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

Goverment breking rules in Referendum

Options
  • 08-11-2012 2:04pm
    #1
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭


    The Supreme Court have ruled that two million leaflets distributed by the government and a website run by the government have broken the rules by being biased in facour of a yes vote in the Childrens Referendum.
    Even if they win now the result must surely be tainted and subject to legal challenge.
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1108/childrens-referendum-court.html


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    The principles prohibit the use of public funds to promote a particular outcome in a referendum.

    In this case who pays for all those piece of shít signs that go up on lamp posts anytime a referendum comes up?


  • Options
    #3
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    In this case who pays for all those piece of shít signs that go up on lamp posts anytime a referendum comes up?
    Interested parties pay for that, not the government.


  • Options
    #4
    okedoke
    Registered Users Posts: 924 ✭✭✭okedoke


    Poster breking spelling rules in title!


  • Options
    #5
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Interested parties pay for that, not the government.
    But where do the parties get their money from? It's not all private donations surely?


  • Options
    #6
    SeaFields
    Registered Users Posts: 6,551 ✭✭✭SeaFields


    No side broke the rules when they got Dana on board


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,067 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Does this open up the possibility that the outcome of the referendum could be challenged or overturned? What a clusterfcuk by the government.. again.


  • Options
    #8
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    In this case who pays for all those piece of shít signs that go up on lamp posts anytime a referendum comes up?

    Posters are paid for by the political parties, so it isn't coming directly out of public funds.


  • Options
    #9
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    My name is URL wrote: »
    Does this open up the possibility that the outcome of the referendum could be challenged or overturned? What a clusterfcuk by the government.. again.
    No, this is a matter of misuse of government funds more than anything else. The government is entitled to campaign for a yes vote, doing so is not prohibited. The funding just cannot come from state coffers.

    The information distributed by RefCom is still fine and has not been challenged, so there's still an unbiased government agency providing unbiased information on it.

    If the RefCom leaflet has been declared biased, then there would be trouble.


  • Options
    #10
    pablohoney87
    Registered Users Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭pablohoney87


    seamus wrote: »

    If the RefCom leaflet has been declared biased, then there would be trouble.
    It has


  • Options
    #11
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    My name is URL wrote: »
    Does this open up the possibility that the outcome of the referendum could be challenged or overturned? What a clusterfcuk by the government.. again.
    It certainly does. They might as well cancel it now


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    This is another epic ****up by the government further proving their inability to do a good job on even the simplest tasks. A yes vote was surely in the bag on this Referrendum, but now there may be a protest vote or a challenge after a yes vote.
    Surely this is a major failure from the office of the Attorney General?

    I had low expectations for this government, and they are failing to meet that even. :(


  • Options
    #13
    CardBordWindow
    Registered Users Posts: 3,191 ✭✭✭CardBordWindow


    They all need a good paddling. Any volunteers? :D


  • Options
    #14
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    I wonder what the "European of the Year" will have to say about latest gubberment ****up?


  • Options
    #15
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    pablohoney87 wrote: »
    It has
    As far as I can tell, this relates to the info distributed by the Dept of Children and childrensreferendum.ie, not the RefCom stuff.


  • Options
    #16
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    seamus wrote: »
    As far as I can tell, this relates to the info distributed by the Dept of Children and childrensreferendum.ie, not the RefCom stuff.
    Just read the the Ruling and you are right, however in view of the fact that the Government distributed 2,000,000 of the booklets and ran a website, with a total spend of €1.1 , it has to be argued that they have seriously tainted the result of the poll.
    Hopefully the result will be ruled void because of this anti-democracy exercise by Inda and Eamo!


  • Options
    #17
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Just read the the Ruling and you are right, however in view of the fact that the Government distributed 2,000,000 of the booklets and ran a website, with a total spend of €1.1 , it has to be argued that they have seriously tainted the result of the poll.
    Hopefully the result will be ruled void because of this anti-democracy exercise by Inda and Eamo!
    There's not really any scope in law to declare a result void because one of the campaigns broke the law or spent more money than the others.
    The only scenario I could see that occurring in is if it could be shown that the population were not provided with an unbiased source of information.
    Since the RefCom info is still sound, then I don't believe this referendum can be challenged after the fact. I could be wrong of course.


  • Options
    #18
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users Posts: 4,468 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Interested parties pay for that, not the government.

    Labour pay for labour signs, part of government, derp.


  • Options
    #19
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    Labour pay for labour signs, part of government, derp.

    A political party spending its funds on something does not equate to a body it is elected to spending its funds on it.


  • Options
    #20
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Just read the the Ruling and you are right, however in view of the fact that the Government distributed 2,000,000 of the booklets and ran a website, with a total spend of €1.1 , it has to be argued that they have seriously tainted the result of the poll.
    Hopefully the result will be ruled void because of this anti-democracy exercise by Inda and Eamo!

    all parties in most elections and referenda produce and circulate biased material

    the issue here is how it was funded


  • Options
    #21
    admiralofthefleet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,515 ✭✭✭✭admiralofthefleet


    SeaFields wrote: »
    No side broke the rules when they got Dana on board

    feck, i was voting No til i saw that religious freak was on board. might spoil now


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Valetta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    .
    Hopefully the result will be ruled void because of this anti-democracy exercise by Inda and Eamo!

    This would be the same as having a "no" result.

    Is this what you want?


  • Options
    #23
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    This govt just keep giving and giving.

    How much more eff ups will it take before they go bye bye?


  • Options
    #24
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    Ghandee wrote: »
    This govt just keep giving and giving.

    How much more eff ups will it take before they go bye bye?

    To let who in?
    Do we have any viable party or combination of parties who could do a better job? This is another example of why politics in Ireland is dead, a lost cause.


  • Options
    #25
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    bbam wrote: »
    To let who in?
    Do we have any viable party or combination of parties who could do a better job? This is another example of why politics in Ireland is dead, a lost cause.

    Direct rule from Germania.

    They seem to be pulling the strings as it is.


  • Options
    #26
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    Valetta wrote: »
    This would be the same as having a "no" result.

    Is this what you want?

    I honestly haven't decided how I'll vote yet.

    However, if now the govt have been found to be unfairly giving a one sided campaign, how can any result be deemed a fair result?

    Like their predecessors, its only fair if its what they want.


  • Options
    #27
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Ghandee wrote: »
    I honestly haven't decided how I'll vote yet.

    However, if now the govt have been found to be unfairly giving a one sided campaign, how can any result be deemed a fair result?

    Like their predecessors, its only fair if its what they want.

    every side gives a one-sided campaign!

    as above, the only issue is about using Public funds


  • Options
    #28
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,852 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1108/childrens-referendum-court.html
    t granted a declaration that the State acted wrongfully in spending public money on the website, information booklets and advertisements in relation to the referendum.

    However, it did not grant an injunction as the court assumed the State will stop distributing and publishing the material.

    ...
    The full reasons for the decision will be given next month.

    The link to the Children's Referendum website, www.childrensreferendum.ie, is no longer active.


  • Options
    #29
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    Valetta wrote: »
    This would be the same as having a "no" result.

    Is this what you want?
    Since the Government have illegally sought to influence the outcome of the poll, then yes, a declaration that the result is invalid is what I want.
    It would appear that there are grounds to challange the result because of the the level of illegal spending by the government in pursuit of its desired outcome.


  • Options
    #30
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    I am delighted with the Supreme Court decision.

    I have always thought that even the naming of referendums was partisan.

    Why are the government allowed to call something

    The Stability Referendum or The Children's Referendum, which have overtly positive connotations.

    Why not call it the 43rd amendment to the constitution or whatever?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Since the Government have illegally sought to influence the outcome of the poll, then yes, a declaration that the result is invalid is what I want.
    It would appear that there are grounds to challange the result because of the the level of illegal spending by the government in pursuit of its desired outcome.

    The government have stated that the referendum will proceed.

    However the result of the referendum is likely to be the subject of a legal challenge given today's ruling. If any such challenge would succeed is a different matter, in my opinion it would not.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



Advertisement