Boards.ie Seanad Referendum

jobeenfitz · 13-09-2013 12:11AM

Reform it? This is just a ploy to save it. If it is retained then they will probably thinker around the edges with reforms. Don't be hoodwinked, abolish it. It has no power and no real function and that will not change, ever!

Oakboy · 13-09-2013 12:15AM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum? I decided not to give an option for reform because its not on the ballot paper.

I personally am against abolition and would like to see it kept as it is a worthwhile institution. It gave reformers, such as Norris and Robinson an initial platform for real change in the past. Ideally would like to see a reformed house, with a much wider franchise.

Abolition is extreme short sightedness, and for what savings? People in favour of abolition need to get past their "hurrr hurrr rabble politicians salaries and it a recession huurrrr hurrr rabble" silly thinking and realise that it is an institution that can be very valuable. It is ridiculous at the moment and I know reform is not on the ballot but if it is abolished then that is it gone for good.

It needs to be ran like a general election (where the whole voting population can vote) in the middle of the Dail term so a proper check and balance system can operate.

The only valid reason for getting rid of it would be the end of that horrible cretin Ivana Bacik

BuilderPlumber · 23-09-2013 07:55PM

I think all politics needs major reform in Ireland. Mainly because they are just lazy, incompetent and self serving.

Look at how a minor financial crisis was turned into something much worse mainly due to politicians' incompetence and a negative media. Their incompetence caused mass unemployment, unnecessary bailouts, the IMF to come in, etc.

Now, what if some REAL crisis hit Ireland? Like, Sellafield blew up, a civil war, an invasion, a terrorist attack, etc. I could not trust our leaders to look after us since they did so poorly with the current situation. The iodine tablets handout in late 2001 would give us an indication of how they would act if a terrorist attack or nuclear accident was to occur.

With this in mind, I would preferably like to see the Seanad and all forms of government reformed. Incompetence, lack of action, poor judgement and corruption have collectively failed Ireland and many other countries too. Irish and world leaders need to learn from their mistakes and poor performing politicians who break their promises should have no place in any nation calling itself a democracy.

theLegion · 23-09-2013 08:46PM

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Now, what if some REAL crisis hit Ireland? Like, Sellafield blew up, a civil war, an invasion, a terrorist attack, etc. I could not trust our leaders to look after us since they did so poorly with the current situation. The iodine tablets handout in late 2001 would give us an indication of how they would act if a terrorist attack or nuclear accident was to occur.

Well you'd be begging for iodine tablets if a radiation leak did indeed occur.

One overlooked item in this referendum:

Referral of Bills to the People

The Constitution provides that Bills may be referred to the people for a referendum if a majority of members of the Seanad and not less than one third of the members of the Dáil ask the President not to sign a Bill because it contains a proposal of such national importance that the decision to have such a law should be made by the people. The President may agree or disagree with this request.

If this referendum is passed:

This possibility of the reference of Bills to the people by the President will be removed from the Constitution.

http://referendum2013.ie/the-seanad-other-changes/

Not that this option was ever used...

I'm torn on how to vote.

Lando Griffin · 23-09-2013 08:56PM

Stinks to the high heavens from a time gone by. An old school establishment that liked to be in bed with De Valera like the Cathloic church and the Gardiand RTE.
Needs to be abolishd and the numbers of TDs cut in half.
Joke of a country.

Hitchens · 23-09-2013 08:58PM

it can't go soon enough imo

Muise... · 23-09-2013 09:02PM

if the referendum is defeated I might apply for a vote -I never bothered with it, but I have degrees from both DU and NUI - maybe I'll get two votes and spoil them both.

Idbatterim · 23-09-2013 09:05PM

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

Hitchens · 23-09-2013 09:07PM

Idbatterim wrote: »

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

the senate is just social welfare for the well off........and the well in

Nodin · 23-09-2013 09:09PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum? I decided not to give an option for reform because its not on the ballot paper.

I personally am against abolition and would like to see it kept as it is a worthwhile institution. It gave reformers, such as Norris and Robinson an initial platform for real change in the past. Ideally would like to see a reformed house, with a much wider franchise.

I'd keep it and reform it. In its current form its not worth a ****.

Mr. G · 23-09-2013 09:10PM

No. Its my opinion that the TDs just want to get rid of the Seanad to make the IMF happy and to keep their jobs secure.

I think a second voice is a good thing.

Mr. G · 23-09-2013 09:11PM

I'd keep it and reform it.

Days 298 · 23-09-2013 09:11PM

Idbatterim wrote: »

If the point of abolishing it is to save an alleged 20 million :rolleyes: who actually gives a toss. Its a smoke screen... Its a tenth of a percent of the welfare budget!

Cant really complain about the big cutbacks if the small ones are treated as shure thats nothing. Id rather see a load of rubbish go than cut services and still be left with the rubbish after this mess. Should have been the first to go. How many people currently servicing are any good? If they are any good why don't they run for the dail where things actually happen. It's a gravy train albeit small still a gravy train.

Technoprisoner · 23-09-2013 09:25PM

im voting to keep it....if enda is worried he cant provide a good enough argument to abolish it, in a live debate then it has to be worth keeping.

Zebra3 · 23-09-2013 09:29PM

I'll be voting to get rid of this undemocratic gravy train.

How many times will we be voting on it though? :rolleyes:

theLegion · 23-09-2013 09:31PM

Technoprisoner wrote: »

im voting to keep it....if enda is worried he cant provide a good enough argument to abolish it, in a live debate then it has to be worth keeping.

Can you name 5 current senators? It has served no real benefit. It acts as a power outlet for councillors who vote in much of the senators promoting croynism and nepotism.

Wilberto · 23-09-2013 10:17PM

As mentioned previously, a reformed Seanad can prove to be a very useful "tool". However, I think two major changes need to happen:

1. The party affiliations of the Senators in the Seanad need to be eliminated. Why not have independent intellectuals in the House debating the legislation that has been passed by the Dáil. Let them have the power to either pass it to the President, or make recommendations, or possibly even veto proposed legislation. The Party whip system works well in the Dáil but it has no value in the Seanad apart from rendering the upper house effectively useless.

2. The election of Seanad members also needs to change. However, I'm still not convinced that allowing everyone that is entitled to vote in the General Election to vote in the Seanad Elections is the way to go. This could just lead to "a second Dáil". Although, if point 1 is implemented fully then this probably shouldn't be an issue. I'd like to see the Univerities element possibly getting a larger share of the seats, with the voting eligibility widened to far more universities, and even IT's.

I know that, as a consequence of point 1 being implemented, the legislative process would be slower, with pieces of legislation travelling back and forth between the two Houses but at least when it does get passed, the general public will know that it has been through some rigorous "testing".

Also, if Fine Gael don't reform the Seanad should the referendum be defeated you can be damn sure that the likes of Micheál Martin, Pierse Doherty, Mary Lou, etc. will make sure that the public remember that come 2016! It'll be just one more bullet that Enda Kenny will have to dodge.

pajor · 23-09-2013 10:19PM

That poll needs Atari Jaguar.

It's what I'll probably vote. :pac:

zl1whqvjs75cdy · 23-09-2013 10:26PM

What do Sinn Fein want, I'll probably vote the opposite of that.

In all seriousness I do think it should be kept but massively reformed. I think if we vote to keep it there will not be any reform however so I'm a bit torn about it.

Days 298 · 23-09-2013 10:28PM

Trevor Enough Rawhide wrote: »

What do Sinn Fein want, I'll probably vote the opposite of that.

In all seriousness I do think it should be kept but massively reformed. I think if we vote to keep it there will not be any reform however so I'm a bit torn about it.

So you're voting with Fianna Fail :pac:

astrofool · 23-09-2013 10:29PM

A sitting Dáil will never ever relinquish power to a second chamber, thus the Seanad will always remain toothless, it needs to be abolished, imagining it'll be reformed is daydreaming.

And got to laugh at FF wanting to keep it, need somewhere to put the crooks who lose their seats.

BuilderPlumber · 23-09-2013 10:29PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

I'll be voting to get rid of this undemocratic gravy train.

How many times will we be voting on it though? :rolleyes:

The Seanad as it is at present is only one part of the Irish political system I'd like to see reformed or gone. A major major problem we have are the surplus of TDs, many of whom have little ability and are not seen from one election to the next.

In many counties, I notice that all the main parties (FG, FF, Labour) seem to make poor judgements on who runs for them in the elections (surely, there are better people within these parties than the tossers who end up running for the election: more often than not, people are left with no choice).

The TDs do the same work as local councillors (who are not as well paid) more often than not. You note as well that many TDs don't even personally attend their clinics. Senators are totally aloof from the people and have no true purpose.

So, FF are now the only party supporting keeping it. I guess all the Donie Cassidy types have a huge voice here! The Taoiseach's 11 is another part of the process I disagree with. Bertie for example packed it full with his cronies.

As said earlier, I could not trust the Irish political system in times of crisis (as noted earlier, they made what was initially a much lesser financial crisis into a major one so what would they do in a terrorist attack situation or if these republican types attempted a takeover).

Wilberto · 23-09-2013 10:30PM

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

What do Sinn Fein want, I'll probably vote the opposite of that.

In all seriousness I do think it should be kept but massively reformed. I think if we vote to keep it there will not be any reform however so I'm a bit torn about it.

Sinn Fein want it abolished. However, they are giving out smashing arguments as to why it should be reformed!

Technoprisoner · 23-09-2013 10:37PM

theLegion wrote: »

Can you name 5 current senators? It has served no real benefit. It acts as a power outlet for councillors who vote in much of the senators promoting croynism and nepotism.

i could probably name 3 or 4...but what difference does that make? i could probably only manage the same if i was to name members of fine gael or labour does that mean they should not be there? the seanad is the last voice the people has before a law is passed. Its a place where our scholars can come and air there opinions about the way the country is ran..i agree there is a certain amount of nepotism but we have that in the dail as well and cronyism. but this is why it should be reformed. i strongly disagree with the taoiseach being able to appoint 11 members of his choice and the way some of the others are elected.

BuilderPlumber · 23-09-2013 10:41PM

Technoprisoner wrote: »

i could probably name 3 or 4...but what difference does that make? i could probably only manage the same if i was to name members of fine gael or labour does that mean they should not be there? the seanad is the last voice the people has before a law is passed. Its a place where our scholars can come and air there opinions about the way the country is ran..i agree there is a certain amount of nepotism but we have that in the dail as well and cronyism. but this is why it should be reformed. i strongly disagree with the taoiseach being able to appoint 11 members of his choice and the way some of the others are elected.

The only senators I can name are: Pascal Mooney, Tony 'Killinaskully' Mulcahy, Prof Crown, Fergal Quinn, a fellow called Mullen I think, and of course David Norris. After that, I know Donie Cassidy was one but not now.

manonboard · 23-09-2013 10:47PM

I'll be voting no because I believe in the purpose of Seanad and believe that abolition will mean no future reform. Hard to fix something that doesn't exist.

and for 2 constitutional changes I am not happy with as outlined in this post:

manonboard wrote: »

There are 2 further reasons I believe I will vote no that should of been altered in a better way.

These 2 are:

1. This possibility of the reference of Bills to the people by the President will be removed from the Constitution.

Currently, it requires the majority of Seanad and 1/3 of the Dail to propose to the president that a bill is of such national importance to the people that it should be decided by a referendum of the people.

I cannot in good conscience sign this right away. This right is important to me. It is a right that would be invaluable when the time comes to use it. Without the Seanad, it cannot be used and will be removed from our constitution. It cannot be a Dail only vote as this makes no sense, so it's either keep the Seanad and the right, or lose them both.
If a issue ever arises where this would of be enacted and cannot in future. It would be a travesty against our society.

2. Removal of judges.

I'm scared of this change. I will not voluntary allow the Dail house, ruled by a party with whip to be also single handily be able to remove people from the judiciary system. I see TDs scared to judge issues independently because of the fear of being removed from office. So why would judges not feel the same fear? In the worst case scenario, I could see a judge who is habitually ruling against the state in cases or likely to declare a proposed legislation as unconstitutional removed from their post.
In a moderate case, I envisage that the judiciary system will oppose the government and state less willingly and less often if they are in fear of their positions being removed.
It scares me to allow a government power to control the people who are there to keep that power in check.

If anyone disagrees for good reason, please share. I wish to cast my vote with as much knowledge as possible.

Son Of A Vidic · 23-09-2013 10:56PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Seanad Eireann should be abolished in the upcoming referendum?

No I don't actually. but I do think we could reduce the number of sitting TD's from 166 down to 47. Culling 119 TD's would save us taxpayers a much greater amount of money than abolishing the Seanad would. The Spanish parliament has 1 Deputy for every 130,000 citizens. The German parliament has 1 member for every 129,000 citizens and the U.K has I MP for every 92,000 citizens. Yet we have 1 TD for every 25,000 citizens. Yes we have a level of parliamentary representation, that is 5 times greater than either Spain or Germany and 3.6 times greater than the U.K. So never mind the Seanad, the Dáil is where we can really save money imo.

theLegion · 23-09-2013 10:59PM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

No I don't actually. but I do think we could reduce the number of sitting TD's from 166 down to 47. Culling 119 TD's would save us taxpayers a much greater amount of money than abolishing the Seanad would. The Spanish parliament has 1 Deputy for every 130,000 citizens. The German parliament has 1 member for every 129,000 citizens and the U.K has I MP for every 92,000 citizens. Yet we have 1 TD for every 25,000 citizens. Yes we have a level of parliamentary representation, that is 5 times greater than either Spain or Germany and 3.6 times greater than the U.K. So never mind the Seanad, the Dáil is where we can really save money imo.

You can't run a country with 47 TD's - the government needs about 18 ministers. Cutting the Seanad would cull 60 oireachtas members and all their expenses.

Wilberto · 23-09-2013 11:02PM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

No I don't actually. but I do think we could reduce the number of sitting TD's from 166 down to 47. Culling 119 TD's would save us taxpayers a much greater amount of money than abolishing the Seanad would. The Spanish parliament has 1 Deputy for every 130,000 citizens. The German parliament has 1 member for every 129,000 citizens and the U.K has I MP for every 92,000 citizens. Yet we have 1 TD for every 25,000 citizens. Yes we have a level of parliamentary representation, that is 5 times greater than either Spain or Germany and 3.6 times greater than the U.K. So never mind the Seanad, the Dáil is where we can really save money imo.

Yup. Especially when the country is run by a group of 15 lads and lassies sitting around a table anyway.

jobeenfitz · 23-09-2013 11:07PM

Abolish or reform? Big smoke screen by some politicians. All talk of reform will be forgotten if the Seanad is retained. I think it is madness to believe it will ever be anything more than a talking shop.

Boards.ie Seanad Referendum

Comments