Referendum re: Oireachtas inquiries

My name is URL

Everything's comin' up Millhouse!

Wertz

Thanks be to f*ck...and to think of all those handing back ballot papers and effectively spoiling votes instead of marking No...

Mark200

Wertz wrote: »

Thanks be to f*ck...and to think of all those handing back ballot papers and effectively spoiling votes instead of marking No...

Yeah those damn people who thought it might have been irresponsible to vote on something that they weren't knowledgeable about.

sgb

Wait for a rerun, the past has shown that if a referendum is not passed the government will run it again, in other words do it again and get it right this time

Wertz

Mark200 wrote: »

Yeah those damn people who thought it might have been irresponsible to vote on something that they weren't knowledgeable about.

...but haven't the gumption to realise that if they aren't knowledgeable about it, that defaulting to No is the safest thing they can do in that situation.
At least we can be grateful that they didn't simply go with what the politicians wnated them to do...

Killer Pigeon

Thrill wrote: »

Referendum defeated.



There were 812,008 votes in favour and 928,175 against.

It'll be put back to the people again until the people at last vote 'Yes', just like Lisbon and Nice. It's "democracy" with a gun at your back.

In IMF Ireland, ballot box votes for you!

Drumpot

Wertz wrote: »

...but haven't the gumption to realise that if they aren't knowledgeable about it, that defaulting to No is the safest thing they can do in that situation.
At least we can be grateful that they didn't simply go with what the politicians wnated them to do...

Agreed . . I sent everybody I know a text to educate themselves on the referendum and asked if they werent sure exactly what powers they could potentially be giving their government, that they would consider voting no . .

If any government wants to grant itself extra powers, it should show its people respect and explain the pro's and con's, otherwise it is simply treating its people with contempt and trying to fool them into signing something they couldnt possibly understand.

This referendum was a joke, a sham, a con from the start and it was sold to the people as a way to haul bankers for a public caning and simply reducing judges pay . . I know what would be said if FF tried the same stunts that FG were up to, the way this referendum was "pitched" to the Irish people was little short of criminal. . .

Mark200

Wertz wrote: »

...but haven't the gumption to realise that if they aren't knowledgeable about it, that defaulting to No is the safest thing they can do in that situation.
At least we can be grateful that they didn't simply go with what the politicians wnated them to do...

Yep, the default position is <whatever result I want>.

If they aren't knowledgeable about something then they should either not vote, or get knowledgeable before they do vote.

And it was annoying to see the no campaigners saying "If you aren't sure, just vote no". It would be a lot more satisfying and responsible of them to say "If you aren't sure, please read up on the issue" instead of trying to take advantage of ill-informed people.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Very glad to see this defeated, its vital to maintain the separation of powers.

Biggins

Thrill wrote: »

Referendum defeated.

There were 812,008 votes in favour and 928,175 against.

http://www.thejournal.ie/amendment-on-oireachtas-inquiries-is-defeated-267543-Oct2011/

THE RESULT OF the referendum on extending powers to Oireachtas committees to hold inquiries has been defeated.

The returning officer at the National Count Centre in Dublin Castle has just announced the following figures for the referendum on the 29th Amendment to the Constitution:

Total of votes cast – 1,785,208
Total spoiled votes – 45,025
Total valid votes – 1,740,183
Votes in favour/ ‘Yes’ - 812,008 (46.7%)
Votes against/ ‘No’ - 982,175 (53.3%)

Earlier today, Brendan Howlin – the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform – suggested to reporters at Dublin Castle that this won’t necessarily be the last we hear of the issue.
He said that “if it is defeated, we’re going to have to think again about how we’re going to get our reform agenda back on track”.

The minister said that the referendums – the one on judicial pay passed earlier this evening by a majority of one million votes - had been lost in the “backdrop of controversy” surrounding the Presidential election. He also said that the public clearly had an “appetite for reform” as evidence by the change of Government in the February general election and he would continue to pursue reforms in the Constitution and in law.

As with the judicial pay enquiry, there was a large number of spoiled votes: 45,025 in this case. (There were 37,696 spoiled in the judicial pay poll.)
More people voted in the Presidential election than did in the judicial pay referendum or in the Oireachtas inquiries referendum.

So by the looks of things, they will be making us vote again!
Sound familiar?

Dyr

Howlins a conniving little weasel. The referendums weren't lost, he tried to sneak them in under the radar hoping people would just vote "whatever". The fact that the judicial pay one passed but the one giving moar powarz to the likes of him was blown out would suggest that he was rumbled.

Of course they'll try to give it another go, such contempt for the will of the people is not surprising given the labour parties attitude towards the constitution is like that of a vampires to garlic.

Napper Hawkins

My name is URL wrote: »

Are any of you registered to vote? :P

I wish I wasn't.

My name is URL

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I am. So is it yes or no for you?

I voted no to both

dsmythy

I voted no but if they put a better proposal before me I might vote yes depending on what it is. If they shove the same question in front of me I'll make sure to get out to vote no against it again.

Napper Hawkins

My name is URL wrote: »

I voted no to both

Great, I'd have voted yes because I still have no idea what it was about despite asking already. Don't have the patience to read a load of waffle, too busy enjoying my weekend.

My name is URL

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Great, I'd have voted yes because I still have no idea what it was about despite asking already. Don't have the patience to read a load of waffle, too busy enjoying my weekend.

Well the reason it was defeated is because many people around the country also had little or no idea what it was about. I'm not sure why you would have voted in favor of something you didn't understand. Each to their own, though

mikemac

Howlin is no different to the last crowd in power.
We replaced a weasel from Waterford with another from Wexford

The referendum was defeated and now he thinks we were distracted or didn't understand it.
He thinks we know nothing

We'll be voting on this again soon enough until they get the result they want

I think I read somewhere there is another referendum planned for next February

For Paws

For Paws wrote: »

Has everyone forgotten what triggered this proposed change ?; the so-called Abbeylara enquiry, where a group of Gardai involved in a 'legal' killing were able to go to court to prevent our political representatives from enquiring into a matter about which a great number of ordinary people were concerned.

Lol, the Abbeylara Committee in the Dail was a disgrace. Howlin and Shatter were both on it of course. They breached so many basic principles of justice and fair procedures it was unreal.

Napper Hawkins

My name is URL wrote: »

Well the reason it was defeated is because many people around the country also had little or no idea what it was about. I'm not sure why you would have voted in favor of something you didn't understand. Each to their own, though

Understanding it isn't my problem, giving a damn maybe..

I just don't get how yet again we've been asked to vote on something the majority cannot or will not understand. Did we learn nothing from that Lisbon ****e?

lcrcboy

Glad it did not pass it was undemocratic

losthorizon

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Understanding it isn't my problem, giving a damn maybe..

I just don't get how yet again we've been asked to vote on something the majority cannot or will not understand. Did we learn nothing from that Lisbon ****e?

Thats a sad reflection on us rather than the government. And when people keep going on about FF - who voted for them in the first place.

Would people even take a modicum of interest in day to day affairs. Things could be so much better.

Freddie59

mikemac wrote: »

Howlin is no different to the last crowd in power.
We replaced a weasel from Waterford with another from Wexford

The referendum was defeated and now he thinks we were distracted or didn't understand it.
He thinks we know nothing

We'll be voting on this again soon enough until they get the result they want

I think I read somewhere there is another referendum planned for next February

And you are from......????

SafeSurfer

I voted no to the Oireachtas inquiries referendum. What clinched it for me was Minister Shatter's response to the 8 Attorneys General. Instead of coherently addressing the arguments they raised he unleashed a string of personalised vective.

If this is the response from the minister for Justice you can imagine how inquiries would be used by back bench TDs playing for the gallery.

steve9859

The idea is bang on. We need the ability to carry out timely inquiries like senate committees in the US and parliamentary committees in the UK. It just wasn't a good piece of legislation. When it comes back (and it 100% will and should) with different wording, I will be looking to vote yes. And with a better campaign I am sure it will get over the line

My name is URL

steve9859 wrote: »

The idea is bang on. We need the ability to carry out timely inquiries like senate committees in the US and parliamentary committees in the UK. It just wasn't a good piece of legislation. When it comes back (and it 100% will and should) with different wording, I will be looking to vote yes. And with a better campaign I am sure it will get over the line

Can the US Senate make findings of fact, though? The Parliamentary Committees in the UK don't seem to be able to do so. They conceded that they were not qualified or competent to make any finding over the recent Murdoch scandal and handed it over to a judicial panel.

In our case, according to what was proposed; the Oireachtas could make findings of fact.

Wertz

Mark200 wrote: »

Yep, the default position is <whatever result I want>.

If they aren't knowledgeable about something then they should either not vote, or get knowledgeable before they do vote.

The default position is to keep the status quo, if you're not sure whether you want to change something or not...it has nothing to do with how I personally voted or what result I want to see in the referendum.

Like it or not, wordings of proposals/amendments may go over people's heads (hence why straightforward information campaigns giving both sides of the argument are needed) but that doesn't mean that the outcome of the proposed changes don't affect them or their fellow citizens or that they should just abstain from the vote. Just because you don't understand something or don't think it's important, doesn't mean it isn't...
I heard a figure of ~10% of voters that handed back ballot papers ...if the numbers against ad been a few % points lower, then that amount of people who didn't vote could have meant that the proposal went through on the merit of ignorance of voters...better that it fail to go through due to ignorance rather than that it succeeds on back of that same ignorance, no?

Mark200 wrote: »

And it was annoying to see the no campaigners saying "If you aren't sure, just vote no". It would be a lot more satisfying and responsible of them to say "If you aren't sure, please read up on the issue" instead of trying to take advantage of ill-informed people.

It would also be a lot more satisfying if those tasked with carrying out the wishes of the electorate and the citizens of this state would give such dramatic changes to the constitution the time and effort they deserve in order to convince people that such changes are needed (and I don't deny for a second that such committees of inquiry are not desirable in a properly structured form, with the proper changes to the constitution)...
The sitting government (and other parties in the Dáil, who were all coming out as if butter wouldn't melt today) are the ones who should be ashamed of themselves for trying t squeeze this through in the manner we saw over the past number of weeks.