Referendum on reducing judges pay.
- Thread starter RMCF
- Start date
I'm thinking about it. It's important that judges can be truly impartial and independent. It might not happen today or tomorrow but I wouldn't like to see a situation where a government wanted a certain judicial outcome and held the threat of impacting judicial pay if they didn't get the outcome.
Judges typically give up quite lucrative legal careers which I think they are not allowed to return to. If they are unsure if the goalposts will be moved once they make the irrevocable decision, then they may choose not to become judges or wait until they are older and more sure of their personal financial position. I know there isn't much sympathy for them but a lot of judges have been impacted by poor financial decisions and I think it is particularly unfair that they are in a position now where they CANNOT return to private legal practice.
And it is worth bearing in mind that something like 80% of judges are voluntarily paying the public sector levy.
Judges typically give up quite lucrative legal careers which I think they are not allowed to return to. If they are unsure if the goalposts will be moved once they make the irrevocable decision, then they may choose not to become judges or wait until they are older and more sure of their personal financial position. I know there isn't much sympathy for them but a lot of judges have been impacted by poor financial decisions and I think it is particularly unfair that they are in a position now where they CANNOT return to private legal practice.
And it is worth bearing in mind that something like 80% of judges are voluntarily paying the public sector levy.
Separation of powers is important
Otherwise Bertie could have started to hassle the Mahon Tribunal as an example.
As it is the cabinet with a majority can force through pretty much anything they want, the President and the Senate can't stop them. And they appoint the Attorney General who will draft it in such a way to get it passed.
The Taoiseach has too much power as it is and the judges have to be kept seperate from this as a check on them
It's a real populist move, it's saves very litte but stirs up the anger if you don't read up about it
I'd be voting no on the Dáil committees too
Otherwise Bertie could have started to hassle the Mahon Tribunal as an example.
As it is the cabinet with a majority can force through pretty much anything they want, the President and the Senate can't stop them. And they appoint the Attorney General who will draft it in such a way to get it passed.
The Taoiseach has too much power as it is and the judges have to be kept seperate from this as a check on them
It's a real populist move, it's saves very litte but stirs up the anger if you don't read up about it
I'd be voting no on the Dáil committees too
I'll probably do the same.
Yes. A waste of time and money. And based on suspect advice from the AG. Article 35.5 currently states "The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in office.". This was intended to protect individual judges not the judges pay-scale. Judges pay should have been reduced and it would have been time enough holding a referendum in the event that a challenge, which wouldn't have happened, was successful in the Supreme Court. The other option would have been to freeze judges pay until such a time as it fell back (in real terms, due to inflation) to the relative level the government wanted. Under the new amendment we will only be able to cut judges pay in the context of wider public service cuts; this is, IMO, more restrictive that the current situation.
Me (although I did once aspire to become Judge Dredd). But then I tend to vote No in referenda (sorry it's referendums now, right?). I'll be voting No to the proposed amendment giving the Oireachtas expended powers of inquisition too. However, I expect both referenda to be carried, as people are generally compliant and trusting of authority.
I am voting yes, and I am insulted you think it's because I am compliant and trusting of authority.
The independence of the judiciary is vital. BUT, does anyone really think that this independence will be affected by the judges having the pay the public service pension levy, like all the rest of the public service.
The wordng of the amendment clearly states that judges pay can only be
reduced in line with other public servants.
The judical pension is the most lucrative pension in the public service, as they can get a full pension after 15 years of service.
The country cant afford this anymore and they are being asked to contribute a tiny amount of money out of their huge earnings towards this pension.
The effect of the levy on their standard of living will hardly be noticed compared to the effect it is having on civil servants on low levels of pay, who dont have a choice but to pay it.
I personally think that the fact that 20% of them are refusing to pay this levy means that they are greedy and completely out of touch with the citizens that they are supposed to be serving.
To use the fact that we pay barristers an obscene amount of money as a reason why the judges should not be paying the levy is beyond me.
The independence of the judiciary is vital. BUT, does anyone really think that this independence will be affected by the judges having the pay the public service pension levy, like all the rest of the public service.
The wordng of the amendment clearly states that judges pay can only be
reduced in line with other public servants.
The judical pension is the most lucrative pension in the public service, as they can get a full pension after 15 years of service.
The country cant afford this anymore and they are being asked to contribute a tiny amount of money out of their huge earnings towards this pension.
The effect of the levy on their standard of living will hardly be noticed compared to the effect it is having on civil servants on low levels of pay, who dont have a choice but to pay it.
I personally think that the fact that 20% of them are refusing to pay this levy means that they are greedy and completely out of touch with the citizens that they are supposed to be serving.
To use the fact that we pay barristers an obscene amount of money as a reason why the judges should not be paying the levy is beyond me.
Hardly.
I don't. I'm opposed to the levy in general however see no reason why judges should be exempted. The government should apply the levy, freeze current judges pay for a few years and introduce a reduced pay-scale for new entrants. The referendum is unnecessary tinkering.
Why are you voting no then?
You stated above that you think the govt should apply the levy and then hold a referendum if a judge ever takes them to court over it.
Now we don't need to wait for a costly court case. We have the referendum, which won't cost too much because it's being lumped in with another referendum and an election.
It's win-win
In my view it is unnecessary, as pay could have been reduced in any case, and it narrows the context in which judges pay can be reduced. Also, cutting judges pay won't make any difference to anything. I'm opposed to unnecessary tinkering with the Constitution.
How could pay have been reduced? I am lost there. After watching part of the frontline last night I was appalled. The scenario was, people were awarded compensation, the person or persons represnenting them took money from the award as a fee but they were already paid by the state. Now to my way of thinking that is theft but what was the outcome, money was paid back and that was it. Carry on regardless. And no names could be named.
We have a legal system that is scary and it could be as bad elsewhere in the world but this is our country. Program did say we have a legal profession with the highest fees in the WORLD!! And we are supposed to be on our knees. Another example, some part of the legal profession had fees of €5k a day!! and had agreed to reduce that to, in face of the recession, €4k a day!!!! We live in a different world but unfortunately it is our money that keeps these people in a nice style of comfort. Why don't the IMF step in and knock these on the head? Forget about a vote, that's just a smokescreen.
When we heard about all the wheezes in Greece we went Wow! but when the same is happeing here on our doorstep we ... hardly a peep. One would think with 7 advisers our leader could dream up a good wheeze to get proper pay scales to reflect the dire state we are in... oh oh forgot he has breached the pay guidelines himself. Back to square one.
A great little country
noah
We have a legal system that is scary and it could be as bad elsewhere in the world but this is our country. Program did say we have a legal profession with the highest fees in the WORLD!! And we are supposed to be on our knees. Another example, some part of the legal profession had fees of €5k a day!! and had agreed to reduce that to, in face of the recession, €4k a day!!!! We live in a different world but unfortunately it is our money that keeps these people in a nice style of comfort. Why don't the IMF step in and knock these on the head? Forget about a vote, that's just a smokescreen.
When we heard about all the wheezes in Greece we went Wow! but when the same is happeing here on our doorstep we ... hardly a peep. One would think with 7 advisers our leader could dream up a good wheeze to get proper pay scales to reflect the dire state we are in... oh oh forgot he has breached the pay guidelines himself. Back to square one.
A great little country
noah
Y
Yorrick
Guest
The Judges pay amendment is a distraction. It is the other one the Governement want to slip through on the quiet. Who wants to be judged by Lowry, Healy Rae and Co ?
If I want to be tried I want it before a jury of citizens not a jury of gombeen men
If I want to be tried I want it before a jury of citizens not a jury of gombeen men
Independent!!! Judges!!! your joking, surely?
The main reason they get appointed in the 1st place is because they're knee deep with the Govt. of the day...they lobby their political party contacts for these top roles, work behind the scenes for years etc
See the 2 appointed this week....1 was a former member of the Workers Party with Gilmore and had represented him in some legal cases also.
So I laugh when I hear about this 'independence', and nearly exploded last night listening to them whine on the Frontline. There was'nt too much said from the head of their self-governing body last night, Ken whats his name, when that survivor of child abuse brought up the over charging. As said above, he briefly mentioned that some complaints of overcharging were proven and the money was handed back...and thats that! No fines, naming and shaming and most importantly, no legal action brought against them...all kept in house- after all, they know best. No need to go to outsiders such as the Gardai!
The legal profession is the last traditional power house in this country still to be toppled and brought down to earth with the Catholic Church, Politicians, Gardai etc...the sooner the better in my opinion.
I'll be voting YES by the way lol
+1 Delboy. I will be voting yes too. The isue of independence is a complete red herring. In any event, judges aren't even interviewed for the job, simply appointed by the gov't of the day. There should be a completely independent panel to appoint,vet and remove judges.
Who should appoint the independent panel?
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,402
Yes, all our existing quangos are wonderful models of complete independence from politics. So much so that we need more of them. Just as long as they're completely independent, mind.
Not sure how they do it in the USA across the board, but don't judges at some levels have to get elected by the general public? Same as Sheriffs in some towns.
That'd keep them on their toes and lower the chances of light sentencing!!!
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,402
Yes the directly-elected local sheriffs and judges in the USA do a great job. The jails are packed to bursting point with, at any given time, one out of 18 men, and one in 11 African-Americans, either in jail or on probation. We really need to follow their example.
Yes the directly-elected local sheriffs and judges in the USA do a great job. The jails are packed to bursting point with, at any given time, one out of 18 men, and one in 11 African-Americans, either in jail or on probation. We really need to follow their example.
here, here. I totally agree
Y
Yorrick
Guest
Sounds good to me