• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.

Political Affiliations of "Ordinary Citizen" members of the Constitutional Convention

LamportsEdge

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
21,694
O'Leary meet the convention. Convention, allow me to introduce you to O'Leary.

 


Big Brother

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
2,717
Take a bow skyrocket

Excellent work.

Now the real question: Why have our official media - RTE / Irish Times etc - failed to highlight this?

This kind of scrutiny is what they should be doing but aren't.

That the chairman of the convention is also chairman of the Irish Times makes this kind of scrutinty even more important.

But it looks like the meeja luvvies have it all wrapped up.

Speaking of Luvvies, did you see how our media utterly failed to expose Ireland's Jimm Saville Donal O'Luvvy?

Too busy rehashing abuse stories from the Ireland of the 50s for teh umpteenth time to expose how their own luvvies were abusing people right up until the 90s.

But then that's the liberal media for you.
 

LamportsEdge

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
21,694
Ireland doesn't have a 'liberal media'. Ireland has never had anything approaching the description of a liberal media. It is a captured provincial media always afraid of upsetting the 'powers that be'.

It is no wonder Brobdinag as a fictional absurdity occured to Dublin's Swift.
 

gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,187
I contacted Senator Ronan Mullen to bring the research in the OP to his attention, I posted a link to this thread. I have received a reply including the following line:

Thank you also for pointing out the information about the questionable make up of the convention. We have had correspondence with regard to other members and how they were selected,
The part I highlighted is interesting.
 

Big Brother

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
2,717
Ireland doesn't have a 'liberal media'. Ireland has never had anything approaching the description of a liberal media. It is a captured provincial media always afraid of upsetting the 'powers that be'.

It is no wonder Brobdinag as a fictional absurdity occured to Dublin's Swift.

We could I think reconcile our points of view by saying that there is some liberalism in the media

There are real liberals like Justine McCarthy who are genuine and brave in espousing what they believe. They are sadly too dismissive and derisory about those they disagree with.

Then there are the wannabes - brainless parrots who regurgitate whatever liberal platitudes are put in front of them.

These idiots have been around since the plague. 50 years ago they were parrotting the values of confessional catholic Ireland. Now they are doing reverse.

In that sense we could say we have media in the grip of an unthinking liberal consensus that is equally sterile and stupid as the unthinking catholic one that prevailed in McQuaid's time.

Same old stupid. Just facing in opposite direction.
 

eltel

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
40
Has the constitutional Convention been stacked with "ordinary citizens", some of whom in reality have political affiliations or could actually be considered politicians themselves having run in local elections?
For completeness, seeing as this thread is repeatedly being cited in the ongoing Christian Right conspiracy theory, it should be noted, also that Julie Corley (née Marks) was the secretary of the Tuam Diocese Eucharistic Congress Steering Group, and according to her Religious Studies students may be "overly religious" and "narrow minded".

hxxp://ie.ratemyteachers.com/julie-corley/124975-t

When not in class, a wonderful woman. When teaching religion, she sticks firmly to what SHE believes in, not what the curriculum teaches. Which is quite different. Has some radical beliefs.
Julie is on the left:

hxxp://tuamarchdiocese.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Servant-11.jpg

I wouldn't do this, but this lady has been named by Declan Ganley and David Quinn as complaining about the objectivity and procedures of the Convention, and they have said that she's happy to have her name out there.

I'm not suggesting for a second that that someone who's heavily involved in the Catholic Church and has strong views should be excluded, but equally I don't see how people who've been politically active should be, either, or how this is a cause for concern. Active citizenship would tend to lead to engagement with religion or politics, and to initiatives such as the Convention.

Basically, what I'm seeing here is an attempt, emanating from the Catholic right, to smear the Convention by any means necessary ... for some unknown reason. Bottom line is that there's no democracy gap and no conspiracy: we get to vote on any proposals (if they ever make it that far) and the vote was broadly in line with public opinion.
 

Sierra

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
3,483
What a stupid thread. Are you really surprised that people interested in politics stuck with the convention?

The evidence is that the vast majority of people contacted didn't want to participate, with many more just failing to turn up for the sessions. It is not surprise that those interested in having an input into the political discourse stuck with the concept.

Take off those tin foil hats.
 

Northsideman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
9,565
What a stupid thread. Are you really surprised that people interested in politics stuck with the convention?

The evidence is that the vast majority of people contacted didn't want to participate, with many more just failing to turn up for the sessions. It is not surprise that those interested in having an input into the political discourse stuck with the concept.

Take off those tin foil hats.
With all due respect your argument is pure bollix, if the deck was stacked then it is good old fashioned corruption pure and simple and needs investigation.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
47,988
Has the constitutional Convention been stacked with "ordinary citizens", some of whom in reality have political affiliations or could actually be considered politicians themselves having run in local elections?

The member list of the CC (66 "randomly" selected "ordinary citizens" and 33 politicians) is posted here: https://www.constitution.ie/Documents/ListOfMembers.pdf

Consider the backgrounds of the following "ordinary citizen" members:

Lydia Peppard, Meath: A woman of the same name ran for election as a Labour candidate to Trim Town Council. She got 2.65% and was eliminated. ElectionsIreland.org: 2004 Town Council - Trim First Preference Votes

She is listed as being elected "Equality officer" of the Meath Labour party in a 2002 article. Father and son appointed Labour - Independent.ie

She and a neighbour also selected were subject of an Irish Independent article in February raising questions about the transparency of the selection process. Concern as couple and set of neighbours are 'randomly selected' for constitutional body - Independent.ie

Ray Howes, Wicklow: A person of the same name ran for Labour in the Wicklow local elections in 2009. He later joined Sinn Fein. "RECENT LOCAL election candidate for Labour in Wicklow town, Ray Howes, has left the Labour Party to join the ranks of Sinn Féin."
Howes joins Sinn Fein after leaving Labour - Independent.ie

Luke Boyle, Kilkenny. A person of the same name is described in a 2005 article as "a former Labour Party councillor on Kilkenny Corporation." Midlands 103 FM Radio - Podcasts Live Radio Podcast Ireland Radio Station Programmes Midlands 103 FM Podcast Audio Playback - Radio Station Ireland

Richard Codd, Wicklow: A person of the same name is described as "Constituency Chairman" of the "Wicklow Constituency Fine Gael Party" in a January 2013 submission to the local electoral boundary committee. http://www.boundarycommittee.ie/SubmissionsReceived/Wicklow Constituency Fine Gael Party - Wicklow.pdf

Is it really credible that these people were "randomly selected"?

There are also other examples but I'm unwilling to post these as there is greater uncertainty due to the names being relatively common and living in large population areas such as Dublin.

It is incumbent on Chairperson Tom Arnold and others leading the Constitutional Convention to demonstrate absolute transparency about the member selection process lest public confidence in the Convention and their recommendations be undermined.
Out of a population of about 4 million people old enough to participate in the Constitutional Convention, I'd say there's about 100,000 who are members of political parties. As such, you'd expect about 1 in 40 on the CC to be party members, or about 2.5%. So 4% isn't that far out.
 

eltel

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
40
With all due respect your argument is pure bollix, if the deck was stacked then it is good old fashioned corruption pure and simple and needs investigation.
Well, it's unsurprising to find that the kind of people who take part in these things may have been active politically or in religious organisations ... if you want to do a full set of background checks, have at, but you'd want to look at more than just party hackery to figure whether the deck had been stacked or otherwise.

Personally, I'm happy enough that at least yesterday's outcome is broadly in line with public opinion and leave it at that till the referendum (if it gets that far).
 

Northsideman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
9,565
Well, it's unsurprising to find that the kind of people who take part in these things may have been active politically or in religious organisations ... if you want to do a full set of background checks, have at, but you'd want to look at more than just party hackery to figure whether the deck had been stacked or otherwise.

Personally, I'm happy enough that at least yesterday's outcome is broadly in line with public opinion and leave it at that till the referendum (if it gets that far).
I have no issue with the outcome yesterday either, but that does not address the question, was the deck stacked? If it was it is a most serious issue and heads would have to roll. The question must be answered, don't you agree?
 

eltel

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
40
I have no issue with the outcome yesterday either, but that does not address the question, was the deck stacked? If it was it is a most serious issue and heads would have to roll. The question must be answered, don't you agree?
I think that if it could be shown that a majority of the candidates were fully paid up party political hacks or religious nutjobs, there may be questions to be asked. But what's really happening here is a transparent attempt to smear the Convention, because the looney right aren't liking how it's been going.

The implication I'm seeing is that Labour in particular loaded the panel with "liberals", which I don't think is borne out by the evidence so far - we have two former labour members, a labour/Shinner (although OP seems to be emphasising the Labour), a blueshirt and a religious kook by my count, quite curious as to how many OP checked.

Really, though, what I'm seeing is the likes of Quinn and his acolytes struggling to process the fact that they are going to lose this one, public opinion is against them.

Then again, that's probably all the public's fault for being "biased".
 

LamportsEdge

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
21,694
Does anyone remember Tony Blair's attempt to make the House of Lords more open and applicable to the citizens of the UK?

The 'People's Peers' they were going to be. That one floundered fairly quickly when it became clear that Blair and New Labour wanted to pick the peers for the people. And strangely enough they were apparatchiks as well.

Same shyte. Different island.

'The 15 people chosen by the House of Lords Appointments Commission all have an Establishment background and include seven knights and three professors. The commission, which was set up to take the recruitment of independent crossbench peers out of the hands of the Prime Minister, insisted that it had wanted outstanding candidates all along, and that it never intended to recruit typical members of the public.' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1317422/No-Joe-Soaps-among-the-peoples-peers.html
 
Last edited:

Northsideman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
9,565
I think that if it could be shown that a majority of the candidates were fully paid up party political hacks or religious nutjobs, there may be questions to be asked. But what's really happening here is a transparent attempt to smear the Convention, because the looney right aren't liking how it's been going.

The implication I'm seeing is that Labour in particular loaded the panel with "liberals", which I don't think is borne out by the evidence so far - we have two former labour members, a labour/Shinner (although OP seems to be emphasising the Labour), a blueshirt and a religious kook by my count, quite curious as to how many OP checked.

Really, though, what I'm seeing is the likes of Quinn and his acolytes struggling to process the fact that they are going to lose this one, public opinion is against them.

Then again, that's probably all the public's fault for being "biased".
All well and good, but there is a question mark over the selection process, so let it be ventilated, investigated and if all is above board, great. If not well the can of worms is well and truly open. But we all know nothing like that would ever happen in Ireland so we've no need for concern.
 

freewillie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,295
This just goes to prove that we really cannot trust our political parties to act honourably without constant supervision, whenever they think they can hoodwink the public and stack the deck against us they do.
I bet they do nothing about this unless there is a massive fuss about it.


Do they get any expenses for travels, meals etc
Their ability to stck in a claim will show whether or not they are politically inclined
 

ManUnited

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
5,161
All well and good, but there is a question mark over the selection process, so let it be ventilated, investigated and if all is above board, great. If not well the can of worms is well and truly open. But we all know nothing like that would ever happen in Ireland so we've no need for concern.
Is there?
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
86,636
Are these the members of the political parties? Or the ordinary citizens?

Am smelling a rat. The % reached yesterday for same sex marriage is a bit odd I thought. As a strong supporter of same sex marriage I was delighted initially and I do believe it will pass a referendum, but the high % figure I don't see on the ground.
That figure is only a little bit higher than those reported in general opinion polls. Add that to the fact that the participants had to listen to arguments, plus the fact that there aren't any good arguments against same-sex marriage, and it's not particularly surprising.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
47,988
Do they get any expenses for travels, meals etc
Their ability to stck in a claim will show whether or not they are politically inclined
Or whether or not they're wealthy.
 

Northsideman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
9,565


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top