Methodology, sources and corrections

For votes, debates, parliamentary questions, member information and legislation, DáilDex uses the Houses of the Oireachtas as its primary source. A summary should identify the record, event date and source link so readers can check the underlying material themselves.

We distinguish parliamentary records from commentary. A vote records a vote. A contribution records what was said. A parliamentary question records the question and the Minister's answer. None of these, by themselves, prove a person's broader motivation or every aspect of their position.

Counts and activity summaries must state the period, the record types included and any limits in the source data. DáilDex does not call activity a measure of quality, rank politicians as “best”, or treat a missing record as proof of absence.

Where voting agreement or similar comparisons are introduced, they must show the included divisions, treatment of abstentions and non-recorded votes, and a link to each underlying division.

AI can help turn a cited record into a short, neutral explanation. It does not create the record, decide how a TD voted, or fill gaps in public data. When an answer cannot be supported by a retrieved official source, DáilDex should say so rather than guess.

AI-generated explanations are designed to be checked against their linked source. The service aims to describe what happened, not tell readers what political conclusion to draw.

To report an error, reply to the relevant alert or contact DáilDex with the page or alert, the proposed correction and the official source that supports it. We assess material corrections against the primary record and update the public explanation where needed.

Records and policies can change. Dated explainers should show their last substantive update, and DáilDex will correct errors without quietly changing the meaning of a record.