A new Constituency Commission report on election boundaries (for general and European elections) is likely to be published some weeks after the final/definitive population by area statistics for Census 2011 are published by the Central Statistics Office on 26th April 2012.

This post will consider what might happen our current constituency configurations if a 158 seat tally was agreed on for the next Dail and in light of the provisional Census 2011 population levels published by the CSO last year. While the Commission has a range of options to choose from between 153 and 160 in terms of seat numbers for the next Dail, the likelihood is they may opt for a seat tally towards the upper range of this as continued population growth may require seat tallies to be constantly changing if they opt for a seat tally at the lower end of this scale. With a referendum pending on the abolition of the Seanad also, this might also persuade the Commission to not take a more radical approach in terms of reducing the number of seats in the Dail.

The key thing that the Commission will be watching for in this review are constituencies whose population per TD ratios fall outside the 5% variance limit – that is, whose population per TD ratios are either more than 5% above, or below, the state average for this (in the case of a 158-seat Dail, the state average would be 28,995 people per TD). In these cases, the Commission must consider whether they need to make changes to the boundaries/seat numbers for these constituencies. On past precedents, they may opt not to make changes if the level of variance is not much higher than this 5% limit (as happened in the case of Cavan Monaghan in both the 2004 and 2007 revisions) but they must make changes if the level of variance exceeds 7.89% - the maximum level of variance permitted by past commissions (Mayo East in the 1983 revisions).

So what might happen to our current constituencies in the light of the decision to reduce the number of Dail seats and the population changes outlined in the provisional 2011 Census population by area figures, if the Commission opt for a 158-seat Dail?

Carlow-Kilkenny – - the current population is fine for this constituency under its present boundaries to remain as a 5-seater (population per TD ratio is just 0.4% higher than the state average), but the population is not too large to prevent the return of the Hacketstown area and allow for a five seat constituency comprising of the total area of both counties (which would have a population per TD ratio that would be 3.4% higher than the state average). Ultimately the decision on whether Hacketstown returns to Carlow-Kilkenny or not would be largely shaped by what happens with Wicklow rather than this constituency.

Cavan-Monaghan - with the population per TD ratio 8.0% lower than the state average, the Commission would have to make changes to the constituency boundaries in the 158-seat scenario. They could seek territory from a neighbouring constituency to bring the population back to the level necessary to sustain a 5-seat constituency. Alternately, if they are looking for extra territory to bolster a four-seat Leitrim and Sligo constituency they may well look for this in west Cavan, resulting in a smaller 4-seat Cavan-Monaghan constituency.

Clare – the population per TD ratio for this as a 4-seat constituency falls within the 5% variance limits (4.1% below the state average) if the current boundaries (excluding Ballyglass ED) are used, or just above the state average (0.8% above) if the Commissions decides to base the constituency boundary on the county boundaries of Clare – either option would be acceptable. (With the return of the West Limerick area from Kerry North, the Clare territory would not be needed to maintain a 4-seat and 3-seat boundary configuration within Limerick if the Commission were prepared to accept a variance level of between 5% and 6% for these two constituencies.)

The Cork constituencies – with a population equivalent to 17.9 TDs based on the 2011 figures, it looks likely as if one one of the Cork constituencies will be losing a seat with Cork South Central and Cork North-Central looking the most vulnerable.

Cork East – with population per TD average just below (1.7%) the state average, there is no need to change the boundaries and Cork East will remain as a 4-seater unless dictated by  more radical changes being made to all of the Cork election boundaries

Cork North Central – as a 4-seat constituency, this is well below 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (9.6% below the state average), but Cork North-Central could maintain its four seats with territory transfers from Cork North-West or Cork South-Central.

Cork North West – as a 3-seat constituency, this is below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (6.3% below the state average), but Cork North-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies. The Commission would also have the option of retaining the constitiuency boundaries as they are as the level of variance does not exceed the absolute maximum degree of variance (-7.89%) permitted in previous boundary revisions, but decisions to be taken in relation to other neighbouring constituencies will have a significant bearing here.

Cork South Central – as a 5-seat constituency, this is below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (6.9% below the state average), but Cork South-Central could maintain its five seats with territory transfers from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies. The Commission would also have the option of retaining the constitiuency boundaries as they are as the level of variance does not exceed the absolute maximum degree of variance (-7.89%) permitted in previous boundary revisions, but decisions to be taken in relation to other neighbouring constituencies will have a significant bearing here.

Cork South West – no need to change boundaries here on the basis of population levels,  the population per TD ratio is below the state average but is just within the 5% variance limits (4.8% below state average) to remain a 3-seater – the Commission would have the option of leaving boundaries as they are, unless chages are required due to changes involving neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Commentary on Cork region – the census figures would suggest that Cork’s population would be equivalent to 17.9 TDs suggesting one of the constituencies (South Central or North Central) would probably lose a seat. A more radical option might involve the (re)creation of a 5-seat (or 4-seat) Cork City constituency and creation of two 5-seat and one 4-seat constituencies in the Cork County area, allowing for the number of Cork constituencies to be reduced by one.

Donegal North East and Donegal South West – while the population of the South West constituency would be too small to allow this remain as a 3-seater with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 10.2% below the state average), the North East population per TD ratio would be within 5% variance limit (4.8% below the state average) and so could remain as is. Territory transfer from North East to South West could help maintain both these as 3-seaters, but the Commission would have to tolerate significant breaches of the 5% variance limit in both of these cases (with degrees of variance moving close to the maximum 7.89% limit).  In the 158-seat scenario, the more likely options might be (i) to create a 5-seat seat Donegal constituency, while transferring out an area equivalent to c. 9,000 population to balance the population per TD ratio, (ii) to bolster the population of Donegal South-West with a territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c. 5,000 population) in from a neighbouring constituency.

The Dublin region – there are are currently 47 Dail seats across shared out across the twelve Dublin constituencies but the population of the Dublin region would be equivalent to just 43.8 seats based on current population figures and a 158-seat configuration. This means that the Dublin constituencies between them are certain to lose two seats in these changes and may well lose three seats.

Dublin Central – with a population per TD ratio that is just 2.5% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin Mid West – with a population per TD ratio that is just 4.8% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a knock-on effect.

Dublin North – with a population per TD ratio that is 1.6% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin North Central, Dublin North-West and Dublin North-East – with the combined population of these constituencies equivalent to 8.1 Dail seats based on the provisional 2011 census figures, the three 3-seat constituency configuration involving these North City constituencies is no longer feasible (and would only be possible with a very large, and rather unsustainable, territory transfer from the neighbouring constituencies of Dublin Central, Dublin North and Dublin West). The most likely solution would be to replace these with two North City 4-seaters (0r a 3-seater/4-seater configuration if the areas located within Fingal County (Howth/Portmarnock/Balgriffin area) was to be moved to Dublin North – probably making this a 5-seat constituency)

Dublin South - with a population per TD ratio that is just 2.5% below the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies of Dublin South-East, Dublin South-Central, Dublin South-West and Dun Laoghaire are to have a bearing here, as could be quite likely.

Dublin South Central - with a population per TD average (12.6% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 5-seater with its current boundaries, this constituency appears likely to lose a seat (possibly to retain four seats in Dublin South-East) and territory, unless constituency receives a significant territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c. 12,000) from a neighbouring constituency (possibly the South East Inner City area from Dublin South East) to help it retain its five seats.

Dublin South East – with a population per TD average (11.1% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 4-seater with current boundaries, this constituency will require extra territory from a neighbouring constituency to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory to become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer (South West Inner City or Terenure area) from Dublin South Central or to Dublin South Central (as noted above), which would either leave two 4-seaters, or a 3-seater and a 5-seater, in the Dublin South City area.

Dublin South West – with a population per TD ratio that is 8.9% below the state average (and hence falling well outside the 5% variance limits), the population of this constituency is too small for it to remain as a 4-seat constituency with its current boundaries. The constituency needs a territory transfer of c. 5,000 to retain its four seats but – given that the neighbouring Dublin Mid-West and Dublin South-Central constituencies are lacking in surplus populations to transfer to Dublin South-West – the only likely source of this new territory would be Dublin South (unless the South Dublin County electoral divisions currently located in Dublin South Central were to be transferred in with the context of Dublin South Central losing a seat). A more radical approach might involve the transferring in of the South Dublin County electoral divisions currently located within Dublin South-Central and Dublin South (equivalent to the Rathfarnham electoral area), which – with a minor territory transfer involving the western part of this constituency and Dublin Mid West – could allow for the creation of a 4-seat Dublin Mid-West and 5-seat Dublin South-West.

Dublin West -with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.0% above the state average, Dublin West can remain as a 4-seat constituency without requiring changes to its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies are to have a bearing here or unless the Commission decides to take account of the 268 submissions call for the political reunification of Swords. The most feasible option for the reunification of the Swords Town area, given that the return of the Swords-Forrest electoral division would leave Dublin West with much too small a population to remain a four-seater, could well be to move the rest of Swords (an area with a population level almost equivalent to one Dail seat)  into Dublin West to make it a 5-seater (with the loss of population to Dublin North potentially being balanced by moving Howth, Portmarnock and Baldoyle into this constituency from Dublin North-East).

Dun Laoghaire – Dun Laoghaire is too small to stay as 4-seater with its current boundaries (population per TD ratio is 9.6% below the state average). This disparity could be solved by small territory transfer equivalent to a population of c. 6,000 from Dublin South East or Dublin South – alternately Dun Laoghaire could lose a seat if territory equivalent to c. 15,000 population was to be moved out of the constituency.

Commentary: Dublin region set to lose three Dail seats, with losses focused on inner suburbs (North City and South City areas) and constituencies located to the south of the Liffey.

Galway East and Galway West – with the population per TD ratios at 5.1% below the state average in Galway East and 3.1% below the state average in Galway West, slight changes will need to be made to the boundaries of Galway East to at least bring this constituency’s population per TD ratio within the 5% variance limit but this territory can be provided from neighbouring Galway West without the need to breach county boundaries. The combined population of these two constituencies equivalent to 8.6 Dail seats, with a 158-seat context, is still closer (albeit only slightly) to that for having 9 Dail seats, as opposed to 8, for the Galway area.

Both Kerry North-West Limerick and Kerry South are too small to remain as 3-seaters under their current boundary configurations with the population per TD ratio 7.3% below the state average in Kerry North-West Limerick and 10.6% below the state average in Kerry South. Moving the West Limerick area back with the other Limerick constituencies would leave the Kerry county area with a population level sufficient for this to become a standalone 5-seat constituency with a population per TD ratio just 0.1% above the state average.

The population of Kildare county is sufficient to retain  4-seat Kildare North (population per TD ratio 3.2% higher than the state average) and a 3-seat Kildare South (population per TD ratio 3.8% higher than the state average) constituency and the boundaries of both constituencies will probably remain as they are (unless the Commission decides to reunite Naas with its rural hinterland). Had the decision not been made to reduce the number of Dail seats, Kildare would have been likely to have received an added Dail seat in this revision.

Laois-Offaly – with the population per TD ratio just above (5.4%) the 5% variance limit (and this constituency would have been likely to have been divided into two three-seat constituencies had the Commission been working on the basis of 166 seats again), a further territory transfer out of this constituency (involving areas in south Offaly and Tipperary North) may be required though the Commission would have the option to leave the boundaries as they are at present given how close the degree of variance is to the 5% limit. The return of the south Offaly area to the Laois-Offaly constituency is not possible with a 158-seat configuration as the population per TD ratio for a two-county Laois-Offaly constituency would be 8.5% above the state average.

The population of the Limerick City constituency is too small to remain as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 11.9% below the state average), while the population per TD ratio in Limerick just slightly lower than the 5% variance limit (-6.3%). Moving the western part of the county that is currently in the Kerry North-West Limerick constituency would ensure the two Limerick constituencies have a sufficient combined population to prevent the loss of a seat if the Ballyglass ED (part of Co. Clare) was to remain within the Limerick City constituency.

Longford-Westmeath – the current population levels are fine for this to stay as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 0.5% higher than the state average), but the return of the Castlepollard area to join with the rest of Westmeath county in this constituency would probably not be feasible as this would leave the constituency with a population per TD ratio that would be 7.7% higher than the state average (close to the 7.89% maximum degree of variance permitted by past Commission reports).

Louth - The Louth constituency can remain as 5-seater with present boundaries as its population per TD ratio would be just 1.2% lower than the state average. If the part of east Meath that was added into Louth in the 2007 revision was to be returned to the Meath East constituency then Louth could return to being a 4-seater Louth County constituency (if the Commission was prepared to accept a +5.9% variance level for this).

Mayo – the population is too small for this to remain a 5-seater (with a population per TD ratio 9.9% lower than the state average) but too large for it to be a 4-seat constituency with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 12.6% higher than the state average). A small territory transfer equivalent to a population of c. 8,000 people from a neighbouring constituency (from Roscommon or Sligo) could help maintain this as a 5-seater – alternately a territory transfer equivalent to a population of 8,000-9,000 people (in eastern Mayo) into a neighbouring constituency could see Mayo become a four-seat constituency.

The Meath county population is more than sufficient (although probably slightly too large with a population per TD ratio 5.8% higher than the state average) to have one 6-seat constituency (if that was to be allowed by the Electoral Act)/or rather two 3-seat Meath West and Meath East constituencies with their territory being entirely from the county area without need for added territory from other counties, such as Westmeath. But if Castlepollard area cannot be returned to Longford-Westmeath and the Commission decides to keep Louth as a 5-seat constituency, then the current status quo involving these constituencies could be maintained without need for any boundary changes, as the population per TD ratios in these two constituencies lie very close to the state average (1.7% below in Meath West, 0.5% below in Meath East).

Roscommon-South Leitrim and Sligo-North Leitrim are both too small to remain as three seaters based on how their population per TD rations sit relative to the 5% variance limit. However the degree of variance involving both of these constituencies – with population per TD rations of 5.9% below the state average in Roscommon-South Leitrim and 6.7% below the state average in Sligo-North Leitrim -  has been allowed by past Commissions, so the Commission could well just opt to retain the current boundary configurations. The population associated with the area covered by these two constituencies would be too large for these to be amalgamated into a 5-seater (population per TD ratio 11.0% higher than the state average), however a territory transfer involving either north-western Roscommon or western Sligo (c. 8,000 population) being moved into Mayo could allow creation of a 5-seat constituency. Alternately, the option of a 3-seat Roscommon-East Mayo and 4-seat Leitrim-Sligo constituency could be feasible with territory transfers from the neighbouring Mayo, Donegal South-West and Cavan-Monaghan constituencies.

In relation to the Tipperary constituencies, the population of Tipperary South is too small for it to remain as a 3-seater with its current electoral boundaries  (population per TD ratio 8.3% lower than the state average), but the population per TD ratio for Tipperary North lies relatively close to the state average (2.4% below this). The creation of a 5-seater Tipperary county constituency is not feasible in a 158-seat scenario, as the population per TD ratio for such an entity would be 9.4% higher than the state average. A territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c. 3,000)from Tipperary North to Tipperary South would appear the likely option here, with the possibility that the loss of territory by Tipperary North could well be offset by the gain of some more territory from Laois-Offaly or else that the Commission would be prepared to accept a variance level of c. -6% for both of the Tipperary constituencies.

Waterford – the population of the constituency area is sufficient for this to remain as a 4-seater without need to change its current boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 3.4% below the state average) and there is scope to allow the constituency reclaim the part of the county that currently lies within the Tipperary South constituency, but this territory would appear to be needed to bolster the Tipperary South population to the level required of a three-seat constituency.

Wexford – with a population per TD ratio that is just 0.2% above the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here, which would appear to be unlikely in this case.

Wicklow - with a population per TD ratio that is 2.9% below the state average, Wicklow  can remain as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here. One such change may well involve Carlow-Kilkenny, especially given that in a 158-seat constituency scenario Wicklow would not need Hacketstown area to maintain a sufficient level of population for it to remain as a 5-seater if the Commission were prepared to accept a variance level of -5.9% for a Wicklow county constituency and to repair the breach of county boundaries affecting Carlow and Wicklow.

Finally, the potential changes to constitiuency boundaries outlined here are specific to a 158-seat context – if the Commission opt for a smaller number of seats then some of the options outlined here would not be feasible. To see the range of options that would be possible in 154-seat, 156-seat and 160-seat contexts, please check my earlier posts relating to these options (as linked above).

A new Constituency Commission report on election boundaries (for general and European elections) is likely to be published some weeks after the final/definitive population by area statistics for Census 2011 are published by the Central Statistics Office on 26th April 2012.

This post will consider what might happen our current constituency configurations if a 156 seat tally was agreed on for the next Dail and in light of the provisional Census 2011 population levels published by the CSO last year. While the Commission has a range of options to choose from between 153 and 160 in terms of seat numbers for the next Dail, the likelihood is they may opt for a seat tally towards the upper range of this as continued population growth may require seat tallies to be constantly changing if they opt for a seat tally at the lower end of this scale. That said, if the Commission feels that they need to be seen to be making a conscious effort to reduce seat numbers they may well opt to reduce seat numbers by ten and go for a 156-seat Dail.

The key thing that the Commission will be watching for in this review are constituencies whose population per TD ratios fall outside the 5% variance limit – that is, whose population per TD ratios are either more than 5% above, or below, the state average for this (in the case of a 156-seat Dail, the state average would be 29,367 people per TD). In these cases, the Commission must consider whether they need to make changes to the boundaries/seat numbers for these constituencies. On past precedents, they may opt not to make changes if the level of variance is not much higher than this 5% limit (as happened in the case of Cavan Monaghan in both the 2004 and 2007 revisions) but they must make changes if the level of variance exceeds 7.89% - the maximum level of variance permitted by past commissions (Mayo East in the 1983 revisions).

So what might happen to our current constituencies in the light of the decision to reduce the number of Dail seats and the population changes outlined in the provisional 2011 Census population by area figures, if the Commission opt for a 156-seat Dail?

Carlow-Kilkenny – the current population is fine for this constituency under its present boundaries to remain as a 5-seater (population per TD ratio is just 0.9% lower than the state average), but the population is not too large to prevent the return of the Hacketstown area and allow for a five seat constituency comprising of the total area of both counties (which would have a population per TD ratio that would be 2.1% higher than the state average). Ultimately the decision on whether Hacketstown returns to Carlow-Kilkenny or not would be largely shaped by what happens with Wicklow rather than this constituency.

Cavan-Monaghan – the population per TD ratio would be 9.2% lower than the state average and the Commission hence would not have the option to keep the constituency boundaries as they are. If the Commission are looking for extra territory to bolster a four-seat Leitrim and Sligo constituency they may well look for this in west Cavan, resulting in a smaller 4-seat Cavan-Monaghan constituency. To maintain 5 seats in Cavan-Monaghan the Commission would need to transfer territory equivalent to a population of over 6,000 (probably from Leitrim) but this would seem hard to justify.

Clare – the population per TD ratio for this as a 4-seat constituency falls just outside the 5% variance limits (5.4% below the state average) if the current boundaries (excluding the Ballyglass ED) are used, or just below the state average (0.5% below) if the Commission decides to base the constituency boundary on the county boundaries of Clare – either option would be acceptable. (However, even with the return of the West Limerick area from Kerry North, the Clare territory in the Limerick City constituency would still be needed to maintain a 4-seat and 3-seat boundary configuration within Limerick, so the Commission would be likely to make no changes here.)

The Cork constituencies – with a population equivalent to 17.6 TDs based on the 2011 figures, one of the Cork constituencies will be losing a seat with Cork South Central and Cork North-Central looking the most vulnerable.

Cork East – with population per TD average that is 3.0% below the state average, there is no need to change the constituency boundaries on the basis of population levels and Cork East will remain as a 4-seater unless dictated by  more radical changes being made to all of the Cork election boundaries.

Cork North Central – as a 4-seat constituency, this is well below 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (10.7% below the state average), but Cork North-Central could maintain its four seats with territory transfers from Cork North-West or Cork South-Central.

Cork North West – as a 3-seat constituency, this is well below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (7.5% below the state average), but Cork North-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Cork South Central – the constituency’s population per TD ratio falls outside the 5% variance limits (-8.1% below the state average) and its population is hence too small to remain a 5-seater with its current boundaries, but is much too large at present to become a 4-seater. A territory transfer will be required, either involving the addition of territory from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies, or else a territory transfer into another constituency (resulting in the loss of a seat) - the Commission may decide to make changes to keep Cork North-Central as a 4-seater and requires territory from Cork-South Central in order to do so.

Cork South West as a 3-seat constituency, this is below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (6.0% below the state average), but Cork South-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Commentary on Cork region – the census figures would suggest that Cork’s population would be equivalent to 17.6 TDs suggesting one of the constituencies (South Central or North Central) will lose a seat. A more radical option might involve the (re)creation of a 5-seat (or 4-seat) Cork City constituency and creation of a 5-seat constituency and two 4-seat constituencies in the Cork County area, allowing for the number of Cork constituencies to be reduced by one.

Donegal North East and Donegal South West – The population of the Donegal South West constituency would be too small to allow this remain as a 3-seater with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 11.3% below the state average), while the North East population per TD ratio falls just outside 5% variance limit (6.0% below the state average) and so changes will be needed to be made to both constituencies. A simple territory transfer from North East to South West would not suffice to redress the population imbalance and territory would need to be transferred in from neighbouring Sligo-North Leitrim to maintain the current two three-seat constituency boundary arrangement in Donegal. Another option might be to create a 5-seat seat Donegal constituency, while transferring out an area in the south of the county equivalent to c. 6,000 population to bring the population per TD ratio within the 5% variance limits.

The Dublin region – there are are currently 47 Dail seats across shared out across the twelve Dublin constituencies but the population of the Dublin region would be equivalent to just 43.3 seats based on current population figures and a 156-seat configuration. This means that the Dublin constituencies between them are certain to lose three seats in these changes and may well lose four seats.

Dublin Central – with a population per TD ratio 3.8% lower the state average, Dublin Central can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin Mid West – with a population per TD ratio that is 6.0% below the state average (and hence falling outside the 5% variance limits), the Commission would need to make a decision as to whether this constituency could remain as a 4-seater with its current boundaries and given the level of changes required for the neighbouring Dublin South-Central and Dublin South-West constituencies the likelihood here is that there will be changes made to the constituencies boundaries, possibly involving the transfer in of a small parcel of territory to bring the constituency population per TD ratio back within the 5% variance limits.

Dublin North – with a population per TD ratio that is 2.8% lower than the state average, Dublin North can remain as a 4-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin North Central, Dublin North-West and Dublin North-East – with the combined population of these three-seat constituencies equivalent to 8.0 Dail seats based on the provisional 2011 census figures, the three 3-seat constituency configuration involving these North City constituencies is no longer feasible (and would only be possible with a very large, and rather unsustainable, territory transfer from the neighbouring constituencies of Dublin Central, Dublin North and Dublin West). The most likely solution would be to replace these with two North City 4-seaters (0r a 3-seater/4-seater configuration if the areas located within Fingal County (Howth/Portmarnock/Balgriffin area) wereto be moved to Dublin North – possibly making this a 5-seat constituency)

Dublin South - with a population per TD ratio that is 3.7% lower than the state average, Dublin South can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies of Dublin South-East, Dublin South-Central, Dublin South-West and Dun Laoghaire are to have a bearing here, as could well prove likely.

Dublin South Central - with the combined population of Dublin South-Central and Dublin South-East equivalent to 7.8 Dail seats based on the provisional 2011 census figures, one of these constituencies must lose a seat. With a population per TD ratio that is 13.7% lower than the state average, Dublin South-Central is too small to remain a 5-seater with its current boundaries and this constituency appears likely to lose a seat (possibly to retain four seats in Dublin South-East) and territory (possibly the South West Inner City or the Terenure area), unless constituency receives a significant territory transfer (equivalent to a population of over 13,000) from a neighbouring constituency (possibly the South East Inner City area from Dublin South East) to help it retain its five seats.

Dublin South East – with a population per TD average (12.2% below the state average) that is too small for this constituency to remain as a 4-seat constituency with its current boundaries, this constituency will require extra territory from a neighbouring constituency (equivalent to a population of c.9,000-10,000) to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory and become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer (South West Inner City or Terenure area) from Dublin South Central or to Dublin South Central (as noted above), which would either leave two 4-seaters, or a 3-seater and a 5-seater, in the Dublin South City area.

Dublin South West – with a population per TD ratio that is 10.1% below the state average (and hence falling well outside the 5% variance limits), the population of this constituency is too small for it to remain as a 4-seat constituency with its current boundaries. The constituency needs a territory transfer of c. 6,000-7,000 to retain its four seats but – given that the neighbouring Dublin Mid-West and Dublin South-Central are currently significantly over-represented and lacking surplus populations to transfer to Dublin South-West - the only likely source of this territory would be Dublin South. A more radical approach might involve the transferring in of the South Dublin County electoral divisions currently located within Dublin South-Central and Dublin South (equivalent to the Rathfarnham electoral area), which – with a minor territory transfer involving the western part of this constituency and Dublin Mid West - could allow for the creation of a 4-seat Dublin Mid-West and 5-seat Dublin South-West.

Dublin West -with a population per TD ratio that is just 0.3% below the state average, Dublin West can remain as a 4-seat constituency without requiring changes to its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies are to have a bearing here or unless the Commission decides to take account of the 268 submissions call for the political reunification of Swords. The most feasible option for the reunification of the Swords Town area, given that the return of the Swords-Forrest electoral division would leave Dublin West with much too small a population to remain a four-seater, could well be to move the rest of Swords (an area with a population level almost equivalent to one Dail seat) into Dublin West to make it a 5-seater (with the loss of population to Dublin North potentially being balanced by moving Howth, Portmarnock and Baldoyle into this constituency from Dublin North-East).

Dun Laoghaire – Dun Laoghaire is too small to stay as 4-seater with its current boundaries (population per TD ratio is 10.7% below the state average). This disparity could be solved by a small territory transfer equivalent to a population of over 7,000 from Dublin South East or Dublin South.

Commentary: Dublin region set to lose three (and possibly four) Dail seats, with these losses focused on inner suburbs (North City and South City areas) and the constituencies located to the south of the Liffey.

Galway East and Galway West - with the population per TD ratios at just 6.3% below the state average in Galway East and 4.3% below the state average in Galway West, changes will need to be made to the boundaries of Galway East to at least bring this closer to the 5% variance limit but this territory can be provided from neighbouring Galway West without the need to breach county boundaries. With the combined population of these two constituencies equivalent to 8.53 Dail seats, with a 156-seat context, this is still closer (albeit only slightly) to that for having 9 Dail seats, as opposed to 8, for the Galway area.

Both Kerry North-West Limerick and Kerry South are too small to remain as 3-seaters under their current boundary configurations with the population per TD ratio 8.5% below the state average in Kerry North-West Limerick and 11.7% below the state average in Kerry South. Moving the West Limerick area back with the other Limerick constituencies would leave the Kerry county area with a population level sufficient for this to become a standalone 5-seat constituency with a population per TD ratio just 1.2% lower than the state average.

The population of Kildare county is sufficient to retain a 4-seat Kildare North (population per TD ration 1.9% higher than the state average) and a 3-seat Kildare South (population per TD ration 2.5% higher than the state average) constituency and the boundaries of both constituencies can stay as they are (unless the Commission decides to reunite Naas with its rural hinterland). Had the decision not been made to reduce the number of Dail seats, Kildare would have been likely to have received an added Dail seat in this revision.

Laois-Offaly – with the population per TD ratio slightly above (5.1%) the 5% variance limit (and this constituency would have been likely to have been divided into two three-seat constituencies had the Commission been working on the basis of 166 seats again), it is unlikely that a further territory transfer out of this constituency (involving areas in south Offaly and Tipperary North) will be required and the Commission would have the option to leave the boundaries as they are at present unless they feel that extra territory is required to balance the populations of the Tipperary constituencies. The return of the south Offaly area to the Laois-Offaly constituency may be possible with a 156-seat configuration as the population per TD ratio for a two-county Laois-Offaly constituency would be 7.1% above the state average – this is outside the 5% variance limits but is lower than levels of variance permitted by past Commissions.

Limerick City constituency is too small to remain as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 13.1% below the state average), while the population per TD ratio in the Limerick constituency also falls below the 5% variance limit (7.5% lower than the state average). Moving the western part of the county that is currently in the Kerry North-West Limerick constituency would ensure the two Limerick constituencies have a sufficient combined population to prevent the loss of a seat by these (though this would require that the Ballyglass area remained in the Limerick City constituency unless the Commission decided to accept an average variance level of -6.9% across the two constituencies). The Commission may well decide to offer swap one seat between these two constituencies in  light of the impact of the return of the west Limerick area and if it is of a mind to make radical changes.

Longford-Westmeath – the current population levels are fine for this to stay as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 0.7% lower than the state average), and the return of the Castlepollard area to join with the rest of Westmeath county in this constituency might be feasible as this would leave the constituency with a population per TD ratio that would be 6.4% higher than the state average – a variance level that exceeds the 5% limit but which is smaller that the levels of variance accepted by the Commission for some constituencies in past boundary revisions.

Louth – Louth can remain as 5-seater with present boundaries as its population per TD ratio would be just 2.5% lower than the state average. Without the east Meath area, Louth could return to being a 4-seater Louth County constituency - the population per TD ratio would in this case be 4.5% higher than than the state average.

Mayo – the population is too small for this to remain a 5-seater (with a population per TD ratio 11.1% lower than the state average) but too large for it to be a 4-seat constituency with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 11.1% higher than the state average). A territory transfer equivalent to a population of c. 10,000 people from a neighbouring constituency (from Roscommon or Sligo) could help maintain this as a 5-seater – alternately a territory transfer equivalent to a population of c.10,000 people (in eastern Mayo) into a neighbouring constituency could see Mayo become a four-seat constituency.

The Meath county population is more than sufficient (with a population per TD ratio 4.4% higher than the state average) to have one 6-seat constituency (if that was to be allowed by the Electoral Act)/or rather two 3-seat Meath West and Meath East constituencies with their territory being entirely from the county area without need for added territory from other counties, such as Westmeath. Such a scenario would involve the part of east Meath currently located in the Loyuth constituency being moved back into Meath East, with a further transfer of territory from Meath East to Meath West to balance these constituencies’ populations. But if the Castlepollard area cannot be returned to Longford-Westmeath and the Commission decides to keep Louth as a 5-seat constituency, then the current status quo involving these constituencies could be maintained without need for any boundary changes, as the population per TD ratios in these two constituencies lie very close to the state average (3.0% below in Meath West, 1.8% below in Meath East).

Roscommon-South Leitrim and Sligo-North Leitrim are both too small to remain as three seaters based on how their population per TD ratios sit relative to the 5% variance limit, with population per TD ratios of 8.3% lower than the state average in Roscommon-South Leitrim and 9.0% lower than the state average in Sligo-North Leitrim. The population associated with the area covered by these two constituencies would be too large for these to be amalgamated into a 5-seater (population per TD ratio 9.6% higher than the state average), however a territory transfer involving either north-western Roscommon or western Sligo (c. 10,000-15,000 population) being moved into Mayo could allow for the creation of a 5-seat constituency. Alternately, the option of a 3-seat Roscommon-East Mayo and 4-seat Leitrim-Sligo constituency could be feasible with territory transfers from the neighbouring Mayo, Donegal South-West and Cavan-Monaghan constituencies.

In relation to the Tipperary constituencies, the population of Tipperary South is too small for it to remain as a 3-seater with its current electoral boundaries  (population per TD ratio 9.5% lower than the state average), but the population per TD ratio for Tipperary North lies relatively close to the state average (3.6% below this). The creation of a 5-seater Tipperary county constituency is not feasible in a 156-seat scenario, as the population per TD ratio for such an entity would be 8.0% higher than the state average. A territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c. 2.500) from Tipperary North to Tipperary South would bring the population per TD ratios of both constituencies to around 6%-6.5% below the state average – a level of variance that would be outside the 5% limit but a degree of variance which has been accepted in some instances by past Commissions. Another possibility might be that this territory transfer would be larger in extent, with the loss of territory by Tipperary North being offset somewhat by this constituency gaining some more territory in south Offaly from Laois-Offaly.

Waterford – the population of the constituency area is sufficient for this to remain as a 4-seater without need to change its current boundaries (population per TD ratio 4.6% below the state average). There would be scope to allow the constituency reclaim the part of the county that currently lies within the Tipperary South constituency, but this territory would appear to be needed to bolster the Tipperary South population to the level required of a three-seat constituency.

Wexford – with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.1% below the state average, Wexford can remain as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here, which would appear to be unlikely in this case.

Wicklow - with a population per TD ratio that is 4.1% below the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here. In a 156-seat scenario Wicklow would probably need the Hacketstown area to maintain a sufficient level of population for it to remain as a 5-seater. The Wicklow county area as a 5-seat constituency would have a population per TD ratio 7.1% below the state average), unless the Commission were willing to accept a level of variance that falls outside the 5% limit but does not exceed the largest level of variance accepted by past Commissions.

Finally, the potential changes to constitiuency boundaries outlined here are specific to a 156-seat context – if the Commission opt for a smaller number of seats then some of the options outlined here would not be feasible. To see the range of options that would be possible in 154-seat, 158-seat  or 160-seat contexts, please check my earlier posts on these (as linked above).

A new Constituency Commission report on election boundaries (for general and European elections) is likely to be published some weeks after the final/definitive population by area statistics for Census 2011 are published by the Central Statistics Office on 26th April 2012.

This post will consider what might happen our current constituency configurations if a 154 seat tally was agreed on for the next Dail and in light of the provisional Census 2011 population levels published by the CSO last year. While the Commission has a range of options to choose from between 153 and 160 in terms of seat numbers for the next Dail, the likelihood is they may opt for a seat tally towards the upper range of this as continued population growth may require seat tallies to be constantly changing if they opt for a seat tally at the lower end of this scale. This scenario has been considered in the previous post, so this post will instead consider what might happen if the Commission were to opt for a number at the lower end of this scale, say 154 seats.

As noted earlier, the key thing that the Commission will be watching for in this review are constituencies whose population per TD ratios fall outside the 5% variance limit – that is, whose population per TD ratios are either more than 5% above, or below, the state average for this (in the case of a 160-seat Dail, the state average would be 29,749 people per TD). In these cases, the Commission must consider whether they need to make changes to the boundaries/seat numbers for these constituencies. On past precedents, they may opt not to make changes if the level of variance is not much higher than this 5% limit (as happened in the case of Cavan Monaghan in both the 2004 and 2007 revisions) but they must make changes if the level of variance exceeds 7.89% - the maximum level of variance permitted by past commissions (Mayo East in the 1983 revisions).

So what might happen to our current constituencies in the light of the decision to reduce the number of Dail seats and the population changes outlined in the provisional 2011 Census population by area figures, if the Commission opt for a 154-seat Dail?

Carlow-Kilkenny – the current population is fine for this constituency under its present boundaries to remain as a 5-seater, but the combined population of counties Carlow and Kilkenny would not be too large to prevent the return of the Hacketstown area and allow for a five seat constituency comprising of the total area of both counties (population per TD average 0.8% above the state average) – however, in this scenario the Hacketstown area would still be need to provide the Wicklow constituency with sufficient population to allow this to remain as a 5-seat constituency.

Cavan-Monaghan – in a 154-seat scenario the constituency’s population per TD ratio (10.3% below the stage average) would be far too low to allow this remain as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries and the Commission would be likely to take away a seat from the constituency with a territory transfer to balance the population for it to be appropriate for a 4-seat constituency unit. The West Cavan area may well be transferred out of the constituency to bolster (along with the south Donegal area) a new four-seat Leitrim and Sligo constituency.

Clare – the population per TD ratio for this as a 4-seat constituency falls just outside the 5% variance limit (6.6% below the state average) if the current boundaries (excluding Ballyglass ED) are used, but is not much lower than the state average (1.8% below) if the Commission decide to base the constituency boundary on the county boundaries of Clare – either option would be acceptable. (However, even with the return of the West Limerick area from Kerry North, the Clare territory in Limerick City would be needed to maintain a 4-seat and 3-seat boundary configuration within Limerick, so the likelihood would be that Ballyglass would remain part of the Limerick City constituency with the Commission opting to permit a 6.6% variance level for the Clare constituency.)

The Cork constituencies – with a population equivalent to 17.4 TDs based on the 2011 Census figures, at least one (and possibly two) of the Cork constituencies would be losing a seat with Cork South Central and Cork North-Central looking the most vulnerable.

Cork East – with population per TD average below (4.2%) the state average but within the 5% variance limits, there is no need to change the boundaries and Cork East will remain as a 4-seat constituency unless dictated by  more radical changes being made to all of the Cork election boundaries

Cork North Central – as a 4-seat constituency, this is well below 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (11.9% below the state average), but Cork North-Central could maintain its four seats with significant territory transfers from Cork North-West or Cork South-Central

Cork North West – as a 3-seat constituency, this is well below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (8.7% below the state average), but Cork North-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Cork South Central – as a 5-seat constituency, this is well below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (9.2% below the state average), but the constituency could maintain its five seats with territory transfers from one or more neighbouring Cork constituencies.Commission would also have option of leaving boundaries as they are – unless the commission decides to make changes to keep Cork North-Central as a 4-seater and requires territory from Cork-South Central in order to do so.

Cork South West – as a 3-seat constituency, this is below the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (7.2% below the state average), but Cork North-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Commentary on Cork region – the census figures would suggest that Cork’s population would be equivalent to 17.4 TDs suggesting one of the constituencies (probably South Central or North Central) would lose a seat, with a strong possibility that a second Cork constituency might lose a seat. A more radical option might involve the (re)creation of a 5-seat (or 4-seat) Cork City constituency and creation of three 4-seat constituencies in the Cork County area, allowing for the number of Cork constituencies to be reduced by one.

Donegal North East and Donegal South West - the population of both constituencies would be too small to allow these to remain as a 3-seat constituencies within their present boundaries (with a population per TD ratios of 12.4% below the state average in South West and 7.2% below the state average in North East). One option might be to create a 5-seat Donegal county constituency but the population of the county would be somewhat too high for this (resulting in a population per TD ratio of 8.2% above the state average) and territory transfers involving neighbouring constituencies are likely to ensue, in order to retain the current two three-seat constituency configuration or else arising from the decision to amalgamate the two Donegal constituencies into one 5-seater.

The Dublin region – there are are currently 47 Dail seats across shared out across the twelve Dublin constituencies but the population of the Dublin region would be equivalent to just 42.7 seats based on current population figures and a 154-seat configuration. This means that the Dublin constituencies between them would be certain to lose four seats in such a scenario.

Dublin Central – with a population per TD ratio of 5.0% below the state average, Dublin Central could stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here (as might be quite likely).

Dublin Mid West – with a population per TD ratio of 7.2% below the state average, this constituency would probably need a territory transfer from a neighbouring constituency to maintain its current seat allocation, unless the Commission decided to reduce its seat numbers by one (raising the possibility of Saggart and Rathcoole being transferred into Dublin South West).

Dublin North  - with a population per TD ratio of 4.1% below the state average, Dublin Central could stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here (as might be quite likely).

Dublin North Central, Dublin North-West and Dublin North-East – with the combined population of these constituencies equivalent to 7.9 Dail seats based on the provisional 2011 census figures, the three 3-seat constituency configuration involving these North City constituencies would be no longer feasible (and would only be possible with a very large, and rather unsustainable, territory transfer from the neighbouring constituencies of Dublin Central, Dublin North and Dublin West). The most likely solution would be to replace these with two North City 4-seaters (0r a 3-seater/4-seater configuration if the areas located within Fingal County (Howth/Portmarnock/Balgriffin area) was to be moved to Dublin North)

Dublin South - with a population per TD ratio of 5.0% below the state average, this could stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless dictated otherwise as a knock-on effect of changes to the neighbouring constituencies of Dublin South-East, Dublin South-Central, Dublin South-West and Dun Laoghaire, as could be quite likely.

Dublin South Central - with a population per TD average (14.8% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 5-seater with its current boundaries. But it could feasibly become a 4-seat constituency without need for territory transfers out of the constituency as a 4-seat constituency based on the present boundaries would have a population per TD ratio that would be just 6.5% above the state average – a level of variance that past Commissions have accepted in previous revisions. The most likely scenario here would be that this constituency appears likely to lose a seat (possibly to retain four seats in Dublin South-East or Dublin South-West) and some of its territory, unless the constituency was to receive a highly significant territory transfer (equivalent to a population of over 15,000) from one of its neighbouring constituency to help it retain its five seats.

Dublin South East – with a population per TD ratio (13.3% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 4-seater with current boundaries, this constituency will require extra constituency from one, or more, neighbouring constituencies to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory to become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer to, or from, Dublin South Central, Dublin South and/or Dun Laoghaire.

Dublin South West - with a population per TD ratio (11.2% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 4-seater with current boundaries, this constituency will require extra constituency from one, or more, neighbouring constituencies to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory to become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer to, or from, Dublin SouthCentral, Dublin South and/or Dublin Mid-West.

Dublin West -with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.6% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here or unless Commission decides to take account of the 268 submissions call for the political reunification of Swords. The most feasible option here, given that the return of the Swords-Forrest electoral division would leave Dublin West with much too small a population to remain a four-seater, could well be to move the rest of Swords into Dublin West to make it a 5-seater (with the loss of population to Dublin North potentially balanced by moving Howth, Portmarnock and Baldoyle into this constituency from Dublin North-East).

Dun Laoghaire - with a population per TD ratio (11.9% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 4-seater with current boundaries, this constituency will require extra constituency from one, or more, neighbouring constituencies to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory to become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer to, or from, Dublin South East and/or Dublin South.

Commentary: Dublin region set to lose four Dail seats, with losses mainly focused on inner suburbs (the North City and South City areas) and the constituencies located to the south of the Liffey.

Galway East and Galway West: with population per TD ratios of 7.5% below the state average in Galway East and 5.6% below the state average in Galway West, the Commission may need to consider whether the current 4-seat/5-seat boundary configuration is still feasible for Galway especially as the population would be closer to that required to sustain 8-seats than that required to sustain 9-seats. There would be a good chance here that the Commission might decide to take a seat from one of the constituencies while balancing this with a territory transfer out to the other Galway constituency. Then again, they may well decide to maintain the current status quo while engaging in a small transfer of territory from Galway West to Galway East.

Both Kerry North-West Limerick and Kerry South are much too small to remain as 3-seaters under their current boundary configurations with the population per TD ratio 9.6% below the state average in Kerry North-West Limerick and 12.9% below the state average in Kerry South. Moving the West Limerick area back with the other Limerick constituencies would leave the Kerry county area with a population level sufficient for this to become a standalone 5-seat constituency with a population per TD ratio just 2.5% below the state average.

The population of Kildare county is sufficient to retain a 4-seat Kildare North and a 3-seat Kildare South constituency and the boundaries of both constituencies can stay as they are (unless the Commission decides to reunite Naas with its rural hinterland). Had the decision not been made to reduce the number of Dail seats from 166, Kildare would have been likely to have received an added Dail seat in this revision.

Laois-Offaly – with 154 seats, the population per TD ratio for this constituency would be above the state average (2.7%) but the 5% variance limit (This constituency would have been likely to have been divided into two three-seat constituencies had the Commission been working on the basis of 166 seats again.) The return of the south Offaly area to the Laois-Offaly constituency is possible with this 154-seat configuration as a constituency based on the area of the two counties would have a population per TD ratio that would be 5.7% above the state average – outside the 5% variance limits but much lower than levels of variance permitted by past Commissions.

The population of the Limerick City constituency is too small to remain as a 4-seater with its current boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 14.2% below the state average) and that of the Limerick constituency is too small to remain as a 3-seater with its current boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 8.6% below the state average). Moving the western part of the county that is currently in the Kerry North-West Limerick constituency would (just about) ensure the two Limerick constituencies have a sufficient combined population to prevent the loss of a seat (though it may make sense to make Limerick City the 3-seater and have an enlarged 4-seater Limerick County constituency) but only if the Ballyglass ED was not to be returned to Clare.

Longford-Westmeath – the current population levels are fine for this to stay as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 2.0% lower than the state average) and the return of the Castlepollard area to join with the rest of Westmeath county in this constituency would also be feasible in this scenario as this would leave a two-county constituency with a population per TD ratio that would be just 5.0% higher than the state average.

Louth – Louth could remain as 5-seater with present boundaries as its population per TD ratio would be just 3.7% lower than the state average - without the east Meath area it could return to being a 4-seater Louth County constituency (with a population per TD ratio that would be 3.2% higher than the state average).

Mayo – the population of Mayo county would be much too small for this to remain a 5-seater (with a population per TD ratio 12.2% lower than the state average) but would also be too large for it to become a 4-seat constituency with the county boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 9.7% higher than the state average). A territory transfer equivalent to a population of c.12,000 people from a neighbouring constituency (from Roscommon or Sligo) would be required to maintain this as a 5-seat constituency - alternately a territory transfer equivalent to a population of c.6,000 people (in eastern Mayo) into a neighbouring constituency could see Mayo become a four-seat constituency.

The Meath county population is more than sufficient (with a population per TD ratio 3.1% higher than the state average) to have one 6-seat constituency (if that was to be allowed by the Electoral Act)/or rather two 3-seat Meath West and Meath East constituencies with their territory being entirely from the county area without need for added territory from other counties, such as Westmeath. This is feasible as the Castlepollard area could be returned to Longford-Westmeath and the Commission could decide to reduce the number of seats by one in Louth to allow the return of the eastern Meath area. But the current status quo involving these constituencies could be maintained without need for any boundary changes, as the population per TD ratios in these two constituencies lie well within the 5% variance limits (4.2% below in Meath West, 3.0% below in Meath East).

Roscommon-South Leitrim and Sligo-North Leitrim are both too small to remain as three seaters based on how their population per TD rations sit relative to the 5% variance limit; 9.5% below the state average in Roscommon-South Leitrim and 10.2% below the state average in Sligo-North Leitrim. Amalgamating these two constituencies into one five seat constituency would not be feasible either (resulting in a population per TD ratio that would be 8.2% higher than the state average), although a territory transfer involving either north-western Roscommon or western Sligo (c. 15,000 population) being moved into Mayo could allow for the creation of a 5-seat constituency. Alternately, the option of a 3-seat Roscommon-East Mayo and 4-seat Leitrim-Sligo constituency could be feasible with territory transfers from the neighbouring Mayo, Donegal South-West and Cavan-Monaghan constituencies. (A 3-seat Leitrim-Sligo consituency would not be feasible, as its population per TD ratio would be 8.7% higher than the state average.)

In relation to the Tipperary constituencies, the population of Tipperary South is much too small for it to remain as a 3-seater with its current electoral boundaries  (population per TD ratio 10.6% lower than the state average). The population per TD ratio for Tipperary North would just about fall within the 5% variance limit (4.8% below the state average) but this is only due to the addition of the south Offaly in the 2007 revisions. The creation of a 5-seater Tipperary county constituency would probably be feasible in this 154-seat scenario, as the population per TD ratio for such an entity would be 6.7% higher than the state average – this would also allow for the return of the south Offaly area Laois-Offaly and see the part of Waterford county currently in Tipperary South reunited with the rest of Waterford county. While such a level of variance has been accepted by past Commissions, a small territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c.2,000) to Waterford would be sufficient to bring the level of variance within the 5% limit .

Waterford – a 154-seat scenario would see the population per TD ratio for the Waterford constituency area (5.8% below the state average) fall below the 5% variance limit – this would not be an issue if the constituency were to reclaim the part of the county that currently lies within the Tipperary South constituency (resulting in a population per TD ratio that would be 4.4% lower the state average) and this could be an option if the Commission were to opt to create a 5-seat Tipperary constituency.

Wexford – with a population per TD ratio that is just 2.3% below the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here, which would appear to be unlikely in this case.

Wicklow - with a population per TD ratio that is just 5.3% below the state average, this could probably stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries (outside the 5% variance limits but not excessively so) unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here. In a 154-seat constituency scenario Wicklow would need the Hacketstown area to maintain a sufficient level of population for it to remain as a 5-seater (the Wicklow county area as a 5-seat constituency would have a population per TD ratio 8.3% below the state average).

Finally, the potential changes to constitiuency boundaries outlined here are specific to a 154-seat context – if the Commission opt for a larger number of seats (as seems likely) then some of the options outlined here would not be feasible. To see the range of options that would be possible in 156-seat (see also) or 158-seat or 160-seat contexts, please check my earlier posts on these (as linked above).

A new Constituency Commission report on election boundaries (for general and European elections) is likely to be published some weeks after the final/definitive population by area statistics for Census 2011 are published by the Central Statistics Office on 26th April 2012.

This post will consider what might happen our current constituency configurations if a 160 seat tally was agreed on for the next Dail and in light of the provisional Census 2011 population levels published by the CSO last year. While the Commission has a range of options to choose from between 153 and 160 in terms of seat numbers for the next Dail, the likelihood is they may opt for a seat tally towards the upper range of this as continued population growth may require seat tallies to be constantly changing if they opt for a seat tally at the lower end of this scale.

The key thing that the Commission will be watching for in this review are constituencies whose population per TD ratios fall outside the 5% variance limit – that is, whose population per TD ratios are either more than 5% above, or below, the state average for this (in the case of a 160-seat Dail, the state average would be 28,633 people per TD). In these cases, the Commission must consider whether they need to make changes to the boundaries/seat numbers for these constituencies. On past precedents, they may opt not to make changes if the level of variance is not much higher than this 5% limit (as happened in the case of Cavan Monaghan in both the 2004 and 2007 revisions) but they must make changes if the level of variance exceeds 7.89% - the maximum level of variance permitted by past commissions (Mayo East in the 1983 revisions).

So what might happen to our current constituencies in the light of the decision to reduce the number of Dail seats and the population changes outlined in the provisional 2011 Census population by area figures, if the Commission opt for a 160-seat Dail?

Carlow-Kilkenny – the current population is fine for this constituency under its present boundaries to remain as a 5-seater (population per TD ratio is just 1.7% higher than the state average), but the population is not too large to prevent the return of the Hacketstown area and allow for a five seat constituency comprising of the total area of both counties (which would have a population per TD ratio that would be 4.7% higher than the state average). Ultimately the decision on whether Hacketstown returns to Carlow-Kilkenny or not would be largely shaped by what happens with Wicklow rather than this constituency.

Cavan-Monaghan – would be in similar situation to last two Constituency Commission reports – population per TD ratio would be lower than 5% variance limit but not to an excessive degree (6.8%) and the Commission might decide to keep boundaries as they are, based on the precedent set by the 2004 and 2007 reports. However, if they are looking for extra territory to bolster a four-seat Leitrim and Sligo constituency they may well look for this in west Cavan, resulting in a smaller 4-seat Cavan-Monaghan constituency.

Clare – the population per TD ratio for this as a 4-seat constituency falls just below the state average (2.9% below) if the current boundaries (excluding Ballyglass ED) are used, or just above the state average (2.1% above) if the Commissions decides to base the constituency boundary on the county boundaries of Clare – either option would be acceptable. (With the return of the West Limerick area from Kerry North, the Clare territory would not be needed to maintain a 4-seat and 3-seat boundary configuration within Limerick).

The Cork constituencies – with a population equivalent to 18.1 TDs based on the 2011 figures, it looks likely as if one one of the Cork constituencies will be losing a seat with Cork South Central and Cork North-Central looking the most vulnerable.

Cork East – with population per TD average just below (0.5%) the state average, there is no need to change the boundaries and Cork East will remain as a 4-seater unless dictated by  more radical changes being made to all of the Cork election boundaries

Cork North Central – as a 4-seat constituency, this is well below 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (8.5% below the state average), but Cork North-Central could maintain its four seats with territory transfers from Cork North-West or Cork South-Central

Cork North West – as a 3-seat constituency, this is below (albeit only slightly) the 5% variance limit in terms of its population per TD ratio (5.1% below the state average), but Cork North-West could maintain its three seats with territory transfers from one or more of its neighbouring Cork constituencies. The Commission would also have the option of retaining the constitiuency boundaries as they are as the level of variance does not exceed the absolute maximum degree of variance (-7.89%) permitted in previous boundary revisions, but decisions to be taken in relation to other neighbouring constituencies will have a significant bearing here.

Cork South Central – slightly below 5% variance limits (-5.7% below state average) to remain a 5-seater, much too large at present to become a 4-seater – a territory transfer may be required but in this case Commission would also have option of leaving boundaries as they are – unless the commission decides to make changes to keep Cork North-Central as a 4-seater and requires territory from Cork-South Central in order to do so.

Cork South West – no need to change boundaries here on the basis of population levels,  the population per TD ratio is below the state average but is still well within the 5% variance limits (3.6% below state average) to remain a 3-seater – the Commission would have the option of leaving boundaries as they are, unless chages are required due to changes involving neighbouring Cork constituencies.

Commentary on Cork region – the census figures would suggest that Cork’s population would be equivalent to 18.1 TDs suggesting one of the constituencies (South Central or North Central) would probably lose a seat. A more radical option might involve the (re)creation of a 5-seat (or 4-seat) Cork City constituency and creation of two 5-seat and one 4-seat constituencies in the Cork County area, allowing for the number of Cork constituencies to be reduced by one.

Donegal North East and Donegal South West – while the population of the South West constituency would be too small to allow this remain as a 3-seater with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 9.0% below the state average), the North East population per TD ratio would be within 5% variance limit (3.6% below the state average) and so could remain as is. Territory transfer from North East to South West could help maintain both these as 3-seaters, but the Commission would have to tolerate a breach of the 5% variance limit in one or probably both of these cases. Another option might be to create a 5-seat seat Donegal constituency, while transferring out an area equivalent to c.15,000 population to balance the population per TD ratio.

The Dublin region – there are are currently 47 Dail seats across shared out across the twelve Dublin constituencies but the population of the Dublin region would be equivalent to just 44.4 seats based on current population figures and a 160-seat configuration. This means that the Dublin constituencies between them are certain to lose two seats in these changes and may well lose three seats.

Dublin Central – with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.3% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin Mid West – with a population per TD ratio that is just 3.6% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a knock-on effect.

Dublin North – with a population per TD ratio that is just 0.3% below the state average, this can stay as a 4-seater with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here.

Dublin North Central, Dublin North-West and Dublin North-East – with the combined population of these constituencies equivalent to 8.2 Dail seats based on the provisional 2011 census figures, the three 3-seat constituency configuration involving these North City constituencies is no longer feasible (and would only be possible with a very large, and rather unsustainable, territory transfer from the neighbouring constituencies of Dublin Central, Dublin North and Dublin West). The most likely solution would be to replace these with two North City 4-seaters (0r a 3-seater/4-seater configuration if the areas located within Fingal County (Howth/Portmarnock/Balgriffin area) was to be moved to Dublin North – probably making this a 5-seat constituency)

Dublin South - with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.3% below the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies of Dublin South-East, Dublin South-Central, Dublin South-West and Dun Laoghaire are to have a bearing here, as could be quite likely.

Dublin South Central - with a population per TD average (11.4% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 5-seater with its current boundaries, this constituency appears likely to lose a seat (possibly to retain four seats in Dublin South-East) and territory, unless constituency receives a significant territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c.10,000) from a neighbour constituency (possibly the South East Inner City area from Dublin South East) to help it retain its five seats.

Dublin South East – with a population per TD average (9.9% below the state average) that is too small to remain a 4-seater with current boundaries, this constituency will require extra territory from a neighbouring constituency to retain its four seats or else may lost some of its current territory to become a three seat constituency. The most likely solutions will involve a territory transfer (South West Inner City or Terenure area) from Dublin South Central or to Dublin South Central (as noted above), which would either leave two 4-seaters, or a 3-seater and a 5-seater, in the Dublin South City area.

Dublin South West – too small to stay as 4-seaters with current boundaries (population per TD ratio is 7.8% below the state average), but this disparity could be solved with small territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c. 3,500) from Dublin South and/or Dublin Mid West.

Dublin West -with a population per TD ratio that is just 2.3% above the state average, Dublin West can remain as a 4-seat constituency without requiring changes to its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies are to have a bearing here or unless the Commission decides to take account of the 268 submissions call for the political reunification of Swords. The most feasible option for the reunification of the Swords Town area, given that the return of the Swords-Forrest electoral division would leave Dublin West with much too small a population to remain a four-seater, could well be to move the rest of Swords (an area with a population level almost equivalent to one Dail seat)  into Dublin West to make it a 5-seater (with the loss of population to Dublin North potentially being balanced by moving Howth, Portmarnock and Baldoyle into this constituency from Dublin North-East).

Dun Laoghaire – Dun Laoghaire is too small to stay as 4-seater with its current boundaries (population per TD ratio is 8.4% below the state average). This disparity could be solved by small territory transfer equivalent to a population of over 4,000 from Dublin South East or Dublin South.

Commentary: Dublin region set to lose two Dail seats, with losses focused on inner suburbs (North City and South City areas).

Galway East and Galway West: with the population per TD ratios at just 3.9% below the state average in Galway East and 1.9% below the state average in Galway West, these can stay as 4 and 5 seaters respectively with no need to change their boundaries.

Both Kerry North-West Limerick and Kerry South are too small to remain as 3-seaters under their current boundary configurations with the population per TD ratio 6.1% below the state average in Kerry North-West Limerick and 9.5% below the state average in Kerry South. Moving the West Limerick area back with the other Limerick constituencies would leave the Kerry county area with a population level sufficient for this to become a standalone 5-seat constituency with a population per TD ratio just 1.3% above the state average.

The population of Kildare county is sufficient to retain  4-seat Kildare North (population per TD ratio 4.5% higher than the state average) and a 3-seat Kildare South (population per TD ratio 5.1% higher than the state average) constituency and the boundaries of both constituencies will probably remain as they are (unless the Commission decides a transfer territory equivalent to a population of c.300-500 from South to North should be used to bring South’s population per TD ratio within the 5% variance limit, or unless it decides to reunite Naas with its rural hinterland). Had the decision not been made to reduce the number of Dail seats, Kildare would have been likely to have received an added Dail seat in this revision.

Laois-Offaly – with the population per TD ratio somewhat above (6.7%) the 5% variance limit (and this constituency would have been likely to have been divided into two three-seat constituencies had the Commission been working on the basis of 166 seats again), a further territory transfer out of this constituency (involving areas in south Offaly and Tipperary North) may be required though the Commission would have the option to leave the boundaries as they are at present. The return of the south Offaly area to the Laois-Offaly constituency is not possible with a 160-seat configuration as the population per TD ratio for a two-county Laois-Offaly constituency would be 9.8% above the state average.

The population of the Limerick City constituency is too small to remain as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 10.8% below the state average), while the population per TD ratio in Limerick just slightly lower than the 5% variance limit (-5.1%). Moving the western part of the county that is currently in the Kerry North-West Limerick constituency would ensure the two Limerick constituencies have a sufficient combined population to prevent the loss of a seat (though it may make sense to make Limerick City the 3-seater and have an enlarged 4-seater Limerick County constituency, especially if the Ballyglass ED was to be returned to Clare.)

Longford-Westmeath – the current population levels are fine for this to stay as a 4-seater (with a population per TD ratio 1.8% higher than the state average), but the return of the Castlepollard area to join with the rest of Westmeath county in this constituency would not be feasible as this would leave the constituency with a population per TD ratio that would be 9.1% higher than the state average.

Louth – it would be OK to remain as 5-seater with present boundaries as its population per TD ratio would be almost exactly the same as the state average - without the east Meath area it could return to being a 4-seater Louth County constituency (if the Commission accepted a +7.2% variance level for this).

Mayo – the population is too small for this to remain a 5-seater (with a population per TD ratio 8.8% lower than the state average) but too large for it to be a 4-seat constituency with its present boundaries (with a population per TD ratio 14.0% higher than the state average). A small territory transfer equivalent to a population of 6,000 people from a neighbouring constituency (from Roscommon or Sligo) could help maintain this as a 5-seater – alternately a territory transfer equivalent to a population of 10,000 people (in eastern Mayo) into a neighbouring constituency could see Mayo become a four-seat constituency.

The Meath county population is more than sufficient (although probably slightly too large with a population per TD ratio 7.1% higher than the state average) to have one 6-seat constituency (if that was to be allowed by the Electoral Act)/or rather two 3-seat Meath West and Meath East constituencies with their territory being entirely from the county area without need for added territory from other counties, such as Westmeath. But if Castlepollard area cannot be returned to Longford-Westmeath and the Commission decides to keep Louth as a 5-seat constituency, then the current status quo involving these constituencies could be maintained without need for any boundary changes, as the population per TD ratios in these two constituencies lie very close to the state average (0.5% below in Meath West, 0.7% above in Meath East).

Roscommon-South Leitrim and Sligo-North Leitrim are both too small to remain as three seaters based on how their population per TD rations sit relative to the 5% variance limit. However the degree of variance involving both of these constituencies – with population per TD rations of 7.1% below the state average in Roscommon-South Leitrim and 7.9% below the state average in Sligo-North Leitrim -  has been allowed by past Commissions, so the Commission could well just opt to retain the current boundary configurations. The population associated with the area covered by these two constituencies would be too large for these to be amalgamated into a 5-seater, however a territory transfer involving either north-western Roscommon or western Sligo (c. 10,000 population) being moved into Mayo could allow creation of a 5-seat constituency. Alternately, the option of a 3-seat Roscommon-East Mayo and 4-seat Leitrim-Sligo constituency could be feasible with territory transfers from the neighbouring Mayo, Donegal South-West and Cavan-Monaghan constituencies.

In relation to the Tipperary constituencies, the population of Tipperary South is too small for it to remain as a 3-seater with its current electoral boundaries  (population per TD ratio 7.1% lower than the state average), but the population per TD ratio for Tipperary North lies relatively close to the state average (1.1% below this). The creation of a 5-seater Tipperary county constituency is not feasible in a 160-seat scenario, as the population per TD ratio for such an entity would be 10.8% higher than the state average. A territory transfer (equivalent to a population of c.2,000-2.500)from Tipperary North to Tipperary South would appear the likely option here, with the possibility that the loss of territory by Tipperary North could well be offset by the gain of some more territory from Laois-Offaly.

Waterford – the population of the constituency area is sufficient for this to remain as a 4-seater without need to change its current boundaries (population per TD ratio 2.1% below the state average) and there is scope to allow the constituency reclaim the part of the county that currently lies within the Tipperary South constituency, but this territory would appear to be needed to bolster the Tipperary South population to the level required of a three-seat constituency.

Wexford – with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.5% above the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here, which would appear to be unlikely in this case.

Wicklow - with a population per TD ratio that is just 1.6% below the state average, this can stay as a 5-seat constituency with its current boundaries unless changes to neighbouring constituencies have a bearing here. One such change may well involve Carlow-Kilkenny, especially given that in a 160-seat constituency scenario Wicklow would not need Hacketstown area to maintain a sufficient level of population for it to remain as a 5-seater (the Wicklow county area as a 5-seat constituency would have a population per TD ratio 4.7% below the state average).

Finally, the potential changes to constitiuency boundaries outlined here are specific to a 160-seat context – if the Commission opt for a smaller number of seats then some of the options outlined here would not be feasible. To see the range of options that would be possible in 154-seat, 156-seat (see also) or 158-seat contexts, please check my earlier posts on these (as linked above).

Some months after the publication of provisional population by area figures by the Central Statistics Office for the 2011 Census, a new Constituency Commission was set in place to begin the process of redrawing European and general election constituency boundaries in light of the changes in population between 2006 and 2011 as revealed in these figures. The other main factor for the new commission to consider was the decision to reduce the number of TDs in the next Dail, in keeping with government reccomendations and the stipulations set out in the 2011 amendment to the Electoral Act. The process commenced much earlier for this Commission than for previous ones, in which the process has started after the publication of the final, or definitive, population by area census figures by the CSO. Following the ruling on the McGrath/Murphy high court case in 2007, the Commission must now commence the process of redrawing Dail and European election constituency boundaries after provisional census figures are published although they cannot publish the final report until after the final or definitive population by area census figures have been published. Given that there tends to be little difference between provisional and final census figures for large areas such as constituencies, very few final tweaks may be needed should a draft version of the final report be available ahead of the publication of the final census figures and the published report is likely to be available some weeks after these figures are released.

In total, 533 public submissions were made to the Constituency Commission between the receipt of the first submission on 22nd September 2011 and the closing date for submissions (10th January 2012). This compared highly favourably with the level of submissions for the two previous cases, with 335 submissions made in the case of the 2007 Constituency Commission and just 99 submissions made in the case of the 2004 Constituency Commission.

As just 37 submissions were general in scope – either relating to the entire state for the purposes or general elections and/or European elections or else specifically focusing on a particular region (e.g. Dublin, Munster) – this meant that most of the submissions were specifically focusing on concerns associated with a specific area, or constituency, or small number of adjacent constituencies. While well over eighty percent of the submissions to the 2007 were concerning the political division of Leitrim county, the main area/issue focused on in submissions to the 2011/12 Commission was Swords with at least 268 (50.3% of the total number of submissions) submissions relating to requests that the political division of the town, arising from changes made in the 2007 Commission’s report, be addressed. The area that received the next highest level of attention was Leitrim (63 submissions, or 11.8% of the total number of submissions), although the level of submissions requesting that the county be politically reunified within the same Dail constituency was well down on the 2007 level, a response no doubt to a sense of the disgruntlement amongst Leitrim people that the level of submissions sent in 2007 did not bring about the desired change. Other areas/constituencies attracting a significant amount of submissions – albeit not to the same level as for Leitrim and Swords – were Terenure (26 submissions, or 4.9% of the total number of submissions), the Cork constituencies (25 submissions, or 4.7%) and Laois-Offaly – the south Offaly area (20 submissions, or 3.8%).

303 of the submissions were made by males while 193 were made by females, meaning that males accounted for 61.1% of all the submissions that were made, excluding those made by groups or those submissions where the gender of the person making the submission could not be deciphered. A significant proportion of the submissions made by females (129, or 66.8%) were made in relation to the Dublin region, with much of these submissions relating specifically to the Swords issue (126 submissions, or 65.3% of the total number of female submissions).  By contrast, while the Dublin region  (160 submissions, or 52.3% of the total number of male submissions) and in particular the Swords issue (144 submissions, or 47.1%) also accounted for a significant proportion of the total number of male submissions, this was a decidedly smaller proportion than was the case for female submissions.

18.0% of the submissions were made by identified politicians or political groups (96 of the submissions), involving either current TDs, Senators, MEPs or councillors, or former elected representatives/election candidates, or party branch members, or else made on behalf of individual political parties or branches of these. In all, individual (or joint, in the case of two of the senators) submissions were made by 39 TDs, 7 senators, 22 councillors and one MEP, as well as there being 25 submissions from political parties or brancjes of these. Politician-based submissions accounted for a significantly higher levels of submissions in certain regions as opposed to others, with just 7.9% of all submissions in the Dublin region being made by politicians (no doubt relating to the volume of submissions on Swords and Terenure from non-politicians) as opposed to levels of 29.3% for Leinster, 19.6% for Munster and 12.5 for Connacht-Ulster. Politicians accounted for a significantly higher number of the submissions made by males (57, or 18.6% of the total number of male submissions) as opposed to those made by females (15, or 7.8% of the total number of female submissions).

The Standards in Public Office Commission made its report on donations and election expenses disclosed to it by the seven presidential election candidates on 14^th February 2012. This report found that, in total, €304,570.75 in campaign donations was received by the seven candidates while they spent a total of just over €2.3 million between them based on declarations submitted to the commission, amounting to an average campaign spend of €331,225.30 per candidate. While the level of donations received was dominated by Michael D Higgins and Mary Davis, who between them accounted for almost eighty percent of all campaign donations received, the level of campaign expenditure by individual candidate did not vary to the same degree with all the candidates, bar Dana Rosemary Scallon, spending at least three hundred thousand euro during the campaign. That being said, the level of expenditure by the Mitchell and Davis campaigns was somewhat in excess of those of the other candidates, as Table 1 shows, meaning that the spend level per vote received for these candidates, given their poor electoral showing, was much higher than for the rest of the field.

Table 1: Campaign donations and expenditure details per candidate for the 2011 presidential election (Standards in Public Office Commission, 2012)

The level of spend on different aspects of the campaign tended to vary significantly between the candidates and with certain aspects attracting a larger campaign spend either from the party candidates or the non-party candidates. While the total campaign expenditures for the three party candidates (€1.19m) and four non-party candidates (€1.13m) were roughly similar, there tended to be greater levels of spending on aspects such as advertising, posters and market research amongst the party candidates (with the Mitchell campaign accounting for a significant chunk of this expenditure) whereas non-party candidates tended to spend significant more on areas such as publicity and office and stationery, as well as on the employment of campaign workers (Table 2).  It could well be that the party candidates were able to draw on party personnel and infrastructural resources in relation to the latter aspects (almost amounting to a payment in kind), thus deflating their overall campaign expenditure by default and meaning that these candidates could afford to invest extra expenditure levels in other aspects of the campaign unlike the non-party candidates who were required to make significant outlays for these areas.

Table 2: Average campaign spend per candidate on different aspects of the campaign for party candidates, non-party candidates, the three most popular candidates (Higgins, Gallagher, McGuinness) and the four least popular candidates (Mitchell, Norris, Scallon, Davis) (Standards in Public Office Commission, 2012)

As a rough measure of gleaning the effectiveness of different areas of campaign expenditure, a comparison between the average campaign spend for the three strongest candidates (Higgins, Gallagher, McGuinness) and the rest of the field shows that these candidates’ average spends tended to be higher in the areas of other election material (e.g. leaflets), office and stationery, posters and transport, while being less significant in the areas of market research, campaign workers, advertising, and publicity.

Table 3: Campaign spend by candidates on advertising, publicity, posters and other election material. (Standards in Public Office Commission, 2012)

Table 4: Campaign spend by candidates on office and stationery, transport, market and research and campaign workers. (Standards in Public Office Commission, 2012)

In the case of market research, the four lower placed candidates spent on average nearly fifty times the amount spent by Higgins, Gallagher and McGuinness, although this figure was very much shaped by the large spend by the Mitchell campaign in this area, amounting for 75.1% of the total amount spent on market research by all of the candidates, as shown by Table 4.

Given the day that’s in it, many will be considering the effect of gender quotas and whether increased levels of female candidates will necessarily translate into a higher level of female representatives. I would argue that the relative success of gender quotas is likely to be predicated, and potentially limited, by constituency size considerations with female candidates less likely to make a breakthrough in smaller sized (e.g. three seat) constituencies based on previous research noted on this site by Claire McGing and yours truly. It is of course not good to generalise on the basis of small numbers (and in looking at general election constituencies one is effectively looking at a relatively small (forty or so) number of cases, or constituencies – it is also worth stressing that the range of constituency size options for general elections is rather weak. In order to increase the number of cases being looked at and also the range of constituency sizes being considered, in this post I will look at the link between constituency size and female candidacy/success levels in the most recent set of County/City Council and Town Council elections, held in June 2009. It is of course fair to say that local electoral contests are somewhat different to general elections in terms of the issues and concerns being raised, as well as the geographical extent of the constituency units, but not dissimilar enough to mean that findings based on analysis of these are necessarily invalid in relation to consequences for general election constituencies.

In the County/City Council elections in 2009, 312 females (out of a total number of 1,824 candidates – 17.1%) contested the election, with 85 female Fine Gael candidates (18.1%), 80 female Fianna Fail candidates (16.9%), 48 female Labour Party candidates (23.1%), 34 female Sinn Fein candidates (22.8%) and 17 female Green Party candidates (22.1%), with 48 females amongst the non-party candidates and other smaller parties grouping (10.8%). Female candidates won 320,251 votes (17.0%) in these electoral contests and female candidates won an average of 1,026 votes against an average of 1,032 for male candidates (just 0.54% higher than the average for female candidates). 146 female candidates (16.5% of the total number of candidates) won seats in these elections. 59 female Fine Gael candidates (17.4% of the total number of successful Fine Gael candidates) won seats, as did 31 female Fianna Fail candidates (14.2%), 29 female Labour Party candidates (22.0%), 11 female Sinn Fein candidates (20.4%) and 0 female Green Party candidates (0.0%), with 16 non-party/other smaller parties females (11.8%) being elected also.

Females candidacies by party in City/County Council elections, 1999-2009

In the Town Council elections in 2009, 278 females (out of a total number of 1,244 candidates – 22.3%) contested the election, with 89 female Fine Gael candidates (29.9%), 74 female Fianna Fail candidates (22.7%), 30 female Labour Party candidates (19.4%), 27 female Sinn Fein candidates (24.5%) and 15 female Green Party candidates (31.9%), with 43 females amongst the non-party candidates and other smaller parties grouping (14.0%). Female candidates won 60,179 votes (19.4%) in these electoral contests and female candidates won an average of 216 votes against an average of 259 for male candidates (19.52% higher than the average for female candidates). 146 female candidates (16.5% of the total number of candidates) won seats in these elections. 66 female Fine Gael candidates (30.6% of the total number of successful Fine Gael candidates) won seats, as did 35 female Fianna Fail candidates (19.3%), 17 female Labour Party candidates (17.0%), 10 female Sinn Fein candidates (13.9%) and 6 female Green Party candidates (40.0%), with 22 non-party/other smaller parties females (14.6%) being elected also.

If we combine the vote and candidate statistics across both the range of City/County Council and Town Council election types, we can see the impact of constituency size on female candidatures, vote levels and success rates. The general trend suggested by Table 1 is that females were most likely to be selected to run in larger constituencies and female candidates were most likely to do better (in terms of seat numbers and vote share) in larger constituencies, with the notable exception of the relatively small number of cases (3) of three-seat constituencies.

Table 1: Female candidacies, seat numbers and vote levels in the 2009 local electoral contests (City/County and Town Council elections combined) by constituency size. 

The trend is perhaps most obvious when one looks at seat numbers, with the table above showing that female candidates’ chances of winning representation increased in line with increased numbers of seats in constituencies consistently being associated with a higher level of female representation. Constituency size especially was significant in terms of the success levels of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail female candidates. In three or four seat constituencies, just 9.1% of Fianna Fail seats were won by females and 13.2% of Fine Gael seats, while in nine or twelve seat constituencies 19.7% of Fianna Fail seats were won by females and 31.9% of Fine Gael seats were won by females.

What is also interesting is the fact that constituency size seems to have impacted more on the prospects of new/non incumbent female candidates than those of sitting/incumbent female candidates. In the case of incumbent females, these accounted for 182 of all the seats won in the 2009 local electoral contests (11.2% of total seats won) and 79.8% of female incumbents who contested these elections successfully defended their seat, a higher level than that for male incumbent candidates (77.6%). Non-incumbent female candidates accounted for 7.3% of the total number of seats won. Incumbent females were significantly more successful than non-incumbent females in the smaller constituencies with 10.0% of seats won in 3, 4 and 5 seat constituencies being accounted for by female incumbent candidates as against just 5.0% for non-female incumbents. The prospects of non-incumbent females however increased notably for the largest constituencies, with the level of seats won by female non-incumbents in 9 and 12 seat constituencies increasing significantly to 9.5% with just a marginal increase in the level (11.9%) of successful incumbent female incumbent candidates. There is no doubt that larger constituencies create “opportunity spaces” for new female candidates, offering them a better prospect of becoming established, and winning a seat, in a constituency than would be the case for smaller sized constituency units.

So what does this mean in relation to gender quotas? If we want the higher level of female candidatures associated with quotas to translate into higher levels of female respresentation (and yes more female candidates will undoubtedly result in a higher proportion of female representation, but the percentage increase in candidacies need not necessarily translate into a similar increase in representation levels) then the best of way of ensuring this is through larger constituency units. For the new legislation to be ultimately successful, I would argue that there also needs to be a change made to the Electoral Act to allow for larger constituency units at general elections over and above the current range of 3, 4, and 5-seat constituency options.

The basis for judgement here is not simply the weight of votes won by a party or candidate, but the extent of improvement relative to a previous contest, the level of local competition from opposing parties/candidates and the impact that a candidate’s performance had on those of their constituency running mates or even on their party’s national prospects.

• Best individual electoral performance by a Fine Gael candidate: Enda Kenny (Mayo), Peter Mathews (Dublin South), Sean Barrett (Dun Laoghaire), Regina Doherty (Meath East), Brendan Griffin (Kerry South)

2011 was good year for a number of Fine Gael candidates and there were many serious contenders for this category, including candidates such as Aine Collins (Cork North-West), Liam Twomey (Wexford), Michael Ring (Mayo), James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath) and Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South-East), in addition to the nominated candidates, as listed above. Of the nominated candidates, both Mathews and Griffin made strong debuts, with Mathews performance being the more notable probably, given that he entered the electoral contest relatively late in the day. Regina Doherty improved significantly on her 2007 electoral performance in Meath East to ensure two seats out of three for Fine Gael in that constituency – helped in no little part by an effective vote management strategy involving her running mate, Shane McEntee, equalled by that of the party in the Dun Laoghaire constituency where Sean Barrett worked well in managing the party vote to ensure the election of his running mate, Mary Mitchell-O’Connor. Barrett’s performance in Dun Laoghaire was probably only surpassed by his party leader, Enda Kenny, who topped the poll in Mayo with 17,472 first preference votes (23.6% of the first preference vote) and helped see the party gain another seat in that constituency to ensure Fine Gael in Mayo won four seats out of five, the first time this feat was ever achieved in an Irish general contest. Winner: Enda Kenny, Runner-Up: Sean Barrett.

• Best individual electoral performance by a Labour candidate: Roisin Shortall (Dublin North West), Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East), Michael McNamara (Clare), Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West), Michael D. Higgins (Presidential Election)

With the exception of the presidential election, most of the strong Labour performances in 2011 came in the Dublin general election constituencies with a number of very strong vote-winning performances by high-profile candidates in that region. Candidates such as Tommy Broughan, Joanna Tuffy, Pat Rabbitte and Roisin Shortall out-performed others such as Eamonn Gilmore and Joan Burton in terms of their ability to marry strong electoral performances with the ability to help ensure the election of running mates. Outside the capital, the stronger Labour performances probably were associated with the constituencies of Louth, Galway East, Meath East and Clare - of these, the most impressive performance was probably that of Michael McNamara who almost won ten times the number of votes that Labour won in Clare in 2007. But ultimately the strongest Labour performance in 2011 had to be Michael D. Higgins’ win in the presidential election, in the process amassing the highest ever Labour vote in a national election. Winner: Michael D. Higgins, Runner-Up: Roisin Shortall.

• Best individual electoral performance by a Fianna Fail candidate: Michael McGrath (Cork South Central), Lisa Chambers (Mayo), David McGuinness (Dublin West by-election), Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath), John Moloney (Laois-Offaly)

If the 2011 General Election was a good one for Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein and the independents, it most certainly was not a good one for Fianna Fail. Despite that, there were a number of credible electoral performances by Fianna Fail candidates in the general election, as well as a number of strong performances by party candidates in the Seanad elections. Particularly noteworthy were the performances of first-time candidates such as Lisa Chambers, who did well despite being put into the electoral contest relatively late in the day and in the face of a strong anti-Fianna Fail sentiment to win sufficient number of votes to help ensure the re-election of more experienced running mates. The best performance of the first-time candidates was undoubtedly that of Robert Troy in Longford-Westmeath who won the only Fianna Fail seat in this highly competitive constituency and this result probably just about edges out David McGuinness’ performance in the Dublin West by-election, when he finished a strong second to Patrick Nulty, as the best performance by a Fianna Fail candidate in 2011. Winner: Robert Troy, Runner-Up: David McGuinness.

• Best individual electoral performance by a Sinn Fein candidate: Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly), Kathryn Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan/Seanad), Sandra McLellan (Cork East), Jonathan O’Brien (Cork North-Central), Pearse Doherty (Donegal South-West)

There were strong performances for Sinn Fein in 2011 by a number of candidates who signficantly improved the party vote in their constituencies to win seats in areas outside of the traditional Sinn Fein Border and working class Dublin heartlands, including those by Michael Colreavy, Jonathan O’Brien, Brian Stanley and Sandra McLellan. Kathryn Reilly did well in her debut set of elections to almost win a second seat for Sinn Fein in Cavan-Monaghan and then win a third seat for the party in the Seanad elections in what was probably the most difficult panel contest for the party. The strongest vote won by a party candidate in 2011′s elections however was that of Pearse Doherty in Donegal South-West, where he took nearly one-third of the first preference votes. This strong performance came little more than two months following his win in the by-election in that constituency – a result that acted as the springboard for the party’s improved result in the general election. Winner: Pearse Doherty, Runner-Up: Jonathan O’Brien.

• Best individual electoral performance by a United Left Alliance candidate: Seamus Healy (Tipperary South), Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West by-election), Joan Collins (Dublin South-Central), Claire Daly (Dublin North), Declan Bree (Sligo-North Leitrim)

The strong performances of Daly and Collins in breaking through very strong fields to win seats in Dublin North and Dublin South Central respectively were probably the individual standout performances of United Left Alliance candidates in 2011, although Seamus Healy also deserves note given that he won the biggest personal vote of any ULA candidate in the general election. Claire Daly also had to deal with an umpromising electoral boundary change affecting Dublin North which meant she lost part of her Swords base heading into the general election – for still managing to win a seat in 4-seat Dublin North despite this she just about edges out Joan Collins for this award. Winner: Claire Daly, Runner-Up: Joan Collins.

• Best individual electoral performance by a non-party candidate: Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow), Shane Ross (Dublin South), Mick Wallace (Wexford), Luke Ming Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim), Catherine Murphy (Kildare North), Victor Boyhan (Seanad/Dun Laoghaire), Sean Gallagher (Presidential)

There was a notable performance by Stephen Donnelly in winning a seat in Wicklow while lacking the electoral base that other successful independent candidates in the general election. Sean Gallagher’s performance in the presidential election, despite the late collapse in his support level in the dying days of the campaign, was also highly noteworthy. But the strongest performance by an independent candidate was probably those of Shane Ross in Dublin South, where he won the highest vote of any candidate in a general election constituency despite the strong competition locally, and Luke Ming Flanagan, who took nearly one-fifth of the first preference votes in Roscommon-South Leitrim, a significant improvement on his last general election performance when he won just 779 votes in Longford-Roscommon in 2002. Ross just about edges this. Winner: Shane Ross, Runner-Up: Luke Ming Flanagan.

• Best individual electoral performance by an election candidate: Michael D Higgins, Robert Troy, Shane Ross, Seamus Healy, Stephen Donnelly, Pearse Doherty, Roisin Shortall, Joan Collins, David McGuinness, Kathryn Reilly, Regina Doherty.

Michael D Higgins has a strong call on this award given his winning of the presidency, but he was helped by a weak Fine Gael campaign, a Fianna Fail no-show and the imploding campaigns of all his main rivals. On weight of vote numbers, Enda Kenny and Shane Ross would both be contenders, although the Taoiseach-elect was always going to poll well in Mayo this year while Dublin South has a history of awarding very large votes in election campaigns to individual candidates (think George Lee in 2009, Eithne Fitzgerald in 1992). Ultimately this award goes to a candidate who almost doubled his vote in a competitive constituency and who made a significant impact nationally in media debates, but also some months earlier had sparked a surge in his party’s fortunes with an excellent by-election performance. Winner: Pearse Doherty, Runner-Up: Enda Kenny.

• Best individual electoral performance by a candidate who did not win a seat: Lorraine Higgins (Galway East/Seanad), Catherine Connolly (Galway West), John Brady (Wicklow), Pat Burton (Cork North-Central), Mary Fitzpatrick (Dublin Central/Seanad), Mary Moran (Louth), Seamus Walsh (Seanad: Cultural and Educational panel), Bobby Aylward (Carlow-Kilkenny) 

General Election 2011 was not as good an election as Labour has been expecting some months earlier head of the late Kenny Krusade and Doherty Drive, but there were some exceptional performances from some of their candidates, including those who missed out on seats and two of these vie for this award. Mary Moran, despite being added to the Labour ticket late in the day, polled well in north Louth and helped secure Ged Nash’s seat. But this award goes to a first time general election candidate who herself could have ended up in the Dail but for a handful of votes and without whose efforts in mopping up votes in South Galway and the Seanad trail Labour would ended up with one fewer Dail seats and probably one fewer seat in the Seanad elections. Winner: Lorraine Higgins, Runner-Up: Mary Moran.

• Luckiest election candidate: Sean Kyne (Galway West), Cait Keane (Seanad), Colm Keaveney (Galway East), Billy Kelleher (Cork North-Central), Sean O Fearghail (Kildare South), Michael D. Higgins (Presidential)

In the 2011 contests, some candidates came very close to losing out on seats (in some cases by a handful of votes) while others were thankful to some lucky breaks with vote transfers or with electoral boundary changes or to weaker than anticipated local competition. Electoral boundary changes involving the transfers of rural areas in Cork North West and Cork East into Cork North Central played a role in Billy Kelleher retaining his seat (while possibly costing Fianna Fail a seat in Cork East), while Fine Gael and Labour’s decision to run just one candidate in Kildare South helped Sean O’Fearghail to retain his seat. But given that his winning of a seat in Galway West was dependent on him being a handful of votes ahead of Fidelma Healy-Eames on the penultimate count and an even smaller number of votes ahead of Catherine Connolly on the last count, Sean Kyne probably edges out this one. Winner: Sean Kyne, Runner-Up: Sean O Fearghail

• Unluckiest election candidate: Mary Fitzpatrick (Dublin Central/Seanad), Catherine Connolly (Galway West), John Brady (Wicklow), Sean Gallagher (Presidential), Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath/Seanad)

Given that she narrowly missed out on a seat in Dublin Central in the general election and then lost out narrowly in the Seanad election, the obvious winner here has to be Mary Fitzpatrick with Catherine Connolly as the runner-up given the narrow margin she lost out on a seat in Galway West by.

• Best performance by a political party in a general election constituency: Fine Gael (Cavan-Monaghan), Fine Gael (Dublin South), Labour (Dublin North-West), Fine Gael (Dun Laoghaire), Fine Gael (Mayo)

It is a tough call here between a number of Fine Gael constituency performances. The Mayo performance in which the party took four out of five seats would seem an obvious contender here, but the gaining of an extra seat here was not as big an ask as the task facing the party in the other nominated constituencies. Ultimately, given the strength of the Ross vote and other strong competition in the constituency and given that the third Fine Gael candidate was a first-time election contender who was added to the ticket relatively late in the day, I’d have to give this one to Fine Gael (Dublin South) with the party’s managing of the vote in Cavan-Monaghan coming a close second just ahead of the Fine Gael performance in Dun Laoghaire. Winner: Fine Gael (Dublin South), Runner-Up: Fine Gael (Cavan-Monaghan).

• Best performance by a political party in a national contest: Fianna Fail (Seanad Election), Labour (Presidential Election), Fine Gael (General Election), Labour (General Election), Sinn Fein (Presidential Election)

In this category, I’d have to go for Fine Gael (General Election) as the winner, with a tie for Runner-Up between Fianna Fail (Seanad Election) and Labour (Presidential Election).

• Most surprising electoral result: Late swing from Gallagher to Higgins in the Presidential Election, Robert Troy winning seat in Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail Seanad performance, extent of Fianna Fail wipeout in the general election, Colm Keaveney wins Labour seat in Galway East

Given that the presidential election looked like being an easy victory for Sean Gallagher only a few days before the presidential election took place, the winner here has to be the late swing from Sean Gallagher to Michael D Higgins in the Presidential Election.

• Most surprising event to happen during an electoral campaign: Gallagher surge in polls in middle of presidential election campaign, Mary Moran builds up strong Labour vote base in north Louth in space of few weeks, Fine Gael push towards the overall majority in opinion polls in run up to election day. 

There were many incidents of an electoral manner that stunned commentators during 2011 but the one that surprised me the most was the Sean Gallagher surge in the polls in the middle of presidential election campaign

• Biggest electoral miscalculation ahead of an election campaign: Fine Gael presidential election strategy, Fine Gael and Labour only running one candidate in Kildare South, the Labhras O Murchu saga and Fianna Fail’s approach to the presidential election, Fine Gael running only one candidate in Dublin North-East, Fianna Fail and Reshufflegate ahead of calling of the general election

Fine Gael’s approach to the presidential election is a strong contender here, but the chaos ensuing in Brian Cowen’s failed attempt at a cabinet reshuffle probably put the nail in the Fianna Fail coffin for the general election and takes this one. Winner: Fianna Fail and Reshufflegate ahead of calling of the election

• Biggest electoral miscalculation during, or after, an election campaign: Dick Roche calling for a recount in Wicklow, Sean Gallagher not “doing an Enda” on night of Frontline debate, Fine Gael and Labour attacking each other in opening weeks of General Election 2011 campaign, the Martin List, Fine Gael making too many promises during general election campaign, Labour making too many promises during general election campaign, Labour going into government after general election

Although understandable from the point of view of Fine Gael scenting the possibility of single-party government/Labour pushing to ensure the party would win enough seats to ensure they would be in government, the raft of late election promises by the two current government parties were, to put it mildly, misguided and formed the basis for a raft of lost party whips in late 2011. But ultimately the winner here has to be Dick Roche calling for a recount in Wicklow

• Best use of internet/social media by an election candidate: Dylan Haskins (Dublin South East), Lorraine Higgins (Galway East), John Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny), Dan Boyle (Cork South-Central), Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid-West)

No real contest here, as Dylan Haskins brought the use of social media to a new level in the general election contest. All the other nominees also shone in terms of their use of social media this year with veteran social media user Dan Boyle just edging first-time general/Seanad election candidate, Lorraine Higgins for the silver here. Winner: Dylan Haskins, Runner-Up: Dan Boyle.

• Best use of internet/social media to comment on/cover the 2011 elections by a non-politician: ElectionsIreland.org, The Irish Election Literature blog, Politweets.ie, The Journal.ie, Maman Poulet

2011 saw a mushrooming of politics related sites, with a good mix of new sites and old reliables (such as electionsireland.org) adding to the electoral experience on the worldwide web. This was a close category (surprise, surprise) but ultimately boiled down to a site that provided an interesting perspective on the election and a constant range of updated material, the excellent Irish Election Literature blog. Winner: Irish Election Literature blog, Runner-up: ElectionsIreland.org

• Best use of tweeting/Twitter by an election candidate: Dennis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim), Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid-West), Dan Boyle (Cork South-Central/Seanad), Aodhán Ó Riordain (Dublin North-Central), Alan Farrell (Dublin North)

Some good tweets from the politicians ahead of, and during the, 2011 campaigns with a number of candidates from other parties catching up with the Greens in terms of Twitter-pact – out of this group, Aodhán Ó Riordain probably just edges out Alan Farrell. But ultimately this award must go to the man who made Irish electoral history by becoming the first person to concede the loss of his seat by Twitter. Winner: Paul Gogarty, Runner-Up: Aodhán Ó Riordain.

• Best use of tweeting/Twitter to comment on the 2011 elections by someone who was not an election candidate: Ken Curtin, Suzy Byrne, Johnny Fallon, Richard Columb, Ryan Meade, Andrea Pappin, Valerie McDermott

There was some great tweeting in this category from a range of tweeters, who by and large proved themselves capable of having good political arguments in the Twitterverse and were able to take on board other views irrespective of their own political leanings or party affiliations. Just edging out the rest of a quality field by a narrow margin were Suzy (for political information) and Johnny (for good quality arguments) – I’m going to cop out here and declare this one a tie! Winner (tie): Suzy Byrne/Johnny Fallon.

• Best use of tweeting/Twitter to comment on the 2011 elections by an academic: Elaine Byrne, Fiona Buckley, Jennifer Kavanagh, Ciaran McMahon, David Farrell, Eoin O’Malley, Theresa Reidy, Jane Suiter, Gary Murphy

Erm, as I just realised I have to sit opposite most of the nominees at Political Studies Association of Ireland committee meetings, I think I will cop out here and declare this category a Tie.

• AK’s favourite radio/TV interviewer in relation to 2011 elections’ media coverage: Jonathan Healy (Newstalk), Mary Wilson (RTE), Claire Byrne (RTE), George Hook (Newstalk), Will Faulkner (Midlands Radio 3)

There are many great TV/radio broadcasters, but a number of those who I’ve personally enjoyed being interviewed/grilled by are listed above, including both national and local media personnel. The overall winner for me (and, ahem, nothing here to do with a Laois bias) has to be the excellent Claire Byrne, with Jonathan Healy just edging out Mary Wilson for second. Winner: Claire Byrne, Runner-Up: Jonathan Healy

Well done to the winners – here’s to 2014!

OK, for better or worse here is the list of the nominees for the Irish General Election 2011 Facts and Figures’ Golden Goose Awards. There is without doubt going to be some glaring omissions here, but what is an awards contest without a bit of controversy!

• Best individual electoral performance by a Fine Gael candidate: Enda Kenny (Mayo), Peter Mathews (Dublin South), Sean Barrett (Dun Laoghaire), Regina Doherty (Meath East), Brendan Griffin (Kerry South)
• Best individual electoral performance by a Labour candidate: Roisin Shortall (Dublin North West), Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East), Michael McNamara (Clare), Pat Rabitte (Dublin South West), Michael D. Higgins (Presidential Election)
• Best individual electoral performance by a Fianna Fail candidate: Michael McGrath (Cork South Central), Lisa Chambers (Mayo), David McGuinness (Dublin West by-election), Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath), John Moloney (Laois-Offaly)
• Best individual electoral performance by a Sinn Fein candidate: Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly), Kathryn Reilly (Cyavan-Monaghan/Seanad), Sandra McLellan (Cork East), Jonathan O’Brien (Cork North-Central), Pearse Doherty (Donegal South-West)
• Best individual electoral performance by a United Left Alliance candidate: Seamus Healy (Tipperary South), Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West by-election), Joan Collins (Dublin South-Central), Claire Daly (Dublin North), Declan Bree (Sligo-North Leitrim)
• Best individual electoral performance by a Green Party candidate: Mark Dearey (Louth), Dan Boyle (Seanad/Cork South Central), Roderic O’Gorman (Dublin West by-election), Trevor Sargent (Dublin North), Eamonn Ryan (Dublin South) 
• Best individual electoral performance by a non-party candidate: Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow), Shane Ross (Dublin South), Mick Wallace (Wexford), Luke Ming Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim), Catherine Murphy (Kildare North), Victor Boyhan (Seanad/Dun Laoghaire), Sean Gallagher (Presidential)
• Best individual electoral performance by an election candidate: Michael D Higgins, Robert Troy, Shane Ross, Seamus Healy, Stephen Donnelly, Pearse Doherty, Roisin Shortall, Joan Collins, David McGuinness, Kathryn Reilly, Regina Doherty.
• Best individual electoral performance by a candidate who did not win a seat: Lorraine Higgins (Galway East/Seanad), Catherine Connolly (Galway West), John Brady (Wicklow), Pat Burton (Cork North-Central), Mary Fitzpatrick (Dublin Central/Seanad), Mary Moran (Louth), Seamus Walsh (Seanad: Cultural and Educational panel), Bobby Aylward (Carlow-Kilkenny) 
• Luckiest election candidate: Sean Kyne (Galway West), Cait Keane (Seanad), Colm Keaveney (Galway East), Billy Kelleher (Cork North-Central), Sean O Fearghail (Kildare South), Michael D. Higgins (Presidential)
• Unluckiest election candidate: Mary Fitzpatrick (Dublin Central/Seanad), Catherine Connolly (Galway West), John Brady (Wicklow), Sean Gallagher (Presidential), Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath/Seanad)
• Best performance by a political party in a general election constituency: Fine Gael (Cyavan-Monaghan), Fine Gael (Dublin South), Labour (Dublin North-West), Fine Gael (Dun Laoghaire), Fine Gael (Mayo)
• Best performance by a political party in a national contest: Fianna Fail (Seanad Election), Labour (Presidential Election), Fine Gael (General Election), Labour (General Election), Sinn Fein (Presidential Election)
• Most surprising electoral result: Late swing from Gallagher to Higgins in the Pesidential Election, Robert Troy winning seat in Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail Seanad performance, extent of Fianna Fail wipeout in the general election, Colm Keaveney wins Labour seat in Galway East
• Most surprising event to happen during an electoral campaign: Gallagher surge in polls in middle of presidential election campaign, Mary Moran builds up strong Labour vote base in north Louth in space of few weeks, Fine Gael push towards the overall majority in opinion polls in run up to election day
• Biggest electoral miscalculation ahead of an election campaign: Fine Gael presidential election strategy, Fine Gael and Labour only running one candidate in Kildare South, the Labhras O Murchu saga and Fianna Fail’s approach to the presidential election, Fine Gael running only one candidate in Dublin North-East, Fianna Fail and Reshufflegate ahead of calling of the election
• Biggest electoral miscalculation during, or after, an election campaign: Dick Roche calling for a recount in Wicklow, Sean Gallagher not “doing an Enda” on night of Frontline debate, Fine Gael and Labour attacking each other in opening weeks of General Election 2011 campaign, the Martin List, Fine Gael making too many promises during general election campaign, Labour making too many promises during general election campaign, Labour going into government after general election
• Best use of internet/social media by an election candidate: Dylan Haskins (Dublin South East), Lorraine Higgins (Galway East), John Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny), Dan Boyle (Cork South-Central), Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid-West)
• Best use of internet/social media to comment on/cover the 2011 elections by a non-politician: ElectionsIreland.org, The Irish Election Literature blog, Politweets.ie, The Journal.ie, Maman Poulet 
• Best use of tweeting/Twitter by an election candidate: Dennis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim), Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid-West), Dan Boyle (Cork South-Central/Seanad), Aodhán Ó Riordain (Dublin North-Central), Alan Farrell (Dublin North)
• Best use of tweeting/Twitter to comment on the 2011 elections by someone who was not an election candidate: Ken Curtin, Suzy Byrne, Johnny Fallon, Richard Columb, Ryan Meade, Andrea Pappin, Valerie McDermott
• Best use of tweeting/Twitter to comment on the 2011 elections by an academic: Elaine Byrne, Fiona Buckley, Jennifer Kavanagh, Ciaran McMahon, David Farrell, Eoin O’Malley, Theresa Reidy, Jane Suiter, Gary Murphy
• AK’s favourite radio/TV interviewer in relation to 2011 elections’ media coverage: Jonathan Healy (Newstalk), Mary Wilson (RTE), Claire Byrne (RTE), George Hook (Newstalk), Will Faulkner (Midlands Radio 3)

Good luck to all the nominees and may the best woman/man/party win…

There have been many electoral contests during 2011, associated with February’s general election, the Seanad elections in April and the October’s presidential elections, in addition to a by-election and two referendum elections. But which parties and candidates managed to get the golden goose who laid the golden electoral eggs in these contests? Sometime over the next week or so I will be deciding which parties (at a national or constituency) or candidates are most deserving of the following awards. Decisions will not be based on sheet weight of numbers (or votes!) but will take account of the challenges faced by candidates/parties in specific constituencies or contests and the level of the competition offered by opposing parties:

• Best individual electoral performance by an election candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a Fine Gael candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a Labour candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a Fianna Fail candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a Sinn Fein candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a United Left Alliance candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a Green Party candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a non-party candidate
• Best individual electoral performance by a candidate who did not win a seat
• Luckiest election candidate
• Unluckiest election candidate
• Best performance by a political party in a general election constituency
• Best performance by a political party in a national contest
• Most surprising electoral result
• Most surprising event to happen during an electoral campaign
• Biggest electoral miscalculation
• Biggest electoral miscalculation ahead of an election campaign
• Biggest electoral miscalculation during, or after, an election campaign
• Best use of internet/social media by an election candidate
• Best use of internet/social media to comment on/cover the 2011 elections by a non-politician
• Best use of tweeting/Twitter by an election candidate
• Best use of tweeting/Twitter to comment on the 2011 elections by a non-politician
• AK’s favourite radio/TV interviewer in relation to 2011 elections’ media coverage

Any comments or suggestions as to likely candidates for the above awards may be made below or via Twitter (#goldengoose), but ultimately in true political tradition it will be a case of uno duce una voce in terms of the final decisions, bwa ha ha.