Search

This paper compares the amendments introduced by the Regulation of Lobbying and Oireachtas (Allowances to Members) (Amendment) Act 2023 with the original regulations of the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015. The study was conducted using the Hired Guns Method for assessing the robustness of lobbying legislation, developed by the Centre for Public Integrity (CPI), allowing findings to be compared with lobbying regulations internationally. The 2015 legislation was introduced after years of tribunals, scandals, unfulfilled political promises, and economic crisis, in an effort to increase the public’s trust in politicians, representative institutions, democracy and the wider bureaucracy. The 2023 Amendment came in the wake of a 2020 lobbying scandal. The paper finds that, despite the CPI score remaining unchanged, in-depth examination of the legislation showed that the amendment introduced more rules and sanctions, particularly in relation to designated public officials, and closed off outstanding legislative loopholes.

This paper employs elite formation quantitative indices to directly and transparently compare the role of the Irish secondary school system in the formation of Ireland’s political and judicial elites, over its history as an independent country (1922–2022). Whereas other elite studies have tended to compare either the same elite formation systems or the same elites, across countries, we examine the eliteness, influence and exclusiveness of one formation system in the creation of two very different societal elites. Our results suggest that the secondary schools that educated Ireland’s superior court judges were significantly more elite and influential than those that educated its cabinet ministers. Additionally, the vast majority of the secondary schools that educated superior court judges, and about 30 per cent of those that educated cabinet ministers, were fee-paying schools, a category of school that constitutes only a tiny fraction of the secondary schools in the country.

Purpose: This paper aims to present an interpretation of freehand drawings produced by a sample of final year degree level learners in response to the question--"What is civic engagement"? The aim in using this approach, with final year degree learners from different countries, but pursuing the same degree, was to compare and contrast their understanding of civic engagement. Design/methodology/approach: Learners completed their drawings and then discussed their drawings in small groups. All of their drawings were initially examined quantitatively before a sample of six drawings were selected for in-depth qualitative examination. Findings: Using learner-generated drawings enables learners convey visually what can be challenging to verbalise. After the exercise, some learners discovered that they had a good basic appreciation of civic engagement. Research limitations/implications: Describing civic engagement pictorially forced participants to think about what the essence of civic engagement was for them. Originality/value: This study shows how a collaborative learning experience, rather than a competitive comparison of performance, facilitates learners readily demonstrating their level of understanding and appreciation for civic engagement.