Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On behalf of the committee, I welcome Dr. Shana Cohen and Mr. Tiarnán McDonough of TASC Ireland, the think-tank for action of social change. Today's discussion will be on citizens' attitudes to democracy and the rule of law. I thank them both for joining us today in one of our final meetings as a committee.

Before their opening statement, I will go through the note on privilege.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name, or in such a way as to make him, her or it, identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue your remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings.

With that done, I call Dr. Cohen to make her opening statement.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

First, both Tiarnán McDonough and I thank the committee for the invitation. TASC was founded in 2001. Since then, we have been engaged in research and public education aimed at strengthening democratic institutions and accountability mechanisms. We also try to understand public perceptions of the health of democracy in Ireland and the EU. In response to the committee's request for information about citizens’ attitudes to democracy and the rule of law, we will present findings from our work in this area over the last 20 years, including insights on how to build greater democratic resilience considering the threats to democracy in Europe and beyond.

In 2005, TASC conducted a democratic audit of 1,200 adults aged 15 and older with Lansdowne Market Research. At the time, we found that attitudes toward democracy were more positive than in other European countries, as 70% of respondents reported being satisfied or very satisfied with the way democracy was developing. In contrast, approximately 50% of respondents reported the same in Europe. Greater equality was considered a democratic value in the survey, as 38% of respondents regarded the most important feature of democracy as "a more equal society". By comparison, 10% responded that "voting for governments in elections" was the most important feature of democracy and 5% of respondents reported that a "free market economy" was an important feature of democracy. More than 90% of respondents favoured enshrining social rights in law, such as universal rights to education, healthcare and housing for homeless people. Two out of every three respondents supported extending these rights to non-citizen residents here. This survey was conducted almost 20 years ago, but in our more recent, qualitative research conducted over the last five to six years pre-Covid and post-Covid, we have noted parallel findings.

Social class remains a major determinant of satisfaction in democracy. In the national audit I cited, those in the highest socioeconomic grouping were more likely to report high levels of satisfaction with democracy compared with those in the lowest category. In the survey, respondents felt that the interests of business owners and managers were the best represented in the Dáil, and that the interests of people living in disadvantaged areas were the least represented. When we asked which groups were treated most unfairly in within Irish society, the most frequently mentioned group in the audit was people living in disadvantaged communities, followed by people with disabilities. The group that people were most likely to say were treated worse than they had been five years previously were people in disadvantaged communities, at 40% and carers, at 30%. These findings suggest that in Ireland, as in other EU countries, not addressing inequality has knock-on effects for trust in politics, policymakers and the policymaking process.

Someone told me recently the Government does not trust working class communities, and residents of these communities feel like they are ignored and disrespected. Councils would prefer to engage with middle-class charity staff representing these areas, rather than directly with the people who live there. Comparative data on political trust collected by the OECD in 2023 shows that in Ireland there is a wider gap in levels of trust in national government between those who report having concerns about their own financial well-being when compared with the OECD average. People in Ireland who feel financially insecure are more distrustful of national Government in comparison with other wealthy OECD countries. This disaffection is pervasive across income brackets. It is not just financial discomfort among the most disadvantaged communities, but also in higher income brackets. Recent research we have conducted in disadvantaged areas has found little interest in voter registration and engagement with politics. In our research, we found distrust and disinterest in the political process and political parties in particular. The distrust is particularly acute in disadvantaged areas, but that does not mean it is only disadvantaged areas.

Research in 2019 with young people in the top 10% income bracket in Ireland, Spain and the UK found that Irish interviewees exhibited the least interest in party politics and the most disaffection with Government. The causes of this alienation are lack of tangible impact in their lives from policymaking and a lack of contact with politicians themselves.

In 2023, after Covid, we spoke to young people living in disadvantaged communities in east Limerick and parts of Dublin about their feelings of trust in politics and democracy. Some of the people we contacted did not understand how and why we would expect them to be interested in politics. Echoing the findings of our democracy audit 20 years ago, in the focus groups and interviews in this research done last year, politicians were viewed as largely interested in personal benefit and remaining in office and not in listening to the concerns of young people, particularly those with experience of socioeconomic disadvantage. The only exception to this was when politicians responded to personal problems. We found that most of the people we talked to during our research last year, and this year in another project, consumed news through social media platforms, making them more vulnerable to misinformation and disinformation, although they reported not necessarily trusting the news they read on social media.

We are currently conducting research in Poppintree, Ballymun for our people’s transition project, which is bringing together community development, participatory democracy and climate action. According to data compiled by Compass Informatics on behalf of Pobal, Poppintree is an area of growing deprivation, with more neighbourhoods classed as very or extremely disadvantaged in the latest census. This represents a deterioration between 2016 and 2022. Preliminary findings from a survey conducted in the area show that more than 95% of respondents reported that they felt changes were needed in their local area but less than 20% felt that they had the power to make changes. I am citing this example as it shows that without tangible change, there is greater disaffection with democracy. There is a greater sense of capacity to make a change, even through voting. Among respondents, residents and community activists were the most trusted to make positive change, and the media and civil servants were the least trusted. There is obviously a gap between the residents of this area and the Government.

In our work at TASC, we have responded to this disaffection through focusing on producing results from our research, expanding public education and enabling young people in particular to participate in policy research. For the people’s transition, we target communities facing complex challenges, spending months listening to resident concerns and then build partnerships to seek funding for projects for our work to produce a concrete impact for the area. It is different from just a consultation. We have also created an open government toolkit and a deliberative democracy toolkit designed to encourage more knowledge and engagement with Government. Our objective is to reduce the gap between the public and politicians and to demonstrate that democracy works for everyone, a premise predicated on tangible change.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank both of our witnesses for their written contribution. I feel a little bit nostalgic, because this will be my last committee meeting of any kind after 42 years in the Oireachtas. I am going to be conceited enough to believe that I have some understanding of the workings of democracy, not only as a representative for 42 years, but being dependent, on very regular intervals, on testing my connection with the people by putting my name on a ballot paper, which is the most direct way. As my friend and colleague, President Michael D. Higgins, said to test the love of the people is an important part of seeing how popular one is. I am struck by a number of things Dr. Cohen said. First, she said someone told her recently that the Government does not trust working class communities. It is a very profound statement, but I do not think it is representative. Some of us are in daily contact with working communities.

My constituency office is in the heart of working-class Wexford. I deal with the problems of FAB Community and Family Resource Centre, which deals with the most vulnerable people in the community. Obviously, I am not a representative of the Government but there is an intimacy between politicians in Ireland that is almost unique, in my experience. This is because of our electoral system which requires people to put a mark directly opposite a named candidate, as opposed to voting for a list - which is in the control of a political party - or simply voting for a party. In general terms, from experience, I would challenge the assertion that there is a disconnect. One of the purposes of this discussion - which unfortunately will not be a series because of the timing - is to look at not so much, disconnection from politics. Again, in my experience, young people in particular are much more focused on issues than the bland question of whether they are interested in politics. They are not interested in party politics by and large or politics per se but if we went out on the streets today and asked people if they were interested in what is happening in Gaza, I think we would get very strong responses. That is politics and what is happening there is a political issue. Another example is what is happening to the climate. Young people are very animated about this issue and I hear them, see them and speak to them all the time about it. This is in opposition to the bland question of politics qua politics.

The real issue I want to get Dr. Cohen's perspective on is this. We have discerned, across Europe and probably across the world, a noticeable change in public attitudes, post Covid. Something has changed with the rise of the right and the questioning of truth, the establishment of alternative truth and people cocooning themselves in their own perspective, to be reinforced. The question for democratic politics is how do we overcome that.

Finally, this is an observation rather than a question. I was speaking to my colleague in the European Parliament yesterday. He is still shocked that the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, made a completely reactionary speech to the European Parliament and 200 Members stood up to applaud him. That is almost one third of the membership. Ideas about how we come to grips with that new phenomenon is what I hope would come from these discussions.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

The Deputy is completely right that there are multiple, even contradictory trends going on. There is significant trust in individual politicians who people know and with whom they have developed a relationship. Everything I have heard in the seven and a half years I have been in Ireland is that this is unique. It is certainly different from what I have seen in the UK, which is much more party focused. At the same time, there is a disaffection with the party system. Especially in areas of significant disadvantage and working-class communities like the Deputy represents, many people question what the local council, the Government or the party system is doing for them. They do not see rapid or even long-term change that they have confidence in. That is propelling disaffection and it has opened a space for the far right. I previously worked in a community that now has a far-right councillor who is a local resident. Several of them who ran in the last local election but there was only one successful candidate. However, there is enough momentum that multiple people think they have an opportunity to succeed electorally. They are from the area and they deliberately spread disinformation. They generate trust because they say they are going to make things happen for people. They emphasise that they are from the area and that they understand local people and listen to them. Even if it does not come true, this is a message that people want to hear and so they listen to it and take a chance on the person because they know and trust the person and they hope that some things will change.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They were not very successful in either the European or local elections in Ireland but yet, people had those fears. In terms of election results, Dr. Cohen has cited two but of the elections across the country the far right was a tiny fraction of elected members.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

Yes, the Deputy is right but I think they have more impact on the ground than their electoral success would suggest. From spending time in communities, I would say they have more influence because they are constantly on social media. They are generating misinformation about migrants, asylum seekers, direct provision recipients or whatever they are trying to rip up. They may only hold one seat on Dublin City Council but that does not mean that their influence is not outsized for the representation they have, especially in a local area.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

From the people I have talked to, I am not sure if it is necessarily a distrust of democracy. I think it is just a disconnect with politics and I differentiate between the two. It is not necessarily that people are going to say that they want an authoritarian regime or to be governed by a fascist, although there are elements of that. I think it is more that people feel that the political class is not responding fast enough or taking them seriously enough, as residents of Ireland or constituents. There are questions of voter turnout or engagement. I interviewed a person in an area of north Dublin who held a voter-registration session and only three people showed up. She thought that perhaps people were registering online. There is also the point that the way social housing was constructed makes it difficult for politicians to canvass during election season because it is hard to get in to the housing complexes.

The connection with the political class is more the issue. It may differ on an individual basis, but what we have seen as the problem is more about bridging this gap. It is not necessarily that these people do not believe in democracy, voting or being represented. They want people to listen to them. They want their voices heard and to see a response.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is an issue right across the board. What is democracy? If it is just about elections, we can look at the example in America and the requirements that must be met to be a candidate for president. It is the same at the lower levels if we were to talk about the Senate and Congress races and the lobby groups involved. I am not entirely sure this is exactly what anyone in Greece, where the concept originated, or anyone else exactly meant by democracy. There is always an element of this relating to everything. Democracy has to be more than even elections. If we are talking about working-class areas, it is about the engagement of State services across the board. It is not just politics. Sometimes politics is only as good or as weak as some of us in the room, and others, and how much we engage.

We all know that drugs are a major issue, for example, and particularly so in large urban working-class areas. People are dealing with a large element of what has become very normalised in this context, from drug debt intimidation and so on. The political process is not offering people in those areas any solutions on a day-to-day basis. I get this. That is one thing. There is an absolute failing and when we fail people, we leave them open to whatever else might result.

The witnesses dealt with social media platforms. Our only hope in this regard is that all of it changes in the near future, which could be in the next year or two. We hope moves will be made in this context. We are up against entities with more resources than half the economies of the world. Advertising works, though. If people get messages that resonate with them emotionally, they will buy into them. Deputy Howlin said something changed during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some people got worked up about several issues and whole communities were created in this fashion. Now, sometimes on these particular issues, the people involved did not manage to get traction outside of them. On the issue of migration, they have, in the sense that people are now aware of the local hotel that has been taken over and other issues. Politics failed to deal with this and to say here is how the system works, here are the issues and this is how we are addressing them. This is just the way it is. There is an element where this situation has impacted on the whole of politics. It has impacted on the Government but also on the political collective. We failed to address all these issues and therefore we left the space open for others.

The social media companies have been utterly disgraceful regarding what they allow on their platforms. I am not necessarily talking about disinformation; I am just talking about idiots who are shouting and screaming, and who suddenly go viral and keep people online. They make money out of it, so it is happy days for them. That does have an impact. That is all well and good because these are the problems on some level and they need to be addressed. The question is how we can deal with this issue. We must have an audit of the need out there and address the existing issues. We could be talking about everything from health deficits right through to the supports families need, which require that we facilitate people and ensure they do not fall onto the wrong track. We must ensure they can get into education and the workforce. We must also deal with the underlying issue of poverty. Again, I get that none of this is straightforward. I have this real issue here.

In fairness to the witnesses, they have put out the questions. They have some of the questions. We are not asking the correct questions at times, but finding the answers is even more difficult. The witnesses have pointed out several things that are wrong. There was the disengagement with working-class communities. The issue concerning social media was spoken of. The disengagement from the political process and whatever else was observed. The issue now is how we can widen the level of engagement. It means there has to be much more emphasis from us on how disengagement happens. Addressing this problem, however, will require resources and this will be especially the case in working-class areas. The reality is that we have not put those resources into those areas.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

One of the things we have consistently found in our research is that the decline of a town's centre has a political impact. It is about the lack of spaces for people to meet. That issue has come up across the generations. It is not older people, but also younger people. They feel like they want to be in a place that is aesthetically pleasing, where they can go out and enjoy themselves and feel good about living there. It is not just the case in working-class communities, but it is particularly the case in those areas. It is about being able to go to shops, having trees in an area and the whole area looking pretty. That may seem kind of simplistic, but the political impact of something like that would be quite strong. We need to have an alternative mode of communication besides WhatsApp groups, Instagram or TikTok. We have found that face-to-face interaction is the strongest alternative. People need to be with people they trust, talk to them and know they will be given a straight answer. This is the most effective counter to whatever information people are getting on social media.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. Cohen. I call Senator Keogan.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the witnesses for their presentation. It is always good to get information back from people engaging with communities with regard to democracy and attitudes towards democracy in the country. Things are changing globally. Things are changing massively on an EU level. If we were to look at the changes that have taken place from 2024 right back to 2019 and the data we have been given, we can see that there has been a rise in respect of Eurosceptics and the centre-right parties coming into politics.

The witnesses have given us one view regarding attitudes and disadvantaged areas and what is considered to be a disadvantaged area and a working-class area. Much of our country now is actually working class. I worry about the gap that exists between the citizen and the power balance. This is something we need to engage more on. Those of us working on the ground would certainly not be distanced from what citizens want. There is that distance certainly when it comes to the European Parliament. There is the distance from the system. Very few people know the value of what the European Parliament can bring to local and national democracy. There is a distance there and the gap needs to be met. How we do this is a challenge for each and every one of us.

Regarding "the rise of the far right", I do not like that term. It is a throw-out label for people who have a different view to that of others. We need to engage more. A comment was made by Deputy Howlin regarding Viktor Orbán who holds the EU Presidency and how people got up and applauded. It must be realised that he is a democratically elected member of the European Union and does have a large number of representatives who believe in his message and in what they are trying to do. It is not good for democracy to shut out somebody like that. It is always good to sit around the table to try to understand what their needs are and to see if we can meet them. This is extremely important.

How do we engage more with citizens to ensure they can believe they are very much part of the process when it comes to democracy and are relevant? The erosion of sovereignty is another issue that the ordinary citizen has.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

Just judging from survey data and our qualitative research, local government in Ireland is historically fairly weak but particularly so since the financial crisis. One point we found consistently is that there is a distrust of local government. More importantly, there is a desire for a stronger local government. Within Ireland that would have a significant impact. People want to be able to engage more with their councillors but also to see Dublin City Council have the capacity to initiate improvements in areas faster.

The appeal of a strong leader, regardless of their political beliefs is that they are promising they can strip past all the bureaucracy, the "deep state" or whatever they want to call it, and effect change. It is the idea that somebody is going to come and improve my life and I will not have to wait for another consultation, regeneration plan or some promise of investment, but it is going to happen because this person is promising me political strength. That has an appeal if you are in an area where you have waited a long time, you have participated in various consultations and they have not led to anything, and you are faced with a weak local government that has limited capacity to instigate changes that are fairly quick rather than long term, like ten or 15 years.

One community in north Dublin that I was doing work with said they had been asking for a community centre for 12 years and they are still waiting for a response on it. That obviously generates frustration and impatience. The community had been given an apartment in one of the buildings in a social housing complex but they want a real community centre. There is constant lobbying, negotiating and pushing the council to achieve some sort of response but that does not help. If somebody is comes along and says "I am going to do this for you because I am strong", then maybe they will trust that person to do it.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is Dr. Cohen saying that strong leadership does not exist within local government?

Dr. Shana Cohen:

It is not that; it is just the fact that people want more rapid changes. It is not that strong leadership does not exist. If Senator Keogan is asking about the general appeal of a leader who wants to consolidate authority in the executive, then the appeal of that kind of person is that you think they can create some sort of stability and security in your life, through a process, so that you are not waiting for change. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but that is one explanation for the appeal of that kind of leader. On the other hand, sometimes the length of time it takes for something to happen in a local area, predictably, generates frustration. That is the issue.

Sharon Keogan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

While I agree with Dr. Cohen, I do not believe what she says is true. I believe that within local democracy, there is very strong leadership from councillors throughout this country. That is why individuals top the poll all of the time. It is because they are delivering. It can be a councillor who drives projects across the line. I have seen it in many communities throughout this country, be they from parties or Independents. Strong leadership is very important when people are voting. If somebody says they can do something, they can deliver and they have a track record of delivery, people will continue to vote for those individuals who are strong leaders. Those strong leaders do exist within communities.

I totally disagree with Dr. Cohen that an individual cannot deliver within local government. My colleagues around this table have extremely active county councillors throughout the country who are delivering individual projects within their own communities. I refer to the community centres, recreational parks and facilities, and health centres if they are members of a health forum. There is a lot people can do with strong leadership. Sometimes it does take strong leadership to get through all the red tape that exists within local government or national government.

We need strong leadership and it very much exists in local government currently, not in all communities but in certain communities around the country where there are very many active, strong, Independent and party councillors driving projects. That is why they top the polls again and again in their communities. My colleagues might disagree with me on that but I believe there is a lot of strong leadership within local government. More needs to be done on how we get the citizen to engage when it comes to European citizenship.

Mr. Tiarnán McDonough:

I just want to add a little bit to what Dr. Cohen was saying in terms of what we know, comparatively and internationally. Trust in local government tends to be low across OECD countries. It is similar in Ireland, where it is among the lowest. Trust in institutions is one of the few areas where we are below the OECD average. We tend to be about the OECD average or a little bit above and this is the one area where we are below. Ireland is very much in line with OECD averages and we know from similar data that the biggest gap between those who trust the Government and those who do not is due to whether people feel they have a voice. That is the biggest determinant.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Mr. McDonough. I will move on to Deputy Harkin.

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was delayed, so I apologise for that. I also have to leave because I am speaking in the Chamber in a few minutes. I thank the witnesses for their presentation. I have quickly scanned the report but I will not pretend I have read it because I have not. I have listened carefully to what they have said. I have a few thoughts and a few questions.

When I came in, I heard it said that current debates on immigration, etc., have opened space for the far right. One of the reasons that has happened is that the centre right and the right are being hollowed out. If somebody tries to identify as centre right or right, they tend to be labelled as far right. I have seen that happen.

I spent 15 years in the European Parliament and I saw how the balance of power was there. In the 15 years I spent there, up to 2019, the centre, as such, held power. It was centre left. Even the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker, perhaps because I did not really know his background, initially, I thought he might be centre or centre right but he was quite socialist. I agreed with much of what he proposed. That has held the ground but what has happened to some extent – because it is changing and it has changed here – is that those who expressed what three or four years ago we would have called centre right or right views were immediately pushed into the far right because that space was gone. That debate was closed down to some extent. To question in a respectful and reasonable way sometimes was seen as being far right.

Even if we look at the Government's stance on something like immigration, we see in the last six months, never mind before that, quite a change in tone and emphasis, and in what is being said. In that context, we blame social media and lots of outside forces, but sometimes we need to look at ourselves to see how the system is helping to create the far right. People do feel excluded. That is just one part of it. I understand there is a lot more.

The second point is about the disconnect with politics.

People feel excluded. This comes back to the fact that there are assumptions on the part of politicians, myself included, that because we are elected, we represent the people. We do, but we do not represent all of the people all of the time. No politician or party can do that. Sometimes decisions are taken on the assumption that they reflect the will of the people and sometimes they are not. We have seen examples recently with referendums, the hate speech Bill, etc.

As politicians, we need to be careful that we do not jump too far ahead. It is not that there is a disconnect; there is, but the last thing we want to do is make it worse. We are not careful enough about that some of the time. Social media can and does amplify false narratives time and time again, but it is also a channel for those people who feel their concerns are not reflected. This does not mean that what they want happens all the time but that their concerns are not reflected whether it is by local or national government. Five years ago, when I was in the European Parliament, people would ask me why there is no far right party in Ireland. The reason I gave, rightly or wrongly, was that we have a programme at quarter to two in the afternoon, hosted by Mr. Joe Duffy, where people can come on air and talk, vent and say what they feel, and they know most of the country is listening to them, or quite a number of people. I felt that was a pressure valve or release for people because they felt at least they were being heard to some extent. Of course, social media has changed all that now.

Dr. Cohen is right about decline of town centres and the negative impact this has. It is not just for towns and villages, it is also for communities across the country in which there is no social space for people to allow them to feel connected to their own place and to people who have similar interests. It is not that we have no such spaces here; we do. However, the communal town centre space has been hollowed out. If the next Government was to do anything to try to bridge the gap we are speaking about this morning, that is one of the things it should take a serious look at.

I spent 15 years in the European Parliament. If there was one thing I tried to do, it was to connect whatever legislation we were dealing with to people's concerns. In other words, if it was something about carers, we linked it to carers. If it was something about workers' rights, we linked it to people who were interested in workers' rights. If it involved some international perspective, whether it was Gaza or whatever, we tried to bring that message back. That is a role for politicians, but it is a huge one. Of course, I was an independent, so maybe I had a freer hand than some others. I am not saying that is better or worse; I am just saying it is different. I found that I could make that work some of the time. That is my opinion.

Finally, in the context of local government being weak, I attended a meeting on Monday night - it does not matter what the issue was, but it is an issue that has gone on for 20 years - and almost everybody agreed that consultation is a box-ticking exercise. I remember somebody once describing it as the illusion of inclusion. That is exactly what it is. People make their concerns known, but rarely does this have a material impact on what happens; sometimes, but rarely. People hear all this talk about how we will have a consultation or whatever. In general, a consultation involves local authority officials or whomever turning up to tell people what is going to happen. They would be better off not doing that because it insults people's intelligence. Most people who go to these events understand the situation. If we are going to talk about consultation, we have to have meaningful consultation or we do not pretend, because the pretence, to me, is what drives people bananas. They know there are being taken for fools and being asked to turn up when they would be better off at home. We need to look at that. Either make it meaningful and let people know the level at which it is meaningful or just say that the officials, elected members or whomever take the decisions and not pretend. I know we have European legislation to comply with all of that but to me, that is one of the biggest issues.

Finally, and this time I mean finally because I see Deputy Howlin is-----

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not normally expound.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I used to have a colleague who gave his memoir title Finally and In Conclusion because he said that a lot.

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He was a great colleague.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes.

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In Ireland, we have not managed to find a space between participative democracy and representative democracy. We say we have, but we have not because representative democracy to some extent - I will not say what the extent is, I will let other people judge that - but it tends to be determined by someone saying "I delivered this for you". Participative democracy is where local communities, groups or whatever work with their elected representatives to try to design the best outcome, and they are part of it. That is a real tension. There is just one question I want to ask from all of this because to me this is really important. How does Dr. Cohen see that we can marry participative democracy and representative democracy is such a way that it will close some of the gaps we are talking about here, recognising the reality of the challenges faced by politicians with re-election and that kind of thing but equally, the challenges faced by communities where their input has to mean something?

Dr. Shana Cohen:

That is an excellent question. It points to the fundamental issues we are talking about in our work. I agree with the comment that the term "far right" is just an easy label that people are throwing out right now. It is more for people who are deliberately contesting the way politics works, and they do not mind using misinformation to do it and they do not mind stirring up trouble. That is the way they build their base. I have heard that repeatedly in the context of the qualitative research I have done with people just deliberately ignoring science and facts. Then, however, there is a real issue, and this addresses the Deputy's point. People ask why asylum seekers are being placed in their community when they do not have enough public services and they are already being ignored and dealing with poverty and economic insecurity. It could be food or energy poverty, and addiction was mentioned earlier. They ask why their community was chosen in which to put a number of asylum seekers, and why they were not put in Blackrock or Clontarf. People could say they are being racist, but it is more that they want to know why someone did not come and talk to them and invest in the community at the same time this was being done. That is the participative democracy element, and that is what links it to representative democracy.

Another issue is civic education. We found there is not enough understanding of the policy-making process and this leads to questions about why it takes so long or it being another consultation that will not lead anywhere. The foundation of civic education could be improved, particularly in areas where schools are already stretched in terms of resources. Just a small investment in civic education would have a big impact. Speaking to communities or having more of a structured process for participation would help quite a lot. I totally agree there are effective individual politicians. It is more the structure of the system that is the issue. There are individual politicians who go to the mat for their communities and will get something done but it is more that the structure is distrusted. There is a differentiation between the individual politician and the way the system works. There needs to be more education about the way the system works and there also need to be a better system.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have covered so much and it has been a very discursive type of meeting. There are a few areas I would like to speak about but I will not go on at great length because we all could and I am very conscious of time. There are a couple of areas which I think are important. I really have a problem with this notion that the use of the term "far right" is a throwaway thing. It is not. There are people involved who are in politics, there are people involved who are elected, there are governments that are in power, and it is the job of people who oppose this, who are also involved in politics and have a very different view, to be willing to make their view clear and to label stuff that is unacceptable.

If people, regardless of whether or not they are the democratically elected government of a country, are behaving in a way that is totally unacceptable to you, I believe that you, if you are an elected representative, have an obligation to call this out, whether this is at international level in terms of someone conducting a military operation that borders on being war crime, if not an actual war crime, whether it is within the European Union, or whether it is people using their position and status, as Dr. Cohen correctly alluded to, to invent their own facts and peddle simplistic solutions to what are very complex problems. There is the middle ground, absolutely, between the people who have a right-of-centre view and left-of-centre view, and it is wrong to label everybody, but in not being willing to try to go down this route you cannot and should not shy away from the fact there is an obligation on politicians in the centre, for the sake of democracy, to call out governments, people in power and people seeking power.

I have a problem with some of what Dr Cohen said about communities and participation in democracy because I do not accept some views. There are people who will always say, "If you did this, well then" or "If this was here, well then" but the reality is you could consult until the cows come home and provide every facility in the world but if people do not like what is happening they will object. Sometimes it is the job of representatives to not just pander to this but to understand that sometimes there can be a greater good. Sometimes in politics part of the art of representing your greater community, and representing an enlarged number of people, is that you have to be willing to do something that is not going to be specifically popular at the moment when you do it. What is often done by groups that target a particular viewpoint is that they play to the idea that "if only we had participative democracy" or "if only we had this", then we would get a different outcome. At a certain point this has to be challenged. Participating in democracy is vital, it is really important, but so is leadership and so is representing the fact that certain decisions that governments and local authorities make are made in the best interests of a community and a greater community. All delivery cannot be done immediately. The world we would like to see cannot be done. There are real challenges. When it comes to the balance between representative and participative, it is very important that we recognise the other aspect to it, which is that what might be the correct immediate solution in terms of participative democracy for one community can have huge impacts.

I want to pick up on another point. Whether it is at European level, national level or wherever, we need to have greater feed-in from the community where views are held, in terms of influencing policy. Occasionally this disconnect is really fed by people feeling they are not listened to. This still does not mean that just because you listen, you are obligated. You will hear views which you diametrically disagree with. I do not agree as a public representative, and no matter what level of participation I am involved in I will not agree, with the views Viktor Orbán would annunciate or the people who support him would annunciate. I am never going to agree and I am very proud of the fact I will not agree with them. We must be willing to listen but we should be cognisant at all times that sometimes there is a greater good. These are just a couple of thoughts. I probably have not phrased them that well but I wanted to make the point.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I want to make a couple of points and we can be very discursive. I want to comment on the strong point that Deputy Harkin made on representative democracy, participative democracy and consultation. My experience is that people argue and, as the point has been made by the Cathaoirleach, when they seek consultation they mean "accept my view". It is not consultation; it is "Accept my view. I object to this. I do not want this to happen". If you do not accept their view the consultation is a failure but that is not what consultation is. There must be a decision-making process. As Dr. Cohen said, one of the frustrations is endless bureaucracy and endless talking about things because people do not want to make a decision. We see this again and again and it is more difficult at local authority level because it is more intimate than it is the Dáil. Politicians may get 200 emails. While this is not that many from among the general electorate, it particularly impacts on politicians at local level. I have always admired people who listen to people arguing for their position and then make a decision, as opposed to somebody who is afraid to make a decision for fear of offending somebody and affecting their electorate. It is a real issue.

Many moons ago as Minister for the environment I produced a document on better local government. It was an effort to involve communities in local authority decision making. The structure I devised at the time was to have strategic policy committees chaired by an elected member but with participants of the sector of the community interested in that particular policy, for example, local housing associations would be on housing committees and local art centres and local theatre groups would be on culture committees. They would collectively be involved in the decision making. This has never been implemented, which is a regret. I hope there will be a review of local government and we go back to this. The idea in the document was to have a director of service who would help the strategic policy committee and its chair in the same way as a chief executive of a board. The policy would be presented to the monthly meeting by the chair of the committee. This does not happen. The directors of service do the presentations. The democratic side was never fully developed. Dr. Cohen may well agree with me that this re-empowerment of the elected side of local democracy is very important.

The final, less positive point I would make is that it suits many members that this is the situation and that they are not the ones leading the policy because then they can decry the policy if they think it might impact on them negatively electorally. These are the vagaries of democracy that we have to live with. As the old adage has it, what is worse than democracy is everything else. We need to perfect it all of the time. We have tried it through freedom of information legislation, the registering of lobbyists, and knowing what is happening in a democracy but reform of our democratic systems should be permanently on our agenda.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I invite our witnesses to make a final contribution.

Dr. Shana Cohen:

I agree. I was not aware of that recommendation but it makes sense. One of the things we found in our research is that the activist base in a lot of communities is ageing and is not being replaced by younger members, particularly in areas of disadvantage but also across the board. That, in itself, is becoming a more urgent issue, to involve younger generations in their communities and in participation in some kind of democratic engagement. For most people whom we have talked to, democracy is a participatory process. It is not voting. It is something more. They want to constantly have their voice heard and they want something to happen. It does not have to be a big project. It could just be a small response, but it is to show that their voice is being heard and that somebody has responded to it because they have acknowledged that they are important. In the context of issues like housing, insufficient transport, length of commutes, cost of living and so on, people want the momentum to keep going and to feel that the authorities are doing the best they can and that they really welcome people's participation in the democratic process. That has been fundamental in all of our work, regardless of who the people are and where they live.

I completely agree with the Deputy about the importance of standing up for what you believe in and not letting the ground become slippery under people whose views you do not think are acceptable. I did not find, albeit in qualitative research involving a small sample, an inclination to share a lot of the extreme views on the right or, rather, the far right. In terms of the extremism of the positions and the manipulation of issues for political benefit, because people are facing so many pressures in their daily lives, there is a manipulation of that space by particular political figures. There is also probably some sophisticated training and financing behind it. I would not say there is a large constituency for those viewpoints based on the work we have done. I just think they are taking advantage of the moment but it is right to stand up to it.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank our witnesses for their contributions and I also thank all members who participated today. As this is our last meeting, I also want to thank all of those who have participated at meetings throughout this committee's term. I also thank the secretariat and support staff for enabling us, as elected representatives, to work very well on this committee during this Dáil. We are not scheduled to have another meeting before the Hallowe'en break.