Ever wonder what motivates TD's to do what they do? A lot of them are highly qualified or have their own business,the hundred grand is loose change.
Not for the money in a lot of cases,maybe they're genuinely in it to do good?
I'd say ego for a lot of them, especially with the bigger parties.
70k is fair, your forgetting about the fact that most TD's spend nearly half their time waffling about getting things done rather than actually getting things done, bad TDs lose their seat but are they held accountable if they feck up badly?
How do you think making it an unpaid role is going to increase the pool of people going for it?
Whether you accept it or not, you would reduce the pool to the already wealthy and nobody else.
Sometimes a job is so shite you need to paid rather well to even be arsed to go for it tbh
Im a Chef and will work all sorts of crazy hours, but I’m paid fairly well to do it. I wouldn’t work for less it wouldn’t be worth it.
I was offered a job in a very nice hotel before for €11/hr. They were laughed at.
Correct. And if you are lucky enough to get a Minister job and pension you have won the lotto.
The salary of the Prime Minister of Spain - a much bigger country than Ireland, with far more taxpayers - is only 97,926 us dollars, so less than that of an Irish TD. An Irish TD is on holidays half the year and stuck in the Dail bar the other half. Ever see the TV debates in the Dail - often only 2 or 3 or 4 people are there, unless it is something very unusual or important. .
I don’t think it’s going to increase the pool of people who go for it, what it does is means there’s a different type of people who go for it, in much the same manner as within volunteering or voluntary roles, there are people who are motivated by all sorts of personal reasons, none of which include financial gain, because there just isn’t any. Some of them have skills which they want to put to good use to improve the lives of others, if not directly, then indirectly, such as the accountant who’s a voluntary board member of a school who does the school’s books, or the principal who’s a board member whom we were at completely opposite ends of the political spectrum, but the one thing we were both passionate about was the right of all children to an education. Other board members had different priorities such as maintaining the reputation of the school and so on.
If I were simply to accept that something which I see as being required to change, couldn’t be changed, I wouldn’t be where I am now. If money were ever my motivating factor, I’d be more inclined to agree with you because I’d be more likely to benefit from the current situation where a TD salary attracts the type of person it does - former teachers, landlords, business owners, etc - people who actually do already have all that free time to serve in public office, and reap the substantial financial rewards of doing so, assisted by a whole bevy of office staff and assistants.
Being a chef though isn’t the same as serving in public office. For one thing being a chef requires the set of skills you have. Serving in public office does not require any particular set of skills. I’m sure you’re also aware of qualified chefs who give generously of their time and expertise to improve other people’s lives, and they aren’t motivated by financial gain? I’d laugh at an employer offering €11 an hour looking for qualified chefs too btw, but I would admire the qualified chef who uses their skills and experience to improve the lives of others and doesn’t expect any financial benefit or reward from doing so. Essentially - they could work as a private chef for a wealthy family or, they could volunteer in a soup kitchen or, they could do both… and hope never to encounter Rishi Sunak in either position 😁
TDs don't Have to listen to 'shite' as you classify it. They go out of their way to assume the position they are in. Plenty of other jobs they might be able to do. Ministers also have helpers that listen to the 'shite' for them, and filter most of it out.
Nice little bit about MP's getting a payrise. I've started it at 55 seconds ink, just before he goes on a rant about MP's.
The key point repeatedly being missed above is that volunteering in your own time, while entirely commendable, isn't a full time job.
Being a TD isn't just a conventional full-time job, it's basically a way of life 24/7.
There's no way whatsoever you could have a day job and be a TD on the side. It's not remotely realistic to suggest it.
No-one goes into politics to "reap the financial rewards". It's a horrific career choice, unbelievably tough and demanding, and very difficult to balance other aspects of your life against.
If my boss came to me tomorrow and said Homelander, we're bumping you up to 105k, but we'll just need you to work 7 days a week over the next four years, and be on-call during holidays, I wouldn't even take a micro-second to consider it.
Politics is absolutely not easy money, it's not an easy life, and it sure as hell isn't very compatible with even the vaguest semblance of good work/life balance, or family life.
It's easy to say "the money's too much considering no qualifications are required", but if it's indeed that easy, public office is open to absolutely everyone and there's no barrier whatsoever to getting involved or striving to get elected.
The "different type of people" is it becoming solely the domain of the wealthy.
You are trying to compare it to one night a week/month voluntary commitments, when it absolutely isn't - this is a full time job. It would be impossible to do it and have another job, hence it will not get volunteers except from those who are already wealthy.
Do you want a government (and opposition) made up entirely of Sunaks?
Been a Politician is a great job, it offers an excellent salary and a really good pension, saying its a horrific career choice is nonsense. Personally I'd gladly take the job for €105k. Their is a barrier to getting elected, it costs quite a bit of money.
the other option is that they're egomaniacs who love the attention and want everyone to know who they are. To become a TD most of them have to battle through the cummans. They have to kiss asses, make promises. They have to threaten and cajole. That's just to get onto the list. Then they have to campaign in an election where they continuously talk about how great they and their party is. Promise everyone the world. Then in power they have to constantly showcase themselves and promote themselves so their voters think they're doing a good job.
I have no doubt that there are good people in politics. But I also believe the job can attract the worst kind of people. People who love the attention.
Certainly not a job for shrinking violets.
Confidence, personal skills, tenacity and a willingness to get stuck in.
These traits are valued in most walks of life.
An accountant on a school board has to go to one meeting for a couple of hours each month and read a few papers in between. They can do this on top of their full time job.
Being a TD is a full time commitment. It’s just silly to suggest it should be restricted to volunteers.
Okay, yes, I don’t have to work 100 hours a week either but if I want to do my job I do. If we want government the pay can’t be total shite either.
i don’t think most of them deserve the money either but I understand the reasons, I guess
Two random names. Rose Conway-Walsh, Mayo and Mary Butler Waterford. Would you say they deserve the money? How do you choose which ones deserve the money?
I never suggested volunteering was a full-time job, and in the same way being a TD is not a full-time job either, nor is it a way of life 24/7 like a vocation. The fact is that it’s precisely because most TDs do hold down full-time jobs or have other sources of income that they aren’t committed to being a TD and doing what is expected of them as a TD. By way of example, James Lawless (and only because he’s mentioned in the article earlier), his day-job, his full-time job, is a barrister. He’s a TD in his spare time, when it suits him. Local politicians who deal with local politics are called councillors, politicians who are elected to serve in the national parliament are called TDs, their responsibility is to the nation.
The attributes you associate with the role of being a politician are easily attributable to any other role you can think of - parenthood for example, is often colloquially regarded as a full-time job, requiring commitment and all the rest of it. It’s comparable to being a politician on exactly the same terms as you’ve chosen, such as it being incompatible with many other choices people have to make, balancing their commitments and prioritising the things which are of greater importance to them. TDs like most employees are not paid on the basis of their personal circumstances, they’re paid on the basis that that’s what the role pays, regardless of their commitment to the role, regardless of their other commitments.
It’s just silly to suggest that the salary is commensurate based upon their performance or their commitment to the role when most TDs appear to treat it as a part-time job or something they do in their spare time anyway. Their re-election prospects are based upon their being viewed favourably in their locality, and Willie O’ Dea for example has been coasting on his looks for the best part of 40 years in politics. He’s a qualified barrister and accountant, but he’s chosen to be a politician. Would he choose to run for election as a TD were it not for the salary? There’s no way of being able to answer that question as it’s never been tested.
I’m not missing your point, I just don’t agree that it’s a legitimate argument.
I’m not comparing being a TD to “one night a week” voluntary commitments. I’m comparing it on the basis that the role of a TD could be fulfilled on a voluntary basis, having their expenses covered, which is more than is included in many voluntary roles. The voluntary role of being on a school board was just an example, and an accountant on a school board was just an example of someone using their skills to indirectly improve people’s lives. It’s why I made the point to Raichu about chefs who use the skills, knowledge and expertise they have gained, in order to improve people’s lives by doing voluntary work. The idea that people couldn’t be found to become involved in politics and do the work that is expected of a TD on a voluntary basis is silly, because they do exist, but the question doesn’t arise because a TD doesn’t have to commit to doing the work of a TD voluntarily.
I wouldn’t want a Government and Opposition made up entirely of Sunaks (we pretty much have that already), but I’m not comparing them on the basis of their wealth, I don’t have any issue with a person being wealthy, I’m happy for them. It’s their inability to relate to people who aren’t themselves is the issue - a cognitive bias if you will. By way of example, if it were a Government and Opposition composed entirely of Richard Bransons, I’d positively piss myself, because I’m aware of the enormous amount of voluntary work and dedication to charity, engagement with enterprising young people, mentoring, advocacy for people with disabilities and so on that Richard Branson does that I’d get over the fact that he wouldn’t like that I wear a tie (it’s a pet peeve of his).
He’s not a perfect example, just like the example of an accountant who sits on the board of a school isn’t a perfect example, but it gives some idea at least of what ordinary people who are highly motivated can do, and could be doing, and doing so voluntarily, and still being able to relate to people (having those soft skills which are mentioned earlier), but the examples should convey an idea, as opposed to the idea of when they are presented with a report about the extent of poverty in Irish society, they switch the focus to instead pointing out that billionaires have debts too, as Leo did in the example I gave earlier.
That kind of cognitive blindness is the sort of thing which fuels the perception that without the role coming with an extraordinary salary, it would not be possible to find competent people willing to work voluntarily as TDs. The question simply doesn’t arise, when they don’t have to, whereas if it were a voluntary role, then it would attract people who are significantly more committed and invested in improving people’s lives, as opposed to simply improving upon what they have themselves already and doing little or nothing at all to improve the lives of people who they are oblivious to, people whom it appears are invisible to them, or unimportant to them because those people aren’t as influential in society given they don’t have access the same resources or opportunities which would enable them to consider or even be considered for, serving in public office. That’s what I mean when I suggest that our national parliament should be more representative of Irish society. As it stands, it’s more reflective of people who couldn’t give a toss, given the levels of invisibility of TDs in the Dáil when they’re expected to be there to participate in matters of national importance, such as, y’know, debates on housing for example -
https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2022/11/22/opposition-parties-join-forces-to-pressure-government-over-housing-emergency/
I'm not quoting a wall of text; but the TDs who have qualifications in other professions are not practicing as them while a TD - Lawless is not working as a barrister currently. Being a TD is a full time job and must be paid as such; reducing it to expenses will ensure that every single one of the current set and pretty close to everyone serious who has ever run would not do it.
Your proposal is bonkers and would ensure we a Dáil full of Sunaks. We already have a Senate full of double jobbers. Those Sunak-alikes would not be doing it out of volunteer spirit, but as a way to further their own business interests alone.
I don’t keep tabs on the man, but when did he decide to commit to being a TD full-time and give up work as a barrister? ‘Currently’ implies a somewhat recent transition -
Mr Lawless pointed out that as a backbench TD he had fewer speaking opportunities in the Dáil, which reduced the amount of time he was required to be in the chamber, while there were also personal reasons why he could not attend Leinster House on certain days.
The Kildare TD, who also practises as a barrister, said he did not believe his legal work impacted on his Dáil attendance.
“I do not accept instructions which clash with Dáil business and in fact the number of cases heard in the courts during Covid was drastically reduced,” he added.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/tds-can-net-full-whack-of-travel-expenses-even-if-they-miss-a-raft-of-actual-dail-sittings-41515135.html
And as for the idea of furthering their own business interests and double-jobbing, the Healy-Rae dynasty have done particularly well for themselves in that regard -
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/michael-healy-raes-47m-property-portfolio-heads-the-list-of-landlords-in-the-current-dail-40886739.html
Again, just examples, by way of refuting the idea that we don’t have that already, and to demonstrate that by changing the criteria for the role, you change the candidates who are interested in applying for the role. Without the financial incentive, it takes the idea of the financial incentive off the table. Bonkers, I know.
I don’t particularly care for what TDs are paid, because I would suggest that in performing a public service they should have their expenses covered and the role should be voluntary
You see this sort of take bandied about but if you follow it through to it's natural conclusion it quickly becomes apparent that it's not a good idea. If T.D.s were not paid then straight away:
I say pay them properly. It's a rotten job - especially for women. Also, yes you don't need any qualifications to get the job but that doesn't mean that it's an easy job to get. It's extremely difficult to become a T.D. - most people who run as independents are complete no-hopers who are lucky to get a few hundred votes. Anyone who runs for a political party likely put in years of membership and had to get through a nomination process and probably a few years as a councilor and even after all that most people running for parties fail to get elected for Dáil seats. Yes, there were a number of candidates who got elected for SF last time out who seem to have had little or no experience anywhere but that was a freak occurrence due to their unexpectedly swift rise in the polls during the campaign.
There’s no “cognitive blindness”. It’s just a silly idea.
The vast majority of people involved in politics here are on a voluntary basis, so this isn’t a novel idea from you. Those who manage to get themselves elected to a representative position are paid. Anyone who doesn’t want the payment can decline it.
Councillors get pocket money. Senators get a basic salary. TDs get a decent salary.
Most Councillors, lots of Senators and a few TDs continue to have other work. Willie Penrose continued to practice as a barrister while a TD.
Removing the payment would dramatically reduce the number of people who could take on these roles. Time to stop digging.
Jesus Andrew that came off as unnecessarily personal 😂
I’m quite aware it’s not a novel idea from me as I’m not the first person who ever suggested the idea in the first place, and obviously I do not expect that TDs will ever propose a change in legislation which would deprive TDs of what I consider to be an extraordinary salary for the role.
At least with the example of Willie Penrose we might finally put this idea to bed that TDs cannot do what is expected of them while also holding down a day-job as it were. I’m assuming all of us here work crazy hours and we are not similarly compensated, in much the same manner as there are thousands of people who work crazy hours for not much more than TDs allowance as the salary for the role, ie - approx €30k. I think it’s important to question whether or not the salary of a TD can be justified on the basis that it is compensation which I consider extraordinary, and whether it’s possible to attain a better outcome for the nation on the basis of expecting the role should be fulfilled on a voluntary basis.
It would certainly open up opportunities for people who would never have previously thought to become TDs, let alone upcoming generations who are highly motivated and wish to advocate for the issues which are important to them but find Irish politics to be a bit of a closed shop.
It was a freak occurrence due to the fact that it was more of a protest vote IMO against the Government of the time, out of desperation more than SF ever being capable of presenting themselves as a legitimate alternative actually worthy of consideration. Our national media doesn’t help matters by appearing to be more focused on magnifying trivial and inconsequential matters rather than focusing on issues which are of national importance, but don’t sell papers or generate clicks. It doesn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s any bit switched on when SF are gaining traction in the polls based on their populist rhetoric. Even Willie has become a bit disenfranchised with his party, but I’ll only believe he’ll run as an independent when I see it (unfortunately all the articles I can link to are behind paywalls… seems appropriate 😒).
A free press means that there is no censorship. If you want to consume highbrow content it is available. You are far from being the only one to go on about dumbing down, wanting your particular interests pandered to while dismissing the interests of others as being trivial. And in the internet age it is appropriate that a fee would be charged for online versions just the same as printed versions.
I think you are far too exercised about the wages of 160 people who come and go at the will of the people.
Who’s demanding censorship? I’ve not once questioned freedom of the press, I question their commitment to that ideal when personality appears to take precedence over policies. I think you may be taking my annoyance at being unable to provide a source for my opinion without paying for it, a tad too seriously tbh.
The issue has nothing to do with the wages of 160 people In any case, the issue is the salary for the ROLE of a TD, whether it can be justified, and whether the commitments which are required by the role can be fulfilled on a voluntary basis. If one is accustomed to a certain lifestyle, it stands to reason that they would argue that such a proposal is preposterous.
The issue has everything to do with the wages of 160 people. And you wanting them to work for nothing.
They don't use US dollars in Spain, they use the Euro. Like we do in Ireland, you know like?
Barristers like Willie don't practice full-time while in the Dail. They'll practice part-time, often continuing cases that they were previously involved in. It is not a 'day job'.
Again, taking away salary most certainly does not "certainly open up opportunities for people who would never have previously thought to become TDs". Anyone who can become a TD with no salary can become a TD with a salary and decline their salary. You're not adding any options, just taking options away for the vast majority of people.
Willie can practice full-time, part-time, whatever time suits him, once he is prepared to commit to the role of a TD which is not only the purpose, but the basis on which he was elected to the position. The point is that it puts to bed the notion of being a TD being something of an all-consuming 24/7/365 commitment that one has to make enormous sacrifices in order to meet the demands of the role which it is claimed justify the extraordinary salary.
It certainly does open up opportunities because it completely changes the nature of the role and puts the value back in terms of performing a public service, as opposed to being in service of oneself. The point you’re making about TDs having the choice to decline the salary is not the same as there being no salary on offer in the first place. It attracts a different sort of person to the role, and they can still claim expenses. I won’t quibble about Micheál Healy Rae using up all the printer ink or running up a hefty phone bill on premium rate numbers, I don’t sweat the small stuff 😂
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ten-thousand-taxpayer-funded-calendars-printed-for-michael-healy-rae-were-dumped-in-recycle-bin-over-missing-hyphen-41406932.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/healy-rae-pays-phone-call-costs-1.879495
You're sweating on the tiny stuff. Pay for politicians is miniscule compared to Social Welfare payments.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/925678a10b2fdb0546d802550390a10f.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
