Does any one else find it patronising...

S

shnaek

Guest
..when politicians and members of the media refer to the electorate as 'confused' about issues?
It really aggravates me when I hear people talking about this referendum result saying that people were confused (and in general they are referring to that 80% that voted in favour). Unlike politicians the Irish public are well able to take an issue, spend a few days on it, and make a decision. We do not need months of talking b*ll*x before coming to a conclusion and then not implementing it.
It is the politicians that are confused, not the people. We know what we want. Decisions and action, not reviews and never ending debates.
 
Spot on

I found it very irritating to hear No campaigners explain how confused voters were and that people didn't understand what they were voting for. This talk of rushing it through without having months of endless discussion was only a way of saying they didn't want it put to the electorate at all.
 
Confused

I wouldn't quibble with the result, even though I disagree with it. I do think a proprotion of the people who voted on both sides did so for the wrong reasons, and even on the day of polling I was hearing scarily naive justifications for voting yes. but with an 80/20 result you have to accept that it's the will of the people, and part of living in a democracy is that you sometimes find yourself in the minority.

I will say this, it's not surprising that "some" people end up confused, when you have a minister who uses a constantly changing rationale for having the vote, and talks about "floods of immigrants" and "citizenship tourists", without having any figures to back up the claims.

From the start I've been more concerned about the long term impact of this vote on the integration of future immigrants than I have been about the issue itself.

What I do find insulting is the talk about voter apathy as if that were the fault of the voters. McDowell wrote in the Sunday Indo that there was a need to tackle voter appathy through education etc.

Never a glimmer of recognition that the actions of the people we elect might be contributing to the apathy.
Never a recognition that for all their talk the major parties who will form a government are basically the same. And as such the value of the vote has diminished.

-Rd
 
Re: Confused

daltonr

I never heard McDowell using the term "floods of immigrants". Did you? If so, where and when?
 
Floods

Tommy,

I've requested transcripts of McDowell's interviews in the Run Up to the Election from RTE and from the Last Word, hopefully that will be possible. I'll keep you posted.

given my Listening habbits the comments would either have been on Morning Ireland, News At One, or the Last Word.

He may have used the word Tide rather than Flood. I'll have a read of his Dail Speech also (The If You're Racist, Vote No Speech). And I'll get back to you.

As recently as Saturday or Sunday (post results) on Radio One, he was still stating that this had been necessary to stop us being "inundated" by "Citizenship Tourists".

If I manage to get the transcripts I'll post all of his comments.

You're absolutely right, It's important that I don't misquote him. I'd hate to join him in the game of playing fast and loose with facts.

I'll post a response as soon as I have more details.

-Rd
 
can't have been tide as it also goes out

so must of been flood (id he saidc it)

but people also hear exactly what they wan't to hear
 
re: confused public

If memory serves, didn't the public get 'confused' about the Nice treaty. They got it right eventually on the second try and the Govt was happy. (And we all lived happily ever after :lol )

Sluice

p.s. love the previous comment re tides vs flood!!
 
Facts

DaltonR - would you consider the 11,000 families who had children here (between the time of the Irish govt withdrawing application forms for residency based on an irish born child and the Supremem court ruling on such -in all this time span was less than 2 years )and applied for leave to remain as parents of irish born children as a 'flood' and would you consider them to be 'citizen tourists'????

Because to me, such a huge amount of people applying for residency in such a short period suggests that our laws on residency and on citizenship were, and are being very much abused. The Supreme court sorted out 1 of those problems and now the referendum has given the opportunity to sort out the other.

I think the people were clear in their own minds on the referendum - and I do find it extremely insulting to hear the NO side saying that those who voted YES were confused or unaware of the issues involved.
 
Re: Bertie Speech

An Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern T.D., said that, the constitutional referendum on citizenship has a single and straightforward purpose. There is a loophole in our citizenship law that is open to abuse. Voting Yes will close that loophole. Ireland is the only EU country that allows an unrestricted right to citizenship at birth. The Government’s proposals are to change that.

The purpose of the constitutional amendment is to replace an unqualified right to citizenship at birth regardless of how briefly either of the parents of a child has been in Ireland with a qualified but liberal provision for citizenship. Under the legislation that the Government will enact if the referendum is passed, a child either of whose parents has been in Ireland for three of the previous four years, will be entitled to citizenship.

In recent days unfounded claims have been made alleging that children born in Ireland might be rendered stateless as a result. This is totally untrue. Any child born in Ireland who would for some reason not be entitled to citizenship in any other state would now and would continue to be automatically entitled to Irish citizenship.

Another unfounded claim is that this change in our constitution would affect the human rights of children. To the contrary, every person in Ireland regardless of whether they are citizens or not is fully entitled under national and international law to have their human rights fully respected.

It is a separate matter for the people of every country to decide to whom and under what circumstances they grant citizenship.

The reality is that people with no connection to Ireland, and even with no intention to live here, have arranged for their children to be born in Ireland so as to have Irish citizenship. This is done, often travelling during the late stages of pregnancy at great risk to themselves and their unborn child. Irish citizenship has also been put forward as a reason why such parents should be allowed stay in other EU countries. This is something that reflects on every Irish citizen, present and future.

This loophole in Irish citizenship law was clearly shown last week in the Opinion of the Advocate General to Europe’s highest court, the European Court of Justice, in the Chen case. Clearly the Government’s decision to propose this referendum to go ahead now was a prudent one.

Ireland today is the most globalised economy in the world. Our continuing success depends on us being an open and welcoming country for people to come to live and work in. As a Government we have pursued an open, but considered, approach to immigration. Some 47,500 work permits were issued last year to non-EU nationals. Immigration has enriched Irish society as a whole, not just economically, but socially and culturally as well.

Ireland will continue to have one of the most liberal citizenship laws in Europe after a YES vote. A YES vote will not remove citizenship from anyone who had it or was entitled to it prior to the enactment of the amendment.

A YES vote will not prevent those who do not acquire citizenship at birth from acquiring it at a later stage, after a number of years residency in the country.

A YES vote will not affect the Good Friday Agreement.

What a YES vote on June 11th will do is close a loophole in Irish citizenship law and protect its integrity and value into the future.
 
Back
Top