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! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Gerry Adams to run for President ?

12467…11

Comments

  • #152
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    It would need to be voted on.

    Who said that it didn't?


  • #153
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Who said that it didn't?

    It would need to be voted on down south. Is there anything indicating it would have to be voted on in the north?


  • #154
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    It would need to be voted on down south. Is there anything indicating it would have to be voted on in the north?

    Nothing that I am aware of.


  • #155
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    No it isn't. If that was the case, it would already be happening.

    Why do you care whether people in the north want to vote for the President or not?

    What's it to you?


  • #156
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Charlie Rock wrote: »
    Why do you care whether people in the north want to vote for the President or not?

    What's it to you?

    It will be interesting to see official Unionism's reaction. They should be worried. as the more influence N.I.'s Irish people have over the ROI's affairs the easier it will be for them to vote for unification.
    They can't really object as they signed an agreement that accommodates it.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    I suspect it's just good old bitterness and the desire to deny the Irish, in the formerly gerrymandered state, some sort of input that involves the flagrant ignoring of the imaginary line that embittered Unionists view as some sort of cosmic chasm.


  • #158
    Manassas61
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    Charlie Rock wrote: »
    Why do you care whether people in the north want to vote for the President or not?

    What's it to you?
    Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. Its a different state. If you don't like other opinions, don't bother posting in the politics thread.


  • #159
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Charlie Rock wrote: »
    I suspect it's just good old bitterness and the desire to deny the Irish, in the formerly gerrymandered state, some sort of input that involves the flagrant ignoring of the imaginary line that embittered Unionists view as some sort of cosmic chasm.
    It's kind of hilarious that you think that the border that divides the Republic of Ireland from the United Kingdom is somehow less real than any other line on a map.


  • #160
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. Its a different state. If you don't like other opinions, don't bother posting in the politics thread.

    The soon to be majority of people who identify themselves as Irish will be given the choice to vote in our presidential elections, they do not as far as I can see, need Unionists blessing or permission to do that. The fact that it is another state is irrelevant on a thread about the presidential elections. Gerry Adams probably sees the potential to do very well in an election like that.


  • #161
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    The soon to be majority of people who identify themselves as Irish will be given the choice to vote in our presidential elections, they do not as far as I can see, need Unionists blessing or permission to do that.
    They do, however, need the blessing of the existing electorate in a referendum, the outcome of which is not a foregone conclusion.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Manassas61
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    The soon to be majority of people who identify themselves as Irish will be given the choice to vote in our presidential elections, they do not as far as I can see, need Unionists blessing or permission to do that. The fact that it is another state is irrelevant on a thread about the presidential elections. Gerry Adams probably sees the potential to do very well in an election like that.
    It will go to a referendum.


  • #163
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    They do, however, need the blessing of the existing electorate in a referendum, the outcome of which is not a foregone conclusion.

    Personally don't see many(bar diehard partitionists) having serious objections to it.


  • #164
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Personally don't see many(bar diehard partitionists) having serious objections to it.
    No disrespect, but I'd be surprised if you did.


  • #165
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    It will go to a referendum.

    In the south


  • #166
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No disrespect, but I'd be surprised if you did.

    Why would a southern Irish man or woman have an objection to a fellow Irish person (they did massively endorse that identification in the GFA referendum) voting in our presidential elections? How would they articulate that objection? Care to give it go?


  • #167
    Manassas61
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    In the south
    Like I said, I have no problem if it happens. All I would ask for is a candidate to represent Unionism from here in Ulster.


  • #168
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    Like I said, I have no problem if it happens. All I would ask for is a candidate to represent Unionism from here in Ulster.

    And like i said two pages back, all the better. why go on that massive trip to come back where you started


  • #169
    Manassas61
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    And like i said two pages back, all the better. why go on that massive trip to come back where you started
    To show that it won't happen unless a vote on it happens. Does Northern Ireland get a vote on this?


  • #170
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Manassas61 wrote: »
    Does Northern Ireland get a vote on this?

    Where does it say that there is a veto on how people who legally identify themselves as Irish behave?
    There is no need for a vote on this, as long as the Irish electorate rubber stamp it then it will happen.
    Americans living in Ireland can vote in US elections, no difference.


  • #171
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Why would a southern Irish man or woman have an objection to a fellow Irish person (they did massively endorse that identification in the GFA referendum) voting in our presidential elections? How would they articulate that objection? Care to give it go?
    It's one thing to say "wouldn't it be nice if..."; it's another altogether to figure out the details.

    For example, who gets to vote? Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland? Why not Irish citizens living in the rest of the UK? If a NI resident can vote, why not my brother in Kent? If you only let NI residents vote, you're creating tiers of citizenship: citizens living in the UK who can vote, and citizens living in the UK who can't.

    Now, if your agenda is entirely driven by an inability to comprehend a border on this island, that's a price worth paying. If not, it may not be.

    And that's just the first glance at the issue.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    US citizens can vote abroad if they file a tax return..... (which is why my American wife doesnt bother).

    If Irish citizens in the UK would like to vote they should kick-in a few euro to the governments coffers for the pleasure.


  • #173
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's one thing to say "wouldn't it be nice if..."; it's another altogether to figure out the details.

    For example, who gets to vote? Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland? Why not Irish citizens living in the rest of the UK? If a NI resident can vote, why not my brother in Kent? If you only let NI residents vote, you're creating tiers of citizenship: citizens living in the UK who can vote, and citizens living in the UK who can't.

    Now, if your agenda is entirely driven by an inability to comprehend a border on this island, that's a price worth paying. If not, it may not be.

    And that's just the first glance at the issue.

    You are talking about several different constituencies (for want of a better word).
    The GFA makes a special case of those living in N.I. and deems them to be living in Ireland and Irish, if that is how they want to see themselves.
    Votes for ex-pats generally is another issue entirely.


  • #174
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's one thing to say "wouldn't it be nice if..."; it's another altogether to figure out the details.

    For example, who gets to vote? Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland? Why not Irish citizens living in the rest of the UK? If a NI resident can vote, why not my brother in Kent? If you only let NI residents vote, you're creating tiers of citizenship: citizens living in the UK who can vote, and citizens living in the UK who can't.

    Now, if your agenda is entirely driven by an inability to comprehend a border on this island, that's a price worth paying. If not, it may not be.

    And that's just the first glance at the issue.

    Well i would suggest that given that the constitution gives the right to everyone born on the island of ireland to be a part of the Irish nation, that thats why it would just apply to the north. of course, you wouldnt even need to go into that level of discussion if you would stop trying to push the ludicrous notion the people in the north are somehow more conne ted to Kent than the rest of Ireland


  • #175
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    None of those murdering terrorists from Sinn Fein/IRA will ever be President or Taoiseach of the 26 county Republic of Ireland.


  • #176
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You are talking about several different constituencies (for want of a better word).
    The GFA makes a special case of those living in N.I. and deems them to be living in Ireland and Irish, if that is how they want to see themselves.
    Votes for ex-pats generally is another issue entirely.
    The constitution allows people born in Ireland to be Irish citizens. It doesn't make Northern Ireland part of the Republic. As much as it suits your agenda to ram your head firmly in the sand on this point, you're proposing that we create a situation where Irish citizens who are resident in a different country are allowed to vote in our elections, unless that country happens to be on a different land mass, in which case they can get knotted.

    I have a problem with creating a special class of non-resident citizen, and I'm not alone.
    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Well i would suggest that given that the constitution gives the right to everyone born on the island of ireland to be a part of the Irish nation, that thats why it would just apply to the north.
    That makes them citizens. It doesn't make them eligible to vote, any more than it makes my brother - who was born in the Republic of Ireland - eligible to vote, as he now lives outside the jurisdiction.
    of course, you wouldnt even need to go into that level of discussion if you would stop trying to push the ludicrous notion the people in the north are somehow more conne ted to Kent than the rest of Ireland
    Irish citizens in Northern Ireland live in a different country. If you'd stop trying to push the ludicrous notion that this isn't the case, we might be able to have a sensible discussion on the topic.

    As it stands, the immediate topic is whether a referendum to allow non-resident citizens to vote would pass. If your ideology requires you to believe that the Irish electorate are lining up to allow non-residents to vote, fair enough; you may find yourself bitterly disappointed if and when it goes to a vote.


  • #177
    Painted Pony
    Registered Users Posts: 209 ✭✭Painted Pony


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Why would a southern Irish man or woman have an objection to a fellow Irish person (they did massively endorse that identification in the GFA referendum) voting in our presidential elections? How would they articulate that objection? Care to give it go?
    On this matter GFA was really about Britain recognising the wishes of some in the North to identify themselves as Irish. The Southern Irish people had no issue with this. Anybody from up there who asserted that they were Irish were accepted as such, nor were their any barriers to them formally becoming Irish citizens. They didn’t start being Irish in 1998!

    Why should they not have a vote in presidential elections? Well for one, the president is the head of state, not of country or nation. And secondly, if you permit them to vote in presidential elections how could you justify denying them votes in referenda or even local / national elections?


  • #178
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    The constitution allows people born in Ireland to be Irish citizens. It doesn't make Northern Ireland part of the Republic. As much as it suits your agenda to ram your head firmly in the sand on this point, you're proposing that we create a situation where Irish citizens who are resident in a different country are allowed to vote in our elections, unless that country happens to be on a different land mass, in which case they can get knotted.

    I have a problem with creating a special class of non-resident citizen, and I'm not alone.

    That makes them citizens. It doesn't make them eligible to vote, any more than it makes my brother - who was born in the Republic of Ireland - eligible to vote, as he now lives outside the jurisdiction. Irish citizens in Northern Ireland live in a different country. If you'd stop trying to push the ludicrous notion that this isn't the case, we might be able to have a sensible discussion on the topic.

    As it stands, the immediate topic is whether a referendum to allow non-resident citizens to vote would pass. If your ideology requires you to believe that the Irish electorate are lining up to allow non-residents to vote, fair enough; you may find yourself bitterly disappointed if and when it goes to a vote.

    If your ideology requires you to believe that irish people would actively deny their fellow countrymen the vote (particularly when they can bloody run for the position) then id wager youd be the one facing bitter disappointment i dont recall there being any outcry when several northerners were appointed to the seanad.

    i have no doubt youre not alone but i wouldnt imagine you and your fellow travelers are anything more than a relatively small group of twisted partitionist diehards. but, time will tell


  • #179
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Painted Pony wrote: »
    On this matter GFA was really about Britain recognising the wishes of some in the North to identify themselves as Irish. The Southern Irish people had no issue with this. Anybody from up there who asserted that they were Irish were accepted as such, nor were their any barriers to them formally becoming Irish citizens. They didn’t start being Irish in 1998!

    Why should they not have a vote in presidential elections? Well for one, the president is the head of state, not of country or nation. And secondly, if you permit them to vote in presidential elections how could you justify denying them votes in referenda or even local / national elections?

    id assume local or dail elections would be based on constituencies.


  • #180
    golfball37
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,715 ✭✭✭golfball37


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    None of those murdering terrorists from Sinn Fein/IRA will ever be President or Taoiseach of the 26 county Republic of Ireland.
    De Valera was both shur,having previously been what you describe.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Painted Pony
    Registered Users Posts: 209 ✭✭Painted Pony


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    id assume local or dail elections would be based on constituencies.
    How it might be done is besides the point. Where would the logic be in affording Northern Irish people a vote in a meaningless election for president but denying them a more important vote?


  • #182
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Painted Pony wrote: »
    How it might be done is besides the point. Where would the logic be in affording Northern Irish people a vote in a meaningless election for president but denying them a more important vote?

    None whatsoever. but i suppose we just have to take it one step at a time. as a largely symbolic move, presidential votes are a good start


  • #183
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    The constitution allows people born in Ireland to be Irish citizens. It doesn't make Northern Ireland part of the Republic. As much as it suits your agenda to ram your head firmly in the sand on this point, you're proposing that we create a situation where Irish citizens who are resident in a different country are allowed to vote in our elections, unless that country happens to be on a different land mass, in which case they can get knotted.

    I have a problem with creating a special class of non-resident citizen, and I'm not alone.

    That makes them citizens. It doesn't make them eligible to vote, any more than it makes my brother - who was born in the Republic of Ireland - eligible to vote, as he now lives outside the jurisdiction. Irish citizens in Northern Ireland live in a different country. If you'd stop trying to push the ludicrous notion that this isn't the case, we might be able to have a sensible discussion on the topic.

    As it stands, the immediate topic is whether a referendum to allow non-resident citizens to vote would pass. If your ideology requires you to believe that the Irish electorate are lining up to allow non-residents to vote, fair enough; you may find yourself bitterly disappointed if and when it goes to a vote.

    You are ignoring the special case the GFA makes of NI. Read it again and you will see how it is perfectly feasible to include Irish citizens (living in a state that is only British by dint of a majority of one side of the community wishing it to be) in an election on the ISLAND OF IRELAND. You would not be making a 'special class', they are already a 'special class' as are Unionists- a 'special class' of British citizen until they majority makes them non resident British citizens.
    That's the complexities that you are rather neatly missing.


  • #184
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's kind of hilarious that you think that the border that divides the Republic of Ireland from the United Kingdom is somehow less real than any other line on a map.

    Kind of hilarious? You're easily amused.

    Where did I say it was less real?


  • #185
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You are ignoring the special case the GFA makes of NI. Read it again and you will see how it is perfectly feasible to include Irish citizens (living in a state that is only British by dint of a majority of one side of the community wishing it to be) in an election on the ISLAND OF IRELAND. You would not be making a 'special class', they are already a 'special class' as are Unionists- a 'special class' of British citizen until they majority makes them non resident British citizens.
    That's the complexities that you are rather neatly missing.


    I have read it many times and I don't see anywhere how you can reach your fantasy conclusion - maybe you could point me to the specific clause that facilitates irish citizens in northern Ireland voting in a presidential election?


  • #186
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Godge wrote: »
    I have read it many times and I don't see anywhere how you can reach your fantasy conclusion - maybe you could point me to the specific clause that facilitates irish citizens in northern Ireland voting in a presidential election?

    There isn't one but what is there is many statements which give them the right to be Irish citizens and we (the Irish government) accept that. Should the Irish Government allow Irish citizens the right to cast a vote for president of an island we (the Irish government) desire to be unified, then that will not be a problem. As Unionists also signed up to the agreement they can have no objection and won't be allowed to, because it doesn't concern them as British citizens.
    The existence of the internationally recognised GFA means N.I. is a special case, (it isn't in any shape or form the same as the rest of the UK) because it has failed, you and others need to face that fact.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    Charlie Rock wrote: »
    Why do you care whether people in the north want to vote for the President or not?

    What's it to you?

    Why have you not answered this Manassas61?


  • #188
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No disrespect, but I'd be surprised if you did.

    Ah the good old 'but-head'.

    Have you ever really considered the lesser spotted but-head?

    No disrespect? I'm not fooled.


  • #189
    Sir Humphrey Appleby
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,465 ✭✭✭Sir Humphrey Appleby


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Why would a southern Irish:confused:man or woman have an objection to a fellow Irish person (they did massively endorse that identification in the GFA referendum) voting in our presidential elections? How would they articulate that objection? Care to give it go?
    Not so sure how a Corkonian (southern Irish) would iterate it.
    I would iterate it as follows, you do not reside and are not domiciled in the jurisdiction covered by the Irish Constitution, therefore you have no grounds to expect to vote in elections held in said jurisdiction.


  • #190
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »
    Not so sure how a Corkonian (southern Irish) would iterate it.
    I would iterate it as follows, you do not reside and are not domiciled in the jurisdiction covered by the Irish Constitution, therefore you have no grounds to expect to vote in elections held in said jurisdiction.

    They reside on an island where the government (the people) enshrine their right to be Irish in the constitution, if the people (the government) give them the right to vote in the election of a President of an electorate that aspires towards untiy, what Irish man or woman could have a legitimate objection to that? You can't selectively exclude or cherrypick aspects of the agreement like that without risking it's collapse, look at the damage Unionist cherrypicking does to the spirit of the agreement.


  • #191
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    ...if the people (the government) give them the right to vote in the election of a President...
    The government can't give them that right. Only the people can give them that right, and if the people give them that right in a referendum, so be it.

    But you're arguing from your conclusion. You're basically arguing that we should let Northern Ireland residents vote in Republic elections, because if we change the constitution to let them vote, it will be OK to let them vote. Which isn't even an argument.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    There isn't one but what is there is many statements which give them the right to be Irish citizens and we (the Irish government) accept that. Should the Irish Government allow Irish citizens the right to cast a vote for president of an island we (the Irish government) desire to be unified, then that will not be a problem. As Unionists also signed up to the agreement they can have no objection and won't be allowed to, because it doesn't concern them as British citizens.
    The existence of the internationally recognised GFA means N.I. is a special case, (it isn't in any shape or form the same as the rest of the UK) because it has failed, you and others need to face that fact.


    So there isn't anything in the GFA to make it perfectly feasible to include Irish citizens in an election on the Island of Ireland unlike what you said earlier.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You are ignoring the special case the GFA makes of NI. Read it again and you will see how it is perfectly feasible to include Irish citizens (living in a state that is only British by dint of a majority of one side of the community wishing it to be) in an election on the ISLAND OF IRELAND. You would not be making a 'special class', they are already a 'special class' as are Unionists- a 'special class' of British citizen until they majority makes them non resident British citizens.
    That's the complexities that you are rather neatly missing.


    What you have failed to address is that the amendment of Articles 2 and 3 as a result of the GFA actually reduce the status of Irish citizens in Northern Ireland to the status of Irish citizens elsewhere when it comes to Irishness.

    Look at the new Article 2:

    "It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage"

    Where in any of that section is there a special case for Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland?


  • #193
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Godge wrote: »
    So there isn't anything in the GFA to make it perfectly feasible to include Irish citizens in an election on the Island of Ireland unlike what you said earlier.

    You do understand the word 'feasible' don't you?
    The entire spirit of the agreement makes the proposal 'feasible'.



    What you have failed to address is that the amendment of Articles 2 and 3 as a result of the GFA actually reduce the status of Irish citizens in Northern Ireland to the status of Irish citizens elsewhere when it comes to Irishness.

    Look at the new Article 2:

    "It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage"

    Where in any of that section is there a special case for Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland?

    The very existence of an internationally ratified agreement makes NI a special case.

    If the Irish Nation accords Irish citizens living on the island a right to vote in a presidential election then that (as OscarBravo and others say) should not be a problem. Unionists would have no veto on that because to deny those that identify themselves as Irish would be to go against the spirit of the Agreement. Not to mention that Unionists no longer have a veto of any kind anyway.


  • #194
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    If the Irish Nation accords Irish citizens living on the island a right to vote in a presidential election then that (as OscarBravo and others say) should not be a problem.
    Not the Irish Nation (which is a pretty vague concept); the Irish electorate (which isn't).

    Brass tacks: if Irish citizens in Northern Ireland could vote, how would they do so? The Department of the Environment can't exactly set up polling stations in a different country.


  • #195
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You do understand the word 'feasible' don't you?
    The entire spirit of the agreement makes the proposal 'feasible'.






    The very existence of an internationally ratified agreement makes NI a special case.

    If the Irish Nation accords Irish citizens living on the island a right to vote in a presidential election then that (as OscarBravo and others say) should not be a problem. Unionists would have no veto on that because to deny those that identify themselves as Irish would be to go against the spirit of the Agreement. Not to mention that Unionists no longer have a veto of any kind anyway.

    The GFA theoretically makes the reunification of this island feasible. But it does not make it realistic. There is a huge difference.

    Article 2 makes no distinction between those who have citizenship as a result of being born in Northern Ireland and those who have citizenship as a result of ancestry.

    You cannot separate out the two and include one group in a Presidential election.


  • #196
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Not the Irish Nation (which is a pretty vague concept); the Irish electorate (which isn't).

    Brass tacks: if Irish citizens in Northern Ireland could vote, how would they do so? The Department of the Environment can't exactly set up polling stations in a different country.

    Why not? Countries all over Europe do it. Lithuanian and Polish citizens can cast their votes for elections at home in the consulate in Newry.


  • #197
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Godge wrote: »
    The GFA theoretically makes the reunification of this island feasible. But it does not make it realistic. There is a huge difference.

    Article 2 makes no distinction between those who have citizenship as a result of being born in Northern Ireland and those who have citizenship as a result of ancestry.

    You cannot separate out the two and include one group in a Presidential election.

    The GFA very clearly lays out the proceedures for unificaion when a majoity vote for it. Nothing theorethical about it, action by the British gov and the Irish gov must be taken when that event occurs. As we know from these forum the reality of that occuring is a matter of opinon. But it is very clear that it is the decision (without impediment from outside) of the people of 'the island of Ireland'. That's makes it a special case in my book.


  • #198
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Godge wrote: »
    The GFA theoretically makes the reunification of this island feasible. But it does not make it realistic. There is a huge difference.

    Article 2 makes no distinction between those who have citizenship as a result of being born in Northern Ireland and those who have citizenship as a result of ancestry.

    You cannot separate out the two and include one group in a Presidential election.

    It doesnt need to though, it already recognises that being born in the north entitles you to citizenship and to be a part of the nation. So someone born in the north, whose whole family is and was from the north, with no links to anyone from down south, wouldnt have any Irish ancestory under your ridiculous parameters, but would still be entitled to citizenship. How can you not see that this alone illustrates that the north is indeed a special case and that this indicates that the constitution already considers those in the north to be Irish, whether they choose to embrace that or not. Somebody from Kent, with no link to Ireland, would not be entitled to citizenship in this way. Similarly, somebody from, for example, China, with no link to Ireland, could have a kid in the north and that kid would be entitled to Irish citizenship, but the same couldnt be said for that child if it were born in England, Scotland or Wales.
    It's clearly a special case.

    Article 3 also states:
    Institutions with executive powers and functions that are shared between those jurisdictions may be established by their respective responsible authorities for stated purposes and may exercise powers and functions in respect of all or any part of the island.

    Surely along these lines the presidency, or at least certain duties of the presidency, could be seen to constitute an all Ireland element, therefor entitling people to a vote.
    You also need to step back from the letter of the law, so to speak, and look at the spirit of it. The president, regardless of what the constitution may hint at, has always been seen as and acted as the President of the entire nation and country. Not in a hostile or threatening manner to unionism, but in a way recognising the realities of Ireland's current state and the affinity the position holds with nationalists in the north. To ignore these aspects of the presidency and its power is to ignore reality.


  • #199
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Why not? Countries all over Europe do it. Lithuanian and Polish citizens can cast their votes for elections at home in the consulate in Newry.
    Does Ireland have a consulate in Northern Ireland?
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    The GFA very clearly lays out the proceedures for unificaion when a majoity vote for it.
    Sure. And when unification happens, Northern Ireland residents will automatically qualify for voting rights in the same way as everyone else in the Republic. Until then, they are Irish citizens living in a different country, and should have the same rights as Irish citizens living in a different part of that country.
    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    It doesnt need to though, it already recognises that being born in the north entitles you to citizenship and to be a part of the nation.
    ...but not to vote.
    Somebody from Kent, with no link to Ireland, would not be entitled to citizenship in this way.
    But somebody born here, but living in Kent, is entitled to citizenship - but not, in your scenario, to vote. So you're asking to selectively enfranchise citizens living abroad in order to further your political agenda.

    Which is fair enough as far as it goes, but don't naively assume that everyone else buys into that agenda.
    Surely along these lines the presidency, or at least certain duties of the presidency, could be seen to constitute an all Ireland element, therefor entitling people to a vote.
    You're missing a huge chunk of logic in there. Entitlement to vote doesn't arise from your desire for such an entitlement.
    The president, regardless of what the constitution may hint at, has always been seen as and acted as the President of the entire nation and country.
    Sure. The President is also the president of the country of which my brother in Kent holds a passport. That doesn't mean he gets a vote.


  • #200
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Does Ireland have a consulate in Northern Ireland?

    Could be done in a number of ways, postal votes, selected polling stations. All depends on the co-operation of the Assembly.
    Sure. And when unification happens, Northern Ireland residents will automatically qualify for voting rights in the same way as everyone else in the Republic. Until then, they are Irish citizens living in a different country, and should have the same rights as Irish citizens living in a different part of that country.
    ...and it is proposed to give them a vote in the Irish presidential election on foot of a referendum here. I am still waiting to hear legitimate objections to that, not objections to holding the poll. Take it as a given that the poll is going ahead. Why would you deny a selected group of Irish citizens on the Island a vote in the election of a president they see as theirs?
    Your brother in Kent not getting the same priviledge is not a legitimate answer. Did he get to vote in the GFA referendums from Kent?


  • #201
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Could be done in a number of ways, postal votes, selected polling stations. All depends on the co-operation of the Assembly.


    The co-operation of the Assembly? What dreamworld are you inhabiting?
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    ...and it is proposed to give them a vote in the Irish presidential election on foot of a referendum here. I am still waiting to hear legitimate objections to that, not objections to holding the poll. Take it as a given that the poll is going ahead. Why would you deny a selected group of Irish citizens on the Island a vote in the election of a president they see as theirs?
    Your brother in Kent not getting the same priviledge is not a legitimate answer. Did he get to vote in the GFA referendums from Kent?


    Article 2 does not distinguish between the brother in Kent and the person born in Belfast. They have equal rights under our constitution.

    Amending Article 2 to give the person born in Belfast greater rights, either in terms of voting or anything else, could be seen as a breach of the GFA.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement