Comments on: Fine Gael the Monarchist party?

By: Slugger O'Toole

Slugger O'Toole — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:51:56 +0000

[...] which is no longer accessible (or archived) although some quotes and more comments can be read here and here. It reprised a recurring Mitchell theme of the Republic rejoining the [British] [...]

By: All about Gay Mitchell (People’s Movement) | rebel-alliance.org

All about Gay Mitchell (People’s Movement) | rebel-alliance.org — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 13:52:05 +0000

[...] might be prepared to surrender the position in certain circumstances. In 2006 he suggested that the queen of England could be included as a head of state in a future united Ireland. [...]

By: Peter

Peter — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:38:48 +0000

I don’t think the crown is merely a symbol of Britishness. Loyalists love their queen. They regularly have goes at the British government but they never have goes at the monarch. I don’t think they would be able to accept an Uachtaráin like we have because that Uachtaráin would be voted in by all the citizens of the UK and it would involved the will of the majority of the people. Anyone who knows Loyalists knows that they do not want to accept the majority will of the people because that would mean a 32 county United Ireland! On the Old English party, they have a terrible leader and I can’t agree with the idea that Irish wouldn’t be compulsory after the Junior Cert. Kenny will be Taoiseach after the next General Election, a scary thought yes but they can’t possibly be as bad Fianna Fáil, the so-called “Republican party”. What a fantastic tangent!

By: Simon

Simon — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:18:31 +0000

Still would be difficult to change a policy people voted for.

By: Keith Gaughan

Keith Gaughan — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:15:09 +0000

It’s not, actually, but it’s the kind of thing that gets mistaken for law.

The declaration is simply just that: a declaration, and nothing more. It is not legally binding. It was simply an undertaking that our policy of neutrality would be respected.

By: Simon

Simon — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:39:22 +0000

I really can’t emphasise this enough: the “triple lock” is a matter of policy, not law, Actually I think there might be a law that came into place with the second vote on the nice referendum with the Sevile declaration.

I agree with him on the point though. I talked about it before on occasions here is one. http://www.irishelection.com/04/irelands-neutrality/

By: Keith Gaughan

Keith Gaughan — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:14:24 +0000

@Tuathal: ‘I concede however that he makes a good point concerning the merits of a “double” rather than “triple” lock system regarding the deployment of Irish troops.’

I really can’t emphasise this enough: the “triple lock” is a matter of policy, not law, and therefore something the government can disregard at their whim. Mitchell’s comments indicate an inability to tell the difference between the two. It’s really little more than a way for the government to avoid having to take responsibility.

By: Sinn Fein’s Killian Forde on The Role of the Monarchy at Irish Election

Sinn Fein’s Killian Forde on The Role of the Monarchy at Irish Election — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 07:16:44 +0000

[...] Killian Forde of Sinn Fein has written the following in response to Gay Mitchells original proposal regarding the role of the monarch in a 32 county Ireland. My initial reaction to Gay Mitchell’s proposal that the British Head of State, i.e. the King or Queen, could be, as some sort of sweetener to Unionism, the Head of State for a unified Ireland was mainly indifference. Mitchell is known for his kite flying and ill thought through ideas, prides himself on, as he sees it, talking straight, e.g. his odd vision on the role of the Defence forces overseas, and frankly I always thought of the guy as a real life Irish version of Ned Flanders. You know a generally harmless crank that you both pity and snigger at. [...]

By: mollie malone

mollie malone — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:51:27 +0000

relax – nobody takes that mitchell fella seriously do they ? !!!
i thought he was out of politics – hes in europe isnt he ? best place for him ……

By: simon

simon — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:56:32 +0000

why not wait until someone from FF does start to propose something of note and see my reaction
Take to long to wait for that

Surely, part of the point of the discussion is about pushing out an idea that most people in the republican would automatically have a immediate problem with
If that was the point of the speech then he would have mentioned. some of the points I mentioned. I.e the flag, soliders song, commanwealth, federal government etc etc. But he didn’t he kept on one very narrow point the mononacry. I think I am going over old ground again here really I will let others advance the discussion.