You are being disingenuous in claiming the likes of the US need a warning from our Leo and for sure that is not why he said those things. It is a naked play to the domestic gallery and to the extent that it steals SF clothes I suppose that is one good thing.No I do not agree. I think the Tánaiste is being helpful to future putative trade partners to the UK under its current administration.
I don't think the US needs any help from our Leo and for sure that is not why he said those things. It is a naked play to the domestic gallery and to the extent that it steals SF clothes I suppose that is one good thing.
Lizzie pulls a sickieStop the presses. The High Queen of the Six Counties will not attend Mass tomorrow to celebrate the perfidy of her ancestor and his government. Taking a leaf out of Mickey D's book she has cried off, pulling a reluctant sickie "on medical advice".
Can you blame her, like wouldn't we all?Lizzie pulls a sickie
Sure she must get the pension, though she only started paying tax a few years back and she's fail the means test so maybe not.The doctor's cert says she "needs a rest". Would an ordinary Josephine get sick pay on foot of such a flimsy excuse? And this posing with walking sticks all looks a bit like malingering to me.
You can now add a 7th - the Partition Party Perfidy when QEII broke her promise to attend a partition celebration bash on the limp excuse of needing a rest.
You can now add a 7th - the Partition Party Perfidy when QEII broke her promise to attend a partition celebration bash on the limp excuse of needing a rest.
Didn't know you were waiting or what point you are making.Still waiting on your alternative suggestion to Irish Sea border? Any day now, and 5yrs.
You will note that there was no violent reaction when the Protocol was announced in the first place but the reaction was when it came visible.
Nope. Civil war centenaries to come. Atrocities, executions, lots of bad things to dredge up......Is that the finish of the centenary then?, fairly damp squib. There'll not be another one.....
Correct. And I made similar points in a previous post on AAM on the name of the state. Art 4 of Bunreacht na hÉireann clearly states that "The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland." No ifs, no buts. So today I get a form from a state body, the CSO, asking me to participate in the household budget survey on "trips taken in the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland". It's really unfair to criticise Jeffrey Donaldson for using the term 'Republic of Ireland', if a major state body uses the same term to refer to the state, and not use the name of the state as specified in the Constitution.I think you'll find it's more complicated than that. A lot more complicated.
The 1948 Act doesn't say the State is called the Republic of Ireland. It says the description of the State is the Republic of Ireland. The name of the State is Ireland as per the Constitution - no ambiguity, end of story.
The Republic of Ireland is merely a soccer team.
The issue here is when does one use the "name" and when does one use the "description". Clearly in terms of the topic of this thread it is the "name" as set out in the Constitution that counts. However, when discussing it in a non constitutional or non legal context it would seem that the "description" as set by the 1948 Act would be more appropriate.Correct. And I made similar points in a previous post on AAM on the name of the state. Art 4 of Bunreacht na hÉireann clearly states that "The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland." No ifs, no buts. So today I get a form from a state body, the CSO, asking me to participate in the household budget survey on "trips taken in the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland". It's really unfair to criticise Jeffrey Donaldson for using the term 'Republic of Ireland', if a major state body uses the same term to refer to the state, and not use the name of the state as specified in the Constitution.
The name of the country is 'Ireland' and the description of the country is 'Ireland'. 'The Republic of Ireland' is the name of a football team. If/when the Island of Ireland is united the name of the country will still be 'Ireland'.The issue here is when does one use the "name" and when does one use the "description". Clearly in terms of the topic of this thread it is the "name" as set out in the Constitution that counts. However, when discussing it in a non constitutional or non legal context it would seem that the "description" as set by the 1948 Act would be more appropriate.
That is not the official position as @Baby boomer advised us some time ago.The name of the country is 'Ireland' and the description of the country is 'Ireland'.
Wiki said:Since 1949, the Republic of Ireland Act 1948 has provided that the Republic of Ireland (or Poblacht na hÉireann in Irish) is the official description for the state.[10] However, Ireland remains the constitutional name of the state.
The constitutional name Ireland is normally used. However, the official description Republic of Ireland is sometimes used when disambiguation is desired between the state and the island of Ireland. In colloquial use this is often shortened to 'the Republic'.
Wikipedia is someone's opinion. It's often shortened to 'Doyn Soyth' as well. That is equally incorrect.That is not the official position as @Baby boomer advised us some time ago.