Constitutional Convention

Cookie_Monster · 04-12-2012 12:03am

I would assume there was an option to say no thanks when the letter / call request first came through to you? I'm sure many many people would resent being put in such a position, losing weekends, dealing with politicians etc.

JDOF · 04-12-2012 12:06am

There is no misunderstanding on my behalf as regards the convention. I know what it is and I think it's a terrible idea, but if it is to exist at all, it should be composed of existing elected officials, or should be directly elected. My objection is to anonymous, unelected, unvetted, unaccountable people having a role, however limited, in the government of our country.

We elect 166 deputies to the Dail to legislate on our behalf. Why can they not come up with their own proposals for constitutional reform? The convention is a talking shop posing as real reform.

Scofflaw · 04-12-2012 12:19am

JDOF wrote: »

There is no misunderstanding on my behalf as regards the convention. I know what it is and I think it's a terrible idea, but if it is to exist at all, it should be composed of existing elected officials, or should be directly elected. My objection is to anonymous, unelected, unvetted, unaccountable people having a role, however limited, in the government of our country.

They have no role in our government, though. They have a purely ideas-generating role for possibilities for constitutional reform. They can enact exactly nothing, which is why they require no mandate. On the other hand, the selection of random citizens provides the possibility of suggestions the political parties might prefer not to make.

JDOF wrote: »

We elect 166 deputies to the Dail to legislate on our behalf. Why can they not come up with their own proposals for constitutional reform? The convention is a talking shop posing as real reform.

And, alas, the Dáil is a talking shop posing as a real legislature, so it seems overly optimistic to expect any more suggestions for real reform from them than we've had from them historically. When we have had 'reforms' put forward in referendum or legislation, they have come from the executive rather than the legislature, and they have invariably resulted in further concentration of power in the hands of the executive.

I am happy to see another source for ideas, and hope that they can avoid the prioritisation of executive efficiency over democracy.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Cookie_Monster · 04-12-2012 12:42am

JDOF wrote: »

There is no misunderstanding on my behalf as regards the convention. I know what it is and I think it's a terrible idea, but if it is to exist at all, it should be composed of existing elected officials, or should be directly elected. My objection is to anonymous, unelected, unvetted, unaccountable people having a role, however limited, in the government of our country.

We elect 166 deputies to the Dail to legislate on our behalf. Why can they not come up with their own proposals for constitutional reform? The convention is a talking shop posing as real reform.

what about all those unelected people working at a high level in all the departments, effectively running the show while the politicos just strut around and change ever 5 years or so, do you find them unacceptable? Or what about AGs, they are elected but do enforce our laws, are they unacceptable?

expectationlost · 04-12-2012 4:29am

the way iceland did was have a 1000 randomly selected people do the first ideas part and then elected 25 people, vocation/senator types, to knock up specific referendum proposals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Constitutional_Assembly_election,_2010

RangeR · 04-12-2012 8:36am

We have been named. As well as some of the day 0 speeches listed.
https://www.constitution.ie/Convention.aspx#documents

View · 04-12-2012 5:57pm

hmmm wrote: »

How else do you propose that a fundamental review of the constitution takes place? Let's say you had 100 members composed entirely of elected representatives - do you think that they are likely to put forward proposals for radical reform of the systems by which they were elected?

And the evidence the public are looking for radical reform is what exactly?

Usually, the electorate won't even go along with mild reform as: a) many people are just disinterested and b) others are "purists" who'll turn up their noses at the mild reforms as they don't go far enough in the - invariably wrong assumption - that by doing so, their "perfect" radical reform will instead be introduced soon.
The result of both is stasis and no reform of any kind.

hmmm · 04-12-2012 10:14pm

View wrote: »

The result of both is stasis and no reform of any kind.

And your point is? That we should do or offer nothing as an option?

One thing I don't understand is our unwillingness to put multiple referendum questions in front of the public. Other countries do it regularly, there is no reason we couldn't have 20 options on a ballot.

silenceisfoo · 04-12-2012 10:40pm

hmmm wrote: »

there is no reason we couldn't have 20 options on a ballot.

The politicians are confusing enough when there is only one issue let alone 20!
Also how would The Referendum Commission's pamphlet explaining the referendums get through the post box? It would be huge!

GRMA · 05-12-2012 2:34am

Esel wrote: »

Saw Gerry was wearing shades when being interviewed on the RTE news last night. Maybe his eyesight is failing (like his memory)?

Is there public access to the convention? If not, there should be.

He had an operation on his eyes, he had a problem where his eyelashes turned inwards and hurt his eyes, or something to that effect.

Thankfully his operation went well.

Plus Gerry likes to set a trend come winter, last year it was his wonderful red scarf (looked seriously snug) but I think he set the bar too high with shades this year lol.

Esel · 05-12-2012 3:56am

GRMA wrote: »

..he had a problem where his eyelashes turned inwards and hurt his eyes, or something to that effect...

Thanks for the scéal (see what I may have done there?

*). Jarry (or his advisors) are to be congratulated on coming up with a very, very good cover story for having his iBags removed. In the old days, you just laid low for a month or two and grew a moustache.

I hope his vision is not adversely affected by temporarily looking at the cameras through brown-tinted glasses. History may refer to it as his Brown-IE period. The shades look like B&L Wayfarers. What's next - the white stick? (ivory, Colonial period, CITES exempt).

* I may have implied that the story was somewhat slanted.

View · 05-12-2012 11:24am

hmmm wrote: »

And your point is?

The point was a randomly selected representative group of citizens will almost certainly NOT put forward proposals for "radical reform" since the general electorate shows little interest or support for radical reforms.

hmmm wrote: »

That we should do or offer nothing as an option?

Plenty of proposals for "mild reform" have been made over the years by various bodies including most obviously our political parties. We could start by putting some or all of them to the electorate.

hmmm wrote: »

One thing I don't understand is our unwillingness to put multiple referendum questions in front of the public. Other countries do it regularly, there is no reason we couldn't have 20 options on a ballot.

We have had multiple referenda on the same day although they are technically seperate referenda. I suspect many of those referenda in other countries are consultative referenda, not binding ones like we hold - consultative referenda are just advice from the electorate.

Xantia · 11-12-2012 9:20pm

I welcome this however there are underlying problems.

The 66 are chosen from registered voters.
A lot of people in the Republic and God knows how many overseas now and in NI are disenfranchised from the electoral system in ROI.
The registration of voters is held with the local authority which are currently using that information to bully people into paying for Banking debts so it does not encourage people to register to vote or to register again if they have moved house.

The Constitution itself although it is a worthy document it does not translate into law or fair governance.
One example would be the 'in camera' Family Law courts where it seems you have no rights if you are a father, or if you are too poor to pay for a solicitor but not poor enough to get legal aid.
Another recent example would be against article 40.6 The right of the citizens to assemble peaceably and without arms - peaceful protesters being arrested by Gardaí in Dublin 5 days ago.
What I am trying to say here is that even though there is a Constitution there is very little precedent for what happens if your constitutional rights are abused.
I don't even want to talk about the estimated 180,000 carers whose lives have been made harder by reducing the overall payment to them by €25 Million.
That exact same €25 Million went to fund a deficit on Senior Civil Servants pensions that had to be shored up.

If I had only one wish for the Constitution it would be that a form of democracy would be restored to the people of this country.
That there would be some avenue of righting wrongs instead of having to protest day in and day out about issues that the overpaid politicians do not see.

I wish you and your team the best in your endeavours.

RangeR · 11-12-2012 10:22pm

Xantia wrote: »

I welcome this however there are underlying problems.

The 66 are chosen from registered voters.
A lot of people in the Republic and God knows how many overseas now and in NI are disenfranchised from the electoral system in ROI.
The registration of voters is held with the local authority which are currently using that information to bully people into paying for Banking debts so it does not encourage people to register to vote or to register again if they have moved house.

Sorry, but you are mistaken. To be 100% accurate, a private agency went door to door and asked citizens, who were legally entitled to vote, would they be interested. Nobody mentioned anything about registered voters.

Xantia wrote: »

The Constitution itself although it is a worthy document it does not translate into law or fair governance.

One example would be the 'in camera' Family Law courts where it seems you have no rights if you are a father, or if you are too poor to pay for a solicitor but not poor enough to get legal aid.

OK, let's discuss these two topics. Are these dictated in law, the constitution or anecdotal? The consititution is a subset of the law so may not be a constitutional issue. I'm not a legal expert and have only read about a quarter of the constitution. I will certainly keep an eye out for these two. If you could point me in the right direction, I'll be sure to study it. However, Article 40.1 states

All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law.

This shall not be held to mean that the State shall not in its enactments have due regard to differences of capacity, physical and moral, and of social function.

To me, it seems that what you stated may be considered a breach of constitutional rights. The second sentence, however, seems to give a little leeway to the state which seems to be highly subjective. Physical? Moral? Social Function?

Xantia wrote: »

Another recent example would be against article 40.6 The right of the citizens to assemble peaceably and without arms - peaceful protesters being arrested by Gardaí in Dublin 5 days ago.

I'm not aware of this specific issue. Can you linky it?

I fear you are misquoting and selectively quoting, Article 40.6 clearly states in FULL

The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality: –
i The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions.

The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.

The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.

ii The right of the citizens to assemble peaceably and without arms.

Provision may be made by law to prevent or control meetings which are determined in accordance with law to be calculated to cause a breach of the peace or to be a danger or nuisance to the general public and to prevent or control meetings in the vicinity of either House of the Oireachtas.

Both of these rights are not absolute. They do have conditions. I don't know the specifics of 5 days ago. I'd like to read an article but maybe, just maybe, the bold piece above related. I can imagine it was related to the budget.

What I am trying to say here is that even though there is a Constitution there is very little precedent for what happens if your constitutional rights are abused.

Article 40.3.1 and 40.3.2 clearly state

1° The State guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen.
2° The State shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may from unjust attack and, in the case of injustice done, vindicate the life, person, good name, and property rights of every citizen.

Citizens are clearly protected under the constitution. Precedent is law, not constitution. I don't believe this falls under the discussion remit. There will be precedent in law if a breach of constitutional rights is successfully challenged in court.

I don't even want to talk about the estimated 180,000 carers whose lives have been made harder by reducing the overall payment to them by €25 Million.
That exact same €25 Million went to fund a deficit on Senior Civil Servants pensions that had to be shored up.

How is that unconstitutional. Shocking cherry picking by the Government, agreed, but nothing to do with the constitution.

If I had only one wish for the Constitution it would be that a form of democracy would be restored to the people of this country.
That there would be some avenue of righting wrongs instead of having to protest day in and day out about issues that the overpaid politicians do not see.

Again, I believe you are mixing law with the constitution. Righting wrongs is a job for law and the courts. The constitution is a series of stated facts and rights.

I wish you and your team the best in your endeavours.

Thank you. I hope you don't find my responses offensive. I have a tendency to debate through fact and logic rather than emotion. I don't disagree with much of what you said. I just question the points being related to the constitution.

RangeR · 14-12-2012 2:23pm

Moving forward with a transparent air... I have been one of the 99 citizens selected to be apart of the Steering Group. We are meeting on Wednesday to discuss how to progress the two issues in January. I would assume that there is also a short list of interested parties to be chosen to speak in the plenary session.

The Steering Group consists of Mr Arnold, 4 of the 66, 5 of the 33 and a few from the actual Convention Committee.

Edit : To be clear, I was selected because I volunteered. I assume not everyone volunteered.

RangeR · 19-12-2012 10:31pm

Current steering group is an interim one. We will be meeting again on Jan 16th to formalise and try get the weighting in favour of the 66 rather than the 33.

Official tag : #ccven
It is envisaged that there will be live blogging to this tag during all plenaries.
It is envisaged that there will be a screen at each plenary where the public can "talk back" to the members during plenary. Ask questions or look for clarification etc.

There is also a facebook page. Will post it here when I know what it is. When I do post it, that will probably be the last I mention it. I don't do facebook.

Paper advertisement will be published soon, asking for submissions for the first two items on the list.

expectationlost · 20-12-2012 1:37pm

why does there need to be an even smaller group of people to decide things vital to the whole group?

RangeR · 20-12-2012 2:15pm

It is standard practice in any large group. The smaller steering group will efficiently assist in setting up and agreeing a format for each meeting, including how much time would be assigned to each speaker and member.

If it wasn't for the steering group "steering the meetings", half of each meeting would be wasted on discussing these things rather than discussing the relevant topics. It's not efficient for a 100 member group to try agree on the basic standard operating procedures. It's more efficient for a smaller group [5 or 10] to do this, present it to the wider group and move from there.

That's all. It is what it says. It steers [directs] the meetings.

In a round about way, this of it as

Tom Arnold as the main referee
The steering group as the lines men
The rest of the members as the "team"

Where all parties get to have a say. But there still must be structure. There must be rules. With no rules, there will be anarchy.

Tom and his admins may suggest certain rules. The steering group may come up with other rules that agree with, compliment or go against Tom's suggestions.

The steering group is not to be thought of as a dictatorship but rather streamlining.

Here's one example of the "non efficiency" of not having a steering group. On the first meeting, behind closed doors. We had multiple topics to discuss. I don't remember the specifics. Let's say it was 10 topics of how to move forward. Because it was the 100 of us discussing it, about 80% of the time was spent on just ONE topic. The rest were either rushed or dropped for future reference.

expectationlost · 20-12-2012 9:42pm

the constituional convention is that smaller group

RangeR · 20-12-2012 10:58pm

expectationlost wrote: »

the constituional convention is that smaller group

What? Whoa? Hang on a second.... Ah ye got me

RangeR · 11-01-2013 5:53pm

We've just been given access to a private members area. Pretty scant at the moment but we can private email each other. When I say "private email", we can choose one of the 100 [plus a few from the Secretariat] from a drop down list. It's not actual email in that we can't use external applications. Looks like we MUST use this specific form. Better than nothing. It opens a communications channel that wasn't there before.

Today is the deadline for receipt of public submissions and comments on (i) the Reduction of the Voting Age and (ii) the Presidential Term. The submissions are available for public viewing on www.constitution.ie. Our expert advisers, Robert Elgie and Theresa Reidy, will consider the issues raised in the submissions and offer some thoughts on the subjects for your consideration.

Our interim Steering Group will be meeting on Wednesday 16th to consider the arrangements for the first weekend meeting and some other items which need to be progressed before the end of the month. I don't have specifics on what these other items are.

Edit : Those specifics are

1. Arrangements for 26th and 27th January
2. Work Programme
3. Draft Rules and Procedures
4. Selection process for (Expert) Advisory Group
5. Meeting outside Dublin
6. 2013 working arrangements for the Steering Group
7. AoB

Tea drinker · 12-01-2013 4:38pm

hmmm wrote: »

The lack of publicity and information is a huge mistake here. These people are going to recommend fundamental changes to the Constitution, and the general public are mostly unaware of the Convention. This thread should have a 1000 posts on it by now.

Not at all, this is "progress" Irish style, keep the plebs out of the loop at al costs. In some way, you can't blame the politicians we are dumb as a bag of hammers. Given that the constitution is frequently ignored, e.g. competition and failure of state regulator to uphold constitional rights it's probably pointless having this debate. As to how to become on of the 66, I guess I'll have to resign from all those quango's I'm on - oh wait.
Very murky process.

RangeR · 12-01-2013 4:48pm

Tea drinker wrote: »

As to how to become on of the 66, I guess I'll have to resign from all those quango's I'm on - oh wait. Very murky process.

What, exactley, are you implying?

Tea drinker · 12-01-2013 10:11pm

RangeR wrote: »

What, exactley, are you implying?

It's not transparent to me the mechanism used for selection here, "a private company was used" and nothing to do with electoral register.
I'm just saying there's potential for abuse, in a country already rife with it.

Of course I could be well wrong.

eVeNtInE · 13-01-2013 4:45am

This post has been deleted.

RangeR · 13-01-2013 9:31am

Tea drinker wrote: »

It's not transparent to me the mechanism used for selection here, "a private company was used" and nothing to do with electoral register.
I'm just saying there's potential for abuse, in a country already rife with it.

Of course I could be well wrong.

If it was done by a "public company" one could say that there was government collusion. Not everyone is on the electoral register. What's the difference between

Randomly picking people from the register, then going to there home to ask if they would be up for it
AND
Ignoring the register and randomly visiting homes?

Ultimately it gets the same job done. Arguably, ignoring the register saves time and money.

RangeR · 13-01-2013 9:36am

eVeNtInE wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

When I know, you will know. The convention meet once a month, usually. The steering group meet another time a month, maybe more, too. I'm not sure who chooses topics and when. It will all become more clear once we get momentum.

My guess is that people would be given at least one month notice.

Annasopra · 25-01-2013 1:14am

RangeR wrote: »

We've just been given access to a private members area. Pretty scant at the moment but we can private email each other. When I say "private email", we can choose one of the 100 [plus a few from the Secretariat] from a drop down list. It's not actual email in that we can't use external applications. Looks like we MUST use this specific form. Better than nothing. It opens a communications channel that wasn't there before.

Today is the deadline for receipt of public submissions and comments on (i) the Reduction of the Voting Age and (ii) the Presidential Term. The submissions are available for public viewing on www.constitution.ie. Our expert advisers, Robert Elgie and Theresa Reidy, will consider the issues raised in the submissions and offer some thoughts on the subjects for your consideration.

Our interim Steering Group will be meeting on Wednesday 16th to consider the arrangements for the first weekend meeting and some other items which need to be progressed before the end of the month. I don't have specifics on what these other items are.

Edit : Those specifics are

1. Arrangements for 26th and 27th January
2. Work Programme
3. Draft Rules and Procedures
4. Selection process for (Expert) Advisory Group
5. Meeting outside Dublin
6. 2013 working arrangements for the Steering Group
7. AoB

I wasn't aware there was a call for public submissions on the voting age and presidential term.

Hope it goes well on Saturday

RangeR · 25-01-2013 8:54am

mango salsa wrote: »

I wasn't aware there was a call for public submissions on the voting age and presidential term.

Yup. There will be public [media] calls for submissions for all items. Or you can submit now, not sure.[/quote]

mango salsa wrote: »

Hope it goes well on Saturday

Thanks. Bit nervous.

There will also be live tweeting on the day. Not sure of the #tag but I'm sure I posted it earlier. We are also trying to setup a system whereby the public can tweet live questions to the convention during plenary.

RangeR · 28-01-2013 10:11am

eVeNtInE wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, sorry. I was sitting on this for a week [from Interim Steering Group] until it was given to the Convention at large and given a chance to agree.

Now this is pretty much cast in stone, here are the details...

Feb 16/17 - Role of Women
Feb 16/17 - Women in Politics

March - Free. Grand Malahide is not available that month and cannot find a suitable hotel to fit our requirements.

April 13/14 - Same Sex Marriage

May 18/19 - Dáil Electoral System

June 8/9 - Dáil Electoral System

July - Free

August - Free

September 28/29 - Votes for Citizens Abroad

October 19/20 - [Galway] Blasphemy
October 19/20 - [Galway] Any Other Amendments

November 30 /December 1 - Any Other Amendments

There is a possibility to extend our time, if we deem it fit and if the Gov allow us. Currently, Tom was told that if we REALLY need more time, we will probably be given it in 2014.

There is a small chance that November might also be opened for a second session for Any Other Amendments.

Constitutional Convention

Comments