Bailout subject to Dail vote as per constitution Article 29.5.2?

spidermom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
9,148


kerryind

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2010
Messages
894
its shocking something this huge can be signed off by unelected people and a government with no mandate
 

Tea Party Patriot

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
11,468
Spider you might want to edit your OP and put in Article 29.5.2 of the constitution.
 

spidermom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
9,148

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
48,197
its shocking something this huge can be signed off by unelected people and a government with no mandate
The problem is that they do have a mandate. As long as they command a majority in the Dail, they have a mandate.

On the OP, I'm not sure this has to go to a vote. It depends on the definition of an "International Agreement", which could be seen as an agreement between us and another country, which this isn't. And taken to its logical conclusion, taking this to a vote could mean that every time the NTMA had a vond auction, we'd have to vote on the terms of the sale afterwards in the Dail. Which isn't exactly practical.
 

goosebump

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
4,940
The problem is that they do have a mandate. As long as they command a majority in the Dail, they have a mandate.

On the OP, I'm not sure this has to go to a vote. It depends on the definition of an "International Agreement", which could be seen as an agreement between us and another country, which this isn't. And taken to its logical conclusion, taking this to a vote could mean that every time the NTMA had a vond auction, we'd have to vote on the terms of the sale afterwards in the Dail. Which isn't exactly practical.
Its a complete irrelevance anyway, given that the IMF Memo of Agreement has yet to be produced, and that it won't be until after the Budget vote. The Dail is hardly going to vote for the Budget and then reject the deal.

Amateur night on p.ie right now.
 

spidermom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
9,148
The problem is that they do have a mandate. As long as they command a majority in the Dail, they have a mandate.

On the OP, I'm not sure this has to go to a vote. It depends on the definition of an "International Agreement", which could be seen as an agreement between us and another country, which this isn't. And taken to its logical conclusion, taking this to a vote could mean that every time the NTMA had a vond auction, we'd have to vote on the terms of the sale afterwards in the Dail. Which isn't exactly practical.
What about section 2.......

The State shall not be bound by any international agreement involving a charge upon public funds unless the terms of the agreement shall have been approved by Dáil Éireann....

......public funds being the NPRF????
 

kerryind

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2010
Messages
894
its shocking to think that jackie healy rae and corrupt lowry are the only hope the country has. I think it should be debated taking on 82 billion debt should be a national emergency and there should be provisions for such things being voted on
 

RightCentreLeft

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
925
The problem is that they do have a mandate. As long as they command a majority in the Dail, they have a mandate.

On the OP, I'm not sure this has to go to a vote. It depends on the definition of an "International Agreement", which could be seen as an agreement between us and another country, which this isn't. And taken to its logical conclusion, taking this to a vote could mean that every time the NTMA had a vond auction, we'd have to vote on the terms of the sale afterwards in the Dail. Which isn't exactly practical.
I dont think the definition of an 'International Agreement' would be the main legal issue as clearly the agreement involves 27 countries.

The real issue is - in relation to Art 29.5.3 - what is a 'technical or administrative agreement'?
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
its shocking to think that jackie healy rae and corrupt lowry are the only hope the country has. I think it should be debated taking on 82 billion debt should be a national emergency and there should be provisions for such things being voted on
There would be if we had DD
 

Ah Well

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
1,228
Like anything else the venue to decide upon this is an Irish Court of Law rather than here ...

The next question being ... who's gonna initiate the Proceedings? :D
 

RightCentreLeft

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
925
Like anything else the venue to decide upon this is an Irish Court of Law rather than here ...

The next question being ... who's gonna initiate the Proceedings? :D
A close family member is a Barrister i've already emailed him to see what he thinks.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Like anything else the venue to decide upon this is an Irish Court of Law rather than here ...

The next question being ... who's gonna initiate the Proceedings? :D
How much money does Declan Ganley have?
 

Buddies

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
491
Someone tell Twin Towers i cant mail him until i hit 100!

Thanks spidey for the thread, ok here is what I think



The Government need to be held to account to the people on a matter of such importance.

I believe that this 'Bailout' is an International agreement, not least because it is designed as a loan from our International partners, but also because if we didn't agree to it, it would have severe International consequences such as the fall of the Euro.

This is not just about Irish state debt

I am not a legal eagle but i want to see this challenged, it is clearly just not an Irish matter as the decision affects our International partners at the cost of the state and the Dail is not being asked!!

Your opinions?
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Well we've seen what a pig's ear the bloody professionals can make of things, haven't we?
Professionals, ha!

Two sons of FF TD's who could afford an education for them that insured they gain a decent education, all part of the grooming. Just get them the seat then old party loyalties will insure they get prime positions.

Not a sign of professionality anywhere
 

Iarmuid

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,650
Amateur night on p.ie right now.
Amateur night - you bring a smile to my face sir.

http://www.politics.ie/economy/40827-what-guarantee-cost.html

goosebump said:
The Guarantees (Liabilities and Deposits) were never intended to prop up the share price, or to address issues of solvency.

The Guarantees were put in place to keep the banks liquid, both by allowing the banks to continue borrowing and to prevent despositors withdrawing their funds.

In this, they were effective.

The share prices of banks has collapsed because nobody knows the value of their liabilities.

The premium we are paying on Debt has more to do with the state of our public finances, and the huge influx of placement from other larger states, than it has to do with our banks, given that we have the cash to deal with the banks (the NPRF).

Several other EU countries are currently offering premia on debt. They are doing so because of their budget deficits. None of them have taken a stake in their banks.

Our spread only started to moved away from the Bund benchmark in the last few weeks of 2008, when the extent of deficit became obvious. The bank guarantee had been in place for months at that stage.

Furthermore, you should ask the question as to what premia we would be paying on Government debt had our financial system collapsed, which could easily have happened had the guarantees not been put in place.
http://www.politics.ie/economy/82356-brought-our-knees-bankers-developers-5.html

goosebump said:
Another article by another egotistical economist who doesn't understand the unique nature of banking.

His solution is to transfer ownership of the banks to the corporate bond holders, a la General Motors in the US.

One minor detail is omitted:

General Motors isn't holding hundreds of billions of euro of fictional on-demand deposits which are guaranteed by the State.

I really, really, really don't know why this is soooooo hard to understand.

We have guarateed desposits. If we don't, the banks can't access temporary finance and go belly up.

Because we have guaranteed desposits, we can't let any bank stop trading, in that doing so will place on call on deposits which we have to meet.

That means that the only solution can be a solution in which the banks remain as going concerns, which means, NAMA, either with nationalisation or without.

There are no other solutions.
Correct on this score

http://www.politics.ie/economy/76218-time-close-down-anglo-irish-bank.html

goosebump said:
Except that the Guarantee is conceptual liability which a wind down would make an actual liability.

The Guarantee exists so that the likelihood of its execution is reduced. The idea is to avoid the exposure thorough recapitalisation rather than dealing with it. Obviously, at some point, recapitalisation may become more expensive, but if we get to that point, someone else will be running the country.
 

Buddies

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
491
Its a complete irrelevance anyway, given that the IMF Memo of Agreement has yet to be produced, and that it won't be until after the Budget vote. The Dail is hardly going to vote for the Budget and then reject the deal.

Amateur night on p.ie right now.
I might be an amateur, but you as a consummate professional are doing what exactly:lol:
 

Ah Well

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
1,228
An International Agreement can be described as an

Instrument by which States and other subjects of international law, such as certain international organisations, regulate matters of concern to them

Is the IMF an international organisation subject to international law?

EDIT - Hang on

As per the IMF's own admission

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization of 187 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.

http://www.imf.org/external/about.htm

I'd think that qualifies as an international organisation - don't you?
 
Last edited:


New Threads

Most Replies

Top