D.C.C meeting on Public Meeting Notices.

by C Murray Sun Mar 25, 2007 14:29

Most group and leaving cert students actually are highly aware of the problems
caused by deportation to their friends, a lot of them have a firmer grasp of democratic
principles of parity than the fecking elected representatives who attempt to
represent us on a mandate that is full of lies and silence.

The idea to give them a vote in the EU and councils is rather excellent,
afterall they drove the Kunle campaign and a lot of kids would be truly horrified
at the lack of gender balance and the over-weening influence of the Church ethic
in the clientelist political system.

But that aside, There are four councillors on the litter protocol bye-law shite
that is going to the vote on April the second, they do not understand the
right to public assembly/freedom of association/right to privacy issues- it has
all become horribly polite and civic duty is translated in very narrow terms.

One councillor ( a male) said that he would always stick his name and home address
on anything as 'He had nothing to hide"- good for him, I have nothing to hide either,
but I consider that any one working within politcal and NGO organisations has the
right to privacy.

A phone number or email contact for the PR/Press or contact of a political group should
suffice. A right to assembly should be a given, and the right to protest and heighten awareness
about inequity is also a given in a democratic sytstem.

Should we name the relevant councillors- there are no real surprises..................... (?)

by Louise Gaffney Sat Mar 24, 2007 21:59

Just who do these people think they are indeed! I attended a meetimg today at which a brother of the late Terence Wheelock spoke. The information was truly shocking, worse than Donegal, and DCC want people to put their names on notices of public meetings, what if the meetings were about police corruption/ sadism, or planning corruption and that person's name is all over the city, I truly shudder to think... What planet are these councillors living on ?

by C Murray Sat Mar 24, 2007 19:33

Apparently the Councillors- and I have talked to two of 'em , believe that they are
acting with civic responsibility. This is hilarious, one of the worst problems emanating
from this is that they want a member of a protest organisation to attach their name,
address and phone number to publicised meetings.

*For the Record- Some of us have young families, have experienced internet stalking
and abuse, it is not acceptable to have to append a private home address to a publicly
displayed poster for reasons of personal safety and privacy.

*There is no facility envisaged for giving a name privately which will be known to
the litter wardens in the proposed changes.

*If there were we cannot know who can access someone's private details.

It is not just a dirty attack on democracy, it is an infringement of basic rights.
There are many upcoming young women's groups in the city who have the right
to privacy -at basic level a contact number should suffice.

To put the price of One hundred Euros on the postering is also clearly wrong.

The councillors who need basic civics lessons regarding the right to free speech and
assembly obviously do not know the object of democratic rights and thus should not
be trusted with such a weighty issue.

[and we can't even blame John Fitzgerald for this one, he's off down Moyross
supporting 9mm Willy o Dea on Crime in the run up to the general election]

by Mick Butler Sat Mar 24, 2007 17:09

Who the hell do these people think they are ? Covering up all the dirt that is going on in this country. Crass political censorship by DCC, Will they get away with this ?