The next Government

[Yermon]

RTE news: Dáil debates Sinn Féin abortion bill on three-day wait

Dáil debates Sinn Féin abortion bill on three-day wait

TDs have debated the Sinn Féin motion to remove the three-day mandatory wait for an abortion ahead of tomorrow's Dáil vote.

www.rte.ie

"Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris are to vote in favour of the Sinn Féin bill tomorrow, with a free vote in place for all Government TDs."


Wait til Otto who thought the SF motion is only to keep pace with SDs, reads this - "There shall be grinding and gnashing of teeth"

 

[Colonel Lee Fields]

Mehawl has gone full Kang

 

[Ogre Moran]

"Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris are to vote in favour of the Sinn Féin bill tomorrow, with a free vote in place for all Government TDs."


Wait til Otto who thought the SF motion is only to keep pace with SDs, reads this - "There shall be grinding and gnashing of teeth"

The strange thing is the leaders of FF and FG voting for a SF motion, not for the motion itself. Neither has been consistent on this issue over time, putting their finger up in the air when the need arises to check which way the wind is blowing. No doubt expecting there to be an electoral benefit to be got from doing so.

 

[Matlock]

The strange thing is the leaders of FF and FG voting for a SF motion, not for the motion itself. Neither has been consistent on this issue over time, putting their finger up in the air when the need arises to check which way the wind is blowing. No doubt expecting there to be an electoral benefit to be got from doing so.

The 3 day waiting period is entirely unnecessary. Tbh, I have not seen any coherent argument in favour of it that isn't based on the person being anti abortion.

 

[outdagap]

"Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris are to vote in favour of the Sinn Féin bill tomorrow, with a free vote in place for all Government TDs."


Wait til Otto who thought the SF motion is only to keep pace with SDs, reads this - "There shall be grinding and gnashing of teeth"

Obviously an attempted ambush by the continuity babykillers, which rebounded on them

 

[Meridian]

"Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris are to vote in favour of the Sinn Féin bill tomorrow, with a free vote in place for all Government TDs."


Wait til Otto who thought the SF motion is only to keep pace with SDs, reads this - "There shall be grinding and gnashing of teeth"

ScumMan, I heard about that yesterday and i don't care.
Your old age is obviously getting at you, I referred to your Scum and their shite about a motion about a UI after Fine Gael announcing sone stupid blue print about a UI.
Your single reason for existing Scum have to stay relevant there of course.

 

[Yermon]

Amazing that SF are allegedly a “single policy party” and yet even the Taoiseach and Tainiste are voting in favour of SF Bills

 

[Hallbopping]

Amazing that SF are allegedly a “single policy party” and yet even the Taoiseach and Tainiste are voting in favour of SF Bills

I think a single policy party is a very legitimate criticism of SF. Despite what they say, I think most people in the 26 don’t see unification or a referendum on same as a very high priority right now.

 

[PROCNA2018]

I think a single policy party is a very legitimate criticism of SF. Despite what they say, I think most people in the 26 don’t see unification or a referendum on same as a very high priority right now.

Thing is they don't have to for it to happen.

Have posted before, this notion that we have to want it, or ask for it or campaign for it is entirely false. It is actually a failing of SF and their current leadership and it's getting to the point where I think they're happy no progress is being made.

The only prerequisite for a BP is for the SoS to call one.

Best way is to plan, discuss and agree to.avoid the Brexit scenario, but it's not a prerequisite to it being called.
Neither is a supermajority. The GFA is clear.

So why does MLMcD keep calling for one? We can't.
Why does she want us to plan when she knows it provides an implied veto if there is no plan.

Why not just say, according to the GFA a BP will be called when a majority want change and demonstrate that that is the case? It seems increasingly because she hasn't a bull's notion what she is.doing.

 

[outdagap]

Thing is they don't have to for it to happen.

Have posted before, this notion that we have to want it, or ask for it or campaign for it is entirely false. It is actually a failing of SF and their current leadership and it's getting to the point where I think they're happy no progress is being made.

The only prerequisite for a BP is for the SoS to call one.

Best way is to plan, discuss and agree to.avoid the Brexit scenario, but it's not a prerequisite to it being called.
Neither is a supermajority. The GFA is clear.

So why does MLMcD keep calling for one? We can't.
Why does she want us to plan when she knows it provides an implied veto if there is no plan.

Why not just say, according to the GFA a BP will be called when a majority want change and demonstrate that that is the case? It seems increasingly because she hasn't a bull's notion what she is.doing.

There's so much in your post.

Above all, the entire obvious issue with SFROI is that they don't answer to the Republic of Ireland, but to the Army Council in Belfast, and anything they order them to do is in their interests, which has little or nothing to do with the people of the Republic of Ireland. That's why their actions frequently appear bizarre within a RoI view.

I partially agree with you that the GFA is clear, certain aspects are clear, but for example a SF lawyer was suggesting that only NI needs a BP and the BP in the Republic could be skipped. That's the level of treachery they're looking to.

Another example is your suggestion of planning, but there's no requirement in the GFA that anyone should. Realistically that was never going to happen at the time of the GFA, and there's no point in even attempting it before a BP if you don't have PUL input, which is probably not going to happen.

If SFROI got in here and pushed to plan and prepare, it would still be poison and pointless as unionism would see it as a threat

Which leads me on to your supermajority comment, and you are correct according to the GFA. However how well do you think the prospect of a UI would be received down HERE, with a NI 50+1 Nationalist majority in a BP, with no buy in from PUL including the many dangerous nutjobs ?

The reality is 50+1 should have been a starting point, not an end goal. SF have wasted the years since the GFA not genuinely trying and not that Adams etc al are nearing the departure gate of life, they're desperate for more flim flam to pretend it's only round the corner.