LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksCorelli,Originally Posted by corelli
There's that old habit again, out of the traps salivating for a minor detail. Now I know what is meant by the comment 'strawman'.
Corelli,
There's that old habit again, out of the traps salivating for a minor detail. Now I know what is meant by the comment 'strawman'.
Ah, so you cannot repost my factual accuracy as opposed to your supposed accuracy.
Well, that tells a tail.
To be very fair, I actually would agree, simpliciter, with a lot of what you say if you did not superimpose it with wishful thinking and allegorical inaccuracy.
I am a creature of habit. I prefer fact to supposition.
I would imagine, given my previously evinced love for John XXIII, that if you were truer to the meaning of "catholic" as espoused by Blessed John, that we would have little to disagree about.
[QUOTE=corelli;1333839]Ah, so you cannot repost my factual accuracy as opposed to your supposed accuracy.
Not when it is irrelevant to the task set me, to prove the E.A. was straying outside it's remit. But if it so pleases Sir, yes you are right, as best as I can ascertain, without going into it further that only one nominee was Spring's. I bow then to your superior knowledge of matters pertaining to the Supreme Court.
Just out of interest, is Catherine McGuinness a supreme court Judge, and who appointed her? Alos would you see Hardiman as FF or P.D?
Belvoboy, sorry I could have been clearer. I thought the post was going off into vent-a-rant about 'equality' generally rather than specifically about the equality authority and wished to point out that the Equality Authority is set up under legislation not some deconstructionist, gender-blind, secular, feminist, insert your own bugbear, ideology. Its not up to me anyway who can say what but long posts on religious theology seem quite irrelevant (short ones would be more interesting).I don't see why people can't express their frustration at this; or why, just because it might not break the letter of any legislation, one can't comment about it.
West's awake, I've no desire to get into a quote the legislation debate either as it would be tiresome, but in fairness, unless you are familiar with the remit of the equality authority, as explicitly set out in the legislation, you can hardly say they are stepping beyond it, can you? How could you know that if you don't know what their legislation-based mandate is?I am not a contitutional or Statutory lawyer and I have neither the time nor inclination to look up the various specific legislative clauses for you, look up section 12 and seciton 7 of the Equal status Act quoted above yourself and you will see that I am right.
Other than that, nothing in what you have posted, including the relevant sections of the equal status act, proves anything other than legal opinion disagrees. They very very very very very often do. I think maybe you are mixing up losing a legal argument with acting outside a remit. They are not the same thing. Especially with relatively young legislation, as the equality acts are, part of the job of promoting equality and prohibiting discrimination should be about finding out where the contours of the legislation are, especially in relation to how it is going to be interpreted by the courts and interpreted in conjunction with other Acts.
Other comments about your very long post
1. your own bugbear is about education. Fair enough, but the equality authority work has a much broader focus.
2. The Diversity at School document you referred to. I googled it and it is on the Equality Authority website but its not published by them, its published by the Institute of Public Administration. It also has the standard clause 'the opinions of the editors do not necessarily reflect the position of the equality authority'. The contributors are mostly drawn from the Education Depts and Sociology of Education Depts of Irish Universities. Take your issues about 'ideology' up with them, not the equality authority. Niall Crowley has written the Foreward which you can read online. He states what the remit of the Equality Authority is, in that foreward and how the research in the report fits in with their work i.e. fits in within their legislative mandate. Do have a read.
3. I don't think its true what you say that Micheal McDowell ensured that there was a balance in the legislation between denominational schools and powers of the Equality authority. The equality legislation has a much longer pedigree than that. I'm drawing on old memories, but i think its origins are in the Rainbow government and then it was brought in by the FF/Labour govt. There was an amendment at some point alright, which Mcdowell could have been involved in, but the exemptions for religious schools definitely date to the original legislation (though were perhaps amended). Anyway, amending those sections makes no change to the equality authority 'powers'. They only change if the sections setting out their legislative mandate (I just can't say it enough with you) are changed. Which they haven't been. I'm fairly sure of that.
4. Seems like, if what you are saying is true, that the school authorities in Balbriggan and Adamstown have done great work in opening up access to their schools. Good for them, all for that.
5. The Equality authority letter to the CPSMA that you refer to. I obviously haven't seen it but you yourself say that in the letter it is "suggested" that various actions "could" be discriminatory. They didn't say it was discriminatory as thats not their job. No working outside the remit there.
In conclusion, and to reiterate,
Differences in legal opinion, legal decisions etc does not equal acting outside your remit.
The Equality Authority is based on legislation, not ideology. (and if i'm remembering rightly that the origins of the legislation traverse Rainbow, FF/Lab and amendments by the FF/PD govt, it is impressively representative legislation).
If you want to know what their remit actually is, I'm afraid you will have to read the legislation (not all of it - there are specific sections that set out their remit. don't have the section numbers to hand but they'd be in the schedule).
Last edited by Mar Tweedy; 22nd December 2008 at 08:34 AM.
What is going on??? Check out what David Norris says about being bullied by a Minister about the issue he raised in the Seanad about the Equality Authority. On friday he spoke about this in the Seanad. Here's what he said, full text on the blog http://www.senatordavidnorris.ie/blogger/
I refer to another matter I regard as quite serious. On foot of newspaper reports, without any personal animus against people whom I do not recall ever having met and about whom I do not know anything, I have raised questions about the way in which the chief executive officer of the Equality Authority was driven out of office. He is a person of the highest integrity. I asked a series of questions. I wish to put on the record of the House that attempts have been made by senior members of Government to intimidate me, to indicate to me that I would be politically punished if I attempted to continue to raise these matters. If that ever happens again, I will name the Minister who did it, and I will not stop in this House. I will do the same outside and I will let anybody who dares to intimidate me or to interfere with the democratic process take his or her chance against me in the courts. I am one of the most litigious people in this land and I have never lost - the worst I had was a draw.
Last edited by Mar Tweedy; 22nd December 2008 at 07:47 AM.
[quote=west'sawake;1333942]You brought it up in order, God knows how, to bolster your position. In any event, Catherine McGuineass retired from the Bench several years ago and is now head of the Law Reform Commission.
Reply With Quote