General Irish politics discussion thread

L1011

Within parties, backbenchers get far less time than front benchers; so which one would you equalise Independents to if there was a free for all?

Peregrinus

Nobody is saying that every TD should have equal speaking rights; just that the basis on which speaking (and other) rights are allocated should not favour party TDs over non-party TDs.

The argumment here is not about benefit or about protecting or undermining the party system. The point is that party and non-party TDs have the same electoral mandate from the people, and the same constitutional function. "Rigging the system" so that party TDs can fulfil their mandates and perform their functions more effectively than non-party TDs is an attempt to benefit parties at the expense of voters, which is A Bad Thing.

As for undermining the party system, if the party system delivers benefits to the public then the public will vote for party TDs. If the party system needs to be shored up by riggind Oireachtas procedures to favour party TDs over non-party TDs, that indicates that the party system can't surive on its own merit. In which case, why shore it up?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951849#Comment_122951849

But you need to define how you'd provide speaking time to independents in this case. If the current system is problematic, what is the replacement?

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951849#Comment_122951849

If party and non-party TDs have the same electoral mandate from the people, and the same constitutional function to fulfil, then surely speaking rights are a minor part of that. Should Cabinet positions, ministries, etc. be shared out so everybody has something too? Why even have government or opposition in that case?

As for the party system being shored up by riggind Oireachtas, what is the alternative? Would having huge numbers of Independents with no over-arching manifesto be better than parties with defined ideology and priorities? Non-party candidates are favoured in our electoral system far more than in most other countries. The electorate can vote in exclusively Independents if they want but don't.

corkie

Could not find a forum for 'The Week in Politics' to post this into: -

https://bsky.app/profile/rtetwip.bsky.social/post/3lddkqguf5c2p

I will be dropping and collecting a relative from mass, so will catch some of it, can watch the rest when repeated tonight or on the player. Government Formation talks!

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/the-week-in-politics/SI0000001936?epguid=IH10002378-24-0035

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951861#Comment_122951861

I'm not saying that the current system is problematic. The technical groups are designed as a mechanism by which non-party TDs can get equitable treatment with party TDs. Others are objecting to the existence of the technical groups; I am defending them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951929#Comment_122951929

Party and non-party TDs are elected to the Oireachtas, which is the legislature, and it is their mandate as legislators of which I speak. Speaking rights are only a part of that; there's also membership of, and chairing of, Oireachtas committees, allocation of office space and other resources, research facilities, etc.

But no TD has a mandate to be in government, the executive branch of government. As regards government your only rights as a legislator are (a) to vote on who will be Taoiseach; to question government ministers and hold them to account; (c) to vote no confidence in the government; (b) to vote on the appropriation of the money that government needs.

The alternative to shoring up the party system by rigging the Oireachtas is not to shore up the party system by rigging the Oireachtas, but to accept the mandate of all TDs equally. It's a system that has worked pretty well up to now, by and large. Why change it?

(And a quibble; ouir electoral system doesn't favour non-party candidates. It favours voters, delivering them signficantly more power than Certain Others We Could Mention. If we have a high number of non-party TDs relative to other countries that is not because the system favours them but because the voters do. If the voters had a stronger preference for party TDs than they do then we would have fewer non-party TDs than we have.)

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122960728#Comment_122960728

To be fair, our system allows for the election of non-party TDs, not all political systems allow for that. The ones that we are most familiar with - UK and US - do allow for the election of non-party representatives, but the systems do make it more difficult. As I mentioned, some like Germany, make it close to impossible.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122961135#Comment_122961135

That wouldn't mean that our system was favouring non-party candidates; it would mean that other systems were disadvantaging them, relative to party candidates.

The most you can say is that the Irish system is less disadvantageous to non-party candidate than many other systems are. But it doesn't favour them, relative to party candidates.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122961171#Comment_122961171

Agreed, but it is a factor. We probably have the worst of all combinations, an electoral system that doesn't disadvantage independent candidates, combined with an electorate addicted to clientist politics. It is that combination that elects so many independents compared with elsewhere, but you need both components.

We could be as clientist-focussed as ever, but if we had the German system, we would elect far less independents.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122961181#Comment_122961181

In the past we were as client focussed as today, or even more so, and we had the electoral system that we have today, and yet we elected far fewer independents. So I think we need to look a bit further to explain the rise in the numbers of non-party TDs.

One possible factor is a cultural change — a decline in the intensity of party identification/loyalty. Irish political parties can no longer rely on a large cohort of rusted-on supporters who have inherited a party allegiance; they have to earn the support of voters. And, it turns out, they're not so good at that.

Possibly related to this is a broader international change — declining public trust in institutions and political establishments. This has beein going on since the Global Financial Crisis. In other countries it has manifested in the rise of the far right/Trumpism/populism; in Ireland in a rise in independent/non-party/minor party TDs. To be honest, if the way this has played out in Ireland as compared to other countries is an outcome of our electoral system, it's a good outcome, not a bad one.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122960728#Comment_122960728

Firstly I said that "non-party candidates are favoured in our electoral system far more than in most other countries". That is not the same as our system favouring them over party members. Certainly non-party candidates aren't disadvantaged under our electoral system.

While no TD has a mandate to be in government, surely the point of the system which sees TDs elected is on one hand to form a government and on the other hand, to form a useful opposition. Certainly the former, and even the latter to a large extent, requires TDs with a defined, collective purpose and a level of discipline to that.

Not sure what you mean by "It's a system that has worked pretty well up to now, by and large. Why change it?". I thought your position was that the system doesn't work ("party system being shored up by riggind Oireachtas", as you put it) and needs to be changed (to accept the mandate of all TDs equally)?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122965007#Comment_122965007

No, other way round. Take a step back: On 12 Dec, Hotblack Desiato suggested:

These 'technical groups' are the biggest load of nonsense ever.

To which Dulpit replied:

They're needed for speaking rights in the Dáil.

(Which I would say should be ". . . speaking and other rights in the Dáil".)

Which prompted Hotblack to say:

Well maybe if you don't want to join a party you don't get the benefits of joining one.

The implication being that, in Hotblack's view, speaking rights in the Dáil should be a benefit of party membership.

And this is the view that I have been resisting. Speaking rights, membership of Dáil Committees, etc. etc. aren't a benefrit of party membership shouldn't be allocated exclusively or preferentially to party TDs; party TDs and non-party TDs have the same electoral mandate, which is conferred by the voters, not by parties. Technical groups exist so that non-party TDs can be treated in the same was as party TDs when it comes to the organisation and execution of parliamentary business. This is a good and necessary thing. It should not be changed.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122965079#Comment_122965079

There is a cohort whose attitude to perfectly legitimately elected reps exemplifies the 'power belongs to us' syndrome.

It's a symptom of the two party dominance of politics here.

Could someone sum up where we are at with the CC job now and what is likely to happen. Is VM a shoe-in now?

rock22

@Peregrinus " …. Speaking rights, membership of Dáil Committees, etc. etc. aren't a benefrit of party membership shouldn't be allocated exclusively or preferentially to party TDs; party TDs and non-party TDs have the same electoral mandate, which is conferred by the voters, not by parties. Technical groups exist so that non-party TDs can be treated in the same was as party TDs when it comes to the organisation and execution of parliamentary business. This is a good and necessary thing. It should not be changed. "

But it could be said that technical groups are only needed because of the way the relevant committee has decided to allocate speaking time. The group who lose out the most in the current arrangement are the backbench TDs who have no allocated speaking time at all, as far as I can see.

An ambitious TD might see that if their road to advancement via ministerial appointment is unlikely then they are better as an independent rather than a backbench TD. And the bigger parties seem happy to offer inducements to independent TDs that they would never offer to their own backbenchers. With that choice, many TDs will prefer the independent route.

A better arrangement might be to allocate speaking time to each TD with the relevent parties taking charge of the speaking time of their TDs. So the government would manage all the speaking time of the government parties TDs, the main opposition would do likewise with it's TDs. etc..

Peregrinus

Speaking time is allocated to parties and groups in proportion to their sizes, except that the allocation is weighted in favour of parties in government (becuase the government is being held to account, it needs extra opportunities to explain and defend itself) and, to some extent, to the official opposition party (because it has a particular responsiblity to hold the government to account, rather than pursuing its own platform).

It's then up to parties and groups to divide up their allocations among their individual members. Government parties, and the official opposition, tend to give extra time to ministers/frontbenchers, for the reasons just stated. Minor parties and technical groups tend to divide up the time more evenly.

This does mean that government backbenchers in particular don't get a huge amount of time. Any government backbench TD who is dissatisfied with this state of affairs can of course refuse the whip and join one of the technical groups, but there might be consequences for that at the next election.

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122965785#Comment_122965785

There is no formal "official opposition" in Ireland. There is one in the House of Commons, but not in the Dáil.

The largest opposition party is typically given precedence over other opposition parties, but there is no official status.

Sam Russell

Are the independent TDs in receipt of extra funds compared to a backbench TD?

hotmail.com

The Social Democrats have said they won't support the election of the first female Ceann Comhairle.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122967921#Comment_122967921

Why would you expect them to? She is antithetical to their policies.

pureza

Tbh,I think Verona’s talents would be wasted in the CC

She is good at holding people to account

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968031#Comment_122968031

Is she?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968199#Comment_122968199

Tell me, how much do you actually know about Irish politics?

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968220#Comment_122968220

Do you? I'm sure she has some disagreements with the Social Democrats but I would hardly call it antithetical. Does anyone in Irish politics have completely different policies.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968277#Comment_122968277

She left FG over a disagreement about being too right wing for them. She is pretty close to being the most right wing TD in the Dáil.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968296#Comment_122968296

She seems grand to me. I don't regard our right wing as bad.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968304#Comment_122968304

And you aren't a Soc Dem.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968304#Comment_122968304

But obviously the more right wing tds are going to be unpopular for Soc Dems. Not hard to see.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122967539#Comment_122967539

The situation here is pretty similar to the UK. The position of "leader of the opposition" has no legal standing; nor does the "opposition" in general — no reference to eitjher anywhere in legislation, or in the Constitution, of course. (Fun fact: In the UK, this is also true of the position of Prime Minister.)

But, also as in the UK, the position is recognised in parliamentary practice and procedure, and in important ways. In particular, the opposition party receives significant additional parliamentary allowances. All parties receive some allowances, but the oppsition gets more — e.g. in 2021 SF (parliamentary party size: 42) got €2 million, while FF (parliamentary party size: 54) got €1.8 million. And the opposition has other non-legal but well-established rights — e.g. to nominate the chair of the PUblic Accounts Committee.

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122969119#Comment_122969119

In the UK the Leader of the Opposition is recognised by the 1975 Ministerial & Other Salaries Act.

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122969119#Comment_122969119

And Sinn Féin’s funding exceeding FFs was down to the number of first preference votes received - nothing to do with their respective roles in Government or in Oppositon.

Following the recent election FF will now have the highest level of state funding

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968081#Comment_122968081

Will her Wexford voters get to hold HER to account for the €255k salary she's taking to avoid doing any work for them?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970352#Comment_122970352

The same question applies to every CC since the 1937 constitution. Have you criticised them as well?

FrancieBrady

SoF and McGuinness eliminated. Transfers to Murphy and O'Snodaigh being counted.

hotmail.com

It's beyond belief that a government wasn't formed when the result was so clear.

FrancieBrady

Verona Murphy elected.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970482#Comment_122970482

You really think a five year programme for government involving two parties, another party and/or independents, can or should be sketched out in a couple of weeks?

harryharry25

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122968296#Comment_122968296

She would fit in well joining back up with FG so

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970408#Comment_122970408

It's a bit different when it is one out of forty or fifty TDs from a party, compared to a lone wolf like Murphy.

She took her Judas pieces of silver. So much for being the voice of accountability.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970686#Comment_122970686

I do.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970809#Comment_122970809

Why? Shouldn't she have the same right to aspire to the job as anyone else in Dail Eireann?

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971180#Comment_122971180

I guess the point of an independent TD is to represent their locality more than being invovled in the wider running of the Dáil/government (otherwise why not be part of a party?). It's odd too that she got the gig after only 1 term in the Dáil. She was on some local radio station the other day saying that she'll use the role to advocate for Wexford and said it's essentially the same as a ministry (it's obviously not).

Maybe I'm cynical, but sounds like she wanted a guaranteed 10 years (assuming 2 full terms) in the Dáil with a substantial pay hike for the next 5. What I don't get is why the rest of the independents in their group pushed for it - it helps her out but not the rest of them.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971211#Comment_122971211

John O'Connell was an independent TD when elected CC, so she is not the first.

FrancieBrady

The two faced nature of Irish politics. FF FG supporting an anti-Covid measures/ dogwhistling anti-immigrant Ceann Comhairle who was encouraged and proposed by Michael Lowry.
What a great start.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971274#Comment_122971274

At least they aren't supporting an anti-Covid measures/dogwhistling anti-immigrant Taoiseach nominee who was nominated today. Putting someone in the CC chair means we don't hear from them for five years on ordinary issues. Wish it was the same with the other woman.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971226#Comment_122971226

Ya, but he had been a TD for 16 years at that point, rather than just serving the 1 term prior to becoming CC.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971226#Comment_122971226

I didn't post much on Boards in 1981, but if I had been around at the time, I might well have raised the same issue then.

I vaguely remember the scandal when O'Connell joined FF after being elected as an independent.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971284#Comment_122971284

If you believe someone to be anti Covid measures/an anti immigration dogwhistler who you forced out of your party and then voted for them for any position of responsibility or duty I woukd call that rank hypocrisy.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122970686#Comment_122970686

Yes. It happened in almost every election up til 2016.

That's what they were elected to do.

Bertie formed in 2007 coalition with the Greens, PDs and Independents in a week and a half.

Has Irish politics got even lazier?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971366#Comment_122971366

I didn't support any of the candidates for CC, neither did I support the person put forward today for Taoiseach.

You might be a little upset that FFG only got 100 votes after transfers for Verona, but managed to pull off 110 against MLMD.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122971435#Comment_122971435

My comment was not directed at you.
it was a general observation.