High Court action to have bye election in South Donegal

bleg · 19-10-2010 09:23PM #1

I'm just wondering how much the state is paying in legal fees to contest this case. Seeing as the election will be held at some stage, surely it makes no sense to contest it. What an absolute utter waste of money...

Fo Real · 19-10-2010 09:32PM

I don't know the exact figures but agree completely that it's an utter waste of public money. The general election is coming within the next 6 months, if not sooner.

It's just the Shinners trying to score some points and play on the anti-government sentiment. I'd hope the good people of South Donegal know better than to elect a terrorist sympathiser to our national parliament.

gandalf · 19-10-2010 11:14PM

Talk about being outraged at the wrong thing. The outrage here is we haven't had these elections long before now. I am no fan of our current electoral system but even I see that the voters in the three constituencies that are without full representation are being denied their rights as citizens of this country.

The only reason I see the elections being delayed is the incumbent Government parties cowardice because they know they will be on to a hiding and it could push a General Election even closer when the numbers constrict further.

At this moment I would say kudos to Sinn Fein in pursuing this and again register my disgust at Fianna Fail and their hangers on the Green Party at their continued denial of the voters right in those constituencies to full representation.

PomBear · 20-10-2010 12:52AM

What waste of money, sure the people of Donegal SW don't need to represented,

Silly democracy, always getting in the way......

Shea O'Meara · 20-10-2010 01:16AM

Fo Real wrote: »

...It's just the Shinners trying to score some points and play on the anti-government sentiment. I'd hope the good people of South Donegal know better than to elect a terrorist sympathiser to our national parliament.

Why when ever anybody calls the government out on something, do we get the 'trying to score points' slant?
Would you rather we all stayed quiet and just hoped they went away?

Lockstep · 20-10-2010 07:56AM

Personally, I think it's a fair point. The seat has been vacant for over a year and I'd imagine the main reason no election has been called is that Fianna Fáil know that the seat will go to an opposition member.

ednwireland · 20-10-2010 08:14AM

Fo Real wrote: »

I don't know the exact figures but agree completely that it's an utter waste of public money. The general election is coming within the next 6 months, if not sooner.

It's just the Shinners trying to score some points and play on the anti-government sentiment. I'd hope the good people of South Donegal know better than to elect a terrorist sympathiser to our national parliament.

have you seen the other candidates we have up here theres not much choice beleive me (if rumours of pat the cope's wife running and if she gets elected ........... i just despair)

Lenny Lovett · 20-10-2010 08:29AM

Fo Real wrote: »

It's just the Shinners trying to score some points and play on the anti-government sentiment. I'd hope the good people of South Donegal know better than to elect a terrorist sympathiser to our national parliament.

So you're another of these people that believes that the people of Northern Ireland should be forced to deal with Sinn Fein but we shouldn't have to? Ridiculous. Sinn Fein are a recognised democratic Political Party and should be treated as such. They/the IRA have complied with their obligations and agreements under the various Northern Ireland agreements and as such have justified their place in any decision making process.

gandalf wrote: »

Talk about being outraged at the wrong thing. The outrage here is we haven't had these elections long before now. I am no fan of our current electoral system but even I see that the voters in the three constituencies that are without full representation are being denied their rights as citizens of this country.

Correct. The usual people who can't see the wood for the trees.

gandalf wrote: »

At this moment I would say kudos to Sinn Fein in pursuing this and again register my disgust at Fianna Fail and their hangers on the Green Party at their continued denial of the voters right in those constituencies to full representation.

Agreed.

ednwireland wrote: »

have you seen the other candidates we have up here theres not much choice beleive me (if rumours of pat the cope's wife running and if she gets elected ........... i just despair)

That point is irrelevant. The point, as stated above by another poster, is that the Government are denying the voters their democratic right. The voters do not necessarily have to vote for any of the candidates if they feel they're not up to it. They can record their discord by spoiling the ballot paper. You seem to think the candidates you have are poor... Why not run yourself?

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 08:33AM

Even if he wins his case there is no guarantee that the election will be held. The courts cannot make the govt hold it. He wants a deceleration saying that the delay is unreasonable and unconstitutional, and is living in the hope that govt will have the election in order to save face and uphold the constitution. It is entirely up to the govt whether they do so or not.

ei.sdraob · 20-10-2010 08:57AM

The state using taxpayers/citizen's money to defend against a citizen who wishes to have a right to cast his vote.

What have we come to now

btw >

ei.sdraob wrote: »

If you want to bring change via protest, get few thousand people not to pay taxes

"no taxation without representation" could be claimed by the people in the areas being denied a by-election

this should bring down current govt and bring on full elections

now where is my gold star

Iwasfrozen · 20-10-2010 08:58AM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Even if he wins his case there is no guarantee that the election will be held. The courts cannot make the govt hold it. He wants a deceleration saying that the delay is unreasonable and unconstitutional, and is living in the hope that govt will have the election in order to save face and uphold the constitution. It is entirely up to the govt whether they do so or not.

If it's unconstitutional then why can't the courts force them to hold an election?

Iwasfrozen · 20-10-2010 08:59AM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The state using taxpayers/citizen's money to defend against a citizen who wishes to have a right to cast his vote.

What have we come to now

btw >

Yeah, that's exactly what we need right now, people not paying taxes. :rolleyes:

ei.sdraob · 20-10-2010 09:00AM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yeah, that's exactly what we need right now, people not paying taxes. :rolleyes:

Why should people pay taxes if they are not being represented and denied a democratic vote?

Iwasfrozen · 20-10-2010 09:06AM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Why should people pay taxes if they are not being represented and denied a democratic vote?

Because:

It's illegal.
If they don't then the rest of us have to pay even more.
Unless they stop buying everything, including food, and take all their money out of their bank accounts then they can't avoid taxes.
Rounding them up and putting them on trial will cost the rest of us even more money.

ei.sdraob · 20-10-2010 09:14AM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Because:
It's illegal.

If they don't then the rest of us have to pay even more.

Unless they stop buying everything, including food, and take all their money out of their bank accounts then they can't avoid taxes.

Rounding them up and putting them on trial will cost the rest of us even more money.

1. it worked for the American Colonies vs British empire before

no taxation without representation

2. if there is a change of government then the likes of anglo and their bondholders could be told to **** off, saving us billions

3. of course there are indirect taxes, i am talking about direct ones

4. attempting to round up thousands of people who are fed up with not being represented will not work neither is there enough detention space, if anything it speed up the government collapse and we all get elections

edit: any move against a group of people seeking their right to have a vote will bring the attention of the world towards Ireland.
And the last thing the government needs is negative press and be shown to be undemorcratic so they will cave in and then collapse.
They dug themselves a hole, about time the people set a trap for these rats.

Iwasfrozen · 20-10-2010 09:27AM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

1. it worked for the American Colonies vs British empire before no taxation without representation

This is not eighteenth century America. And I don't think south Donegal will be declaring independence anytime soon.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

2. if there is a change of government then the likes of anglo and their bondholders could be told to **** off, saving us billions

Do you realise what happens to peoples credit ratings when they default on their loans? Well the same thing happens to countries on a global scale. Except this time is happens to millions instead of one.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

3. of course there are indirect taxes, i am talking about direct ones.

You didn't say that earlier. And of course this now means you must change your chant to "No direct taxation without representation."

ei.sdraob wrote: »

4. attempting to round up thousands of people who are fed up with not being represented will not work neither is there enough detention space, if anything it speed up the government collapse and we all get elections

Of course we can round up thousands of people if it comes to that. Which I doubt it willl. More likely the government would just suspend services like closing schools, hospitals, roads etc. untill the people agree to pay for them.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 20-10-2010 10:02AM

Haven't read all the Paul Gogarty threads yet, anyone know offhand if this topic was put to him?

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 12:19PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

If it's unconstitutional then why can't the courts force them to hold an election?

Due to the separation of powers. The Judiciary cannot tell a TD what way to vote if a motion(in this case to move the writ) comes before the Dáil. Doherty knows this, thus has not asked for a injunction or anything like that, as he knows that that would never be granted. I could go into further detail here but it is not really necessary. To the best of my knowledge the courts cannot force the govt to hold this election. They just cannot.

So to sum up, the courts cannot force the govt on this issue. They can however, issue a deceleration saying that it is unconstitutional.

ei.sdraob · 20-10-2010 12:49PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

This is not eighteenth century America. And I don't think south Donegal will be declaring independence anytime soon.
.

you should brush up on history, original aim of the colonists was representation not independence (that came later), no one is calling for independence here just long overdue democratic elections :rolleyes:

what is wrong with holding elections? its democratic no??

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you realise what happens to peoples credit ratings when they default on their loans? Well the same thing happens to countries on a global scale. Except this time is happens to millions instead of one.
.

Defaulting on bondholders would be a smart thing to do asap, alot of economists agree, just go visit the irisheconomy.ie forum where many independent economists written on subject

if anything it be positive to our ratings since the debtors buying government bonds would realise that there will be more chance that they are paid back now that the bank noose is loosened somewhat

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You didn't say that earlier. And of course this now means you must change your chant to "No direct taxation without representation."

dont be silly, if you want other forms of tax (cat, corpo) can be withheld if businesses join in.
the whole point of this is peaceful disobedience until the democratic right of the people is granted.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Of course we can round up thousands of people if it comes to that. Which I doubt it willl. More likely the government would just suspend services like closing schools, hospitals, roads etc. untill the people agree to pay for them.

the moment they attempt to roundup more than a thousand people the **** would hit the fan, hows this for a Times headline "Irish government arrests citizens demanding an overdue democratic election"
That would break the camels back leading to more popular support.

so there you have it, peaceful and democratic process against a government denying representation for the citizens.
no revolutions, no car-burnings no ****, all civilized

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 12:51PM

Times headline "Irish government arrests citizens demanding an overdue democratic election"

It is not overdue. There exists no timetable, outline etc of how long it can be left.

Lenny Lovett · 20-10-2010 01:08PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

It is not overdue. There exists no timetable, outline etc of how long it can be left.

That's straight from the Robert Mugabe handbook of Democracy. How long do you believe is a fair length of time to wait for an election then?

mikemac · 20-10-2010 01:11PM

In the next election could we possibly also have a referendum to amend the constitution?

Something simple, like 3 months or even 6 months to have a by-election?

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 01:12PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

That's straight from the Robert Mugabe handbook of Democracy. How long do you believe is a fair length of time to wait for an election then?

I would have thought a snipe at my username would have been more apt tbh!

I dont know, 2 months max? Doesn't really matter what I think.

Hopefully when this case concludes we will have a constitutional clarification from the courts.

Fact is, the govt have done nothing illegal. And even if Doherty gets the deceleration he wants saying that the delay is unconstitutional, the govt are under no obligation to move the writ forward.

bleg · 20-10-2010 01:15PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

It is not overdue. There exists no timetable, outline etc of how long it can be left.

Nice username.

It just baffles me completely and utterly how the Govt can stand by this action. I don't care who's doing the point scoring, that's irrelevant. But using strained State finances to fight a case such as this is puzzling to say the least.

I'm completely and utterly disillusioned.

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 01:16PM

feelingstressed wrote: »

In the next election could we possibly also have a referendum to amend the constitution?

Something simple, like 3 months or even 6 months to have a by-election?

That would have to pass through the Oireachtas first. So the next government may want to do that.

Personally I suspect that if the court comes out and declares that there is a constitutional obligation to fill a seat within a certain time frame governments in the future will do so.

bleg · 20-10-2010 01:18PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Fact is, the govt have done nothing illegal.

Yes but what they're doing is plain wrong and they have the cheek to use our money to defend their own position.

Legal/Illegal does not equal Right/Wrong, something as a nation we seem to have forgotten.

Lenny Lovett · 20-10-2010 01:23PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I would have thought a snipe at my username would have been more apt tbh!

Dang! I missed that. Must try harder!!;)

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I dont know, 2 months max? Doesn't really matter what I think.

Hopefully when this case concludes we will have a constitutional clarification from the courts.

Fact is, the govt have done nothing illegal. And even if Doherty gets the deceleration he wants saying that the delay is unconstitutional, the govt are under no obligation to move the writ forward.

True. The thing is, like expenses reform, removal of state cars etc etc I can't see any party bringing it through given that they may need it themselves next time. Let's face it they're all guzzling from the same trough opposition or not.

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 01:26PM

bleg wrote: »

Nice username.

It just baffles me completely and utterly how the Govt can stand by this action. I don't care who's doing the point scoring, that's irrelevant. But using strained State finances to fight a case such as this is puzzling to say the least.

I'm completely and utterly disillusioned.

The governments stance seems to be that if the 3 bye elections are held this year it will cause economic damage. However if they are basing their arguments on that I don't see where that will get them as there is a precedent set that practicability in these cases refers to administrative things, not stuff like state finances.

The constitution states something to the effect that casual seats shall be regulated in accordance to law. However you have to read that in light of other parts of the constitution. Govt says it has not breached said law.

Wolfe Tone · 20-10-2010 01:28PM

bleg wrote: »

Yes but what they're doing is plain wrong and they have the cheek to use our money to defend their own position.

Legal/Illegal does not equal Right/Wrong, something as a nation we seem to have forgotten.

But what if their position is the legally correct one?

Morally I think it is wrong to delay them so much.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 20-10-2010 01:53PM

Fo Real wrote: »

It's just the Shinners trying to score some points and play on the anti-government sentiment. I'd hope the good people of South Donegal know better than to elect a terrorist sympathiser to our national parliament.

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

Why when ever anybody calls the government out on something, do we get the 'trying to score points' slant?
Would you rather we all stayed quiet and just hoped they went away?

Absolutely Shea. Love it when Irish people complain about inaction but then snipe when someone does the right thing. I mean how far could that accusation go?

''Stupid government, just introducing universal healthcare and free education to score points''

maccored · 20-10-2010 01:58PM

there has to be a crossover between those shouting for an election and those who voted for FF in the last election. I find that level of shortsightedness amazing - though that is a tad offtopic.

High Court action to have bye election in South Donegal

Comments