Latest news with #AngelaFeeney
BreakingNews.ie
2 hours ago
- Politics
- BreakingNews.ie
Seanad count challenge: Returning officer had no reason to doubt accuracy of vote, court told
A returning officer who refused a former Seanad candidate's request for a full recount of the vote during the recent election has told the High Court he had no reason to doubt the accuracy of the count. Martin Groves, the recently retired clerk of the Seanad, said a narrow margin of votes separating Cllr Angela Feeney and the final successful candidate in the agricultural panel was not grounds in and of itself to direct a full recount of votes. Advertisement Cllr Feeney, a Labour Party councillor in Kildare, was eliminated on the 23rd count by a margin of .116, or one-ninth, of a ballot, missing out on the final seat to Fine Gael's Maria Byrne in January's election. Each valid Seanad ballot paper is deemed to have a value of 1,000 votes. The total valid poll for the 11-seat agricultural panel was 95,667 votes. Cllr Feeney, a member of the Labour Party's central council and former head of Technological University Dublin's school of languages, law and social sciences, has brought a High Court petition challenging the conduct of vote counting for the agricultural panel. Cllr Feeney's case claims there should have been a full recount of the ballots, rather than simply a repeat of the 23rd count. Cllr Feeney wants the election result overturned and a recount ordered. Advertisement Giving evidence at the hearing of Cllr Feeney's action on Wednesday, Mr Groves said legislation allows returning officers conducting Seanad election counts discretion to direct full recounts in circumstances where they are not satisfied with the accuracy of the count. Mr Groves said his discretion to direct a full recount of votes is restrained by those circumstances. He said a narrow margin separating candidates was not a reason in and of itself to order a full recount. During the count, after considering Cllr Feeney's request for a full recount, Mr Groves said he concluded he had no reason to doubt the accuracy of the count, noting that no errors were uncovered following two partial recounts. Advertisement He said there were lots of potential circumstances where he would begin to doubt the accuracy of the count. On Thursday, Dr Eoin O'Malley, a political scientist and professor at Dublin City University, told the court he was 'surprised' Cllr Feeney was not granted a recount. Dr O'Malley, an expert witness called by Cllr Feeney's side, stipulated that he did not have expertise or experience with Seanad counts, but had experience of observing Dáil election counts. He agreed with Conor Power SC, for Cllr Feeney, that recounts in election counts with tight margins can lead to greater satisfaction with the outcome of the election. Advertisement Dr O'Malley said he believed part of the reason for the granting of recounts in those circumstances is to satisfy all candidates that the count has been conducted fairly and properly. In the case of Cllr Feeney, Dr O'Malley said it would have been better for democracy and the electoral process had a recount been granted, and noted it would have been quicker and cheaper than pursuing the issue through the courts. He said he believed that granting Cllr Feeney the recount could have satisfied the candidate that there were no errors in the count. The trial, before Mr Justice Míchéal O'Higgins, continues.
Irish Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
Former Seanad candidate wants full recount of agricultural panel vote, court hears
A former Seanad election candidate wants a full recount of the recent agricultural panel vote in the interest of fairness and transparency, the High Court has heard. Cllr Angela Feeney, a member of the Labour Party's central council and former head of Technological University Dublin's school of languages, law and social sciences, has brought a High Court petition challenging the conduct of vote counting for the agricultural panel. Cllr Feeney, a councillor in Kildare, wants January's election result overturned and a recount ordered. She was eliminated on the 23rd count by a margin of .116, or one-ninth, of a ballot, missing out on the final seat to Fine Gael's Maria Byrne. READ MORE Each valid Seanad ballot paper is deemed to have a value of 1,000 votes. The total valid poll for the 11-seat agricultural panel was 95,667 votes. Cllr Feeney's case claims there should have been a full recount of the ballots, rather than simply a repeat of the 23rd count. She says her request for a full recount was denied by the returning officer. On Tuesday, giving evidence at the hearing into her action, Cllr Feeney said she was asking the court to grant the recount in the interest of fairness and transparency. She added that the 'bigger issue' in the case is transparency and public faith in the electoral system. Cllr Feeney said she was 'surprised' when counting at the count centre began at such a distance that candidates and their teams had no proper sight of the process. Counting continued at a distance of about 7ft away and did not lend itself to 'proper oversight' of the process, as one might expect at local or Dáil election count centres, she said. Cross-examined by Catherine Donnelly, senior counsel for the returning officer, Cllr Feeney agreed other candidates vying for a seat on the agricultural panel were eliminated by similarly slim margins, less than the value of one ballot paper. Cllr Feeney said because she was last to be eliminated, she had the potential to be elected. None of the other candidates missed out by virtue of a margin as fine as hers, she said. Cllr Feeney agreed that her side had not identified any particular error in the count process. She said she believed the error was not allowing the full recount and the lack of transparency. Ms Donnelly put to Cllr Feeney that the count was visible to candidates. The councillor said the visibility was not adequate. Asked why she did not raise with the returning officer concerns around transparency when she first arrived at the count centre, Cllr Feeney said it did not seem she and her team had an opportunity to raise such concerns. Conor Power, senior barrister for Ms Feeney, said the returning officer had discretion in granting a full recount but a number of factors must be considered in exercising that discretion. In Cllr Feeney's case, those factors included the narrow margin of difference between her and the next candidate, the very small margin of difference on a number of previous counts and the possibility of human error during the count, Mr Power said. The case continues before Mr Justice Mícheál O'Higgins.
BreakingNews.ie
2 days ago
- Politics
- BreakingNews.ie
Seanad candidate had ‘expectation' of a full recount of vote over fine margin
An unsuccessful candidate in the Seanad election told a court there was an 'expectation' of a full recount of the agricultural panel vote due to the 'fine' margin of votes by which she lost the final seat. Kildare county councillor Angela Feeney told the High Court in Dublin that there were issues around transparency of counting votes, and that the venue in Leinster House was 'cramped and crowded'. Advertisement Earlier this year, Ms Feeney was granted permission by the court to present a petition challenging the conduct of the counting of votes for the 11-member panel. Ms Feeney, who is a member of the Labour Party, claims she was refused a full recount by the returning officer. She said she lost out on a seat by one-ninth of a ballot. Ms Feeney claimed that the margin of difference was as close as it has ever been since the 1980s. Advertisement Her petition to have a full recount is being opposed by a number of defendants in the case, including the returning office and the Minister for Housing. Ms Feeney lost to Fine Gael's Maria Byrne following a margin of difference of one-ninth of a ballot. Ms Byrne was the last candidate on the panel to be elected. In the Seanad elections, as the electorate is much smaller than other elections, each ballot paper is given a value of 1,000 votes. There was a total valid poll of 95,667 on the agricultural panel. At the conclusion of the 23rd count, in which Ms Feeney had been eliminated, she had 17,513 votes. Advertisement Ms Byrne had, at the end of that count, a total of 17,629 votes. It represented a difference of one ninth of a ballot paper. Senior counsel Conor Power, for Ms Feeney, said that the petitioner wants to have the results overturned and recounted. Mr Power said that Ms Byrne was marginally ahead of Ms Feeney, and that it was the tightest of margins at a stage of elimination where the final seat was up for grabs. He claimed it was the closest margin that they have come across since 1987 on a final determinative count, where one exclusion deemed everyone else elected. Advertisement He said that following the conclusion of the 23rd count, Ms Feeney asked the returning officer for a full recount of votes cast on the agriculture panel. Having considered the request, the returning officer said that only a full recount of the 23rd count would be carried out. The court heard that Seanad election candidates are legally entitled to call for a recount, but not a full recount. Candidates can, however, ask the returning officer for a full recount, to which the returning officer has discretion. Advertisement Following the returning officer's refusal to carry out a full recount, Ms Feeney objected in writing. Mr Power said there are two issues raised by Ms Feeney, the issue of a failure to allow for a full recount and the second being the issue of transparency of how the 23rd recount was carried out. Mr Power also said he is making a request for the court to order a full recount before its determination of the case, saying it may assist the court, particularly if a mistake or irregularity is established. Mr Power said that small margins in a system where ballot papers are counted by people must be considered by the returning officer in exercising their discretion of power. He said that the purpose of the Electoral Act is to ensure an outcome that the public has confidence in the system and that recounts are part of that process. 'We say that all of the rules for counting and recounting is to produce a result that everyone can stand over,' he said. 'But because there are narrow margins and there is a possibility of human errors, notwithstanding planning by the returning office and staff. The evidence shows that recounts do result in different voting outcomes and changes to the number of votes. 'We say the margin of difference is something of particular note for the returning officer to consider as that bears directly on the outcome of the election.' Giving evidence, Ms Feeney said she has attended election counts for a number of decades, both as a candidate and as part of local Labour Party teams. She said she has attended count centres for Seanad, Dáil and local elections. She said she would have been well used to the process of counting ballot papers. Ms Feeney said she was 'very surprised' that when the counting process started, it was taking place at such a distance that there was no proper line of sight of the ballot papers. She said that some staff members had their backs to candidates and that she did not have a proper line of sight to see the ballot papers being counted. She said there was no opportunity to see the tally of votes as they were being counted around seven feet away. Ms Feeney told the court that there was an 'expectation' that because of the fine margin, a recount would have been called. She said this also raised issues of transparency, that the venue was very cramped and crowded and was not an appropriate venue which did not allow for transparency. She also claimed the layout of the room also caused issues, in that those watching the count were restricted from seeing the ballot papers. The case continues.
