Time for a New Ireland?

[Hardy]

Being honest I think that Ireland is not so big that it needs to be separated into regions. If anything, I believe it needs more and more people who are blind to the whole geography of the country and who look at what the country needs rather than what each area needs when making decisions.

I was going to post to make this precise point. Apart from considerations of fragmenting the national identity when the opposite is more desirable, if more efficient administration is a goal I don't see the sense in having more than one administration for a population roughly similar to that of Greater Manchester. Particularly since the sovereignty we have already signed away and continue to cede (see EU oversight of our budget before the Dáil gets to see it) renders the national government little more than a glorified County Council anyway.

[andoireabu]

If i had my way then there would only be one counciller per area.  each bit up here only needs one MP so why do they need 10 MLA's.  there are 108 (i think) MLA's for a population of 1.5ish million people which i think is stupid.

108 MLAs might be a few too many, but to be represented by just one MP is hardly sufficient either. You're in East Derry - do you think Gregory Campbell is adequate representation for all of the people in your constituency? The same with North Belfast, North Antrim and South Antrim.

Plus all this balls of claiming expenses for their jobs would be banned and punishable with months of hard labour.  if i have to buy a pair of boots for my work or my lunch then i pay for it and i don't see why they can't also because they definately get paid more than me.  i pay for the fuel it takes to get me their but i doubt they do.

Time to put away your copy of The Sun. Do you expect an MP to run a constituency office, pay staff, travel to London, cover accommodation away from home - all genuine expense - out of their own salary?
Yes, some MPs clearly ripped the arse out of the system, but that doesn't mean that genuine expenses aren't a valid entitlement.

As for what MPs get paid, i'm sure plenty of them could be earning just as much putting in much fewer hours. £65k might seem like a lot of money, but plenty of accountants, solicitors and other professionals would earn that money by the time they're 45/50. Plenty of MPs are solicitors, barristers and doctors and could be earning more than £65k if they had stayed with their professions.

fair enough 1 for each region might be too little but it shouldn't take as many as it does.  honestly i don't think gregory represents the whole place but then you need a nationalist and a uniounist to keep everyone happy but the chances are they would argue more than work together and the whole thing goes round in a circle.

In fairness i never said they should have to pay staff out of their own pocket or for the running of their offices. the travelling to london and accomodation are fair enough but how many of them drive their own cars to work everyday? its all the other stuff that they shouldn't be claiming for that rags me and i would suspect that more were at it than got caught but obviously i have nothing to back it up.

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

Aw and i wouldn't use The Sun for toilet paper.

[Maguire01]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

[andoireabu]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there.  i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

[Maguire01]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there.  i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

It's not about 'needing' it. What wage do you think a politician, doctor, surgeon, accountant, dentist, solicitor, barrister, engineer etc should be paid? Or do you support a Communist regime?

[andoireabu]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there.  i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

It's not about 'needing' it. What wage do you think a politician, doctor, surgeon, accountant, dentist, solicitor, barrister, engineer etc should be paid? Or do you support a Communist regime?

if it isn't about needing it then what is it about? Greed? Social standing?  ive just qualified as an engineer but i don't think I should have a massive wage because of it.  if i get enough to cover all the bills and a bit left by for small luxuries then i would be happy.  i don't have any notion for the big house or the flash car. as for what that amount is i wouldn't know because im not old enough to have lived the working life yet but i got by comfortably at university on less than £10,000. that covered rent, food and house stuff, travelling and a fair few nights in the pub .

Im not in favour of what i know about communism i.e any communist country i see doesn't seem appealing to me but the idea of it if it was done right might not be too bad.  not the everyone earns the same but definately not the system we seem to have where people earn as much as they can get away with.

[Maguire01]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there.  i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

It's not about 'needing' it. What wage do you think a politician, doctor, surgeon, accountant, dentist, solicitor, barrister, engineer etc should be paid? Or do you support a Communist regime?

if it isn't about needing it then what is it about? Greed? Social standing?  ive just qualified as an engineer but i don't think I should have a massive wage because of it.  if i get enough to cover all the bills and a bit left by for small luxuries then i would be happy.  i don't have any notion for the big house or the flash car. as for what that amount is i wouldn't know because im not old enough to have lived the working life yet but i got by comfortably at university on less than £10,000. that covered rent, food and house stuff, travelling and a fair few nights in the pub .

Im not in favour of what i know about communism i.e any communist country i see doesn't seem appealing to me but the idea of it if it was done right might not be too bad.  not the everyone earns the same but definately not the system we seem to have where people earn as much as they can get away with.

We'll have to agree to differ then. I didn't go through university and professional qualifications to earn the same (or close to the same) as if i'd left school at 16.

In respect of MPs, it would be interesting to see who you think would take the job if the salary was £20-30k.

[Myles Na G.]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there. i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

O reason not the need! Our basest beggars
Are in the poorest thing superfluous.
Allow not nature more than nature needs,
Man's life is as cheap as beast's. Thou art a lady:
If only to go warm were gorgeous,
Why, nature needs not what thou gorgeous wear'st,
Which scarcely keeps thee warm. But, for true need--
You heavens, give me that patience, patience I need.

[andoireabu]

Your last part about how many of them left their professions and are now earning less, it was their own choice to do so and shouldn't give them the right to bump up their salaries to the level they were before.

I agree. My point was that £65k isn't an outrageous salary.

Im not sure i would agree with you there.  i can't see how anyone needs that when many more people live on a lot less.  does anyone really need the flashy house and car in the drive way or has the lifestyle everybody wants got out of hand and now there is no money left to support it?

It's not about 'needing' it. What wage do you think a politician, doctor, surgeon, accountant, dentist, solicitor, barrister, engineer etc should be paid? Or do you support a Communist regime?

if it isn't about needing it then what is it about? Greed? Social standing?  ive just qualified as an engineer but i don't think I should have a massive wage because of it.  if i get enough to cover all the bills and a bit left by for small luxuries then i would be happy.  i don't have any notion for the big house or the flash car. as for what that amount is i wouldn't know because im not old enough to have lived the working life yet but i got by comfortably at university on less than £10,000. that covered rent, food and house stuff, travelling and a fair few nights in the pub .

Im not in favour of what i know about communism i.e any communist country i see doesn't seem appealing to me but the idea of it if it was done right might not be too bad.  not the everyone earns the same but definately not the system we seem to have where people earn as much as they can get away with.

We'll have to agree to differ then. I didn't go through university and professional qualifications to earn the same (or close to the same) as if i'd left school at 16.
In respect of MPs, it would be interesting to see who you think would take the job if the salary was £20-30k.

thats fair enough but can we agree that some people do earn far too much for the job they do.  i seen in the news that the head of the NHS was on over £200000 which in my eyes is outrageous. the problem is then how to rate professional qualifications in terms of pay.  Why is one persons effort at university not worth the same as anothers?
As for the politicians i would say there would always be someone to fill the gap for that money because its not a bad salary.

[Zapatista]

Possibility of a great thread here if it isn't side tracked by topics like expenses.

I don't think we ever started from scratch and I don't think we ever will. I suppose we could have a hypothetical discussion about starting from scratch which would mean stripping away all the rules of the current system and teaching ourselves all over again without Nationalism, Identity, Culture etc. And if we choose to build them up again and include them, then so be it. We could also scrap left and right wing as in the perfect system either could operate equally. It would be like learning a new language were none of the rules you live your life by apply.

If we are only looking for solutions to current problems it will be very difficult as we must work inside the current system to achieve them. The current system (like all systems) has become alive and has a built into itself defence cs that won't allow for change.

There are two major contributors to the way we have arrived at the politics we have today. One is an evolution (where only the strongest survive) and the other is interference (where the strongest usually survive).

If we take the catholic church as an example, they arrived in Ireland to find pagans and rather than plant a new faith on them they decided to mix the two. They took what the pagans held close which had evolved over centuries and attached the new theory to it. This mixture of old and new left a form of hybrid. It didn't kill off paganism it just became paganism taking a different direction which didn't produce Catholicism but a mixture of the two.
The same can be applied to the 26 counties. After 1921 the state didn't start new it inheretied the existing framework and took it in a slightly different direction. 

I could spend forever on a thread like this, even though ultimately I think all we'd be doing is teasing ourselves with how good things could be, if only!

There are two ways to look at a discussion like this - there is the slightly practical and then there is the entirely theoretical. I think the idea of creating "regions" is impractical for a few reasons, the first and foremost being that in order to make them equitable and practical, you'd have to draw them along nontraditional lines - and thus any sense of identity with that region would be lost. Five regions in the Republic would mean populations of around three quarters of a million in each - in that regard Connacht and Ulster would probably have to be all the one, and I'm guessing there would be little or no shared identity between the people of Belmullet and the people of Belturbet. God knows I feel little enough in common with Laois or Westmeath sometimes and I certainly would have no vested interest in their prosperity over and above any other Irish people.

Just to continue with this. I can't see the problem. The world is designed along non traditional lines from towns to counties to countries.. In many cases this brings problems and in many cases it doesn't. If the product on offer is good enough then it is something I would expect to be welcomed. The traditional boundary of Ulster was divided much more decidedly than what is being proposed yet the people of Cavan Monaghan and donegal as with the people of the Six only have issues with the division of the Country.

Secondly, the reason for doing this would have to be to create more efficient regions that are better able to stand on their own two feet - but you knock that on the head with the notion that there would have to be "equalisation". The idea of each area getting rewarded for their own resources is of course fine, but to start by saying that there should be some sort of Dublin tax to compensate everyone else for the fact that the City is where all the roads are would utterly defeat the purpose of such regions. A Federal tax to pay for things like justice, defence and possibly things like third level education would be needed and that could be on income, but ultimately if Connacht or wherever was to be autonomous they and everyone else would have to pay their own way

.

That shouldn't be too hard to address. Limited autonomy secured within a constitution.

A crucial point of this too is that if the poorer areas are constantly bailed out, they have no incentive to improve. If Connacht is constantlyt being "equalised", they have no incentive to put good people in charge since the incompetence of sleveens never really comes home to roost to those who put them in power.

True. However, Connacht could have a designated but not exclusive section of the Irish economy to provide for. Fishing, water, farming, wind energy etc. If it is agreed and secured by constitution that all must aid the Island then so be it. The people of Leitrim are only complaining the same amount as the people of Dublin are regarding NAMA which was a problem escalated in Dublin but paid equally across the country.

Being honest I think that Ireland is not so big that it needs to be separated into regions. If anything, I believe it needs more and more people who are blind to the whole geography of the country and who look at what the country needs rather than what each area needs when making decisions.

You could be dead right. In the interest of the thread though I'm going to disagree

There is a huge problem with geographical politics in Ireland. They electoral power held in Dublin will almost always return a Dublin favoured leader. Crys of 'up Mayo' at leadership battles. The north south divide. If we can divide up the country in the way suggested these people would be working directly for eachothers interests rather than against eachother.

[muppet]

Being honest I think that Ireland is not so big that it needs to be separated into regions. If anything, I believe it needs more and more people who are blind to the whole geography of the country and who look at what the country needs rather than what each area needs when making decisions.

I was going to post to make this precise point. Apart from considerations of fragmenting the national identity when the opposite is more desirable, if more efficient administration is a goal I don't see the sense in having more than one administration for a population roughly similar to that of Greater Manchester. Particularly since the sovereignty we have already signed away and continue to cede (see EU oversight of our budget before the Dáil gets to see it) renders the national government little more than a glorified County Council anyway.

Hardy, Greater Manchester doesn't have people who have to travel distances such as from Belmullet & Donegal  to Galway for Chemotherapy. It can easily be served by one airport and one seaport and canal. It requires only a few major road/rail connections. It has few rural issues to worry about and has very few under under-utilised natural resources. That is without mentioning tourism. I don't see that as a valid comparison with us.

The object of my position would be to make it more efficient, i.e. that government would cost a lot less and would deliver a lot more. If either of those objectives could be demonstrated to be unachievable then I would accept defeat and look for another model.

[seafoid]

The Donegal to Galway thing is atypical because in any normal political setup
Donegal people would go to Derry since that is their nearest major urban centre.

Has there been any example of a country going for a cantonal type arrangement from a highly centralised
political structure ? 

The only thing to get the ball rolling would be a major crisis. The banking situation might deliver something that serious yet.   
there was a letter to the Irish times about this type of thing a few months ago. Someone said he was involved in a movement around 35 years ago and they looked at things like devolving power to the regions and regional newspapers etc but that the powers in dublin just steamrolled the whole thing. And that was that.

[Pangurban]

Desmond Fennell, one of the few genuine intellectuals that Ireland ever produced,has been pushing the Canton ideas in various forms, since the early sixties.

[muppet]

The Donegal to Galway thing is atypical because in any normal political setup
Donegal people would go to Derry since that is their nearest major urban centre.

Has there been any example of a country going for a cantonal type arrangement from a highly centralised
political structure ? 

The only thing to get the ball rolling would be a major crisis. The banking situation might deliver something that serious yet.  
there was a letter to the Irish times about this type of thing a few months ago. Someone said he was involved in a movement around 35 years ago and they looked at things like devolving power to the regions and regional newspapers etc but that the powers in dublin just steamrolled the whole thing. And that was that.

So are we here?

The current crisis may have reversed the Dublin subsidy problem as we all will be subsidising the Dublin based banking system for generations.

[ONeill]

We'll have to agree to differ then. I didn't go through university and professional qualifications to earn the same (or close to the same) as if i'd left school at 16.



Did you stay in education to earn more money? Or to learn more?

Some of those lads who left at 16 built the house you're sitting in, service the car you're driving and helped make the food in your fridge. They mightnt know much about selling property or making computer hardware but why should they not earn as much?