Sir, – Fine Gael hates Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin. Fianna Fáil hates everyone but Fine Gael. Sinn Féin claims never to have hated anyone. The Social Democrats are rotating who they hate. Labour hates the position it is in, and everyone hates Michael Lowry (for now).
I have a headache. – Yours, etc,
DES DORIS,
Dún Laoghaire
Co Dublin.
Sir, – In the run-up to the general election, the politicians offering the fewest “conversations” and “narratives” will get my vote. – Yours, etc,
BLÁNAID WHITE,
Nobber, Co Meath.
Sir, – Am I alone in dreading the forthcoming election? The constant promises, denials and refusal to answer the most straightforward questions with a simple answer.
Perhaps it is time for a change. Not just of government,which the election will decide. I am thinking more about the manner of communication with our elected politicians and candidates .
How about we bring brevity and straightforward talking back to the political conversation? How? Perhaps we can start with a simple idea, a quota. Not of ideas but of words. It is common in many interviews that half of the reply is made up of repeating the question or going off track to muddy the waters and then arrive back, adding little in the way of information, but getting your name out there.
What if the simple questions had to be answered simply, with a low word count, a verbal twitter if you like, except with a higher word count.
Politicians may then have to learn to say what they mean, whatever about meaning what they say! At least we will be clear on one thing.
Unfortunately it would need to be a word quota and not a time issue as you can imagine the galloping Irish tongue would fit in a record amount of nothing in the shortest time possible, only adding to the confused nature of our political debate.
I realise that this may be hard to enforce but if successful it could breed a new type of politician, a politician that means their every word and perhaps one that you can count on, word for word. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN WALSH,
Ballymacarbry,
Co Waterford.
A chara, – Considering the potential for continued change in electoral voting patterns during the forthcoming elections, would it not be pertinent to introduce a “none of the above” option, along with a reason for doing so, on the ballot paper?
While the number of spoiled votes are counted during elections, there can be no information extrapolated from this on whether there was a valid and justifiable reason for doing so.
Some of this subset may deliberately take the time to go and voice their dissatisfaction with the current representation on offer to them by spoiling their vote.
Voting is not mandatory, as in other jurisdictions. Indeed, the number of genuinely spoiled votes gives no indication as to their satisfaction or otherwise with the eventual electoral winners and opposition, nor does it give the political establishment at large any information as to the potentially valid considerations to enable the full participation of these voters. – Is mise,
ERIC CREAN,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.