Register to Comment
Page 260 of 320 FirstFirst ... 160210250258259260261262270310 ... LastLast
Results 2,591 to 2,600 of 3199
Like Tree1844Likes
  1. #2591
    General Urko General Urko is offline
    General Urko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    11,573

    Quote Originally Posted by Leandrai View Post
    I saw TORL leaping around claiming it was but no actual trace of it...where did you find that?
    http://www.merrionstreet.ie/MerrionS...nProgramme.pdf

    It' s on page 24, to be reintroduced at stage 2 in the Seanad.
    There seems to be an awful lot of legislation planned, particularly in Fitzie Fitzie's Department!
    The sex worker hating Bill is quite complex, so will require debate!
    Maybe they won't be able to get it over the line before recess!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #2592
    Dame_Enda Dame_Enda is offline
    Dame_Enda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    35,153

    Quote Originally Posted by General Urko View Post
    http://www.merrionstreet.ie/MerrionS...nProgramme.pdf

    It' s on page 24, to be reintroduced at stage 2 in the Seanad.
    There seems to be an awful lot of legislation planned, particularly in Fitzie Fitzie's Department!
    The sex worker hating Bill is quite complex, so will require debate!
    Maybe they won't be able to get it over the line before recess!
    Then hopefully a Cabinet reshuffle! Enda can say in the context of the close Brexit vote Frances - a committed European - should be sent to campaign over there and earn her place as the saviour of Europe or the Irish economy.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #2593
    General Urko General Urko is offline
    General Urko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    11,573

    Quote Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post
    Then hopefully a Cabinet reshuffle! Enda can say in the context of the close Brexit vote Frances - a committed European - should be sent to campaign over there and earn her place as the saviour of Europe or the Irish economy.
    I wouldn't put her in charge of a septic tank!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #2594
    Leandrai Leandrai is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    825

    Quote Originally Posted by General Urko View Post
    http://www.merrionstreet.ie/MerrionS...nProgramme.pdf

    It' s on page 24, to be reintroduced at stage 2 in the Seanad.
    There seems to be an awful lot of legislation planned, particularly in Fitzie Fitzie's Department!
    The sex worker hating Bill is quite complex, so will require debate!
    Maybe they won't be able to get it over the line before recess!
    Thanks...I looked EVERYWHERE for it when the *TORL Gloating Hakka kicked off...

    LOOK at that...late addition popped in the middle (see the odd font?).

    Funny how it's going back to the Senate...maybe some impropriety in the last debate? I was actually thinking last night that the best legal challenge here is a full judicial review of the consultation procedure. It cannot be right, because, if it is, then ANY government consultation can (and even "MAY") be conducted along the same lines. I don't mean what was going on behind the scenes that can be known but not proved either...nobody will ever let THAT into the light of day, I mean what is on formal record. The contradictions, the misrepresentations, the total failure to check a single fact or bona fide.

    I remember making submission to another, equivalent level, consultation more than 10 years ago that involved describing a couple of questionable incidents relevant to that enquiry. They literally HOUNDED me to participate in formal investigation (I was far too ill at the time)...and yet this time not one single query was made, nothing was checked...NOBODY even attempted to look into the obvious hostility between sex workers and Ruhama. THAT should be a no brainer, when an organisation comes before a consultation claiming to speak of and for a user group that objects and is frantic to speak independently of them...is it normal procedure to brush the objections under the carpet and pretend they never happened?

    When sworn allegations of fraud related to the consultation are made is it common practice to ignore them?

    Y'know what? If I was in the mood for handing out advice, my advice to the government would be to dial it back to the consultation stage, and do it properly this time...

    ...cos if it goes to judicial review people might start wondering if this IS all common practice and looking into other consultations, mightn't they?

    *Is our government genuinely stupid enough to believe people who are this spiteful and malignant to their soi disant "user group" ever have their best interests at heart? Serious question?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #2595
    Fellow Fellow is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    299

    Quote Originally Posted by Leandrai View Post
    Thanks...I looked EVERYWHERE for it when the *TORL Gloating Hakka kicked off...

    LOOK at that...late addition popped in the middle (see the odd font?).

    Funny how it's going back to the Senate...maybe some impropriety in the last debate? I was actually thinking last night that the best legal challenge here is a full judicial review of the consultation procedure. It cannot be right, because, if it is, then ANY government consultation can (and even "MAY") be conducted along the same lines. I don't mean what was going on behind the scenes that can be known but not proved either...nobody will ever let THAT into the light of day, I mean what is on formal record. The contradictions, the misrepresentations, the total failure to check a single fact or bona fide.

    I remember making submission to another, equivalent level, consultation more than 10 years ago that involved describing a couple of questionable incidents relevant to that enquiry. They literally HOUNDED me to participate in formal investigation (I was far too ill at the time)...and yet this time not one single query was made, nothing was checked...NOBODY even attempted to look into the obvious hostility between sex workers and Ruhama. THAT should be a no brainer, when an organisation comes before a consultation claiming to speak of and for a user group that objects and is frantic to speak independently of them...is it normal procedure to brush the objections under the carpet and pretend they never happened?

    When sworn allegations of fraud related to the consultation are made is it common practice to ignore them?

    Y'know what? If I was in the mood for handing out advice, my advice to the government would be to dial it back to the consultation stage, and do it properly this time...

    ...cos if it goes to judicial review people might start wondering if this IS all common practice and looking into other consultations, mightn't they?

    *Is our government genuinely stupid enough to believe people who are this spiteful and malignant to their soi disant "user group" ever have their best interests at heart? Serious question?
    The Bill is going back to the Seanad because all Bills lapse with a general election and have to start again from scratch.

    A judicial review of the consultation process wouldn't succeed because all that is at the total discretion of the legislature. There need be no consultation at all if they want.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #2596
    Leandrai Leandrai is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    825

    Quote Originally Posted by Fellow View Post
    The Bill is going back to the Seanad because all Bills lapse with a general election and have to start again from scratch.

    A judicial review of the consultation process wouldn't succeed because all that is at the total discretion of the legislature. There need be no consultation at all if they want.
    I recognise that, but there must be some judicial barrier to basing bills on deliberate, facilitated misrepresentation, otherwise - well, take it out of an emotive, stigma loaded issue and apply the same rules to legislation that shifts billions in cold hard cash around. Sometimes people believe these things cannot be challenged simply because nobody has ever tried.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #2597
    riker1969 riker1969 is offline
    riker1969's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,447

    Seemingly a lot of people have no problem renting a womb or buying human life in the form of sperm/egg donation but making use of a vagina for under an hour is morally hazardous?!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #2598
    Leandrai Leandrai is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    825

    Quote Originally Posted by General Urko View Post
    I wouldn't put her in charge of a septic tank!
    Don't be so nasty...she will ALWAYS be welcome to rod mine any time it gets blocked...under supervision, of course
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #2599
    General Urko General Urko is offline
    General Urko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    11,573

    I came across this while surfing a chap has done an analysis of the Northern Irish Version of this sex worker hating law, which has been on the statute books for a year and in terms of online advertising by sex workers there has been no change and practically no enforcement of it wrt indoor sex for sale activites!

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...=2&pli=1#gid=0

    There has been 1 arrested for brothel keeping, where trafficking/coercion was suspected and I would have no issue with that! It would have been illegal as is it here with or without the sex worker hating law!

    https://www.psni.police.uk/news/Late...-road-belfast/

    I suspect that our version of this complete and utter insanity will be enforced as our Pigz will like to rim Fitzie's Hole, however as we all know it will never be enforced against the great and the good!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #2600
    Cato Cato is offline
    Cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    36,391

    Quote Originally Posted by Leandrai View Post
    I recognise that, but there must be some judicial barrier to basing bills on deliberate, facilitated misrepresentation, otherwise - well, take it out of an emotive, stigma loaded issue and apply the same rules to legislation that shifts billions in cold hard cash around. Sometimes people believe these things cannot be challenged simply because nobody has ever tried.
    There isn't. Maybe there should be, but there isn't. There's no obligation on the Houses of the Oireachtas even to hold consultations or, having held them, pay any heed to them. You're going to have to either rely on voices within the Oireachtas to challenge and amend this, or else on the electorate to (indirectly) correct it at a future general election.
    Last edited by Cato; 18th June 2016 at 03:16 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment