Tanaiste claims we have 'gist' of tribunal that can't go on forever

lostexpectation

MontgomeryClift wrote:

Remember Frank Connolly and the Centre for Public Inquiry? That fuss was to have the CPI shut down because it was about to investigate McDowell's purchase of the Thornton Hall site for at least six times what it was worth. It worked so successfully then why not try something similar with the tribunal?

it was moriarty who robbed the northern bank!

that'll do it

Glenbhoy

Tristrame wrote:

I'm sure he negotiated a price with them.

and then

Tristrame wrote:

Theres a difference between not needing money and píssing whats already collected away for lack of negotiation.

So which is it?

Perhaps McDowell didn't tell Roche that he was going to go public with his private thoughts?

No, maybe not, in fact maybe that's why Bertie was caught on the hop with his estimate of 400M for 3rd party discovery costs?

Of course either could be right or there could be something entirely different out there to be said yet on the matter.

Agreed, but looking at the events as they have transpired, one would have to feel that this was a concerted effort to test the public appetite for closing down the tribunals - incidentally, that O'Callaghan supreme court action is due for decision within a fortnight!

That ignores (1) that this tribunal could go on ad infinitum if it takes an as yet unknown tangent.
It has the form to do so already with the way it has taken so long tangential to its initial purpose to get to todays stage. and (2) The fact that you are pre supposing that McDowell an emminent former Barrister/SC is stupid.

I remain unconvinced of either

McDowell is not as smart as he makes himself out to be, I am also unconvinced as to just how emminent he actually was, also presuming he was so good, could he not have warned the Dail, that the terms of reference they set out for the tribunal were so broad as to leave it unavoidable that tangental enquiries would have to be considered?
As for the infinitum, why do you not believe the judge, he told the dail yesterday that he had indicated to the minister that there was unlikely to be more than a year left.

Glenbhoy

Glenbhoy wrote:

and then

So which is it?

You already know,I answered it in what you quoted.

Agreed, but looking at the events as they have transpired, one would have to feel that this was a concerted effort to test the public appetite for closing down the tribunals - incidentally, that O'Callaghan supreme court action is due for decision within a fortnight!

You mean you could feel that.
It's a legitimate take to have on it but not a neutral one.

McDowell is not as smart as he makes himself out to be, I am also unconvinced as to just how emminent he actually was, also presuming he was so good, could he not have warned the Dail, that the terms of reference they set out for the tribunal were so broad as to leave it unavoidable that tangental enquiries would have to be considered?
As for the infinitum, why do you not believe the judge, he told the dail yesterday that he had indicated to the minister that there was unlikely to be more than a year left.

In my experience,Lawyers,Barristers and SC's do what they are hired to do.
After all in most if not all court cases there are two sides both represented by inteligent teams not stupid teams.
McDowell wouldn't be any different,his job is to put the governments case.

Akrasia wrote:

my point was that mcdowell's motivation isn't money. There is something else he's worried about.

Which I've said would indicate that he's stupid if such worries were driving a need to close the tribunal.
He can't and won't and he isn't stupid.