A Social Bunch

at

unspecified2Social Democrats Conference 2016. Pic SHARPPIX

Social Democrats Conference 2016. Pic SHARPPIX

unspecified unspecified1

The Social Democrats inaugral national conference took place at the Treasury Holdings Tower, Convention Centre in Dublin over the weekend with Fintan O’Toole among the guest speakers.

Among the policy priorites set out by the party’s co-leaders Catherine Murphy, Stephen Donnelly and Roisin Shortall were repealing Section 7(3)(c) of the Equal Status Act, to remove the baptism barrier. Repealing the 8th and a review of Article 43 of the Constitution to “ensure the measures needed to effectively tackle the housing crisis can be swiftly introduced”.

FIGHT!

From top:  Catherine Murphy and Roisin Shortall (top), Fintan O’Toole, Niall Crowley, Anne-Marie McNally and Philip O’Connor (second photo), Gary Gannon (third), Sarah-Jane Hennelly, Jen Whitmore and Glenna Lynch (fourth); Ms Murphy and Ms Shorthall.

Social Democrats

Rollingnews

17 thoughts on “A Social Bunch

  1. Clampers Outside

    …in case you wuz wonderin’ as I was… what’s Article 43 again?
    .
    .
    .

    PRIVATE PROPERTY

    Article 43

    1.1° The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the natural right, antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external goods.

    2° The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the right of private ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath, and inherit property.

    2.1° The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in the foregoing provisions of this Article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by the principles of social justice.

    2° The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good.

    Source: http://indigo.ie/~imr/consti.htm#PRIVATE%20PROPERTY

    1. Robert

      Wow those first two paragraphs are pretty powerful. Practically an inducement to rent-seeking behaviour. It seems as though it’s counterbalanced by the next two but the wording is quite vague …

      1. newsjustin

        They need to be powerful. The right to private property is one of the cornerstones of society. All-in-all Article 43 looks fine to me. But a review can’t hurt.

        1. DubLoony

          I’ve a major problem with private property turning into a neglected derelict site for decades without the state having the ability to confiscate it for public good.
          Para 2.1 needs to be invoked a lot more frequently.

  2. Painkiller

    “principles of social justice” – the angle is apparent :)
    And work to be done in getting non-binary pronouns in here…sheesh!
    (notice how the above sentence avoided the use of pronouns)

    1. Clampers Outside

      Depends, many social justice types have a hypocritical streak in their attempts to shut down free speech, and that would be regressive.

      But now that the SocDems are getting a new comms director hopefully their comms will be less social-justice-cringey, and more of the hard-fact-bingey as Catherine and Roisín are known for.

Comments are closed.