Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

United Ireland governing system

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909147#Comment_120909147

    A) barely and by being incredibly divisive

    B) an executive president performing terribly getting re-elected does nothing for your argument that its a better system



  • Options
    #63
    shkrood
    Registered Users Posts: 16 ✭shkrood


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120896380#Comment_120896380

    Generally it’s a bad idea to centralise power. Anywhere where power can be distributed, distribute it. If impossible, move it up and centralise, but only if necessary. Put power in as many hands as you can.



  • Options
    #64
    dublincc2
    Registered Users Posts: 373 ✭✭dublincc2


    Having a president who can issue executive orders instead of parliamentary bureaucracy which takes too long would be preferable.

    In addition I don’t see the drawbacks in having a technocratic cabinet. Ministers should be chosen on the basis of experience and background in the field of their ministry, as opposed to some random primary school teacher from Westport or an accountant from Clonmel who is elected as a TD for the largest party and has little knowledge of his brief.



  • Options
    #65
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,666 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909147#Comment_120909147

    You brought him up as an example of why we should change to a presidential executive so its your job to back up that up with reasons somewhat based in facts when asked. Maybe try something beyond the simplified personal opinions youve been giving out up until now in the thread to back up your proposals.



  • Options
    #66
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,666 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909285#Comment_120909285

    Speed doesn't make for better laws or policies also since executive orders can be rescinded just as easily as they are enacted they are purely short term solutions that plug holes instead of pushing forward long term progress or change.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Executive orders are only required in dysfunctional systems. Like the one proposed here.



  • Options
    #68
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 38,972 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909285#Comment_120909285

    Your proposals don't make much logical sense, when compared to what is in place, and based around short-term and populist right-wing thinking (and that's absolutely fine if you choose to believe in that). However, you've been asked to elaborate on some of your proposals so with my mod hat on: mod: if you're asked to back up some of your points, please do so as otherwise it comes across as trolling which may result in a ban!



  • Options
    #69
    dublincc2
    Registered Users Posts: 373 ✭✭dublincc2


    You would be biting directly for one person and on their policies, instead of a party which may not get in or which may go into a coalition government where their manifesto pledges are diluted.

    In a united Ireland we would need to build a genuinely new state, this has already been accepted by many commentators and politicians.

    An executive president would streamline and modernise the new republic, bringing stability and trust that is needed for the 32 county Ireland to develop and grow. Party political arguments and point scoring would be vastly reduced. Ireland can leap into the future.

    It would allow decisions to be made at a quicker pace and avoid a lot of the current bureaucracy in the Oireachtas. Ireland would also be protected from authoritarian tendencies by the parliamentary veto outlined above, and an independent judiciary.

    I think putting trust in a person with direct ambition and drive to lead the country without the constraints of being an elected TD would be beneficial to all.

    In terms of the vice presidency, ideally there would only be one vice president but I suggested that the president could appoint more if he or she wished, the second vice president preferably being someone from the Ulster Protestant community.



  • Options
    #70
    dublincc2
    Registered Users Posts: 373 ✭✭dublincc2


    The reason I believe this is the way to govern a reunified Ireland is twofold.

    Firstly, symbolic. A new Ireland should break from the Westminster style of government to demonstrate that we are a separate republic with strong executive institutions, instead of an elected monarch-type figurehead for 7/14 years which is what we have here. A president with actual power and relevance who could serve for a maximum of two five year terms.

    Secondly, efficiency. Instead of a cabinet of ministers often inexperienced in their brief answerable to the Oireachtas and thus embroiled in party politics, a single person elected by the majority could decide who sits on the cabinet based on merit and background in the field. Thus, making the decision-making process more efficient. Executive orders issued by the president allow for faster implementation without the bureaucratic process. The Dáil would no longer have interpellation and thus cannot slow down presidential decrees.



  • Options
    #71
    dublincc2
    Registered Users Posts: 373 ✭✭dublincc2


    What else is there to elaborate on?



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    cj maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,446 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx


    I'd limit TD's to 100 .there's enough civil war scroungers living off the state (and us )



  • Options
    #73
    Furze99
    Registered Users Posts: 10,427 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909218#Comment_120909218

    I get your point but the downside of putting power in as many hands as you can, is that you end up with too many loci of power and therefore too many borders, too many people on little power trips rowing with their adjacent areas. This screws up things for the ordinary citizen. As pointed out above, if you live near or on a local authority/ county council border as it stands, you learn about these disadvantages. Too many borders for a small island, remove them and have five regional authorities. By all means have local committees within each but these in advisory capacity.



  • Options
    #74
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I cannot see the people of Ireland voting for any suggestions made wrt the President - possible reduce tenure to a term of five years and increase the minimum age to 45 years, but that is about it.

    The President is guardian of the constitution, acting through the Supreme Court, following the advice of the Council of State. He is the official the oversees the calling of a GE, and the appointment of Ministers and Judges. He is outside politics - or at least political parties.

    I cannot see any advantage of changing that.

    Any change to the constitution following a vote for a UI would be just a revision to take account of the change to a UI. Some revisions would be to broaden the scope of equality of all citizens before the law, and not to give exceptions to any subgroup within the population.

    The Senate might do with reform, particularly its suffrage - extending it to all adults, and perhaps restricting those who can stand so that it stops being a retirement home for failed TDs.

    Restricting the number of TDs to say 160, and not having it depend on the population is worthy of implementing. If the USA can get by with 100 Senators, then little old Ireland could surely manage with 160 TDs.

    The flag and anthem are the tokens of the nation and could be changed, or modified, to reclaim the flag for the nation away from groups who have usurped it without any agreement from the general population of Ireland. I would think adding the official version of the Harp somewhere would be a good modification, and allow this reclaim.

    Generally, the Irish State has reached a level of maturity and inclusion in the time since the GFA that should be recognised and is quite capable of being able to welcome all of NI, and prosper as a United Ireland.



  • Options
    #75
    Furze99
    Registered Users Posts: 10,427 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911240#Comment_120911240

    The trick though will be to give Ulster or Munster for that matter, a sense of being more in control of regional affairs. Rather than everything funneling through Dublin. Which is why some sort of federal system would fit the bill.



  • Options
    #76
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120912642#Comment_120912642

    Of course there is another approach.

    Move the capital of Ireland to Armagh. Stormont could become the seat of an all-island Dail and Senate.

    It worked for Australia, Nigeria, Brazil, and many other countries. Noe what Unionist could not vote for that?



  • Options
    #77
    Furze99
    Registered Users Posts: 10,427 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120914713#Comment_120914713

    Well you know what the likely response to that otherwise reasonable idea would be down here. Apoplectic outrage from certain quarters and 'it's not for this that Pearse died in 1916... blah blah'.



  • Options
    #78
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120914971#Comment_120914971

    Are you sure about that?

    Armagh is the seat of the Primate of All Ireland - for both the Catholic church and the Church of Ireland. Why would anyone begrudge the title of Capital Of Ireland to such a Place?

    If it persuaded most Unionists that a UI would not be a cold house for them, then surely it is a small price.

    Do not leave the perfect be the enemy of the good. That is the mistake fundamentalists make, when giving a few wins early could give the ultimate prize we all will be grateful for in the long run. Even OO marches down O'Connell St could be OK for the tourist industry - to rival St Patrick's Day celebrations. We also have Chinese New Year, and the Muslim feast of Ide.

    We can be very accommodating.



  • Options
    #79
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,105 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911240#Comment_120911240

    The Senate in the USA is the upper house of parliament

    The comparator to the Dail is the House of Representatives, which has 435 members.



  • Options
    #80
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120915749#Comment_120915749

    435 Congessmen for 338 million USA citizens, whille we make do with 160 TDs for 50 million. 60 senators for us and 100 for the USA.

    Just how do they manage?



  • Options
    #81
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,105 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    There are also:

    50x State Govts, with 50 Departments of Transport, Health, Education, etc.

    50x State Senates

    50x State House of Reps

    50x State police forces


    Thousands of local govts

    Thousands of elected local Govt members

    Thousands of Mayors

    Thousands of local police forces



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,105 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120916033#Comment_120916033


    The USA is a federation, with much state exp and taxes devolved to States.

    The federal Govt is smaller, relative to GDP, compared to us, as so much is decentralised.



  • Options
    #83
    Furze99
    Registered Users Posts: 10,427 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120915442#Comment_120915442

    Personally I don't see any problem at all with Armagh as being the location of a national assembly or Orange marches on O'Connell Street, same as Paddy Day parades.

    But we all know that for many citizens of this Republic, that would cause apoplexy.



  • Options
    #84
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120917947#Comment_120917947

    I doubt it.

    There was no apoplexy when divorce was approved - and by a tiny majority. Nor when the 8th was revoked. Nor when same sex civil partnership was brought in. Nor when same sex marriage was passed in a referendum by a huge majority.

    Now they were all expected to cause apoplexy - but no. All welcomed hugely - and more so as time passes.

    The GFA was accepted by a huge majority as well - much to the relief of all.

    I think apoplexy if a disappearing art form - only for the feeble minded, and the bigots.



  • Options
    #85
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,117 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909147#Comment_120909147

    The fact that Erdogan won is hardly an endorsement of a presidential over a parliamentary system. After all, if the other guy had won, he too would have been elected to an executive presidency.

    The issue here is not who won the election; it's whether the Turkish example suggests to us that a presidential republic would be a good model for Ireland.

    The answer, I think, is "no". Turkey is rated "not free" by Freedom House, whose criterion is whether a country is a democratic country with a government accountable to the people. In their view the government has "growing contempt for political rights and civil liberties" and it is engaged in "a dramatic and wide-ranging crackdown on perceived opponents". Relevantly Erdogan has "concentrated power in the hands of the president", which is concerning because "opposition victories in 2019 municipal elections and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the already shaky economy have given the government new incentives to suppress dissent and limit public discourse".

    Don't believe Freedom House? The Carnegie Foundations takes the view that Turkey "has embarked on a militaristic foreign policy, and its democracy . . . has given way to one-man rule". The Economist considers that Erdogan has "dismantled many of the country’s democratic institutions" and that "Turkey is still just a democracy, but it is not certain to remain that way".

    You may not agree with these perceptions, but they are not coming from the radical left. These are fairly traditional right-of-centre perspectives on Turkey.

    Erdogan's only cheerleaders, really, seem to be authoritarians who like a government that delivers a firm slap, regardless of outcomes for freedom, well-being or human rights. If that's the kind of government that you want for Ireland, well, the Turkish experience suggests that a presidential republic may help to deliver it. But I think you're going to need to find a more compelling case than Turkey to persuade most people.



  • Options
    #86
    cj maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,446 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120917947#Comment_120917947

    Armagh is tiny. I a federal Ireland it would by the obvious Belfast, Dublin Galway and Cork.



  • Options
    #87
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120922703#Comment_120922703

    Why should it matter how big Armagh is?

    There are problems with Belfast, Galway and Cork. Each has its problems.

    It is a gesture to offer the designation to somewhere in NI, but not Derry, nor Belfast.

    So if Armagh was OK for St Patrick, the Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland, why not for a new UI?

    Stormont might make a good option for the Dail and Senate. The new Gov of the new UI can be decentralised.



  • Options
    #88
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120922959#Comment_120922959

    Because where various churches deem worthy of having nominal heads is of literally zero relevance to where the capital of a state should be. If anything its deeply regressive.

    Size matters and suggesting Armagh for the capital is ridiculous. Unless it was a capital in name only and had no executive or legislature, in which case what is the point?



  • Options
    #89
    dublincc2
    Registered Users Posts: 373 ✭✭dublincc2


    Although my #1 choice for the seat of a united Ireland parliament is the College Green Bank of Ireland, I would be happy to have the institutions housed in Armagh. The city has space to expand, old palace houses for the president to reside and its Catholic majority but not sectarian.



  • Options
    #90
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120923145#Comment_120923145

    Symbolism.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120923505#Comment_120923505

    Having the capital in the seat of religious power is _terrible_ symbolism.



Advertisement