Why are we having a referendum on Women in the Home?

Ezeoul

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590055#Comment_121590055

I've already mentioned some.

Why don't you make some suggestions?

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590081#Comment_121590081

I don't know, because in O'Gormans infinite wisdom he's chosen wording that's open to interpretation.

If all relationships that meet that definition cannot be outlined then such wording has no place in the fundamental law of the country - since it is impossible to determine the consequences.

beggars_bush

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590090#Comment_121590090

Your problem is with the minister

Build a bridge and get over it

reniwren

Just wondering, if the way it's worded now could it be interpreted as a woman if staying home should get a full actual wage for doing so? But it would have to be challenged of course

Tow

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590365#Comment_121590365

No, if anything the opposite.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121583623#Comment_121583623

Not sure what you mean by " If the property is to be sold, then the tenant is unaffected."?

How is the tenant unaffected, they still need to find somewhere else?

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121585587#Comment_121585587

Therefore does not favour landlords!

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590429#Comment_121590429

If they are unaffected, then their current lease conditions are assumed by the new owner. The tenant remains in the property with the same rent.

What else can 'unaffected' mean?

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590443#Comment_121590443

The lack of social houses increases demand for private rental property - that favours landlords.

The ability of landlords to evict tenants without due cause of failure of the tenant wrt the lease, favours landlords. Tenants need security of tenure such that no fault evictions cannot occur.

Sleepy

The real issue with this referendum is that it demonstrates just how out of step the political classes are from the average person. A few cranks aside, there are few that have any issue with removing out-dated and sexist language from our constitution. The problem is the (accurate imo) perception that large numbers of government (and opposition) TDs are allowing themselves to be distracted from the major issues(Housing, Health, Climate Change, Crime, Education, Immigration) with a referendum that will have absolutely no real world effect on anybody's life.

It'd be far better optics to bundle this referendum (which basically just amounts to a bit of constitutional housekeeping) with something more meaningful such as the upcoming Local and European elections (already scheduled for June) or a referendum on the legalisation of Marijuana (if only the Citizen's Assembly on Drugs hadn't had it's terms of reference set to avoid such a common sense move).

Beta Ray Bill

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590530#Comment_121590530

100%

I think they are incredibly out of touch. I also think the civil servants who also suggest X amendments are also completely out of touch.

The reforms the political system needs are incredible, but yet here we are talking about: "Women in the Home".

I think it's just been years and years of tipping along with laxadaisy attitude has brought us to where we are.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590492#Comment_121590492

Landlords cannot be blamed for the inadequacy of the government.

I wonder why private landlords are leaving the market if it is soo much in favor of them? Why are their vacant houses not being rented.. maybe if the rental market wasnt such a sh*tshow then people would rent these houses!

Ya think landlords like having problem tenants, tenants that damage property, tenants who dont pay rent for years in worse cases.. etc etc..

I really cannot see how the PRTB favors landlords?

In any case it is NOT the tenants property, if the landlord wants to evict it is their house to do so, it is only a problem as their is no where else they can go.. again not the problem of the private landlord.

Your grievance is with the government not landlords...

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590470#Comment_121590470

Your comment was very definitive, as if their is only 1 outcome" If the property is to be sold, then the tenant is unaffected."?

Maybe your grammer is at fault? should have been " If the property is to be sold, and the tenant is unaffected."?

Beta Ray Bill

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590683#Comment_121590683

I'd agree with you to an extent.

If you create a system that's open to abuse then people will abuse it, that's just the way people are. While small time landlords are leaving the market. Big firms are still buying up everything in a hush hush way:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058330332/uk-fund-snaps-up-85-of-dublin-17-housing-estate-originally-aimed-at-individual-buyers/

The news articles are disappearing, as they are posted, which is very strange.

No one in government can decide what kind of market we want and as such it's mostly a free for all.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590745#Comment_121590745

Exactly, ppl will abuse it.. but tarnishing all landlords (especially private ones) cause of government inadequacy and firms buying up houses is wrong!

Lest we forget, alot of abuse comes from tenants as well, more so if you ask me....

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590090#Comment_121590090

'Durable Relationship' is a wishy washy woke term that means nothing legally. It could encompass anything that the parties believe is durable, it could be a grandmother & child but it could equally be a group of polyamorous swingers who all say they are in a durable relationship. The public will look at this and say 'nah' - we'll stick with what we know.

baldbear

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590805#Comment_121590805

Let's say a fella from Afghanistan has a durable relationship with 60 family members back home. Can they get them all relocated to Ireland once their asylum claim is processed?

Neale Richmond shouldn't have brought immigration into the debate. Or did he do this on purpose so there could be an open debate on immigration via this referendum?

So what of the government loose this referendum. It'll be a way for people to blow off some steam and feel good about themselves. But it will achieve nothing.

Then we have the local elections/general election coming up so the government will be better prepared.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590877#Comment_121590877

I think it'll just just set the trend for the year. We're going to see some blame shifting going on and I expect our friends in the Greens are going to take a right kicking.

Montage of Feck

This referendum isn't getting much traction in the media and it's all really a bit vague in what the changes will achieve mean this could go very arseways for the government, especially if other issues like migration get side loaded in.

pgj2015

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121583509#Comment_121583509

Lol You should post that in the conspiracy theory thread. As if they would ever do that. You do know you live in Ireland yeah?

Dravokivich

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121583509#Comment_121583509

You need to ease up on idle gossip, it's a far stretch calling this nonsense a theory. Single parents regardless of whether they are fathers or mothers get the child benefit payments too.

foxsake

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121588967#Comment_121588967

can you explain why you think it is archaic and sexist?

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590695#Comment_121590695

There is nothing wrong with my grammar.

In commercial leases, this is the phrase used when a property is up for sale but the tenant will remain in situ on existing terms.

Also, tenants that contravene the terms of the lease or do not pay the rent when due should be evicted in short order.

Tenants pay rent to use the property. The landlord surrenders the use of the property in exchange for the rent under the terms of the lease. The landlord has restricted access to the property during the lease, and should respect the rights of the tenant.

It is to ensure the tenant rights that a referendum is required, but should also include the right of the landlord to reclaim the property should the rent not be paid or other terms of the lease not be complied with.

Now disputes arise when the landlord fails to repair faults and tenant retains rent until the repair is carried out. Now that is within the PTRB's remit (or should be).

I have no financial interest either as a landlord or a tenant but I do realise there is considerable hardship and homelessness caused by no-fault evictions.

whatisayis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121590068#Comment_121590068

"The sexist titles for these payments were there, because sexism was acceptable at the time.

Not because of any constitutional obligation to support women."

The sexist titles were there because these payments were only available to women and Article 41.2. was the reason the men who challenged these payments lost their case.

I see you are choosing to completely ignore the impact of the use of the word endeavour in the Article, so I'm not going to waste any more effort in going back and forth on this with you.

All Articles in the Constitution have to be read in their entirety. In a nutshell, Article 41 says the state guarantees to protect the family and, in particular, because the common good cannot be achieved without women caring for their families, the state will do all it can to ensure those women do not have to go out to work. The Irish version, which takes precedent over the English translation, actually says that the state will seek to make certain that women will not have to go out to work and cause them to neglect their duties to their family. Note: No mention of "a women's place is in the home"

"(eta) the case I referred to had a different plaintiff (different surname) but the same outcome. The court found a deserted husband and his two children were not entitled to the same support as a deserted wife and her children."

Although I don't know what case you are referring to I would assume he was denied the payment because he wasn't a women.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121592541#Comment_121592541

If that is true, no wonder is their so much ambiguity using statements like that, does not make sense..

And this is the problem "Also, tenants that contravene the terms of the lease or do not pay the rent when due should be evicted in short order."

The Law / PRTB make this very difficult, tenants can stay in a house for ages without paying rent... therefore landlords pull out of rental market making it that little bit harder...

You definitely are biased towards landlords.. in any case "I do realise there is considerable hardship and homelessness caused by no-fault evictions.", this is a symptom of a greater problem, no-fault evictions would not be such a big deal if they could find somewhere else to live...

Again, your problem is with the government and how they are tackling this crisis... private landlords play a minute role in this

Economics101

Last 'week's Irish Times article by Orla O'Connor of the National Women's Council has produced highly critical responses in the IT letters page for 3 days running. Must be some sort of record for a forum normally dominated by right-on feminist attitudes.

Also the critical letters were impressively well-argued and show up the stupidity of those who designed the proposed wording

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121594078#Comment_121594078

The Irish version, which takes precedent over the English translation, actually says that the state will seek to make certain that women will not have to go out to work and cause them to neglect their duties to their family. Note: No mention of "a women's place is in the home"

Singling out women going to work as neglecting their duties to their family as opposed to men going to work is, in fact, suggesting that women's place is in the home.

The re-wording is slightly clumsy, but no one should be under any doubt about what the clause meant at the time it was inserted.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121595446#Comment_121595446

I do not think you understand my posts.

I think this is now way off topic so I will leave it there.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121597100#Comment_121597100

good cop out.

Sam Russell

I think it would be much simpler to use the following somewhere appropriate.

'This constitution is gender neutral so where the word MAN is used, the word WOMAN is implied, and vice versa', and the word FAMILY includes any relationships that is between couples and can span generations and usually implies economic dependencies.'

Of course this can certainly be improved upon.