NUI Seanad Election 2016

feardeas

I'm one of the relatively few graduates who voted in the last senate election for this panel. Like most people I tend to ignore the workings of the upper house although I did vote to retain it in the referendum almost two years ago.

There were times during the referendum on marriage that I regretted that. I respect the fact that Senator Mullen has a mandate to serve and that he is naturally free to espouse his opinion as he sees fit. The manner in which he conducts himself is at times akin to the schoolyard child who feels if he shouts loud enough and long enough he will most likely get his way. I found it quite jarring to hear him talk about constituency work etc in East Galway.Surely he realises that he is elected by the graduates of the NUI and these are not confined to East Galway.

It might be nice if there could be a raising of the awareness of the Seanad elections. The graduates of the last two years alone would be enough to elect a slightly less regressive voice to the Seanad. I know that John Crown is there but it might be nice to have a similar voice with him to balance Sen Mullen and Sen Quinn who are very able voices for a more conservative view of the country.

Before people might get a little irate I have nothing but respect for the mandate these men have received but would like if a mandate from university graduates of the NUI could have a more enlightened view of Ireland and the world

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

feardeas

True. They are, however, the largest constituencies in terms of numbers. The others that are elected come from councilors and members of the oireachtas.

The means of electing members to the senate is beyond bizarre but my issue or quibble is with the members elected by the NUI panel for the reasons I mentioned. However in the scheme of things it is the definition of a first world problem. I just think that if the USI had a drive towards registering and voting in Seanad elections there could very well be a useful progressive voice in the upper chamber which might balance members such as Terry Leydon or indeed Pascal Mooney or the bould Labhras.

expectationlost

they were supposed to expand the electorate to all graduates but doesn't look like its going to happen

glacial_pace71

The two university panels do have the feel of rotten boroughs. However, just as Senator Norris represents a socio-cultural demographic that wouldn't get through the constituency-oriented politics of Dáil Éireann, so too does Senator Mullen's unashamed courting of the 'Christian militia'. (However, Senator Mullen would appear to be something of a draft-dodger when it comes to the whole crusading thing, and it often has the feel of putting on a political show, e.g. remember the "what's yer agenda?" repeated ad infinitum to ensure that the badgering was covered by third parties rather than an attempt to listen to the families in question). I'd still give a lower preference to anyone outside the main political parties all the same, including Senator Mullen, just to main the diversity of views in the upper house.

The 11 Taoiseach nominees do ensure a built-in majority for the Govt. In the past a seat was traditionally reserved for a representative from Northern Ireland, but it was a clumsy tokenism that only served to highlight the political patronage being bestowed elsewhere.

The problem with the 43 senators elected by sitting councillors, outgoing senators and incoming TDs is that the 5 vocational panels are very much a snapshot of a 1930s corporatist ideal. However, the provisions of Bunreacht na hÉireann do not require these vocational panels to be elected by councillors:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/en/constitution/index.html#article18

However, to attempt to add to the electorate of the vocational panels, e.g. via professions/trades regulated by law, you'd end up with everything from Aircraft Maintenance Engineers to bouncers (many ex-IRA) regulated by the Private Security Authority.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2008/en/si/0139.html

Adding to the vocational electorate could be as ridiculous as retaining the existing structure. Still though, it'd be nice for the building site SafePass Cert holder to get to vote in the Labour panel, but could you then imagine the scramble as every political hack is told which certificate to obtain in order to flood a particular panel? Bear in mind that the term 'farmer' is not regulated by law, and if the equivalent of a practising certificate was receipt of the single farm payment then you'd end up with companies qualifying for a franchise for the Agricultural panel?
Similarly, those with a vote in the university panels would need to be excluded from the vocational panels, as otherwise there'd be doctors, lawyers etc voting twice.
Can't see reform without another referendum on how to elect the vocational panels and/or to restrict the number of Taoiseach's nominees.

expectationlost

glacial_pace71 wrote: »

The 11 Taoiseach nominees do ensure a built-in majority for the Govt. In the past a seat was traditionally reserved for a representative from Northern Ireland, but it was a clumsy tokenism that only served to highlight the political patronage being bestowed elsewhere.

The problem with the 43 senators elected by sitting councillors, outgoing senators and incoming TDs is that the 5 vocational panels are very much a snapshot of a 1930s corporatist ideal. However, the provisions of Bunreacht na hÉireann do not require these vocational panels to be elected by councillors:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/en/constitution/index.html#article18

However, to attempt to add to the electorate of the vocational panels, e.g. via professions/trades regulated by law, you'd end up with everything from Aircraft Maintenance Engineers to bouncers (many ex-IRA) regulated by the Private Security Authority.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2008/en/si/0139.html

Adding to the vocational electorate could be as ridiculous as retaining the existing structure. Still though, it'd be nice for the building site SafePass Cert holder to get to vote in the Labour panel, but could you then imagine the scramble as every political hack is told which certificate to obtain in order to flood a particular panel? Bear in mind that the term 'farmer' is not regulated by law, and if the equivalent of a practising certificate was receipt of the single farm payment then you'd end up with companies qualifying for a franchise for the Agricultural panel?
Similarly, those with a vote in the university panels would need to be excluded from the vocational panels, as otherwise there'd be doctors, lawyers etc voting twice.
Can't see reform without another referendum on how to elect the vocational panels and/or to restrict the number of Taoiseach's nominees.

the plan is to add everyone to the vocation panel electorate http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Work_Of_The_Department/Protocol/Working_Group_on_Seanad_Reform/Seanad_Bill_2015_.pdf although how they balance out the numbers voting in each panel hasn't been explained.

glacial_pace71

expectationlost wrote: »

the plan is to add everyone to the vocation panel electorate http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Work_Of_The_Department/Protocol/Working_Group_on_Seanad_Reform/Seanad_Bill_2015_.pdf although how they balance out the numbers voting in each panel hasn't been explained.

Thanks, I had thought the working group had still to publish that particular report. The approach had been very low key.

It'd appear that the initial debates have already taken place on the broad proposals, though the legislation hasn't yet had a second stage reading:
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2015050500002?opendocument

I can see a huge problem with the Northern Ireland registration issue. As it stands many unionist graduates of TCD do register for Seanad elections. However, an explicit 'tribal headcount' structure for a universal franchise would probably just see nationalists register.

This would be hugely problematic on several levels.

Firstly, the whole Good Friday Agreement approach has been oriented towards a three strand approach of internal NI powersharing, a North-South structures and a set of British-Irish arrangements. To offer a tokenistic representation in a toothless chamber just jars with that.

Secondly, it is hugely disrespectful to northern nationalists. The last Oireachtas elections in which there was northern representation by directly elected franchise was the Second Dáil of the Republic of Ireland (Poblacht na hÉireann). Ok, so the representatives were often 'celebrity' or big name personalities, e.g. see the election of Arthur Griffith, Seán Milroy and Seán O'Mahony to Fermanagh & Tyrone 8-seater (neither the nationalist Thomas Harbison nor the 4 Unionists took up their seats as TDs) ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermanagh_and_Tyrone_(Northern_Ireland_Parliament_constituency)
... but the Second Dáil was nevertheless the elected chamber of a 32-county republic, albeit one that was succeeded by a 26-county Irish Free State with Dominion home rule status. It's difficult to just set any restoration of directly-elected Oireachtas representation to that of a handful of Seanad seats without an inevitable demand for the right to have Dáil constituencies created for Irish passport holders north of the border. (Of course the constitutional restrictions on how Dáil constituencies are created would nip that in the bud, but it would leave an unrepresentative second chamber further destabilised by some of its representation being the only route through which they can be directly represented: disrespecting their mandate, not just on a North-South issue, could see regular resignations and political crises in Northern Ireland for political institutions that the majority in that jurisdiction would not support).
In most countries the role of the second chamber is oversight/scrutiny and sometimes a combination of expert opinion or other mechanisms for keeping the Government in check and accountable to parliament. In Ireland we often rely on the President to refer a Bill to the courts to test its constitutionality, i.e. the checks and balances on Government are somewhat unusual.
I just can't see the legislation being pushed through without all sorts of objections being made from the British-Irish route on behalf of a particular North-South angle.

expectationlost

glacial_pace71 wrote: »

Thanks, I had thought the working group had still to publish that particular report. The approach had been very low key.

It'd appear that the initial debates have already taken place on the broad proposals, though the legislation hasn't yet had a second stage reading:
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2015050500002?opendocument

I can see a huge problem with the Northern Ireland registration issue. As it stands many unionist graduates of TCD do register for Seanad elections. However, an explicit 'tribal headcount' structure for a universal franchise would probably just see nationalists register.

This would be hugely problematic on several levels.

Firstly, the whole Good Friday Agreement approach has been oriented towards a three strand approach of internal NI powersharing, a North-South structures and a set of British-Irish arrangements. To offer a tokenistic representation in a toothless chamber just jars with that.

Secondly, it is hugely disrespectful to northern nationalists. The last Oireachtas elections in which there was northern representation by directly elected franchise was the Second Dáil of the Republic of Ireland (Poblacht na hÉireann). Ok, so the representatives were often 'celebrity' or big name personalities, e.g. see the election of Arthur Griffith, Seán Milroy and Seán O'Mahony to Fermanagh & Tyrone 8-seater (neither the nationalist Thomas Harbison nor the 4 Unionists took up their seats as TDs) ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermanagh_and_Tyrone_(Northern_Ireland_Parliament_constituency)
... but the Second Dáil was nevertheless the elected chamber of a 32-county republic, albeit one that was succeeded by a 26-county Irish Free State with Dominion home rule status. It's difficult to just set any restoration of directly-elected Oireachtas representation to that of a handful of Seanad seats without an inevitable demand for the right to have Dáil constituencies created for Irish passport holders north of the border. (Of course the constitutional restrictions on how Dáil constituencies are created would nip that in the bud, but it would leave an unrepresentative second chamber further destabilised by some of its representation being the only route through which they can be directly represented: disrespecting their mandate, not just on a North-South issue, could see regular resignations and political crises in Northern Ireland for political institutions that the majority in that jurisdiction would not support).
In most countries the role of the second chamber is oversight/scrutiny and sometimes a combination of expert opinion or other mechanisms for keeping the Government in check and accountable to parliament. In Ireland we often rely on the President to refer a Bill to the courts to test its constitutionality, i.e. the checks and balances on Government are somewhat unusual.
I just can't see the legislation being pushed through without all sorts of objections being made from the British-Irish route on behalf of a particular North-South angle.

wow thats alot you imagined there

heres the actual seanad reform report http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Work_Of_The_Department/Protocol/Working_Group_on_Seanad_Reform/2nd_version_Final_Seanad_Reform.pdf

glacial_pace71

expectationlost wrote: »

wow thats alot you imagined there

heres the actual seanad reform report http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Work_Of_The_Department/Protocol/Working_Group_on_Seanad_Reform/2nd_version_Final_Seanad_Reform.pdf

The reference in the report to the extension of the franchise to Northern Ireland (see pp.27-28 of the link you provided) does not fully address the issue of the legitimacy of the Seanad public representative role in circumstances in which there's no corresponding right to Dáil representation. No imagination needed: a token quote about the Orange Order dropping in for tea does not overcome the issue of how a political crisis can be generated in both jurisdictions from representation in the other.

expectationlost

glacial_pace71 wrote: »

The reference in the report to the extension of the franchise to Northern Ireland (see pp.27-28 of the link you provided) does not fully address the issue of the legitimacy of the Seanad public representative role in circumstances in which there's no corresponding right to Dáil representation. No imagination needed: a token quote about the Orange Order dropping in for tea does not overcome the issue of how a political crisis can be generated in both jurisdictions from representation in the other.

how would this crisis be generated ?

but the Second Dáil was nevertheless the elected chamber of a 32-county republic, albeit one that was succeeded by a 26-county Irish Free State with Dominion home rule status. It's difficult to just set any restoration of directly-elected Oireachtas representation to that of a handful of Seanad seats without an inevitable demand for the right to have Dáil constituencies created for Irish passport holders north of the border. (Of course the constitutional restrictions on how Dáil constituencies are created would nip that in the bud, but it would leave an unrepresentative second chamber further destabilised by some of its representation being the only route through which they can be directly represented: disrespecting their mandate, not just on a North-South issue, could see regular resignations and political crises in Northern Ireland for political institutions that the majority in that jurisdiction would not support).

could you explain with less of a run on sentence

glacial_pace71

expectationlost wrote: »

how would this crisis be generated ?



could you explain with less of a run on sentence

If you have half a million Northern nationalists registering to vote you can't then just turn around and tell them to keep their heads down and mouth shut when it comes to representing their views on legislation.

On the point re Dáil representation versus Oireachtas representation? The Seanad has limited rights in respect of money bills. However, many issues of concern to northern representatives will inherently have a financial dimension, e.g. no point in saying that we agree to a North-South piece of infrastructural development then don't fund it.

There seems to be a presumption that a few SF or SDLP representatives can be elected, be used as human wallpaper/background filler for photo ops, then told not to bother with any of that political representation nonsense. What happens if all the NI reps resign on what they regard as a fundamental issue? For example it would not be inconceivable that the Tories could pretend to their Eurosceptics that some watering down of their commitments to the Council of Europe's ECHR was an attack on the EU's ECJ. It's highly likely that the Irish Govt would go along with some tweaks to the NI human rights framework to facilitate a fig leaf for Cameron in his referendum battle. You could have the NI Seanad representatives scream blue murder but southerners shrugging their shoulders and saying "ah sure they can pass something at Stormont".

Why bother letting Northern Ireland Irish passport holders to register to vote and elect representatives to one of the Houses of the Oireachtas if in effect they'll be told to work within the existing three strand approach?

expectationlost

glacial_pace71 wrote: »

If you have half a million Northern nationalists registering to vote you can't then just turn around and tell them to keep their heads down and mouth shut when it comes to representing their views on legislation.

they can give their views via the Seanad. like the rest

On the point re Dáil representation versus Oireachtas representation? The Seanad has limited rights in respect of money bills. However, many issues of concern to northern representatives will inherently have a financial dimension, e.g. no point in saying that we agree to a North-South piece of infrastructural development then don't fund it.

why would anyone?

There seems to be a presumption that a few SF or SDLP representatives can be elected, be used as human wallpaper/background filler for photo ops, then told not to bother with any of that political representation nonsense. What happens if all the NI reps resign on what they regard as a fundamental issue? For example it would not be inconceivable that the Tories could pretend to their Eurosceptics that some watering down of their commitments to the Council of Europe's ECHR was an attack on the EU's ECJ. It's highly likely that the Irish Govt would go along with some tweaks to the NI human rights framework to facilitate a fig leaf for Cameron in his referendum battle. You could have the NI Seanad representatives scream blue murder but southerners shrugging their shoulders and saying "ah sure they can pass something at Stormont".

Why bother letting Northern Ireland Irish passport holders to register to vote and elect representatives to one of the Houses of the Oireachtas if in effect they'll be told to work within the existing three strand approach?

I havn't seen anyone in Ireland or the minister of foreign affairs shrug their shoulders at the threat to the ECHR part of the GFA

The Government has serious concerns that London could breach the terms of the Belfast Agreement if prime minister David Cameron carries through on a pledge to scrap the UK’s Human Rights Act.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Charlie Flanagan said any British plans to repeal the Act and curtail the role of the European Court of Human Rights would be “a matter of some concern” and will raise the issue at a meeting with Northern Ireland Secretary Theresa Villiers.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-concern-about-uk-plan-to-scrap-human-rights-act-1.2211556 CAmeron was all gung ho on it and has backed off

glacial_pace71

expectationlost wrote: »

they can give their views via the Seanad. like the rest

why would anyone?

I havn't seen anyone in Ireland or the minister of foreign affairs shrug their shoulders at the threat to the ECHR part of the GFA

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-concern-about-uk-plan-to-scrap-human-rights-act-1.2211556 CAmeron was all gung ho on it and has backed off

On the first point? Giving their views is about the height of it: they're not proper legislators as such, but will have a bigger electoral mandate than the TDs who do decide on Money Bills.

Re the why? of infrastructural funding? That dispute has already arisen re North South 'cooperation' on funding the motorways. It'd be amplified further if any Northern senators were told that the Govt knows best and/or won't disclose its poker hand, i.e. there'd be no real parliamentary accountability to certain categories of senator.

Re the ECHR example. Well in this particular case Holyrood and Stormont were gathering the baying mobs on a cross-community basis in each jurisdiction, which helped the Irish Govt re-discover its spine.

However, what if there's a situation in which there's no similar unanimity? e.g. Scottish nationalists provoking English nationalist rattlesnake. Supposing there's another series of convulsions on CAP reform or the British rebate? What if the Irish Govt decides that British-Irish relations are more important than internal NI or North-South stability? The potential for Northern Nationalist Senators to regard their mandate being set at naught is quite considerable. (Already the Irish Govt made a call that Stormont implementing a series of Tory cutbacks was an internal NI problem, even when many in NI sought it to be considered in the North-South and British-Irish strands. For better or worse the Tories said "we'll do what we like ... it's Finchley" and the Govt said "yessir, mistah, me no be causing no trouble", i.e. there's already been a rehearsal for the future, in which British-Irish relations are valued uber alles).

As you've apparently a strong interest in the Govt's Seanad proposals, what do you suggest are the merits of their scheme and how do you feel the NI dimension can be best accommodated?

expectationlost

glacial_pace71 wrote: »

On the first point? Giving their views is about the height of it: they're not proper legislators as such, but will have a bigger electoral mandate than the TDs who do decide on Money Bills.

Re the why? of infrastructural funding? That dispute has already arisen re North South 'cooperation' on funding the motorways. It'd be amplified further if any Northern senators were told that the Govt knows best and/or won't disclose its poker hand, i.e. there'd be no real parliamentary accountability to certain categories of senator.

they don't tell sneators anything anyway

Re the ECHR example. Well in this particular case Holyrood and Stormont were gathering the baying mobs on a cross-community basis in each jurisdiction, which helped the Irish Govt re-discover its spine.

However, what if there's a situation in which there's no similar unanimity? e.g. Scottish nationalists provoking English nationalist rattlesnake. Supposing there's another series of convulsions on CAP reform or the British rebate? What if the Irish Govt decides that British-Irish relations are more important than internal NI or North-South stability? The potential for Northern Nationalist Senators to regard their mandate being set at naught is quite considerable.

so what its only the Seanad

(Already the Irish Govt made a call that Stormont implementing a series of Tory cutbacks was an internal NI problem, even when many in NI sought it to be considered in the North-South and British-Irish strands. For better or worse the Tories said "we'll do what we like ... it's Finchley" and the Govt said "yessir, mistah, me no be causing no trouble", i.e. there's already been a rehearsal for the future, in which British-Irish relations are valued uber alles).

there this thing called the Good Friday Agreement

As you've apparently a strong interest in the Govt's Seanad proposals, what do you suggest are the merits of their scheme and how do you feel the NI dimension can be best accommodated?

dunno, its clearly is a long way off, won't be implemented before the EU referendum, this started off as a thread on 2016 elections

Agent Smith

feardeas wrote: »

I'm one of the relatively few graduates who voted in the last senate election for this panel. Like most people I tend to ignore the workings of the upper house although I did vote to retain it in the referendum almost two years ago.

The entire upper house is a Rotten Borough and deserves to be scrapped. But then turkeys dont vote for Christmas....

I wasn't aware Feargal Quinn is an NUI senator.

I sort of assumed he'd been there since the first Senate, and nobody'd had the heart to kick him out.

It's strange to see a University panel with such a conservative representation. You'd hope such faulty thinking would be civilised by education.

At least Trinity can be proud of its more progressive senators, and indeed its progressive senators in history.
Their senator Kingsmill Moore. the judge and poet, used make a point of having his nomination papers signed by women only. This was during the war. Mullen & Quinn hardly think women should be let in charge of their own bodies.

CramCycle

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

. Mullen & Quinn hardly think women should be let in charge of their own bodies.

I am voting purely with the aim of having Mullen at the bottom of the pile.

Lockstep

I voted Luke Field, Laura Harmon and David Begg in that order. Seanad can achieve little but might as well have some social progressives in there.

Voting Mullen at the bottom felt great.

JJ

I'm not able to vote in the Seanad election but my wife is. Late last year, I decided to help her update her address on the Seanad register because she never got around to changing it from her parents' address. We did that in November last year and I thought she was all set. She hadn't received her ballot paper so we contacted the NUI office and it turns out that she was supposed to update her address before 1st June 2015 to be on time for the current Seanad register. I even got a Seanad candidate to try and help me out but after he looked into it, he confirmed that nothing could be done. He also said that, ironically, if we hadn't changed her address on the register, we could've just contacted the NUI office during the election and just asked them to send the ballot paper to our current address. That is some serious BS. The only upside to this is that she will be on the register with our current address for the next Seanad election.

CramCycle

Surely if it was not updated in time they should have sent it to her parents address. Serious BS is an understatement.

As I said before though, this is the first time I have received my ballot paper even though I have been registered (and confirmed) for the past 15 years.

JJ

CramCycle wrote: »

Surely if it was not updated in time they should have sent it to her parents address. Serious BS is an understatement.

I would've thought so too but since we updated her contact details late last year, they completely took her off the current register and added her to the next register (which starts from 1st June) with our new address. I was motivated to do this because word was going around on social media to make sure you were on the Seanad register (if you qualify) and because I wanted to ensure at least one anti-Mullen vote.

CramCycle

JJ wrote: »

I would've thought so too but since we updated her contact details late last year, they completely took her off the current register and added her to the next register (which starts from 1st June) with our new address. I was motivated to do this because word was going around on social media to make sure you were on the Seanad register (if you qualify) and because I wanted to ensure at least one anti-Mullen vote.

I brought it up at lunch in work today as about 75% of us graduated from NUIs. I asked had everyone got their ballot yet. Disappointingly, the resounding response was no, never signed up for it and I don't care. The only people who knew of others who were voting, were where their parents or elderly relation had signed up.

I wonder do they have stats on the typical age of those who registered, might explain the odd reelecting of people who IMO do not reflect the majority views of graduates.

Field east

JJ wrote: »

I'm not able to vote in the Seanad election but my wife is. Late last year, I decided to help her update her address on the Seanad register because she never got around to changing it from her parents' address. We did that in November last year and I thought she was all set. She hadn't received her ballot paper so we contacted the NUI office and it turns out that she was supposed to update her address before 1st June 2015 to be on time for the current Seanad register. I even got a Seanad candidate to try and help me out but after he looked into it, he confirmed that nothing could be done. He also said that, ironically, if we hadn't changed her address on the register, we could've just contacted the NUI office during the election and just asked them to send the ballot paper to our current address. That is some serious BS. The only upside to this is that she will be on the register with our current address for the next Seanad election.

Ye are living in dublin. Why not get it posted and deliver it by hand into the NUI post box by Tuesday next. Put a stamp on it. NUI will think that the PO stamping machine missed it. Only issue is - will the ballot paper be posted to you on time.

Field east

CramCycle wrote: »

I brought it up at lunch in work today as about 75% of us graduated from NUIs. I asked had everyone got their ballot yet. Disappointingly, the resounding response was no, never signed up for it and I don't care. The only people who knew of others who were voting, were where their parents or elderly relation had signed up.

I wonder do they have stats on the typical age of those who registered, might explain the odd reelecting of people who IMO do not reflect the majority views of graduates.

If 'I do'nt care ' is the case , well then those non voters have no grounds for lambasting any senator because they do not like what they say/stand for when they could have given such individuals their last vote. They gave up the opportunity to have an influence on whether they got a seat or not

The Randy Riverbeast

CramCycle wrote: »

I am voting purely with the aim of having Mullen at the bottom of the pile.

Unfortunately I missed the deadline but the whole reason I was going to register was to vote in anyone except Mullen.

Field east

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Unfortunately I missed the deadline but the whole reason I was going to register was to vote in anyone except Mullen.

I rang NUI today and my understanding is that you are leaving it very tight by emailing your current address now if you want your ballot to be posted out and have it 'posted back' by Tuesday next. I am open to correction

JJ

Field east wrote: »

Ye are living in dublin. Why not get it posted and deliver it by hand into the NUI post box by Tuesday next. Put a stamp on it. NUI will think that the PO stamping machine missed it. Only issue is - will the ballot paper be posted to you on time.

They won't even post a ballot to us. My wife is not on the current register at all. She will be on the next register, which starts on 1st June this year. Because we sent a change of address request after 1st June last year, their (BS) procedure is to remove the person from the current register and update her on the next register.

JJ

CramCycle wrote: »

I brought it up at lunch in work today as about 75% of us graduated from NUIs. I asked had everyone got their ballot yet. Disappointingly, the resounding response was no, never signed up for it and I don't care. The only people who knew of others who were voting, were where their parents or elderly relation had signed up.

I wonder do they have stats on the typical age of those who registered, might explain the odd reelecting of people who IMO do not reflect the majority views of graduates.

That is disappointing to hear. This is the reason why people like Mullen get elected. I'd love to be able to vote in the NUI Seanad election, even if the whole system is BS, and they're just throwing their vote away.

Field east

JJ wrote: »

They won't even post a ballot to us. My wife is not on the current register at all. She will be on the next register, which starts on 1st June this year. Because we sent a change of address request after 1st June last year, their (BS) procedure is to remove the person from the current register and update her on the next register.

I am on the register but NUI sent my papers to an old address which I never changed. NUI informed me by email that my papers were returned to it because of the 'not known at this address' understanding. I had emailed the NUI the day before with my new address. Hope that this is of some help.

CramCycle

JJ wrote: »

That is disappointing to hear. This is the reason why people like Mullen get elected. I'd love to be able to vote in the NUI Seanad election, even if the whole system is BS, and they're just throwing their vote away.

The funny thing is that several of the people running don't seem to be running very effectively. I am quite shocked that someone fresh out of any of the NUIs has not hit the ground running with a strong social media campaign, helping people get set up with a ballot paper.

If I knew then what I knew now, I would have run straight after college. Between social media and persistence, while people still have that college buzz, you could easily push for a mass campaign through the USI or simply through your own college.

Based on the platforms of the previously reelected, it wouldn't be hard to find an opposition base to them and drum up support.

Geuze

CramCycle wrote: »

I am voting purely with the aim of having Mullen at the bottom of the pile.

He got the most first prefs.

Water John

Voted the full list to make sure he was last.
I accept he represents a section of society but I feel his behaviour and being disenginous over referenda deserves zero.

Water John

Yeah Geuze, it's called democracy.
But he hasn't done the Catholic Church any favours really. Not the best PR guy to have out in front.

CramCycle

Water John wrote: »

Yeah Geuze, it's called democracy.
But he hasn't done the Catholic Church any favours really. Not the best PR guy to have out in front.

Barely democracy, they still haven't updated the law since the referendum to allow other non NUI or TCD graduates to vote.

A large number of people I mention it too have never known or realised they could vote.

The numbers voting are tiny in relation to number of potential voters and I can't help (paranoia hat) that's the way they like it.

Geuze

CramCycle wrote: »

Barely democracy, they still haven't updated the law since the referendum to allow other non NUI or TCD graduates to vote.

A large number of people I mention it too have never known or realised they could vote.

The numbers voting are tiny in relation to number of potential voters and I can't help (paranoia hat) that's the way they like it.

Approx 36,000 voted on NUI panel.

Field east

CramCycle wrote: »

I am voting purely with the aim of having Mullen at the bottom of the pile.

One would assume that degree holders would be that bit more progressive than non degree holders and therefor Sen. Mullen would be the last thing on their mind . But there you go..
Mullen can be the total counter foil to all the rest of the - progressive !?!?!- senators and , IMO, I thing that the full range of issues/ options/ opinions need to be heard in any debate and more particularly in a public forum such as the senate. Otherwise you are into group think,conservatives voice not being heard, etc. so maybe that's why Sen Mullen polled so well. It's always good to know what the other woman/ man is thinking.
Some of us do not like his 'style'. It's just him. But let's try and play the ball and not the man.

Field east

Field east wrote: »

I rang NUI today and my understanding is that you are leaving it very tight by emailing your current address now if you want your ballot to be posted out and have it 'posted back' by Tuesday next. I am open to correction

By way of background, my voting papers were sent to wrong address. I corrected address by emailing current address to elections @nui.ie. NUI then posted out to me new papers - received two days before closing date. I filled in the paper and posted it by hand at NUI , Merrion Sq. I rang NUI at the outset re the above procedure before I proceeded.
Have met with a number of grads in the meantime and most said that they either never got a voting paper or that they never voted in a senate election. Partially explains the very low turnout of 30%.
Are the 6 NUI elected senators the most 'democratically 'elected of the 60?

nice_guy80

It's a sad reflection of NUI education in the country.

CramCycle

Geuze wrote: »

Approx 36,000 voted on NUI panel.

I don't know how many people are eligible but I would have thought that there is alot more than 36,000.

Geuze

nice_guy80 wrote: »

It's a sad reflection of NUI education in the country.

I would say that myself and the three other people I spoke to are all reasonably well educated.

We all voted for Mullen, though not all first prefs.

Geuze

CramCycle wrote: »

I don't know how many people are eligible but I would have thought that there is alot more than 36,000.

How and when will the ballot papers be sent to the electorate?
Ballot Papers are sent by registered post on the date set out in the Minister’s Order. Because of the size of the two university electorates - currently 103,165 for NUI, and approximately 54,000 for University of Dublin (Trinity College) - delivery of the registered post may take a number of days from the date of issue. Delivery of ballot papers sent to addresses overseas depend on local postal services.


So 103,165 electors, of which 36,293 voted.

PhoenixParker

How many of those were signed for and collected I wonder?

The whole process of registering to vote for the Seanad and making any subsequent changes to your address is annoying and easy to forget.
For instance I'm not on the register for Trinity. I graduated last April, but the updated register didn't apply:

If you are a recent graduate and/or have submitted a form of claim following February 26th 2015 and before February 26th 2016 you will included in the provisional version of the 2016 Register due to be published on 01 June 2016. You will receive a ballot for elections following this publication, however as the April 2016 election necessarily corresponds to the 2015 Register you will not be eligible to receive a ballot on this occasion.

I found that out by emailing Trinity for clarification and it took them weeks to reply.

I'm also a graduate of NUI and was sure I registered, but don't seem to have made the list. The only way I could check whether I'd registered or not was to ask my sister (who's a student in Galway) to go to the library and check the register for me.

Someone else either in this thread or another thread mentioned a change of address which resulted in someone being wholly removed from the current register but placed on the future register, thus dis-enfranchising them.

There's a whole lot of the system that could be made much easier, if they actually wanted people to vote.
Online register checking, online address changing and more efficient maintenance of the register might go a long way to getting people to vote.

CramCycle

Geuze wrote: »

I would say that myself and the three other people I spoke to are all reasonably well educated.

We all voted for Mullen, though not all first prefs.

I will give credit where it is due, he has some things he has put forward or supported in the Seanad that are agreeable, to almost everyone. Some, alot less so, but the childish behaviour of timetabling so many amendments so as to stifle democracy when it is something he does not agree with is brattish at best and not the type of behaviour that should be tolerated.

PhoenixParker wrote: »

How many of those were signed for and collected I wonder?

The first one I received was not signed for, several ex classmates have never received theirs despite checking the register every time.

The whole process of registering to vote for the Seanad and making any subsequent changes to your address is annoying and easy to forget.
For instance I'm not on the register for Trinity. I graduated last April, but the updated register didn't apply:

It should be an automatic sign up, with returned envelopes being taken off the register.

I'm also a graduate of NUI and was sure I registered, but don't seem to have made the list. The only way I could check whether I'd registered or not was to ask my sister (who's a student in Galway) to go to the library and check the register for me.

TBF you can e-mail them and they will respond, give your name, year of graduation, degree title, I think I may have had to give my student number as well.

Someone else either in this thread or another thread mentioned a change of address which resulted in someone being wholly removed from the current register but placed on the future register, thus dis-enfranchising them.

Indeed, a clear cut case of idiocy by the system.

There's a whole lot of the system that could be made much easier, if they actually wanted people to vote.
Online register checking, online address changing and more efficient maintenance of the register might go a long way to getting people to vote.

They could easily latch it onto checktheregister.ie without a huge amount of effort.

Water John

Yes I gave Mullen a vote the last time so that a wide spectrum of society were represented in the Oireachtas.
I believe he abused his position in a number of ways. So I voted the ballot paper to put him last.

nice_guy80

Geuze wrote: »

I would say that myself and the three other people I spoke to are all reasonably well educated.

We all voted for Mullen, though not all first prefs.

I couldn't bring myself to vote for some who spouts hate at people who oppose his stance on abortion legislation