Ireland's Commissioner 2009-2014 ?

Het-Field

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/novelty-betting/other-politics/irelands-next-eu-commissioner

The odds would suggest that former European Parliment President, and Progressive Democrats Deputy Leader, Pat Cox will take the plum position as Ireland's Commissioner. I would roundly endorse this. The man is very respected in a European context, and I would suggest has the backing of the Political Establishment.

John Bruton would also interest me. He has a huge international reputation, which has developed since 2004. I also have a view that he could perform on this level.

Maire Geogeghan Quinn, is the only FF I could possibly endorse at this stage. Her acitivites, while active in Irish politics, would be very much along the line of integration and co-operation amongst communities. This would suggest that her involvement at Commission level could be very helpful.

Does anybody have another take on the issue ?

PopeBuckfastXVI

I like Pat Cox.

John Bruton is too overtly religious for my tastes, running that campaign to have a god inserted into the EU constitution.

ninty9er

It's unlikely to be Cox as he'll have to remain a-political if he does do it, not trying to influence individual states as constituents. However he is currently doing the circuit of the country on a pro-Lisbon campaign, which he will no doubt succeed with, unless he becomes the commissioner before the referendum at which point he won't have the time.

I'd have no beef with Pat Cox being Ireland's nominee to the Commission, however I imagine if he were offered the job, he may consider turning it down.

View

My guess is the Attorney General. We have nominated Attorney Generals to the position on more than a few occasions.

CraggyIslander

As long as it's not: Mary Harney, Michael Martin or Bertie 'teflon' Ahern.. they'd all do more damage to irelands already deteriorated political image around europe

KINGVictor

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I like Pat Cox.

John Bruton is too overtly religious for my tastes, running that campaign to have a god inserted into the EU constitution.

That would be avery short sighted reason why you think Bruton would not be suitable for the Job.You have to realise and get used to the fact that people have their own convictions and it may not be in conformity with yours.I personally find him a bright and articulate fellow.The fact that he is not an atheist should not automatically disqualify him.

PopeBuckfastXVI

That's why I said 'for my tastes'.

KINGVictor

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

That's why I said 'for my tastes'.

Lets be clear you didnt say that.Never said why you liked Cox but went to express your dislike of Bruton .

Scofflaw

KINGVictor wrote: »

Lets be clear you didnt say that.Never said why you liked Cox but went to express your dislike of Bruton .

Stop. The post in question is only a couple of posts up, and "for my tastes" is exactly what it says.

So let's be clear - he did say that.

Scofflaw

K-9

Tony Blair or Declan Ganley?

KINGVictor

Scofflaw wrote: »

Stop. The post in question is only a couple of posts up, and "for my tastes" is exactly what it says.

So let's be clear - he did say that.

Scofflaw

Thanks for the clariication...I cant believed I didn't see that.

But Scofflaw..you really need to chill out...you were a bit like ...urrgh.Easy mate ...its not war...just discussing.

sceptre

KINGVictor wrote: »

Thanks for the clariication...I cant believed I didn't see that.

But Scofflaw..you really need to chill out...you were a bit like ...urrgh.Easy mate ...its not war...just discussing.

More reading and less high horsing without reading means less war. Moderation comments go to the Help Desk or to PM, not to the thread as the rules mention. More reading... (repeat as necessary)

FutureTaoiseach

I would like a Commissioner that favours EU membership and cooperation but not a Federal State in both name and substance. I'd reappoint McCreevy for his public opposition to Commissioner Kovacs plan for CCCTB (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base). But as he's apparently not interested, I'd appoint someone like Declan Ganley or Ulick McEvaddy instead. Pat Cox is a no-no for me because of his integrationist views, including his support for the rejected Lisbon Treaty. We want to be in Europe - not run by Europe.

KINGVictor

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I would like a Commissioner that favours EU membership and cooperation but not a Federal State in both name and substance. I'd reappoint McCreevy for his public opposition to Commissioner Kovacs plan for CCCTB (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base). But as he's apparently not interested, I'd appoint someone like Declan Ganley or Ulick McEvaddy instead. Pat Cox is a no-no for me because of his integrationist views, including his support for the rejected Lisbon Treaty. We want to be in Europe - not run by Europe.

I agree with everything you have said but I doubt if Ganley would ever have a look in.He has cost the Government enough pain already.:mad:

turgon

Ganleys not getting in would have nothing to do with any pain hes caused, it based on the fact he has repeatedly shows he is willing to ignore facts, make up lies, and oppose things for no good reason but rather solely for the idea of the opposition itself. Hes not the kind of personality you want with actual power.

FutureTaoiseach

turgon wrote: »

Ganleys not getting in would have nothing to do with any pain hes caused, it based on the fact he has repeatedly shows he is willing to ignore facts, make up lies, and oppose things for no good reason but rather solely for the idea of the opposition itself. Hes not the kind of personality you want with actual power.

In your opinion. Given that SIPO has just confirmed the funding of Libertas as a "bona-fide" loan, methinks that figures in the pro-Lisbon side are not above telling a few lies themselves. Maybe if he had broke the law like Justice Commissioner Jacques Barrot he'd fare better:

BBC News wrote:

Mr Barrot, 67, a close ally of French President Jacques Chirac, received a suspended jail term in a party funding case in 2000, but it was automatically erased by a 1995 presidential amnesty.Under French law, no reference may be made to such a sentence, which carries no criminal record.

turgon

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

In your opinion. Given that SIPO has just confirmed the funding of Libertas as a "bona-fide" loan, methinks that figures in the pro-Lisbon side are not above telling a few lies themselves.

So your saying Ganley telling lies is lee worse because some Yes side people also told lies? Is this what you really think?

Either way, I wasn't referring to his funding - I really couldn't care less about that - I was referring to the myriad of lies he conjured about Lisbon.

KINGVictor

turgon wrote: »

Ganleys not getting in would have nothing to do with any pain hes caused, it based on the fact he has repeatedly shows he is willing to ignore facts, make up lies, and oppose things for no good reason but rather solely for the idea of the opposition itself. Hes not the kind of personality you want with actual power.

But that is your opinion of him...it doesn't really have any bearing on his reputation.He has been accused of a lot...from fraud to fabricating lies.Till date,I have not seen him arrested or anyone given me any tangible evidence to support their claims.
If I go with your statement about his personality....we dont really a vast talent pool of men/women of character either.

FutureTaoiseach

turgon wrote: »

So your saying Ganley telling lies is lee worse because some Yes side people also told lies? Is this what you really think?

Either way, I wasn't referring to his funding - I really couldn't care less about that - I was referring to the myriad of lies he conjured about Lisbon.

What lies are you accusing him of telling? Are you similarly concerned about the lie told by Dick Roche to Declan Carty on Newstalk (Late Night Live) when asked, prior to the 2008 referendum, if a second referendum would be held if the people voted no, his response was "No". That is on record and is a fact. So I wouldn't go around lecturing from the pulpit if I were the yes side.

KINGVictor

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

What lies are you accusing him of telling? Are you similarly concerned about the lie told by Dick Roche to Declan Carty on Newstalk (Late Night Live) when asked, prior to the 2008 referendum, if a second referendum would be held if the people voted no, his response was "No". That is on record and is a fact. So I wouldn't go around lecturing from the pulpit if I were the yes side.

Or..Eamon Gilmore appearing on Six news on RTE on 13th June 200 saying that the treaty was dead because it had to be ratified by all 27 member nations...only for him to make a U-turn .

Scofflaw

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

What lies are you accusing him of telling? Are you similarly concerned about the lie told by Dick Roche to Declan Carty on Newstalk (Late Night Live) when asked, prior to the 2008 referendum, if a second referendum would be held if the people voted no, his response was "No". That is on record and is a fact. So I wouldn't go around lecturing from the pulpit if I were the yes side.

Libertas were extremely liberal in their use of lies. That's factually the case, and those lies were lies about what was in the Treaty - that it allowed abortion, that it allowed the EU to change our tax rates, that it meant we'd never have a referendum again, that if we voted No we wouldn't lose our Commissioner. All of those were lies, and they're lies about the Treaty. That's a different issue from Roche saying the government wouldn't hold hold a second one.

However, I would like to have a source for the quote nonetheless, because the closest I can find is July 17th last year (Source:OpenEurope), with Roche saying to Newstalk:

"It is far, far too early to be talking about a referendum or about some specific policy to go forward," the Irish European Affairs Minister, Dick Roche, told Newstalk radio. He said that "rash" proposals were "not helpful”, adding, "That’s not the way to formulate a policy in response to a referendum."

A Google search for the source of the quote turns up, as a sole source, you.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

KINGVictor wrote: »

Or..Eamon Gilmore appearing on Six news on RTE on 13th June 200 saying that the treaty was dead because it had to be ratified by all 27 member nations...only for him to make a U-turn .

Which is, again, irrelevant, because it didn't (obviously) have any impact on the vote.

cordially,
Scofflaw

turgon

What Scofflaw said. Ganley making up lies is not my opinion, its fact. You do realize you dont have to support just because hes on the same side, you know.

KINGVictor

turgon wrote: »

What Scofflaw said. Ganley making up lies is not my opinion, its fact. You do realize you dont have to support just because hes on the same side, you know.

Because Scofflaw said it does not make it a fact.
Where have I said I support him? I was simply pointing out inaccuracies in your post.Relying on other people's posts to justify yours doesn't really spaek too well.

turgon

KINGVictor wrote: »

Because Scofflaw said it does not make it a fact.

In general it usually does. But whatever about Scofflaw, Libertas spread lies about Lisbon that can be proved.

Scofflaw

KINGVictor wrote: »

Because Scofflaw said it does not make it a fact.
Where have I said I support him? I was simply pointing out inaccuracies in your post.Relying on other people's posts to justify yours doesn't really spaek too well.

I don't think turgon is claiming I speak ex cathedra on these things - more that the various Libertas claims were provably lies, and in some cases they were forced to retract them publicly. The most obvious one is abortion, where Caroline Simmons was put directly on the spot and agreed that there was nothing in Lisbon that impacted abortion - after Libertas had raised the claim repeatedly. The claim that we'd keep our Commissioner if we voted Lisbon down was, similarly, very simply demonstrable at the time as a lie - the Commissioner can only be kept under Lisbon.

cordially,
Scofflaw