Did you know that there's two referenda this month?

Morag

Yeah they want to change the constitution again, at this stage it's more "repaired" then a fishermans net, they should just draft a new one.

I didn't know there was two of them we're meant to be voting on until this morning. Did you know?

One is about lowering judges salaries and the other is something about having the Dail and Senate being able to investigate more things. Like they are soo good at it now, I swear Ivor calley is roaring laughing.

Anyway I reckon most people who go to vote on the 27th will wonder why the fúck they are being given 3 ballot papers, unless your one of the lucky ones who get to also vote in the bye election for Brian "I;m not dying I swear" Lenihan's seat.

and it's not like we have body set up just for campgaining for and educating the people about up and coming referenda, oh **** yeah we do.
Which was apprently created through another fecking referenda.


About the only thing they have done is snuck up a website, no posters from
this lot to let people know whats going on.

http://www.referendum2011.ie/

starbelgrade

Sharrow wrote: »

I didn't know there was two of them we're meant to be voting on until this morning. Did you know?

Yes. I keep abreast of the news.

It's not that hard to do & doesn't take up much time.

No point in blaming others if you're not informed.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Sharrow wrote: »

Brian "I;m not dying I swear" Lenihan's seat.
http://www.referendum2011.ie/

Too soon...

FatherLen

starbelgrade wrote: »

Yes. I keep abreast of the news.

It's not that hard to do & doesn't take up much time.

No point in blaming others if you're not informed.

sorry you lost me at a breast....

Swampy

Couldn't give a toss.

Sure did.

cocoshovel

Im sorry but what about 3 ballot papers? I haven't a clue what you're on about.

mackg

yes

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74647183

InkSlinger67

Don't forget the third - The vote between Turnip and Potato to become our national vegetable

mikemac

Fix your poll OP, why are results hidden

vicwatson

Seven of us sitting around having a pint last Wednesday, 6 of the 7 didn't know about the referenda, I had to explain to them what we would be voting on on Oct 27th. They hadn't heard and just thought it was the Presidential election only.

First newspaper/radio ad I heard/saw was this morning on Today FM.

My name is URL

I did know but think that both proposals are blatant power-grabbing attempts by the government, and unnecessary populist bullshit ones at that.

biko

mikemac wrote: »

Fix your poll OP, why are results hidden

I was just asking myself the same thing.

banquo

Atari ballotbox. Love it.

Morag

mikemac wrote: »

Fix your poll OP, why are results hidden

Ah Balls, hopefully one of the mods will sort that, stupid poll options, wasn't mean to be hidden.

biko would you be a dear and fix that please?

LimeFruitGum

I only heard about it on the radio this morning and then I looked up the Ref. Commission site, so I think I'm good to go.

Paddy Samurai

At present, Article 15.10 states:
“Each House shall make its own rules and standing orders, with power to attach penalties for their infringement, and shall have power to ensure freedom of debate, to protect its official documents and the private papers of its members, and to protect itself and its members against any person or persons interfering with, molesting or attempting to corrupt its members in the exercise of their duties.

Does this mean members private papers cannot be investigated,if they are the ones under investigation?.

Scuid Mhór

brian lenihan was a great man caught in poor circumstances. if y'all weren't such government hating sheep you'd know that by now

Oranage2

Don't ask me im just a girl - he he he

starbelgrade

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

brian lenihan was a great man caught in poor circumstances. if y'all weren't such government hating sheep you'd know that by now

That's complete bollox, in fairness.

randylonghorn

Sharrow wrote: »

... the other is something about having the Dail and Senate being able to investigate more things. Like they are soo good at it now, I swear Ivor calley is roaring laughing.

Apparently that one is quite iffy though; in an attempt to give the committee structure more teeth, they seem to be exempting it from any kind of recourse to the courts or oversight apart from themselves.


EDIT:

The relevant section:

It shall be for the House or Houses concerned to determine, with due regard to the principles of fair procedures, the appropriate balance between the rights of persons and the public interest for the purposes of ensuring an effective inquiry into any matter to which subsection 2° applies.


Can anyone say Senator McCarthy?

Sharrow wrote: »

biko would you be a dear and fix that please?

Fixed.

Morag

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

brian lenihan was a great man caught in poor circumstances. if y'all weren't such government hating sheep you'd know that by now

NewsFlash for ya, Fine Fail aren't the government any more.

Morag

randylonghorn wrote: »

Apparently that one is quite iffy though; in an attempt to give the committee structure more teeth, they seem to be exempting it from any kind of recourse to the courts or oversight apart from themselves.

Can anyone say Senator McCarthy?

So that they can just investigate and give each other a slap on the wrist?
Sure none of them can be made to vacate the office.
No over sight from the courts or any branch of the Dept of Justice, ha sounds like they are trying to take a leaf out of the roman catholic churches book.

randylonghorn wrote: »

Fixed.

Thank you kindly

Wertz

Well if I didn't there's a nice chatty radio ad to tell me all about in a friendly and patronising manner.

Morag

I knew about the one re the judges salaries alright, no idea when they tacked the other on.
Sure they may as well throw in the other's they have been farting about and not having,
like the one on the rights of children.

randylonghorn

Sharrow wrote: »

So that they can just investigate and give each other a slap on the wrist?
Sure none of them can be made to vacate the office.
No over sight from the courts or any branch of the Dept of Justice, ha sounds like they are trying to take a leaf out of the roman catholic churches book.

The more worrying thing to me (given that none of the above would be much of a change anyway) is that they're giving themselves the power (assuming the subsequent legislation follows the same line) to investigate basically anything or anyone if *they* decide it's in the public interest without any oversight from or recourse to the judicial branch.

Each House shall have the power to conduct an inquiry, or an inquiry with the other House, in a manner provided for by law, into any matter stated by the House or Houses concerned to be of general public importance

(Bold is my emphasis).

Hence my reference to the McCarthy era.

Morag

randylonghorn wrote: »

The more worrying thing to me (given that none of the above would be much of a change anyway) is that they're giving themselves the power (assuming the subsequent legislation follows the same line) to investigate basically anything or anyone if *they* decide it's in the public interest without any oversight from or recourse to the judicial branch.

Each House shall have the power to conduct an inquiry, or an inquiry with the other House, in a manner provided for by law, into any matter stated by the House or Houses concerned to be of general public importance

(Bold is my emphasis).

Hence my reference to the McCarthy era.

Sound like you may be worried that if they took a notion they could choose to investigate you Randy.

randylonghorn

Sharrow wrote: »

Sound like you may be worried that if they took a notion they could choose to investigate you Randy.

They know plenty about me as it is, so I can't say that causes me much disquiet.

They could choose to investigate anything or anybody though; and my historian's bump tells me that the most likely candidates will be whatever the redtops are baying about this week, and whatever they therefore see as vote-grabbing issues, regardless of common sense or even justice.

Conceivably though (while I wouldn't argue that it's especially likely) an independent publication organ like Boards could see itself at the table ... and at a table where the rules of "fair procedure" (note that the word "justice" isn't even used) are set by the people investigating, and the courts have no say.

starlit

I knew about choosing a President to vote for but didn't know we had to vote on changing the constitution what do we have to vote for in the constitution to be changed?

AhSureTisGrand

I'm hoping this will go like Lisbon (attempt one), and people who don't understand and don't give a damn vote no

Morag

doovdela wrote: »

I knew about choosing a President to vote for but didn't know we had to vote on changing the constitution what do we have to vote for in the constitution to be changed?

You have to vote yes for the changes to happen.
You can read more about the proposed changes here.
http://www.referendum2011.ie/

Jev/N

Sharrow wrote: »

Yeah they want to change the constitution again, at this stage it's more "repaired" then a fishermans net, they should just draft a new one.

That's a ludicrous and very naive view

By saying that, you obviously don't know either how constitutions are intended to be developed over time with changing values, priorities and circumstances or how difficult with would be to have to draft a brand new one.

My name is URL

Jev/N wrote: »

That's a ludicrous and very naive view

By saying that, you obviously don't know either how constitutions are intended to be developed over time with changing values, priorities and circumstances

Praise be to God* that they are dealing with the most important bits first

*required field

Morag

Jev/N wrote: »

That's a ludicrous and very naive view

By saying that, you obviously don't know either how constitutions are intended to be developed over time with changing values, priorities and circumstances or how difficult with would be to have to draft a brand new one.

Given how much change the country has been through over it's short existence and the farce which is the preamble it's needs an over haul, rather then editing and re editing, cos as it is there are too many gaps and loop holes. Like children's rights cos we have an abysmal record of cherishing all children equally.

squod

Fully intend wiping my ass with those two ballots, possibly all three.

Pete M.

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

brian lenihan was a great man caught in poor circumstances. if y'all weren't such government hating sheep you'd know that by now

LOL

Shur there's nothing to talk about here hey!
Shur haven't we a presidential election to be distracted by?

We should be having two referenda every month at this stage.

There should have been one before now.

Do you want to sell the Country down the swanny?

Yes _ No _

btard

28.57% of respondents are deluded.

Pete M.

btard wrote: »

28.57% of respondents are deluded.

33.6% of statistics are made up on the spot.

randylonghorn

62.4 % of spots occur before the age of 18

TanG411

So should we be voting yes or no on these referEndaKenny?

Pete M.

ThinksAmoral wrote: »

So should we be voting yes or no on these referEndaKenny?

Jaysus, you'd think you'd know at this stage:rolleyes:

No No No

just no

randylonghorn

I don't really have much problem with the one that says judges should be subject to any universal pay or tax hike which applies to the public service generally, tbh.

The second one I will definitely be voting "no" to though.

Einhard

I love the way people complain about there not being enough information whilst referencing the website with all the information they could possibly need on the referenda proposals! What more do they want- Enda Kenny to come down and read the proposals to them individually?!

Fishooks12

Einhard wrote: »

I love the way people complain about there not being enough information whilst referencing the website with all the information they could possibly need on the referenda proposals! What more do they want- Enda Kenny to come down and read the proposals to them individually?!

Same people will be effing and blinding about the government in 6 months time when the legislation comes into force.

Pete M.

randylonghorn wrote: »

I don't really have much problem with the one that says judges should be subject to any universal pay or tax hike which applies to the public service generally, tbh.

The second one I will definitely be voting "no" to though.

Come on now! It don't matter what the subject matter is.

Just vote No.

And No again.

Einhard wrote: »

I love the way people complain about there not being enough information whilst referencing the website with all the information they could possibly need on the referenda proposals! What more do they want- Enda Kenny to come down and read the proposals to them individually?!

You love it? You're awful you are :P

And the idea of Endof coming down and reading that aloud to me has me grinning.
Over a bottle of buckie and a couple of smokes or else in Mellets in Swinford.
They, the meejah, could talk a bit more about the referenda though, seeing as they mean something, as opposed to the other election wots happenin.

bonerjams03

My name is URL wrote: »

I did know but think that both proposals are blatant power-grabbing attempts by the government, and unnecessary populist bullshit ones at that.

Seriously. What the **** is wrong with you?

Judges are way too overpaid and get allowances for buying books and other such things on top of it. What harm can come from stopping more money being wasted?

And the ability to investigate more things could put an end to tribunals that are lengthy and expensive, and at least give more power to all people in the Dáil so as TD's aren't just party voting machines.

Such cynicism for what are really mild alterations.

Manach

This has been discussed on the Politics boards. In my own view it is a power grab by the government to garner more power for themselves (the state is already proved itself incompetant), but that is my opinion only. The referendum site can give more details.

Tar.Aldarion

Had no idea. No news in my bubble

randylonghorn

Pete M. wrote: »

Come on now! It don't matter what the subject matter is.

Just vote No.

And No again.

I am neither Ian Paisley nor Maggie Thatcher!!

I can manage more than one automated response!

I have a brain, I have!! It even works!

Occasionally ... >_>

Phill Ewinn

Einhard wrote: »

What more do they want- Enda Kenny to come down and read the proposals to them individually?!

Not making him tae

randylonghorn

IRcolm wrote: »

And the ability to investigate more things could put an end to tribunals that are lengthy and expensive, and at least give more power to all people in the Dáil so as TD's aren't just party voting machines.

Yes, but this amendment gives the government (essentially, as they are in a majority) far more than just "the ability to investigate things".

It gives them carte blanche to investigate whoever they like however they like, and sets aside the normal protection afforded by the law and the courts to the citizen in favour of a set of "procedures" to be put in place by the investigating body themselves.

One could have accurately written a similar sentence about both the McCarthy trials and the Inquisition.

While I don't really believe we're likely to see a repeat of either here ... nevertheless, the fact that the same summary could validly be applied to this amendment as to such low points in the history of the human race should surely give us pause for thought?

There was no reason why "the ability to investigate things" should lead to this type of catch-all wording for an amendment.