+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: 30th Amendment of the Constitution (Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries) Bill 2011

  1. #1
    Super Moderator Jimdagym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Balbriggan
    Posts
    4,052
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked 956 Times in 529 Posts

    30th Amendment of the Constitution (Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries) Bill 2011

    This is the second referendum matter on the ballot on the 27th.
    It is proposing the insertion of three new subsections into Article 15 Section 10 of Bunreacht na hÉireann.

    Existing text:

    1° Each House shall make its own rules and standing orders, with power to attach penalties for their infringement, and shall have power to ensure freedom of debate, to protect its official documents and the private papers of its members, and to protect itself and its members against any person or persons interfering with, molesting or attempting to corrupt its members in the exercise of their duties.


    Proposed Inserted Text:

    2° Each House shall have the power to conduct an inquiry, or an
    inquiry with the other House, in a manner provided for by law, into
    any matter stated by the House or Houses concerned to be of general
    public importance.

    3° In the course of any such inquiry the conduct of any person
    (whether or not a member of either House) may be investigated and
    the House or Houses concerned may make findings in respect of the
    conduct of that person concerning the matter to which the inquiry
    relates.

    4° It shall be for the House or Houses concerned to determine, with
    due regard to the principles of fair procedures, the appropriate
    balance between the rights of persons and the public interest for the
    purposes of ensuring an effective inquiry into any matter to which
    subsection 2° applies.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Jimdagym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Balbriggan
    Posts
    4,052
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked 956 Times in 529 Posts
    Probably abit late to be discussing this, but anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimdagym View Post
    4° It shall be for the House or Houses concerned to determine, with
    due regard to the principles of fair procedures, the appropriate
    balance between the rights of persons and the public interes
    t for the
    purposes of ensuring an effective inquiry into any matter to which
    subsection 2° applies.
    How, for the love of gad, can anyone read this and vote yes?
    Prima facie, yeah it sounds great we save on tribunals. But come on. The government has been very underhanded about disclosing information about this. In my opinion, they are asking to give far too much power to these investigations.

    I will be voting no.

  3. #3
    Mbabazi danthesaint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    At the bar in McDowell's
    Posts
    2,881
    Thanks
    1,779
    Thanked 808 Times in 408 Posts
    can you translate Jim?
    We All Dream Of A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!! A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!! A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!!

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,902
    Thanks
    507
    Thanked 2,562 Times in 866 Posts
    I'm voting yes just to start another scrap

  5. #5
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,426
    Thanks
    1,505
    Thanked 5,845 Times in 2,612 Posts
    I'm voting yes because Michael McDowell said i should vote no.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dodge For This Useful Post:


  7. #6
    Administrator charliesboots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    715
    Thanks
    87
    Thanked 182 Times in 86 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimdagym View Post
    Probably abit late to be discussing this, but anyway.



    How, for the love of gad, can anyone read this and vote yes?
    Prima facie, yeah it sounds great we save on tribunals. But come on. The government has been very underhanded about disclosing information about this. In my opinion, they are asking to give far too much power to these investigations.

    I will be voting no.
    Agree with Jim - happy birthday btw - I've no problem with the Oireachtas having an investigative function but not where there is a provision that effectively excludes somebody from challenging the application of fair procedures in the courts. It's witch-hunt politics.

    Another reason for voting no (and I agree with Dodge that McDowell is a tit and should generally be disagreed with) is that Shatter apparently drafted the text himself.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to charliesboots For This Useful Post:


  9. #7
    Super Moderator Jimdagym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Balbriggan
    Posts
    4,052
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked 956 Times in 529 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by danthesaint View Post
    can you translate Jim?
    Yeah, do you think Michael Healy Rae should be allowed investigate your life with no reason or proof?


    Not a chance!

  10. #8
    Patrons
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,529
    Thanks
    1,510
    Thanked 1,267 Times in 642 Posts
    a big fat no for me. I would like to see tribunals and costs in these sort of things reduced but this is just giving them too much power, plus this doesnt sit right with me at all :

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...306505560.html pretty serious if true

    some more reading in favour of no :

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...mpaign=digests

    http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/colu...tas-inquiries/
    Cyril The Judas

  11. #9
    Mbabazi danthesaint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    At the bar in McDowell's
    Posts
    2,881
    Thanks
    1,779
    Thanked 808 Times in 408 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimdagym View Post
    Yeah, do you think Michael Healy Rae should be allowed investigate your life with no reason or proof?


    Not a chance!
    yeah why not i have nothing to hide, who ya think i am Sean Gallagher
    We All Dream Of A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!! A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!! A Team Of Curly Wurly's!!!

  12. #10
    Colm Foley steward20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mc Dowells
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    92
    Thanked 87 Times in 35 Posts
    Voting No meself on this one and the one to reduce judges pay.
    Wolves Saint

  13. #11
    Patrons
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,529
    Thanks
    1,510
    Thanked 1,267 Times in 642 Posts
    The amendment will “make it impossible for the courts to protect the substantive rights” of people before inquiries, says Professor Gerry Whyte. Who’s he? He’s the foremost academic authority on the constitution in the country.
    Cyril The Judas

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to TheSaintsno.12 For This Useful Post:


  15. #12
    Noel Mernagh
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    118
    Thanks
    138
    Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSaintsno.12 View Post
    The amendment will “make it impossible for the courts to protect the substantive rights” of people before inquiries, says Professor Gerry Whyte. Who’s he? He’s the foremost academic authority on the constitution in the country.
    Most of the people who are against this are either Barristers or Solicitors I wonder why.

  16. #13
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,426
    Thanks
    1,505
    Thanked 5,845 Times in 2,612 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by seanyboy View Post
    Most of the people who are against this are either Barristers or Solicitors I wonder why.
    Because they're some of the few who can understand the poxy language used

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Dodge For This Useful Post:


  18. #14
    Patrons
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,582
    Thanks
    371
    Thanked 1,633 Times in 624 Posts
    Will be voting no to this. Might sound good at first but the terms are too vague to ensure we don't end up with a situation like that of Dr David Kelly in the UK who ended up being outed as the source of comments made off the record to a journalist casting doubt on the potentcy of Iraq's WMD programme that the government didn't like (which turned out to be correct) . He was grilled alive over by a Commons Select Committee (as opposed to a Court of Law where he'd have been entitled to much more defense of his position) and his reputation was destroyed - he committed suicide (or was 'suicided') two days later.

    The tribunals here have been totally ineffective but that's because of the terms under which they were set up - by the Oireachtas, many of whose members stood to face prison had they been given more power. That's the issue right there and removing the due process of law won't solve anything.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_K...weapons_expert)

    Plus, the irony of giving the likes of Michael Lowry the power to investigate what the citizens of this state are doing is fucking sickening.
    Last edited by Gaz; 27th October 2011 at 04:49 PM.

  19. #15
    Curtis Fleming
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    983
    Thanks
    259
    Thanked 346 Times in 172 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dodge View Post
    I'm voting yes because Michael McDowell said i should vote no.
    I'm voting no because Alan Shatter says I should vote yes !

  20. #16
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,426
    Thanks
    1,505
    Thanked 5,845 Times in 2,612 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Redstar View Post
    I'm voting no because Alan Shatter says I should vote yes !
    Its a great counter point. I eneded up voting no

  21. #17
    John McDonnell
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,227
    Thanks
    522
    Thanked 422 Times in 224 Posts
    They where snakes about that vote so nobody would ask questions, stick it in with a bill that everyone will vote yes to (judges pay) and the presidency!

  22. #18
    Patrons
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,529
    Thanks
    1,510
    Thanked 1,267 Times in 642 Posts
    voted no on this too, like has been said before it was sneaky how they brought it in with fuck all discussion
    Cyril The Judas

  23. #19
    Paul McGrath Doom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northside Scum
    Posts
    1,985
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 376 Times in 209 Posts
    This was defeated
    Negativity is the new Positivity.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts