Electoral systems matter in determining election outcomes. Our system, which has been stable since the foundation of the State and practically unchanging since the 1930s, is now being put into the melting pot. The Electoral Commission, established in February, is a new independent statutory body. Its imminent report on Dáil constituency boundaries will provide for up to 20 more TDs and will be the biggest upheaval in the electoral map since the infamous Tullymander of the 1970s. That botched attempt at gerrymandering lives in infamy under the name of its architect, then local government minister Jim Tully.
Additional TDs are constitutionally required in a system where the Constitution mandates a Dáil seat for every 20,000-30‚000 of population. In a 20th century largely marked by declining population, that wasn’t an issue. Our population is growing at a rate of two TDs a year, which is a bounty we never reckoned with. A constitutional referendum on capping the number of Dáil seats is highly likely to be on the wider political agenda soon.
Independent boundary commissions have been the norm since 1977, but the new Electoral Commission is a beast of a different stripe. It is a permanent and systematic commission, not an ad-hoc body to consider only boundaries. One apparently modest power it enjoys is to agree to an annual research programme following consultation with the minister and relevant Oireachtas committee.
The Minister for Housing Darragh O’Brien has written to the commission asking it to review issues including the use of posters and the voting age, with consideration for the Scottish model, which allows a vote at 16. Those issues owe their prominence to the Green Party.
With 2024 set to be the hottest year ever, why have plans for climate spending been put on hold?
Sinn Féin is on the back foot but that does not mean the Government parties are over the line
Simon Harris is making Micheál Martin look like the status quo. This is a problem for Fianna Fáil
Gerard Howlin: We have learned nothing from the Celtic Tiger crash
The commission can additionally set its own agenda and is likely to consider six-seat constituencies (the norm is three, four or five seats). Unlike a change in the voting age, which requires a constitutional amendment, legislation can provide for larger constituencies. The Social Democrats and the Greens would support the move, as I suspect would small parties and independents generally. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael certainly wouldn’t. Where Sinn Féin, newly arrived as a much larger party, plants its flag remains to be seen.
The threshold for election to a Dáil seat in a six-seat constituency is about 14 per cent of the first preference vote, compared with 25 per cent in a three-seater. It is much more democratic. It would also address the conundrums that will be obvious when the Commission publishes its map for an enlarged Dáil.
Long-established boundaries will be broken, including county boundaries. Wexford, which was last divided in the 1918 election in the single seat, first-past-the-post Westminster system, is now too populous to remain a five-seater. The country must either be divided into two three-seaters, or a portion of south Wicklow put in with north Wexford to make a constitutionally compliant, but geographically and politically askance, constituency.
And so it will be around the country. In the 1923 election there were seven-, eight- and nine-seat constituencies, though curiously no six seaters, and larger constituencies continued until the 1930s.
Whether the commission includes in its forthcoming or future study programmes the issue of what is called district magnitude, or constituency size, is a matter for itself. It has been asked to consider voting rights in Dáil elections for 16-year-olds. The next general election will be fought on the current system, albeit within radically changed constituency boundaries. Changes around posters, and postal voting, another study request from the minister, could in theory apply before the local and European elections at the end of May next year.
The commission’s influence will soon be brought to bear. Lowering the voting age to 16 would require government support and a constitutional referendum. Neither is assured. But the consequence of either lowering the voting age to 16 or increasing the number of seats in constituencies is highly significant in terms of electoral outcomes.
The combination of both would be transformative but also unpredictable. It certainly would not suit the status quo electorally and majority-making would become more difficult.
The argument for extending the franchise is that it inculcates the habit of voting for life, at an earlier age. Given what else is legally permitted and the reality of life at 16 it is argued that it is incongruous to deny the vote. It would also rebalance the politics of an ageing society, where parties compete to dump obligations on the young, to schmooze the old.
Calls this week for mortgage interest relief provide a classic example of how the young and unhoused would be taxed to subsidise their elders. It is their elders who will decide, however, if the franchise should be extended, and they will do so in the secrecy of the ballot.
Bigger parties generally won’t want to help with electoral change that goes beyond housekeeping. But no big party can be in government without smaller ones. The catalyst for change in the electoral system would better opportunities for coalition. A century-long status quo could soon be over.
This article was edited at 1.25pm on August 11th. The commission is not preregistering 16-year-olds on the Electoral Register.