Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE DÁIL CONSTITUENCY occasionally referred to as the “group of death” given the slew of high-profile candidates could be set to elect just two TDs in the next general election, according to a report this morning.
The Irish Times says the report of the Constituency Commission, which is set to report its findings in the coming weeks, is to recommend cutting the number of members of the Dáil from the current 166 down to 158.
While the most obvious seat losses could come in Tipperary, Donegal and Kerry – each of which is earmarked to see one five-seat constituency replacing the two current three-seaters – the report also suggests that Dublin constituencies could be consolidated.
Among the possibilities mentioned are cutting one seat in Dún Laoghaire, reducing it from from seats to three – a move which would prove controversial within that constituency, which has recently lost one seat and is likely to see another one taken out of action next time.
Dún Laoghaire was a five-seater until the election in February of last year, and was the subject of a special ‘group of death’ debate on RTÉ’s Frontline last February given the slew of high-profile candidates seeking election there.
Three ministers – social protection minister Mary Hanafin, children’s minister Barry Andrews and planning minister Ciaran Cuffe – were among the five outgoing TDs last time looking to hang on to their seats as the area went from five seats to four.
Among the other candidates were Labour leader Eamon Gilmore and the party’s Seanad chief Ivana Bacik, as well as stalwart Fine Gael TD Sean Barrett and PD-turned-FG councillor Mary Mitchell O’Connor, while the ULA’s Richard Boyd Barrett was also on the ballot.
Ultimately the constituency was among those which saw the largest transformation during last year’s tumultuous election, with all three of the sitting ministers turfed out as the electorate punished Fianna Fáil and the Greens.
The likes of Hanafin and Bacik – and potentially also Cuffe and Andrews – could be interested have another crack at election, providing an unusually heavyweight panel of challengers to the incumbent four.
While this challenge could be made significantly more difficult if the number of seats is reduced to three, Fine Gael already has a trump card in this constituency – thanks to Seán Barrett’s automatic entitlement to re-election if he seeks it.
Barrett is the Dáíl’s current Ceann Comhairle – meaning if he wants to be part of the 32nd Dáil, whenever it’s elected, he simply only has to say the word and he is automatically returned without needing to go before the public again.
This is a legal privilege granted to the Ceann Comhairle in order to compensate them for the fact that their political neutrality, as an impartial overseer of Dáil business, means they are unable to engage in the cut and thrust of everyday politics.
If the current Dáil runs to its full term and defers the next election to February 2016, Barrett will be 71, and may opt to bring an end to a 35-year career as a TD – but if he opts to keep going, he would automatically take one of the three available seats.
This would mean that the crop of Bacik, Hanafin, Andrews and Cuffe and the usual handful of independent TDs – would have to overcome party conventions and an election in order to win back their Dáil seats against the incumbents, including a sitting Tánaiste.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why bother electing any. At worst they’re lying thieving corrupt greedy bastards, at best they’re vacuous un-medicated imbeciles.
Going from 166 TD’s to 158 is a joke, weren’t we promised a reduction in numbers to 100 ? More lies…
As far as I know no party made any sort of promise to reduce the numbers in the Dail to just 100
100 would require a referendum
Art 2 2° The number of members shall from time to time be fixed by law, but the total number of members of Dáil Éireann shall not be fixed at less than one member for each thirty thousand of the population, or at more than one member for each twenty thousand of the population.
at 4,590,000 people CSO census last year
the Minimum without a referendum is 153, however as each constituency isnt divided exactly per population and follows some geographic boundries to give equal representation to each person (or close to it) there will inevitably be a surplus. 158 is pretty close to this be honest.
Reduction to a 100 is way too much. If the Govt. had 40 51 TD’s nearly half of that would be in Cabinet or Ministry.
Little Denmark, a very well run country has 175 Rep’s.
As Stephen Donnelly has kindly shown us the ministers created in the formation of government are largely unaccountable to the TDs in the Dail.
So why do we need the TDs?
The system of government itself exists largely to merely rubber stamp decisions made in Brussels as well as to support the interests of large businesses such as EMI, and as a lesser point deal with increasingly infrequent issues pertaining to the populace itself when these issues fall out of decisions already made in Brussels.
It would therefore make more sense to dispense with the expense of TDs altogether along with the rigmarole of electing them.
All we need to elect (if Brussels can’t trouble itself to appoint them) is the ministers.
Local politicians can, if they wish, appeal to these ministers over local issues that are bothering them. Of course they will be largely ignored.
This will provide us with a government very much like the current set up but much more cheaply.
If the government wants to exclude Sinn Fein and Left TDs from future Dáils, they’ll have to do a lot more fancy boundary moving that this.
Remember the promise of abolishing the Seanad? That would clear up a lot of undemocratic representation and save a fortune.
The boundary commission is independent. Some of the moves mentioned pose just as much a problem for gov TD as they do opposition.
Richard Boyd Barrett will have to work his socks off so!
Gilmore is a pig of a man, a liar and a coward, in my opinion.
We could reduce the Dail to 100. The ratio would be more in line with other parts of the world
The savings made by reducing it the 100, along with scrapping the Seanad, the advisors, the cronies etc would be massive.
This along with reducing TD’s & Ministers/Advisors salaries by 50%. Also halve the allowances allowed.
bye bye fg/lab
Outcome if two seats were fought today would be Gilmore and MMO’C. RBB hasn’t enough support to take one and FF is still on the ropes. Only an independent could challenge, then interestingly the Tánaiste loses his seat :P
I wouldn’t be so sure about that, especially where MMO’C is concerned. She’s been invisible.
Bye Bye Boyd Barrett!
Hello Blueshirts
Typical schoolyard attitude David. Grow up.
Barrett is nothing but noise. He wants to add €10bn of tax austerity to an already fragile economy. Doesn’t mind if this country goes the way of Greece just so he can advance his socialist tripe
@David even without a redraw of boundries its not just RBB in trouble.The lies told by FG and Lab will not be forgotten by the population.Already a newly elected FG TD stated how difficult it is to survive on a 93,000 a year.FF levels of arrogance in less than 18 months incredible.
Here, here, about time that uppity pr*ck Rich Boy Barrett was put out of a job, so he’d know what being on the dole is really like! A dos of reality as it were!
Barrett is doing a good job in opposition by providing an alternative point of view. There’s no point in electing more FG backbench fodder.
Given Sean Barrett retired in 2002, only to come back in 2007, it’s not implausible he could decline the automatic reelection, as Sean Treacy did in 1997.
Term limits,, two terms and you are out on your ear. Career politicians are a boil on the arse of humanity.
Cut them to 100 and abolish expenses.
Why not just have same levels of representation as other similar sized countries, why abolish expenses. Just bring them and salaries in to line with other similar sized economies/countries.
We don’t have to do the christian martyr on everything. It achieves nothing, and will not save us a penny in the long run. It does not contribute anything to political reform and change here. Lets focus on making the system work effectively.
Reducing the number of TDs is not “reform”. We’ve actually got the perfect number of TDs for our population. Introducing a party list system: now that is reform.
Why not both?
And we have far too many TDs. Its the root cause of parish pump politics which contributes so much to our problems. One TD per constituency is enough. Then they would all be subject to intense scrutiny. It would also help put an end to political dynasties.
Noddy, we’ve got the optimal number of representatives per population for a democracy. Lowering the number of representatives would be an attack on democracy.
If you want to get rid of parish pump politics, then maybe reoroganise Irish politics along federal lines with “state parliaments” (or some suitable Irish name of equivalent structure) with the power to raise revenue for local infrastructure. Maybe crap local councils and replace them with mayors, vested with real power? And for national representation, do as I suggested: replace our personality-based PR SVT with a PR party list system.
I agree with the list system Fiachra but still believe we have far too many TDs. I’m open to correction, but do we not have more TDs per head of population than most european countries? We certainly have much more than the UK so I don’t see how it would be an attack on democracy. If anything it would foster greater transpareny and accountability.
@Fiachra – can you add some information on how you work out that “optimal number of representatives per population for a democracy” ? I’m curious.
The problem with both the reduction in the number of TD’s and the Seanad is that we have to have referendums to make this happen. With a Children’s Rights Referendum already promised in the autumn I think there might be a bit of referendum fatigue if we tried to do more of them at the moment. Anyway even if we pass these referendums they can’t take effect until the next election which despite some people’s hopes probably won’t happen until 2016.
However I reckon that if you have a referendum on reducing the number of TD’s you’ll find that the United Left Alliance and the Independents will probably campaign for a NO vote because chances are that they will be the parties or people that lose out if there’s a large reduction in the number of TDs. Bigger parties tend to get a seat bonus under our constituency system so if we had a Dáil of around 100 you might find that it would probably be dominated by FG, Labour, FF, SF with very few other voices present.
have your say