Supreme Court says Government’s Referendum site ‘not fair, equal or impartial’

splashthecash

What do ye make of this? I would have automatically gone to the independant website myself.....certainly not the government one as they were always pushing for the YES.


http://www.thejournal.ie/supreme-court-government-referendum-website-666108-Nov2012/


Text of the link below:


THE SUPREME COURT has upheld a challenge against the Government’s informational website and booklet on the Children’s Rights Referendum, finding that the government had “acted wrongfully” in spending money on a website which was “not fair, equal or impartial”.


The court this morning upheld a challenge from Dublin resident Mark McCrystal, who had claimed that the ChildrensReferendum.ie website, and a booklet distributed by the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, contained language which effectively advocated a Yes vote in the referendum.


The Supreme Court upheld McCrystal’s appeal after it was rejected by the High Court last week – and in a brief ruling today found that there were “extensive passages in the booklet and on the website which do not conform to the McKenna principles”.


Those principles, established by the Supreme Court in 1995, found that public funding and resources should not be used in a referendum campaign “to espouse a particular point of view”.
Chief Justice Susan Denham, delivering the ruling, said she did not consider it “either appropriate or necessary” to grant an injunction ordering the government to remove the website, however.
This was because “it is to be assumed that the respondents will cease distributing and publishing the material”. The website, which had been launched in September, was taken offline at 11:39am this morning.
“The Court has concluded that it is clear that there are extensive passages in the booklet and on the website which do not conform to the McKenna principles,” the Chief Justice said.

This material includes a misstatement, now admitted to be such, as to the effect of the Referendum. The Court is satisfied that while not all of the website or the booklet are in breach of the McKenna principles, because of the overall structure of the booklet and website, it would not be appropriate for the Court to redact either.

Voting to still take place on Saturday as planned


The literature had summarised the effects of the proposed referendum under five headings – ‘Dedicated Constitutional provisions for children’, ‘Protecting children and supporting families’, ‘Removing inequalities’, ‘Adoption: a second chance for children’, and ‘Recognising children in their own right’. The polling order for the referendum is not affected by the ruling – meaning the ballot will still go ahead on Saturday, with counting to begin on Sunday morning – but the judgment could be a blow to the government’s hopes of an easy victory for the Yes side.


Denham said the case had been dealt with “as a matter of urgency” by both the High Court and the Supreme Court, given the obvious time pressures at stake in the referendum.


While she said the “substance of that [referendum] proposal is a matter for the people alone”, it was up to the court to rule on the matter at hand as soon as possible. A written judgment will be published on December 11.
The Government had come under criticism in both this referendum and in May’s vote on the Fiscal Compact, for distributing its own ‘impartial’ information booklets and publishing its own information website on the referendum – an apparent overlap of the role of the Referendum Commission, which has its own separate website and booklet.
Although most observers still expect the referendum to be passed on Saturday, the court’s finding – which effectively means the government literature is biased in favour of encouraging a Yes vote – could provide a late boost to the referendum’s opponents.

Boulevardier

I am a vehement Yes supporter, but I agree with the Supreme Court on this. The government leaflet (as distinct from the Referendum Commission's one) was biased.

I only hope that this does not lead to a No victory, but i can see that it might.

Zamboni

An injunction should have been granted.
A Yes result will be met with calls for a new unbiased referendum.
Hopefully, this will sway the public to a no vote.

Manach

I plan to vote No. I was surprised that the Government had issued a separate leaflet, mindful of the McKenna decision. However to my mind, it did seem on the whole balanced enough, but then so was the referendum's commission one so I regard it as a waste of money.
As well, I had sent the Referendum commission an email on Oct-2nd inquiring why they did not have their website up of the upcoming referendum - so as per OP, the Government's website was up before it.

Sierra Oscar

What the hell are the government playing at? It was almost impossible for this referendum to be defeated when examining opinion polling, yet the actions of the government are undermining the credibility of the entire 'Yes' campaign. They did not need to pull this stunt, the referendum was on target to be endorsed by the electorate. Now there will be an aura of illegitimacy hanging over the referendum even if it is passed.

Ridiculous. Who sanctioned this stunt?

CrinkElite

It stinks! They've certainly made my mind up for me.

Sarah Molloy

The Order has been passed by the Oireachtas. This means it is not legally possible for the date of the referendum to be changed. All of this palaver about the SC judgement is ridiculous and taking the focus away from the importance of the referendum. Children in Ireland have been waiting for this for 30 years! We cannot let another generation of children to grow up without the protection and respect that they deserve.

Sully

Why did the Government feel the need to put out their own 'independent' circular when they have a body setup just to do - the Referendum Commission?

I know people complain that they want more information but surely any booklet from the Government is going to be biased anyway or at least at risk of such?

spaceHopper

Alan Shatter was on the 6 one news yesterday, he refused to appolagise for getting it wrong, he also kept saying the high court backed the goverment while accepting the SC ruling. He should have appolagised, if we have a goverment minister for Justice who does not accept the court rulings and does not have the good sense to see when they are wrong can we trust them with child welfare?

I can see the next flue out break forced vacinations in schools and God help any parent who says no - remebmer the rushed out swine flue vacine.

Boulevardier

My main fear arising from this is not about this referendum, which is now going ahead regardless - it is about future referendums.

I think there will be a concerted campaign by the political class and their media hacks to have the McKenna judgement watered down. Then, the government will be much more in control of future referendums, particularly on Europe, where they have had to whip us back into line on 2 occasions when we gave them the wrong answer the first time.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Boulevardier wrote: »

they have had to whip us back into line on 2 occasions when we gave them the wrong answer the first time.

Assuming you mean Nice & Lisbon then you're leaving out the Divorce referendums.

Did you switch your choice between each vote? If not how come you were able to resist this 'whip' where everyone else was cowed by it? Could it be that you are not the only person with a mind that can be made up, changed, exercised by the owner of that mind, and not by external parties, and that more people just happened to disagree with you than agreed with you? Is that not a possibility?

spaceHopper

You left out the Dail inquiries - they are planning to legislate around thatone!

Javan

I know there are calls for the vote to be postponed, but that would be a dreadful outcome.

It would set a precedent that would allow some future government to go through an entire referendum campaign and then decide at the last minute whether to actually have a vote. Once the decision to call for a vote is made it is absolutely right that it goes ahead on schedule.

Boulevardier

Your Bucky holiness, the referendum results speak for themselves, particularly in the case of Lisbon 2. The Irish people were told to reconsider, and they duly changed their minds en masse. Quite simply, they let themselves be browbeaten.

oscarBravo

Boulevardier wrote: »

The Irish people were told to reconsider, and they duly changed their minds en masse. Quite simply, they let themselves be browbeaten.

So, the Irish people can't be trusted to decide these issues for themselves?

So much for democracy.

Boulevardier

They can decide anything they like for themselves, and I accept Lisbon 2 as a valid referendum result.

That does not mean they weren't bullied. Similarly I can decide anything I want, but that could include either giving in to bullying or not doing so. Either way it is still my decision.

oscarBravo

Boulevardier wrote: »

That does not mean they weren't bullied.

The concept of "bullying" has been ridiculously cheapened by the constant use of the term by politicians who use it as a synonym for persuasion, when that persuasion isn't in the direction they want to see. I saw a story in the local paper about people being prosecuted for not registering for the household charge; predictably as clockwork, a local Sinn Féin councillor described the prosecutions as "bully-boy tactics".

If you genuinely felt that you were bullied in the run-up to the second Lisbon referendum, you must have had an idyllic time in school.

Ozymandius2011

I can't believe we still haven't had a poll on this. Please give us one!

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

I can't believe we still haven't had a poll on this. Please give us one!

If it's any help, there's a poll on the thread in AH.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056781033&page=30

oscarBravo

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

I can't believe we still haven't had a poll on this. Please give us one!

Why?

Ozymandius2011

oscarBravo wrote: »

Why?

Because we usually get one with a referendum happens. Why should this be any different?

oscarBravo

What would a poll tell us, other than the ratio of people who selected a yes rather than a no option in an online poll?

Ozymandius2011

Well it's traditional for boards.ie to have one when we have elections/referendums. Why break with that? And we might get an idea how it could go.

Manach

oscarBravo wrote: »

What would a poll tell us, other than the ratio of people who selected a yes rather than a no option in an online poll?

Given that the election poll from the general election on Boards was fairly accurate, I'd venture to say a general idea of what engaged voters think.

kippy

spaceHopper wrote: »

I can see the next flue out break forced vacinations in schools and God help any parent who says no - remebmer the rushed out swine flue vacine.

This is the second post in relation to vacines and I can see no like between it and this referendum, being honest.


As for the cock up, one would have to ask who vetted the documentation/website before it went out/up, was the AG and his team involved?
What repurcussions will people face due to this massive waste of citizens money?

28064212

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

I can't believe we still haven't had a poll on this. Please give us one!

What do you mean "give us one"? Polls are created by users. If you want one, create one!

Ozymandius2011

28064212 wrote: »

What do you mean "give us one"? Polls are created by users. If you want one, create one!

Well there is no poll option here when I go to make a new thread.