Dr. Liam Weeks:

The Deputy asked whether county identities influence behaviour. Put more broadly, the question is whether institutions influence behaviour or if behaviour influences the type of institution created. We are often guilty of overestimating the effects of the voting system. If we followed the example of Israel and the Netherlands by voting on the basis of the entire country as one list, the quota might be very low and voters in certain localities could choose candidates from their area. Professor John Coakley has written about the national election of 1925, which was held by single transferable vote. The quota was between 20,000 and 30,000 and candidates ran on a county basis because, for example, a candidate for Cavan might have enough votes from that county to get elected. Regardless of whether that is a bad thing, it suggests changing the rules might not change the voters' behaviour.

The question also arises as to why one would want to change the mentality of voters and their way of thinking about their counties. Voting behaviour and constituents' interactions with Deputies might change over time but these patterns run far deeper than the size of constituencies or the number of Deputies. Ireland is one of only six EU member states which divide up their countries into constituencies for elections to the European Parliament. Why do we do this, particularly given the mess we saw at the last election? It is clear that, aside from the question of the importance of counties, the use of county boundaries restricts the process and creates problems. We saw an example of this with Deputy Catherine Murphy's experience in Kildare in 2007 on foot of changes in voting numbers and population size. This is related to Deputy Stanley's question about whether we should introduce fixed boundaries. They would be easier to manage and as the population changes, we could simply alter the number of seats. This is why we need a commission to investigate these questions.