Voting reform, Dail Scandal and Politican's greed [See post 172]

blanch152

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Apologies I got my numbers mixed up. The point I was making the rules do not allow for one member to vote for another but by the same token they do not expressly forbid it. Maybe the author of the standing orders would have thought it was obvious you don't vote on behalf of another TD. Clearly they were wrong, our TD's are like children that need to have things spelt out in very clear terms.

Correct.

If Dooley is in the Dail, chamber and says to Collins that he is voting yes, would you press the button for me, he technically may be within the rules.

What is surprising in this case is that Dooley wasn't in the chamber and is therefore clearly in breach of the Standing Order.

L1011

Scottish system has parish pump++ due to the single member local seats and absolute headcases getting in via the additional member lists. It doesn't solve anything

National lists in theory eliminate the parish pump but absolutely guarantee parties will put odious candidates mid list and plenty will get in. And it strips preferentiality from it

We have quite a good system, vastly superior to Scotland as well as many other neighbours. If it was all 5 seats or indeed larger it'd be better; as would breaking away from the GAA/council borders more

riddlinrussell

L1011 wrote: »

Scottish system has parish pump++ due to the single member local seats and absolute headcases getting in via the additional member lists. It doesn't solve anything

National lists in theory eliminate the parish pump but absolutely guarantee parties will put odious candidates mid list and plenty will get in. And it strips preferentiality from it

We have quite a good system, vastly superior to Scotland as well as many other neighbours. If it was all 5 seats or indeed larger it'd be better; as would breaking away from the GAA/council borders more

Broadly agree with you on the boundary changes etc being a good thing, should probably change with each census (say, once census analysis is competed). If it was to change regularly enough it would reduce the risk of establishing an 'area' that look at all others as getting a better deal than they do etc.

So if mixed member doesn't work what would you change about the actual system itself? (e.g. how votes are counted, ideal constituency size and number of representatives, rather than the boundary changes etc that would be a good start)

Also would you want to see the exact same system retained in the event of a United Ireland, or some hybrid of the two formats of STV currently in use?

Tea Shock

What would people think of having 158 one-seat constituencies instead of 40 constituencies that are 3,4 or 5 seats?

On one hand, particularly in rural locations, it may increase the parish-pump factor

On the other hand, it would remove the situation where an entire county in the shadow of a larger neighbor gets zero TDs in the Dail (e.g. Carlow in the past)

L1011

riddlinrussell wrote: »

Broadly agree with you on the boundary changes etc being a good thing, should probably change with each census (say, once census analysis is competed). If it was to change regularly enough it would reduce the risk of establishing an 'area' that look at all others as getting a better deal than they do etc.

So if mixed member doesn't work what would you change about the actual system itself? (e.g. how votes are counted, ideal constituency size and number of representatives, rather than the boundary changes etc that would be a good start)

Also would you want to see the exact same system retained in the event of a United Ireland, or some hybrid of the two formats of STV currently in use?

7-9 seat constituencies, retain current population to TD ratio. NI only counts marginally differently, I'm not sure it's worth it - the rest is the same

is_that_so

L1011 wrote: »

Multiple times a day. It adds up very, very considerably which is why we replaced it

Still very little time in the grand scheme of things. I didn't say we should go back to it but if they can't master rules around simple buttons it should be an option.

Jolly Red Giant

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Relax, it's cross party.

Not actually - all parties do not abuse the system - only those who have a habit of abusing people in the first place.

James Brown

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Not actually - all parties do not abuse the system - only those who have a habit of abusing people in the first place.

Which parties did pay all their bar tabs?

L1011

is_that_so wrote: »

Still very little time in the grand scheme of things. I didn't say we should go back to it but if they can't master rules around simple buttons it should be an option.

It would be entire days over the course of a Government.

McMurphy

L1011 wrote: »

Multiple times a day. It adds up very, very considerably which is why we replaced it

Thumb/Fingerprint reader.

Even our shower of chancers aren't that carless that they'd leave home without or misplace their hands.

Nigh on impossible to circumvent or abuse.

Job done.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Thumb/Fingerprint reader.

Even our shower of chancers aren't that carless that they'd leave home without or misplace their hands.

Nigh on impossible to circumvent or abuse.

Job done.

Wouldn't pass GDPR. Fingerprint information is sensitive personal data. You would have to prove you really need it.

GarIT

blanch152 wrote: »

Wouldn't pass GDPR. Fingerprint information is sensitive personal data. You would have to prove you really need it.

Complete nonsense. You would have to prove there is a business case for using it. "It is used to verify identity" Problem solved.

GarIT

I do honestly believe this should be quite a serious crime. Whether it is or isn't at the moment I don't know. Elected officials voting in somebody else's name, a life sentence wouldn't be far from what's due.

KaneToad

GarIT wrote: »

I do honestly believe this should be quite a serious crime. Whether it is or isn't at the moment I don't know. Elected officials voting in somebody else's name, a life sentence wouldn't be far from what's due.

A life sentence, ah here!

It's not a crime. They were asking others to press their button for them, in their absence. It was shoddy, lazy behaviour but no fraud is committed. I'm no fan of Dooley but I think it is being blown out of proportion. Procedures need to be tightened up, that should be the end of it.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Wouldn't pass GDPR. Fingerprint information is sensitive personal data. You would have to prove you really need it.

Ye what?

Cmon, this GDPR stuff attempted to be used by people as some magic bullet is getting beyond ridiculous.

I know we have a contact with a major retailer in the country and I access my goods within their premises via their fingerprint recognition system that they've only recently had installed.

All the staff (prob 500) all use it too

They're fingerprints, pretty hard to replicate and hardly easily identifiable to everyday civilians.

Jolly Red Giant

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Which parties did pay all their bar tabs?

Not all parties waste their time in the Dail bar.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Ye what?

Cmon, this GDPR stuff attempted to be used by people as some magic bullet is getting beyond ridiculous.

I know we have a contact with a major retailer in the country and I access my goods within their premises via their fingerprint recognition system that they've only recently had installed.

All the staff (prob 500) all use it too

They're fingerprints, pretty hard to replicate and hardly easily identifiable to everyday civilians.

And depending on the opportunity to cause criminal damage and the security needs, that food retailer may well be justified under GDPR.

That doesn’t mean it is justified in the Dail. Each situation has to be considered on its merits, and if there are less invasive ways of carrying out the business e.g. the old lobby system or electronic button voting, then they should be used.

careless sherpa

blanch152 wrote: »

And depending on the opportunity to cause criminal damage and the security needs, that food retailer may well be justified under GDPR.

That doesn’t mean it is justified in the Dail. Each situation has to be considered on its merits, and if there are less invasive ways of carrying out the business e.g. the old lobby system or electronic button voting, then they should be used.

Might be better to replace them with a bunch of monkeys. We could train them to push buttons more effectively

GarIT

KaneToad wrote: »

A life sentence, ah here!

It's not a crime. They were asking others to press their button for them, in their absence. It was shoddy, lazy behaviour but no fraud is committed. I'm no fan of Dooley but I think it is being blown out of proportion. Procedures need to be tightened up, that should be the end of it.

As I said I don't know whether it currently is a crime. I would have a lot more leniency where the person being voted on behalf of was in the building and had requested it. If it was as has been reported in at least one of the cases where the person being voted for was not in the building and/or was not aware they were being voted for then it is casting votes that wouldn't have otherwise been cast, which is manipulating dail votes, which should carry a mandatory life sentence in my opinion.

uck51js9zml2yt

Gerry G wrote: »

So they just get away Scot free again after committing fraud. Where will the corruption end??

It will stop when we stop voting them into power.

But of course we all know that will never happen.

Just look at Lowry and Mick Wallace. He robs his employees and the state, declares bankruptcy and we give him a promotion to Europe.
As for Lowry, he keeps topping the poll.
We need to stop pretending we care....as a nation, we don't!

Infernal Racket

Ailani Thankful Riot wrote: »

It will stop when we stop voting them into power.

But of course we all know that will never happen.

Just look at Lowry and Mick Wallace. He robs his employees and the state, declares bankruptcy and we give him a promotion to Europe.
As for Lowry, he keeps topping the poll.
We need to stop pretending we care....as a nation, we don't!

So who do we vote for?? Every single party is full of ****ehawks. And the indos are no better

uck51js9zml2yt

Gerry G wrote: »

So who do we vote for?? Every single party is full of ****ehawks. And the indos are no better

None of the above might be a start.
Time to send a message to the politicians that we've had enough and that honesty and integrity are important in all walks of life.

If we don't vote then we might get people putting themselves forward who are honest for a change.

ednwireland

the fact is that TDs have been found out and cant be trusted to follow rules set in the constitution. there should be some sort of wireless card that enables the button when you go to vote. I'm sure that is available. however this been public sector and gov it would cost millions to implement.

uck51js9zml2yt

It wouldn't happen here.

A Japanese minister resigns for breaking the law regarding the giving of gifts and the PM apologies and takes responsibility for appointing him.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-50178408

James Brown

If we had a credible system of government and decent professional public representatives everyone involved would resign. They could even put it to the people by putting their name in the hat next election.

A solution might be better people?

James Brown

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Not all parties waste their time in the Dail bar.

I was speaking on not paying the bar tab. I like the sound of these people though, if such a party exists.

dub_skav

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It was suggested before but the claim was they would lose the card.
Very simple solution, fingerprint scanner at their seat. They won't lose their hand unless in an unfortunate accident.

Have an ID card that is used for only 2 purposes; voting and as their bar tab.
They'll never lose it and never trust anybody else with it

Scott Tenorman

dub_skav wrote: »

Have an ID card that is used for only 2 purposes; voting and as their bar tab.
They'll never lose it and never trust anybody else with it

It’s not like they all pay their bar tab either!

Jolly Red Giant

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I was speaking on not paying the bar tab. I like the sound of these people though, if such a party exists.

Solidarity TDs (and staff) do not use the Dail bar.

blanch152

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Solidarity TDs (and staff) do not use the Dail bar.

Don’t they have their own politically correct bar back at hq? Or is that just the communists?