though, and stand in them too.

I can understand the reasons why they'd be unable to vote on constitutional matters, or on the election of the head of state, but I feel like they should be entitled to vote for a representative in the national parliament.

Sam Russell

Oymyakon wrote: »

I can understand the reasons why they'd be unable to vote on constitutional matters, or on the election of the head of state, but I feel like they should be entitled to vote for a representative in the national parliament.

Why? There is no provision in the constitution for it.

tHE vAGGABOND

Why? There is no provision in the constitution for it.

There should be - I know folks who have paid the top rate of tax for 10+ years, members of the GAA etc etc; yet have next to zero say at ballot box

Oymyakon

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why? There is no provision in the constitution for it.

Which is fair enough, in which case I think we should have a referendum on it because I think it's unfair. (Sorry, off topic) I was also wondering if other EU countries have similar rules when it comes to the voting register.

Sam Russell

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

There should be - I know folks who have paid the top rate of tax for 10+ years, members of the GAA etc etc; yet have next to zero say at ballot box

Well, stand in the DBS bi-election with that as your policy. You only have to persuade the electorate of your view and get elected - then get the referendum accepted by the Dail. God luck with that.

Larbre34

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

There should be - I know folks who have paid the top rate of tax for 10+ years, members of the GAA etc etc; yet have next to zero say at ballot box

Well if they've done all that, they're a bit slack in getting their citizenship, aren't they?

Then they could vote in all the elections they fancied.

KevRossi

Oymyakon wrote: »

Which is fair enough, in which case I think we should have a referendum on it because I think it's unfair. (Sorry, off topic) I was also wondering if other EU countries have similar rules when it comes to the voting register.

It's a reciprocal arrangement. Any country is free to have that agreement with each other. So we can vote in Locals and EU elections in any EU country and vice versa.

We have a separate agreement with the UK. They can vote in all common elections that we have, so Local and Dail. Not the Presidential as Queenie still sits on the throne and not in referenda as they don't have a Constitution that can be altered via popular vote.

It has been mooted a couple of times that we get to vote in each other parliamentary elections in the EU-27 but I haven't heard about it in a long time.

blackwhite

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

There should be - I know folks who have paid the top rate of tax for 10+ years, members of the GAA etc etc; yet have next to zero say at ballot box

Then that’s purely their own decision, as they’d have been eligible to apply for Irish Citizenship by now

Podge_irl

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'd almost be going the other way. This nonsense of 'coming home to vote' of non-residents, when they really had no right to do so, was a massive compromise of electoral law and that should be tightened up.

Ireland already disenfranchises emigrants more than almost any Western country and you want to tighten it even further? Also calling it a "massive compromise of electoral law" seems a bit shrill.

blackwhite

Podge_irl wrote: »

Ireland already disenfranchises emigrants more than almost any Western country and you want to tighten it even further? Also calling it a "massive compromise of electoral law" seems a bit shrill.

It's perfectly accurate though.

Under our current legislation you are not legally entitled to vote if you've emigrated and been gone for more than 18 months.

Celebrating the #hometovote stuff was explicitly celebrating electoral fraud.

By all means campaign for changes if you want, but trying to claim that ignoring our electoral laws is something to be celebrated is a dangerously slippery slope to go down.

L1011

Chu says she is running for the nomination but will not run for the election (as Ind/SD/whatever) if she doesn't get it.

Podge_irl

blackwhite wrote: »

It's perfectly accurate though.

Under our current legislation you are not legally entitled to vote if you've emigrated and been gone for more than 18 months.

Celebrating the #hometovote stuff was explicitly celebrating electoral fraud.

By all means campaign for changes if you want, but trying to claim that ignoring our electoral laws is something to be celebrated is a dangerously slippery slope to go down.

And if they had been gone less than 18 months or were there as students there is nothing illegal about it.

I didn't celebrate it, but nor do I think it was a "massive" anything really.

Brussels Sprout

blackwhite wrote: »

It's perfectly accurate though.

Under our current legislation you are not legally entitled to vote if you've emigrated and been gone for more than 18 months.

Celebrating the #hometovote stuff was explicitly celebrating electoral fraud.

By all means campaign for changes if you want, but trying to claim that ignoring our electoral laws is something to be celebrated is a dangerously slippery slope to go down.

They could have been recent emigrants who had been gone for less than 18 months?

We already excel at disenfranching our emigrants to an extreme degree without people getting hot & bothered about this kind of stuff.

Some countries (such as France) grant their expatriate citizens unlimited voting rights, identical to those of citizens living in their home country. Other countries allow expatriate citizens to vote only for a certain number of years after leaving the country, after which they are no longer eligible to vote (e.g. 15 years for the UK and 25 years for Germany). Other countries reserve the right vote solely to citizens living in that country, thereby stripping expatriate citizens of their voting rights once they leave their home country (such as Ireland, with extremely limited exceptions)

link

Brussels Sprout

L1011 wrote: »

Chu says she is running for the nomination but will not run for the election (as Ind/SD/whatever) if she doesn't get it.

Surprisingly mature decision. I believe the electorate is confined to party members in DBS. I wonder who will be the favourite there?

blackwhite

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

They could have been recent emigrants who had been gone for less than 18 months?

Plenty were not, and were happy to state as such when tweeting.


The irony was that the two referenda that gave rise to the hashtaag showed exactly how to campaign to get laws that you don't like changed. Ignoring those laws and celebrating breaking the laws isn't how you do that

Sam Russell

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

They could have been recent emigrants who had been gone for less than 18 months?

We already excel at disenfranching our emigrants to an extreme degree without people getting hot & bothered about this kind of stuff.



link

It would be ridiculous for Ireland to give all Irish passport holders equivalent voting rights to those citizens living and paying taxes within the state - there are too many who have never been tax resident within the state, or have left and taken up permanent residence elsewhere. Many of these will never return to Ireland to reside here.

That situation does not apply to most other countries to anything like the same extent. For the last century and a half, a very large proportion of the population have been forced by economic need to emigrate. The emigrants may or may not have an interest in Irish politics, but whether they do have an interest, they will not have to live with the consequences of their vote.

Getting back to the thread topic, if Kate O'Connell decides to contest the FG nomination, it will be equivalent to Hazel Chu's bid as being not flavour of the month within the party HQ.

It all adds to the gaiety of the nation.

awec

L1011 wrote: »

Chu says she is running for the nomination but will not run for the election (as Ind/SD/whatever) if she doesn't get it.

It would not be a good look for her to run as an independent again. She would have to face sanctions from the party, they couldn't dodge it again.

As for running as a SD, it would be impossible to hide the careerism any longer.