NAMA referendum? (not another thread pro or anti nama)

[toughbutfair]

This thread is NOT about whether you are pro or anti NAMA as there are enough of them - so no comments please about that.

This is whether there should be a referendum on it.

Reasons for a referendum

(1) The legacy (for better or worse) will be here for at least 20 years
(2) It is the biggest economic decision in our history, no mandate for it as issue wasn't there pre election

(3) It is possible the majority of taxpayers are against it


Reasons against it

(1) Members of the dail elected by us
(2) Politicans job is to vote on economic policies
(3) Average man/woman cannot have the experience to know best banking practice

[EoinMn]

I'd like a referendum on the issue. Or better still a preferendum, outlining a number of options.

[johnfás]

We have plenty of pieces of legislation which have an effect for 20 or more years. Health and Education policy leave a footprint of generations. We cannot have a referendum on every issue. We live in a parliamentary democracy, if you do not agree with it, seek to change the system, not to have an a la carte approach when that system doesn't suit you.

Beyond which, a "referendum" is irrelevant, there would be no legal requirement for the Dáil to follow the result of it. This is not a Constitutional issue.

[seabhac siulach]

What is needed is not a referendum but a general election. The present government has no mandate to undertake any policy that was not envisaged at the time of the last election, certainly nothing that will have effects over a number of future Dail terms, such as NAMA.

At present, we do not have democracy, we have a form of constitutional dictatorship where the majority voice (as indicated in the June elections) is being ignored. This is very dangerous. The government, over NAMA and the lack of credit to businesses, etc., is forcing Left and Right together in common cause, and energising (electrifying?) the middle classes...
Forcing NAMA through may cause the defeat of the Lisbon treaty, etc. Which is more important to the strategic interests of Ireland?

[Finbar10]

We have plenty of pieces of legislation which have an effect for 20 or more years. Health and Education policy leave a footprint of generations. We cannot have a referendum on every issue. We live in a parliamentary democracy, if you do not agree with it, seek to change the system, not to have an a la carte approach when that system doesn't suit you.

Beyond which, a "referendum" is irrelevant, there would be no legal requirement for the Dáil to follow the result of it. This is not a Constitutional issue.

Interestingly, the constitution has a provision for a type of consultative referendum in article 27. If a third of the Dáil and a majority of the seanad petition the president on a bill of national importance before she signs it into law, she can decide to put it to a referendum, whose result would be binding. It's a provision which has never been used though. And it would be hard to see such a measure getting a majority in the seanad.

[Digout]

(3) Average man/woman cannot have the experience to know best banking practice

Neither do the politicians or the bankers we have here.

[Decadance]

The petition to the president in Article 27 is just that a petition to the president - it would be up to her to decide if the issue raised is 'a proposal of such national importance' to warrant her to decline signing the bill; unless voted for in a referendum or if passed by the house following a general election.

If a no vote in referendum the bill is vetoed. iI new Dail formed they would then decide on new bill or not.

I think we all have a duty before the bill is passed (if it is ever passed?) to impress on TD's and Senators that they represent us the people of Ireland. It is the people who are sovereign from whom all powers are entrusted in certain matters to our elected representatives and it is the people who have ultimate say on 'all questions of national policy according to the requirement of the common good' (a6)

To deny the people the opportunity to engage in such an important matter would be unconstitutional - the executive power of the government is subject to the people; the legislative power of the oireachtas is subject to the people - we the people will be saddled with the bill we should have our say. Our TD's and Senators as guardians of the constitution and the state owe us a vote at least.

Remember the shareholders of AIB and BOI were afforded an opportunity at an EGM to vote on proposals for recapitalisation - is our government proposing that we are put into debt of 30 - 90bn without a similar democratic opportunity?

Surely being a shareholder of a failed corporation cannot endow you a greater opportunity to shape your future than mere citzenship of a democracy, ironically one which claims to be a republic!?

[ivnryn]

Interestingly, the constitution has a provision for a type of consultative referendum in article 27. If a third of the Dáil and a majority of the seanad petition the president on a bill of national importance before she signs it into law, she can decide to put it to a referendum, whose result would be binding. It's a provision which has never been used though. And it would be hard to see such a measure getting a majority in the seanad.

Exactly, the words in the constitution is that it should be used for a "Bill containing a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained."

If NAMA doesn't qualify, the I am not sure anything does.

It might have been worth dropping the Seanad support level required. I guess the concern is that it isn't desirable for every bill to be referred. It is hard to decide on a support level that would only be used when necessary.

If the Seanad was independent of the government of the day, then maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal, but the Taoiseach's Senators mean that the Seanad is a total rubber stamp.

Maybe, you could have a rule that a proposal would require the signature of 10 TDs and 2 questions would be put to the people. "Do you support the bill?" , "Do you think the bill was of sufficient national important to merit a reference to the people?". If the 2nd question doesn't achieve a majority, then the 10 TDs would be deemed to have resigned from the Dail.

[Oldira1]

How can anyone argue against a referendum and claim to be a democrat???? NAMA is not like any other piece of legislation.......we are told that once its there, there is no way it can be reversed. This has the potential to impoverish the country for a couple of decades and the people should have a say. If not by referendum then by general election.

[thebig C]

Well, I do think we need to vote on NAMA be it a referendum or a General Election. This is not just a run of the mill policy that we elect the government to enact. Nama has ramifications that will determine the course of our future....we deserve a say in our futures!

C