Queen Elizabeth II to visit Ireland.

aDeener

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

And you would know it is The British Government that awards those honours, not the Queen herself. For those that want Wilfords honour removed they need to petition the right people, which is not the Queen.

The BGov have apologised for Bloody Sunday, compensation will follow for the relatives. That is the best they can do given the circumstances tbh.


All this Commander-in-Chief business is a red herring, it wasn't the Queen who sent the troops into the north, it was her Government. She is merely a figurehead and couldn't have stopped them sending them in if thats what they wanted.

it is not a red herring oppenheimer. The Queen remains the ultimate authority of the military and retains the power to prevent its unconstitutional use.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7758314.stm

IrishTonyO

aDeener wrote: »

it is not a red herring oppenheimer. The Queen remains the ultimate authority of the military and retains the power to prevent its unconstitutional use.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7758314.stm

The UK does not have a constitution

dvpower

Simple question:

What drawbacks will a visit by the queen of britain have?

Biggins

IrishTonyO wrote: »

The UK does not have a constitution

Then how can they hold a referendum - say on the Euro question for example?

Genuine question - forgive my lack of knowledge in regards to the legalities of English law.

Wolfe Tone

eightyfish wrote: »

• Positive media attention worldwide, generating goodwill for Ireland.
• Improved tourism from the UK beacuse people will realise we're not still holding a hundreds-year-old grudge
• Feeling of pride among Irish people that we've matured sufficiently to accept a visit from the head of state of our nearest neighbours without riots and blood-letting, similar to the feeling after the English national anthem was treated with respect in Croke Park
• And you never know, there's probably some Irish people out there who'd quite enjoy going to see the queen.

You do realize there will be numerous protests?
Positive media attention worldwide? I doubt it.
Matured? Thats just rubbish. Time and time again people just write off people, Irish people, in the 6 counties. There is a lot of enmity towards that woman not only for the past but for the present also.


Until we hear what the Queen will do here I see in no way how a visit will be in any way beneficial. If she is literally just popping over for tea then what is the point of wasting millions? However if she is coming over and will do things here that can be considered reconciliatory as I outlined earlier, then her visit could be a good thing. Otherwise it is simply pointless.

aDeener

IrishTonyO wrote: »

The UK does not have a constitution

oh you're back, i take it you didn't read the link, just like when you didnt read my previous posts in the thread. it refers to their unwritten constitution.

IrishTonyO

Biggins wrote: »

Then how can they hold a referendum - say on the Euro question for example?

Genuine question - forgive my lack of knowledge in regards to the legalities of English law.

A referendum is not just on a constitutional issue, a referendum is simply a direct vote by the entirety of the electorate. A referendum can be held for any number of reasons including the following.

• change to a constitution
• enactment of a law
• a vote on government policy

Run_to_da_hills

IrishTonyO wrote: »

The UK does not have a constitution

Either do we for that matter since we foolishly sold out our rights to the EU in Lisbon referendum. :rolleyes: .

getz

Biggins wrote: »

Then how can they hold a referendum - say on the Euro question for example?

Genuine question - forgive my lack of knowledge in regards to the legalities of English law.

there is no written constitution, so the goverment of the day does not need to go to the people,but only a foolish goverment would reject the peoples wish

dvpower

IrishTonyO wrote: »

A referendum is not just on a constitutional issue ...

I'd add that constitutional law doesn't have to be in a single document called the constitution. It can be (as in the case of the UK) the body of law that deals the distribution and exercise of government power.

So the UK doesn't have a constitution but it does have constitutional law.

eightyfish

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

You do realize there will be numerous protests?

I do. I'm just hoping they don't eclipse the visit itself. I bet eirigi will be there, they love a good riot.

IrishTonyO

dvpower wrote: »

I'd add that constitutional law doesn't have to be in a single document called the constitution. It can be (as in the case of the UK) the body of law that deals the distribution and exercise of government power.

So the UK doesn't have a constitution but it does have constitutional law.

When the UK is said to have an unwritten constitution it is said that it has laws that make a part constitution, or uncompleted. And constitution in the true sense is completed and legally recorded in a document(s). The UK is only one of about 3 democracies in the world without a complete written constitution.

who the fug

Biggins wrote: »

Then how can they hold a referendum - say on the Euro question for example?

Genuine question - forgive my lack of knowledge in regards to the legalities of English law.

That is why the Tories & Labour have got away with Europe for so long, as the government of the day does not have to refer back to the people on any issues


If they did , then the UK would be more unpopular than it is in europe

Coillte_Bhoy

who the fug wrote: »

That is why the Tories & Labour have got away with Europe for so long, as the government of the day does not have to refer back to the people on any issues


If they did , then the UK would be more unpopular than it is in europe

Most other EU contries dont have to refer back to the people either and they have written constitutions.

dvpower

Maybe the Queen can give us a talk on UK constitutional law when she gets here - I believe she's a bit of an expert.

oppenheimer1

aDeener wrote: »

it is not a red herring oppenheimer. The Queen remains the ultimate authority of the military and retains the power to prevent its unconstitutional use.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7758314.stm

In theory yes, but in reality there would be a constitutional crisis in the UK if the Queen refused to perform her duties. Her role is like the Presidents in Ireland but less codified. In reality she cannot refuse her governments wishes.

When the objections the Queen had personally to apartheid in SA were made known, there was little she could do because the Thatcher Government opposed any sanctions to be imposed.

djpbarry

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Well, if you mean the Irish right to self-determination is still being denied, you're spot on.

So this assembly thingy in Stormont consisting of Irish representatives - what's that all about?

rovert

I love that the people who care about the Queen the most are Nationalists, others dont really care.

djpbarry wrote: »

So this assembly thingy in Stormont consisting of Irish representatives - what's that all about?

Dont question his talking points from the 70s

aDeener

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

In theory yes, but in reality there would be a constitutional crisis in the UK if the Queen refused to perform her duties. Her role is like the Presidents in Ireland but less codified. In reality she cannot refuse her governments wishes.

When the objections the Queen had personally to apartheid in SA were made known, there was little she could do because the Thatcher Government opposed any sanctions to be imposed.

there hardly would have been "a constitutional crisis" if she refused an OBE to a man who was in charge of the slaughter of 14 innocent civilians? think you're exaggerating a bit there oppenheimer.

oppenheimer1

aDeener wrote: »

there hardly would have been "a constitutional crisis" if she refused an OBE to a man who was in charge of the slaughter of 14 innocent civilians? think you're exaggerating a bit there oppenheimer.

Its not her who decides that gets an OBE, its the government of the day. If she refused to perform any of her duties, no matter how minor it would trigger a crisis.

Look at what happened in Ireland in the past, O'Dalaigh had to resign when a minister called him a thundering disgrace. Seems minor doesn't it?

Eliot Rosewater

rovert wrote: »

I love that the people who care about the Queen the most are Nationalists, others dont really care.

Ironic indeed. I don't like to be dismissive of other political views, but this all-out semi-militant nationalism is something I can't fathom. Whether or not the Queen visits Ireland will have no perceptible difference on my life, ditto with whether Northern Ireland is apart of the country stamped on my passport. I'd prefer to just aim my life at doing what I personally like to do and achieving what I can, rather than always looking backwards, taking a negative view of the country I'm in and agitating for things, like unification, that won't actually change my life or make me happier.

I can understand patriotism, just not militant nationalism.

djpbarry wrote: »

So this assembly thingy in Stormont consisting of Irish representatives - what's that all about?

You see, self-determination doesn't matter, despite the overtures. It's only Irish self-determination that does, even if that is at the expense of what the majority want up North.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wolfe Tone

Unification would make a lot f people happier. Change peoples lives too. Just thought I would put that out there.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

aDeener

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

two thirds of a province

getz

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Unification would make a lot f people happier. Change peoples lives too. Just thought I would put that out there.

i am all for irish unification but i cannot see it happening in our lifetime,unless ALL the people of ireland agree, all i can see is another civil war,and i dont think ireland has the power to deal with that.to get the loyalist fraction to agree with it you would have to bring in some sort of british factor.

cursai

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Make the lady welcome, and show them that we have matured as a state, and are a confident people going forward.

Don't you mean 'forgiven'.

aDeener

i find it funny how whenever anglo-irish relations are brought up people always trot out the "move on, its all in the past" line and tell everyone to mature and grow up. but whenever the ills of the catholic church and the horrible things they did in the past is brought up the same is never said. i wonder why?

rovert

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Unification would make a lot f people happier. Change peoples lives too. Just thought I would put that out there.

Are you trollling or what?

aDeener wrote: »

i find it funny how whenever anglo-irish relations are brought up people always trot out the "move on, its all in the past" line and tell everyone to mature and grow up. but whenever the ills of the catholic church and the horrible things they did in the past is brought up the same is never said. i wonder why?

Because they are very different situations. Just a guess mate.

aDeener

rovert wrote: »

Are you trollling or what?

how is that trolling. it is true, it would make a lot of people happier, granted it would also make a lot of people unhappy, but what he said still holds