What Has Martin McGuinness Ever Done For The Republic of Ireland?

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

and if a majority in either the republic or NI vote no to unification - what then?

No unification....that's what was agreed in the GFA.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

If I was living in NI I would have to think long and hard whether I wanted to join the banana republic that currently exists in the 26 counties. Do we say - Come Join us and share in our sovereign debt? Come drive through our pots holes? Forget the NHS - we have a trolley waiting for you in a HSE hospital for only 100 euro admission charge (further charges will apply). Join us and watch our elected representatives get off scot free when caught fiddling expenses?

You are just moving the goalposts Bannasidhe. That's a whole different topic in fairness.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You didn't address my main question though - how do we get Unionists to agree to join a United Ireland? What is in it for them?

This convinces me that a lot of people commenting on here haven't read the Agreement.
We don't need to convince them, it happens when a referendum votes in favour.

Liam Byrne

K 9 I've yet to hear or read anyone express support for the proxy bombs.

McGun & Co did. If you object to them, how could you vote for him?

View

Happyman42 wrote: »

What?

Article 9.2 is from the constitution. You have heard about it, haven't you?

Or are you just confused at the idea that Irish citizens are supposed to adhere to its provisions rather than treating it with contempt?

Bannasidhe

maccored wrote: »

surely it depends on how you envisage a united ireland happening. If it was to happen overnight, then yes, there'd be issues combining both states and with people who disagree. more realistically though, it would be a very, very gradual process that would probably be worked towards over decades

But the argument can be made that by stating he will be president of 32 counties McG is being politically presumptuous. He has no right to claim a presidency of a population of another jurisdiction - no matter how symbolic that claim is. Some may see it as aspirational, others as dismissive of their wishes. Either way it is divisive.

McG did not like the idea of Ireland (republic of...) joining the Commonwealth because this 'could' result in Queen Elizabeth II becoming our titular head of state -( not true as it happens, only 16 have Elizabeth II as head of State, 33 are republics and 5 have monarchs not from the House of Windsor) and that this was not what the Irish people want - but in declaring himself president of 32 counties - McG would be claiming to represent a substantial number of people who are not, and do not want to be, part of the republic of Ireland. He has no right to do that...

maccored

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But the argument can be made that by stating he will be president of 32 counties McG is being politically presumptuous. He has no right to claim a presidency of a population of another jurisdiction - no matter how symbolic that claim is. Some may see it as aspirational, others as dismissive of their wishes. Either way it is divisive.

McG did not like the idea of Ireland (republic of...) joining the Commonwealth because this 'could' result in Queen Elizabeth II becoming our titular head of state -( not true as it happens, only 16 have Elizabeth II as head of State, 33 are republics and 5 have monarchs not from the House of Windsor) and that this was not what the Irish people want - but in declaring himself president of 32 counties - McG would be claiming to represent a substantial number of people who are not, and do not want to be, part of the republic of Ireland. He has no right to do that...

I think thats just making up arguments for the sake of it to be honest.

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

No unification....that's what was agreed in the GFA.



You are just moving the goalposts Bannasidhe. That's a whole different topic in fairness.


This convinces me that a lot of people commenting on here haven't read the Agreement.
We don't need to convince them, it happens when a referendum votes in favour.

I have read the GFA

IF a referendum votes in favour. It's a big IF.

What is it with goalposts? - I've never moved a goalpost in my life...I hate soccer!! I have run into a few uprights back in my rugby playing days...:p

It's not moving anything - it's getting to the heart of the matter - a united Ireland is not a given... it is an aspiration held by some of the population of the island and an absolute no way situation for others. Until there are referendums we have no way of knowing what percentage is in which camp.

Happyman42

View wrote: »

Article 9.2 is from the constitution. You have heard about it, haven't you?

Or are you just confused at the idea that Irish citizens are supposed to adhere to its provisions rather than treating it with contempt?

Dealt with long ago. Nobody is at war with the constitution. Several wish to change it, one has, and all of them accept to be bound by it, as it is.

Bannasidhe

maccored wrote: »

I think thats just making up arguments for the sake of it to be honest.

Ummm...isn't that what debating an issue is? (checks dictionary..

Argue about (a subject), esp. in a formal manner.

.yup - that would be debating alright...);)

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I have read the GFA

IF a referendum votes in favour. It's a big IF.

What is it with goalposts? - I've never moved a goalpost in my life...I hate soccer!! I have run into a few uprights back in my rugby playing days...:p

It's not moving anything - it's getting to the heart of the matter - a united Ireland is not a given... it is an aspiration held by some of the population of the island and an absolute no way situation for others. Until there are referendums we have no way of knowing what percentage is in which camp.

Nobody is saying any different.

maccored

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ummm...isn't that what debating an issue is? (checks dictionary...yup - that would be debating alright...);)

debating an issue is one thing, but inventing reasons that currently dont exist is quite another.

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

Nobody is saying any different.

So do you agree that McGuinness is being presumptuous in stating he will be president of 32 counties when he has no mandate to do so from a sizeable percentage of the population of 6 of those counties which lie outside of the political jurisdiction of the republic?

Bannasidhe

maccored wrote: »

debating an issue is one thing, but inventing reasons that currently dont exist is quite another.

The Unionists exist. They utterly oppose the unification of Ireland. The problem exists and should be discussed. If you don't want to acknowledge it exists - that's grand - but don't try and pretend it's not the elephant in the room of aspirational unification.

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So do you agree that McGuinness is being presumptuous in stating he will be president of 32 counties when he has no mandate to do so from a sizeable percentage of the population of 6 of those counties which lie outside of the political jurisdiction of the republic?

I haven't heard a lot of him talking about that.
He cannot be a formal 'President' for the 32 counties, so I am assuming he means it in the same way that McAleese and Robinson presumed to speak to the entire Irish diaspora. (candle in the window etc)
Gonna try and research it later, I will post anything relevant, you do as well if you have a quote from him.


BTW, I think McG's style as president will be or could be quite interesting.
Most people around the border and in NI completely switch OFF when we start hearing the platitudinous Peace & Reconciliation guff that McAleese indulged in.
McG has always bluntly confronted the issue of identity in the same way as the late David Ervine did about his, it would be great to now see an honest debate about identity facilitated by The Aras instead of the mumbo jumbo designed to start foreign audiences applauding and slapping 'great wee paddy's back'!:D

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

I haven't heard a lot of him talking about that.
He cannot be a formal 'President' for the 32 counties, so I am assuming he means it in the same way that McAleese and Robinson presumed to speak to the entire Irish diaspora. (candle in the window etc)
Gonna try and research it later, I will post anything relevant, you do as well if you have a quote from him.


BTW, I think McG's style as president will be or could be quite interesting.
Most people around the border and in NI completely switch OFF when we start hearing the platitudinous Peace & Reconciliation guff that McAleese indulged in.
McG has always bluntly confronted the issue of identity in the same way as the late David Ervine did about his, it would be great to now see an honest debate about identity facilitated by The Aras instead of the mumbo jumbo designed to start foreign audiences applauding and slapping 'great wee paddy's back'!:D

Well according to his website he is 'campaigning' in 32 counties

The Peoples President campaign kicked off on its tour of the 32 counties tonight with an open air rally tonight in Derry’s Bogside.

http://www.thepeoplespresident.ie/contents/30

In a speech in Letterkenny he stated

I intend to be a President for all of Ireland’s 32 Counties.

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2011/10/09/in-full-martin-mcguinness-letterkenny-speech-at-clanree-hotel/

This seems to me to go way beyond Robinson's candle...

Agree with your comment re: McAleese. Was at a function thingy for Mary R in Dublin City Hall last year and there was a large contingent of women from Belfast there (West and East) who were incredibly dismissive of McAleese.

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Well according to his website he is 'campaigning' in 32 counties http://www.thepeoplespresident.ie/contents/30

In a speech in Letterkenny he stated http://www.donegaldaily.com/2011/10/09/in-full-martin-mcguinness-letterkenny-speech-at-clanree-hotel/

This seems to me to go way beyond Robinson's candle...

Cheers for that.

In this Presidential election thousands of Irish citizens are being denied the right to vote for their President. The current President could not even vote in the Presidential election if she still lived in her native Belfast. This must change. Irish citizens from whatever part of Ireland must be able to vote in Presidential elections and the Government must do whatever it takes to ensure that this democratic entitlement is realised.
In the meantime, vote or no vote, I intend to be a President for all of Ireland’s 32 Counties.

He can't act as a President for 32 counties yet, but it's as I thought, perhaps stronger than the candle, but still just a reaching out to his constituency.....and mine as it happens.
I have to say, if we say in the GFA that people can be Irish citizens (as per their birth-rights) we should allow them to take part in some form in determining the future. *

However I totally agree with him here V V and this has a lot of traction in border areas:

The Peace Process has gone a long way to tackle the worst effects of Partition but there is much further to go. Many of the physical barriers have been removed. The next stage needs to be to build an all-island economy. The wasteful duplication of services needs to end. Sensible all Ireland working can deliver better services.
Look at the example of the new cancer centre in Altnagalvin, or the new A5 road. None of these developments and others would have happened without the all-Ireland Ministerial council or which I am the longest serving member.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Agree with your comment re: McAleese. Was at a function thingy for Mary R in Dublin City Hall last year and there was a large contingent of women from Belfast there (West and East) who were incredibly dismissive of McAleese.

Incredibly cringe making!

*partitionists country(26 counties )wide have just keeled over lathered in cold sweats!

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

He can't act as a President for 32 counties yet, but it's as I thought, perhaps stronger than the candle, but still just a reaching out to his constituency.....and mine as it happens.

My concern is that by reaching out to his constituency with such a definative statement as 'I intend to be' he is pre-empting the outcome of some future referenda on unification and risking alienating the Loyalist community - those are the people who need to be convinced a United Ireland is in their interests but many would be concerned at such a bald declaration of intent before any mandate giving him the right is in place. I know I would if I were in their position...

I have to say, if we say in the GFA that people can be Irish citizens (as per their birth-rights) we should allow them to take part in some form in determining the future. *

I think this is a broader issue which also affects the diaspora - Should Irish citizens living outside the jurisdiction of the state be entitled to a vote or should voting rights be restricted those those citizens resident in the State (and therefore contributing to its economy - no representation unless you bare taxation)? Should we also extend voting rights to all of those resident in the State on the grounds they contribute to the economy?

However I totally agree with him here V V and this has a lot of traction in border areas:

The Peace Process has gone a long way to tackle the worst effects of Partition but there is much further to go. Many of the physical barriers have been removed. The next stage needs to be to build an all-island economy. The wasteful duplication of services needs to end. Sensible all Ireland working can deliver better services.
Look at the example of the new cancer centre in Altnagalvin, or the new A5 road. None of these developments and others would have happened without the all-Ireland Ministerial council or which I am the longest serving member.

I agreed we need to create greater integration among the two economies - but can we please somehow keep the NHS? I also fear that the republic's current economic melt-down and the whole sovereign debt issue could become a spanner in the works of unification - who would wish to become a citizen of a country that has saddled it's citizenry with such a large debt burden which will take generations to pay off? Do we say - 'new' citizens (by which I mean only those who would 'move' jurisdictions from the UK to the republic - this is not in anyway a comment on the entitlement of the people of NI to Irish citizenship.) are exempt from the debt burden share?

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My concern is that by reaching out to his constituency with such a definative statement as 'I intend to be' he is pre-empting the outcome of some future referenda on unification and risking alienating the Loyalist community - those are the people who need to be convinced a United Ireland is in their interests but many would be concerned at such a bald declaration of intent before any mandate giving him the right is in place. I know I would if I were in their position...

They will do the exact same as they did when McAleese was pres....ignore him/her. If a Unionist exists that thinks McG won't always address his constituency then they are living in a home for the terminally bewildered.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think this is a broader issue which also affects the diaspora - Should Irish citizens living outside the jurisdiction of the state be entitled to a vote or should voting rights be restricted those those citizens resident in the State (and therefore contributing to its economy - no representation unless you bare taxation)? Should we also extend voting rights to all of those resident in the State on the grounds they contribute to the economy?



I agreed we need to create greater integration among the two economies - but can we please somehow keep the NHS? I also fear that the republic's current economic melt-down and the whole sovereign debt issue could become a spanner in the works of unification - who would wish to become a citizen of a country that has saddled it's citizenry with such a large debt burden which will take generations to pay off? Do we say - 'new' citizens (by which I mean only those who would 'move' jurisdictions from the UK to the republic - this is not in anyway a comment on the entitlement of the people of NI to Irish citizenship.) are exempt from the debt burden share?

I have enough warnings and slaps from the mods......this ^ ^ is for another thread.

maccored

I completely don't see where mmg has claimed he'll reunite ireland if he's president.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

maccored wrote: »

debating an issue is one thing, but inventing reasons that currently dont exist is quite another.

The Unionists exist. They utterly oppose the unification of Ireland. The problem exists and should be discussed. If you don't want to acknowledge it exists - that's grand - but don't try and pretend it's not the elephant in the room of aspirational unification.

maccored

I completely don't see where mmg has claimed he'll reunite ireland if he's president.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

maccored wrote: »

debating an issue is one thing, but inventing reasons that currently dont exist is quite another.

The Unionists exist. They utterly oppose the unification of Ireland. The problem exists and should be discussed. If you don't want to acknowledge it exists - that's grand - but don't try and pretend it's not the elephant in the room of aspirational unification.

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

They will do the exact same as they did when McAleese was pres....ignore him/her. If a Unionist exists that thinks McG won't always address his constituency then they are living in a home for the terminally bewildered.

Bewildered or not - there are correct in believing that someone campaigning for election as president of the 26 county republic has no business electioneering in a foreign jurisdiction. Right or wrong, His constituency in NI cannot vote for him in this election.
I still feel his focus on NI is too great given the office he is running for and he needs to demonstrate both interest and involvement in the republic outside the border counties...

Bewildered or not - if McG desires a unified Ireland his goal would be better served by not alienating those who wish to remain in the union by acting as if the outcome of future referenda is a foregone conclusion and he has a de-facto mandate as president of 32 counties.

I have enough warnings and slaps from the mods......this ^ ^ is for another thread.

We shall desist from this interesting tangent so - sure your head must be ringing from all the MOD slaps

Bannasidhe

maccored wrote: »

I completely don't see where mmg has claimed he'll reunite ireland if he's president.

I never said he did. I said - and provided direct quotes - that he stated he intends to be president of 32 counties - Unionists can quite rightly complain that he has no mandate or right to make this claim and by doing so he is ignoring their political viewpoint.

maccored

So you have an issue with him treating Irish people in the north as Irish? I'm sure the unionists won't mind as much as you claim they will - people have moved on a bit from the bull****. Unless if course you're just arguing for the sake of it of course. Either way, I don't think it's much of an argument tbh.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

maccored wrote: »

I completely don't see where mmg has claimed he'll reunite ireland if he's president.

I never said he did. I said - and provided direct quotes - that he stated he intends to be president of 32 counties - Unionists can quite rightly complain that he has no mandate or right to make this claim and by doing so he is ignoring their political viewpoint.

OMD

maccored wrote: »

So you have an issue with him treating Irish people in the north as Irish? I'm sure the unionists won't mind as much as you claim they will - people have moved on a bit from the bull****. Unless if course you're just arguing for the sake of it of course. Either way, I don't think it's much of an argument tbh.

If the queen said she would be queen for all the people of Ireland north and south I bet you and many others would have a problem

Bannasidhe

maccored wrote: »

So you have an issue with him treating Irish people in the north as Irish? I'm sure the unionists won't mind as much as you claim they will - people have moved on a bit from the bull****. Unless if course you're just arguing for the sake of it of course. Either way, I don't think it's much of an argument tbh.

No, I have an issue with him prioritising a portion of the electorate of a foreign jurisdiction over the electorate of the state he is seeking election in.

He is running for the office of president of the 26 county republic of Ireland. His mandate, should he be elected, will come only from those Irish citizens who are currently resident in the 26 counties. Election would not give him any right to claim to represent the 32 counties as the electorate of 6 of those counties cannot endorse him due to not actually living in the republic.

The fact that You may not like it - doesn't make it a bad argument.

Happyman42

OMD wrote: »

If the queen said she would be queen for all the people of Ireland north and south I bet you and many others would have a problem

She tried that before and look what happened!

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

She tried that before and look what happened!

That was Elizabeth I not Elizabeth II silly. Liz 2.0 never claimed to be monarch of all Ireland.

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That was Elizabeth I not Elizabeth II silly. Liz 2.0 never claimed to be monarch of all Ireland.

humph! they are all the fecking same, them wans! I'd say Gay M had her over for a recce :rolleyes::D

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

humph! they are all the fecking same, them wans! I'd say Gay M had her over for a recce :rolleyes::D

Have a look at the reception Queen Victoria got when she visited in 1900
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=51944.

See how her loyal subjects in Dublin waved their little Union Jacks, cried 'Huzzah for her Majesty', welcomed her with open arms and generally had a jolly good time.

Mayo Exile

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No, I have an issue with him prioritising a portion of the electorate of a foreign jurisdiction over the electorate of the state he is seeking election in.

He is running for the office of president of the 26 county republic of Ireland. His mandate, should he be elected, will come only from those Irish citizens who are currently resident in the 26 counties. Election would not give him any right to claim to represent the 32 counties as the electorate of 6 of those counties cannot endorse him due to not actually living in the republic.

Article 3.1 of the Irish Constitution limits the powers of the office to this jurisdiction. He's probably using the aspirational aspect of Article 2 (part of the Irish Nation etc) to base his 32 county claim on. Hardly a big issue I think.

Many Nationalists in the North would be Irish passport holders. Many aspire to a 32 county state. If they dont want the Head of the British State to represent them, who will?

Bannasidhe

Mayo Exile wrote: »

Article 3.1 of the Irish Constitution limits the powers of the office to this jurisdiction. He's probably using the aspirational aspect of Article 2 (part of the Irish Nation etc) to base his 32 county claim on. Hardly a big issue I think.

Many Nationalists in the North would be Irish passport holders. Many aspire to a 32 county state. If they dont want the Head of the British State to represent them, who will?

Nonetheless, the electorate is restricted to Irish citizen's currently resident in the republic. Irish citizens who live within British jurisdiction have Elizabeth II as Head of State - in the same way as Irish citizen's in Australia, Canada etc do, while those in the U.S. have Obama. When I lived in London, Elizabeth II was the head of state of the country I lived in - regardless of my anti-monarchy views I had no choice but to accept that. I did not have a vote in who became president of Ireland (Mary R) as I was not resident in the 26 counties at the time of her election.

The Constitution does not grant voting rights to ANY Irish citizen resident outside the State.

Aspirational is all very well and good (I aspire to winning the Euro Millions) but is simply is not the current political reality.