To Vote for None of the above

// October 29th, 2009 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

There is an interesting quirk in the Irish electoral system that someone can run in more than one constituency in the same general election, and we’ve had a number of people avail of this for quixotic reasons (Noel O’Gara) or to advance a particular cause (Barbara Hyland).

But it could have another purpose, if say someone were to posit themselves as an Irish Martin Bell and run on a straightforward None of the Above (or get the effers out as someone suggested to me) platform. Given the apparently more general displeasure with politics and with the feeling aboard that it is politics itself that is flawed what might happen if None of the Above was actually on the ballot and how would you go about doing so.
Well, to answer the second question first in order to have None of the Above on the actual ballot you’d need to register as a party called “None of the Above” but that can be quite hard as registering a political party requires a certain number of members and a constitution and such like. An alternative for a one person band would be to change your name by Deed poll to “None of the Above” or more accurately, and in order to ensure that everyone else was going to be above you, the change should be to “X-None of the, Above”.

What might be the outcome of such a run, especially if they running to screw things up? Well, it’s hard to say given that there is no precedent for someone getting elected on more than one place in under the 1937 constitution. But it is almost certain they would be able to only take up one seat and the others won would be then deemed vacant. But only after the counts were all concluded. So any new Dail would be down the number of extra seats they won. It would be one rather instant way to reduce the size of the Dáil. New By-elections couldn’t be held onto the writs were moved by the new Dáil.

In part I was given to wonder about this after reading about a book called ‘Seeing’ by José Saramago which is a sequel to the book that the recent movie Blindness with Julianne Moore is based on. ‘Seeing’ begins with a parliamentary election in which the majority of the populace casts blank ballots.

An open letter on Seanad Reform

// October 21st, 2009 // 8 Comments » // enda kenny, fine gael, Seanad, seanad eireann, seanad reform

The proposal that Fine Gael policy should be to abolish the Seanad after the next election as announced by the party leader Enda Kenny leaves me in two minds. As a means to put down a marker to the government and the Seanad more generally that reform of politics must happen now or else, it is without equal. This reform can start this side of Christmas by extending the franchise beyond TCD and the NUI by legislation, and with notice of a referendum on wider reform to be put before the people by the time of the next summer recess. The choice is now very stark: reform or die.

I am quite sure that this idea will have widespread popular support amongst the public. Yet the mere popularity of an idea is no reflection on its merit. Though I understand and indeed share in the view that the charade of reform has gone on too long, I also believe that a genuine case can be made for the need for bicameral system given the enormously local focus that the current electoral system forces upon TDs. That is the work that TDs do and must do in order to be elected, and a reduction from 166 to 124 in the number elected in this way will not shift the burden sufficiently to allow major change to occur.

We should be in no doubt; the general public are debating ideas considerably more unthinkable than the mere abolition of the Seanad. If such debate continues to occur in places ignored or unheard by party politics then it will be to the detriment of us all. For the moment I would ask that the policy should be one of reform now or die, rather than die now. For that reason, I would ask that the policy to be adopted be with the proviso that it would be reviewed should substantive political reform be implemented prior to the next general election. We should say that we are planning to act but if the government were to implement, not simply announce or propose or set up a commission or look for another report, but actually implement reforms that will match the parameters of cost reduction, increased powers of scrutiny and compellability for committees as outlined over the last few days then we would be prepared to give it the chance to work. This has the advantage of throwing the focus back onto the lack of action by all the government parties and also sets an immediate clock ticking on the issue with concrete milestones that all the issue to be revisited to our advantage. If there is no move on the university seats by Christmas say then it becomes topical again, if there is no bill and referendum by the summer recess then the same. We can keep the pressure on the government at each step. Let us accept that the Seanad is now drinking in the last chance saloon but we should not be so rude as to eject it before it has finished its drink and had the chance to demonstrate, really demonstrate that it can change.

Yet as someone who stood independently for the Seanad in 2007 in large part on the issue of reform, I am minded that party members of all major Irish political parties have no substantive input into the formulation of party policy. Ard Fheiseanna of all hues have long passed into the realm of mere staged managed speaking and photo opportunities for election candidates. A process colluded in by the media who hype up the merest prospect of any real debate as a sign of in-fighting and division instead of the sign of vibrancy it really is. While a leader should and must have the right to initiate policy ‘on the hoof’ in reaction to events, no events have occurred in the last week requiring such a policy shift.

Now more than ever, we need politics to be a genuine battleground of ideas, new and, if long neglected, old. These ideas must be examined, debated, tested and contested at every step. Political parties exist because they are a means to reflect and express the collective views of their members, from the person at the branch level to the highest of our public representatives. After all, it is those members who have to argue the case for those views to the wider citizenry in the hard slog of canvassing, leafleting, and ultimately by standing as candidates for election. That is why it is necessary for there to exist some real means for their views to be heard in advance of most policy decisions. Party members, even elected representatives, should not be placed in a position of having to ‘like it or lump it’ when it comes to the adoption of policy. At the very least, the views of members should have the chance to be heard on policy.

I will say this, the fact that Fine Gael are the ones who stand to gain most in the next Seanad elections means the party can’t be accused as the government will be of changing the rules because they are going to lose out in the next elections.

PfG – is it a mandate to gerrymander the next Oireachtas?

// October 13th, 2009 // No Comments » // green party, Seanad, seanad eireann, seanad reform

The Program for Government: a possible mandate for a gerrymander?

An interesting constitutional problem, thrown up by the outcome of the local elections, which has not as yet been covered in the mainstream media is that no government comprised of FF and any likely set of partners can now to command a majority in the Seanad after the next general election.

Even if they were to form a government with someone like the Labour party, they would end up falling just short. Forming a government with anyone else from SF to the Greens and independents or all of the above does not even come close to a Seanad majority, even with the Taoiseach’s 11 thrown in.

I recall some casual references to this amongst friends at the time of the local elections counts about how this would impact on the Seanad and a few people have written about it on-line Michael Cosgrave for one but no one in the mainstream press that I can find. It could be that the story wasn’t sexy or imminent enough when the counts were happening and then simply fell off the radar. Yet it has important implications in that FF would only be able to claim a partial victory in the next general election no matter what happens in the Dail.

Coupled with this are effects within the FF organisation with the knowledge that the lifeboats that would be available to those who lost out will be much reduced. Looking back over recent electoral history I can’t find FF ever going below 17 seats even in opposition; they did have only 11 Senators in 1954 which was a time of considerable electoral turmoil with new parties being formed. With the surety of 20 or so Seanad seats on the back of their storing local presence, FF was always able to install a mixture of Senators who had different roles: some were bright new prospects for the next general election and there were those who had been just deposed but who still might make it back, and then there were a couple of Seanad only heads. With only a dozen seats now likely to be available if they were not in government that mixture simply would not be possible. And the role of HQ in selecting candidates would again come under scrutiny with such limited chances of success.

Looking at the change in numbers in more detail, in 2007 of the major parties FF had 556 votes, FG had 385 votes and Labour had 129 votes. After the changed landscape of the local elections of 2009, it is now likely that FF would have 218 cllrs + the new Dail members and those outgoing 28 Senators. On current polls that would be under 300 votes, even exceeding the polls would leave them only on about 320.

FG in contrast would start with circa 340 votes from the councils alone and perhaps another 80 to 90 more votes from new TDs and outgoing members of the Seanad ending up well north of 400 perhaps even a possibly 420 or more. Lab could have 160/170 votes from councils and TDs. The remaining 200 odd votes are scattered across SF, smaller parties and independents; a good number of who are FF gene pool so there is a bit of hope for the party. Yet even in the best case scenario that the next election was to throw up the unlikely possibility that the Dail was to be returned exactly as it is now FF would still start with little more than 300 votes in the Seanad elections and would struggle to maintain even close to the number of outgoing Seanad members they had.

I’ve done some rough sums below and am in the process of running through the previous election with the new numbers to confirm this outcome. I’ve started with the scenario most benign to current government as the current Dail arithmetic is preserved, and the same rough proportions of non-aligned councillors and Oireachtas members as before to support the FF, FG and Lab candidates. SF continues to lack the votes to get anyone elected on their own and it would seem with Labour no longer requiring their support that they would be on their own. The reason the alignment of independent is so benign is that post the general election and with a government formed of the Greens and PDs, independents would be more inclined to support a FF Seanad candidate as they would necessarily have access to the levers of power. So it is possible that it could get worse.
Guide: Panel Name Total Number of Seats/ Current seat allocation and Quota in 2007

Cultural and Educational Panel 5 / FF 3 FG 1 Lab 1 Quota 179
FF might even struggle to elect 2 in the 5 seater Cultural and Educational Panel where they got 3 the last time. It’s that bad for them. More likely is for them to get the 2 though.

Administrative Panel 7 seats / FF 4 FG 2 Lab 1 Quota 134
FF would solidly have the votes for 2 seats but beyond that for 3 seats could be a real problem. Not an insurmountable one as while there are no PDs and only 2 Greens, there are a few ex PD cllrs and gene pool FFers to round things out. But if there is an insurrection about candidate selection and too divided and internal competitive a ticket then that 3rd seat would slip away.

Agricultural Panel 11 / FF 5 FG 4 Lab 1 SF 1 Quota 90
3 seats should be safe here but the 4th is likely to be a bridge to fair.

Industrial and Commercial Panel 9 / FF 5 FG 3 Lab 1 Quota 107
FG would start with 4 in the bag and likely another one

Labour Panel 11 / FF 5 FG 4 Lab 2 quota 90
FG would have 5 here and possibly 6 if FF were to end up swapping places with them on 3 seats with Lab most likely getting 2.

Likely Outcomes
So FF would be looking at getting from the Labour panel 3 + Ag Panel 3 + C&E 1/2 Admin 2 + I & C 2/3 leading to a worst case situation of 11 seats and a best case of 13. So even adding in the Taoiseach’s nominees of 11 they would have a minority in the Seanad come what may. A period of cohabitation would be in order. The most likely outcome is 12 seats.

FG would have Labour panel 5/6 + Ag Panel 5/6 + C&E 2/3 Admin 3/4 + I & C 4/5 Worst case 19 Best case 24. Most likely

Lab would be able to get only the same one seat per panel this time though this time without needing the assistance of SF. Without the help of Labour SF would most likely lose their one seat as it is hard to see the various independent and the more generally left leaning groupings giving SF the advantage of a Seanad seat.

Is it absolutely impossible for FF and Lab to get enough for the Taoiseach’s 11 to bring them over the top? No. But is it likely? A strong no is the answer to that too.

I had been looking at this for a few weeks now but I have to wonder what implications this has on the new Electoral Commission’s (as announced in the PfG document) plans to yet again report on a new electoral system for the Seanad. Might a charge of gerrymandering be levelled at the new Program for Government? This charge would be most easily made if the changes result in FF and the Greens being able to dilute the influence of the local authority members on the Seanad make-up. A not unreasonable idea but it would be a real pity if this idea came to be seen as FF changing the goalposts once they could no longer win.

The outcome of the Lisbon poll

// October 2nd, 2009 // 4 Comments » // Uncategorized

My poll is now closed and the No wins by 64% to 36%. Will that be the result this time tomorrow? Somehow I doubt it. My prediction would be around 54% Yes 46% No.

The longest petition for political divorce in Irish history

// October 1st, 2009 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

The Greens have leaked or had stolen from their HQ some of their policy ideas for the new Program for Government. Engaging in some verbal theft of my own from Gerald Kaufman MP, who said of the 1983 Labour party manifesto that it was the longest political suicide note in history, I would say this set of ideas is the longest petition for political divorce in Irish history.

While some of the ideas are quite sensible the question is whether FF will be in any position to wear them given the state of the economy. I simply don’t know, but my guess is that they won’t. Agreeing to them would open the cabinet up to a list of ideas from their own backbenchers. Below are some of the Green thoughts and my own feelings on them

A reduction in the number of TDs, – no real problem there, but how big a reduction?

major changes in the electoral system – I would agree with the need for changes but what changes exactly. Not sure that top up TDs is the way to go.

a new third rate of income tax – I’d go for 4 rates of tax, with a new one of 55% and have an introductory rate of 10% which would apply to those on the minimum wage.

the abolition of the PRSI ceiling, – If we’re abolishing the ceiling then don’t we have to abolish the ceiling on the benefits of PRSI too? Otherwise it’s a tax by another name

the integration of the income levies with the tax rates – yes

and a clampdown on tax exiles. – By all means, not sure how much it would raise. But it seems the right thing to do.

An animal welfare Bill that would ban hare coursing, stag hunting, fur farming and the importation of wild animals to be used in circuses is another objective.- I’m sort of ambivalent about this

The Greens are also insisting that basic social welfare entitlements and overseas development aid should not be cut in the forthcoming budget.-

I’d cut the base rate of the social back to the nice round figure of €200 including reducing the non-contributory pension by the same amount (not to the same figure) while leaving the contributory as is.

They also want a massive shift of emphasis from investment in road building to public transport initiatives in the Government’s capital programme.- Let’s buy lots and lots of buses, and extend the frequency and capacity of the commuter rail network.

The party is also seeking a commitment from its partners that the value of social welfare payments should be protected for the next three years. – After the reduction above, I wouldn’t see any reason to reduce them further.

A total revamp of the health service with the introduction of a universal single-tier system is another key part of the plan.- i.e. this is the FG and Labour plans in essence so I’ve no problem with the over arching aims here.

Tax incentives for private health insurance would be abolished.- over time that makes some sense but we’d want to have fixed the health system first.