The strange affair of Dimmy Tooley

Loafing Oaf

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I know there is a slight difference between the Lisa chambers and Timmy Dooley and Niall Collins incidents but I don't understand how Michael Martin has not asked Lisa chambers to step down like he did the two lads.

Can't defenestrate his entire front bench...

expectationlost

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So from having heard from several politicians over today and yesterday on the radio it appears that it's not uncommon for TDs and senators while in their respective chambers but not at their seat to ask a colleague next to their seat to press the vote button for them but the point they stress is that they are in the chamber and fully aware of what is being done.The difference here with deputies Dooley and Collins and chambers is that there were votes cast by them or for them which did not accurately reflect the reality of the people present in the chamber.

Callerary wasn't in the Chamber

expectationlost

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Charlie Flanagan minister for justice admitted he has done the same.
Seems the practice is just not confined to FF. Harris's faux outrage was hilarious though. Did the dog eat Charlie's homework too?

Harris was referring to their delayed and weak explaination.

expectationlost

salmocab wrote: »

If someone is talking to someone somewhere whether it’s in the corner or in their office down the corridor it shouldn’t matter as they weren’t paying attention to the debate so shouldn’t be voting on it. I know they follow the whip but we shouldn’t have a system that takes into account the party system it should be one vote each if your present.

the votes are often quite separate to the debate especially now that they are done in block on a Thursday.

salmocab

expectationlost wrote: »

the votes are often quite separate to the debate especially now that they are done in block on a Thursday.

So they only need to be around on Thursday and can’t even manage that? It sounds to me like the whole place is a lot more dysfunctional than we thought.

blanch152

expectationlost wrote: »

the votes are often quite separate to the debate especially now that they are done in block on a Thursday.

Don't expect most of the people commenting on this to have any knowledge of Dail procedures.

Most of them can't see the difference between pushing a button for someone who is in the Chamber and calls across to vote for them and pushing a button for someone who isn't in the Chamber.

salmocab

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't expect most of the people commenting on this to have any knowledge of Dail procedures.

Most of them can't see the difference between pushing a button for someone who is in the Chamber and calls across to vote for them and pushing a button for someone who isn't in the Chamber.

No your right most people don’t know about Dail procedures, most would assume that the people in there do though.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't expect most of the people commenting on this to have any knowledge of Dail procedures.

Most of them can't see the difference between pushing a button for someone who is in the Chamber and calls across to vote for them and pushing a button for someone who isn't in the Chamber.

So what is Dail procedure surrounding votes then?

Is it permitted to vote on behalf of someone else regardless of whether they're in the chamber or not?

Seems a fairly flawed procedure if it's ok if you just ask your pal to hit the button on your behalf because you're otherwise engaged, be that on the phone or on the jack's or whatever.

So let's say in a situation where a TD is on the phone and a vote comes up and they shout over to John, press that auld button for me there John, Mary's on the phone to me here.....John hits the no button instead of the yes button, either accidentally or on purpose, with the result of the TD having a vote recorded against their name that they didn't choose.

There's either a rule that you must vote personally, or someone can vote on your behalf if you're in the chamber.

I wonder does anyone know the answer here?

Plumbthedepths

Any chance that the experts on Dail procedure post a link to standing orders that allows one TD cast a vote on behalf of another TD or can I assume they are talking through a certain oriface other than their mouth.

Itssoeasy

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/parliamentaryBusiness/standingOrders/dail/2019/2019-01-11_consolidated-dail-eireann-standing-orders-january-2019_en.pdf

Standing orders effective from January of this year.

And from looking through it quickly to the relevant part from page 53 onwards it talks about when and how the votes happen and all that but unless I missed it reading quickly it has to be said, it doesn't say they can.

blanch152

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Any chance that the experts on Dail procedure post a link to standing orders that allows one TD cast a vote on behalf of another TD or can I assume they are talking through a certain oriface other than their mouth.

If you can’t tell the difference between voting for someone who is not in the Dail Chamber and pushing a button because sonmeone in the Dail chamber calls over to you to do so, then I really can’t help you there.

osarusan

blanch152 wrote: »

If you can’t tell the difference between voting for someone who is not in the Dail Chamber and pushing a button because sonmeone in the Dail chamber calls over to you to do so, then I really can’t help you there.

As I asked earlier, if, after asking Collins to vote for him, Dooley had been up the back chatting to somebody instead of outside the door chatting to somebody, do you think there is a fundamental difference in the two scenarios?

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

If you can’t tell the difference between voting for someone who is not in the Dail Chamber and pushing a button because sonmeone in the Dail chamber calls over to you to do so, then I really can’t help you there.

Just reading the Indo (who broke the story) editorial section, in it, they claim

'Using someone else's vote is a violation of democracy'

The piece then goes on to say the following.

There is also a suggestion that the practice of politicians pushing buttons on behalf of others may be widespread. That vague allegation requires rigorous investigation

.

So my guess is that none of them should be voting for their pals, period, in the chamber/out of the chamber, it doesn't matter.

How many will emerge from the woodwork before the end of the week I wonder?

Itssoeasy

Do we know where exactly Timmy Dooley was within Leinster house when he wasn't in the actual dail chamber ? I've seen reports that Niall Collins was under the assumption that Timmy Dooley was "up the back" but has that been clarified ? I mean you'd assume that the Ceann Comhairle will get the facts as to what the hell was happening in Leinster house last Thursday.

Plumbthedepths

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/parliamentaryBusiness/standingOrders/dail/2019/2019-01-11_consolidated-dail-eireann-standing-orders-january-2019_en.pdf

Standing orders effective from January of this year.

And from looking through it quickly to the relevant part from page 53 onwards it talks about when and how the votes happen and all that but unless I missed it reading quickly it has to be said, it doesn't say they can.

The only section where I saw reference to voting was section 76 of SO referring to electronic means of voting no mention that you can vote on behalf of another member.

Plumbthedepths

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Do we know where exactly Timmy Dooley was within Leinster house when he wasn't in the actual dail chamber ? I've seen reports that Niall Collins was under the assumption that Timmy Dooley was "up the back" but has that been clarified ? I mean you'd assume that the Ceann Comhairle will get the facts as to what the hell was happening in Leinster house last Thursday.

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo, it stretches credibility to think only FF were acting in this manner.

Itssoeasy

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

The only section where I saw reference to voting was section 76 of SO referring to electronic means of voting no mention that you can vote on behalf of another member.

Yeah. I think if nothing else that part will be clarified going forward.

osarusan

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Any chance that the experts on Dail procedure post a link to standing orders that allows one TD cast a vote on behalf of another TD or can I assume they are talking through a certain oriface other than their mouth.

Irish Times:

Are TDs allowed to vote for each other?

TDs vote for each other if they have moved from their assigned seat to speak to another member and will ask a colleague to press the button on their bench. Sometimes TDs go to the back of the chamber to take a phone call and will ask someone in their row to press the button. The protocols for voting are set out in the handbook that each new TD receives when elected to the Dáil.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/all-you-need-to-know-about-d%C3%A1il-electronic-voting-1.4057114

Seems a fairly stupid system to me - if you are already in the chamber just press your own damn button!


It actually makes more sense to me to have a system that allows an absent member to (formally, officially) nominate somebody to vote on their behalf.

lola85

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo, it stretches credibility to think only FF were acting in this manner.

What is people’s obsession with pointing out other parties are at, it so poor FF????
Why are FF been absolved because maybe other parties are at it???

Itssoeasy

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo, it stretches credibility to think only FF were acting in this manner.

Well until we get reports that parties other than FF have had votes cast with a TD not in the chamber.The asking a party colleague to vote for you seems to be an accepted unofficial rule but it's TDs been listed as having voted when they aren't physically in the dail chamber is the issue. The unofficial rule may be banned pretty lively I'd think.

McMurphy

lola85 wrote: »

What is people’s obsession with pointing out other parties are at it so poor FF????
Why are FF been absolved because maybe other parties are at it???

Who has been absolving them?

People are rightly pointing out that others do be at it too.

You doth protest too much, methinks.

Macy0161

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo, it stretches credibility to think only FF were acting in this manner.

Pretty sure FF would've found someone from FG or SF if they could, and at least tipped a hack off.

Plumbthedepths

lola85 wrote: »

What is people’s obsession with pointing out other parties are at it so poor FF????
Why are FF been absolved because maybe other parties are at it???

Who is absolving FF? My point was it stretches credibility to believe only FF engages in this behaviour. Flanagan admitted he has voted on behalf of another TD we have to take his word that the TD he voted on behalf of was in the chamber at the time. McDowell has claimed it goes on in the Seanad aswell again we have to take his word that the member having his vote cast for him is in the same chamber. I suspect after a proper investigation using video footage linked to voting patterns it will be more than just FF TDs acting the maggot.

Itssoeasy

osarusan wrote: »

Irish Times:


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/all-you-need-to-know-about-d%C3%A1il-electronic-voting-1.4057114

Seems a fairly stupid system to me - if you are already in the chamber just press your own damn button!


It actually makes more sense to me to have a system that allows an absent member to (formally, officially) nominate somebody to vote on their behalf.

There's a line in that article where it says it was suggested that TDs could use the card system they have in the European Parliament, but it was feared that TD's. Could lose them. These are grown adults FFS and they appear not to trusted with a card that would allow them to vote.

McMurphy

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Who is absolving FF? My point was it stretches credibility to believe only FF engages in this behaviour. Flanagan admitted he has voted on behalf of another TD we have to take his word that the TD he voted on behalf of was in the chamber at the time. McDowell has claimed it goes on in the Seanad aswell again we have to take his word that the member having his vote cast for him is in the same chamber. I suspect after a proper investigation using video footage linked to voting patterns it will be more than just FF TDs acting the maggot.

The Indo are on the case, having already caught Barry Cowen apparently, I do believe there'll be a few squeaky bums among our politicians for the next few weeks.

blanch152

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo, it stretches credibility to think only FF were acting in this manner.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/english-and-cowen-say-they-never-asked-colleagues-to-vote-for-them-when-absent-from-the-dail-958802.html


"Speaking tonight, Mr English said he was at the back of the chamber and, as has often been the case, he “asked down for my button to be pressed”.

Mr Cowen in a statement said similar in relation to September 26, when two votes were cast in his assigned seat of A-15, but he was not present.

He told the Irish Examiner: “I have never asked a colleague to vote for me when I was not in the chamber. As has been confirmed in the last few days, there is a known practice of members who are in the House asking colleagues to press the voting button if they are away from their seats in other parts of the chamber. There are at least four entrances to the Chamber that are used frequently by all members of the House."

The allegations against Collins, Dooley and Chambers are more serious than the other ones.

expectationlost

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Barry Cowan wasn't in the chamber when a vote was cast in his name story is in the Indo

he says he was https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/barry-cowen-the-latest-fianna-fil-td-to-be-dragged-into-phantom-votes-scandal-38618039.html

expectationlost

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Do we know where exactly Timmy Dooley was within Leinster house when he wasn't in the actual dail chamber ? I've seen reports that Niall Collins was under the assumption that Timmy Dooley was "up the back" but has that been clarified ? I mean you'd assume that the Ceann Comhairle will get the facts as to what the hell was happening in Leinster house last Thursday.

he exited through the doors https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHBlz7oS6_I&feature=youtu.be&t=1651 and said he left the chamber https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fianna-f%C3%A1il-td-says-colleague-voted-for-him-while-he-was-not-in-d%C3%A1il-1.4056564

expectationlost

when did the Oireachtas video stream start showing the voting display during voting?

blanch152

osarusan wrote: »

As I asked earlier, if, after asking Collins to vote for him, Dooley had been up the back chatting to somebody instead of outside the door chatting to somebody, do you think there is a fundamental difference in the two scenarios?

Yes, I do think there is a difference between those two scenarios. There are two conditions set out in the Constitution - present and voting.

If you are not present, you cannot vote. If you are outside the Dail Chamber you are not voting.

Those of us of a certain age will remember one of the elections for Taoiseach back in the early 1980s when there was a narrow majority in the Dail. Workers Party TDs had to get in via the Press Gallery when the main door was closed for the vote.

Now, being present and asking someone to press a button while you finish a conversation or a phone call is a very different thing. It may not be best practice but it is not in the same category as telling someone to vote in your place while you leave the Dail.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/time-was-when-a-mere-two-votes-could-bring-down-a-government-26396386.html