# How long can the forming of a government take?



## Brendan Burgess (18 Feb 2020)

Is there a deadline in the Constitution? 

At what stage is a new election called and who makes the decision? 

Brendan


----------



## Purple (18 Feb 2020)

Article 28.11 of the Constitution states;

_If the Taoiseach at any time resigns from office the other members of the Government shall be deemed also to have resigned from office, but the Taoiseach and the other members of the Government shall continue to carry on their duties until their successors shall have been appointed._
_The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed._
Therefore it looks like there is no time limit between the election of a Dáil and the formation of a government. 

I'm open to correction though!


----------



## Sunny (18 Feb 2020)

Not that I know but having unelected ministers can only go on for so long.  They are even TD'S so probably not even answerable to the house. Nothing will be done until they form a government so its makes a mockery of all parties concerns about housing and health crisis.....


----------



## TarfHead (18 Feb 2020)

It is my understanding, informed by Pat Leahy in the Irish Times, that the current Taoiseach remains in office until the Dáil elects a successor.  Until that happens, the current Government stay in place.  The only person who can call another General Election is the current Taoiseach.
I guess that Ministers who are no longer TDs, like Katherine Zappone and Regina Doherty, would not carry on in those roles.


----------



## Sunny (18 Feb 2020)

TarfHead said:


> It is my understanding, informed by Pat Leahy in the Irish Times, that the current Taoiseach remains in office until the Dáil elects a successor.  Until that happens, the current Government stay in place.  The only person who can call another General Election is the current Taoiseach.
> I guess that Ministers who are no longer TDs, like Katherine Zappone and Regina Doherty, would not carry on in those roles.



No, the ministers are the same. They keep the office until successors are appointed. Not being a TD anymore doesn't change that. Even the ones that retired are stuck.


----------



## mathepac (18 Feb 2020)

If they are not TDs, hopefully their Dail salaries stops and they just get paid the Ministerial differentials? I know it's unlikely, but I live in hope.


----------



## Purple (18 Feb 2020)

I don't think they can be ministers, even acting ministers, if they are not members of the Dáil or Seanad.
They have to be members of the Dáil to be Taoiseach or Minister for Finance but I think any member of the Seanad can be any other minister.


----------



## Sunny (18 Feb 2020)

_The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed._

Same happened at last election









						Defeated Ministers remain in office until new government formed
					

Ministers James Reilly and Alex White lost seats but attended meeting yesterday




					www.irishtimes.com


----------



## Sophrosyne (18 Feb 2020)

Sunny said:


> _The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed._




That is correct - Article 28. 11.2

The Dáil has been dissolved but not the ministerial offices. Ministers and TDs of the previous Dáil continue to carry out their duties until a new government is formed.


----------



## Purple (18 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> That is correct - Article 28. 11.2
> 
> The Dáil has been dissolved but not the ministerial offices. Ministers and TDs of the previous Dáil continue to carry out their duties until a new government is formed.





Sunny said:


> _The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed._
> 
> Same happened at last election
> 
> ...





Purple said:


> Article 28.11 of the Constitution states;
> 
> _If the Taoiseach at any time resigns from office the other members of the Government shall be deemed also to have resigned from office, but the Taoiseach and the other members of the Government shall continue to carry on their duties until their successors shall have been appointed._
> _The members of the Government in office at the date of a dissolution of Dáil Éireann shall continue to hold office until their successors shall have been appointed._
> ...



That confirms it so


----------



## Sunny (18 Feb 2020)

Odd how before the election, everything was a crisis that needed to be solved immediately. Now we need to take time and reflect on what the people said or didn't say. Maybe take a few weeks/months talking or not talking. 

I know it's not easy but it would help if they stopped talking through both sides of their mouths. If you are not going to be part of Government, then say it and we can go back for another election. Instead we get 'It is not us'. 'It is up to them'. 'We won't be found wanting'. 'Its too early to say'. 'We were very clear about that'. 'I wouldn't rule anything out. 'We rule out going into Government with them'. 'We can't form a Government without FF/FG'. 'We can still form a minority Government without FF/FG'. 'The people voted for change and that doesn't mean FF/FG'. 'FF/FG are anti democratic from ignoring the vote of the people'


----------



## Sophrosyne (18 Feb 2020)

Yes. It is all tactics at the moment as a prelude to discussing policy issues.

It took 70 days of negotiations to form the last government - with just two parties involved and which didn't have the complicating SF factor.


----------



## michaelm (18 Feb 2020)

Sunny said:


> I know it's not easy but it would help if they stopped talking through both sides of their mouths.


At least the Soc Dems have called FG out on their nonsense . .

"It is clear to all that Fine Gael are now engaged in a game-playing exercise and we refuse to participate in what is essentially theatrics by Fine Gael . . . . while it was always the case that we were unlikely to find much common ground with Fine Gael, we intended to honour our commitment of engaging openly with all parties. Clearly FIne Gael’s intention is to engage in shadow-boxing for the coming weeks and we've no interest in participating in such a charade."

I don't think the Greens will tolerate much BS either.


----------



## Purple (18 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Yes. It is all tactics at the moment as a prelude to discussing policy issues.
> 
> It took 70 days of negotiations to form the last government - with just two parties involved and which didn't have the complicating SF factor.


Belgium had no government for 589 days back in 2010/2011. These things can take time.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Feb 2020)

Good article here by Simon Carswell 









						Q&A: How long could it take to form a new government after Election 2020?
					

There are no rules and no time limits on how to put together a new administration




					www.irishtimes.com
				




*How long could this limbo continue for?*
Technically indefinitely, but this is highly unlikely in practice. In theory Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe could present a new budget – a critical point in the life of any government – in October, but this would hardly pass given that Fine Gael is in a minority and is no longer supported by Fianna Fáil.


*Who decides if another election is needed?*
Only Taoiseach Leo Varadkar can seek to dissolve the 33rd Dáil and call an election.

*Does President Michael D Higgins have to approve?*
Yes. Under article 13 of the Constitution only the President can dissolve the Dáil on the advice of the Taoiseach. The President may in his absolute discretion refuse to dissolve the Dáil on the advice of a taoiseach who has ceased to retain the support of a majority in the parliament.


*Could the President play a role in trying to help form a government?*
Technically no, but if the political stalemate drags on the situation could force him into unchartered waters. There is nothing in the Constitution providing the President with any role in the formation of a government as the role of the presidency, as head of State, sit above politics.


----------



## joe sod (18 Feb 2020)

Sunny said:


> No, the ministers are the same. They keep the office until successors are appointed. Not being a TD anymore doesn't change that. Even the ones that retired are stuck.



Maybe we will be getting into the brexit and house of commons theatrics now in the Dail. Will they be sending a letter to the queen to ask her to prorogue the Dail like Johnson did? Imagine David Cullinane in that scenario he would be apopletic with rage, it would be a good Waterford Whispers headline though


----------



## Deiseblue (19 Feb 2020)

Left , left again , further left - ok , we’re on the same page .
Give the soldiers of destiny a ring now - fair enough Leo , will do !


----------



## Ceist Beag (19 Feb 2020)

I said before the election that we could still be waiting on a new Government come Easter. I think it's too early yet to start clamouring for another election, as others said, these things take time. I think we'll have a better picture in a couple of weeks time but I can't see anything happening before then so it's best we let them at it for a few more weeks yet.


----------



## josh8267 (20 Feb 2020)

After appointing Ceann Comhairle FF and SF now have 37 TDs each,
Only 28 TDS voted for  Denis Naughten strange one all FG TDs did not vote for Dinis Naughten seeing the have no FG TDs in Roscommon/Galway since Naughten went Independent,


----------



## Purple (20 Feb 2020)

A Grand Coalition is a coalition between the two largest parties in a Parliament. Therefore a FF/SF coalition is a grand coalition.


----------



## josh8267 (21 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> A Grand Coalition is a coalition between the two largest parties in a Parliament. Therefore a FF/SF coalition is a grand coalition.


To me it's looks like a coalition or arrangement between FF and FG is taking place in the background  going off the vote for Ceann  Comhairle  Denis Naughton is FG to the back bone , His Brother  ran for FG in last council elections, Naughton is part of a new group of 11 TDs in Dail, I suspect all voted for him
Naughton made up part of the last FG government, until he stepped down over the broadband ,

Talking to FG people he is well respected by TDs from all parts the country ,From what I understand Word was out to leave Ceann Comhairle to FF ,

Naughton as Ceann Comhairle FG would take a seat in Roscommon/Galway next time out, which could be very shortly if the have no interest in forming/supporting a Government,

I expect FF and FG will drag out forming supporting a Government until most party members are on side for the new arrangement  like they did last time around ,

So around 70 days again  some members of both FF/FG are already saying it is going to take some time to form a Government,

So await the  spin we had to put the Country First , I just hope they start the reform Both put on the back burner for the last 40 years,


----------



## 24601 (20 Apr 2020)

Is anyone struck by the utter peculiarity of how this has developed? The joint document published by FFFG  is rooted in some sort of Utopia whereby the housing crisis will be solved and universal health care will be introduced, all without the need for additional income taxes after the horror COVID-19 is about to visit upon us. And they still can't get the Greens/SocDems etc. on board? One would have to hope the document is a device designed to trap one of the smaller parties since the commitments are totally undeliverable. This, of course, means that SF are almost guaranteed an even bigger surge come the next election.


----------



## Vanessa (22 Apr 2020)

24601 said:


> Is anyone struck by the utter peculiarity of how this has developed? The joint document published by FFFG  is rooted in some sort of Utopia whereby the housing crisis will be solved and universal health care will be introduced, all without the need for additional income taxes after the horror COVID-19 is about to visit upon us. And they still can't get the Greens/SocDems etc. on board? One would have to hope the document is a device designed to trap one of the smaller parties since the commitments are totally undeliverable. This, of course, means that SF are almost guaranteed an even bigger surge come the next election.



S.F. would know all about Utopia as their election promises are gone up in smoke with the Coronavirus hammering the economy. Their supporters canlive in hope of a surge but the next election is 4/5 years away. There are still plenty combinations ready to grab a bit of power evenif S.D.s or the Greens decline


----------



## Purple (23 Apr 2020)

If the Shinners get into power after the next election then it's no more than the Irish people deserve. Being stupid once is excusable but not doing it twice.


----------



## Leper (23 Apr 2020)

I'm having a Boris Johnson moment - Can we have another general election immediately please?


----------



## Purple (23 Apr 2020)

Leper said:


> I'm having a Boris Johnson moment - Can we have another general election immediately please?


Wasn't that what Theresa May did as well though?


----------



## Leo (23 Apr 2020)

Vanessa said:


> S.F. would know all about Utopia as their election promises are gone up in smoke with the Coronavirus hammering the economy.



They were even an economic pipe dream when the economy was doing really well. Note, I said pipe dream, not pipe bomb!


----------



## joe sod (27 Apr 2020)

The greens are being the stupid ones now, they are looking for way too much and will kneecap the economy from any recovery from the corona virus if their demands are entertained. I think it is better that the big parties call their bluff and go for another election whenever it can be held.


----------



## Baby boomer (27 Apr 2020)

joe sod said:


> The greens are being the stupid ones now, they are looking for way too much and will kneecap the economy from any recovery from the corona virus if their demands are entertained. I think it is better that the big parties call their bluff and go for another election whenever it can be held.


You're absolutely right.  But better still, why not a government of FG, FF and like minded independents.  There's about a dozen of FG/F gene pool types who's demands wouldn't cost a fraction of what the greens want.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (27 Apr 2020)

joe sod said:


> The greens are being the stupid ones now, they are looking for way too much and will kneecap the economy from any recovery from the corona virus if their demands are entertained. I think it is better that the big parties call their bluff and go for another election whenever it can be held.


Absolutely!   I'm all for meeting our international obligations on carbon emissions but being super heroes in this regard is self indulgent at the best of times and economic madness in the current situation.   The GE was held in a completely different set of circumstances.  Surely a GE now would see common sense return and the electorate focus on pragmatic and credible strategies to some how stage a recovery from this crisis.   There would be no space for fantasy manifestos.


----------



## Purple (28 Apr 2020)

joe sod said:


> The greens are being the stupid ones now, they are looking for way too much and will kneecap the economy from any recovery from the corona virus if their demands are entertained. I think it is better that the big parties call their bluff and go for another election whenever it can be held.


What are they looking for that is so bad?
I am against their drive for organic farming as it is bad for the environment.


----------



## joe sod (24 May 2020)

I see Mary Lou Mcdonald in today's independent has more or less endorsed the IRA campaign and would have included herself personally in that campaign, (thats the snippets of the interview I picked up). She is more or less backtracking on all her work in the last few years of putting big distance between SF and the IRA, WHY ?  Is she wanting to torpedo any prospects of SF going in with FF and the hopes of some in FF to do a deal with SF. Therefore she is running away from SF being in any government for the next few years because of the dire economic situation coming down the road. SF do not want to be in government even if it means losing some of their support for now. I think they want to force FF and FG into government along with the greens (possibly). She is probably also torpedoing the greens hopes of a "left alliance" as SF are returning to hard republicanism for now. It is good for Eamon Ryan as the extremist element have now been damaged by Mary Lou. Im not a fan of SF but this is a master stroke.


----------



## Leo (25 May 2020)

joe sod said:


> She is more or less backtracking on all her work in the last few years of putting big distance between SF and the IRA, WHY ? Is she wanting to...



Probably less about what she wants and more about what the puppet masters tell her...


----------



## Purple (25 May 2020)

Leo said:


> Probably less about what she wants and more about what the puppet masters tell her...


Well she does have to do what the leadership wants.


----------



## Leper (7 Jun 2020)

Leper said:


> I'm having a Boris Johnson moment - Can we have another general election immediately please?


It's six weeks since I wrote that and several months since the general election. I'm fed up with the goings-on to try form a new government with minorities squabbling over unsquabble issues. Let the people make their minds up for them.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (11 Jun 2020)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Is there a deadline in the Constitution?
> 
> At what stage is a new election called and who makes the decision?
> 
> Brendan



Apparently some national legislation needs to be passed now so Ireland can take advantage of some EU Covid money.

This can't be done without a new Seanad.


----------



## Purple (15 Jun 2020)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Is there a deadline in the Constitution?
> 
> At what stage is a new election called and who makes the decision?
> 
> Brendan



Well it seems that the answer to the question  "How long can the forming of a government take?" is 128 days.


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Jun 2020)

They're not there yet Purple, still have to be approved by each party.


----------



## Sunny (15 Jun 2020)

Ceist Beag said:


> They're not there yet Purple, still have to be approved by each party.



It will be accepted but SF have just won the next election.....


----------



## joe sod (15 Jun 2020)

Sunny said:


> It will be accepted but SF have just won the next election.....


What about the ff grassroots, they also have to ratify this, in their eyes the greens got way too much, it's not a done deal that they will back this, not the sort of ff  grassroots guys I know of anyways. The popular assumption is that ff are most afraid of another election, but that's only the tds , the ff grassroots have nothing to lose by risking another election especially when they are already giving so much to the greens. They might be better risking an election now rather than after a few years of a very unpopular green government and carbon taxes


----------



## Purple (15 Jun 2020)

Sunny said:


> It will be accepted but SF have just won the next election.....


I dunno, if the new government can last the 5 years and the economy is doing okay then the protest vote the child killers got may dissipate.


----------



## Sunny (15 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> I dunno, if the new government can last the 5 years and the economy is doing okay then the protest vote the child killers got may dissipate.



That's a pretty big IF! There is a lot of promises in that document when we are borrowing €30 billion this year to pay for Covid and our economy will not be back to anywhere near normal until next year.... Did I read somewhere that they were looking at a sugar tax increase or something. That should make a difference!


----------



## Purple (15 Jun 2020)

Sunny said:


> Did I read somewhere that they were looking at a sugar tax increase or something.


 Sweet.


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Well it seems that the answer to the question  "How long can the forming of a government take?" is 128 days.


Looks like, if ratified by the parties, it will be 140 or 142 days, as estimates are that the new government will be signed in on Saturday 27th or Monday 29th of June.


----------



## Conan (15 Jun 2020)

The Sinn Fein strategy never changes. Oppose everything any Government proposes whilst promising everything for free. Mary Lou and her fellow travellers are in Government in Norn Ireland and we can see how (in)effective they are. But the SF strategy now is clearly not to get into Government in the Republic because they know that tough decisions will have to be made. They are much more comfortable sitting on the sidelines, carpIng.


----------



## WolfeTone (16 Jun 2020)

Conan said:


> Oppose everything any Government proposes whilst promising everything for free.



That's basically the strategy of every opposition party, with the exception of supply and confidence arrangements.


----------



## Purple (16 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> That's basically the strategy of every opposition party, with the exception of supply and confidence arrangements.


Yep, sit on the sidelines and lob in a few grenades (metaphorically speaking... nowadays).


----------



## Purple (16 Jun 2020)

I see that the centre-left parties are on 51% support (FG37%, FF14%) in the latest poll with the child killers holding at 25%.
Amongst over 65's FG get 50%, FF18% and the Child Killers 15%.
It seems that the real change that people wanted was for the two main parties to end their civil war divisions and go into government together. Thankfully that seems to be happening.
Source


----------



## WolfeTone (16 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> It seems that the real change that people wanted was for the two main parties to end their civil war divisions and go into government together.



You mean, the IT poll is the _real _mandate, and not the election last February?


----------



## Purple (16 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> You mean, the IT poll is the _real _mandate, and not the election last February?


No, the election in which the centre-left parties got the biggest share of the vote is the mandate.
(and welcome back!)


----------



## joe sod (16 Jun 2020)

I see there is opposition to this deal among the ff grassroots, 50 ff councillors have formed a group in opposition to the deal. It's far from a done deal


----------



## Drakon (21 Jun 2020)

Is Hazel Chu now opposing the PfG?

She was advocating it on Prime Time during the week but I’m sure I heard on the radio this morning that she’s opposing it. 
Also, the Green NI MLA is opposing it. It’s a bit mad that the 800 Green Party members in NI can vote for/against the PfG despite not being eligible to vote in GE2020.


----------



## Purple (22 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> Is Hazel Chu now opposing the PfG?
> 
> She was advocating it on Prime Time during the week but I’m sure I heard on the radio this morning that she’s opposing it.
> Also, the Green NI MLA is opposing it. It’s a bit mad that the 800 Green Party members in NI can vote for/against the PfG despite not being eligible to vote in GE2020.


Yea, I've a big problem with the NI Greens having a vote in this. At least the majority of the votes are in this country, unlike a certain other Party where all decisions on what they do are made in the UK.


----------



## Purple (22 Jun 2020)

Given that this is probably the most left wing and greenest programme for government in the history of the State what more do the disaffected Greens want?


----------



## Baby boomer (22 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Given that this is probably the most left wing and greenest programme for government in the history of the State what more do the disaffected Greens want?


You're missing the point!  The disaffected actually like being disaffected.  No PfG could EVER be good enough for them.  They're essentially the Whingers Before Profit crowd on a bike.


----------



## Purple (22 Jun 2020)

Baby boomer said:


> You're missing the point!  The disaffected actually like being disaffected.  No PfG could EVER be good enough for them.  They're essentially the Whingers Before Profit crowd on a bike.


I have to disagree with you; the people who would otherwise support the Shinners but they draw the line at being run by people who spent most of their life murdering children and covering up Paedophilia.


----------



## Drakon (23 Jun 2020)

The Green Party had Marc Ruffalo (clumsy American male actor) on a video conference yesterday, encouraging acceptance of the PfG.


----------



## Drakon (23 Jun 2020)

If The Greens reject the PfG, a FF/SF Grand Coalition is in the cards. They’ll need a few extra TDs, but RaeNua and Lowry spring to mind.


----------



## Purple (23 Jun 2020)

RaeNua and SF? I doubt it.


----------



## michaelm (23 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> . . what more do the disaffected Greens want?


The first time they jumped into bed with FF they brought us BER certs and banned the lightbulb.  This time you'd think they be happy with the magic beans that are banning of diesel/petrol cars, banning natural gas and oil exploration and other tomfoolery like pouring money into offshore wind.  The only thing they didn't get was a policy that all newborn babies must be eaten in order save the planet.  But I guess vegan Greens might baulk at that one.


----------



## Purple (23 Jun 2020)

michaelm said:


> The first time they jumped into bed with FF they brought us BER certs and banned the lightbulb.  This time you'd think they be happy with the magic beans that are banning of diesel/petrol cars, banning natural gas and oil exploration and other tomfoolery like pouring money into offshore wind.  The only thing they didn't get was a policy that all newborn babies must be eaten in order save the planet.  But I guess vegan Greens might baulk at that one.


BER certification was a great idea. I don't know about you but I have no problem buying light bulbs. The diesel thing was a big mistake last time out but the market it shifting to electric cars (for good or ill). I'm not a fan on banning oil exploration, although so far it's been a waste of billions for those who have looked. 
Offshore wind is also of questionable economic value. Nuclear is the only proven reliable green energy but there is an entrenched fear of it, born of ignorance, amongst most of the population. That said we already have nuclear power stations; they are in Wales.


----------



## Drakon (23 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> RaeNua and SF? I doubt it.


Sorry, using that pun from a few years ago.

Not Renua (Lucinda Creighton), but ReaNua (Michael and Danny Healy-Rae TDs, their niece that looks like Michael Jackson, their nephew, and the son “Assault & Vinegar).


----------



## Drakon (23 Jun 2020)

Wave power is the way forward. Waves and tides. 24/7.


----------



## Purple (23 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> Wave power is the way forward. Waves and tides. 24/7.


Yea, if only anyone could come up with a wave generator that actually worked.


----------



## Purple (23 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> Sorry, using that pun from a few years ago.
> 
> Not Renua (Lucinda Creighton), but ReaNua (Michael and Danny Healy-Rae TDs, their niece that looks like Michael Jackson, their nephew, and the son “Assault & Vinegar).


Ah, I'm a bit slow today (maybe the "today" is unnecessary).


----------



## PMU (23 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Yea, I've a big problem with the NI Greens having a vote in this. At least the majority of the votes are in this country, unlike a certain other Party where all decisions on what they do are made in the UK.


 I'm surprised this hasn't evoked more discussion.  The UK is no longer an EU member state and last year the EU Parliament adopted a resolution ((ref: P9_TA(2019)0031) on the dangers of foreign interference in national and EU democratic processes.  Does the intervention of the NI Greens not constitute foreign interference?  They are not in the EU.  By any standard it is trying to influence political decision making beyond one's own political sphere.  Is this really any different than e.g. Turkey's attempt in the 2017 German election to dissuade German Turks for voting for the CDU?


----------



## WolfeTone (23 Jun 2020)

PMU said:


> Does the intervention of the NI Greens not constitute foreign interference?



No. Under Irish law they are regarded as Irish citizens if they wish to be recognised as such.


In any case, it is not interference in our electoral system. It is an internal party matter. If FG or FF are concerned about it, they should pull the plug on forming a govt with them.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> No. Under Irish law they are regarded as Irish citizens if they wish to be recognised as such.


And are the Green Party members in Northern Ireland Irish citizens? They have the option of being Irish citizens but have they exercised that option?
I'm sure you are aware that having Irish citizenship doesn't entitle you to vote in this country so why does holding Irish citizenship mean that it isn't interference in our political process by people in a foreign country?

I don't see this being as big a deal as the Shinners who are actually run from the UK by a group of largely unelected (former?) terrorists but it is still concerning.



WolfeTone said:


> In any case, it is not interference in our electoral system. It is an internal party matter. If FG or FF are concerned about it, they should pull the plug on forming a govt with them.


 Delegates from a foreign country are telling elected members of our Parliament what to do and you don't think that's interference in our political process from a foreign country. How do you come to that conclusion?


----------



## Delboy (24 Jun 2020)

The Green Party are constituted as an all-Ireland party. Other parties are set up similarly and I believe more will go that route as the numbers up North continue to change.
While it's clear some in the South are concerned with that, I would guess that equal numbers are not and see it as a good thing given our 'history' and 'ties' to the North. 
For example, I wouldn't call the North a 'foreign country' but each to their own!


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> And are the Green Party members in Northern Ireland Irish citizens? They have the option of being Irish citizens but have they exercised that option?
> I'm sure you are aware that having Irish citizenship doesn't entitle you to vote in this country so why does holding Irish citizenship mean that it isn't interference in our political process by people in a foreign country?



Because they are not voting in our political process. It is an internal party matter. If the Greens, or anyone else for that matter, want to constitute to allow Tibetan monks isolated in the Himalayas become party members and have a say on whether the party leadership should accept the PFG in Ireland, then it really is their business. 
What's important is that this information has not been kept from the public. It hasn't. It may be a case that some voters were unaware of the Green Partys All-Ireland make-up, but ignorance is no defence.



Purple said:


> Delegates from a foreign country



Since when was NI a foreign country? There is only one country, Ireland, which in part is judicially administered by a foreign power, Britain, in other part , by the people of Ireland themselves. Such a part, under British administration, being recognised commonly under the title 'Northern Ireland'. 

Northern Ireland is as much a part of the Irish nation as my constituency in Dublin Central is.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Because they are not voting in our political process. It is an internal party matter. If the Greens, or anyone else for that matter, want to constitute to allow Tibetan monks isolated in the Himalayas become party members and have a say on whether the party leadership should accept the PFG in Ireland, then it really is their business.
> What's important is that this information has not been kept from the public. It hasn't. It may be a case that some voters were unaware of the Green Partys All-Ireland make-up, but ignorance is no defence.


I'm not saying it's secret. I'm saying that I have a problem with people from another country telling our elected political representatives what to do.




WolfeTone said:


> Since when was NI a foreign country? There is only one country, Ireland, which in part is judicially administered by a foreign power, Britain, in other part , by the people of Ireland themselves. Such a part, under British administration, being recognised commonly under the title 'Northern Ireland'.
> 
> Northern Ireland is as much a part of the Irish nation as my constituency in Dublin Central is.


No, Northern Ireland is part of the UK and is a different country to Ireland. You may not wish it to be so but that doesn't change the political, legal and social reality.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> There is only one country, Ireland, which in part is judicially administered by a foreign power, Britain,



You'd wonder why the constitution was modified to remove that claim then...with that amendment being carried by 94%.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

Delboy said:


> The Green Party are constituted as an all-Ireland party. Other parties are set up similarly and I believe more will go that route as the numbers up North continue to change.
> While it's clear some in the South are concerned with that, I would guess that equal numbers are not and see it as a good thing given our 'history' and 'ties' to the North.
> For example, I wouldn't call the North a 'foreign country' but each to their own!


"The South" isn't a country. "Ireland" is the name of this country.  The Shinners are run from Northern Ireland so in effect they are a foreign run party. The Greens are run from Ireland but have delegates in Northern Ireland. As a patriotic Irishman I certainly won't be voting for any party that compromises our national sovereignty by giving decision making powers to our former colonial masters.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Leo said:


> You'd wonder why the constitution was modified to remove that claim then...with that amendment being carried by 94%.



Except no such claim was ever modified. The only claim ever removed was that Irish government laid claim over the territory known as NI and as such had a right to administer there. 
But the Irish government is a different entity to the Irish Nation, which under Irish law, lays claim to the whole island - as carried by 94% in the South and I recall, some 70% of people in NI.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> I'm saying that I have a problem with people from another country telling our elected political representatives what to do.



They are not telling them what to do - as in giving them orders that they must follow, if thats what you mean? They are expressing their opinion as party members. If they were in a position to give orders that must be followed then that would be different, there would be little point in continuing with this PFG. 
They are expressing their views and recommending to other party members to follow suit. The other party members can make up their own minds. Its all perfectly normal and healthy.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> But the Irish government is a different entity to the Irish Nation, which under Irish law, lays claim to the whole island - as carried by 94% in the South and I recall, some 70% of people in NI.



No, Article 2 used to be:



> The national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas



That was removed and replaced with an entitlement for anyone born on the island to claim Irish citizenship. Allowing someone to claim citizenship and claiming a territory as your own are two very different things.

They also removed the 'pending the re-integration of the national territory' piece and replaced that with a 'firm will' to unite all under a united Ireland, specifically calling out that they are two separate jurisdictions.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> They are not telling them what to do - as in giving them orders that they must follow, if thats what you mean? They are expressing their opinion as party members. If they were in a position to give orders that must be followed then that would be different, there would be little point in continuing with this PFG.
> They are expressing their views and recommending to other party members to follow suit. The other party members can make up their own minds. Its all perfectly normal and healthy.


1/3 of the delegates are in Northern Ireland and a 2/3 majority is required to enter government. That's a controlling vote.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

Leo said:


> No, Article 2 used to be:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And article 9 of the constitution states that _"Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, a person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, who does not have, at the time of the birth of that person, at least one parent who is an Irish citizen or entitled to be an Irish citizen is not entitled to Irish citizenship or nationality, unless provided for by law"_. Therefore being born in Northern Ireland, or Ireland, doesn't confer any automatic right to citizenship unless a parent is a citizen or has an automatic right to citizenship. 
No amount of aspirational fluff changes the facts.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> No amount of aspirational fluff changes the facts.



Yep, no way the Good Friday Agreement would have been possible with any semblance of territorial claim remaining.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Ok, we are in danger of falling into ambiguous genius of the GFA, it being all things to all people, so its possible we all have different interpretations.



Leo said:


> That was removed and replaced with an entitlement for anyone born on the island to claim Irish citizenship. Allowing someone to claim citizenship and claiming a territory as your own are two very different things.



Except it wasn't. There is no entitlement for anyone born on the island of Ireland to claim Irish citizenship in Article 2. There is a right for those born on the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the "Irish Nation" which, Art 1 sets out to be inalienable, indefeasible and sovereign right to develop life, political and economic etc....



Leo said:


> They also removed the 'pending the re-integration of the national territory' piece and replaced that with a 'firm will' to unite all under a united Ireland, specifically calling out that they are two separate jurisdictions.



Yes, 'pending re-integration' implies that every Irish government is duty bound to pursue and prepare for that objective. I can see how from a Unionist perspective that would be considered aggressive or intimidating. The other controversial element of that Article was "and without prejudice to _the right of the parliament and government established by this constitution to exercise jurisdiction over the whole territory" _. Again from a Unionist perspective it is understandable the sense of hostility to this.

So those articles have been diluted with more aspirational language, yet the territorial claim remains, Art 3 "It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share _the territory of the island of Ireland" . _

But admittedly, we can go around the houses on this one until the cows come home....its just a matter of interpretation. Do you think NI is a 'foreign country'? I don't.

I suspect the Greens dont either. Come to think of it, I doubt FF do, im not sure if FG do, certainly not SF, nor the SDLP for that matter. PBP are also an all-ireland political organisation.
So my guess is that, somewhere in the region of 80% of all political persuasions, north and south, do not consider NI - or conversely, The Republic, as foreign.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Yes, 'pending re-integration' implies that every Irish government is duty bound to pursue and prepare for that objective.


Does it? I don't see how.



WolfeTone said:


> So my guess is that, somewhere in the region of 80% of all political persuasions, north and south, do not consider NI - or conversely, The Republic, as foreign.


 I always felt that the Shinners regarded this country as foreign. They only recognised our sovereignty recently. In fact they regarded our police and army as legitimate targets until recently.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> There is a right for those born on the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the "Irish Nation"



Ah, you're making the mistake of interpreting nation as synonymous with state. They're very different things. A nation is conceptual, refers to a grouping of people, it has no territory. A sovereign state on the other hand generally has territory, a government, internationally recognised borders, etc..



WolfeTone said:


> Yes, 'pending re-integration' implies that every Irish government is duty bound to pursue and prepare for that objective.



That's some leap. The GFA watered down the previous wording of re-integration being a target to being something that might happen only if the majority of both jurisdictions wanted it. 



WolfeTone said:


> But admittedly, we can go around the houses on this one until the cows come home....its just a matter of interpretation. Do you think NI is a 'foreign country'? I don't.



What I might wish for has little bearing on what constitutes a country under international law. So I do recognise it as a separate state, as do our own government, and most of the world. Is there a country that does not recognise it as such?


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Does it? I don't see how.



Because it suggests it is to happen? And because it was in the constitution, an Irish government could not, legally, take a position contrary to it.
It might be of interest to know why, since partition and until after the GFA, that there was never an official Head of State visit between Ireland and Britain, was because no Irish government could permit its Head of State to visit the Head of State while the government of Britain was occupying illegally the territory of the country. Ditto, the British Government, it could not sanction a visit of its Head of State to Ireland while Ireland made, in its view, an illegal claim to administer law in what it claimed to be its territory.

What the GFA has done, is remove the dispute over the right of administering law in NI, but it has not removed the territorial claim, laid out now is aspirational manner - as is, its 'for the people to decide', rather than government being obligated.
Its is political obfuscation at its best. 

In the end, it is all a matter of interpretation. Do you consider NI as foreign? I do not.




Purple said:


> I always felt that the Shinners regarded this country as foreign. They only recognised our sovereignty recently. In fact they regarded our police and army as legitimate targets until recently.



I don't get that. The Shinners are as Irish as you or me. How Irish people can be regarded as foreign, or regard other Irish people, in their own country is beyond me. 
We can dispute the legitimacy of the State, as in the Civil War, but we are all still Irish.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Because it suggests it is to happen? And because it was in the constitution, an Irish government could not, legally, take a position contrary to it.
> It might be of interest to know why, since partition and until after the GFA, that there was never an official Head of State visit between Ireland and Britain, was because no Irish government could permit its Head of State to visit the Head of State while the government of Britain was occupying illegally the territory of the country. Ditto, the British Government, it could not sanction a visit of its Head of State to Ireland while Ireland made, in its view, an illegal claim to administer law in what it claimed to be its territory.
> 
> What the GFA has done, is remove the dispute over the right of administering law in NI, but it has not removed the territorial claim, laid out now is aspirational manner - as is, its 'for the people to decide', rather than government being obligated.
> ...


There is no territorial claim over Northern Ireland in our constitution. There is an aspiration, but no claim.
I aspire to sleep with Anne Hathaway, I make no claim that it will happen and if I meet her I won't attempt to coerce her into sleeping with me.


----------



## Firefly (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Do you consider NI as foreign? I do not.


The people living there may see themselves as Irish or British and that's fair enough, but they live in the UK which is foreign


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Leo said:


> A nation is conceptual,



I agree



Leo said:


> refers to a grouping of people, it has no territory



Clearly this nation does, when it refers to its islands and seas?



Leo said:


> That's some leap



I dont see how? I seem to recall Unionists getting quite vexed over it for that exact purpose that every Irish government was bound under Bunreacht na hEireann to effectively pursue re-integration of NI with the South.



Leo said:


> What I might wish for has little bearing on what constitutes a country under international law. So I do recognise it as a separate state, as do our own government, and most of the world. Is there a country that does not recognise it as such?



I didn't ask what you 'wish' for, I asked you what you thought. Do you think NI is a foreign country?

I also recognise NI as a separate State to the Irish State. I do not recognise it as a _foreign_ country. It is part of the country and nation of Ireland, no different to Cork, Galway or Dublin. It is legally administered by foreign State (btw I do not consider British people to be foreign either, but rather its State to be a foreign State - but lets not go down that rabbit hole!)

The Irish State has ceded its right to administer law and order in that jurisdiction to another State. However, the Nation, it being all its people on this island, and further afield, are not foreign, they are Irish (if they so wish to be), and that in itself cannot be ceded by any Irish government (the inalienable, indefeasible and sovereign right as set out in the constitution).

As the Proclamation stated, it cannot be extinguished except by the destruction of the Irish people. 

So yes, its all aspirational rather than legally set, but its significance should not be underestimated. The _Emma De Souza _case is a good example of this. 
So if a political party, like the Greens, constitute themselves for all-ireland membership, I cannot see any difficulty in anyone who, under Bunreacht na hEireann, would qualify as being part of the Irish Nation (whether they themselves want to be or not) excercising an opinon on the internal political affairs of the party that they are members of.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> There is no territorial claim over Northern Ireland in our constitution. There is an aspiration, but no claim.
> I aspire to sleep with Anne Hathaway, I make no claim that it will happen and if I meet her I won't attempt to coerce her into sleeping with me.



Yes, but you can claim it did happen and will happen again (pending your re-integration with Anne Hathaway) ....which I suspect may invoke the ire of Anne Hathaway herself (as our territorial claim did with Unionists). 
Aspiring to be part of unified communion with Anne Hathaway, through exclusively peaceful and consentual means, is your perogative and I will stand in unison with you, wherever you go, to uphold the right to hold that aspiration.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> So if a political party, like the Greens, constitute themselves for all-ireland membership, I cannot see any difficulty in anyone who, under Bunreacht na hEireann, would qualify as being part of the Irish Nation (whether they themselves want to be or not) excercising an opinon on the internal political affairs of the party that they are members of.


And you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. My opinion is that only those who are entitled to vote in this country should have a say in what is done by our elected members of parliament.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Yes, but you can claim it did happen and will happen again (pending your re-integration with Anne Hathaway) ....which I suspect may invoke the ire of Anne Hathaway herself (as our territorial claim did with Unionists).


While I could claim that is would, alas, be factually incorrect to do so and may well cause indue and unjust stress and upset to the other party.



WolfeTone said:


> Aspiring to be part of unified communion with Anne Hathaway, through exclusively peaceful and consentual means, is your perogative and I will stand in unison with you, wherever you go, to uphold the right to hold that aspiration.


I appreciate your support; we can all dream.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Firefly said:


> The people living there may see themselves as Irish or British and that's fair enough, but they live in the UK which is foreign



If I join FF or FG and move to Liverpool to live, do I relinquish my right to have a say in the affairs of the political party as a paid member?


----------



## Firefly (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> If I join FF or FG and move to Liverpool to live, do I relinquish my right to have a say in the affairs of the political party as a paid member?


No idea and it's not the point I am making. If you move to Liverpool you are still Irish but you are living in a foreign country.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Firefly said:


> No idea and it's not the point I am making. If you move to Liverpool you are still Irish but you are living in a foreign country.



_Firefly, _you seem to suggest that a persons nationality is the issue, not necessarily where they live? _Purple _was suggesting that where a person lived, and not necessarily their nationality, was the primary issue.

There is little more to be gained here. I can be an American citizen living in Ireland and join most political parties, or I can be Irish and living in America and join most Irish political parties. I can be Nigerian and living in Italy and still join most Irish political parties - if that is what their constitutions allow them to do. There is no impact on our electoral processes. The vote was taken and counted, that is not changing until the next election.
The real scope of this issue can be measured in the traction it is gaining in the media in general. Which is zero. Its not an issue.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> _Firefly, _you seem to suggest that a persons nationality is the issue, not necessarily where they live? _Purple _was suggesting that where a person lived, and not necessarily their nationality, was the primary issue.


I'm suggesting that only people who are entitled to vote in an election should then get to decide what their elected representatives do. I don't want people from China or Russia or the USA or the UK having a say in our political process.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> I'm suggesting that only people who are entitled to vote in an election should then get to decide what their elected representatives do. I don't want people from China or Russia or the USA or the UK having a say in our political process.



Even if they live and work and pay taxes here? 

I accept my last comment about Nigerians in Italy was a little too flippant. I would imagine most political parties have some restrictions in place for party membership. Being resident in Ireland, or an Irish citizen I would imagine being the basic criteria for party membership.

Excluding people who are not yet entitled to vote would be undemocratic. A foreign national living here without a right to vote is still affected by the laws administered here, such a person should be allowed a political channel to voice their concerns. Party membership allows that.
As for NI, most political parties have policies set on relations, political, economic that may have direct impact on the people living there. I think its only reasonable then that those residing in NI have a say in the decision making processes of those political parties here. 
As the constitution recognises, they are not foreign, but part of the Irish Nation. They may be governed by a foreign state, but they are not foreigners in their own country. 

The easy answer to your issue is, to allow those residing in NI to have Dáil representation.


----------



## Firefly (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> _Firefly, _you seem to suggest that a persons nationality is the issue, not necessarily where they live?


I'm not saying there is any issue, perhaps read my posts again.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Firefly said:


> I'm not saying there is any issue, perhaps read my posts again.



No thanks. There is an issue, _Purple_ has highlighted it. I'll stick to that , rather than  involve me in your non-issue then, if that's ok.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Clearly this nation does, when it refers to its islands and seas?



Where does the nation claim the islands and seas as sovereign territory?



WolfeTone said:


> I dont see how? I seem to recall Unionists getting quite vexed over it for that exact purpose that every Irish government was bound under Bunreacht na hEireann to effectively pursue re-integration of NI with the South.



Obviously they wanted to go further and have any notion of the possibility of, or more importantly machanism for the re-unification to be removed.



WolfeTone said:


> I didn't ask what you 'wish' for, I asked you what you thought. Do you think NI is a foreign country?



I know for sure it is considered as a separate state by our own government and I'm not aware of any foreign government who think otherwise. Now of course I'm sticking to context and taking the strict definition of country as being a state, sovereign state, or nation state. The good folks of Ballyhoura call their region 'Ballyhoura Country', just like people talk about various regions as 'Wine Country', calling them country does not make them a separate state. 



WolfeTone said:


> As the Proclamation stated, it cannot be extinguished except by the destruction of the Irish people.



Yes, because it's simply a notion, it isn't tangible.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Leo said:


> Where does the nation claim the islands and seas as sovereign territory?



It doesn't explicitly claim it, but implicitly it does. It removes the administration of law by Irish government, by the Irish State (typically a hostile act if another State lays claim to a territory), and instead invokes the rights of the people to lay claim to all of the territory, including islands and seas, by virtue of birthright, born on the island of Ireland - as recognised internationally, the whole thing, not just the 26-county republic.



Leo said:


> I know for sure it is considered as a separate state by our own government and I'm not aware of any foreign government who think otherwise.



I consider NI a separate State. It is governed by a foreign State and is the creation of a foreign State.  I don't consider the people living there as separate. Or foreign. I consider them every bit as much Irish as anyone else. Some of them may choose otherwise. That is their perogative. Legally, they have the exact same right to invoke their national identity as anyone else.

My question to you was, do you think NI is a foreign country?



Leo said:


> Yes, because it's simply a notion, it isn't tangible.



Absolutely. As is being Irish itself, or British, or Japanese or whatever. A totally artificial, abstract human construct developed in the mind.

It is important though, when it comes to politics of identity, profoundly so. Much more profound, in my opinion, than the machinations of any particular State.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Even if they live and work and pay taxes here?
> 
> I accept my last comment about Nigerians in Italy was a little too flippant. I would imagine most political parties have some restrictions in place for party membership. Being resident in Ireland, or an Irish citizen I would imagine being the basic criteria for party membership.
> 
> ...


 You are conflating law and aspiration. 



WolfeTone said:


> The easy answer to your issue is, to allow those residing in NI to have Dáil representation.


 Sure, when that aspiration becomes a reality (and the bombs start going off in Dublin).


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Sure, when that aspiration becomes a reality (and the bombs start going off in Dublin).



Never surrender to the terrorists.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> You are conflating law and aspiration.



Can you show me the law that the Green party are breaking by allowing its members in NI have a say in what the Green party does? 
Or is your desire to prevent such interference just an aspiration of your own?


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Never surrender to the terrorists.


So don't support the Shinners. Is that what you are saying?


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Can you show me the law that the Green party are breaking by allowing its members in NI have a say in what the Green party does?


 Where did I say they were breaking the law? In case you don't realise it I was responding to the post I quoted. 



WolfeTone said:


> Or is your desire to prevent such interference just an aspiration of your own?


 I'm not trying to stop it. I'm saying that I don't like it.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> So don't support the Shinners. Is that what you are saying?



No. Support whoever you wish in good conscience.


----------



## Ceist Beag (24 Jun 2020)

Well we can see that Wolfie is back with a bang ... another thread completely gone down a rabbit hole...


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Ceist Beag said:


> Well we can see that Wolfie is back with a bang ... another thread completely gone down a rabbit hole...



I beg your pardon? Exactly at what point did I bring this thread down a rabbit hole?

If you hadn't noticed - which appears to be the case  - I'm not exactly engaging by myself here. The question of Green Party members in NI interfering in the election processes here was raised. I merely gave my views with sight on the Constitution and the rights of Irish people. It is wholly pertinent to that issue.
You may be better identifying posters who quote me for no reason, have no opinion, why quote me?  Posts #85 and #91 and #95 are useful.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

Ceist Beag said:


> Well we can see that Wolfie is back with a bang ... another thread completely gone down a rabbit hole...


Well we are talking about the Greens and their process for approving going into government so...


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> No. Support whoever you wish in good conscience.


Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to terrorists.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to terrorists.



Watch out! The rabbit-hole police are about!


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Watch out! The rabbit-hole police are about!


Well if things don't go as planned and the mooted FG/FF/Green coalition falls before the starting line then there's a chance that the terrorists from the UK will be part of a new government.


----------



## Leo (24 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> It doesn't explicitly claim it, but implicitly it does.



Care to quote that section? I can't seem to find it. 



WolfeTone said:


> the rights of the people to lay claim to all of the territory, including islands and seas, by virtue of birthright, born on the island of Ireland - as recognised internationally, the whole thing, not just the 26-county republic.



It entitles anyone born on the island of Ireland to be part of a notional grouping of people! No more. That is in no way a claim on any territory. The very fact that is is called out as the 'island' of Ireland is an acknowledgement of the existence of the two separate states. 



WolfeTone said:


> My question to you was, do you think NI is a foreign country?



As we're talking constitutions and entities recognised internationally as states, in that context Northern Ireland absolutely is a foreign country.


----------



## PMU (25 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> No. Under Irish law they are regarded as Irish citizens if they wish to be recognised as such.


This isn't correct.  There is a lot of misinformation on this topic and no one has a right under Irish law to be an Irish citizen just because you wish to be recognised as one.  If you or your parent were born on the island of Ireland before 2005, you are an Irish citizen. If not your right to Irish citizenship is subject to the provisions of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 and associated regulations. The Department of Foreign Affairs makes this clear.   https://dfa.ie/citizenship/.

But even if the NI Greens have Irish citizenship or 'identify' as Irish this is neither here nor there.   Citizenship in itself is not a justification for meddling. In 2006 Russia granted citizenship to various Abkhazians and South Ossetians in Georgia, thereby creating a 'Russian' population to 'protect' and thereby justify the subsequent Russian incursion into Georgia.   Russia's annexation of the Crimea was similarly justified.



WolfeTone said:


> In any case, it is not interference in our electoral system. It is an internal party matter. If FG or FF are concerned about it, they should pull the plug on forming a govt with them.


It's not an internal party matter.  Clare Bailey has called for the rejection of the proposed programme for government. Apart from the absurdity of Ms. Bailey advocating policies for which she will never have to pay taxes to implement, it is an example of  'soft power', i.e. trying to influence the political sphere in another country by agenda framing, obtaining a preferred outcome etc., by a political actor in a non-EU state.  It's no different than the Turkish president asking Turks in Germany to boycott the CDU in Germany's 2017 election.  And while Ms Bailey lives in a democracy, it still is foreign influence; it may not be malign but it still is unacceptable.  It just provides a model that could be cloned by non-free states to justify interference in EU affairs and in the affairs of EU member states.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (25 Jun 2020)

Thought experiment.  The Greens happen to be organised along all Ireland lines. But in fact their movement is global.  So imagine they were organised at a World or even European level, which logically is consistent with their ideology.  How would we feel if the World Green Movement had a vote on the PfG?  It wouldn't be unconstitutional.


----------



## Firefly (25 Jun 2020)

PMU said:


> Clare Bailey has called for the rejection of the proposed programme for government. Apart from the absurdity of Ms. Bailey advocating policies for which she will never have to pay taxes to implement, it is an example of  'soft power', i.e. trying to influence the political sphere in another country by agenda framing, obtaining a preferred outcome etc., by a political actor in a non-EU state.  It's no different than the Turkish president asking Turks in Germany to boycott the CDU in Germany's 2017 election.  And while Ms Bailey lives in a democracy, it still is foreign influence; it may not be malign but it still is unacceptable.  It just provides a model that could be cloned by non-free states to justify interference in EU affairs and in the affairs of EU member states.



I agree


----------



## WolfeTone (25 Jun 2020)

Well, it looks like the formation of the new government is imminent. 
I wish them well.


----------



## Drakon (26 Jun 2020)

There are 700-800 Green Party members in Northern Ireland. None of them have a vote in Dáil elections. 
There are about 1950 Green Party members on the island. 
If every member in the Republic voted ‘Yes’ and every member in NI voted Not, the PfG would be defeated. 
This should not be.


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> This should not be.



Are you conflating the PfG as having some legislative basis?

Has anyone here actually read, or looked at the PfG?

I would implore you to read the part about a Shared Island, here is a snippet:

*Mission: A Shared Island*
_We are committed to working with all communities and traditions on the island to build consensus 
around a shared future....

We will: 
• Establish a Unit within the Department of An Taoiseach to work towards a consensus on a 
shared island. This unit will examine the political, social, economic and cultural 
considerations underpinning a future in which all traditions are mutually respected. 
• Ensure that the Northern Ireland deal, New Decade, New Approach is implemented in full. 
We acknowledge that full implementation of this agreement and its predecessors is crucial, 
and we will work with others to achieve that goal.
• Continue to utilise the All Island Civic Dialogue as a forum for addressing Brexit-related 
issues and other challenges arising for the island.
• Enhance, develop and deepen all aspects of north-south cooperation and the all-island 
economy_..._and on and on and on_

Item No. 1 on the agenda of some here is to stop those Northern Greens from having a say in their own party's participation in a government that promises to interfere in their daily lives!

Such a mindset derives from the playbook and mindset of fringe extremist republican/loyalist flag-waving baboons. The politics of exclusion and division, rather than inclusion and co-operation.

Trying to exclude Irish Green Party members from their right to vote in Green party affairs is guaranteed to pull the Green Party out of government formation. They are under no obligation to participate if they choose not to.
My understanding is that the Green 'No' vote is less than 250 (and not necessarily Northern)


----------



## Drakon (26 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Are you conflating the PfG as having some legislative basis?



No. For me it does not sit well that people that do not have a vote in this state can vote to accept or reject a PfG.



WolfeTone said:


> Has anyone here actually read, or looked at the PfG?


I haven’t. In fact, this is as far as I got with your post.


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> For me it does not sit well that people that do not have a vote in this state can vote to accept or reject a PfG.



That's fine if you think that way, but I can assure you it is perfectly above board, legal, and broadly welcome across the political spectrum.



Drakon said:


> I haven't



That's fine too. It explains a lot.


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

From wiki

"the William Drennan Cumann in Queens University, *Belfast*, and the Watty Graham Cumann in UU Magee, *Derry*, which subsequently became *official units of Fianna Fáil's youth wing, attaining full membership and voting rights,* and attained official voting delegates at the 2012 Árd Fheis. On 23 February 2008, it was announced that a former Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) councillor, Colonel Harvey Bicker, had joined Fianna Fáil.[73]"


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Jun 2020)

FG have voted yes. Interesting breakdown from RTE.

Announcing the result of the Fine Gael vote this afternoon, Chair of the party's executive council Fiona O'Connor said there was a turnout of 95%, with 674 votes cast.
Among the parliamentary party, 90% voted in favour of the deal, with 10% voting against it.
The party's constituency delegates voted 71% in favour, while the party's council of local representatives voted 57% in favour of the deal.
The party's executive council voted 85% in favour.









						FF, FG and Green Party agree historic coalition deal
					

The Green Party has joined both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in giving its backing to the programme for government, paving the way for a historic coalition between the parties.




					www.rte.ie


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

Pretty resounding vote of approval there. 
I could be wrong, but my inkling is that the FF vote will be a lot closer than Green vote.


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Jun 2020)

FF back it with 74% in favour


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

odyssey06 said:


> FF back it with 74% in favour



Resounding result also. Just one more to go. Hopefully this time tomorrow we will have a new government in place.


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Pretty resounding vote of approval there.
> I could be wrong, but my inkling is that the FF vote will be a lot closer than Green vote.



The Green vote for yes at 76% was higher than the FF vote of 74%...

Green Party members voted to endorse the programme with 76% favouring the deal – above the two-thirds that was needed for the endorsement of the deal. 








						It's a yes: FF, FG and Greens to enter coalition after members back government deal
					

Martin can expect to be elected taoiseach when the Dáil meets in the Convention Centre tomorrow.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## RichInSpirit (26 Jun 2020)

Relieved and delighted that a new Government is formed.


----------



## WolfeTone (26 Jun 2020)

odyssey06 said:


> The Green vote for yes at 76% was higher than the FF vote of 74%...



Pretty resounding all round. Well done to each of the party leaders. I wish them all well. 

How long before we can start deriding them?


----------



## Drakon (27 Jun 2020)

The Shinners have started deriding them already. 
“People voted for change”, they’re claiming. If my memory serves, there was no ‘change’ option on my ballot paper. Just a list of TDs.

“Our voters are being ignored”, is another narrative they’re trying to generate. Well, some of those voters transferred to FF, FG and the Greens, so they’re are not being ignored.

“We had the highest percentage vote, we should govern”, is another mis-informed line. 
HELLO, this is the Dáil, not Westminster. It doesn’t work like that in Ireland. We’ve got PR. 51% of the people gave their first preference to the government parties.

Maybe someone could correct me, but AFAIK FF “won” (as in highest percentage vote and most TDs) in every election from 1932-2007.
Do SF think think FF should have been in government all that time?


----------



## Leper (27 Jun 2020)

After the formalities today we'll have a new Taoiseach and a new government. At last, we have an electorate that is not 100% loyal to a particular political party. If I were Micheál Martin or Leo Varadkar I'd be cracking the whip to get the government working fast and well. Sinn Féin are snapping at their heels and public opinion matters more than it ever had. 

The government has five years to produce the goods and any sensible politician would be eying his position for this day five years time. More of the same is not an option anymore.


----------



## WolfeTone (27 Jun 2020)

It is interesting times ahead. The dynamic has changed now insofar that MM can now go directly head to head against MLMc.
I consider MM an effective orator, and his disdain toward SF is palpable.
It remains to be seen how much he relies on IRA atrocities of the past to keep SF vote at bay. I think he done this effectively in the past. I'm not sure how effective a strategy it is anymore given nearly all SF TDs were never in the IRA (Dessie Ellis is the only one I can think of).
I would suggest it a poor strategy now. The election results in Feb point to a increasing detachment growing numbers of people now have from the coalface of the Troubles. This is understandable. Of my generation, brutal atrocities etched into the conscience, such as Jean McConville and Joan Connolly, are of time past for younger people who will have an increasing sense of detachment from the past and, naturally, a greater interest in the future.

A small observation; Shortly after the David Cullinane "Up the 'Ra" incident and the subsequent outrage, I was in a well known tourist pub in Co Clare at end of February where a political/historical conversation commenced between a 60yr old English friend and a group of college students. With drink involved the conversation was a mish-mash of opinion, but the most striking observation for me was the frequent "up the 'ra" chants by these students. Shortly afterwards, at my sons U14 soccer training I heard the chant amongst a group of boys. It would appear "up the' ra" was trending. This is something that, outside of hardcore republican circles, would not have been tolerated in social settings where I grew up. But here it was, nonchantantly thrown about by young adults.

It is a detachment from a time gone by. While such atrocities should never of course be forgotten, nor will they be, I hope for all our sakes it is the present and future that dominates proceedings in the Dáil as it is clear to my mind that with one in six people not even born here, the priorities are very different, if not necessarily now, but in the very near future.

Those that lean too much on the past as crutch to hold themselves up will quickly become irrelevant.


----------



## Drakon (27 Jun 2020)

I think the popularity of “ooh aah up the ‘ra” stems from the hugely popular “ooh aah Paul McGrath”.


----------



## Drakon (27 Jun 2020)

Both of which are entirely different to Gina G’s “ooh aah, just a little bit”.


----------



## joe sod (27 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> but the most striking observation for me was the frequent "up the 'ra" chants by these students. Shortly afterwards, at my sons U14 soccer training I heard the chant amongst a group of boys. It would appear "up the' ra" was trending. This is something that, outside of hardcore republican circles, would not have been tolerated in social settings where I grew up. But here it was, nonchantantly thrown about by young adults.



Its the typical anti establishment unthinking populist stuff that the young always want to associate with, its because the violence and murder more or less stopped in the mid 90s, therefore the rawness and brutality of that is now forgotten by the young, they never directly experienced it in the first place. Whats left are the slogans and the chants that have been basically disarmed because the IRA is no longer killing and maiming.


----------



## Drakon (28 Jun 2020)

It’s taken 130+ days but we finally have a government.
51% of first preferences, 84 TDs in the government and the Taoiseach elected by 93 TDs.

I don’t think anyone wanted a second #GE2020. It would have been unnecessary and C19 would have made it extra complicated.

It’s good to see that there was no faffing about once the PfG had been approved.


----------



## WolfeTone (28 Jun 2020)

joe sod said:


> Its the typical anti establishment unthinking populist stuff that the young always want to associate with,



Of course, I'm only thinking that when the Dáil gets down to business that if MM relies on the past to rebuff SF, which he has done effectively before, I'm thinking it won't wash with ever increasing numbers of the electorate. Time, and the fact the current SF TDs have had no participation in the IRA (save Dessie Ellis) is bringing forth that detachment. 
I'm looking forward to the bouts between the opposition and government on the social economic and environmental issues of the day.


----------



## joe sod (28 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I'm thinking it won't wash with ever increasing numbers of the electorate.


yes you are correct, do you mean never overestimate the intelligence and integrity of the voter? also MM has been the main target of SF in their social media attacks, they have really focussed in on him personally. Leo Varadker has also been targetted but not to the same extent as MM


----------



## Drakon (28 Jun 2020)

MM won’t attack SF over their IRA past anymore because he doesn’t need to. He’s in government now. SF will attack him because that’s what the opposition do. MM will defend himself and the government’s performance. 
When you’re in opposition you attack. 
When you’re in government you defend (and there’s some counter attacking).  But the latter will be simple rebuffing of the opposition’s alternative policy. 

The dynamic has changed.


----------



## joe sod (28 Jun 2020)

Drakon said:


> SF will attack him because that’s what the opposition do.


No thats not what opposition does thats what SF does, normal opposition focuses on the total governments policies that should be on FF, FG and the greens in total. However SF will continue to focus personally on MM, less on FG and Leo V and not at all on the green party. The SF strategy which is obvious is to focus personally on MM so as to try and isolate him within FF.


----------



## Drakon (28 Jun 2020)

As always, SF have their own internal problems. The present ones are a bigger concern. 
Cllr Holohan (the Conor McGregor wannabe), who was suspended from the party earlier this year, has been endorsed by the party to run for deputy mayor. 
SF-LGBT are “angry” because of his racist and homophobic tweets, podcasts, etc. 

But, if you’re a populist party and there’s no election in the offing, and the guy can pull in the votes, just turn a blind eye to it all.


----------



## Peanuts20 (29 Jun 2020)

Interesting that it is a young cabinet, most in their 30's or 40's. Makes me feel old if I'm honest but a bit of a clean broom in many respects won't do any harm

As for all this garbage about the west not having a minister, I don't care, I'd sooner see them selected for their competence then their location but obviously MM and LV can't come out and say that


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Of course, I'm only thinking that when the Dáil gets down to business that if MM relies on the past to rebuff SF, which he has done effectively before, I'm thinking it won't wash with ever increasing numbers of the electorate. Time, and the fact the current SF TDs have had no participation in the IRA (save Dessie Ellis) is bringing forth that detachment.


I think the issue is that the Army Council of the IRA still have a controlling influence over the Shinners. 
It's like a business that was set up by the Mafia but conducts itself within the law and has a properly constituted Board but the Board still really take orders from the Don. Some will point out that the business is run properly. Others will point out who is really in charge.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2020)

I'm happy to see the new government formed. I think the 3 leaders are people of integrity. I'm also glad to see Eileen Flynn nominated to the Senate. She's a fantastic example for any young person.


----------



## WolfeTone (29 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> I've a big problem with the NI Greens having a vote in this.





Purple said:


> I'm happy to see the new government formed.



No problem anymore with NI Greens having a say? 



Purple said:


> I think the issue is that the Army Council of the IRA still have a controlling influence over the Shinners



If that is the case, we are talking about the _present _not the past, in which case it would be a pertinent issue. 
Perhaps I am doing MM a disservice.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> No problem anymore with NI Greens having a say?


 None of their TD's are living in a foreign country and it is their TD's who are in power.



WolfeTone said:


> If that is the case, we are talking about the _present _not the past, in which case it would be a pertinent issue.
> Perhaps I am doing MM a disservice.


 That is the accusation which is levelled at the Shinners. The fact that they continue to celebrate IRA terrorists is a stain on their character and on the character of every person who supports them, but it isn't the main issue with them holding power.


----------



## WolfeTone (29 Jun 2020)

Purple said:


> None of their TD's are living in a foreign country and it is their TD's who are in power.



I know. 
They got there, in part, from party members endorsing the PfG, including members from NI having a say in that vote. 
I'm glad you appear no longer to see that as a big problem.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I know.
> They got there, in part, from party members endorsing the PfG, including members from NI having a say in that vote.
> I'm glad you appear no longer to see that as a big problem.


I do see party members (any party) from a foreign country, including any part of the UK, having a say in our political process. I thought I was clear on that.


----------



## Drakon (29 Jun 2020)

Peanuts20 said:


> As for all this garbage about the west not having a minister...



The West’s awake with parochialism! Happens ever cabinet appointment but I think it’s being bred out over time. Transport and communications have greatly improved since 1937. The need for a local minister is not relevant now. 
Anyway, there’ll be a reshuffle in 30 months. 

IIRC, the 14,500 FF votes were being returned on a constituency-by-constituency basis so that MM would get a feel for the effort put in by the TDs in getting a yes vote. Maybe the likes of deputy leader Dara Calleary hadn’t a resounding yes count?

Sometimes I wonder if people would prefer 26 ministers. One for each county.


----------

