If you could rewrite/amend the Irish constitution, what would you do?

djk1000

This came from a pub conversation, I thought that it was an interesting exercise. If you could do anything at all to the constitution, what would it be?

Here are a few of my thoughts,

1. Remove "Jesus Christ" from the preamble, although it is a predominantly Christian country, the constitution is for all the people. I would also give the likes of the incoming president the option to remove references to God in their oath, or to change the reference to Mohammad or whatever.

2. I would consider giving the President more power, the ability to introduce legislation and to take control of certain matters for short periods of time if he or she deemed it necessary, for instance, if the president felt that clear control was required over Christmas in keeping the countries roads clear of snow, then he/she could have put the army where needed, ordered local councils to distribute grit where needed etc etc. (that's just one quick but trivial example, but you get the idea).

3. Reform the Seanad, I'm happy with the concept of a Seanad, but I think all its members should be elected through Universities, colleges, institutes, unions, councils, etc, no political nominations from the Dail, get rid of the failed politicians lurking there until the next general election.

4. I would create a constitutional office in a similar vein to the Comptroller, their job would be to look at freedom of information and secrecy in Government. If something is to be made confidential for 30 years, it should be in the interests of the state, not to protect people from embarrassment.

5. I would reform the powers of certain Oireachtas committees, giving more authority to investigate, compel witnesses and report. I'd give them the ability to apply to the High Court for discovery of documents etc. I would however put time limits on investigations and other checks and balances to prevent long running tribunal type stuff, I'd also restrict these powers to specific named committees.

6. I would eliminate ministers of state or any other kind of pseudo minister, they are not necessary.

7. I would consider a system where the president can appoint people of talent and known skill in an area, to a public position with real power in that area (Oh, I don't know, maybe Michael O'Leary in a position with teeth in Enterprise Trade and Employment, or on a Presidents Council which suggests legislation for the president to introduce).

8. I would redefine "family" to take account of a changed society, this could do many things to legislation, like giving unmarried fathers more rights.

9. I'd create a constitutional obligation for the Government to make schools teach a class in "society" covering an understanding of our political system, voting system, tax system, courts system, powers and responsibilities of a citizen and so on.

These were a few beer induced ideas, anyone have anything they would remove/introduce?

ei.sdraob

the whole blasphemy related blurb

digme

1 All estates acquired during the occupation be given back to the Irish people.
2 Banks cannot give out more than 10 times what they hold in gold or other suitable commodity.
3 All immigrants to be checked for the likes of aids and other serious diseases before entry.
4 People to be treated equal under the law,be it politician,banker,or war criminal from other countries.
5 A person is a Irish citizen by birth if he or she is born in Ireland with at least one parent who is a Irish citizen.

José Alaninho

Religion and anything to do with it

Nodin

Make myself GodFuhrer for life. Though childish and somewhat backward looking, it does rather fit with the overall Bunracht vibe.

Sulmac

I would create a completely new constitution with similar principles to the current one but with some noticeable changes.

1. Fully secular, no mention of this "Jesus" craic or anything like it. Also a provision that all public services (including education and health) must be secular.

2. Unicameral parliament, with 100 TDs elected via a national closed party list system. Saves time and money on by-elections. Fixed-term elections (national and local, EU already "fixed") - every 4 years on 29 February (see what I did there) which would be a public holiday.

3. Full separation of powers. Ministers cannot sit as TDs, like in some other European countries. "Expert" (ie. non-political/non-elected) ministers can also sit; though all Ministers must be approved by the Dáil. Also, write judicial review into the constitution.

4. Stronger committee system in the Dáil (make up for a unicameral parliament).

5. Stronger local government, though based on "provinces" (Dublin, Leinster, Munster, Connacht-Ulster) with elected "mayors" (or whatever you want to call them) that have real powers - like in London. Also having councillors based on a closed list system, but with constituencies coming from counties/cities.

6. Far more liberal, or else leaving issues (like abortion, marriage, divorce, etc.) out altogether for politicians to decide on. Possibly also have legislative referenda in some cases.

7. Keep the clause meaning all amendments require a referendum.

8. More rights for the citizen, with less "buts" (e.g. we have Freedom of Speech but it can be limited through trivial things like "blasphemy").

9. Slightly more powerful President but nothing too extreme (e.g. more ability to act on their own rather than "on advice of the government").

10. Cut a lot of jargon out, make it simple to read like some other countries' constitutions, such and Iceland's.

That's all I can think of at the moment, but any more and I'll add to the list...

syklops

24 hour licensing

Sleepy

Sulmac has most of the changes I'd introduce though a few more:

1. Removal of the nonsense about women's position in the home
2. Introduction of a clause pertaining to legislation based on race, gender and sexuality being non-consititutional - a citizen is a citizen and what counts as a crime against any one is a crime against any other. (open to Pythonesque jokes about men having the right to have babies but prevents nonsensical 'hate crime' or 'positive discrimination' laws.)
3. Removal of Irish as the national and first official language of the state.

oppenheimer1

digme wrote: »

1 All estates acquired during the occupation be given back to the Irish people.
2 Banks cannot give out more than 10 times what they hold in gold or other suitable commodity. not a constitutional issue
3 All immigrants to be checked for the likes of aids and other serious diseases before entry. not a constitutional issue
4 People to be treated equal under the law,be it politician,banker,or war criminal from other countries. Already the case
5 A person is a Irish citizen by birth if he or she is born in Ireland with at least one parent who is a Irish citizen. Already the case

So you're left with one point. Why would the state want all those old big houses?

Iwasfrozen

Get rid of Irish, i don't care about anyhting else.

oppenheimer1

djk1000 wrote: »

This came from a pub conversation, I thought that it was an interesting exercise. If you could do anything at all to the constitution, what would it be?

Here are a few of my thoughts,

1. Remove "Jesus Christ" from the preamble, although it is a predominantly Christian country, the constitution is for all the people. I would also give the likes of the incoming president the option to remove references to God in their oath, or to change the reference to Mohammad or whatever. Why I don't think this necessary. Europe has a long judeo christian heritage

2. I would consider giving the President more power, the ability to introduce legislation and to take control of certain matters for short periods of time if he or she deemed it necessary, for instance, if the president felt that clear control was required over Christmas in keeping the countries roads clear of snow, then he/she could have put the army where needed, ordered local councils to distribute grit where needed etc etc. (that's just one quick but trivial example, but you get the idea). In essence become a temporary dictator? Unless the office of president was totally reformed this would be dangerous.

3. Reform the Seanad, I'm happy with the concept of a Seanad, but I think all its members should be elected through Universities, colleges, institutes, unions, councils, etc, no political nominations from the Dail, get rid of the failed politicians lurking there until the next general election.
The Dáil would get even less done if one the opposition held the majority in the senate

4. I would create a constitutional office in a similar vein to the Comptroller, their job would be to look at freedom of information and secrecy in Government. If something is to be made confidential for 30 years, it should be in the interests of the state, not to protect people from embarrassment. I like this one, but it would have the effect of stifiling the government, they would be afraid to speak up for fear of being seen to back an unpopular idea.

5. I would reform the powers of certain Oireachtas committees, giving more authority to investigate, compel witnesses and report. I'd give them the ability to apply to the High Court for discovery of documents etc. I would however put time limits on investigations and other checks and balances to prevent long running tribunal type stuff, I'd also restrict these powers to specific named committees. I agree

6. I would eliminate ministers of state or any other kind of pseudo minister, they are not necessary. I think they are

7. I would consider a system where the president can appoint people of talent and known skill in an area, to a public position with real power in that area (Oh, I don't know, maybe Michael O'Leary in a position with teeth in Enterprise Trade and Employment, or on a Presidents Council which suggests legislation for the president to introduce). The taoiseach can do this at the moment if he wants

8. I would redefine "family" to take account of a changed society, this could do many things to legislation, like giving unmarried fathers more rights. I agree

9. I'd create a constitutional obligation for the Government to make schools teach a class in "society" covering an understanding of our political system, voting system, tax system, courts system, powers and responsibilities of a citizen and so on. Is that really a constitutional issue?

These were a few beer induced ideas, anyone have anything they would remove/introduce?

.

narwog81

Sulmac wrote: »

2. Unicameral parliament, with 100 TDs elected via a national closed party list system. Saves time and money on by-elections. Fixed-term elections (national and local, EU already "fixed") - every 4 years on 29 February (see what I did there) which would be a public holiday.

5. Stronger local government, though based on "provinces" (Dublin, Leinster, Munster, Connacht-Ulster) with elected "mayors" (or whatever you want to call them) that have real powers - like in London. Also having councillors based on a closed list system, but with constituencies coming from counties/cities.

+1

party list system is the only way to get rid of the parish pump politics and improve the quality of backbencher.

stronger local government is crucial also, planning and zoning needs to be taken out of the hands of the average councillor and subject to greater oversight. also the poor reaction to floods/snow could have been avoided with more effective local government.

SeanW

Biggest thing for me would be getting rid of that nonsense about blasphemy, and the associated legislation. When we're getting commended for our human rights policy by countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, something is wrong.

Getting rid of the "Irish" language as the first language of the State would be my next priority.

Lockstep

Implement most of what the Commission Review Committee decided.

Also;
Enshrine the uninumerated rights like privacy. Just so there's no confusion.

Change the citizenship rights to include Jus Soli. Remove the 27th Amendment.

Allow voting in absentia to citizens who have lived and paid taxes in the country within the past two years.

Removal of Article 38 (Special Criminal Courts)

Strengthen local government.

Institute a church tax, similar to the one in Italy, although expanded to include other mainstream Irish religions.

Make freedom of expression an absolute right, subject only to things like national security.

Give the president the ability to shelve legislation for up to one year.

Strengthen the powers of the Senate, as well as expanding it's franchise.

Expand the definition of the "family" for modern times.

Formally prohibit dual mandates.

rccaulfield

Religious content!!!

Manach

Strengthen the language which supports the Natural Law doctrine.
Increase the right of free association to make in near-absolute, especially in regard Church matters.
Remove references to dutys of citizens owed to the state.

jhegarty

rccaulfield wrote: »

Religious content!!!

Do you really think that a few meaningless words in a preamble is the most pressing issue the country has the moment ?

aDeener

SeanW wrote: »

Biggest thing for me would be getting rid of that nonsense about blasphemy, and the associated legislation. When we're getting commended for our human rights policy by countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, something is wrong.

Getting rid of the "Irish" language as the first language of the State would be my next priority.

Longford was never really a bastion of the irish language, alas it is a stronghold of "cant", would you be pressing for that to be included as from what ive heard on my visits it is the most widely spoken language in the county, certainly the town?......

bangersandmash

aDeener wrote: »

would you be pressing for that to be included as from what ive heard on my visits it is the most widely spoken language in the county, certainly the town?......

Was that meant as some kind of ad hominem attack towards the previous poster? Lame.

JonathanAnon

Reinstate the death penalty for certain crimes. Europe dictates that we can have this at the moment.

Some people are just bad eggs and should be put down. The whole premise for giving people long prison sentences is that they will have "learned their lesson" after their period of incarceration. This does not turn out to be true is most cases, as the statistics on recidivism prove. The rights of decent people need to be put ahead of the scum that carry out these crimes, so they should be put down and not released.

Esp Paedophiles, rapists, murderers... These people reoffend esp the sex offenders, and prominence should be given to the rights of the law abiding citizen (who should be protected) as opposed to the rights of scumbags.

Fighting Irish

jhegarty wrote: »

Do you really think that a few meaningless words in a preamble is the most pressing issue the country has the moment ?

a lot of laws have come from religion

jhegarty

Fighting Irish wrote: »

a lot of laws have come from religion

Depends what you mean by "come from religion".

The 10 commandments include not stealing or killing. I presume you don't want them legal just because the bible says we shouldn't do them.

Every law should be viewed on it's merits , not it's origin.

Rebelheart

SeanW wrote: »

Getting rid of the "Irish" language as the first language of the State would be my next priority.

So now, because it suits your own evidently uncompromisingly defined intellectual limitations, the Irish language is no longer the Irish language but rather the "Irish" language?

Indeed. What was that the mid-seventeenth-century poet Seán Ó Cónaill wrote in Tuireamh na hÉireann: do bhí an Gael Gallda 's an Gall Gaelach (the Irish became foreign and the foreign became Irish).

Oh yes: that was it precisely. And how apt for your current predicament and that of the rest of your small little band of repining anti-Irish anglophile malcontents who want to create in Ireland what another seventeenth-century poet observed to be a Sasana nua darbh ainm Éire (new England named Ireland).


Rest assured; if this latest Spenserian project to wipe all traces of Irishness from Ireland collapses, you always have mother England. Yes, England, that paragon of progress amid the mire of Irish backwardness, as one other contributor here (poster DonegalFella) would contend.

aDeener

bangersandmash wrote: »

Was that meant as some kind of ad hominem attack towards the previous poster? Lame.

What the hell are you talking about? :rolleyes:

kickoutthejams

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Implement most of what the Commission Review Committee decided.

That's pretty impractical and they could barely agree on many points. The minority opinions are fantastic and some of the later articles by its authors on the issues they disagreed with are absolute must reads, particularly Gerard Hogan.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Enshrine the uninumerated rights like privacy. Just so there's no confusion.

There's a danger that if they're enumerated then the Courts will feel bound by the list as exhaustive. Leaving the unenumerated rights reservoir intact as it currently stands is fine.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Removal of Article 38 (Special Criminal Courts)

Couldn't agree more. Never going to happen unless Europe force us to somehow, probably ECHR related but I doubt it since the ECHR isn't really binding.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Institute a church tax, similar to the one in Italy, although expanded to include other mainstream Irish religions.

Legislative matter.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Make freedom of expression an absolute right, subject only to things like national security.

You can't have an absolute right subject to anything. If you accept that it is a right which can be limited then you have to live with that. FWIW I think freedom of expression laws here are a bit unusual.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Give the president the ability to shelve legislation for up to one year.

Pointless. The House of Lords 2 year shelving veto really works wonders for their authority.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Expand the definition of the "family" for modern times.

The definition of the family comes from the courts, not the Constitution. You could put a definition in the Constitution but then it limits the definition to that. It's a very complex issue.

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Reinstate the death penalty for certain crimes. Europe dictates that we can have this at the moment.

Some people are just bad eggs and should be put down. The whole premise for giving people long prison sentences is that they will have "learned their lesson" after their period of incarceration. This does not turn out to be true is most cases, as the statistics on recidivism prove. The rights of decent people need to be put ahead of the scum that carry out these crimes, so they should be put down and not released.

Esp Paedophiles, rapists, murderers... These people reoffend esp the sex offenders, and prominence should be given to the rights of the law abiding citizen (who should be protected) as opposed to the rights of scumbags.

Yawn. This is such a tired argument. Rights are rights and everyone has them, no matter what you try and classify them as. Your terminology, "put them down", shows a complete moral vacuum despite the high horse you seem to be trying to sit on.

Besides that, we stopped using the death penalty WAY before we joined the EU and it's our choice to not give the State the power to kill people.

Rebelheart wrote: »

Irish Irish Irish

If your cultural identity is limited simply and solely to your language then you have a far narrower idea of what it means to be Irish than I do. The elitism of irish speakers is staggering sometimes. (By the by I am taking classes to learn Irish, I want to learn Irish because I like the language, not because if I don't then the Profidious Albion will steal my Gaelic Soul)

Regardless, the position of the Irish language is almost totally irrelevant in the Constitution. What practical effect does it have on anyone's life? Really? Unless you want to be a teacher or solicitor probably none whatsoever.

Rebelheart

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a dishonest idiot who "quotes" other posters by putting his own words into the "quoted" element

Fair enough then.


PS: And it's perfidious Albion. If you didn't have the inclination to take two seconds to check this before writing then it's highly unlikely that you've taken time to develop your thoughts on any of the issues raised in your post.

Alcatel

Frankly, I think our constitution could do with a rewrite from the ground up. It was written by some narrow minded folks who I don't think are in line with our values today...

For me, the top item on the list would have to be the introduction of a party list system, and perhaps the changes to how we appoint ministers etc. We need to break the 'first world country with third world politics' mentality in Ireland.

Rebelheart

Rebelheart wrote: »

Fair enough then.


PS: And it's perfidious Albion. If you didn't have the inclination to take two seconds to check this before writing then it's highly unlikely that you've taken time to develop your thoughts on any of the issues raised in your post.

Ha, I must say you don't help your case. I simply parsed your post into what it seemed to boil down to as my own was long enough without having yours fully quoted. However, if you feel I've misrepresented your position I apologise, also for my spelling of perfidious which is inexcusable.

You have not commented on anything I have said about the position of Irish within the Constitution. In fact, if you read it carefully, I am actually saying there is no need to remove Irish as the first language as that Article has almost no practical effect.

However, I shall not reply to another post of yours containing an insult, though if you wish to discuss the Constitutional position of Irish, a subject I am eminently qualified to discuss, I would be more than happy to.

oscarBravo

Rebelheart is banned for a month for calling another poster an idiot.

Scofflaw

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Reinstate the death penalty for certain crimes. Europe dictates that we can have this at the moment.

Some people are just bad eggs and should be put down. The whole premise for giving people long prison sentences is that they will have "learned their lesson" after their period of incarceration. This does not turn out to be true is most cases, as the statistics on recidivism prove. The rights of decent people need to be put ahead of the scum that carry out these crimes, so they should be put down and not released.

Esp Paedophiles, rapists, murderers... These people reoffend esp the sex offenders, and prominence should be given to the rights of the law abiding citizen (who should be protected) as opposed to the rights of scumbags.

We cannot reintroduce the death penalty in Ireland, because we are signatories to Protocol 13 of the ECHR, which prohibits the death penalty in any form (including in time of war). Even if we rowed back on Protocol 13, we'd still be bound by both Protocol 6 of the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, both of which preclude the use of the civil death penalty, which is what you're calling for.

If there is 100% certainty of both guilt and reoffence, then keeping people locked up for life is entirely adequate to protect the public - with less than 100% certainty, you will be killing innocent people.

The death penalty is unnecessary, cannot be reversed in the light of new evidence, has no convincing record of deterrence, and the only thing that can be said for it is that it is cheaper and some people find it gratifying, neither of which are acceptable reasons for killing people.

regards,
Scofflaw

Sulmac

Scofflaw wrote: »

...and the only thing that can be said for it is that it is cheaper...

It's actually not. Over in the US, it is far more expensive to put someone to death than sentence them to life imprisonment.

Granted, it's probably cheaper in countries like China, but do we really want to head that way?

Wheely

Scofflaw wrote: »

We cannot reintroduce the death penalty in Ireland, because we are signatories to Protocol 13 of the ECHR, which prohibits the death penalty in any form (including in time of war). Even if we rowed back on Protocol 13, we'd still be bound by both Protocol 6 of the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, both of which preclude the use of the civil death penalty, which is what you're calling for.

If there is 100% certainty of both guilt and reoffence, then keeping people locked up for life is entirely adequate to protect the public - with less than 100% certainty, you will be killing innocent people.

The death penalty is unnecessary, cannot be reversed in the light of new evidence, has no convincing record of deterrence, and the only thing that can be said for it is that it is cheaper and some people find it gratifying, neither of which are acceptable reasons for killing people.

regards,
Scofflaw

+1

@ Jonothananon-What in the hell was meant by "Europe dictates we can do this" anyway?

Lockstep

Deleted User wrote: »

That's pretty impractical and they could barely agree on many points. The minority opinions are fantastic and some of the later articles by its authors on the issues they disagreed with are absolute must reads, particularly Gerard Hogan.

Well, we are talking fantasy here; what we'd like to see in it.

Deleted User wrote: »

There's a danger that if they're enumerated then the Courts will feel bound by the list as exhaustive. Leaving the unenumerated rights reservoir intact as it currently stands is fine.

Yes but that doesn't mean uninumerated rights don't apply anymore. It means that the existing ones are solidified and made canon, leaving future ones open if needed.

Deleted User wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. Never going to happen unless Europe force us to somehow, probably ECHR related but I doubt it since the ECHR isn't really binding.

Shame I know.


[QUOTE=Deleted User;64029898
Legislative matter.[/quote]
Once again, we are talking about an idealised constitution.

Deleted User wrote: »

You can't have an absolute right subject to anything. If you accept that it is a right which can be limited then you have to live with that. FWIW I think freedom of expression laws here are a bit unusual.

Fair point. I should have said reducing the restrictions on freedom of expression, rather than defiining it as an absolute right.

Deleted User wrote: »

Pointless. The House of Lords 2 year shelving veto really works wonders for their authority.

Yes, but the president isn't trying to execute a high amount of authority (I prefer having an unpoliticised,ceremonial head of state rather than the potentially divisive US-style president.

Deleted User wrote: »

The definition of the family comes from the courts, not the Constitution. You could put a definition in the Constitution but then it limits the definition to that. It's a very complex issue.

I don't see why the defininition of the family cannot be enshrined while leaving the possibility open. Treason is defined for example

oscarBravo

Wheely wrote: »

@ Jonothananon-What in the hell was meant by "Europe dictates we can do this" anyway?

Pre-Lisbon urban legend. I wouldn't worry about it.

aDeener

Scofflaw wrote: »

We cannot reintroduce the death penalty in Ireland, because we are signatories to Protocol 13 of the ECHR, which prohibits the death penalty in any form (including in time of war). Even if we rowed back on Protocol 13, we'd still be bound by both Protocol 6 of the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, both of which preclude the use of the civil death penalty, which is what you're calling for.

If there is 100% certainty of both guilt and reoffence, then keeping people locked up for life is entirely adequate to protect the public - with less than 100% certainty, you will be killing innocent people.

The death penalty is unnecessary, cannot be reversed in the light of new evidence, has no convincing record of deterrence, and the only thing that can be said for it is that it is cheaper and some people find it gratifying, neither of which are acceptable reasons for killing people.

regards,
Scofflaw

There is no need for the death penalty, in my eyes it is a way out for the scum outlined by the previoius poster. What needs to be done is proper sentencing, bread and water, hard labour etc. not this rubbish of a serial rapist getting out after 8 years for "good behaviour". This probably isnt a constitutional issue what im talking about but i do feel the judicial system needs a complete overhaul. The death penalty is not the way to go at all

marcsignal

I'd put a match to it and start again, beginning with introducing a Civil Law based legal system, and scrapping the Common Law one we're trying to still apply, for a country and society that no longer exists.

eblistic

jhegarty wrote: »

Do you really think that a few meaningless words in a preamble is the most pressing issue the country has the moment ?

The power that a certain religious instution has enjoyed for the last century and a half is arguably the most pressing issue the country has at the moment. (If not it's got to be up there).

I'd actually say the problem of control of our primary education system is the worst symptom so a constitutional ban on religious discrimination and sectarian segregation in both the employment criteria and enrollment acceptance criteria in publicly funded primary schools doesn't seem unreasonable does it?

kraggy

SeanW wrote: »

Biggest thing for me would be getting rid of that nonsense about blasphemy, and the associated legislation. When we're getting commended for our human rights policy by countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, something is wrong.

Getting rid of the "Irish" language as the first language of the State would be my next priority.

Why would you want to get rid of Irish as the first language? Why the hell do people have a problem with our national language?

And why did you put Irish in inverted commas?

rubensni

1. Scrap text in preamble about the holy trinity, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ sustaining our fathers through centuries of trial, etc. and put it up there on the first page that the country is a republic and all power derives from the people who are sovereign. All other references to God/religion in the main body should be scrapped esp. Art. 44.

2. Take the abortion issue out of it altogether. Leave it up to the legislature when life begins.

3. Remove the requirement that the right of freedom of speech be subject to public order and morality. Scrap the requirement that blasphemy be criminalised.

4. No references as to where women should be. Strike out that whole section. Make rights of children concrete, scrap special position of the family.

5. Reduce Dáil terms to 4 years, Keep PR but scrap multi-seat constituencies, scrap the Seanád. Require that by-elections be held within three weeks of a death/vacancy.

6. Allow Taoiseach to nominate members of the government from outside the Dáil, except the Taoiseach, Táiniste and Minister for Finance.

7. Reduce Presidential terms to 4 years with no bar to amount of terms a person can serve in that office.

8. Reduce age floor for running to any elected office to 18 years.

9. Allow for minority judgments in Art. 26 references. Allow for constitutional challenge even if bill has been subject to Art. 26 reference.

10. Enumerated right to privacy with wording similar to ECHR.

rubensni

kraggy wrote: »

Why the hell do people have a problem with our national language?

The constitutional position is either language (or both) can be used, and that makes sense. I think most people have a problem with the Official Status Act which has given Irish plenty of bad press over the years as it is nothing more than an empty PC gesture. When I hear of technical documents like environmental impact statements being translated into Irish solely for the purposes of delaying a bypass or the like, or county development plans lying unread in council offices after hundreds of thousands being spent on translation it makes my blood boil. I'm a fluent Irish speaker and I have yet to meet anyone who would choose the Irish version of a technical document.

oppenheimer1

rubensni wrote: »

1. Scrap text in preamble about the holy trinity, humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ sustaining our fathers through centuries of trial, etc. and put it up there on the first page that the country is a republic and all power derives from the people who are sovereign. All other references to God/religion in the main body should be scrapped esp. Art. 44.

2. Take the abortion issue out of it altogether. Leave it up to the legislature when life begins.

3. Remove the requirement that the right of freedom of speech be subject to public order and morality. Scrap the requirement that blasphemy be criminalised.

4. No references as to where women should be. Strike out that whole section. Make rights of children concrete, scrap special position of the family.

5. Reduce Dáil terms to 4 years, Keep PR but scrap multi-seat constituencies, scrap the Seanád. Require that by-elections be held within three weeks of a death/vacancy. Do you even know how PR works?? For a single seat PR reduces to first past the post.

6. Allow Taoiseach to nominate members of the government from outside the Dáil, except the Taoiseach, Táiniste and Minister for Finance. Have you read the constitution as it exists, This can happen as it stands, its just never used.

7. Reduce Presidential terms to 4 years with no bar to amount of terms a person can serve in that office. Why?

8. Reduce age floor for running to any elected office to 18 years. Why? Personally I'm more concerned by dynasties.

9. Allow for minority judgments in Art. 26 references. Allow for constitutional challenge even if bill has been subject to Art. 26 reference.

10. Enumerated right to privacy with wording similar to ECHR.

.

oscarBravo

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you even know how PR works?? For a single seat PR reduces to first past the post.

Presumably the intention was to keep STV, which allows for 1-2-3 voting instead of the 'X' approach of FPTP.

FYI, it would help if you could figure out how to break up quotes using the

tags rather than putting your replies inside someone else's quote and using coloured text.

rubensni

oscarBravo wrote: »

Presumably the intention was to keep STV, which allows for 1-2-3 voting instead of the 'X' approach of FPTP.

That's exactly what I meant, similar to presidential elections. First past the post is a mess.

rubensni

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

6. Allow Taoiseach to nominate members of the government from outside the Dáil, except the Taoiseach, Táiniste and Minister for Finance.

Have you read the constitution as it exists, This can happen as it stands, its just never used.

I could ask you the same question! The current system requires the taoiseach to appoint them to the seanad. As I propose scrapping the seanad (point No. 5), the existing system would have to go. The current system also puts a cap of two on the number of non-TD cabinet members (Art 28.7.2), a cap I would favour removing.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

7. Reduce Presidential terms to 4 years with no bar to amount of terms a person can serve in that office.

Why?

I think it's pretty self explanatory. I feel seven years is too long to go without an election, but I don't see the reason for the (current) two term limit.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

8. Reduce age floor for running to any elected office to 18 years.

Why?

It is a democracy and if the people want to elect 18 year olds (i.e. adult citizens who have the right to vote) I say let'em. Anything else is discriminatory as far as I'm concerned

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Personally I'm more concerned by dynasties.

I personally don't care if people keep electing people from dynasties, and in any case attempts to limit them would be undemocratic. How do you propose limiting dynasties without breaching equality provisions?

Sulmac

I've thought of a few more since my original post:

11. Adopt a monist (rather than the current dualist) international policy [see here for explanation].

12. Irish and English to both be official and equal languages; also have some special provision around the status of Irish Sign Language, like in New Zealand.

13. If possible, replace common law with civil law (probably on a phased basis).

14. Shorter presidential terms, elected every 4 years on the same date as the Dáil and local government. Basically, 29 February would be a national election day. Continue the two term limit.