An Comhchoiste ar an mbunreacht. Joint Committee on the Constitution

Transcription

1 An Comhchoiste ar an mbunreacht An Tríú Tuarascáil AIRTEAGAL 16 TORTHAÍ SUIRBHÉ AR CHOMHALTAÍ DHÁ THEACH AN OIREACHTAIS AN CÓRAS TOGHCHÁIN, RÓL IONADAÍOCHTA TEACHTAÍ DÁLA AGUS TOGRAÍ MAIDIR LE HATHRÚ Tuarascáil Eatramhach Feabhra 2010 Joint Committee on the Constitution Third Report ARTICLE 16 RESULTS OF SURVEY OF MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM, REPRESENTATIVE ROLE OF TDS AND PROPOSALS FOR CHANGE Interim Report February 2010

2 1

3 Table of Contents Foreword 1 Executive Summary 3 Orders of reference of the Committee 7 Membership of the Committee 9 Introduction 11 Summary of main findings 13 Part 1: The TD s workload and representative roles Introduction The TD s workload Who do TDs feel they represent? Explaining variation in constituency work International comparisons 32 Part 2: Evaluating the current electoral system and examining proposed alternatives Evaluating PR-STV Support for change and proposed alternatives 52 Conclusions 61 Appendix A: Types of electoral systems 65 Appendix B: Some international studies of parliamentarians working practices 69 Appendix C: Copy of survey 71 Appendix D: Multivariate regression analysis full model and variable measurement 79 Appendix E: References and bibliography 83

4

5 FOREWORD In the current phase of its work programme, the Joint Committee on the Constitution is currently undertaking a review of the electoral system for the election of members of Dáil Éireann as prescribed by Article 16 of the Constitution. To inform its deliberations, the Committee decided to elicit the views of members of both Houses of the Oireachtas on the current electoral system of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote (PR-STV). In doing so, the Committee has sought to bring the voice of public representatives into the debate in a systematised manner. This interim report presents an analysis of the survey results. It provides an assessment of the workload and representative role of members, their evaluation of the current electoral system and their preferences in relation to reforming the system. The survey results are also compared with the results of an identical survey undertaken of MPs in Malta. Given that Malta is the only other country in the EU to use STV for parliamentary elections, this provides a unique opportunity to assess just how much influence STV has on the representative role of members of the Dáil. In presenting this report, we would like to record our thanks to members of both Houses for sharing their invaluable insights and perspectives on the areas explored in the survey. We also acknowledge with gratitude the contribution of Mr. Hermann Schiavone (PhD student, Malta), who conducted the research presented in this report on the operation of PR- STV in Malta for his thesis at the University of Manchester on STV in Malta and its consequences on Maltese Politics. We are most grateful to him for sharing his research results with the Committee. The Committee s work has been greatly facilitated by the assistance provided by a research team from the Department of Political Science in Trinity College Dublin. We would like to record our thanks to PhD research students Mr. Séin Ó Muineacháin and Mr. Matthew Wall for assisting the Committee in this study. We look forward to further debate on the matters considered in this report. Sean Ardagh TD (Chairman) Jim O Keeffe TD (Vice-Chairman) 1

6 2

7 Executive Summary This report presents the results of a survey of members of the Houses of the Oireachtas carried out by the Joint Committee on the Constitution, as part of its ongoing review of the electoral system for the election of members of Dáil Éireann. The report addresses two principal themes: (1) The workload and representative role of the TD; and (2) The evaluation by members of the current electoral system for election to Dáil Éireann, and their proposals for reform. With regard to the workload of TDs, the report finds that: (1) TDs report that they spend (on average) 53% of their working time on constituency-based work, 38% on legislative work, and 9% on other work. (2) The largest single category of constituency-based work was working on individual constituents cases, which alone accounts for just over a fifth of the average TD s overall workload. (3) TDs typically see their role as being primarily constituency representatives. They rate constituency-based activities as more important than legislative activities. When asked who a TD should represent, the highest ranking option was that a TD should primarily represent all voters in their constituency, rather than their own supporters, their party s supporters, or all voters in the country. (4) Certain characteristics appear to be associated with higher levels of constituency work. These include constituency characteristics, most notably the distance from Dublin of the constituency. TDs role in the legislature also influences their workload, and both Ministers and Ministers of State spend less time engaged in constituency-based work, although there was no discernible difference for 3

8 Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs or for Party Spokespeople. TDs age, educational/occupational background, and levels of political experience do not appear to be related to their levels of constituency work; however female TDs appear to engage in slightly higher levels of constituency work than males. (5) More overtly political factors also appear to play a role, especially those to do with intra-party competition: these include the extent to which candidates faced competition from members of their own party in the previous election, and whether a candidate had ever previously lost to a member of their own party. Intra-party competition is typically associated with higher reported levels of constituency-based activity. (6) An identical survey carried out in Malta indicated that, while MPs there tend to hold other jobs in conjunction with their role in parliament, the ratio of constituency to legislative work there is close to 1:1. In terms of the role of the representative, there seems to be more emphasis on the national aspect than is the case for TDs, although constituency representation is also seen as highly important. With regard to members evaluation of the electoral system, the report finds that: (1) Overall, members favour retaining the electoral system to Dáil Éireann, with 43% in favour of changing and 57% in favour of keeping the current system. This marks an increase in support for changing the electoral system compared to a 1999 survey of members which indicated that 27% of members favoured change against 73% in favour of retaining. (2) The survey unearthed a wide range of opinions across members, with the largest portion proclaiming themselves either extremely satisfied (31%) or fairly satisfied (36%) with the current system, but with several members expressing dissatisfaction (25%). (3) Members evaluated the current system over a range of criteria. They indicated that it was performing most strongly in creating a link between voters and their 4

9 representatives. The system also received, on average, positive evaluations with regard to its proportionality and representativeness, and its standing with the public. Members indicated, however, that the system does encourage intraparty rivalry. Members were somewhat ambivalent overall with regard to the extent to which the current system allowed TDs to be effective legislators and hold the government to account. The survey of MPs in Malta resulted in a near-identical assessment of PR-STV across the various criteria, apart from a somewhat more positive rating on the capacity of the system to allow MPs to legislate/hold the government to account. (4) Among those members who advocated changing the current electoral system, the most preferred alternative electoral system mentioned is a mixed system which would combine single-member districts with a list vote. This type of electoral system is currently in operation in legislative elections in Germany and New Zealand. The second most preferred electoral system is the Alternative Vote, which maintains the current system of vote transfers, but operates in single-seat constituencies. This type of electoral system currently operates in Australia s legislative elections. (5) A number of suggestions were also made as to how the current system could be improved. These included altering the methods by which constituencies are drawn (to have greater regard for county boundaries), randomising candidates names on the ballot paper, changing the current methodology for counting transfers, lowering the voting age, altering constituency sizes, and improving the voting register. Several members called for reforms that did not involve the electoral system, focusing principally on changing Dáil procedures to give TDs a greater role in making and amending legislation, as well as calling for a strengthening of local government institutions. By publishing this research the Committee seeks to make fresh information available to political leaders, commentators, and to the public at large for the evaluation of the electoral system for the election of members of to Dáil Éireann as well as the working practices of public representatives. 5

10 6

11 Orders of reference of the Committee Joint Committee on the Constitution Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann ordered: (1) That a Select Committee, consisting of eleven members of Dáil Éireann, be appointed to be joined with a Select Committee to be appointed by Seanad Éireann, to form the Joint Committee on the Constitution to complete a full review of the Constitution in order to provide focus to the place and relevance of the Constitution and to establish those areas where Constitutional change may be desirable or necessary. (2) In considering such matters as it may select and see fit and on which it shall report to both Houses of the Oireachtas, the Joint Committee shall take cognisance of: (a) (b) the work already undertaken by the Joint Committee on the Constitution in the 28 th and 29 th Dáíleanna and the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution since its establishment in July 1996 and re-establishment in October 1997 and again in December 2002; and the Report of the Constitution Review Group. (3) The quorum of the Joint Committee shall be five, of whom at least one shall be a member of Dáil Éireann and one a member of Seanad Éireann. (4) The Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 83(1), (2), (3), (4), (8) and (9). (5) The Chairman of the Joint Committee shall be a member of Dáil Éireann. 7

12 8

13 Deputies JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION MEMBERSHIP Seán Ardagh (FF) Chairman Jim O Keeffe (FG) Vice-Chairman Ned O Keeffe (FF) Jimmy Devins (FF) Michael D Arcy (FG) Tom Hayes (FG) Brendan Howlin (LAB) Michael Kennedy (FF) Senators Denis Naughten (FG) Mary O Rourke (FF) Michael Woods (FF) Dan Boyle (GP) Denis O Donovan (FF) Eugene Regan (FG) Alex White (LAB)

14 10

15 Introduction This report presents the findings of a survey of members of the Houses of the Oireachtas undertaken by the Joint Committee on the Constitution. In the current module of its work, the Committee is conducting a review of the electoral system for the election of members of Dáil Éireann. Over several meetings, the Committee has sought to analyse the effectiveness of the current system of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote (PR- STV), and to explore a range of proposals for its reform. To this end, the Committee has balanced input from experts with specialised knowledge of the Irish electoral system and of alternative electoral systems with evidence from political practitioners and advocacy groups on their experiences and perceptions of the current system. The survey which is analysed here addressed two broad themes. Firstly, the survey contained a number of questions on TDs day-to-day workload and their perceptions of the representative role that a TD should perform. Secondly, the survey asked members for detailed evaluations of the current electoral system s performance, as well as their preferences for electoral system reform. In conducting this study of TDs workload and representative roles, the Committee seeks to make available fresh evidence with regard to the most commonly cited criticism of the PR- STV electoral system: namely that it puts excessive pressures on TDs to engage in localised constituency services, to the detriment of their performance of national/legislative duties. By surveying members views on the current electoral system and alternatives for reform, the Committee intends to bring the voice of public representatives into the debate in a systematised manner, rather than having representatives who have a particularly strong opinion one way or another dominating the agenda. 11

16 12

17 Summary of main findings How do TDs divide their working time between constituency and legislative activities? The first part of this report focuses on the workloads and representative roles of TDs. In the survey, TDs were asked about how they divide their time as public representatives between constituency work and legislative activities, the importance that they attribute to various types of representative activity, and which groups they feel that they primarily represent in their work. One caveat that should be attached to all findings reported here is that they are based solely on the self-reported working practices of TDs. Looking at the balance between constituency and legislative work, of the 75 TDs who responded to the survey, the average TD reported spending 53% of their working time on constituency-related work, 38% on legislative work, and 9% of on other activities, which included work for voluntary organisations, party-based and media work, as well as (for holders of ministerial office) ministerial work. The average ratio of constituency to legislative workload is approximately 1.4:1. Put more simply, for every hour the average TD spends on legislative work, one hour and twenty five minutes is spent on constituency-based work. TDs were also asked to sub-divide their constituency and legislative work into various categories. The largest proportion of time in any category was dedicated to working on constituents cases which, on average, accounts for nearly 40% of constituency-based work, according to this survey. Lobbying on behalf of one s constituency and visiting the constituency/delivering leaflets on one s work both accounted for approximately 25% of constituency work, while tabling parliamentary questions on behalf of constituents accounted for the remaining 10%. In terms of TDs legislative work, activities were more evenly spread out Committee work accounted for 26%, researching legislation and preparing amendments accounted for 22%, as did speaking/participating in Dáil debates, 16% of time was spent participating in parliamentary party meetings, while tabling questions on legislative issues accounted for the remaining 13%. 13

18 TDs were asked to assess how important each of these activities is to them. Out of 9 activities considered, the 3 most important were all constituency-based, with the most important activity being the most time-consuming one, namely working on individual constituents cases. Speaking/participating in parliamentary party meetings was seen as the least important activity. How do TDs view their role as representatives? A strong constituency orientation is also evident in TDs responses to a question which asked them what group a TD should primarily represent. Out of 6 possible groups, the top-three ranked groups were constituency-based: with the highest ranking going to the option that a TD should represent all voters in the constituency. The option of representing all voters in the country was ranked fourth and the option of all voters in the country who voted for a TD s party was ranked fifth. The idea that TDs should represent members of a particular social group was ranked last. However, on average, TDs responses indicate that they feel that, when it comes to voting in the legislature, the party s position should be the main determinant of a TD s voting behaviour. When asked how they felt a TD should vote when party policy clashes with the opinion of the party s supporters in the constituency, 86% answered that the TD should vote with their party. Similarly, when asked how a TD should vote when that TD disagrees with party policy, 83% indicated that the TD should vote with their party. This finding is unsurprising when one considers that party legislative discipline in Ireland (i.e. the tendency for TDs to vote with the party whip) is quite high by European standards. It indicates that TDs may make a distinction between their representative role on behalf of their constituency and their voting behaviour in the Dáil. How do TDs levels of constituency work compare with those of MPs elsewhere? The results of the survey of members of the Dáil are discussed in the light of studies of MPs activities in other political systems, and are compared to an identical survey recently carried out by Mr. Hermann Schiavone in Malta, under the supervision of Professor David Farrell; the only other country that employs PR-STV for elections to its national legislature. 14

19 A broad observation here is that constituency service appears to be expected of parliamentarians in legislatures across the world, operating under a range of electoral systems. It is extremely difficult, however, to compare Irish TDs with MPs elsewhere with any confidence, as studies of MPs workloads have tended to employ different measures and have been taken at various time points. Comparative international studies that have included Ireland have identified it as having a relatively strong culture of constituency service. One such study specifically compared TDs to MPs in the UK in the mid 1990s and found that, while both groups engage in high levels of constituency-based work, TDs spent more time on constituency service (59% according to that research) than MPs (47%), and that TDs were more likely to cite electoral considerations in explaining their focus on constituency work than MPs (Wood and Young, 1997). There are some indications that electoral systems have a role to play in the amount of constituency-based work undertaken by MPs, and, indeed the type of constituency role that they perform. Dr. Thomas Carl Lundberg presented research on this topic to the Committee which compared the workloads of constituency and list MPs elected under mixed electoral systems in Germany, Scotland, and Wales and found different patterns of behaviour for the two groups. The comparison with Malta is somewhat more reliable, as it is based on an identical survey which was conducted there at the same time as the survey of TDs. Malta provides an appropriate point of comparison for the Irish system, as the Maltese legislature is the only other national lower house in the world that is elected under the PR-STV system. MPs in Malta rate PR-STV in a very similar manner to TDs, with the link that it creates between voters and representatives seen as its principal strength. Maltese MPs were slightly more confident then Irish TDs that PR-STV allows MPs to be effective legislators and exercise scrutiny over the executive. There are several important differences between the Irish and Maltese system to bear in mind in comparing the workload and representative role of TDs and MPs all Maltese MPs in the current legislature are members of either the Nationalist Party (35 seats) or of the Labour Party (34 seats). Furthermore, the majority of MPs in Malta are part-time, and do their work in conjunction with holding another job. Nonetheless some interesting similarities and divergences were notable while Maltese MPs do spend a considerable amount of time and 15

20 invest great importance in their constituency role, this appears to be slightly more evenly balanced with their legislative and national roles than is the case for TDs. The ratio of constituency to legislative work reported by Maltese MPs, for example, is close to 1:1, and in terms of their view of the MP s representative role, national representation was balanced more evenly with constituency orientation than for TDs, who overwhelming favoured constituency representation. What factors influence levels of constituency-focus of TDs? The report also provides an analysis some of the factors that appear to affect variations observed in the legislative/constituency balance of TDs workloads. Looking at characteristics of TDs constituencies, it appears that constituencies that are further from Dublin tend to be associated with a higher proportion of time spent on constituency-based activity. For example, in constituencies within 100 kilometres of Leinster House (measured by distance of furthest point in the constituency from Leinster House), the (average) level of constituency based activities reported by TDs was 47%, whereas in constituencies more than 100km from Leinster House, this figure rises to 57%. TDs roles in the current legislature were also found to influence their workloads, most notably with Ministers and Ministers of Stae spending less time engaged in constituency work. However, this is not to say that Ministers constituencies are any worse served than non-ministers, as holders of ministerial office receive administrative support to provide constituency services. In terms of TDs personal characteristics, neither TDs age, nor the number of years that they had held office appeared to be related to levels of constituency work. One interesting pattern that did emerge was that the level of educational attainment of TDs appeared to be negatively related to the proportion of time spent engaged in constituency work, with TDs holding a postgraduate qualification spending an average of 45% of their time on constituency work, somewhat below the 53% overall average, but analysis did not bear this pattern out to be statistically significant. Levels of constituency work did differ between male and female TDs, with female TDs spending marginally more time on constituency work. 16

21 Most importantly from the point of view of the Committee s focus on the role of the electoral system; TDs personal experiences of the PR-STV system appear to influence the way in which they work. Intra-party competition plays a significant role here: TDs facing competition in their constituency from fellow party members in the 2007 elections appear to spend greater portions of time engaged in constituency work, as do TDs who have had the experience of losing to co-partisans. On average, a TD who faced no opponents from the same party in their constituency in 2007 spends 41% of their time on constituency-related work. This figure jumps to 62% for TDs who faced two or more candidates from the same party in their constituency. Those TDs who, at some point in their career, lost their seat to a fellow party member reported an average of 66% of time spent on constituency work well above the average figure of 53%. Member s evaluations of the PR-STV electoral system The second part of the report focused on members perceptions of the current electoral system for Dáil Éireann, and sought to identify their preferences with regard to reforming this system. A similar survey was carried out in 1999 under the auspices of the Lenihan All Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution, and some of its findings were presented in that Committee s (2002) 7 th progress report. We report the findings of that survey here as a point of comparison. The survey analysed in this report allowed members to evaluate the system over several different areas, acknowledging the reality that Professor David Farrell emphasised to the Committee in his submission; namely that there are numerous criteria over which electoral systems can be judged, and that there is no system currently in existence that fulfils all desirable criteria perfectly. Overall, members indicated that they were most satisfied with PR-STV with regard to its performance in creating a link between the voter and the representative. Members were also quite satisfied with the system in terms of: its achievement of proportionality between votes and seats for parties; its capacity to elect a legislature that represents a microcosm of society; and its support among the public. 17

22 Members were rather ambivalent about the balance between incumbency and responsiveness to changes in public opinion struck by the system, its encouragement of strong disciplined parties, and its facilitation of the election of effective legislators who can hold the government to account. Members indicated that the system generates high levels of intraparty competition. Members evaluations of each of these criteria are discussed in the light of submissions to the Committee by academic researchers, advocacy groups, and political practitioners in the report. In a broader question asking members to indicate their overall satisfaction with PR-STV, the largest group of members declared themselves somewhat satisfied (36%), while the second largest group were extremely satisfied (31%). However, of those members who declared themselves somewhat satisfied several indicated that they would change the current electoral system. 21% of members pronounced themselves somewhat dissatisfied and 4% stated that they were extremely dissatisfied with PR-STV. 8% were ambivalent, stating that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the current electoral system. Do members favour changing the current system? If so, what are the alternatives? The results of the survey indicate that when asked: Do you believe the electoral system should be changed? 43% of members indicated that the system should be changed while 57% indicated that it should not. This is a considerable increase in members favouring change compared to the responses elicited by a survey conducted in 1999 by the Lenihan Committee. In that survey, 27% of members indicated that they would favour changing the system, with 73% indicating that they would prefer to retain the current system. As such, while the gap between the two groups appears to have narrowed considerably since the 1999 survey, the majority grouping continues to favour retaining the current electoral system. The survey asked members who expressed a preference for changing the current system to indicate what their preferred alternative would be. Of the 33 members who described a preferred alternative, the most frequently mentioned electoral system was a mixed system, 18

23 which combines single-seat constituency and proportional list elements. This type of system was favoured by 55% of members who indicated a preferred alternative. The second most frequently mentioned category (30%) was to change to a single-seat based system, maintaining the current system of vote transfers. This type of system is known as the Alternative Vote system, and is currently in use in elections to the Australian lower house. Also mentioned were the UK first-past-the-post system (9%) and a closed list PR system (6%). Electoral system types are explained in the appendix to this report (Appendix A). The survey also allowed members to express their preferences for changes to the current system that would not involve a move away from PR-STV; the most frequently cited changes in this regard were to do with the system by which constituency boundaries are determined, and several members indicated that county boundaries should never be transgressed in determining electoral constituencies. Other suggestions included technical changes to ballot papers (such as the randomisation of ordering of candidates names), amending the counting procedures for vote transfers, and reviewing the voting age. The next section of the report contains the detailed figures behind this summary, and goes into more depth in the discussion of these findings. 19

24 20

25 Part 1 TDs workloads and representative roles 1.1 Introduction The survey of members reported here allowed the Committee to undertake one of the most in-depth investigations to date of what TDs do with their time, and how they balance their roles as constituency representatives and legislators. The response rate across both Houses of the Oireachtas to the survey was 44%; with 75 out of 165 TDs responding, and 23 out of 57 Seanad members responding. In analysing these results, it is important to bear in mind that respondents were self-selected (i.e. those members who chose to fill out and return the survey), rather than being randomly selected. We cannot rule out the possibility that the members who replied to the survey differed from those who did not in terms of their working practices or of their opinions with regard to PR- STV and possible reform options, though we do note that the survey appears to capture a broad array of responses from those who declare themselves extremely satisfied with the system to those who are extremely dissatisfied, and a range of evaluations between these extremes. We note that while party breakdowns are not included in the report, the partisan balance of responses was broadly proportional to the partisan distribution of seats in the Houses. We also note here that the number of responses varies by question, as some questions were left blank in the completed surveys. The numbers of responses upon which averages are based are tabulated for each question. Table 1b (tables are listed at the end of each section of the report) shows some variation in response rate on the basis of political positions, with the response rate among Ministers and Ministers of State being significantly lower than the average, and the response rate among Committee Chairs is significantly above average. In this section of the report, four issues are dealt with. Firstly, the results from the survey as to the overall balance between constituency work and legislative work reported by TDs are 21

26 presented. Secondly, the view that TDs take of their role as a representatives is examined, using a range of questions posed in the survey on the significance attributed to various activities by TDs, the groups that they feel that they represent in their work, and how they feel they should behave when the opinions of various groups (such as, for example their party and the voters in their constituency) clash. Thirdly, the report examines whether characteristics of TDs and of the constituencies that they represent are associated with higher (or lower) proportions of time dedicated to constituency work. Finally, we discuss these findings in the light of international studies of MPs working practices, and compare the results to an identical and contemporaneous survey conducted in Malta, where PR-STV is also employed to elect members of parliament. 1.2 The TD s workload Constituency work, as an activity undertaken by TDs, is perhaps one of the more topical aspects of Irish politics. Its critics claim that the excessive concentration of TDs on their constituency work leads them to neglect their legislative duties, and that it leads to deputies clogging up the system with useless correspondence and deputations. On the other hand, advocates of constituency work argue that it allows members to walk the factory floor, to maintain a high level of responsiveness with voters at a local level, and to provide a channel of representation for these citizens in dealing with the state. Furthermore, there appears to be a relatively high level of public demand for TDs to provide constituency services: 21% of people surveyed in the Irish National Election Study in 2002 reported having made contact a TD in the preceding five years, and there is evidence that a wide range of voters generally expect TDs to provide a local service with over 60% saying as much in the 2007 Irish National Election Study. Constituency-based work is described by Michael Gallagher and Lee Komito as being divisible into the sub-roles of the local promoter and local dignitary, who seek to attract resources and prestige to the area, and the welfare officer, who assists constituents in their dealing with the state (for an in depth discussion, see Gallagher & Komito, 2010). 22

27 Legislative duties, which involve speaking and participating in plenary sessions of the Dáil and in Oireachtas Committees, researching legislation and amendments to legislation, and participating in parliamentary party life, are considered by some to be the raison d être of parliamentarians. This ideal is consistent with the Burkean philosophy that members of parliamentary assemblies should consider themselves as servants of the nation, rather than servants of the constituencies that elect them. There is no clear indication as to what the ideal level of constituency work or legislative work of a member of parliament should be. The matter is open to political and philosophical debate, and this report does not take any explicit stance on the issue. Rather, the report seeks to objectively analyse the relative emphases the TDs place on these roles. In the survey, members were asked to divide their workload among three different types of activity constituency-based work, parliament-based work, and other activities. There was also a section in the survey that allowed deputies to describe these other types of activity, that they consider part of their working week. Such activities fall outside the remit of either constituency-based or parliament-based work. The activities most frequently mentioned here are ministerial duties, media activity, party policy formulation, and general work on behalf of the party. We see from the results presented in table 2 that the average proportion of time of TDs working week spent on constituency-based work is 53% (all percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number), whereas 38% of the working week is spent on parliament-based duties. This statistic is telling, in that it suggests that constituency-based activity takes up approximately 1.4 times the amount of time as parliamentary activity. The conclusion that can be drawn here is that constituency-based activity, for the most part, is the dominant area of activity for members of the 30 th Dáil. The survey also asked members to give a more detailed breakdown of their constituencybased and parliament-based workloads. The results of this analysis are detailed in Tables 3 and 4. Table 3 gives an interesting insight into the different constituency-based tasks that TDs undertake. The task that takes the largest proportion of TDs time as part of their constituency-based workload, on average, is that of working on individual constituents 23

28 cases. If we calculate the percentage of the total working week spent on working on individual constituents cases, it comes to about 21% - slightly more than one fifth of the typical TD s working week. As Professor Gallagher pointed out in his submission to the Committee, Irish political culture is supportive of the idea that working for individual constituents is a normal and natural part of the TD s role. Indeed, this role appears to persist in spite of civil service reform that has taken place with an emphasis on putting in place mechanisms to allow citizens to address their grievances through more user-friendly channels than had existed in the past. The survey also asked TDs to detail the precise breakdown of their legislative workload. These results are produced in Table 4. The largest single category is speaking/participating in parliamentary committees, which accounts for 26% of the average TD s legislative workload. The labour-intensive (and, arguably, less glamorous) activities of participating in parliamentary committees, tabling questions on legislative issues, and preparing and researching legislation and amendments to legislation take up a large part of the TDs legislative duties collectively they account for 62% of time spent on legislative work. The more public face of the TDs work in the legislature, speaking and participating in Dáil debates, takes up 22% of legislative workload. The survey then asked TDs to rank these activities on a scale as follows: 1 = This activity is extremely important to me. 2 = This activity is quite important to me. 3 = This activity is important to me. 4 = This activity is somewhat important to me. 5 = This activity is not important to me at all. The average score assigned to each activity is detailed in Table 5. The most important activity for members of the Dáil, on average, is the one that occupies the largest portion of their working time; namely, working on constituents cases. This is followed by lobbying on behalf of the general interest of the constituency, and visiting the constituency. As such, the three highest-rated activities in terms of importance to TDs are all constituency-based. These rankings underline the centrality to the average TD of the constituency role. On the other 24

29 hand, the three bottom-ranked activities in terms of importance were all part of TDs legislative workload. Among TDs legislative activities, speaking/participating in Dáil debates was assigned highest importance. The least important activity for members of the Dáil, on average, is speaking and participating in parliamentary party meetings Who do TDs feel they represent? The survey asked the respondents to choose from four different options that described their opinions as to whether or not they thought that the views of TDs accurately reflected the views of voters. Those options were as follows: 1=the views of TDs reflect the views of voters very well 2=the views of TDs reflect the views of voters fairly well 3=the views of TDs reflect the views of voters not very well 4=the views of TDs reflect the views of voters not very well at all From 73 responses, 20 indicated that the TD s views reflect those of voters very well, 50 that they are reflected fairly well and 3 that they are not very well reflected. No TDs chose the not very well at all option. However, an interesting question is precisely which group of voters they feel that they are elected to represent. TDs were asked to rank a set of groups from 1 to 6, where 1 was the group they felt that they primarily represent. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 6. Consistent with our findings in relation to constituency work being highly important to TDs, there is a heavy emphasis on the constituency when TDs are considering those who they represent. Out of 6 options, the top-ranked three are all constituency-based. On average, TDs feel that they should primarily represent all voters in the constituency and then all voters in the constituency who voted for the TD. There is considerable consensus with regards to this view of the representative role that a TD should play 49 out of 71 TDs (69%) ranked all voters in the constituency as the most important option. Overall, 85% of respondents placed this category in their top two. 25

30 The figures with regards to responses to the contention that a TD should represent all voters in the country are interesting as they reveal considerable variation of TDs on this issue. Quite a high number (47%) ranked this as either 1 or 2, however 35% ranked it at the bottom of their considerations, at either 5 or 6. The importance of party in determining who a TD should represent is not so evident from these findings. It is apparent that TDs place considerable importance on their personal vote, given that they rank the importance of their role as a personal representative to people above the role of party representative. Furthermore, constituency party supporters are ranked above party supporters nationally. The importance of representing those who supported the party nationally is also outranked by the TD s perceived role as a general national representative. The group of least importance to the TD when they are considering who they represent are members of a particular social group. 55% of TDs gave this category bottom ranking. Finally, the survey posed a number of scenarios to TDs who were members of political parties, and asked them how a TD should vote in parliament in each different scenario. First they were asked how a TD should vote where there was a disagreement of policy between the party s voters in the TD s constituency and the TD s party. 86% of respondents indicated that the TD should vote with their party. Next they considered a scenario where TD holds a different view to the party s supporters in the constituency. 80% indicated that a TD should vote on the basis of their view and not of their constituency supporters. Lastly, they were asked how a TD should vote where there is a clash of view between the TD and their own party. Of 64 respondents, 83% indicated that the TD should support the party s view in their vote. These results show that TDs place great value on party discipline at the parliamentary level. Overall, the results presented here point to deputies who perceive themselves as constituency workers and representatives first and foremost, but who legislatively place more importance on representing party policy, as well as their own opinions, than on representing constituency opinion. 26

31 1.4 Explaining variation in constituency work In this section of the report, we look at variation in constituency-based activity among TDs. Firstly, we will describe the levels of variation that we observe in constituency-based work among deputies. Secondly, we analyse the results of the survey to uncover those factors that best account for variation in constituency work among TDs. Using this approach, we assess the observed relationships between the proportion of time spent on constituency work by TDs and a number of factors. It is worth looking at characteristics of TDs and their constituencies, to see if there is any relationship between these characteristics and the level of constituency work. Most importantly in terms of assessing the electoral system, we evaluate whether the intra-party competitive dynamic faced by individual TDs has a bearing on the levels of constituency work that they engage in. PR-STV is not the only electoral system to engender intra-party competition open list PR systems also allow voters to choose among party members, and even in single-seat constituencies there can be considerable intra-party rivalry in securing nominations. However, intensive pressure to compete with co-partisans is the most commonly cited factor among those who attribute excessive levels of constituency work to the operation of PR- STV in Ireland. Table 7 presents some information about the variation in constituency-based activity reported by TDs in their responses. The total range of reported time spent on constituency-based activity goes from 15% to 90%. We notice that the majority of TDs place themselves between 25% and 75% when determining how much of their time they spend on constituency-based activity. The point here is that, while no TDs spend all of their time on either legislative or constituency activities, they do exhibit considerable variance in the portions of their time spent engaged in constituency/legislative work. There are four sets of characteristics we measure as predictors of TDs levels of constituencybased workload 1) non-political attributes of TDs, 2) political attributes of TDs, 3) nonpolitical attributes of the Dáil constituencies that TDs represent and 4) political attributes of those Dáil constituencies. 27

32 First of all, we deal with the non-political characteristics of members of the Dáil. These include the age of TDs, their gender, their level of education and their occupational background. These variables are included in the analysis to capture whether generational, gendered or professional attributes have any bearing on how TDs approach their work. In terms of the political attributes of TDs, we look at the marginality of their election to the Dáil (in terms of the percentage of the quota that they received), whether or not they have ever lost their seat, whether or not they have ever lost their seat to a fellow party member, how many party running mates they had in their constituency at the last immediate election, whether they are a member of a big party (Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael), the number of elections they have contested, and the number of years they have spent as TDs throughout their political careers. We also control for TDs formal positions within the Dáil including ministerial and committee responsibilities. Marginality is usually the base that a TD believes they are working from as they look toward the next election, and as such informs their thinking about the ground they need to cover to secure their seat at the next election and may influence their tendency to engage in constituency work. The experience of having lost their seat previously may also act as an incentive to dedicate larger portions of time to constituency work. There is a significant intra-party turnover of Dáil seats in Ireland, as outlined by Professor Michael Marsh in his submission, 33% of TDs who lose their seats lose them to members of their own party. This notion of intra-party threat is captured by two factors: the number of running mates that TDs have in the immediate preceding election, and whether the TD has ever lost their seat to a member of their own party. We include the measure of whether TDs are members of a big party to control for the fact that members of FF and FG are far more likely to face significant intra-party competition in general elections than members of the (traditionally) smaller parties. This is done to avoid confusing the effects of intra-party competition with the effects of being a representative of either FF or FG. Experience of elections and the length of time spent as a TD seek to capture the incumbency effect usually, in Irish politics, people who get elected are very good at staying elected. 28

33 TDs formal positions in the Dáil are included to capture the time that these positions may take away from their constituency role. Certain characteristics of a constituency may also have a bearing on the amount of constituency work performed by TDs from that district. These can be divided into political and non-political attributes. Non-political attributes include population density, the geographical size of the constituency, the distance from Dublin of the constituency, the degree of broadband penetration (people with access to broadband may feel more empowered in dealing with the state services and not demand that their local TDs provide such services), age profiles and educational profiles of constituents, and the levels of involvement in voluntary groups in the constituency. Political attributes of a constituency include the number of seats that are available in the constituency and the turnout of registered voters at the last election. A difficulty with discerning which factors matter in influencing TDs behaviour is that several of the factors that we are interested in are related to each other. For example TDs level of educational attainment tends to be related to their previous profession. Constituency size and broadband penetration levels tend to be related to the distance of the constituency from Dublin, and so on. As such, it is difficult to pick out which factors are driving the results. We employ a statistical technique called multivariate regression that allows us to estimate whether the impact of each variable is significant when the others are held constant. We use this approach in seeking to uncover what factors best explain variation in reported levels of constituency work among TDs who responded to the survey. Table 8 presents the results of this analysis displaying the attributes that we were able to say affected levels of constituency work with a high level of statistical confidence 1. 1 Our analysis effectively performs a test on each of the variables described above, and investigates whether or not that variable has any explanatory power in the levels of constituency service reported by TDs, when all others are held constant. Those factors that have a very low probability of being unrelated to the outcome in each case are deemed statistically significant. Selecting levels of certainty at which variables are deemed statistically significant is a rather arbitrary process, however in this analysis we follow the normal procedure in the political science literature, and adopt 95% confidence (or a maximum of a 5% probability that there is no relationship) as our cut-off point. Appendix D provides a full breakdown of the analysis on which table 8 is based. 29

34 It should be noted that this technique estimates the impact of each factor with error, and the statisticians adage that correlation does not prove causation should be borne in mind at all times. Also, a caveat should be attached here regarding the reliability of TDs responses as objective measures of their work schedule there may be systemic biases in TDs responses of which we are unaware. Nonetheless, our analysis does reveal some fascinating patterns in the levels of constituency work engaged in by TDs who responded to the survey. The variables not included in Table 8 could not be said to affect observed levels of constituency based work at the set confidence level. These were: TDs age, TDs educational attainment, TDs former occupation, TDs electoral and legislative experience, being a Committee Chair, Vice-Chair, or Party Spokesperson, the marginality of TDs most recent election, membership of a big party, the age, educational, broadband, voluntary, and turnout profiles of TDs constituencies, and the geographic size and population density of constituencies. Geography does appear to have some role to play, however, with the distance from Dublin of the TD s constituency being positively related to the levels of constituency-based activity that they engage in. That is, TDs appear to report higher levels of constituency-based work as the distance from Dublin of their constituency increases. This is borne out if we look at the figures presented in Table 9. There appears to be a relationship between distance from Dublin and levels of constituency work. On average, as a TD s constituency is farther away from Dublin, they spend higher proportions of time engaged in constituency-based work than a TD whose constituency is less than 100 km from Dublin. One simple explanation here is that TDs may include travelling time to and from the constituency when calculating the proportion of their time engaged in constituency work. It is also interesting to see that there is not a constant upward trend in the relationship between distance from Leinster House and the average level of constituency work, but rather a critical point of 100 km. Overall, however, TDs who live farther than this from Leinster House do appear to engage in an above average amount of constituency work. Regardless of the electoral system, TDs holding some ministerial rank will likely do less constituency work, given the time constraints associated with such appointments, and our analysis bears this proposition out. Indeed, Ministers and Ministers of State are provided with official support in this regard. These findings are borne out further by not just looking at 30