Cannot suspend it. Court ruling.

I don’t think he asked RTE to suspend the Policy. I believe he asked the Organisation to avoid creating an artificial opposition to a widely accepted proposal where none seemed to exist formally at present.

I disagree. When Most sane people support a long-overdue change to protect children in this country, our PSB is forced to seek out a few loonies who oppose it just to conform with the rules.

People have a right to be heard, even if the majority think their views ate “loony”. I’m fully pro-choice, but I’d never refuse the pro-life movement their right to air their views. But it doesn’t mean RTE needs to dig out some “anti” people. Instead, it means less “pro” coverage, which, if the majority have already made up their minds, is no great loss. But presenting only one side exclusively is not on.

Very simple. Let the Dail put forward it’s case in the Dail and not enter into Public Debate. That will silence RTE but upset them because they won’t have the juicy current affairs programmes that cost nothing to make and they can oversell advertising!
That’s where the real conflict lies.

@Paddy this is a extremely important referendum and needs to publicaly debated

I don’t think anyone should be either entitled to an opinion or a hearing on this matter unless there is some chance of being able to know who they are. Mehoop is not a name that can be found in directories or State registries such as Births Marriages and Deaths. So why do you hide behind such a name and are you representing anyone other than yourself?

I can call myself what I want, son of Buck. I didn’t realise that this website required PPS numbers to verify identity prior to commenting.

Mehoop is not a name that can be found in directories or State registries such as Births Marriages and Deaths.
.
are you referring to persons from this country. Or all across the world?
.
What about Wening Wulandari from Indonesia, are they allowed to have that name and comment on here. ?

Same FG / FF / Labour wasters using primitive arguments to try and change opinion.

I’l debate with them, put me on air the suggestion of “no one supporting the no vote” is to support their yes vote.
I’ve contacted the Parties, Agencies and Companies in favour of this referendum and the not so funny thing is not one of them actually says this referendum is about giving rights but in in fact to make the adoption process easier, they go on telling the people its about rights but the underlining text of this referendum will give the Private companies that have taken over the role of the HSE in fostering, adoption and care mean to profit from children being taken into care.

In the UK the same laws are being thrown out as we speak that have EU governments bring the UK to court over what they have called “child snatching laws” It’s also worth noting the private companies here are UK owned not Irish.

It is nit actually clear that the 50-50 is a legal requirement, it is merely an interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling.

The problem is that you can’t have a fair and equitable debate with an empty chair (as Clint Eastwood discovered). As far as I can tell there are no TDs, Senators or MEPs against the referendum – and APS is the only group against.

So is it fair and equitable if APS gets 50% of the media coverage?

As far as I know, no TDs, Senators, MEPs or even Councillors have come out against. Former MEP Kathy Sinnott has and must be likely to be the main voice we’ll get to hear (I really hope we don’t get 50% Sinnott coverage…). The only other high profile name that I’ve seen on the No side is Nora Bennis, but she’s never been elected to anything; I think 5% was about her best performance in any election.

Eileen
Here we go again. Read what the Minister has said and admit that you haven’t done so yet or didn’t understand what he said. My understanding is that he asked RTE to avoid creating artificial opposition to a Referendum proposition where none or little might exist . That sounds difficult to achieve but reasonable to ask.
I could decide to set up an organisation right now called The Irish Childs Rights Association and appoint myself President ( just like the Irish Patients Organisation by the way) and demand access to the airwaves to match the time given to basic information discussions never mind debates in Leinster House. That’s pure nonsense and the Minister is correct to have RTE Management consider his views without you guff. Again.

Spot on, Ryan. Even the lobby groups said they were really pleased with the bill which included all their requests for child protection. Giving 50% airtime to a tiny number of dissenters is itself inequitable. The ruling, in this case, makes no sense!

Gentle men (Except Paddy Mark Rodgers ) I accept what you say .but that ruling was brought in for fairness ,the minister should know this. What he should have asked was for RTE to have the time on the whole debate to be reduced . Not just one side of it ! … Children’s rights are paramount ,so I know what way I will be voting .However that does not mean to say that the opponents should be semi – gagged …

Paddy Mark Rodgers \ /.

All the ministers are used to not debating!

ENDA Kenny- fiscal treaty

They know if they debate it there will be no good come of it and will end up having everybody vote no which in my opinion is the best option. Under the constitution all our children’s rights are protected in the first place…why alternate it??

Secondly what good has ever come out of the government with children in care?

Children have died, been abused,raped, molested etc etc have we seen any prosecutions for this NO.

What good are they to our children if they can’t even protect the most vulnerable when their rights are laid out in front of them in the constitution?????

http://www.change.org/petitions/supporting-the-irish-nation-step-down-from-government

Exactly Chris. I haven’t looked into it in detail yet but frankly anything the Irish political establishment so overwhelmingly recommends automatically makes me suspicious. Sorry, but they’ve f*cked us over for so long on so many different issues and in so many ways that it’s their own fault that I and many, many others instinctively don’t trust them – regardless of any merits of their argument.

I will of course do my own research – but will not simply be voting Yes because the likes of FF, FG, Labour, Fergus Finlay etc. are advocating a Yes vote.

Chris
Some day you may have children , nieces nephews etc. Read up
on the referendum, please , and get out and vote, whatever way you decide ,
but vote. I urge every one to exercise their constitutional right to vote . Please.

Chris,, do the research yourself on our FaceBook page, lots of links http://www.facebook.com/AllianceOfParentsAgainstTheState

Funny how a lot of the supporters of the referendum have absolutely no clue how ineefective and pointless it is.

I think the NO group have raised a few issues of which i have concerns.

If they are true i wont vote yes. I will be watching all the debates.

the “no side” oppose this referendum for simple valid reasons, whilst our children are already protected under the constitution and state laws the state has constantly failed them and hundreds have gone missing and some found dead, hundreds of foreign children brought here for adoption have also gone missing and NOBODY has ever taken responsability for it so why would any parent trust the state to take care of the welfare of our children when their past records speaks very loudly

Can you show us all these “pro life” objectors?, I’m pro-abortion and atheist. It seem most of Ireland is “Pro-Life” as there was a referendum on it and the majority said no, that’s democracy.

Funny how people with argument against their opposition have to resort to labelling people and attacking them because they cant attack their arguments.

Noonan hasn’t a clue about Child Protection, he’s jumping on the bandwagon like all the others. Watch them jump ship like sinking rats when the people of Ireland hear what is currently happening and call out for Ryan Report II.

Surely there is no 100% accurate way of gauging the support from all persons that can vote. If no one in Government is opposed to it, other organisations representing 1,2, 10, 30% of people should still be entitled to express the reason against it.

agreed Chris ,again no one is suggesting that opponents don’t get a platform to air an opposition , the difficulty lies in the fact that there are obligations ( rightly ) to have to inform the public on the details of any referendum , in this case almost every major political party etc is supporting a yes vote , the 50|50 rule means that broadcasters are obliged to ensure that an EQUAL amount of airtime is given to opponents , not weather they get a platform or not , but that they get an equal amount of time in all cases , which is in principle when its a debated issue or a euro referendum etc as both sides of course should be heard and given equal time , but again the complication here is that the onus on all broadcasters to have to find opposing voices and fill the airwaves in equal time with opposition when there is such an overwhelming number of backers , hey I totally understand everyone is cynical against the govt etc but im just explaining why the 50 50 rules can be a challenge in circumstances like this.

but at the same time if people only support this because of the singled sided voice then how can we have balance and maybe the no side have valid points to make which in turn may make people think twice about their choice of vote, we need balance to make sure both sides of the arguement is heard so people can make their own minds up and make a conscious decision

There nobody suggesting you don’t get any opportunity to offer the no side or give balance to an argument , the 50/50 rule which is a fairly recent rule since McKenna judgement , mandates an EQUAL amount of time be given to opposition , that’s pretty easy to operate for media outlet when there an issue that needs all sides given time to put Roward views, the problem here is that the rule has to be followed even in cases – like this , where you MUST given equal amount of time to the opposing view , this can be practically challenging , if 4 major parties speak out in support of the referendum and takes 20 minutes on air , if only one opposes , they must get a full 20 minutes to match/ that’s the law , nobody is saying don’t give he opposing views airtime , just that this rule is kinda flawed in certain circumstances , I should declare I’ve worked in media for years but have no vested net rest in this , but I do see the practical challenges with applying this rule in some circumstances

Only flaw in your theory is that the No side are ahead in the only poll available on Journal.ie

Joe burns

http://www.APS.ie

Ps, I’m an atheist and pro-abortion, any other labels?

With respect That doesn’t present a flaw in my theory , I’m not putting forward a theory , I’m commenting on the 50/50 rule and the practical challenges it presents , I’m sharing my thoughts on how it works and commenting on the article and why they are looking it , I’ve no interest in yes or no sides on this subject at all

The amendment? Sinn Féin support the amendment and feel it was really not reforming enough.

If SF didn’t think it was reforming enough, why are they supporting it?

the state is already obliged to look after our children but they have constantly failed a referendum wont fix the problem its the whole childcare system that needs fixing

“someone in RTE will have to act professionally and competently”

Bwahahahaha, I see what you did there, nice one Graham : )

Three “thumbs down”, so that’ll probably be the director general, baldy and enda marking me card :)

Graham, it is not up to RTE to decide if they are fair and balanced. They have to answer to the BAI and the Dept of Communications. The airtime is actually audited to show how many minutes each contributor / side gets. They can be fined by the BAI if they don’t comply.