Breaking news: 'Sinn Féin may take Govt to court over bailout deal'

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 02:48PM

evercloserunion wrote: »

On the face of it appears to be illegal? How? This is the thing, it's very easy to claim that a decision you don't like is unconstitutional but if you really believe it you should be able to say what part of the constitution is violated. Actions of the government are presumed to be constitutional unless proven otherwise. Airy fairy arguments like "we're being screwed" don't tend to impress in the High Court or Supreme Court, you need something a little more concrete.

I think you're reading much into that which gonedrinking never said. Sinn Féin is considering challenging this decision of the government which is of major historic importance. It is not a matter of "challenging every decision" so you can stop the scaremongering. It is right that some group is doing this. This move is representative of a very large number of this population who are deeply uncomfortable with it. Nowhere in Irish democracy do the people surrender all of their own sovereignty when they elect a government. Nowhere. A basic understanding of Irish constitutional law would confirm this.

You appear to be suggesting that it is wrong to challenge legislation by the government simply because the government was voted in back in 2007. Doing this would be the antithesis of our democracy. Judicial Review, which in effect is what Sinn Féin will be seeking if they go through with this, has been an integral part of both Irish law and the democratic process since the Ryan case in 1967. Many of these cases have been brought by independent Irish citizens, and have resulted in Irish courts adjudging that decisions made by Irish governments are unconstitutional. It is through this process that contraceptives were allowed to be sold in Ireland (1973), that the government was forced to hold a referendum on the Single European Act (1986), and so forth.

Any group, including Sinn Féin, is perfectly correct to consider challenging this. I'm strongly pro-EU and would not hold with the Sinn Féin line at all on the EU; being closer to the EU gives us more independence than being in the shadow of Britain. In fact, much of my thinking would favour EU policy over Irish government policy - I want higher taxes for greater services; I want a more equitable distribution of wealth; I believe the Irish low corporation tax undermines social justice in the EU. And so on.
However, my views on the EU are changing now as it is clear that we, Irish taxpayers, are paying for the business failures of German, British and French financial institutions. This is morally wrong, and a politically terrible decision on the part of people who should be protecting the EU ideal. Most blame of all, of course, rests with the current government of Ireland and the extraordinarily incompetent civil service in the Department of Finance, the very people who have led us into this mess and in the past week decided to bury us alive.

I wholly support Sinn Féin in this. If Fine Gael or Labour, two parties well able to pull populist strokes in case anybody thinks otherwise, had the same sense of outrage I would support them. They don't. If Sinn Féin takes this challenge they could fail, or they could succeed. As Gonedrinking clearly said, time will tell. But to disparage a challenge to this awful deal for our people as "populist" is taking a very narrow view of things.

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 02:57PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The deal may be crappy and the government may be incompetent, but at the moment Ireland doesn't exactly have a strong negotiating position.

If, as numerous EU figures have said, there was/is a likelihood of Irish problems having a domino effect on other EU economies, particularly Spain, then the Irish negotiating position was strong.

Taking this massive loan out has, however, made this government's political problems considerably easier; had they not taken it the depth of cuts would have been so severe that, finally, even the most apolitical Irish person would have been engaging in mass protests. This has given the government breathing space. Moreover, this deal has allowed German, French and British businesses to have their private debts taken on by Irish taxpayers. The Irish government had a very strong hand to resist this imposition/outright robbery.

evercloserunion · 01-12-2010 03:38PM

gonedrinking wrote: »

Post 18 in this thread:

So evercloserunion are you claiming that a deal with the IMF and EU is not an international agreement?

First of all, legal opinion seems to suggest that the EU-IMF bailout is not necessarily an international agreement. You have to remember that words often have different meanings in a legal context than in an every day context. So according to Gerry Whyte, the challenge is likely to fail as the deal is not in the nature of an international agreement: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1201/1224284485706.html

That article also says roughly what I have been saying, which is that the courts are not here to protect you against the bad political decisions of the people you elect.

But even if the challenge were to succeed, that would not make the bailout illegal or unconstitutional--it would merely make FF's acceptance of the package without a Dáil vote illegal. FF still have a majority in the Dáil, so a challenge would not prevent the bailout from going through. To be honest though, I originally misunderstood Sinn Fein's intentions as trying to have the bailout itself ruled as unconstitutional. That's what the other thread I posted is about.

01-12-2010 04:33PM

evercloserunion wrote: »

First of all, legal opinion seems to suggest that the EU-IMF bailout is not necessarily an international agreement. You have to remember that words often have different meanings in a legal context than in an every day context. So according to Gerry Whyte, the challenge is likely to fail as the deal is not in the nature of an international agreement: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1201/1224284485706.html

That article also says roughly what I have been saying, which is that the courts are not here to protect you against the bad political decisions of the people you elect.

But even if the challenge were to succeed, that would not make the bailout illegal or unconstitutional--it would merely make FF's acceptance of the package without a Dáil vote illegal. FF still have a majority in the Dáil, so a challenge would not prevent the bailout from going through. To be honest though, I originally misunderstood Sinn Fein's intentions as trying to have the bailout itself ruled as unconstitutional. That's what the other thread I posted is about.

From your link: 'International agreements are normally lodged with the UN' Seems that they are not always...

The consitution states: “The State shall not be bound by any international agreement involving a charge upon public funds unless the terms of the agreement shall have been approved by Dáil Éireann.”

So it seems to me that the case will rest on the interpretation of an international agreement as we can clearly see that there is a cost to the public funds due to the bailout. I doubt the constitution defines an international agreement as one that has to be lodged with the UN but I stand to be corrected here.

As the govt are trying to weasle their way out of putting the agreement up for discussion/vote it really is a further spit in the face to the Irish people as this will destroy our finances for years to come and herald state asset striping which will make the eircom saga look like a fairytale.

dolphin city · 01-12-2010 05:54PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

Hear hear. People are always harping on about Sinn Fein being murderous scum and dragging up the Troubles. Well what about Fianna Fail? Not only do they fleece the Exchequer, bankrupt the economy and mortgage the future of the country but they also allow American troops and equipment to stop off at Shannon before continuing on their way to their bloodbath in Iraqistan.

All political parties have an unsavoury past. It's just that Sinn Fein's is more recent.

yes, and what was done was in their effort to preserve our country and the future generations who live in it - to keep our culture. The crowd of yahoos that bankruped the place had nothing in mind but greed - they don't give a tos* about the country - they sold it off - and as for future generations, the have proved that they mean nothing too - lumbering them with dept up to their eyeballs, while they all now take early retirement with the fat pay cheques. Gimme SF anyday.

Dudess · 01-12-2010 05:54PM

My name is URL wrote: »

What does that have to do with the constitutionality of the credit agreements though? The things you've mentioned most certainly should not be ignored but showing support to one idea does not tacitly imply that you support every other idea or agenda of the persons expressing it.

If Gerry Adams said that left was right would you drive on the other side of the road just to uphold your own moral ideals? It shouldn't matter who is espousing this.. it makes sense and historical differences should be set aside in order to do something about the current issue.

If Sinn Fein espouses something, I literally cannot bring myself to back them, even if I agree with it. And as I said, those neo unionist types down here give me a pain in the tits too - it looks as if, in places on this thread, a rejection of SF's proposal is being viewed as simply going along with Eoghan Harris/Ruth Dudley Edwards/CCOB type muck, but that's certainly not my take, and it's doing a disservice to the victims of the paramilitary campaign to view it that way. I cannot detach what SF is connected to... until it renounces all of that, I would not be able to back anything it proposes with a clear conscience. I take into consideration all the "Time to move on" stuff, but to me, that means balls-all until SF acknowledges that moving on is a two-way street and renounces provo terrorism.

phantom_lord · 01-12-2010 05:58PM

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

charlemont · 01-12-2010 06:02PM

Fair play to Sinn Fein, the only party that acts like it cares about Ireland...:)

Chucky the tree · 01-12-2010 06:05PM

phantom_lord wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

Well, these are the same people who just read headlines and take that as face value. Not the smartest people in the world obviously so hardly surprising.

Dudess · 01-12-2010 06:07PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

Hear hear. People are always harping on about Sinn Fein being murderous scum and dragging up the Troubles.

Ah yeah, twas only a bit of auld murder...

Well what about Fianna Fail?

I'm hearing nothing but criticism of Fianna Fail so your question is rhetorical I presume.

All political parties have an unsavoury past. It's just that Sinn Fein's is more recent.

All political parties have an unsavoury past to the extent of Sinn Fein's? Really? I think it's more to do with the bombs and the shootings than the "recentness".

dolphin city wrote: »

yes, and what was done was in their effort to preserve our country and the future generations who live in it - to keep our culture. The crowd of yahoos that bankruped the place had nothing in mind but greed - they don't give a tos* about the country - they sold it off - and as for future generations, the have proved that they mean nothing too - lumbering them with dept up to their eyeballs, while they all now take early retirement with the fat pay cheques. Gimme SF anyday.

Laughable if it wasn't so depressing - SF damaged Ireland in a phenomenal way.
It's dismaying to read how people can so easily dismiss events like Enniskillen, it really is. And I'd be coming from a fairly nationalist - possibly moderately republican - perspective.

Sticky_Fingers · 01-12-2010 06:21PM

phantom_lord wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

An alternative for government, not a chance would I vote for them. That does not mean that they are wrong on this issue. The main opposition parties are more then happy to sit back and let this bailout go through. They make vague muttering and flaccid statements but will not rock the boat since they are the ones who will be in power come the next election and prefer to do whats easy as opposed to what is right.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Well, these are the same people who just read headlines and take that as face value. Not the smartest people in the world obviously so hardly surprising.

Reminds me of people who see the name SF and refuse to listen to what they have to say after that. Arrogance and stupidity in the extreme IMO;)

Chucky the tree · 01-12-2010 06:28PM

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

An alternative for government, not a chance would I vote for them. That does not mean that they are wrong on this issue. The main opposition parties are more then happy to sit back and let this bailout go through. They make vague muttering and flaccid statements but will not rock the boat since they are the ones who will be in power come the next election and prefer to do whats easy as opposed to what is right.

Reminds me of people who see the name SF and refuse to listen to what they have to say after that. Arrogance and stupidity in the extreme IMO;)

I listen to what they said, and it's pretty much the exact same as what Labour said. But for some reason people seem to be praising SF to the high heavens over it.

Wolfe Tone · 01-12-2010 06:35PM

Dudess wrote: »

If Sinn Fein espouses something, I literally cannot bring myself to back them, even if I agree with it. And as I said, those neo unionist types down here give me a pain in the tits too - it looks as if, in places on this thread, a rejection of SF's proposal is being viewed as simply going along with Eoghan Harris/Ruth Dudley Edwards/CCOB type muck, but that's certainly not my take, and it's doing a disservice to the victims of the paramilitary campaign to view it that way. I cannot detach what SF is connected to... until it renounces all of that, I would not be able to back anything it proposes with a clear conscience. I take into consideration all the "Time to move on" stuff, but to me, that means balls-all until SF acknowledges that moving on is a two-way street and renounces provo terrorism.

Will you also refuse to back any other Irish political party which celebrates militant republicanism?

Sticky_Fingers · 01-12-2010 06:42PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I listen to what they said, and it's pretty much the exact same as what Labour said. But for some reason people seem to be praising SF to the high heavens over it.

Labour, don't make me laugh. That pack of bedwetters will do nothing about the bailout. That talk a good fight and make all the right noises but when it comes down to it their masters in the unions will not allow them to alter the terms because it will put in jeopardy the sweet no PS wage/job cuts the deal entails.
I'll support Labour (won't vote for them though) when they decide to grow a spine and take practical steps to opposing the bailout instead of giving weak tea condemnations. SF may have been a pack of terrorist sympathisers but at least they are putting their money where their mouth is and seeking a legal challenge against the government.

Fratton Fred · 01-12-2010 06:47PM

Dionysus wrote: »

If, as numerous EU figures have said, there was/is a likelihood of Irish problems having a domino effect on other EU economies, particularly Spain, then the Irish negotiating position was strong.

Taking this massive loan out has, however, made this government's political problems considerably easier; had they not taken it the depth of cuts would have been so severe that, finally, even the most apolitical Irish person would have been engaging in mass protests. This has given the government breathing space. Moreover, this deal has allowed German, French and British businesses to have their private debts taken on by Irish taxpayers. The Irish government had a very strong hand to resist this imposition/outright robbery.

I keep hearing about how German, French and British businesses and banks are having their debt paid by the Irish tax payer, but i haven't seen anything to back up this statement.

Do you have a link or anything?

squod · 01-12-2010 06:53PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I keep hearing about how German, French and British businesses and banks are having their debt paid by the Irish tax payer, but i haven't seen anything to back up this statement.

Do you have a link or anything?

Have you ever read a newspaper?

evercloserunion · 01-12-2010 07:04PM

phantom_lord wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

Well, as long as people like you continue to dismiss them out of hand without suggesting any real alternatives, more and more people will begin to see them that way.

Chucky the tree · 01-12-2010 07:06PM

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Labour, don't make me laugh. That pack of bedwetters will do nothing about the bailout. That talk a good fight and make all the right noises but when it comes down to it their masters in the unions will not allow them to alter the terms because it will put in jeopardy the sweet no PS wage/job cuts the deal entails.
I'll support Labour (won't vote for them though) when they decide to grow a spine and take practical steps to opposing the bailout instead of giving weak tea condemnations. SF may have been a pack of terrorist sympathisers but at least they are putting their money where their mouth is and seeking a legal challenge against the government.

So have Sinn Fein said they'd cut PS wages and jobs if they get elected? SF have said they have got in touch with solicitors to see if the Bailout is unconstitutional, Labour have said the same.

Sticky_Fingers · 01-12-2010 07:17PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

So have Sinn Fein said they'd cut PS wages and jobs if they get elected? SF have said they have got in touch with solicitors to see if the Bailout is unconstitutional, Labour have said the same.

Never said I supported them on that front, they are more left then Labour, I support their actions in this matter and their motivation to get a better deal for Ireland not their motivation of protecting the PS and welfare at all costs. Changes need to be made but in order for this to have any chance of success we need to throw out the bailout and start renegotiation.
I would ride with the devil if he was trying to overturn the atrocious deal the government signed but once that is done all bets are off and I will remove my support to someone who is willing to take on both the unions and the bankers.

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 07:21PM

phantom_lord wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

Such as who? I can't see anybody in this thread expecting Sinn Féin to win anything near enough seats to be the dominant party in government - although I can see many people supporting this action (which happens to be taken by Sinn Féin). There is an important difference.

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 07:22PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Well, these are the same people who just read headlines and take that as face value. Not the smartest people in the world obviously so hardly surprising.

Would you have a citation for that rather conceited view of your own intelligence/the inferiority of the intelligence of people who support this action?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I listen to what they said, and it's pretty much the exact same as what Labour said. But for some reason people seem to be praising SF to the high heavens over it.

If so, could you tell us where is the Labour party's claim that they are considering challenging this agreement? It may exist, but I haven't seen it yet.

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 07:24PM

Dudess wrote: »

If Sinn Fein espouses something, I literally cannot bring myself to back them, even if I agree with it.... I cannot detach what SF is connected to... until it renounces all of that, I would not be able to back anything it proposes with a clear conscience. I take into consideration all the "Time to move on" stuff, but to me, that means balls-all until SF acknowledges that moving on is a two-way street and renounces provo terrorism.

Yet every day in government a former chief of staff of the Irish Republican Army - a man who in 1973 declared, ' 'We have fought against the killing of our people .... I am a member of Óglaigh na hÉireann and very, very proud of it' - and other senior members of that organisation can work alongside members of the Democratic Unionist Party, and win their agreement to proposals.

Across all of Ireland, members of all political parties (including whatever party you might vote for) can do similar on urban and county councils. You are, of course, entitled to your views but when even the DUP can back Sinn Féin proposals it ought to raise some questions about their suitability in 2010.

Dionysus · 01-12-2010 07:25PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I keep hearing about how German, French and British businesses and banks are having their debt paid by the Irish tax payer, but i haven't seen anything to back up this statement.

Do you have a link or anything?

A quick google has the following:

1. British debt (from the Telegraph): British banks have £140 billion exposure to Ireland's economic crisis

2. German debt (from Spiegel): Investments at Risk: money owed to German banks by Greece, Portugal, Ireland & Spain

3. French debt (from France News Economy): French Banks exposure to Irish debt

And a general overview of Eurozone debt to Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain:
EuroZone Banks Hold 62% of PIIGS Debt

Hope this helps.

Fluorescence · 01-12-2010 07:48PM

My current problem SF is that they're hypocrites. They have lots of posters in Dublin city centre saying to oppose the cuts, yet if they were in government they'd surely have to make cuts too. I'm dubious as to whether they would actually follow through on their words if they made it into government. Even looking at some of their policies on their webpage - some of them are overly ambitious when you take into account Ireland has no money and certainly won't if they refuse the bailout and try their own luck.

I'm all for opposing the awful deal the government struck with the EU/IMF but I don't think voting SF is the answer.

Fratton Fred · 01-12-2010 08:20PM

Dionysus wrote: »

A quick google has the following:

1. British debt (from the Telegraph): British banks have £140 billion exposure to Ireland's economic crisis

2. German debt (from Spiegel): Investments at Risk: money owed to German banks by Greece, Portugal, Ireland & Spain

3. French debt (from France News Economy): French Banks exposure to Irish debt

And a general overview of Eurozone debt to Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain:
EuroZone Banks Hold 62% of PIIGS Debt

Hope this helps.

that isn't the Irish tax payer paying off someone else's debt, that is the Irish tax payer covering debt Ireland (Either private individuals, companies or the Government) owes to various banks.

When the government issues bonds raise cash, who do you think buys them?

My name is URL · 01-12-2010 09:49PM

I just came across this blog post in which the author Bill Cash MP, head of the European Scrutiny Committee; touches on how 'bailouts' in general, may be illegal under the Maastricht Treaty.

Such mechanism ignores the "no bailout" clause included in the Maastricht Treaty and today provide in Article 125 TFEU. According to Jean-Claude Juncker the mechanism "would not be a violation of the no-bailout clause […] since the loans are repayable and contain no element of subsidy…" However, the loans breaches the treaty’s provisions as Member States will became liable. The Treaty forbids Member States for being liable for the debts of another. Article 125 of the TFEU states “The Union shall not be liable for or assume the commitments of central governments, regional, local or other public authorities, other bodies governed by public law, or public undertakings of any Member State (…)A Member State shall not be liable for or assume the commitments of central governments, regional, local or other public authorities, other bodies governed by public law, or public undertakings of another Member State, (…)”

http://europeanjournal.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/11/are-the-eurozone-bailouts-illegal.html

Maybe it's not just testable under Irish law, but that of the EU.

Chucky the tree · 01-12-2010 09:56PM

Dionysus wrote: »

Would you have a citation for that rather conceited view of your own intelligence/the inferiority of the intelligence of people who support this action?

Read the thread. No once in your OP or in the link is someone from Sinn Fein quoted about taking FF to court over the bail out but everyone is harping on about they are the only party willing to stand up for people.

Dionysus wrote: »

If so, could you tell us where is the Labour party's claim that they are considering challenging this agreement? It may exist, but I haven't seen it yet.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1130/1224284430805.html

No one will know if it's unconstitutional or not until the Government realise more details. This just seems like a good PR stunt by SF.

brianthebard · 01-12-2010 10:59PM

fluorescence wrote: »

My current problem SF is that they're hypocrites. They have lots of posters in Dublin city centre saying to oppose the cuts, yet if they were in government they'd surely have to make cuts too.

They might have to make cuts but they don't necessarily have to be the same cuts; SF would believe that the working classes should not take the majority of the burden. They also wouldn't agree with the bailout which would radically change the amount of cuts that would have to be made. Tbh I find it sad that even in the face of recent huge progressive steps by SF people are still attempting to make the party into the bogeyman. I think as much as anything people are scared of the fact that SF have an actual ideological basis to their politics, unlike most of the rest of the politicians in this country.

Johro · 02-12-2010 12:07AM

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Can someone give me a RATIONAL explanation as to why they are against this?

I am no advocate of Sinn Fein but they seem to be the only party to contest anything in the political system today.

I have heard NOTHING from the other partys in relation to the bailout, just empty rhetoric and nonsense.

Someone in another thread referred to Sinn Fein as a party of idealists.
I think it was meant negatively.:rolleyes:
If only we had more idealists in the current government, we might not be in such a mess now. There is nothing wrong with idealism. It is, after all, the opposite of materialism.
Where I live, the same local TD's, Mayors and Councillors have been doing their version of musical chairs for way too long now. It's time for change.

jackiebaron · 02-12-2010 01:16AM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Ehh....hmm....what do yez think?

I'm considering calling them feckin' money-hungry public-opinion-thirsty cowards.

Yeah? Consider away!
I'd prefer to listen to a man who's been shot than a man who's ran from office. I'd prefer to listen to a man who's been tortured and kept his mouth shut than a man who's been handed a brown envelope and spilled his (and the country's) guts. Adams and McGuinness may be street fighters and may have blood on their hands but something deep down tells me that these fcukers can't be bought.

......unlike so many.

Breaking news: 'Sinn Féin may take Govt to court over bailout deal'

Comments