• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

McKenna underfire


ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255
Cloughlan, Crotty, McKenna underfire?

I must say i'm a little annoyed listening to some commentator's/politicians today on the radio who believe that the media having to ensure that both sides of the argument have to be discussed running up to a referendum, is an unhelpful rule. The point was made that even though all sides in the Dail and the vast majority of charities were in favor of the children's referendum, it leaves the media having to give air time to extremists. This reason being why this referendum was not overwhelming accepted by the people.

Minister Shatter's response to the Supreme Court ruling this week, where this government have been found to have blatantly breached McKennna, was arrogant and unapologetic. Fine Gael chairman Charlie Flanagan earlier this year described the McKenna judgment as “a nonsense”.

To have our Legislators voicing such contempt and opposition to McKenna/Coughlan and for the judgement of the highest court in the land to be given such flippant treatment by the Minister for Justice is very disturbing. Our FG/Lab Government appears to find judgements like McKenna and Crotty and Coughlan to be serious impediments to the manner in which they wish to govern. It's ironic that it was a FG/Lab administration that lead to the McKenna judgement and Ministers Howlin, Bruton, Quinn, Noonan and the Taoiseach Enda Kenny were serving Ministers in that administration.

I supported and canvassed for the Yes side in this referendum and view judgements like McKenna, Coughlan and Crotty as enhancing debate and democracy.

The interpretation of the Coughlan judgment (2000) is that there has to be strict balance in coverage on TV and radio for both sides of a referendum campaign (though the same restriction does not apply in the print media). Both sides of the debate have equal access to the airwaves, regardless of their respective support or of the quality of their arguments.

The Crotty judgment (1987) requires a constitutional amendment (and, as a consequence, a referendum) if a new EU Treaty is considered to go beyond the “essential scope or objectives” of the existing EU Treaties.

In the McKenna Judgement the Supreme Court found the then Fine Gael-Labour government was acting unconstitutionally in spending public money to support one particular outcome of a referendum.

The McKenna Judgement found ....

"The freedom to express opinions incorporates the corollary right that in the democratic process of free elections, public funds should not be used to fund one side of an electoral process, whether it be a referendum or a general election, to the detriment of the other side of the argument."

"Ireland is a democratic state. The citizen is entitled under the Constitution to a democratic process. The citizen is entitled to a democracy free from governmental intercession with the process, no matter how well intentioned. No branch of the government is entitled to use taxpayers monies from the Central Fund to intercede with the democratic process either as to the voting process or as to the campaign prior to the vote"

Important Judgments
 
Last edited:

Keith-M

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
15,779
Website
www.allkindsofeverything.ie
This is a government (like the previous one) that wants to consult the public as little as possible and even then, when the people speak (as they did on Lisbon) they want to ignore them. They want to create an autocracy and McKenna and Crotty (and now McCrystal) limit their power.
 
Last edited:

asknoquestions

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
2,977
It's fair enough for state controlled broadcasters to be forced to give both sides equal time but free speech should surely mean that a private media company should be free to broadcast whatever view they like about a referendum.
 

Con Gallagher

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,413
Governments just don't get it. The Constitution is the People's document which limits the powers of the executive. It is a very well written document, relatively easy to read and with only 31 amendments (with many on the same issue eg Europe, divorce, pr stv, abortion) it has stood the test of time.

So what have the 3 amendments this government have proposed have in common?
Allowing the legislature conduct populist inquires*, softening the cough of the judiciary with pay cuts and making it easier for the State to interfere with families ie a power grab to itself.


(*they are desperate to rerun it and want to reduce accountability even further by abolishing the second chamber).
 

He3

Moderator
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
17,094
This is a government (like the previous one) that wants to consult the public as little as possible and even, when the people speak (as they did on Lisbon) they want to ignore them. They want to create an autocracy and McKenna and Crotty (and now McCrystal) limit their power.
Their power is limited by the Constitution.

McKenna and Crotty gave the Courts the opportunity to point that out.

The general topic is already being discussed here - http://www.politics.ie/forum/justice/199826-planning-ahead-how-run-referendum.html
 

RightCentreLeft

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
928
I must say i'm a little annoyed listening to some commentator's/politicians today on the radio who believe that the media having to ensure that both sides of the argument have to be discussed running up to a referendum, is an unhelpful rule. The point was made than even though all sides in the Dail and the vast majority of charities were in favor of the children's referendum, it leaves the media having to give air time to extremists. This reason being why this referendum was not overwhelming accepted by the people.

Minister Shatter's response to the Supreme Court ruling this week, where this government have been found to have blatantly breached McKennna, was arrogant and unapologetic. Fine Gael chairman Charlie Flanagan earlier this year described the McKenna judgment, which obliges broadcasters to give equal time to both sides in referendums, as “a nonsense”.

To have our Legislators voicing such contempt and opposition to McKenna and for the judgement of the highest court in the land to be given such flippant treatment by the Minister for Justice is very disturbing. Our FG/Lab Government appears to find judgements like McKenna and Crotty to be serious impediments to the manner in which they wish to govern.

I supported and canvassed for the Yes side in this referendum and view judgements like McKenna and Crotty as enhancing debate and democracy.

Important Judgments
Excellent Post. Shatter and Fitzgerald showed utter contempt for the Judiciary today during their respective interviews on RTE Radio 1.

It is very worrying indeed.
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
The arrogance of Shatter is reason enough not to change McKenna. Can you imagine the rubbish he would have been pumping out into the airwaves about the Oireachtas Inquiry referendum, at our expense, if he had been allowed get away with it?
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255
While previous FF administrations have also shown distaste for McKenna, present government appears to be aggressively attacking this judgement. Surely the media and who they source to provide the Yes and No voices should be the focus of their "concerns" and not the fundamental principle of having both sides of the argument aired?

And I wonder if this breach of McKenna was a simple mistake by government? I believe that the last information booklet and website produced by this government relating to the EU fiscal treaty would have also been found in breach of McKenna had it been challenged.
 

Didimus

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
6,285
This is a government (like the previous one) that wants to consult the public as little as possible and even then, when the people speak (as they did on Lisbon) they want to ignore them. They want to create an autocracy and McKenna and Crotty (and now McCrystal) limit their power.
Cunning move to hold a referendum when they did not have to in order consult the people as little as possible.
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
While previous FF administrations have also shown distaste for McKenna, present government appears to be aggressively attacking this judgement. Surely the media and who they source to provide the Yes and No voices should be the focus of their "concerns" and not the fundamental principle of having both sides of the argument aired?

And I wonder if this breach of McKenna was a simple mistake by government? I believe that the last information booklet and website produced by this government relating to the EU fiscal treaty would have also been found in breach of McKenna had it been challenged.
This government is shockingly arrogant. Ministers like Shatter, Varadkar and Hogan are utterly intolerant of dissent. It's quite worrying.
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255
This government is shockingly arrogant. Ministers like Shatter, Varadkar and Hogan are utterly intolerant of dissent. It's quite worrying.
Arrogance itself is distasteful. Having, as legislators, such disdain for the ruling of the highest court in the land questions the suitability of these elected representatives in their role as legislators surely?
 

PO'Neill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Messages
12,425
Website
www.facebook.com
Minister Shatter's response to the Supreme Court ruling this week, where this government have been found to have blatantly breached McKennna, was arrogant and unapologetic.
I wouldn't expect anything better from Shatter, he's a zionist.
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255

carlovian

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
5,067
Excellent Post. Shatter and Fitzgerald showed utter contempt for the Judiciary today during their respective interviews on RTE Radio 1.

It is very worrying indeed.
I thought shatter was very poor this morning on radio.

A little humility isn't a bad thing.
 

Didimus

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
6,285
This government is shockingly arrogant. Ministers like Shatter, Varadkar and Hogan are utterly intolerant of dissent. It's quite worrying.
People are being locked up as we speak.
I'm really worried.
 

PO'Neill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Messages
12,425
Website
www.facebook.com

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255

Didimus

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
6,285
"First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist....".
Who is actually coming for who? Have I missed something?
Hold on .
There's a knock on the door.
I'l be back in a minute.......
 

pedagogus

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
2,561
It's fair enough for state controlled broadcasters to be forced to give both sides equal time but free speech should surely mean that a private media company should be free to broadcast whatever view they like about a referendum.
Whether public or private broadcasting organisations have to conform to the standards of impartiality laid down in the Broadcasting Act.
 
Top