Seanad Eireann

[Rocky]

Well, with the exception of the "undemocratic" bit, you could make much the same arguments about the Dail. It is totally tame and just rubberstamps everything the Government wants (by Government I mean the Executive (i.e. the Ministers) rather than the parties).

Offhand, I can't think of any occassion when the Dail took an independent line on legislation from the Government/Executive. Likewise, when was the last time a Government lost a vote in the Dail? Was it the "VAT on Shoes" budget back in 1981 or 1982?

If we want to save money we could probably abolish the Dail also. Just elect 15 Ministers and 15 Junior Ministers to run the state. After all, if the Dail just rubberstamps Government decisions then the Opposition TDs and the Government back-bench TDs are just wasting their time there.

PS A Senate is not necessarily supposed to democratic. Most of them are there to counterbalance the fact that one or more groups can dominate the lower house.

Well if the Dail took a different line to the government, then dam near inherently the government would fall. That's the way parliamentary democracy works. It would have happened in 1994 had FF given it the chance.

The most important function of the Dail is it elects the Taoiseach and ensuring that the Taoiseach/government still has the support of the majority of the elected representatives of the people. It also serves a useful purpose in giving the opposition a platform and an opportunity to question/attack and to an extent hold the government to account. This is done through Leaders question and generally Kenny's and Gilmore comments during this does get a decent amount of media attention.

It also gives the opposition a chance to put forward their own bills and amendments to bills and although these are nearly always rejected out of hand, they do give the public a chance to see what the opposition cares about/would do differently and also there is no fundamental reason as to why the government must reject them, that's just a choice FF makes and opposition bills/amendments have been accepted in the past. And although amendments can be put forward by the opposition in the Seanad as well, there is no need to be able to do it in two places.

There is also of course the whole constituency worker element.

None of this is the case in the Seanad.

It's notable that pretty much every country in the world has a parliament, even many non-democratic ones. Many many states including about half the EU don't have a second chamber.

[Fr. Hank Tree]

The hubris of Fine Gael 'revolutionaries' is nauseating, anything to distract from their abject failure in opposition to usurp this vile FF/G government: their culpability is manifest in their complacency.

Abolitionism is reactionary knee-jerk baloney, throwing the babe out with the bathwater. The Senate should be made fit for purpose not disestablished - honestly who comes up with this ill-thought-out populist sh*t??

Just more evidence that the polarised disfunctional Legislative Estate is riven by partisanship - why can't the 166 members of the other House just park their differences and work together.

The proposed referendum is baloney and should be opposed by all right thinking members of society.

It's broke but we can fix it.

I agree with you. The proposal to abolish the seanad is a stupid gimmick, as is the proposal to shorten the term of the presidency. We need better ideas. Without substance this "constitution day" plan will look like a cheap stunt, just like the "contract" in 2007.

[Supermanpolitician]

Why do you have to post sh*te like this? It ruins debate.

PJOZ is trying to be the next Eurocitizen!

[paulp]

Is there a fear in FG that in power the Seanad may keep yer excesses in check?
Your list could equally apply to Dail Eireann.

Is that next on the blueshirt hit list?Ye do have a tradition of supporting a facist dictatorship after all.Is the new shouting Enda modelled on any European leader of the past I wonder?

Jeez, talk about the kettle call the pot black,

[just4ever]

I wouldn't be in favour of complete Seanad abolition but I do think it needs substantive reform. Senators should be directly elected by the public. They should have the power to vote down a bill and have that as the end of it.

[Supermanpolitician]

I wouldn't be in favour of complete Seanad abolition but I do think it needs substantive reform. Senators should be directly elected by the public. They should have the power to vote down a bill and have that as the end of it.

Nah get rid of who f*cking lot of em. It is obscenely undemocratic. Full Dail type elections with the same electorate will mean more politicians doing constituency work.

Most countries, both bigger and smaller have much lower electorate top public rep ratios.

[Lightning Rod]

I agree with you. The proposal to abolish the seanad is a stupid gimmick, as is the proposal to shorten the term of the presidency. We need better ideas. Without substance this "constitution day" plan will look like a cheap stunt, just like the "contract" in 2007.

Yeah I'll sign your contract.



Yet another own goal by our vaunt opposition.

Last week Lucinda vetoed expanding democratic female representation,
Fine Gael's spokesman on children apologizes for genocide in Palestine,
They grow fat on their TDs' salaries and their corporate 'donation' accounts and their private health insurance as thousands go unattended in public hospitals and hundreds of thousands fall into penury.

Anyone who believes that Fine Gael are any better than Fianna Fail *spits* or The Gormless Greens needs their heads examined.

Why the hell didn't we get a referendum when in it mattered: ON NAMA.

This proposed referendum is just a mouldy oul' sop for an ineffectual Oireachtas, picked off the top shelf - dusted off and recycled for more than it's worth.

I'd have more confidence in a pigeon running this country.

[pjoz]

Why do you have to post sh*te like this? It ruins debate.

It worries me to read plans like this from FG. Their history is relevant in light of plans like these. I would like to know the rationale behind putting this before the electorate if they come to power. History shows in all walks of life people make sub optimal decisions under severe stress and when in search of hope. For me these FG proposals offer no hope in the face our current difficulties and I worry there may be more sinister motivations at work on the part of the blueshirts.

For that reason I point out their historical link to Franco, and I'll add one of Hitlers first actions in consolidating power was abolishing the upper house of parliament and Mussolini was an advocate of list systems.

Where do FG get their inspiration I wonder?

[Rocky]

It worries me to read plans like this from FG. Their history is relevant in light of plans like these. I would like to know the rationale behind putting this before the electorate if they come to power. History shows in all walks of life people make sub optimal decisions under severe stress and when in search of hope. For me these FG proposals offer no hope in the face our current difficulties and I worry there may be more sinister motivations at work on the part of the blueshirts.

For that reason I point out their historical link to Franco, and I'll add one of Hitlers first actions in consolidating power was abolishing the upper house of parliament and Mussolini was an advocate of list systems.

Where do FG get their inspiration I wonder?

To begin with a lot of FG's current proposals are coming from the Benelux or Scandinavian Countries and since these are in most cases the best run countries in the world that makes sense. In this case this is a clear follow on from Scandinavian countries most of which have abolished their second chamber in recent years, so if there is an inspiration I'd say it's that.

Beyond that as Kenny has said, the Seanad does not serve a useful role in this state and since we need to save money it's a good way of doing so. It's also shows that politicians are prepared to take pain and make sacrifices as this will obviously make 60 politicians unemployed.

As in all cases of public services the question shouldn't be why should we abolish something, but why should we retain it? And there is no answer to that question in the case of Seanad beyond ignorance and fear of change.

[Supermanpolitician]

It worries me to read plans like this from FG. Their history is relevant in light of plans like these. I would like to know the rationale behind putting this before the electorate if they come to power. History shows in all walks of life people make sub optimal decisions under severe stress and when in search of hope. For me these FG proposals offer no hope in the face our current difficulties and I worry there may be more sinister motivations at work on the part of the blueshirts.

For that reason I point out their historical link to Franco, and I'll add one of Hitlers first actions in consolidating power was abolishing the upper house of parliament and Mussolini was an advocate of list systems.
Where do FG get their inspiration I wonder?

Wuhoo!

And Goodwin's Law states.....