TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 13 °C Friday 24 May, 2013

Poll: Should the Presidential term of office be shortened to five years?

The matter is being considered by the Constitutional Convention today but what do you think?

Áras and Uachtaráin in the Phoenix Park (File photo)
Áras and Uachtaráin in the Phoenix Park (File photo)
Image: Niall Carson/PA Archive/Press Association Images

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION is holding its first full meeting today to consider the possibility of reducing the Presidential term of office from seven to five years.

It is just one of a number of constitutional reforms that the gathering of 66 members of the public and 33 politicians is considering along with the lowering of the voting age, abolishing the Seanad and other measures. Members will vote on issues and their outcome could eventually lead to a referendum of the Irish people on each issue.

While some argue that the Presidency needs little change given it’s relatively uncontroversial position in Irish society others argue that seven years, or 14 if a President serves two terms, is too long for one person to hold elected office.

But what do you think: Should the Presidential term of office be shortened to five years?


Poll Results:





Read: Convention to discuss lowering vote age and Presidential term

Read next:

Comments (102 Comments)

  • KMart 26/01/13 #

    Making it a 5 year term would possibly increase the number of ex presidents we have to pay a ludicrous pension to.

    Reply
  • Considering the last presidential election, once in seven years is enough.

    Reply
  • It’s fine as is – can’t see why changing it is necessary. It’s understandable running a four or five year term system if there’s a policy element; but there isn’t.

    Reply
  • CABK 26/01/13 #

    This idea is a waste of time. If we are happy to elect someone for five years, then why not just let them stay an extra two years and keep it at seven. It is not as if our president has any real powers. When a president does then shorter terms are a good idea in order to prevent them from consolidating their power and potentially turning the state authoritarian.

    As this is not an issue in Ireland the only real knock on effect of shorter presidential campaigns that I can see is more elections – and the associated waste in fliers and campaigning and more past presidents to pay out a larger pension to which we can hardly afford as it is.

    Reply
  • Surely our president is short enough!

    Reply
  • I voted yes but changed my mind. Can’t stand the thought of all the election hype every 5 years.

    Reply
  • 7 years, one term only, stand alone election, reform the nomination process and more freedom of speech/powers to the officeholder; these would be my preferences (the idea of the Convention is a very good one, giving citizens a voice in shaping reform).

    Reply
    • KMart 26/01/13 #

      Conor

      It gives citizens a chance to give their view on an agenda set by Gilmore and the likes.

      It gives Gilmore and co a chance to ponce around feeling important while ignoring the real issues!!

      Hardly a free forum for citizens to air their concerns.

      Reply
  • Honestly don’t see any good reason for shortening it. It is a token position and as such 7 years or 5 years make no difference, plus we have less pensions to pay this way.

    For the record. For those saying they wish McAleese was still there, I remember when she took over from Mary Robinson and hearing similar comments regarding how everyone wanted Robinson back. Michael D. holds himself, the office and this country to a very high standard and we should be delighted he got in over Gallagher (who bizarrely promised jobs and people believed him) and Norris (who had become too much of a roadshow).

    President Higgins is doing great stuff with youth groups and is looking to inspire more active citizens among them. He should be applauded for that and we should hope he succeeds.

    Reply
  • Shorten the term!! whatever!! Just don’t shorten the president , he’s short enough.

    Reply
  • Lengthen it. I want to see Yoda in office as long as possible!!

    Reply
  • dev 26/01/13 #

    Get rid of it altogether or make it a voluntary unpaid position. If you love your country it’s not about the money. Right?

    Reply
    • Julie 26/01/13 #

      No politician in power at moment or president, cares about the country it ALL about the money ! If it wasn’t Enda would slash his wage along with rest of party( only party suggesting that is SF, love their country) as for yoda what sickens me is the outright suffering and targeting by the government of the least well off and he does or says nothing ( Martin McGuinness wanted to stay and an average salary and hire people to do jobs in the Oireachtas with the rest if his wage, loves his country ) get the money drainers out and get in people that LOVE our country ! Makes sense like

      Reply
    • Great.idea

      Reply
    • It does have an executive role. Up to when the death penalty was repealed, the President would have signed the warrant or commuted it.

      Reply
  • It is the least of peoples worries today. If a president was in Office ten yeas I would not think they would notice. I would leave it at the present seven years. It is only a ceremonial role after all. It would be different if the President was actually head of Government. Like in USA. or France.. Leave well alone I say.

    Reply
    • The Presidential role is a Constitutional role, he is the Guardian of our Constitution. Legislation doesn’t come into force unless and until it is signed by the President. If the President and Council of State are ‘suspicious’ of the legislation being constitutional, it’s passed on to the Supreme Court for a final decision. That’s hardly a ceremonial role.

      Reply
  • Don’t shorten it. Scrap it. Ludicrous waste of money

    Reply
    • I wish McAleese was still President.

      Reply
    • Bo bo 26/01/13 #

      Yes shorten it. Unfortunately our current President is a disappointment. Every thing he says is about himself. “I did this, I have done that”… I was at a local opening that the President attended where he wizzed passed all the kids and parents who waited hours in the cold to meet him. It was polar opposite to the previous 2 ladies.I think he is a hark back to pre President Robinson days and the office is back to being a retirement home for aging politicians. The dynamism from the two Mary’s has gone from the highest office in our land. IMO.

      Reply
    • If some people were around 100 years ago, they’d be taken out and shot!
      Always rattling on about the Army and the Presidents office been a ‘waste of money’
      People died so to gain these positions. People fought (and died) for independence and civilisation and the Republic.
      And we, the 21st century screwball with everything at our beck & call want to scrap things willy nilly..
      Have we lost our spirit on this island or are we back to where we seemingly started? ‘Eating poison Apple?’

      Reply
    • i think its short enough as it is…. is he even five foot???? (ill get my coat)

      Reply
    • Glorified diplomat. Waste of tax payers money. Move the Taoiseach into the aras, and cut his pay. They always say the high salary makes up for not getting a house. Problem solved.

      Reply
    • At boy russell, current and past governments have ground the spirit from our country. Those who fought for Ireland fought for the people. Fast forward 100 years our current so called leaders do the opposite.

      Reply
    • Aldo 26/01/13 #

      ?Yeah definitely get shot of it, we have enough money wasted on sh!te like this, how many pensions does our current president have at the moment anyway?

      Reply
    • This small, broke country cannot afford a president – we are top heavy with politicians and councillors and they are overpaid extravagantly. We are sinking under the weight of them all.

      Reply
    • @Rob Cunningham.. And the former of your comment I agree with. You’re spot on!
      But it’s also up to the person in his/herself to relay back to those 100 years ago and not lose our spirit and be dragged down by today’s blasé remarks.
      I’m sure there was less money in the country in Douglas Hydes time.

      Reply
    • I wish de Valera was still the prez

      Reply
    • No thank you. “Holy Mary” can stay in Rome, as far as I am concerned.

      Reply
    • @Bo Bo, only thing is if it was shorter, then the two Mary’s would not of been there as long either. I think people will look back and see some presidents as good and others as bad. I’m not sure, but maybe allowing a president to run for more terms than currently allowed would mean we would have the good ones longer? I know usually the second term is usually unchallenged at the moment.

      Reply
    • Wish I could give Len more than one green thumb. I remember Dev and John Charles McQuaid. It’s a wonder we didn’t all asphyxiate under the blanket of repression then.

      Reply
    • HAVE not “of”.

      Why cannot Irish people tell the difference?

      Reply
    • If Higgins was around 100 years ago who do u think would be shot first.

      Reply
  • Do we really want Presidential election debates every 5 years..No! Keep it at 7 years

    Reply
  • Scrap it to 5 years and you have to be at least 90 to take office…..that’ll ease the pension burden…

    Reply
  • The Commander in chief , the army as well as the emergencies services & and teachers are valuable assets to the people of Ireland

    Reply
  • if the president had anything more than a figurehead status then yes but 7 years is fine as it is

    Reply
    • The Presidential role is a Constitutional role, he is the Guardian of our Constitution. Legislation doesn’t come into force unless and until it is signed by the President. If the President and Council of State are ‘suspicious’ of the legislation being constitutional, it’s passed on to the Supreme Court for a final decision. That’s hardly a figurehad role.

      Reply
    • Paul 26/01/13 #

      It’s a sorting office role. (a) sign it (b) ask a few people (council of state) what they think and then sign it or ask a few more (supreme court) and do what they say.

      Reply
    • Paul,
      And even when it’s broken down to this simplistic sentence, you cannot see the importance of the role?

      Reply
    • Paul 26/01/13 #

      A constitutional test brought by the president prohibits any interested citizen from ever challenging any aspect of the law again, even if they spot a conflict not identified or mentioned when the law was tested by the president’s sending it to the supreme court. This is one of the main reasons why the president usually doesn’t like testing laws in this way, it’s permanent and can never take new judgements and perspectives into account. So yes, I don’t see much value in it for that reason.

      Reply
  • Do it by a public lottery, each year,

    Reply
  • While it wouldnt be a pressing priority most of the former occupants of the office have actually supported this measure. Think about it while being President would be a great honor, after a while you must be bored senseless with the job.

    I think if it is to remain a 7 year term then you should only be able to hold it for just one term.

    Reply
  • I’d like to know what is the true cost to the State for keeping our President in the park. If I knew that then I might have a clearer opinion. Only saying…

    Reply
  • Our Presidents are something to be proud of. Mary Robinson championed Human Rights and Women’s Rights, Mary McAleese did great work building bridges with unionism and Michael D is a lover of the Arts and Irish culture. The crowd in the Dail constantly let us down with their broken promises, lies, bickering and bluster. The Office of the President is something we can unite behind, without party-politics. I think a seven-year term is fine, but maybe limit it to one term per person.

    Reply
  • The 7-year term is perfect. However they should revise the age limit.
    Why should the presidential house become a nursing home?
    That might sound harsh but it’s true.
    The President should be someone to lead (like the last two ones).
    He’s well over the retiring age. He should just take the pension and keep writing.
    Why is there a retiring age then? The President, Gay Byrne and others…and then we
    complain there are no jobs …of course there are not …when all the ‘qualified’ one are still there.
    How can we climb the ladder if people on the top don’t get off.

    Reply
  • KMart 26/01/13 #

    How much is this Constitutional convention costing us?

    Another of Eamon Gilmore’s self indulgant extravagances at the tax payers expense.

    What will it actually achieve that will be of real benefit to us?

    Reply
  • Reduce the the term to 5years would give more democratic input. Higgins was elected on a vote swing based on lies from our state broadcaster. As such he is a symbol of the golden elite. He is most often seen amongst his elite artist and political friends.. A shorter term for a president of greater stature I say…

    Reply
  • What a waste of money and time…scrap both the presidency and this ridiculous talking shop !

    Reply
  • We’ve already shortened the President, so no need to also change the term :-)

    Reply
  • What’s an even bigger waste of money is paying a shite load of money to people to sit around at taxpayers expense discussing the length of the Presidential term. Who care’s. How would it benefit our democracy to shorten it to a 5 year term. Half the salary, cut the pensions and leave it at 7 years.

    Reply
  • Jimbohs 26/01/13 #

    Waste of money. Vote them in and leave them in til they pop their clogs. No need for the expense of an election, our incumbent is doing diddly up in the park, proof we dont need one, but for ceremonial occasions maybe its nice and all that.

    Reply
  • Yes how about 2 years

    Reply
  • Given the challenges of unemployment and national debt, what possible difference would it make to reduce change the term of office of the President from 7 years?

    As Head of State, the President has no executive function or responsibility and limited powers.
    It is good to have elections that are “out of sync” with the normal political cycle.
    It enables us to focus on just who we want for this important role – representing us as a people.
    I think it important that we do not change the term of office for this position, which we directly elect.
    In our Republic, It is the only directly office to which term limitation applies – the President cannot serve more that two terms.
    Note that to change the President’s term of office, we will have to vote to change this part of the Constitution.

    The fact the the governing elite asked the Convention to look at this (for whom is the term of office of the President an issue?) suggests that they regard the Constitutional Convention as less than serious.

    Unlike the effects of bad governance (eg. the property bubble leading to bank bailouts etc) and ‘implementation deficit disorder’ (eg. the 20 year dealy in legislating for abortion arising from the X case), the term of office of the President has NOT been an issue – for anyone.

    Reply
  • Seán Gallagher for president! Pat Kenny for the sack!

    Reply
  • Red Ed 26/01/13 #

    Who gives a f@@€!?

    Reply
    • The tax payer is giving plenty of €€€€€€€ to this office and all associated political offices – so much so there is very little left for our hospitals, schools, gardai etc.

      Reply
    • Red
      Why display your lack of class and education with contributions as base as that. Do you understand how degenerate that is or should we draw a little picture for you?

      Reply
    • Red ED is right… My sentiments exactly… an undemocratically selected talking shop which can only discuss what the Government says they can discuss…

      I mean, who gives a MONKEYS about whether the President serves 5 or 7 years….

      Surely, the main problem with the Presidency is the nonsensical nomination system – is that being addressed?? Nope.

      Reply
  • Scrap the presidency. It’s pointless. Alternatively scrap the Dail, it’s even more pointless, and give the president real power as is done in other countries.

    Reply
    • Irony is using the flag of a republic as an avatar while supporting the concept of scrapping the office which makes this state a republic.

      Reply
    • A president does not make the country a republic, the people do.

      Reply
    • KM 26/01/13 #

      Why on earth would you think scraping the Dáil is a good idea? I imagine its just some unreasoned anti-government statement based solely on the fact that you don’t like politicians very much. Even the democratic countries that give their President power all have a Parliament anyway. If you honestly think some all powerful President is the answer to our problems, then you are sadly mistaken.

      Reply
    • In case you haven’t noticed, the Dail has no power. In this country, the Dail serves only to elect the Taoiseach who then appoints ministers from the Dail. As they are all muppets, we have muppets running the country. It doesn’t matter what political party is in power, only muppets get to decide. Conversely, in real democracies, eg the United States, the people have a real say in who gets to be president (notwithstanding its funny electoral college system) and this president has real power.

      Reply
    • KM 26/01/13 #

      The economy in this country is the main problem. In the US, Congress constructs and submits the budget to the President. The President then is legally obliged to enforce that budget regardless of his own views. He may only make suggestions to Congress on budget matters but they have no obligation to listen to his ideas

      Reply
    • Eric
      You are wrong. The Taoiseach is not obliged to appoint Ministers who are members of the Dail. He can appoint anyone he wants as long as they are Members of the Oireachtas. To achieve that he can appoint up to eleven people as Senators and that complies with the Constitution.

      Reply
    • Sorry Eric but you’re wrong. The people make it a democracy. The roll of President makes it a republic. Otherwise you could call the UK a republic.

      Reply
  • Honoury Position should be for the President Of Ireland. Expences Only. Still To Be Elected By All The People Of Ireland North & South.

    Reply
  • Do we really care though? When was the last time we were proud of anyone in a political position in this country?

    Reply
  • Scrap it we cannot afford it.

    Reply
  • Michael D Higgins.
    Does the D stand for Dustin, because I think he is a ringer for him.

    Reply
  • Shortening it would give more politicians a chance to stay in the public purse rummaging around for the last few pence they can squeeze out of the people of Ireland. It would also allow politicians carry on as normal with expenses etc not to mention travel and a nice lifestyle. I think our currant president is the last of our politicians with integrity. So the future presidents will be from the currant bunch of bullies with no integrity. Not 1 of our current bunch have a genuine interest in helping our country — thet are just self serving greedy people. Who of this lot would people think has the quality to be president for 1 day????

    Reply
    • Does the president have to be a former or current politician? Is it mot open to all?
      Out of the 6 candidates in the last election, only 2 had held any office here. We voted one of them in. But that doesn’t mean we always will vote in a politician.

      Reply
    • Danny- you only need 2 requirements really to run for president- To be Irish & to be over the age of 35.

      Reply
    • Exactly Emily.
      Frank here seems to be under some misunderstanding that the president has to be a TD at some stage. Or a politician at least.

      Frank,
      Neither of our previous 2 presidents stood for election for the Dail before the presidency. They were both in the Seanad, but we’re appointed, as far as memory goes.

      Even now, there are a few members of the present Seanad I would take as president.

      Reply
  • Politicians wages need to be downgraded , their retirement wages , the spending to travel abroad for holidays and of course bank loans from their banking buddies

    Reply
  • Add scrapping presidency to the referendum on scrapping seanad ??

    Reply
  • Five years as any longer a person may become stale while in office.

    Reply
  • Wonder if the choice of scrapping it completely was on the table how the vote would read. I for one would vote to get rid of the office, waste of money we can no longer afford.

    Reply
  • Why bother with a Don’t Know option on the poll? Is it for thick people with no opinion on anything but who still get to impact a simple poll all the same?

    Reply
  • Why do we even need someone to live in the lap of luxury?

    Reply
  • 5 years is to long for Goverment, especially incompetent muppets

    Reply
  • i dont see the point in reducing it. And dont know why they wud lower the voting age 18 is even a little young. Not alot of teenagers care about politics or even understand what is going on. I only really started to know what was goin on til i lost my job and cas of the recession and in future wen hopefully we will be out of this mess teenagers wont be interested in normal day to day politics anyway.

    Reply

Add New Comment