27 January 2025
By Roger Kennedy
roger@TheCork.ie
Entertainment
Ireland could take a few pages from Australia’s political playbook. The two countries share a lot – historic commonwealth ties, cultural exchanges, and even a shared love of rugby – but when it comes to politics, Australia seems to have figured out a few things Ireland hasn’t. From voter turnout to checks and balances, there’s plenty Ireland could borrow to sharpen its democracy.
Single-Member Constituencies: A Clearer Chain of Responsibility
In Australia, each member of the House of Representatives serves a single constituency. It’s simple: one representative, one area, one chain of accountability. Voters know exactly who to blame if promises aren’t kept or local issues are ignored.
Ireland’s multi-seat constituencies muddy the waters. With several TDs (Teachtaí Dála) representing the same area, responsibility gets spread too thin, and voters are left guessing who’s actually looking out for them. A shift to single-member constituencies would force Irish politicians to focus on their districts and give voters a clear point of contact to hold accountable.
Compulsory Voting: Getting Everyone to the Ballot Box
Australia doesn’t mess around with voter turnout. Voting isn’t optional – it’s the law. That’s why elections consistently see over 90% turnout. Everyone’s voice gets heard, and the results reflect the whole population, not just the most engaged minority.
Ireland, on the other hand, struggles with turnout. People show up for the big referendums, but general elections? Not so much. Compulsory voting could fix that. Sure, it would spark debates about freedom of choice, but the benefits are hard to ignore. If Just Casino can get gamblers to engage through incentives, surely a system that nudges citizens to the polls could push Ireland toward a more representative democracy.
A Senate That Actually Does Something
Australia’s Senate isn’t just a talking shop – it’s a real counterweight to the government. It can block or amend legislation, forcing genuine debate and preventing the lower house from bulldozing through laws unchecked.
Ireland’s Seanad? Not so much. Its powers are limited, and critics often question its relevance. Reforming the Seanad to give it real teeth could ensure better oversight and more balanced governance. A stronger upper house could also give minority voices a platform, helping Ireland avoid the “groupthink” that sometimes dominates its politics.
Shorter Election Cycles: Keeping Politicians on Their Toes
In Australia, federal elections happen every three years. That’s quick – maybe too quick – but it keeps politicians on their toes. They don’t have time to get complacent because voters are always around the corner, ready to judge their performance.
Ireland’s five-year cycles offer stability, but they also give politicians room to drift. Shortening the cycle – maybe to four years – would strike a better balance. Politicians would stay more responsive to voters without sacrificing long-term planning.
Checks and Balances: Keeping Power in Check
Australia’s system is all about balance. The Senate, often controlled by smaller parties or independents, acts as a counterweight to the government. No one party gets to dominate, and every piece of legislation faces real scrutiny.
Ireland’s system leans heavily toward the government. When one party – or a coalition – controls both the Dáil and the Seanad, dissenting voices struggle to get a word in. Strengthening checks and balances would keep power from pooling in one place. More oversight, more transparency, and more space for opposition parties would go a long way toward improving accountability.
Final Thoughts
Australia’s system isn’t perfect, but it gets a lot right. Its focus on accountability, voter participation, and balanced governance offers a roadmap for Ireland. Adopting some of these practices wouldn’t just modernize Irish politics – it might actually make people trust the system again.