Charles Haughey was he the best politican this country has ever seen?

mountainyman

Wicknight wrote:

If the people cannot rely on their elected representatives to honestly represent them then what is the point of having a democracy in the first place. I mean the worst King in the world occationally did good things for his people, but that is hardly a reason for wanting to live under a monarchy rather than a democracy.

If everyone is corrupt why would they get worked up about corruption from their leaders? Why would a nation of sinners demand a saint?

MM

Zombrex

daithimac wrote:

I don't think that people with the personalitys of alter boys make good national leaders.

Richard Nixon would undoubtable agree ...

daithimac

as would Churchhill, FDR, and even mandella

Zombrex

daithimac wrote:

as would Churchhill, FDR, and even mandella

You think they (Nelsen Mandella??) were corrupt like Haughey??

What nonsense is this ... seriously where do Irish people get their political news?

Wicknight

Wicknight wrote:

Richard Nixon would undoubtable agree ...

But you would also agree that, though a crook and a rogue, Nixon was extremely competent at foreign policy. He should be recognised for scaling down US involvement in Vietnam and improving relations with China just as much as Watergate. The point in relation to Haughey is that his whole career shouldn't be judged just through the prism of corruption, nor can it be ignored.

daithimac

FDR & churchill both drank amounts which by todays standards would suggest drinking problems. they both concealed Illnesses from there electorates. mandella Supported the ANC's campain of violence before his Imprisionment. If you want a posterboy for good clean leadership maybe Hitler would be of use

daithimac

daithimac wrote:

If you want a posterboy for good clean leadership maybe Hitler would be of use

Ummmmmm...Godwin's Law?

mike65

That wraps it up for this thread then!

Mike.

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

But you would also agree that, though a crook and a rogue, Nixon was extremely competent at foreign policy.

But why do the Irish always think it is one or the other. Instead of Nixon I would want someone who is not corrupt and good at foreign policy.

If one tolerates corruption you never find this person, because he is probably going to excel in an environment where corrupt people excel.

The actual harm Haughey did to the country was not only the money he took, and how that effected his office, but also the environment that his corruption created.

Deleted User wrote:

He should be recognised for scaling down US involvement in Vietnam and improving relations with China just as much as Watergate. The point in relation to Haughey is that his whole career shouldn't be judged just through the prism of corruption, nor can it be ignored.

Well to be honest I'm struggling to find things that Haughey did that were above and beyond. I mean we should be hardly falling over ourselfs to praise him simply doing his job.

daithimac

ye I got me a bitch slapping there.:D
I still have to say however that my point is accurate.
The people who can do the most in the service of the state are not always its most upstanding citizens.
This is undoubtly the case with regard to CJH

Zombrex

daithimac wrote:

FDR & churchill both drank amounts which by todays standards would suggest drinking problems.

That isn't corruption

daithimac wrote:

they both concealed Illnesses from there electorates.

Neither is that

daithimac wrote:

mandella Supported the ANC's campain of violence before his Imprisionment.

Neither is that

Do you actually know what Haughey did?

He took millions in personal money from certain interests, putting him in position of debt to these interests. That is corruption. He was in debt to people other than the electorate who elected him. His interests lay else where.

Zombrex

daithimac wrote:

The people who can do the most in the service of the state are not always its most upstanding citizens.
This is undoubtly the case with regard to CJH

You cannot do the most in the service of the state and at the same time be corrupt. That is an oxymoron.

By definition of being corrupt Haughey wasn't doing the most in the service of the state, since he wasn't serving the state, he was surviving the interests of those who gave him,over the space of his career, close to 8 million euro.

daithimac

Wicknight wrote:

You cannot do the most in the service of the state and at the same time be corrupt. That is an oxymoron.

By definition of being corrupt Haughey wasn't doing the most in the service of the state, since he wasn't serving the state, he was surviving the interests of those who gave him,over the space of his career, close to 8 million euro.

Just out of interest could you site one occasion on which he was a servant to the Interests of the people who gave him money.

Macy

daithimac wrote:

Just out of interest could you site one occasion on which he was a servant to the Interests of the people who gave him money.

Goodman's Insurance Policies/ the lack of comeback over dodgy drawdowns of EU funding. Sorting out Ben Dunne's tax bill. Appointing Smurfit to the Telecom Eireann Board, and the subsequent property deals. NCB contracts as advisors on privatisations. Giving Celtic Helicopters confidential Aer Lingus reports and plans. The Kinsealy sewage system.

Zombrex

daithimac wrote:

Just out of interest could you site one occasion on which he was a servant to the Interests of the people who gave him money.

Since the very first time he took the money :eek:

I was amazed during the Bertie thing a few weeks ago that people don't get this. People (Irish people) seem to think that corruption is only when someone gives you money and specifically asks you to do something for them. That is not true (though as Macy points out there is a long list of Haughey doing this).

Being given money by someone, either as a loan or a gift, puts you in a position of debt to that person. That is why they do it They don't have to ask you specifically for anything, you are still in an unethical situation.

Say for example the money Haughey got from Dunne. Dunne doesn't have to specifically ask Haughey for anything, because once Haughey has accepted that money he is in an uneven position. How likely is it that Haughey will then, in his political job, work for situations that go against the interests of Mr. Dunne? Very unlikely. Dunne is helping fund Haugheys lifestyle, Haughey owes him, and probably expected more.

Say I'm a TD and you run a business in say delivery. You give me 100,000 euro as a gift (or as Bertie likes to call it a "loan"). Now you don't ask for anything back, because you don't need to. A year later I'm in a position to support or ignore a move to protect say the environment that will be damaging to your business. You don't have to ask me to do anything, I'm going to vote in support of your business because you have already given me 100,000 and I'm eternally grateful. You are my "friend" who has "helped me" with a large sum of money. You have done something for me, and I'm going to help you out.

That is the nature of Irish corruption. It is not specific bribes for specific things, its bank rolling your friends in the Dail so that they are your friends, and "share" the same political and economic out look as you.

Even if it actually innocent, and say Bertie's friends or Haughey's friends really were just helping him out (*cough* bullsh1t *cough*), it is still unethical because you will still create a conflict of interests, where in the future your political responsibility to those who voted for you may clash with the interests of those who have given you money in the past. What do you do then, ignore the interests of those who have helped you with serious money? Doubtful

mountainyman

daithimac wrote:

Just out of interest could you site one occasion on which he was a servant to the Interests of the people who gave him money.

He gave instructions as to the approach to be taken to pursuing the liabilities outstanding from the Dunne's family trust.
If the rich had been made to pay thei taxes, perhaps the rest of the country could have tightened its belt less.


MM

Macy

Wicknight wrote:

I was amazed during the Bertie thing a few weeks ago that people don't get this. People (Irish people) seem to think that corruption is only when someone gives you money and specifically asks you to do something for them. That is not true (though as Macy points out there is a long list of Haughey doing this).

Just to point out, examples were asked for so I gave them. Probably more if you research, but those spring to mind. Totally agree with the rest of your post, but with Haughey you also have to add in the massive tax evasion, as mountainyman points out at a time when he was telling the nation to tighten it's belt him and his mates were avoiding paying their share (I suppose another example of him benfitting his friends rather than the country).

jdivision

daithimac wrote:

Just out of interest could you site one occasion on which he was a servant to the Interests of the people who gave him money.

He set up a meeting between the Dunnes family trust and the Revenue that resulted in a far lower tax bill for them
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1419204&issue_id=12642