Should the Taoiseach resign?

spanner

As echoed by other posters he shouldnt resign because in a few weeks we the people get to chose weather we are happy with his conduct.

As far as I am concerned every stay at home voter, PD and FF voter are saying, "yes I dont mind what Bertie did and really dont care if he continues"

what will we say....

Pride Fighter

Bertie should resign and let Cowen take the reigns. At least Cowen appears to be an honest if slightly odd politician.

DoubleJoe7

spanner wrote:

As echoed by other posters he shouldnt resign because in a few weeks we the people get to chose weather we are happy with his conduct.

As far as I am concerned every stay at home voter, PD and FF voter are saying, "yes I dont mind what Bertie did and really dont care if he continues"

what will we say....

The problem is, however, that many "stay at home" or absent voters will be doing so not out of choice but because they can't due to the Thursday vote. "Selective Democracy" could well bail the crook out...

Pride Fighter

True. Nearly every 3rd level institute will have exams on that day meaning that thousands if not hundreds of thousands of students from all over the country wont be able to vote. Bertie knows this and students tend to be liberal and environmentalists. If they could vote the Greens could get over a dozen seats with labour going over two dozen. Electoral gerrymandering by Bertie at its best.

patrickc

in simple terms he should.. he's a muppet and the next haughey as far as im concerned

Pride Fighter

lol. Well said. Couldnt have said it better myself.

SeanW

Should the Taoiseach resign?

IMO, no.

Even though I'm not his biggest fan, I do believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and this is an absolute.

I will wait to see what he has to say later this week in his statement. Like many others, I'd like this election campaign to be done on issues, which quite frankly there are a lot of, not Chinese Whispers about someone's finances. Michael McDowell needs to figure out what he's doing. If he has some serious information about Bertie's finances that is too troubling, he should reveal this information and get out of government. If not, he should stop being a drama queen.

Heinrich

Chakar wrote:

The question is why would he leave?

Integrity a good enough reason?

Selective revelations

Selective democracy

Selective integrity

Select Velcro Taoiseach

SeanW

SeanW wrote:

IMO, no.

Even though I'm not his biggest fan, I do believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and this is an absolute.

I will wait to see what he has to say later this week in his statement. Like many others, I'd like this election campaign to be done on issues, which quite frankly there are a lot of, not Chinese Whispers about someone's finances. Michael McDowell needs to figure out what he's doing. If he has some serious information about Bertie's finances that is too troubling, he should reveal this information and get out of government. If not, he should stop being a drama queen.

well said.

Heinrich

Tristrame wrote:

well said.

Eloquent yes, valid not so sure.

...as in - a nicely wrapped and delivered turd is still a turd.

Time to decide if we want shady dealers running the show. There is no shadow of doubt that the revelations and how they are being delivered are shady.

joolsveer

I don't think Bertie should resign as after all he hasn't taken as much money from his friends and the tax payer as Charles J. Haughey who was never convicted of any crime. I think the media are orchestrating a campaign of vilification against Bertie. He is not doing anything that any other FFer wouldn't do in the same circumstances.

My granny had a saying "if you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas". Wasn't Bertie the protégé of Charlie? Why would anybody expect him to behave in a different way to his mentor? You can't expect a leopard to change his spots.

Heinrich

joolsveer wrote:

I don't think Bertie should resign as after all he hasn't taken as much money from his friends and the tax payer as Charles J. Haughey who was never convicted of any crime.

It is not known how much money Bertie got from his friends and the taxpayer. That is why we have the expensive tribunals which do not have any real powers. They simply try to make the unclear clear.

When the Bertiegate was in full swing in October last, certain monies were not mentioned and this is why McD was doing his grumbling. Even allowing for those recent disclosures it is not beyond the realms of reason to believe that there could be further money issues which have not been disclosed.

The thundering silence of Celia and Miriam is also questionable. If I was involved in suspicions of this nature I would certainly do mz utmost to clear my (good) name.

As for sleeping with dogs - rabies comes to mind.

Dandesav

joolsveer wrote:

I don't think Bertie should resign as after all he hasn't taken as much money from his friends and the tax payer as Charles J. Haughey who was never convicted of any crime. I think the media are orchestrating a campaign of vilification against Bertie. He is not doing anything that any other FFer wouldn't do in the same circumstances.

So because Charlie got away with it Bertie should to? It doesn't matter how much or how little he took, the fact is he did.

cast_iron

SeanW wrote:

I
Even though I'm not his biggest fan, I do believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and this is an absolute.

I will wait to see what he has to say later this week in his statement. Like many others, I'd like this election campaign to be done on issues, which quite frankly there are a lot of, not Chinese Whispers about someone's finances. Michael McDowell needs to figure out what he's doing. If he has some serious information about Bertie's finances that is too troubling, he should reveal this information and get out of government. If not, he should stop being a drama queen.

So, on the one hand you are saying we should wait to let Bertie explain himself. But on the other hand, McDowell shouldn't offer the same courtesy?

jos28

Bertie was trained by the Master. Its obvious that there is a ton of sh** that the Taoiseach has kept hidden. But like Charlie it will all come out eventually. He should just own up and face the consequences.

Seth Brundle

Bertie wasn't trained by the master. He was too busy signing blank cheques for him to receive any training!

Dandesav

jos28 wrote:

Bertie was trained by the Master. Its obvious that there is a ton of sh** that the Taoiseach has kept hidden. But like Charlie it will all come out eventually. He should just own up and face the consequences.

Didn't Charlie once call Bertie 'the most cunning, the most devious'?

Jesus, if HE calls you that...

Lennoxschips

Bertie shuold have been sacked in October when he admitted himself that he appointed influential businessmen and develepors to important state boards not, in his words, because they just all happened to give him loadsamoney (which didn't have to be repaid, let's be honest), but because they were his friends.

Anybody who doesn't understand the corruption and cronyism involved in that is in cloud cuckoo land.

And then he has the cheek to show up at rugby matches with paddy the plasterer sitting next to him. Two fingers to the honest, hard-working people of Ireland, that is.

is_that_so

SeanW wrote:

IMO, no.

Even though I'm not his biggest fan, I do believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and this is an absolute.

I will wait to see what he has to say later this week in his statement. Like many others, I'd like this election campaign to be done on issues, which quite frankly there are a lot of, not Chinese Whispers about someone's finances. Michael McDowell needs to figure out what he's doing. If he has some serious information about Bertie's finances that is too troubling, he should reveal this information and get out of government. If not, he should stop being a drama queen.

Agreed.

The danger of this story, as far as I can see, is that the election could end up going away from the government just because the alternative are not the government.

I am of the opinion that this election should be fought on issues that will affect us for the next five years. Bertie Gate and Mahon will have gone long before that time. He can be replaced, albeit not before the election.

So there is a credibility issue about him, but does that issue , by association extend to his party?

I would much rather see the decision we make, based on what is best for the country than a media-driven campaign to get Bertie. As some of the RTE pundits mentioned last week there is no telling what way the story can go and what it will do. Last November is telling in how the story then backfired , in that his popularity rose.

I am hoping that the statement when it comes, will answer enough questions for the story to be returned to Mahon , where I think it belongs.

oscarBravo

is_that_so wrote:

So there is a credibility issue about him, but does that issue , by association extend to his party?

Pretty much automatically, if they unequivocally back him.

is_that_so

oscarBravo wrote:

Pretty much automatically, if they unequivocally back him.

You see this is the problem I have with it all. I don't think that , although I can think of any other number of reasons why I would vote them out.

A voter thinking "I am not going to vote FF just because Bertie's in it" rather than "Which party has the best policies for me and the country?" runs the risk of getting a government he or she is almost forced to choose.

Akrasia

It doesn't matter what policies a party puts forward in a manifesto, if they are being presented by people with no integrity or honesty.

The policies and promises are a joke anyway. There is no way in hell the government can increase public spending while reducing taxes in a time were the economy is suffering serious problems that are not being even acknowledged by any of the big parties.

Corruption is rife in Ireland at present. Anyone with eyes in their head can see the dodgy planning decisions that have been made over the last 10 years in every part of the country, the cosy relationship between developers and other special interests has destroyed our country. 10 years of unrestrained greed and it shows in the decline in our public services while private wealth has been shifted more and more into the hands of the few well connected cronies and 'personal friends'

Villain

Fair play to Sean O'Rourke I thought he was excellent last night, if the Tanaiste needs the People of Ireland to tell him whether he has confidence in the Taoiseach or not I think one of them needs to go, just a question of which one!

As for Bertie been innocent until proven guilty yea right he is :rolleyes:, oh and as OscarBarvo said in another thread on a different subject

Dogs in the street, etc etc, but you can call it my unsubstantiated opinion if it will make you feel better

Mick86

SeanW wrote:

Even though I'm not his biggest fan, I do believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and this is an absolute.

Yes he is innocent until proven guilty. But he has a case to answer in my opinion, yet, like Haughey, he will never be brought to trial. On the subject of which, innocent until proven guilty applies solely to a court not a discussion board.

Heinrich wrote:

Integrity a good enough reason?

Selective revelations

Selective democracy

Selective integrity

Select Velcro Taoiseach

Very true. But for these reasons he should be booted out by the electorate.

Incidentally I hope Ms Larkin paid tax on her little windfall back in the 1990s.:p

joolsveer wrote:

I don't think Bertie should resign as after all he hasn't taken as much money from his friends and the tax payer as Charles J. Haughey...

...He is not doing anything that any other FFer wouldn't do in the same circumstances...

Ah sure that's alright then.:rolleyes:

joolsveer wrote:

who was never convicted of any crime...

I still think Harney deliberately prejudiced any hope of a trial.

joolsveer wrote:

Why would anybody expect him to behave in a different way to his mentor? You can't expect a leopard to change his spots.

So we can expect equal corruption from every Fianna Fáil government from now on then.

is_that_so wrote:

A voter thinking "I am not going to vote FF just because Bertie's in it" rather than "Which party has the best policies for me and the country?" runs the risk of getting a government he or she is almost forced to choose.

On the other hand a voter thinking he is going to vote FF because the party has the best policies for him and the country will certainly be giving the impression to Bertie and his fellow blackguards that the voter approves of his actions, or at least does not believe Bertie did anything wrong.

joolsveer

Bertie is very popular with the electorate in his constituency so he must be doing something right. If FF are perceived as the party of corruption it must be a facet of politics that is admired by very many voters. Compare FF's vote to that of the PDs.

Mick86

joolsveer wrote:

Bertie is very popular with the electorate in his constituency so he must be doing something right.

Compare FF's vote to that of the PDs.

Popularity is not a measure of integrity.

joolsveer wrote:

If FF are perceived as the party of corruption it must be a facet of politics that is admired by very many voters.

Or ignored in the interests of the economy or whatever.

RainyDay

Lennoxschips wrote:

I don't think it matters if he's guilty or innocent, politicians are supposed to set a good example. When you are Minister of Finance you do not keep 50k stashed in a safe at the office

I still cannot get my head around the €50k cash in his safe. He said he didn't have a bank account - right? So how was he paid his TD/Ministerial salary? Presumably Minister's aren't paid in cash, so he was paid by cheque or credit transfer? If he was paid by credit transfer to someone else's account, then surely this was 'de facto' his own account, in the same way that the courts ruled that the credit card accounts operated by a taxi driver for Liam Lawlor were effectively Lawlor's accounts. If crossed Departmental cheques were being lodged to an account in any one else's name, then someone was breaking the law, either the bank or the account owner.

SeanW

In the past, you could cash a cheque without having an account - you would simply take the cheque to the accountholders branch and cash it out there.

Its only since 2000-ish (not sure exactly) that you had to have an account to cash a cheque.

RainyDay

SeanW wrote:

In the past, you could cash a cheque without having an account - you would simply take the cheque to the accountholders branch and cash it out there.

Its only since 2000-ish (not sure exactly) that you had to have an account to cash a cheque.

Not a crossed cheque. A crossed cheque cannot (and could not in the past) be cashed - it must be lodged to an account in the name of the payee of the cheque.

galwayrush

If he had any morals he would resign. All Weasel Words,he now comes across as a very dishonest person.