Talk:Referendum Commission

Gormley paragraph
I've removed this paragraph:
 * On 6 March 2008, the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, John Gormley established a referendum commission for the first referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon. The minister did not restore the original remit of the commission – to outline arguments for and against the referendum – however during the campaign against the first Treaty of Nice referendum by the Green Party, Gormley had praised the role of the commission in advancing the pros and cons of the treaty.

For one thing, it was in the wrong section. For another, I'm not sure what the point is. It seems to be an attack on Gormley for flip-flopping, which may be true but is hardly encyclopedic. Is there a point to be made that the original purpose of the Commission was to outline pro and con arguments in a balanced way, and that later the purpose changed somehow? If so that point needs to be made more clearly, more balanced, and with better references. jnestorius(talk) 12:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It is not an attack on Gormley, it highlights the differences between the original remit of the commission and its changed remit by 2008. Gormley was the minister at the time so he is mentioned, and he had previously praised the original remit, which is why this is mentioned. It is a fact, I thought we mentioned such facts in Wikipedia? Anyway, it really belongs on John Gormley's article, so I have added it there. The point that the remit of the commission was changed is very important and does need more references. Snappy (talk) 16:45, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * We mention facts in Wikipedia, but I'm not sure we mention "such facts" since I'm not sure what you mean by "such". It is very common for a politician to say one thing at one time and do a different thing at another time. This is not notable unless an external source says it is. Gormley was the minister but there is no evidence that it was his decision to change the remit as opposed to a collective cabinet decision by the three-party coalition in which his party was a junior member. The formal responsibility for appointing the Commission is defined by statute to lie with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, but the power is technical rather than discretionary.
 * I won't dispute that the paragraph was not intended as an attack on Gormley; but I hope you won't doubt that that is genuinely how it seemed to me, and that such an impression is to be avoided if possible. I completely agree that the change in remit of the commission is very important and does need more references.jnestorius(talk) 18:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)