Did you receive an information leaflet from the referendum commission?

Wertz

Just a quick poll to see if you or your address/place of residence received the literature that is supposed to be supplied to voters prior to the upcoming referendums.
There have been a lot of radio and TV ads that to call them dumbed down would be an insult to the dumb, and of course there is a website, that few will actually visit and cuts out those who don't use the net.

This independent body is obliged by law to inform the voters in a clear and unbiased manner on the exact issues they will vote on and no doubt receive plenty of funding and salaries to carrry out that work.
However, anyone I've spoken to between here and Dublin have gotten nothing and some were still very confused about what these votes on the constitution mean.

Poll incoming

Yakult

A lot of people I've talked to don't have a clue what they are voting for.

smash

The only info I've seen or heard about the voting are the ads on TV. And they're not very informative. I think they simplify the issues in bias way to make them sound good.

Temptamperu

weve just had presidential nonsense here nothing about the referendums... its almost like they dont want you to know

Fishooks12

Yakult wrote: »

A lot of people I've talked to don't have a clue what they are voting for.

Tell them to get informed so

It's really not that difficult

amacachi

Nothing here yet. In fairness they've had a lot of ads on RTE pointing to their website which may be enough. Was in the post office yesterday actually and I could've sworn there used to be plenty in there when referendums were coming up but I didn't see anything this time.

smash

I can't actually even access http://www.referendum2011.ie/

My name is URL

I received mine last Thursday. Sure the commission's website was only accessible since last week too afaik. I'm almost convinced they don't want people to know what they're voting on.

Wertz

smash wrote: »

The only info I've seen or heard about the voting are the ads on TV. And they're not very informative. I think they simplify the issues in bias way to make them sound good.

That's the way they come across to me that way too...the patronising tone, the different ones for different regions (mooing cows for local radio here, metrosexual cooking chic for Dublinocentric stations) and the general tendency toward "Yes is best".

My name is URL wrote: »

I received mine last Thursday. Sure the commission's website was only accessible since last week too afaik. I'm almost convinced they don't want people to know what they're voting on.

Interesting...you're in Dunleer right? Yet no one in Dundalk I've spoken with has had them...nor any in Drogheda. All on electroal register btw.

amacachi

Wertz wrote: »

and the general tendency toward "Yes is best".

You say that but isn't "not knowing what you're voting on" one of the top reasons for a No vote? In which case the lack of detail is overwhelmingly pro-No. :pac:

Kojak

Didn't recieve any info.

DOn't really care anyways - I'm voting NO on the 2 referendums, mainly because the government wants us to vote YES.

My name is URL

Wertz wrote: »

Interesting...you're in Dunleer right? Yet no one in Dundalk I've spoken with has had them...nor any in Drogheda. All on electroal register btw.

Well just outside Dunleer. That's nuts that you don't know anyone in the towns that have received theirs. That's not on.. These wasters are paid handsomely to make sure that people can inform themselves about what it is they're voting on. My polling card arrived on the same day, incidentally.

Kojak wrote: »

Didn't recieve any info.

DOn't really care anyways - I'm voting NO on the 2 referendums, mainly because the government wants us to vote YES.

That's great, but according to the latest Red C poll, 87% & 76% plan on voting Yes to the judge's pay and oireachtas enquiries referendums respectively.

http://www.thejournal.ie/gallagher-extends-lead-in-latest-presidential-opinion-polls-260880-Oct2011/

Zebra3

Not sure as I get so much junk mail.

Don't care if I did get it or not.

I'll simply be voting for the opposite of whatever the likes of Sutherland are supporting.

Lollipops23

I am voting yes on decreasing judges pay (don't see how that could be a bad thing really) but the jury is still out about enquiring into people's conduct. I want to see people investigated for white collar crime, but at the expense of civil liberties?

Not sure, open to suggestions/opinions though.

Lone Stone

I dont understand what the hell they want us to vote on, Why should they have the power to investigate people? Who do they want to investigate exactly? What exactly does a politician know about investigating some one's activities ? Surely thats a job for the Garda or some one and not corrupt td.

And i dont think i got any information on it sent to my house, I just saw those awful add's.

JohnK

Nope, I'm in Cork and I've only got the presidential candidates leaflets but nothing about the referendums. Nothings come to my parents house which is where I'm registered and nothing has come to my apartment where previous tenants are registered; both locations are in the same area though.

Wertz

To be fair it's only relatives and friends I've asked in passing...all have received polling cards where applicable.

As for voting the opposite of Sutherland, I'd normally agree 100%...on this occasion however, it only takes a read of the proposed re-wording and it's lack of clarity to tell you this isn't the way to go.
As for judge's pay...the instinct is to say, yeah f*ck em, overpaid public servants etc...but it's a potential line of attack on the separation of powers.

Go away and redraft it properly ffs.

Dravokivich

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Yakult wrote: »

A lot of people I've talked to don't have a clue what they are voting for.

Tell them to get informed so

It's really not that difficult

hmmm... but it the instance you dont know its going to happen? How easy is it to be informed then?

I only found out there was a referendum lumped in with the presedential voting on Sunday when a mate was talking to me about it.

I rarely if ever watch rte and yesterday was the first time I saw ads for it on the telly, 2 of them are sh!te in the way they are produced.

I regularly use the rte news website and have never seen anything on that about it either. There only seems to be a ramp up of telling the masses about it now.

If it wasnt for my mate saying it, I honestly wouldnt have known it was going to happen.

Azureus

Didnt recieve any info on them in the post, but researched it a bit myself because of the tv ads. They seem fierce vauge in their wording-was left questioning what exactly certain things meant-so I think they should really either provide some literature clarifying things or wait until they've properly thought this referendum through before asking people to vote on it.

MagicMarker

No one has any excuse to be ignorant, there's loads of tv and radio ads telling you about what's going on with a mention of the website, if people don't seek out the information then that's their own fault.

BluesBerry

I heard that if there is a Yes vote to the Judges pay the other one will get in through some loophole even if everyone voted no on the other

Please can someone tell me if this is true?

We have not been informed properly the government tried to hoodwink us this

Im voting No to both

billybudd

I have not recieved one yet but i use the net away to find out about these things. maybe the civil servants in charge of postals that week was sick.:D

Lollipops23

Wertz wrote: »

As for voting the opposite of Sutherland, I'd normally agree 100%...on this occasion however, it only takes a read of the proposed re-wording and it's lack of clarity to tell you this isn't the way to go.
As for judge's pay...the instinct is to say, yeah f*ck em, overpaid public servants etc...but it's a potential line of attack on the separation of powers.

Go away and redraft it properly ffs.

Yeah I'm always a bit suspicious when they fail to explain it properly...

sdanseo

All I know is that the guy on the radio ad is a damn good cook, apparently.

Dravokivich

Hmm.. only just seen this thread now as well asking if we knew there was a referendum occuring.

SeaFields

Hmmm....if a majority of people dont receive this info and the government dont get the answer they want (in the investigation one, the judges pay one s a given I hope) could we be asked to vote again?! Certainly leaves the option open to them I suspect.

For the record my registered address at my parents and my own address received none.

My name is URL

SeaFields wrote: »

Hmmm....if a majority of people dont receive this info and the government dont get the answer they want (in the investigation one, the judges pay one s a given I hope) could we be asked to vote again?! Certainly leaves the option open to them I suspect.

For the record my registered address at my parents and my own address received none.

85% of judges have already taken the proposed pay-cut on a voluntary basis. Is diminishing the separation of power between the executive & the judiciary really worth it for the sake of forcing the 15% of others to do the same?

You can be asked to vote again on any referendum btw.

SeaFields

My name is URL wrote: »

Is diminishing the separation of power between the executive & the judiciary really worth it for the sake of forcing the 15% of others to do the same?

To be honest I'll but my hands up and say I dont know enough of the argument for keeping it the way it is. From this point of view it just seems to me that they are public sector workers who are above having their pay cut. That might seem like a populist sentiment but its how I'm looking at it.

The leaflets that were supposed to arrive may have been useful for many people in properly understanding the issue and making a more informed decision.

amacachi

BluesBerry wrote: »

I heard that if there is a Yes vote to the Judges pay the other one will get in through some loophole even if everyone voted no on the other

Please can someone tell me if this is true?

It's not, how could it be?

My name is URL wrote: »

85% of judges have already taken the proposed pay-cut on a voluntary basis. Is diminishing the separation of power between the executive & the judiciary really worth it for the sake of forcing the 15% of others to do the same?

You can be asked to vote again on any referendum btw.

Meh, I still say their above inflation pay-rises diminished the seperation of powers.

My name is URL

SeaFields wrote: »

To be honest I'll but my hands up and say I dont know enough of the argument for keeping it the way it is. From this point of view it just seems to me that they are public sector workers who are above having their pay cut. That might seem like a populist sentiment but its how I'm looking at it.

The leaflets that were supposed to arrive may have been useful for many people in properly understanding the issue and making a more informed decision.

Aye, that's fair enough, and to be honest I agree with the idea that those who see themselves as 'above' anyone else in the public sector should be taken down a peg. I just don't think that it should be done in this way. There's loads of stuff which needs to be amended in our constitution which is far more important than this.

I'm amazed at how many people have not received the information leaflet. If that many people were not receiving their polling cards then something would be done about it, and the referendum would possibly even be postponed.. and tbh I'd view not having the information the same as I would not having a polling card.

Yakult

What are the cons to voting yes re: judges pay?

starlit

Honestly don't know what we are suppose to really vote for in the referendum. Could someone please explain to me despite adverts on tv, radio, info online and in the leaflet I don't really understand what are we voting for like?

Reducing Judges pay and that the senad has a say in people data or what ever?

MagicMarker

doovdela wrote: »

Honestly don't know what we are suppose to really vote for in the referendum. Could someone please explain to me despite adverts on tv, radio, info online and in the leaflet I don't really understand what are we voting for like?

Reducing Judges pay and that the senad has a say in people data or what ever?

http://www.referendum2011.ie/

smash

MagicMarker wrote: »

http://www.referendum2011.ie/

The site keeps going up and down.


The important one I think:

Proposed amendment – Oireachtas inquiries

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.”

It is proposed to renumber this as 15.10.1° and to insert the following subsections:

2° 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.

3° In the course of any such inquiry the conduct of any person (whether or not a member of either House) may be investigated and the House or Houses concerned may make findings in respect of the conduct of that person concerning the matter to which the inquiry relates.

4° 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.

but there's more, such as: http://www.referendum2011.ie/your-decision/referendum-on-inquiries-by-the-oireachtas/finding-which-affects-a-persons-good-name

Kidchameleon

If I vote no then the Gov. will run the referendum again so I wont be voting.

MagicMarker

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If I vote no then the Gov. will run the referendum again so I wont be voting.

Smart

If you vote no and you're made vote again then you vote no again.

CYHSN

I definitely got mine, the only reason I remember is the sexy wan on the front of the leaflet

Wertz

smash wrote: »

2° 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.

"Provided for by law." Including laws not yet on statute book?
"Into any matter concerned to be of public importance" So basically, whatever you're having yourself and determined by whoever is in power at the time, which in the future could be any one.
Too open ended

3° In the course of any such inquiry the conduct of any person (whether or not a member of either House) may be investigated and the House or Houses concerned may make findings in respect of the conduct of that person concerning the matter to which the inquiry relates.

"ANY person's conduct...concerning the matter to which the inquiry relates."
So anyone deemed to have broken a "law" by way of their conduct or raised the hackles of people or politicians...they can have "findings" made against them. Findings?
Go away and write it again


4° 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.

They get to determine the RIGHTS of ANY individual who has conducted themselves in a manner against a law which may not even be on the statute yet? Due regard to fairness is interpretative in many ways, especiallly when you bring up such stuff as the greater good or in the public interest...appropriately of course.

The bold emphasis is my comprehension and may well be alarmist...but the wording is so ambiguous and can be interpreted and adjusted accordingly.
Once this is in the founding document, what politician in power will move to have it removed?
The fine detail of this hasn't just been hidden, it's not even clear when you read the damn thing...but where is the commission telling us their interprataion of it and what it'll actually mean? Lazy lazy smug adverts that are cahracter lead and focus on nothing of the substance of the changes involved.
Sometimes I really really hate this country.

We need some more powers of investigation...BUT we need them on clear terms.
We also need a cap on the pay of senior cousel and barristers, never mind the judges who already take a pay cut the minute they get their wig and gowns...

Disturbingly I was talking to an aunt earlier who says she and her husband who aren't stupid people are voting yes to both. I tried to dissuade her but she was having none of it.

ríomhaire

I got one in the post at home (as in, my parents' house) but now where I live for college term.

Ellis Dee

I didn't get an information leaflet, but I did get a disinformation leaflet.

Coated paper, too, so not even of use in the jacks.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

markc1184

Plenty of the candidates leaflets coming in the post lately but nothing about the referendum.

Kidchameleon

MagicMarker wrote: »

Smart

If you vote no and you're made vote again then you vote no again.

So what would have happened if Lisbon 2 was a no vote?

Wertz

Kidchameleon wrote: »

So what would have happened if Lisbon 2 was a no vote?

They would have tweaked the wording that was being focused on by the No campaign and went with a Lisbon3 perhaps...or else something could have happened in one of the other states voting on the Treaty. we'll never know because people were spun a line on jobs and other such nonsense in order for the euro project to proceed...and look where we're at now (not that a No vote would have changed that really)

If this gets a No vote, they can only find out why people were against it and redraft the amendment for another ref at a later stage.
That's why a No vote is the safer bet here...no information or biased information is no way to runs such a vital ref...No means they "must try harder" (to quote my old school teacher)...

ShooterSF

Did get the leaflet, though by then I had read up on the topics plenty. Will probably vote no on both but as they're two populist amendments I can't see them not passing. Also where is my referendum on children's rights, on the blasphemy crap and on the existence of the seanad?

MagicMarker

Kidchameleon wrote: »

So what would have happened if Lisbon 2 was a no vote?

Who cares?

Whether you vote twice or a million times, why change your vote unless you've actually changed your mind?

sdanseo

By the way folks, please God vote NO to both of these. Certainly to the oireachtas one but remember the Judges' pay one also attempts to place a constituional precedent for categorising people "of a particular class" - terribly stupid wording and VERY, VERY dangerous.

TheZohanS

Don't worry, shur if we vote the wrong way they'll have another vote. Shur the Irish people are thicko's.

MagicMarker

sdeire wrote: »

By the way folks, please God vote NO to both of these. Certainly to the oireachtas one but remember the Judges' pay one also attempts to place a constituional precedent for categorising people "of a particular class" - terribly stupid wording and VERY, VERY dangerous.

Can you expand on that a little? I think you might be misinterpreting the ''classes of persons'' part, or I am.

2° The remuneration of judges is subject to the imposition of taxes, levies or other charges that are imposed by law on persons generally or persons belonging to a particular class.

I interpret the ''particular class'' part as referring to any changes in taxes referring to any specific tax bracket, rather than changes across the board?

This doesn't sound like an issue to me.

Baked.noodle

No leaflet in Galway city. This referendum will be a disaster. Not even the bare minimum of effort has been undertaken to inform the general public of the issues. I suspect the proposed changes to the constitution will be resoundingly rejected, in keeping with the developing tradition of Irish referendums. No doubt we will be back here debating these issues again, regardless of the optimistic poles. Perhaps if these issues, and others, where actually respected by the government we wouldn't have to deal with them again and again. It is clear the establishment has nothing but contempt for ordinary decent Irish people.

sdanseo

MagicMarker wrote: »

Can you expand on that a little? I think you might be misinterpreting the ''classes of persons'' part, or I am.

2° The remuneration of judges is subject to the imposition of taxes, levies or other charges that are imposed by law on persons generally or persons belonging to a particular class.

I interpret the ''particular class'' part as referring to any changes in taxes referring to any specific tax bracket, rather than changes across the board?

This doesn't sound like an issue to me.

I know what it's meant to be intrepreted as and what the intention is, and agree that the intention is perfectly harmless (except perhaps to judges :P )

What worries me is that it is open to interpretation - all it takes is one stupid supreme court judgement and suddendly it's OK to classify people by other means.

Oh_Noes

I recieved it but then I wasn't relying on printed literature coming in my front door to inform me of possible changes to the constitution. People should be informed or be able to inform themselves, if anything they shouldn't have wasted paper by doing this.

I think both of these amendments are a step too far and completely regressive. I hope to god that they aren't passed because it will further remove Alan Shatter from reality and encourage his egotism.