Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General Irish politics discussion thread

Options
1143144146148149154

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 26,511 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I think it happened even less back in the day. The Press and the Indo were widely understood to be rusted on to FF and FG respectively. Nobody would have been interested in what election endorsement they might give, because in both cases the endorsement would have been completely predictable. So they didn't give endorsements. The Irish Times held itself out as independent and, for that reason, also didn't give endorsements.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,949 ✭✭✭✭dulpit


    You look at what is going on in places like France, the UK and the States and it makes me happy that our electoral system is the way it is and our politics are largely the way they are...



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,207 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Yeah the French system really is only marginally better than the UK and American systems. it's basically PR-lite. You get one crack at choosing who you really want to vote for and then you're down to voting to keep someone else out (or, has been the case this week, candidates themselves dropping out in order to keep someone out)



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …the more i learn about pr-stv, the more im also glad we have this in place, fptp is just truly awful, we need to make sure we protect this, or the lunes will eventually get in, on both the left and right…..



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The weakness of the Irish system is the effect that local issues can play in who gets voted in. You can see that in the Donegal voting in the Mica candidates who want free money to fix up their crumbling houses.

    The weakness in the USA and UK system is the FPTP where a very few constituencies get to elect the winners.

    The French system at least allows the choice between the first and second candidates if no-one gets 50%+.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,207 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    I think the only way to prevent local populists getting elected would be to impose a minimum national percentage in order for a party to get elected, as is the case in some European countries.

    That of course would remove the independent candidates altogether. It'll never happen here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …its not free money at all, its generally recirculated tax revenue, and since this is currently primarily from corporate tax receipts, happy days, of course the issue ultimately came from the deregulation of the building industry, so not the fault of homeowners at all, as most would have no way of actually knowing this at the time of building…..



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I do not want to go down that particular mica strewn road.

    However, building defects are best handled by insurance claims. Many of the defective houses have been extended multiple times - some extended to over 300 sq m (3300 sq ft). It is unlikely they were granted PP to be built that size originally.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …best of luck with getting recourse through the legal system, by the time such claims get knocked around the courts, and with builders and building companies that no longer exist, again, this is firmly based in political ideologies that advocate for deregulation and self regulation, this is the basis of our main political parties, and have been for many decades now…..



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,949 ✭✭✭✭dulpit


    Single seat constituencies are the problem. Even with a sense of proportionality it still means decent chunks of people don't get represented. If you look at the potential labour vote in UK they're polling 40%ish but are on track to get well over 50% of the seats.

    Reform (even though an awful party) will end up with a good chunk of votes and few, if any, seats. Garbage system.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 134 ✭✭acceletor




  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    As an example of local politics that are only local.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,207 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    FF tried to do away with PRSTV….twice. Fortunately the voters disagreed. The first time, in 1959, was the closest: 51.8% - 48.2%. They tried again 9 years later but the voters were definitely having none of it then: 60.8% - 39.2%



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Single seat PR is an OK system but small parties get left out.

    The more seats per constituency allows smaller parties to get elected representation. However, the more seats results in longer counts, but that is only once per election.

    An alternative is the list system. Each party puts forward a list and candidates are elected in order based on the parties votes. This gives a lot of power to the parties who draw up the list. The UK used this system for EU elections so surprise, Farage got elected first for his party.

    Some countries use a combination of list plus votes for individuals. Not sure how that works in practice, but it is better than FPTP.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0703/1457978-june-exchequer-figures/

    Surplus of over €3 billion, government must be doing something right.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,792 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Single seat PR doesn't exist - its AV or IRV (instant runoff) depending on what you want to call it.

    You can't have proportionality without multiple seats.

    The single seat + PR correction pool ("alternate member") system Scotland/Wales/London use is sort of a worst of both worlds as you have the issues of list and the issues of FPTP.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,429 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Was our system originally conceived by Lewis Carroll (Charles Dodgson)?



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    … due to a combination of policies implemented over decades, particularly in relation to fdi, i.e. its doing exactly what it was designed to do, and thankfully so…

    …noting, a surplus signifies money actually removed from the economy, i.e. put it back in asap…..



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I should have called STV - single transferable vote - which we use for the Presidential election. [It is a form of proportional voting.]

    Alternate vote only allows a second choice, which is not the same unless there are only three candidates.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,792 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    AV can allow as many choices as they want to give - the old London mayoral two vote option is not common (and is not what was being offered in the AV referendum in the UK - that was single seat, fully tranferrable vote)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,792 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Budget advanced by a week, all but confirming a late October or very early November election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,657 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    The speculation seems to be for some time in early November.

    This move definitely suggests an autumn election alright - there is probably no other reason they would move the budget date.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,792 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Chambers is insisting its for EU reasons, but these EU reasons won't have come out of thin air three months before the budget.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …ah handy one for ffg, theyve very little to be worrying about, again, the best way to change, is to stay the same!



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,657 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    The moment I heard he'd moved the budget date, I thought that meant the election is on - there's no way they are going for a Spring 2025 election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,196 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    I would say a November date is more likely as an Autumn election date risks the budget preps and passing. Conversely October now can be spent on the budget and getting it through the houses before the Dáil is dissolved setting up a November election nicely.

    Not sure how happy the greens are about this, seems they're getting shafted again by the Civil War parties



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,231 ✭✭✭HalloweenJack


    As has been the case for every junior coalition party in the history of the state. Its not even the first time it's happened to the Greens.

    It's in SF's interests to stay away from Government if they are not going to be the top dog; FFG always shuffle away and return at some point. The only good thing is that their respective vote shares don't seem to be reaching levels of old and they are being forced to work together, thus removing any doubt that they were ever really that different.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,416 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    …yup, staying the same definitely is the way forward for ireland…..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,617 ✭✭✭rock22


    @HalloweenJack quote "FFG always shuffle away and return at some point. The only good thing is that their respective vote shares don't seem to be reaching levels of old and they are being forced to work together, thus removing any doubt that they were ever really that different."

    While i agree that there is little to separate the two parties today, the difference between them historically was massive. Support for or against the Treaty was a major defining societal viewpoint and it influenced your political allegiance but would also decide your news source , your friendships , your marriage and possibly your employment. In the fifties , and even in the sixties, I remember people who wouldn't read the opposite newspaper and in our village everyone was known as either a FF or FG supporter, whether they voted or not, based on their position on the Treaty. None of this should be surprising because these people were the participants or the children of participants in the civil war or the political views around it.

    Thankfully we have moved on , after a hundred years, where such distinctions (mostly) don't matter anymore.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,602 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Each system has its drawback.

    The biggest drawback with PR-STV is that you always get coalition governments, which is fine in a way, but governments are then weak and wont want to make any big decision on anything important. So we muddle away while kicking the can down the road when it comes to more important issues we need to tackle.

    FPTP, usually means a stronger government with a stronger mandate and they can make those harder decisions.



Advertisement