Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Why is elected member of the Dail causing havoc at Protest not sitting in Dail?

Options
  • 21-06-2012 11:15am
    #1
    IrishHomer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,936 ✭✭✭


    Luke Ming flannigan is currently involved at a protest on Clonmoylon Bog in Galway. he rushed down last night to get involved with the protest in preventing National Parks & Wildlife Service and Gardai from implementing the law.

    I want to know how come he can stay down there supporting the protest is he not being paid to sit in the Dail today? Is his role in the Dail not as important as his passion for promopting anarchy?:mad:


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    A related though not specifically this case thought:

    Does it not undermine our governance system that TDs publicly flout, and encourage others to break, the laws that they disagree with? Is it not an essential part of our democracy that even if you disagree with a law, if it has been passed then you agree to be bound by the will of the majority?

    b]edit for maximum clarity[/bI'm thinking of Ming and the bogs, the bin tax, house charges etc.
    Examples would be this protest re: the bogs, the bin tax protests, the house hold charge tax protests, etc. where sitting TDs publicly call on the public to break the law.b]/edit[/b

    Surely this is a fundamental part of democracy, and those wishing to sit in either house of our republic should not be allowed to ignore laws just because they voted against them.


  • Options
    #3
    creedp
    Registered Users Posts: 5,597 ✭✭✭creedp


    IrishHomer wrote: »
    Luke Ming flannigan is currently involved at a protest on Clonmoylon Bog in Galway. he rushed down last night to get involved with the protest in preventing National Parks & Wildlife Service and Gardai from implementing the law.

    I want to know how come he can stay down there supporting the protest is he not being paid to sit in the Dail today? Is his role in the Dail not as important as his passion for promopting anarchy?:mad:


    Would we be better off if he headed off to Poland with Wallace!


  • Options
    #4
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


     
    Why is elected member of the Dail causing havoc at Protest not sitting in Dail?


    Maby because he is supporting his constitutants who feel, rightly or otherwise that they have been shafted out of their rights to use their own land in the way it has been used for generations.

    Probably a more representitive and honest use of time spent away from the dail than most of the party men who blindly follow the whip with no questions as to right or wrong.

    Just my view.


  • Options
    #5
    crusher000
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭crusher000


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    A related though not specifically this case thought:

    Does it not undermine our governance system that TDs publicly flout, and encourage others to break, the laws that they disagree with? Is it not an essential part of our democracy that even if you disagree with a law, if it has been passed then you agree to be bound by the will of the majority?

    I'm thinking of Ming and the bogs, the bin tax, house charges etc.
    Surely this is a fundamental part of democracy, and those wishing to sit in either house of our republic should not be allowed to ignore laws just because they voted against them.

    If this was the case we would have very few sitting TD's in the dail as let's face it alot of them have flaunted the law. Can we isolate one politican for flaunting the law by joining a protest v a politican that owes money for work rendered on their house v politicans whom haven't paid taxes due or found guilty of drink driving. I could go on but I think you see what I'm getting at.


  • Options
    #6
    crusher000
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭crusher000


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    Why is elected member of the Dail causing havoc at Protest not sitting in Dail?


    Maby because he is supporting his constitutants who feel, rightly or otherwise that they have been shafted out of their rights to use their own land in the way it has been used for generations.

    Probably a more representitive and honest use of time spent away from the dail than most of the party men who blindly follow the whip with no questions as to right or wrong.

    Just my view.

    Some people forget the emotional ties country people have with the land and how it's used. Penal law only allowed the cutting of turf for certain number of days a year. I have heard of farmers whom were jailed because they flouted this law. I know, I know it's way back and move on etc. but some people may relate these stories to what's happening now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    crusher000 wrote: »
    If this was the case we would have very few sitting TD's in the dail as let's face it alot of them have flaunted the law. Can we isolate one politican for flaunting the law by joining a protest v a politican that owes money for work rendered on their house v politicans whom haven't paid taxes due or found guilty of drink driving. I could go on but I think you see what I'm getting at.
    And you missed my point.
    Which was that TDs who break the law should lose their seats. I was not targeting ming


  • Options
    #8
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    Actually I referred to at least 5 other TDs;
    Joe Higgins, Clare Daly, Seamus Healy, Richard Boyd Barrett, and Joan Collins.

    Though my list would go on, hence the "etc."
    Why didnt I refer to these people by name?
    A) I'm really only interested in having a discussion with informed people, so I assume there is sufficient background knowledge that I would not need to provide an exhaustive list every TD who took part in every protest
    B) Its a philosophical / hypothetical argument over a principle, I do not want to argue to merits of individual protests or the politics of individual TDs.


  • Options
    #9
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    A related though not specifically this case thought:

    Does it not undermine our governance system that TDs publicly flout, and encourage others to break, the laws that they disagree with? Is it not an essential part of our democracy that even if you disagree with a law, if it has been passed then you agree to be bound by the will of the majority?

    I'm thinking of Ming and the bogs, the bin tax, house charges etc.
    Surely this is a fundamental part of democracy, and those wishing to sit in either house of our republic should not be allowed to ignore laws just because they voted against them.

    Just because something is signed into law does not make it just. While I may not agree with the actions of the politicians you have mentioned I do see the benefits to society by allowing people, even elected representatives, protest against certain laws they feel are unjust.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience


  • Options
    #10
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Well, local Gardai have plenty of practice in dealing with protesters in that neck of the woods. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    Personally I find it hysterical the amount of victim playing. Ten years to sort this out and crocodile tears over compensation and here we are wrestling in a bog over machinery. Pathetic.


  • Options
    #11
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    amcalester wrote: »
    Just because something is signed into law does not make it just. While I may not agree with the actions of the politicians you have mentioned I do see the benefits to society by allowing people, even elected representatives, protest against certain laws they feel are unjust.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
    Thats the obvious counter. Civil disobedience is held up as the best form of protest.
    I'm wondering though if there is a difference in what one should expect from a TD and an ordinary citizen.

    What is or is not an unjust law is a matter or opinion (obviously, or the law would not have been passed).
    I have protested in the past, and have no reason to think that I wouldnt in the future.

    But for a TD to encourage the breaking of a law, or for them to do so themselves, is a bit like a child saying if I cant have it my way then I'm not playing at all.
    I wonder if it undermines the legitimacy for our democratic process for a TD to be unwilling to be bound by the will of the majority.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Ming claims this machine was burnt out. Political stunt? I can't see NPWS setting fire to things.

    http://twitpic.com/9yrabt

    He also tweeted that this is now a police state. Really Ming?
    On my way to clonmoylan bog. Armed response unit present. Attempts being made to confiscate machinery. welcome to the police state.


  • Options
    #13
    Dirk Gently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,784 ✭✭✭Dirk Gently


    IrishHomer wrote: »
    is he not being paid to sit in the Dail today? :

    perhaps he thought he'd do something productive for his wages instead?
    I've no interest in the turf situation but I can't fault a TD for getting involved in something he primarily campaigned on over sitting in the Dail, which is just a glorified rubber stamp and yields no democratic or accountability merits. You could argue that sitting in the Dail is a waste of his time given the centralised power structure we have.


  • Options
    #14
    doopa
    Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭doopa


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    Thats the obvious counter. Civil disobedience is held up as the best form of protest.
    I'm wondering though if there is a difference in what one should expect from a TD and an ordinary citizen.

    What is or is not an unjust law is a matter or opinion (obviously, or the law would not have been passed).
    I have protested in the past, and have no reason to think that I wouldnt in the future.

    But for a TD to encourage the breaking of a law, or for them to do so themselves, is a bit like a child saying if I cant have it my way then I'm not playing at all.
    I wonder if it undermines the legitimacy for our democratic process for a TD to be unwilling to be bound by the will of the majority.

    Perhaps he disagrees with the legitimacy of the democratic process. Perhaps he and others don't find it very legitimate. You clearly do. Others don't.


  • Options
    #15
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    Thats the obvious counter. Civil disobedience is held up as the best form of protest.
    I'm wondering though if there is a difference in what one should expect from a TD and an ordinary citizen.

    What is or is not an unjust law is a matter or opinion (obviously, or the law would not have been passed).
    I have protested in the past, and have no reason to think that I wouldnt in the future.

    But for a TD to encourage the breaking of a law, or for them to do so themselves, is a bit like a child saying if I cant have it my way then I'm not playing at all.
    I wonder if it undermines the legitimacy for our democratic process for a TD to be unwilling to be bound by the will of the majority.

    I dont think it does undermine the legitimacy of our democratic process, if anything it only strengthens it. Whats the point in having an opposition if they are bound to go along with the decisions of the sitting government.


  • Options
    #16
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    doopa wrote: »
    Perhaps he disagrees with the legitimacy of the democratic process. Perhaps he and others don't find it very legitimate. You clearly do. Others don't.

    I think I'll ask him. But while I'm waiting for his answer, would someone like to explain to me why this is an example of an "illegitimate" process.
    [edit]Radio Interview:
    http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/player.html?20120621,3324008,3324008,flash,257

    Question: You're a paid TD, why are you stopping the guards from doing their jobs.
    Luke Flannagan TD: I won't answer that as its not relevant.

    The question was put to him again and he dodged it. I don't think Mr Flannagan thinks the democratic process is illegitimate. This particular protest is outside his constituency I think. He is breaking the law because he doesnt agree with it, not because of any short coming in the democratic process[/edit]

    amcalester wrote:
    I dont think it does undermine the legitimacy of our democratic process, if anything it only strengthens it. Whats the point in having an opposition if they are bound to go along with the decisions of the sitting government.

    I believe in the social contract. I must agree to be bound by the laws I disagree with because I need the instruments of the law to protect me from those who would break other laws and harm me. I cannot choose to obey only the laws I like, because if everyone did that society would crumble.


  • Options
    #17
    doopa
    Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭doopa


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    I think I'll ask him. But while I'm waiting for his answer, would someone like to explain to me why this is an example of an "illegitimate" process.
    [edit]Radio Interview:
    http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/player.html?20120621,3324008,3324008,flash,257

    Question: You're a paid TD, why are you stopping the guards from doing their jobs.
    Luke Flannagan TD: I won't answer that as its not relevant.

    The question was put to him again and he dodged it. I don't think Mr Flannagan thinks the democratic process is illegitimate. This particular protest is outside his constituency I think. He is breaking the law because he doesnt agree with it, not because of any short coming in the democratic process.

    I believe in the social contract. I must agree to be bound by the laws I disagree with because I need the instruments of the law to protect me from those who would break other laws and harm me. I cannot choose to obey only the laws I like, because if everyone did that society would crumble.
    I don't know what he thinks so I won't answer for him.

    To the second point - the concept of a social contract. I think its a great idea, since it will always have problems we therefore require civil disobedience - as best espoused by Thoreau - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_David_Thoreau
    You seem to be suggesting you disagree with the concept? Or that there exist a universally agreed set of conditions when it can be employed?


  • Options
    #18
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    doopa wrote: »
    I don't know what he thinks so I won't answer for him.

    How about answering for yourself. Can you make an argument for why laws passed by the Dail should be considered illegitimate?


  • Options
    #19
    doopa
    Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭doopa


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    How about answering for yourself. Can you make an argument for why laws passed by the Dail should be considered illegitimate?

    What exactly is the question? Is it possible that the state can create illegitimate laws?

    I think the answer is obviously yes they can.


  • Options
    #20
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,952 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    he is supporting his constitutants
    That's not his constituency and therefore presumably those involved are not his constituents.


  • Options
    #21
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    How do you know his constituents are not among the protestors????

    It is not so long ago that Jailbirds (and their families) were invited en masse to Green Party Conferences and even invited to speak. Did anyone condemn the Greens for that???

    http://www.shelltosea.com/node/756
    Members of the Rossport 5 and their families are guests at the Green Party Annual Convention, which is being held at the Newpark Hotel in Kilkenny this year. The convention takes place on Saturday and Sunday 25th/26th March, and Miceál Ó Seighin is scheduled to speak at 4PM on Saturday 25th.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    That's not his constituency and therefore presumably those involved are not his constituents.

    That's why maby was at the start of the sentence you selectively edited.

    I should have said supporting a cause on behalf of his constitutants, in order to keep the pedants at bay.


  • Options
    #23
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    I don't have a problem with anyone, ordinary citizens or members of the Oireacthais, engaging in protest. What I do, however, have a problem with, is when people believe they have the right to flout or break the law with impunity in pursuance of that protest. I don't think, frankly, that one has the right to knowingly break the law in a liberal democracy, and then screm blue murder about tyranny and the police state when one is faced with the consequences of that action.

    Also, Ming is rather prone to hysterical analogies between Ireland and repressive, absolutist regimes. I would argue that, in his disregard for the will of the democratically elected parliament, that he shows far more disdain for democracy than any of those against whom he rails.


  • Options
    #24
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,952 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    That's why maby was at the start of the sentence you selectively edited
    I've never heard of the term/word "maby".

    Why couldn't you have said "may be" or used "perhaps" and it would have added much more clarity to your point?


  • Options
    #25
    crusher000
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭crusher000


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    Actually I referred to at least 5 other TDs;
    Joe Higgins, Clare Daly, Seamus Healy, Richard Boyd Barrett, and Joan Collins.

    Though my list would go on, hence the "etc."
    Why didnt I refer to these people by name?
    A) I'm really only interested in having a discussion with informed people, so I assume there is sufficient background knowledge that I would not need to provide an exhaustive list every TD who took part in every protest
    B) Its a philosophical / hypothetical argument over a principle, I do not want to argue to merits of individual protests or the politics of individual TDs.

    Thats fair enough but I think any politician that went to the people seeking election on a certain issue be it water charges, potholes whatever and then when elected to turn their back on their mandate would be selling out those that elected them. Our current sitting government sold out on their promises so I applaud politicans that stand by the mandate that they sought election for in the first place even if they flaunt the law enforced on us by un elected EU politicans


  • Options
    #26
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    crusher000 wrote: »
    the law enforced on us by un-elected EU politicans

    Are seriously claiming that EU politicians are un-elected???

    Seriously? No, really?

    I'm astounded that you clearly have absolutely no clue as to how the European Union operates.

    You might wish to educate yourself http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/georgia/documents/virtual_library/08_euro_en.pdf

    The three main decision-making institutions are:
    • the European Parliament, which represents the EU’s citizens and is directly elected by them;
    • the Council of the European Union, which represents the individual member states;
    • the European Commission, which seeks to uphold the interests of the Union as a whole.


  • Options
    #27
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    I disagree with the TD in question, but...
    Einhard wrote: »
    I don't have a problem with anyone, ordinary citizens or members of the Oireacthais, engaging in protest. What I do, however, have a problem with, is when people believe they have the right to flout or break the law with impunity in pursuance of that protest. I don't think, frankly, that one has the right to knowingly break the law in a liberal democracy, and then screm blue murder about tyranny and the police state when one is faced with the consequences of that action.

    Also, Ming is rather prone to hysterical analogies between Ireland and repressive, absolutist regimes. I would argue that, in his disregard for the will of the democratically elected parliament, that he shows far more disdain for democracy than any of those against whom he rails.

    So the line or bar here is once a state is generally a "liberal democracy" you must follow all of its laws, even an unjust law?


    Stabshauptmann wrote: »
    I believe in the social contract. I must agree to be bound by the laws I disagree with because I need the instruments of the law to protect me from those who would break other laws and harm me. I cannot choose to obey only the laws I like, because if everyone did that society would crumble.

    One of three things has happened here: [1] The idea of civil disobedience has gone over your head, [2] you disagree with civil disobedience but instead of just saying so you're going off on a tangent, [3] you agree with civil disobedience but are being selective.


  • Options
    #28
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    monument wrote: »



    So the line or bar here is once a state is generally a "liberal democracy" you must follow all of its laws, even an unjust law?

    In actually worded my post quite carefully to avoid such miscomprehension. I didn't criticse anyone for breaking the law, but rather for expecting to do so with impunity. If someone flouts a law that they believe to be unjust, that's fair enough; however, I would expect them to then face the consequences, without screaming at the top of their lungs about how they are being oppressed.

    To address your point more fully- yes, in a liberal democracy, I expect people to uphold the law, and be prepared to face the consequences if they choose not to. One might argue that some laws are manifestly unjust, but the idea that subjective personal disapproval of a law grants one the right to act illegally. When that happens, the tail very much wags the dog, and one would have the likes of Shell to Sea dictating energy policy in this land, and Ming Flanagan et al dictating the environmental.

    In a modern, liberal democracy such as ours, with all the safeguards of personal rights in place, redress can be sought for perceived wrongs, and I therefore don't think there is any excuse to willfully break the law, and expect no sanction. Otherwise, where does it end?


  • Options
    #29
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Einhard wrote: »
    In a modern, liberal democracy such as ours, with all the safeguards of personal rights in place, redress can be sought for perceived wrongs, and I therefore don't think there is any excuse to willfully break the law, and expect no sanction. Otherwise, where does it end?

    Err in a lot of cases you have to break the law in order to be in a position to legally challenge it.

    As an aside: you can also break the law with a legal excuse (ie defending somebody, which goes as far as attack aircraft).
    Einhard wrote: »
    Otherwise, where does it end?

    When the courts says it does.


  • Options
    #30
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    I don't agree with Ming on much, but fair play to him for supporting the turf cutters, nice to see people stand up for rural Ireland for a change. We don't have a bog any longer, it was blanket bog and cut by hand, have to buy it in now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    .


Advertisement