NEXT REFERENDUM

NuMarvel · 25-05-2018 02:03PM

Here's the most recent plan:

Referendums on Blasphemy (Article 40.6.1) and “Woman's life within the home” (Article 41.2.1) – October 2018

Plebiscite on directly elected executive mayors - October 2018

Referendums on Divorce, Extending the Franchise at Presidential Elections to Irish Citizens Resident outside the State, and Reducing the voting age to 16, – June 2019

There may be others coming out of the Citizens Assembly, even though their remit was broader than just constitutional change.

cruizer101 · 25-05-2018 02:04PM

Next referendums are already planned

Three referendums are due to be held in late 2018:
Referendum on whether Ireland should have directly elected mayors (October)
Blasphemy (October)
The role of women in the home (October)

I think the above will be alongside the Presidential election

Then in June 2019 there will be another three referendums:
to extend voting rights to citizens living abroad
liberalising Ireland’s divorce laws
reducing the voting age to 16

Ronin247 · 25-05-2018 02:12PM

Dependant on the government getting the result they want this time.... Nice and Lisbon still disgust me.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-05-2018 02:14PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

Here's the most recent plan:

Referendums on Blasphemy (Article 40.6.1) and “Woman's life within the home” (Article 41.2.1) – October 2018

Plebiscite on directly elected executive mayors - October 2018

Referendums on Divorce, Extending the Franchise at Presidential Elections to Irish Citizens Resident outside the State, and Reducing the voting age to 16, – June 2019

There may be others coming out of the Citizens Assembly, even though their remit was broader than just constitutional change.

Irish citizens or passport holders or is there a difference.

alchemist33 · 25-05-2018 02:15PM

I'll regret asking this, but what's the story with "women's life within the home"?

Mr. CooL ICE · 25-05-2018 02:16PM

Whatever the new constitution is, I tip my hat to it. And if there's a revolution, I will bow. I'd be looking at the changes with a happy face. And like it's any other day, I'd play a little guitar. Might even kneel down and have an oul' pray. Nobody will get the better of us.

Hitman3000 · 25-05-2018 02:16PM

Ronin247 wrote:

Dependant on the government getting the result they want this time.... Nice and Lisbon still disgust me.

The voting public changed their vote the second time round.

Billgirlylegs · 25-05-2018 02:18PM

Gannicus wrote: »

I had no idea these were on the cards at all.

Get away:pac:

ArmaniJeanss · 25-05-2018 02:19PM

alchemist33 wrote: »

I'll regret asking this, but what's the story with "women's life within the home"?

This is currently in the constitution.

"The State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home."

NuMarvel · 25-05-2018 02:19PM

alchemist33 wrote: »

I'll regret asking this, but what's the story with "women's life within the home"?

Some background here.

The reason for the delay is trying to come up with what, if anything, replaces it.

How Soon Is Now · 25-05-2018 02:20PM

Proper rights for single fathers and men in general who are being punished in court because of the system nearly always favouring the mother.

Owryan · 25-05-2018 02:20PM

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Tougher sentences for people convicted of child abuse, child porn , rape

Can be handled through legislation not by referendum

amcalester · 25-05-2018 02:21PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This is currently in the constitution.

"The State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home."

Does this have any real life implications?

NuMarvel · 25-05-2018 02:21PM

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Proper rights for single fathers and men in general who are being punished in court because of the system nearly always favouring the mother.

I don't think a referendum isn't needed for that. Unless there's a section of the constitution prohibiting this from being legislated for that I don't know about.

How Soon Is Now · 25-05-2018 02:24PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I don't think a referendum isn't needed for that. Unless there's a section of the constitution prohibiting this from being legislated for that I don't know about.

Call me stupid but I don't understand what you meant by way you worded this.

aidoh · 25-05-2018 02:26PM

I'll put money on a series of United Ireland referendums over the next decade.

conorhal · 25-05-2018 02:26PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This is currently in the constitution.

"The State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home."

No. But we'll spend a fortune for the government to virtue signal and feel progressive on a referendum with no impact or cost implications for the government, which is their favorite kind of referendum.

Patser · 25-05-2018 02:27PM

Irish reunification but with the proviso Tánaiste position is renamed 2nd minister and always to be held by a Unionist.

Ush1 · 25-05-2018 02:27PM

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Call me stupid but I don't understand what you meant by way you worded this.

You only need a referendum to change the constitution.

Owryan · 25-05-2018 02:27PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I don't think a referendum isn't needed for that. Unless there's a section of the constitution prohibiting this from being legislated for that I don't know about.

I don't think this needs to be dealt with through a referendum but it is interesting that children and mother's are specifically mentioned in the constitution but, to the best of my knowledge, fathers are not

ohnonotgmail · 25-05-2018 02:27PM

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Call me stupid but I don't understand what you meant by way you worded this.

Referendums (referenda?) are votes to makes changes in the constitution. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents fathers getting a fair deal in court. Therefore a referendum cannot change anything in this regard.

Atlantic Dawn · 25-05-2018 02:28PM

Getting people to walk on the left side of paths only, the efficiency benefits would bring us back to the boom times.

Guy:Incognito · 25-05-2018 02:28PM

Rory28 wrote: »

If only. Its mad that a drug dealer can get a longer sentence than a monster.

Godzilla should be the top of the tree, sentence wise.

Rory28 · 25-05-2018 02:30PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Godzilla should be the top of the tree, sentence wise.

Thats profiling. Godzilla saved us from Mothra. We should be grateful.

How Soon Is Now · 25-05-2018 02:32PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Referendums (referenda?) are votes to makes changes in the constitution. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents fathers getting a fair deal in court. Therefore a referendum cannot change anything in this regard.

Alright ya I get ya!
Will never change so especially these days.

joe40 · 25-05-2018 02:33PM

I assume every amendment requires a referendum.
If so the referendum was enacted in 1937, the 1st amendment was in 1939. (if you can say what it was for I'll be very impressed.)

If the 8th amendment was in 1983 (There has been a bit of talk about it recently) and the current referendum is the 38th amendment. That means there have been 30 referendums in the past 35 years.
As the young people say wtf!

Is it time to rip the damn thing up and start again.

bringoutthegimp · 25-05-2018 02:34PM

conorhal wrote: »

No. But we'll spend a fortune for the government to virtue signal and feel progressive on a referendum with no impact or cost implications for the government, which is their favorite kind of referendum.

Well, it could be argue that the our current income tax scheme, which punishes single income families vs two income families, is in breach of that article of the constitution. Getting rid of it will make that problem go away..

AlmightyCushion · 25-05-2018 02:36PM

amcalester wrote: »

Does this have any real life implications?

I doubt it and on its own it probably wouldn't be worth holding a referendum for it but seeing as we're having one on blasphemy there's no real harm tacking this onto it.

daheff · 25-05-2018 02:37PM

Assetbacked wrote: »

Right to bear arms!

the right to Arm Bears

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This is currently in the constitution.

"The State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home."

I think the state is failing miserably in this regard.

Seems like we should all be suing for them failing as a breach of our constitutional rights.

amcalester · 25-05-2018 02:38PM

joe40 wrote: »

I assume every amendment requires a referendum.
If so the referendum was enacted in 1937, the 1st amendment was in 1939. (if you can say what it was for I'll be very impressed.)

If the 8th amendment was in 1983 (There has been a bit of talk about it recently) and the current referendum is the 38th amendment. That means there have been 30 referendums in the past 35 years. as the young people say wtf!

Is it time to rip the damn thing up and start again.

If you did that you'll probably find a similar pattern looking back in 50/60 years anyway.

Once written, a new constitution would reflect society's values at that time, as time passes though it would need to be changed and that rate of change will only increase. So we'd be back to where we are now.

Only thing I can think of is to make it easier to amend the constitution, but I don't see how that's practical/possible.

NEXT REFERENDUM

Comments