Should the brokerage work done by TDs be regarded more as a cause or a consequence of the weakness of the Dail vis-a-vis government, or are the two not related to each other?"

Résumé du document

Ireland was once qualified ‘a periphery dominated centre' (Garvin, 1981), or put differently, a political system in which the government is monopolized by local interests rather than national ones. For example, Irish Teachta De'las (TDs) spend most of their time protecting the interests of their constituency and constituents helping them with their welfare and administrative problems. This phenomenon has been described in the corresponding literature that has flourished in the second half of the 20th century as “clientelism” or, more accurately in the Irish case, as “brokerage”. How can this be explained? Norris (1997) identified the problem of the explanation of TDs' important constituency service as a real “puzzle” while other tried to identify the “push factors” that increased constituency effort by politicians and “pull factors” that decreased it (Heitshusen, Young, and Wood, 2005).

More precisely, the factor we propose to examine here refers to the relationship between TDs' constituency work and the weakness of the Irish Parliament. The latter is sometimes considered as a consequence and sometimes a cause of Irish brokerage. On one hand “there are some who believe that constituency work causes TDs to become distracted from their role as legislators, which is considered their real job” and so weaken the Dáil (O'Leary, 2011:343). On the other hand, Gallagher and Komito (2010:247) argue that “some TDs […] come to prioritize national policies, while others, who find their initial national-level goals to be unachievable to acquire a stronger local focus over time”.

Extraits

[...] “Much of what goes into legislative representation in industrialized democracies occurs outside of the legislature” (Heitshusen, Young, Wood, 2005:217). Clientelism is thus a phenomenon witnessed in every democracies, whether the Parliament is powerful or not. But it is important to insist of the fact that Irish brokerage is a particular case in the literature on clientelism, and that challenge to what are effectively fundamental components of the Irish political system may not be compatible with public and political opinion, which in many ways appreciates the benefits of brokerage”(Murphy, 2006:437). [...]

[...] and O'Shea M “Clientelism: facilitating rights and favours”. In: Adshead M. and Millar M (eds). Public administration and public policy in Ireland: theory and methods. London: Routledge. Komito, L Politics and Clientelism in Urban Ireland: Information, Reputation and Brokerage. Available at: http://ucd.ie/komito/thesis.htm Kelly V “Focus on clients: a reappraisal of the effectiveness of TDs interventions”, Administration, pp. 130–151. Chubb, B The Government and Politics of Ireland. London: Longwood, 3rd edition. [...]

[...] If constituency work is integral to the role of parliamentarian in Ireland, the problem remains about the amount of time TDs should devote to this in order to be still able to fulfill their national duties. Otherwise, TDs are “little more than messengers for local constituents, and the Executive as a dominant (almost sole) influence on every aspect of the legislature's business” (Murphy, 2006:442). Are TDs making more constituency effort because their power in the Dáil is limited, or is the Dáil weak because of the relative absence of TDs? If we believe the Irish Constitution the Dáil is a powerful assembly, but in practice there are some heavy constraints on parliamentary activity in Ireland[5]. [...]

[...] It doesn't mean necessarily that state of affairs is a problem which needs to be solved. On the one hand “constituency work should be embraced because it allows for awareness among TDs of the problems inherent in society, which can enhance their legislative duties” (O'Leary, 2011:341), and on the other hand Irish people appreciate the practice of brokerage. If weakness of the Dáil and constituency work are related, one cannot reduce though the practice of brokerage in Ireland to the lack of power of Irish parliamentarians. [...]

[...] “Despite enjoying what might be reasonably viewed as considerable powers, Dáil Éireann's exercise of these powers exposes the limits and constraints under which the institution operates” (Murphy, 2006:438). The role of French députés is seen by voters as “interceding with central government on behalf of individuals or councils, rather than as a legislator or watchdog over executive power or debater of the great issues of the (Frears, 1990:46). Wood and Young (1997) found that British MPs did just slightly less constituency work than Irish TDs. [...]