Would You Be In Favour Of A Complete Re-Structure In Irish Politics

ISAW

oncevotedff wrote: »

To that we need to stop our graduates from heading to the nearest airport as soon as they receive their degree. We'd also need to revamp our education system to reduce the number of useful arts graduates and replace them with science and engineering types. Ultimately though we need to do away with our dependence on foreign companies providing huge employment.

AS someone who spent ten years promoting investment in R&D I think scientists are the last people to be running the economy and so do they.

The whole "smart economy" thing is a misunderstood myth! And many politicians and other policy makers don't understand the issues. For example the people running FÁS and the innovation council. REmember the big Farmleigh meeting? Some CEO of Dell or Microsoft says something asnd everyoine focuses on that. While they know about business and speciffically their own business many CEOs are necessarily creators of knowledge. the whole thing is an organic system. Yes there needs to be investment in the knowledge base. But there has been. Billions of it! What has it given us in terms of jobs or products? I know of many of the Irish Companies and I believe the SME's need to have a knowledge base but other factors have to be considered.

there has to be a culture which supports a smart economy. arts graduates are part of this . As are sports people. And entertainers. there has to be a financial system which is tuned for it as well. And you also need innovators. These are NOT scientists. They are people who take the good ideas of scientists and make them into patentable products. People like Steve Jobs. He got the killer applications for Apple from Xerox! Bill Gates also had support from his cultural background and didnt exist in isolation.

Maybe that is how we should restructure FAS? - to bring finance knowledge and sociocultural factors together. there are a lot of people in FAS doing a good job but the whole system needs more joined up thinking. Putting CEO's and senior execs in a room (many of whom if they quit their job would be on 250k a year pension) won't sort out the systemic problems. And Union leaders on the same whack don't cut the mustard either as far as I reckon.

ISAW

feelingstressed wrote: »

Kilkenny

i was going to say that. Not under the Act. But isnt it mentioned as a City in the annex to an Act?

An Irish city as defined under the 2001 Local government Act. which lists Ireland’s towns and cities, but declines to offer any clarification of how they are identified. The section that outlines the areas governed, and terms of reference, of the country’s City Councils, “is without prejudice to the continued use of the description city in relation to Kilkenny, to the extent that that description was used before the establishment day and is not otherwise inconsistent with this Act"

But go on then let us call it a City. It has a City council.

ISAW

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The people (and the states) wanted GW Bush, and they got him. I don't see how that reflects on the American system of government at all. .

No they didnt! More people didnt vote for him and Bush and his pals rigged Florida by cutting out black voters (declaring them ex felons) and "filtering" postal voters from the Military and orchestrating a media call for Bush in order to get Gore to admit defeat and stopping the recount (which Gore would have won) by getting the courts to interfere.

thetonynator

feelingstressed wrote: »

Kilkenny

ISAW wrote: »

i was going to say that. Not under the Act. But isnt it mentioned as a City in the annex to an Act?

An Irish city as defined under the 2001 Local government Act. which lists Ireland’s towns and cities, but declines to offer any clarification of how they are identified. The section that outlines the areas governed, and terms of reference, of the country’s City Councils, “is without prejudice to the continued use of the description city in relation to Kilkenny, to the extent that that description was used before the establishment day and is not otherwise inconsistent with this Act"

But go on then let us call it a City. It has a City council.

In theory, yes. But if you live there, i wouldnt go so far as to describe it as a city, for the purpose of constituencies anyway. But we like to think it is anyway!!

Eliot Rosewater

ISAW wrote: »

No they didnt! More people didnt vote for him and Bush and his pals rigged Florida by cutting out black voters (declaring them ex felons) and "filtering" postal voters from the Military and orchestrating a media call for Bush in order to get Gore to admit defeat and stopping the recount (which Gore would have won) by getting the courts to interfere.

And that discredits the separation of powers in the American government how?

rantie

The main problem in Ireland is that we cannot answer a question directly. This thread is entitled: Would You Be In Favour Of A Complete Re-Structure In Irish Politics?
I don't' see any attempt to answer it yet...
My two-penn'orth would be:
Since the FF party machine has been in power for the majority of the life of this state, not only is it corrupt, but the entire civil service has become just an arm of the party, making it impossible for any other party or coalition to get traction on the running of the country.
Hence the reply of the man in the street in answer to the question "Why don't we vote FF out?": 'Sure who else could do better?' To which the answer "Why don't we TRY something else" has evaded the man in the street for decades. If we are that dumb, then really, we got no more than we deserve.
I most certainly would be in favour of a restructure of the Irish Political System starting with the declaration of FF as a terrorist organisation. Followed by the forced political re-education of the civil service by the Finns and terminating with the declaration of a ceiling on earnings of €150,000 for all public servants. Maybe then they might understand that they are, after all, SERVANTS of the people!
End of rant.

Eliot Rosewater

rantie wrote: »

The main problem in Ireland is that we cannot answer a question directly. This thread is entitled: Would You Be In Favour Of A Complete Re-Structure In Irish Politics?
I don't' see any attempt to answer it yet...

I know yeah, isn't it terrible that we don't jump to amend our constitution to enforce the first whim that enters our mind?

EDIT: unattractive sarcasm aside, constitutional change should be slow and considered. It's a big deal. I don't think it should be determined by rants (using your own word here).

rantie

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I know yeah, isn't it terrible that we don't jump to amend our constitution to enforce the first whim that enters our mind?

EDIT: unattractive sarcasm aside, constitutional change should be slow and considered. It's a big deal. I don't think it should be determined by rants (using your own word here).

Thanks Ed. You are right; this is no time for rants. It's just that sometimes it makes me angry that something so glaringly obvious as the fact that if you only vote one party in to power, and it's no good, giving the others a try is a reasonable alternative. And then, you realise that even if it happens, they will be frustrated by a politicised civil service.
It is horrifying to realise how little power the voter has in a so-called democracy. (I thought Ireland was a Republic, not a Democracy?)

P O Neill Retd

absolutely but it has to start with the electorate.as long as we elect ex finance ministers , sans bank account , to the office of the Taoiseach and accept low standards in high places such as we have seen on countless occasions with different govts etc ......

lets get real here ,change has to start with the people.

It seems to me that the greed culture has permeated down to all levels of Irish society and if we , as a people , ever had a social conscience it is long gone.

Politically exterminate FF aand FG and lets have a proper idealogical debate / divide in Irish politics.

Let the people speak

sparkling sea

P O Neill Retd wrote: »

absolutely but it has to start with the electorate.as long as we elect ex finance ministers , sans bank account , to the office of the Taoiseach and accept low standards in high places such as we have seen on countless occasions with different govts etc ......

lets get real here ,change has to start with the people.

It seems to me that the greed culture has permeated down to all levels of Irish society and if we , as a people , ever had a social conscience it is long gone.

Politically exterminate FF aand FG and lets have a proper idealogical debate / divide in Irish politics.

Let the people speak

Totally agree maybe we as a nation need a whole new social contract, we should start with a blank slate with something expected from everyone except our most vunerable of citizens.

Nemi

Liam Byrne wrote: »

it's bad enough that DAA undermined Shannon as it did without giving the regions an official sanction to "compete".

Your core point is acceptable enough, but I'm finding this a little hard to relate too. There's hardly a place in the country that got more out of Government than Shannon, including its own regional development agency with a specific remit to generate traffic for the airport. If there's nothing to show for all that, its hardly the DAA's fault. It would be quite strange if what's probably the prime example of Dublin's inability to turn its economic weight into political weight.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Part of me once wished that Munster was separate from Dublin, since Dublin seems so out of touch with real life;

Have you ever considered, even for a moment, what you actually mean by 'real life'?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

there's a massive amount of political reform required before we'd even consider giving the localised version of the gombeen men more power.

I don't know. I think, in ways you probably didn't intend, your post illustrates one of the enduring cleavages in Irish society. I think there's a problem in delegating power to county level, as counties are typically too small to operate as coherent units. Delegating to some regional structure that operates above county would mitigate that.

I think the main organisational reform is to re-orient tax raising powers to regional level. If all politicians have to do is lobby to some central body for funds, then obviously they'll back any daft scheme so long as its local. If they'd to raise local funds to pay for it, they might think twice.

Also, we might then be saved sights like the failure of Shannon Development to find a market for Shannon Airport being laid at the door of the DAA. But perhaps that's too much to hope for.

Nemi

ISAW wrote: »

Some CEO of Dell or Microsoft says something asnd everyoine focuses on that. While they know about business and speciffically their own business many CEOs are necessarily creators of knowledge.

I think we also have to remember that if someone is presented as "CEO of <insert US multinational name> Ireland Ltd" that he's really just a branch manager, and not someone who necessarily knows how the company he works for sets strategy, as that's done back in the States.

sparkling sea wrote: »

Totally agree maybe we as a nation need a whole new social contract, we should start with a blank slate with something expected from everyone except our most vunerable of citizens.

And almost immediate isn't it predictable that this would provoke an argument over who "our most vulnerable of citizens" are. Everyone will want to be deemed 'vulnerable' so they don't have to contribute, and circus will go on just like before. Consider how perfectly well-paid health professionals will defend their earnings on grounds of their service to "our most vulnerable of citizens".

I think we've to start more fundamentally than that, by defining who the 'we' are that needs this social contract, and explaining what the feature is that unites us into that 'we'.

At different times, the 'we' might have been Southern Irish Catholics, with Southern Irish Protestants being tolerated as guests, but required to accept the ideology of the State would be imposed on them. '"We' included promotion of the Irish language, and the vow to settle as many families as possible in the land. So the social contract you needed was one that defined the rights and duties of Catholic, proto-Irish-speaking rural dwellers.

The Catholic bit is probably now largely defunct. Rural dwelling still hovers on the agenda incoherently, without any real understanding of from whence it came. Irish speaking is madly popular with some, and madly unpopular with others.

So, in the light of all that, can you explain to me this 'we' business?

margarite

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

The kind of restructuring I'd support would be reducing the number of TD's and abolishing the Seanad and maybe PR, and also cutting these fool's expenses by 90%. If they want to go down to Ballygobackwards to open a door in a new off licence for deh pahrty fatefull, they can drive themselves, and hopefully contribute to road accident statistics in the process.

I agree there are to many TD s and what good is the Seanad more time wasting highly paid and what have they ever achieved. I cannot think who would be good enough to lead us out of this crisis, or even which T D s that tell one before being elected and do the opposite when they get in. We get paid for the amount of hour worked if the T D s were paid likewise without the expensive cars, drivers, admin. staff and their hourly rate be the same as the rest of us, just think of how much would be saved. Sorry for getting of topic I agree with the person who originally wrote this.

onimpulse

Given recent events is it now time for a total political overhaul?

Everyone is busy complaining about "the politicians" and saying that while FF are bad the others aren't much better.... Why is it that politics attracts this type of person? and Why is it that we keep electing them?

Firstly, I hope this gives us the Electorate a wake up call... it's not good enough to elect people just because they did you some kind of a favor, attended all the right funerals and inherited the seat from their father!

We have to take responsibility for this from now on - only elect competent politicians who will act in the national interest. Michael Lowery & Jacky Healy Rae etc should never have gotten a single vote! Shame on us for electing them. Rewarding that behaviour creates a culture - the culture is our fault!

Secondly, PR has to go. It leads to the local politics and horsetrading, and encourages the brown envelopes & the I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine mentality. This then becomes the culture & well... look where that got us!

Thirdly, No Minister should be directly elected! Just look at every minister not just in this government but going back as far as you want. If you have a minister for education in your area - your schools are funded multiples of times better then those the far side of the country. Transport... just look at Meath, three Motorways & a new train - all thanks to Minister Dempsey...

I could go on but the point is it's not in the national interest to run the country like this. Do like America - appoint the most suitably qualified person for each position - this could in theory be just about anyone who has a proven track record in that area.


Finally, We need some recourse when they betray us as has been proven lately. Iceland can bring their former Prime Minister to court for neglecting his duties which lead to their troubles. Will we see Brian Cowan up in court here?



This isn't a time for a band -aid and carry on as before. We need real change to ensure this never ever happens again. I hope the electorate matures & begins to take some responsibility for their actions when they go to the polls.

sceptre

Two threads merged.

Amhran Nua

onimpulse wrote: »

Secondly, PR has to go. It leads to the local politics and horsetrading, and encourages the brown envelopes & the I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine mentality. This then becomes the culture & well... look where that got us!

PR isn't the problem, its the STV version that's put us on the rocks. Switching to a party list system is what we need to do.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Increasing the size and spending power of the middle class does not necessarily mean increasing wages. If our labour costs decreased across the board so would the cost of living

Or, you end up with stagflation, where wages decrease while the cost of living remains the same or increases, also known as the fast track to becoming a third world country. Given how much we import, from energy to staple foodstuffs to vehicles to just about everything, I'm very slow to point the finger at labour costs as the main problem, and I'm very wary of advocating a reduction in private sector wages for the same reason.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

That's exactly the point. The regional parliaments would be for regional issues. One could devise a competency system to determine what they can and cannot do, and I would be in favour of giving them power to tax. That way at least people will see how their money is being spent closer to home.

Ireland hasn't got the size neccessary to support something like that, even if it was a good idea. More marginal or rural areas wouldn't be able to provide the services they might need; health, education, even basic policing. Besides which it was excessive self interest as promoted by the abovementioned STV system that caused so many problems in Ireland - the last thing we need is more fracturing.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The people (and the states) wanted GW Bush, and they got him.

You could say the same about voters in Ireland, so if both countries got resoundingly unimpressive leadership from their electoral decisions, what benefit would come from switching one or both systems around?

Nemi

Amhran Nua wrote: »

More marginal or rural areas wouldn't be able to provide the services they might need; health, education, even basic policing.

Just on a point of detail - do rural voters typically acknowledge that their public services cost more to deliver per capita? Do they more usually complain that they feel they get nothing in exchange for their tax?

I'd be happy enough to leave them to it. I'm a great believer in giving people enough rope.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

it was excessive self interest as promoted by the abovementioned STV system that caused so many problems in Ireland - the last thing we need is more fracturing.

I'm vaguely reminded of the implementation of Newspeak in 1984 - and the belief that dissent could be suppressed by eliminating all words needed to express it.

Do you feel an electoral system can, in some way, suppress real differences and real outlooks? Surely exactly the same pressures will make themselves felt elsewhere. For the sake of argument, unions have no electoral mandate at all, but in the past have managed to have a place in policy development.

I'm really not sure that its all down to the mechanics of the voting system. What's needed is for us to conceive of ourselves in a different way.

Amhran Nua

Nemi wrote: »

I'm really not sure that its all down to the mechanics of the voting system. What's needed is for us to conceive of ourselves in a different way.

Well, weekend psychoanalysis of four million unique individuals aside, its not a panacea, but its a big step towards an improvement.

Executive Steve

Overheal wrote: »

That implies extreme constitutional overhaul. Not something to be taken lightly.

Our consitution arguably hasn't been fit for purpose for decades though.

galway2007

A TD should be only be elected for a total of 15 year ( 3 terms)
After that they must give up there seat
For the first 5 year they are not allowed to be a minister
Td's have no input in to local issues and we should only have 90 of them

paddy462

I think there should be an average of 5 TD's per county, 130 in total. Bigger urban areas then obviously will have more TD's than rural areas. Population divided by 130 will be the population required for a TD in an area.

I believe the country needs a new party. One to rival both Fine Gael and Fianna Fail like a Liberal Democratic Party as in some Eastern European countries as opposed to the Leftish UK party.

yahoo_moe

rantie wrote: »

System starting with the declaration of FF as a terrorist organisation.

galway2007 wrote:

A TD should be only be elected for a total of 15 year ( 3 terms)
After that they must give up there seat
For the first 5 year they are not allowed to be a minister

margarite wrote: »

We get paid for the amount of hour worked if the T D s were paid likewise without the expensive cars, drivers, admin. staff and their hourly rate be the same as the rest of us, just think of how much would be saved.

For me, throwing around arbitrary anger-based solutions isn't really helpful. It also undermines the case for giving "the people" a greater say in things, if this is the type of thing that's going to be proposed.

Some questions:

(1) If our TDs - who incur large election and electoral expenses - were to run the country in an efficient manner (I said if ), do they really only deserve minimum wage? Will that entice the best candidates to ignore the private sector?
(2) Abolishing the Seanad, rather than reforming it, puts all the eggs in the Dail basket, so to speak. Look at the original set-up of US democracy - it's all about checks and balances. Of our current 3 houses of the Oireachtas, two are ceremonial.
(3) Politics should be competence-based, not subject to its own apprenticeship system. Your problem with lifetime politicians might be more with the politicians themselves, rather than the "lifetime" part. And if someone is suitable for a 20-year career where (s)he is made a Minister halfway through their first term, why not?

T runner

Denerick wrote: »

You can restructure the superficial all you like, nothing will change. The real cancer in our society are the ordinary citizens who rarely if ever give a damn about issues on a national scale. We're all cute whoors at the end of day, so long as Mayo has its hospital Roscommon can go and burn.

Thats complete simplistic bull. The structure of politics in Ireland means that TDs are defacto county councillors, not parliamentarians.

So if youre TD is the man who gets you local hospital services etc. you elect a TD based on his ability to deliver said hospital services.

This should be mainly the county councillors job. Local councillors etc with an interest in policy should go for Dail Eireann.

"All politics is local" is a worldwide political truism.

T runner

1. More power to local councils and county councillors
2. Key positions eg Finance minister, under minister to be filled by appointment outside of dail
3. Political system to be restructured taking account of compatibility with future north South integration
4. all tax loopholes to be closed. Legal system reformed. everyone is accountable and equal as citizens of the republic
5. Heavily amended constitution: second republic

Maj Malfunction

T runner wrote: »

1. More power to local councils and county councillors
2. Key positions eg Finance minister, under minister to be filled by appointment outside of dail
3. Political system to be restructured taking account of compatibility with future north South integration
4. all tax loopholes to be closed. Legal system reformed. everyone is accountable and equal as citizens of the republic
5. Heavily amended constitution: second republic

1. No way! I don't want to see parish politics. Thanks.
2. There is some merit in this to get the best people in.
3. I'd support this,
4 & 5. Not before time!

two wheels good

paddy462 wrote: »

I think there should be an average of 5 TD's per county, 130 in total. Bigger urban areas then obviously will have more TD's than rural areas. Population divided by 130 will be the population required for a TD in an area.

No, No! Still way too many!
In Ireland we have 1 TD per 25,000 people
In UK 1: 55,000 or even 1:65,000 in some constituencies and the UK is proposing to reduce the number of MPs
In Germany, I believe its 1:80,000
New Zealand, similar population, much smaller "upper house" 120 MPs

A few more points:
The Irish constitution dictates the ratio. It also states that any changes to constituencies cannot be implemented until the subsequent Dail. (Why! Self preservation!)
Thus, as far as I can see, a change to the constitution is first necessary. (According to my local FG TD a reduction of 20 TDs is possible without a change to the constitution. I've yet to find out how)

thebigcheese22

Executive Steve wrote: »

Our consitution arguably hasn't been fit for purpose for decades though.

Exactly! Just to note that Labour are the only party proposing a new constitution for a new republic. It's all very well having a lot of referendums; but some things, like the crazy Catholic preamble can't be amended at all. Bunreacht na hEireann was written by Dev and Charles McQuaid, hardly people that represent this country in this century.

invinciblePRSTV

On the point of PR-STV, there is nothing wrong with this method for voting, and changing to a list method, AV method or even back to a plural system will do nothing in itself without ironing out the deficiencies inherent in our political system.

The main deficiency as far as i can see is the centralisation of all power to the executive. This has facilitated the parish pump tendency inherent in our polity since the foundation of the state, but has really become a central issue since the late 1970s with the abolition of domestic rates and the loss of power from local to national government.

It's no coincidence that since the abolition of these rates and loss of power from the local councils - which became the plaything of developers, auctioneers & solicitors abusing for their own ends the only function local gov. had left, the power of zoning land and granting planning permission - that we have seen the emergence of the super local politicians, in the form of independent and back bench TDs, who have no desire for involvement in national politics but are in DE to achieve the kind of local policies - build schools, fix potholes, help Mrs. Murphy - that would be far better dealt with with a viable local government administration with the kind of functions common in other nations.

To that end a devolvement of the functions carried out by the patronage departments - Gaeltacht & Rural Affairs, Education, Transport, Social Protection - to a reformed local government administration not based on county boundaries but on a regional basis allows for the the shrinking down of the Dail and leave it to focus on national issues.