What does government do when it fears the people who elected it?

[He3]

An unusual power struggle is reflected in this line-

' Also in question is whether any other provisions lead to a public vote, something te government does not want, as it fears defeat'.

So says Arthur Beesley in the IT today, on the current draft of the E treaty (subject of discussion elsewhere on P.ie). Link.

Leaving aside views on the specific treaty if possible, what are people's thoughts on this way of governing?

Government is elected by the people to govern, in line with the Constitution. But when government fears the people's judgment in the way Beesley claims, to whom do they owe their allegiance if not the people?

Are the people not entitled to be 'wrong'?

[Interista]

But when government fears the people's judgment in the way Beesley claims, to whom does their duty lie if not the people?

Wasn't it Macchievelli who said 'it is better for a leader to be feared than loved?'

[Ulster-Lad]

A good point He3. The government fears the people and the result it will get if it were to put this treaty to the people so they will avoid it at all costs. It does not say much for a government that is elected by the people to represent them.

I have said it before, there should be a means to force a debate in the Dáil on any topic that has the popular support of the people such as they have in the UK that could possibly lead to a referendum.

[Astral Peaks]

He3, not being pedantic, but the article quoted says they "fear defeat", not "the people"?

So a Govt has identified the best course of action, in their own minds, and now seeks to follow that by the easiest path they can find.

We did elect them to govern?

[hiding behind a poster]

An unusual power struggle is reflected in this line-

' Also in question is whether any other provisions lead to a public vote, something te government does not want, as it fears defeat'.

So says Arthur Beesley in the IT today, on the current draft of the E treaty (subject of discussion elsewhere on P.ie). Link.

Leaving aside views on the specific treaty if possible, what are people's thoughts on this way of governing?

Government is elected by the people to govern, in line with the Constitution. But when government fears the people's judgment in the way Beesley claims, to whom do they owe their allegiance if not the people?

Are the people not entitled to be 'wrong'?

If a referendum isn't required under the Constitution (and we don't know the answer to that yet as regards to fiscal compact treaty) then the government is, as you say, governing in line with the Constitution. You could just as easily say that by not having a referendum on the VAT hike, or a tax rise, or a specific spending cut, the government also "fears defeat". But that doesn't in any way diminish their mandate to take such decisions without referenda, if they view them as being in the national interest.

[The Cat]

An unusual power struggle is reflected in this line-

' Also in question is whether any other provisions lead to a public vote, something te government does not want, as it fears defeat'.

So says Arthur Beesley in the IT today, on the current draft of the E treaty (subject of discussion elsewhere on P.ie). Link.

Leaving aside views on the specific treaty if possible, what are people's thoughts on this way of governing?

Government is elected by the people to govern, in line with the Constitution. But when government fears the people's judgment in the way Beesley claims, to whom do they owe their allegiance if not the people?

Are the people not entitled to be 'wrong'?

First off, just because soemone expresses and opinion in the paper doesn't mean it is true.

But I agree with your basic point, the public have the right to be wrong, sort of.

As a country we have not switched over completely to democracy. Once people get into a position of power they believe they know and understand things that ordinary people do not. What has not helped has been the predominance of certain sectors in the corridors of power, teachers, gentry, accountants, solicitors, journalists, all professions who tend to have inflated views of their own intelectual abilities. We need a democratic transformation.

I believe that you can never get true democracy while you have high levels of exclusion. 30% of our population are completely excluded from our political system. To change that we need an assembly based on a random selection of the entire population. This assembly should replace the senate.

[jpc]

Wasn't it Macchievelli who said 'it is better for a leader to be feared than loved?'

Elected leaders didn't figure back in his day though!
But government from any point of the political spectrum know better than the electorate.
And that might actually be true occasionally.

[LamportsEdge]

The subject line contains a very good question when it comes to Ireland but I fear it also points to one fundamental flaw in Irish politics- the political establishment have never been afraid of the electorate. In France the government there knows it can go so far but pulls back sharply when it fears civil unrest in Paris and elsewhere- they know from experience it can end badly for the governing class.

In Ireland a form of Home Rule was granted and it was faked up to look like a democratic Republic. That was easy enough to do when there was a compliant and not very well educated or even politically aware electorate.

I'll give you an example of the difference between the Republic of France and the 'Republic' of Ireland. Some years back Nicholas Sarkozy proposed parachuting his own son into the vacant administative leadership of a major borough of Paris- La Defence. This administrave section of the city has an annual budget of hundreds of millions of euros. Sarkozy Jr had no administrative experience whatsoever and had been a student up to this point.

In Ireland there is every likelihood that a politician would get away with it especially if the son had been active in college politics for example.

In Paris the rumblings started very quickly and the noises out of La Defence and the rest of Paris were unmistakeable. Sarkozy Jr was on the television withdrawing his candidature within hours.

The French, and Parisians will ignore quite a lot- but naked nepotism brings back memories of the behaviour of a petty nobility that they had to separate from their heads at one point.

My point is that Ireland would be a much better place and with a much less arrogant political establishment if the government had good reason to fear widespread anger.

The fact that there has never been a government deposed with blood in the streets in Dublin is not such a good thing for the proper level of respect between government in the 'Republic' of Ireland and the average citizen. This is precisely why there is so much open corruption among the political class whose only interest is in inserting themselves into the public income stream and diverting as much as they can into their and their families' pockets.

Some of them, and I include the senior civil servants' families along with political dynasty families, show all the arrogance of a self-appointed petty nobility at times in Ireland with their 'entitlements' nurtured in the better 'catholic ethos' private schools. It might be nasty and brutish but I have thought for a long while now that Ireland would be much improved with a certain amount of real fear in the political class.

[Spanner Island]

An unusual power struggle is reflected in this line-

' Also in question is whether any other provisions lead to a public vote, something te government does not want, as it fears defeat'.

So says Arthur Beesley in the IT today, on the current draft of the E treaty (subject of discussion elsewhere on P.ie). Link.

Leaving aside views on the specific treaty if possible, what are people's thoughts on this way of governing?

Government is elected by the people to govern, in line with the Constitution. But when government fears the people's judgment in the way Beesley claims, to whom do they owe their allegiance if not the people?

Are the people not entitled to be 'wrong'?

All governments should fear their electorates and all electorates should make their Governments fear them - which we Irish are utterly crap at.

Because once a government doesn't fear the people you get what goes on here... attitudes of entitlement and self serving while the people are treated with contempt.

The eFFing traitors portrayed this beautifully. They are the poster boys and girls for this kind of greed, arrogance and self serving indulgence.

And unfortunately the current Government seems to be having difficulty avoiding the same groove.

[Interista]

Elected leaders didn't figure back in his day though!

True. But even unelected governments have to keep the people on side to some extent.