Originally Posted by ger12

Surely more likely the AG?

"Government acted illegally" - surprised to hear a RTE reporter use those words in The Week in Politics.

Without knowing what advice the AG gave I won't comment on that.

Originally Posted by MrFunkyBoogaloo

Without knowing what advice the AG gave I won't comment on that.

I hadn't considered that perhaps the AG's advice may not have been followed.

Originally Posted by ger12

Something tells me that no one is going to fall for having breached McKenna turdsl. But you are correct, these judgements protect democracy. And will continue to protect democracy.

It's ironic that it was a FG/Lab administration that lead to the McKenna judgement and today at cabinet Ministers Howlin, Bruton, Quinn, Noonan and the Taoiseach Enda Kenny were serving Ministers in that administration.

I disagree. Democracy was not protected during the Children Referendum campaign, or during the Fiscal Treaty Referendum campaign and only after the horse has bolted has the gate been closed.....again.
Members of this government broke the law, despite a previous black and white ruling. If such behaviour has no penal consequences then our justice system has lost all moral authority.

Originally Posted by ger12

Haven't this government spent spent taxpayer monies "illegally" considering the SC ruling this week?

I thought the same. I always understood that when the Supreme Court make a determination, that determination automatically becomes law, therefore the law has been broken. Or have I got this completely ar5e about face?

Originally Posted by MrFunkyBoogaloo

Someone would want to fall and quick (big shout out to Frances Fitzgerald and any others involved) otherwise the whole government (and State) has lost the moral authority to pursue others for breaking the law.

What does one call the situation whereby a law-breaking government pursues people for breaking the law?...

Blatant hypocrisy?

The Referendum process involves neither parties nor Govt. The Oireachtas proposes a change, and the people vote on whether to accept that change or not. Simples. The position of the political parties or the Govt. is an irrelevance. A referendum is a vote about text, unlike every other type of vote we have.

D

Originally Posted by FrankSpeaks

McKenna and Coughlan judgements are abominations.

The Coughlan judgement shackles the broadcast media and gives free reign to the print and social media, that is patently unfair to the broadcast media, I think they would have a case if they took it under 40.6.1.i of the constitution.

McKenna I think is also wrong because it inhibits the governments ability to promote its polices as per its mandate.

You misunderstand the difference between representative democracy and direct democracy. The Govt. is not allowed use our money to convince us how to vote, any more than it can use taxpayers money for a party political broadcast.


D

Originally Posted by Half Nelson

I disagree. Democracy was not protected during the Children Referendum campaign, or during the Fiscal Treaty Referendum campaign and only after the horse has bolted has the gate been closed.....again.
Members of this government broke the law, despite a previous black and white ruling. If such behaviour has no penal consequences then our justice system has lost all moral authority.

So individual members of the government must suffer the consequences? And you believe the SC has the ability to do this?

The demand that the yes and no sides should be given equal coverage in the broadcast media, no matter how open and shut the case for an amendment may be seems to me to be an incentivisation of fruitloopery.

This has become obvious in recent referenda, but never more so than during the latest one.

The Coughlan judgement is therefore, imo, completely wrongheaded.

This blog is very reasonable on the issue:

Referendums in Ireland, how many more can we take? « politicalreform.ie

Originally Posted by Toland

The demand that the yes and no sides should be given equal coverage in the broadcast media, no matter how open and shut the case for an amendment may be seems to me to be an incentivisation of fruitloopery.

This has become obvious in recent referenda, but never more so than during the latest one.

The Coughlan judgement is therefore, imo, completely wrongheaded.

This blog is very reasonable on the issue:

Referendums in Ireland, how many more can we take? « politicalreform.ie

Coughlan wrongheaded? McKenna was described recently as "silly".

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. I'd wager that the majority of Irish citizens view these Judgements as being fair and enhancing the democratic process.

And in fairness, when you consider the scant regard the present government has towards the law - in breaching McKenna AND using tax payers monies to distribute misinformation in the government booklet - you can really see the sense in these Judgements.

The blog you posted points out very well the negatives of having Coughlan, Crotty and McKenna. For many, the positive outweighs the negative in all three of the above.