Who exactly does Alan Shatter think he is?

Matt_Trakker

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/shatter-solo-run-on-photo-row-sparks-cabinet-rift-3233261.html

Mr Shatter wants a privacy law to protect the likes of the Duchess of Cambridge in a row that last night led to the editor of the 'Irish Daily Star' being suspended from work.

Six months ago, he announced he intended to review how the "current architecture" was working but said it would be "premature" to bring in the Privacy Bill. "If the Government decides we need substantive legislation in this area, the 2006 Bill will need repair to ensure it achieves its twofold objective of preventing unwarranted intrusions into individuals' personal privacy and striking a proper balance between the rights of individuals and the public interest," he said in March.

Yet last night, Mr Shatter was looking directly at the legislation itself and announcing plans to enact it.

So, what's his game? Is he a West-Brit annoyed that her royal boob-lady was photo'ed or could there be possible exernal pressure being applied that we don't know about.

There was a good thread already about those photos so probably no need to go into that again, but personally I'm pretty annoyed that Shatter could bring a law about because of his personal reaction to an English issue.

Pat Rabbitte is quoted in the piece with a quite sensible reaction...there's not something that you see written often... but surely Shatter is over-reacting.

Broadsheet have a good post about the debate on Pat Kenny's program last night & I have to say I agree with everything that Dearbhail McDonald said

You’re dealing with a post-Leveson landscape in the UK. And you’re also dealing with the fact that his Express newspapers, the core, the key, the jewel in the crown of that, is the Daily Express which is a pro-Royalist, pro-Monarchist newspaper. And I think it would be grossly amiss of any Government, and this is why I don’t believe that Alan Shatter’s views should be tolerated this evening. To allow Irish privacy laws to be determined by the British monarch.”

tl;dr version:
I don't like Alan Shatter, he's a mug and loves Kate Middleton's boobies more than most people and wants them only to himself.

admiralofthefleet

he should be more concerned with internal affairs than some foreign tart that married an inbred

ejmaztec

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/shatter-solo-run-on-photo-row-sparks-cabinet-rift-3233261.html





So, what's his game? Is he a West-Brit annoyed that her royal boob-lady was photo'ed or could there be possible exernal pressure being applied that we don't know about.

There was a good thread already about those photos so probably no need to go into that again, but personally I'm pretty annoyed that Shatter could bring a law about because of his personal reaction to an English issue.

Pat Rabbitte is quoted in the piece with a quite sensible reaction...there's not something that you see written often... but surely Shatter is over-reacting.

Broadsheet have a good post about the debate on Pat Kenny's program last night & I have to say I agree with everything that Dearbhail McDonald said



tl;dr version.
I don't like Alan Shatter, he's a mug and loves Kate Middleton's boobies more than most people and wants them only to himself.

He's only using the royal boobs controversy as a means to an end i.e. to stop people slagging him off in the media.

Augmerson

Shatter coming out with a Privacy bill has nothing to do with the Royals over in the UK. It's just convenient that it happened, good timing, so he can come out with an excuse for what I bet will be a bill aimed to protect the wealthy in our society and stop everybody else snooping into their business.

Border-Rat

He's not a West-Brit, he's a West-Israeli.

seamus

Shatter's justification is that a newspaper shouldn't be allowed to engage in money/frenzy/sensationalist activities under the guise of "free expression".

Which is correct, in theory.

However the entire theory of the right to free expression is that a Government should not have the power to decide what is and is not "free expression". It's a fundamental failure on his part to understand the nature of media and he would appear to be trying to protect the private lives of his buddies.

My name is URL

He's a bollox of the highest order. There's plenty of outdated laws in Ireland which need to be revisited and modernised yet he avoids ever dealing with those, instead jumping on whatever populist bandwagon is passing through town at the time.

Nodin

Considering that pictures were put in the Indo of the son of malcom mcarthur visting his father in prison and this raised not an eyebrow, you'd have to say this was a bit of a forelock tugging. Mind you, as its the bluesshirts, thats hardly suprising.

Balmed Out

He should do nothing at all until we have a similar situation of our own involving mary harney and then resign for not having tackled the situation sooner.

latenia

Number of complaints made to the regulator here: 0

I think it's kind of obvious Irish people don't really care that much.

Nodin

Balmed Out wrote: »

He should do nothing at all until we have a similar situation of our own involving mary harney ......

....that whould have to be handled at the Internation Criminal Court under the crimes against humanity legislation

rasper

Very wary of a blueshirt government who first opportunity wants to rush through privacy laws , for who exactly , and yet anything remotely reformist eg upward only rents or universal healthcare is unconstitutional .
Smells like censorship to me shatter

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I stopped reading at the "west-brit" bit. Always do. So.

Privacy laws? Long overdue. As I said in a different thread, everyone is entitled to privacy. There is no difference between a royal and a celeb and no difference between a celeb and an ordinary Joe. End of.

Nodin

rasper wrote: »

Very wary of a blueshirt government who first opportunity wants to rush through privacy laws , for who exactly , ..............

I've no idea, at all, whatsoever. Complete mystery, in fact.

Mint Sauce

Thinly veiled 'Katie and her Boobs/Ban the Star/Attack the Goverment' Thread.

Nodin

irish-stew wrote: »

Thinly veiled 'Katie and her Boobs/Ban the Star/Attack the Goverment' Thread.

No, looks like a blatant 'slag off stupid statement by Minister' thread to me.

Helix

why are people complaining about something that could potentially improve the quality of the media in ireland dramatically, while going a way to shutting down this nonsense celebrity culture that people are unhealthily obsessed with?

sure there are bigger fish to fry, but as an aside it's hardly a bad thing

magicbastarder

if it's legally OK for an irish newspaper to publish photos of a half naked woman, secretly taken by a peeping tom, and sold for nothing but financial gain - then yes, we do need to change the law here.

Nodin

Helix wrote: »

why are people complaining about something that could potentially improve the quality of the media in ireland dramatically, while going a way to shutting down this nonsense celebrity culture that people are unhealthily obsessed with?

It would have no effect on "celebrity culture" because the usual crew of non-entities actively court the media. In addition, theres the fact that various things have happened over the years and ne'er a peep, but when some Brit royal gets snapped its 'I will revisit my bill'.

I find it hilarious that the one time the Justice minister pops his head from out of his ......, thats its because some english womans breasts are in the papers.:rolleyes:

Not once have I heard anything about the crime thats getting out of hand in this country. Nah he wants tighter privacy laws for himself and his cronies in gov, so we cant tell whos living high on Cotton Hill and sucking us dry.

God forbid he sort out the crime rates. Pity he wasnt so upset about the people of rural Ireland being left as sitting ducks in some areas due to lack of policing,

:mad:

Border-Rat

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I stopped reading at the "west-brit" bit. Always do. So.

Yes, I heard this kind of thing upsets East-Brits. :mad:

Biggins

Look, we are dealing with a government that can have a children's referendum on a Saturday (November 10th 2012 to be exact) but cannot organise any political election ever on a weekend!
(We wonder why? Well not really, the answer is obvious to some)

...In other words - they do things to only suit themselves and their agenda!

CardBordWindow

Alan Shatter.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

rasper wrote: »

Very wary of a blueshirt government who first opportunity wants to rush through privacy laws , for who exactly , and yet anything remotely reformist eg upward only rents or universal healthcare is unconstitutional .
Smells like censorship to me shatter

Jesus Christ, if you can't tell the difference between freedom of expression and privacy you should not be allowed anywhere near the internet. Or a camera.

Larbre34

He's only biding his time, he shall be Emperor Alan Augustus, and a terrible despot he shall be

Larbre34

Biggins wrote: »

Look, we are dealing with a government that can have a children's referendum on a Saturday (November 10th 2012 to be exact) but cannot organise any political election ever on a weekend!
(We wonder why? Well not really, the answer is obvious to some)

...In other words - they do things to only suit themselves and their agenda!

The referendum shall not take place on a Saturday.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Border-Rat wrote: »

Yes, I heard this kind of thing upsets East-Brits. :mad:

I know. You'd think this people would be a little bit more geographical correctness towards the sensitive amongst us when blindly aiming their insults.

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

I am against censorship they have every right to print it.

I think it is a shame she has not a shred of savy or grace.

No it will progress untilone cannot call her a tart or a slut in a newspaper until one cannot run negative stories.

It is a facist move by a very powerful family

Shatter is totally wrong and an embarrassment. To use privacy laws for this story is a missjudgement.

And it is double standards what about Harry's escapades??

And anyone pictured by the press ???

Totaly a*se lick and a rubbish TD he is not dealing with law and order here he should be PROTECTING our free media.

And it is the Irish people's opinion and favour he should be worried about.

fishy fishy

alan Shatter works in ireland - I wonder does he realize that? He should be worried about what is going on for the people of Ireland, and not trying to set up a law that protect rich peoples boobs.

In all honesty that woman knows what she got herself into - does she really not think that this would happen. c'mon. Sarah and toe sucking, Diana and her stories.

Let the UK do the law - they serve her after all.

alan shatter should be taking care of business at home.

HeyThereDeliah

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

he should be more concerned with internal affairs than some foreign tart that married an inbred

She is hardly a tart now in fairness and he is not an inbred.
They should have ignored the pictures in the first place and laughed it off, press would soon get tired of it when no one was interested.

Biggins

Larbre34 wrote: »

The referendum shall not take place on a Saturday.

REALLY?

http://www.thejournal.ie/childrens-rights-referendum-date-november-10-599760-Sep2012/

THE LONG-AWAITED CHILDREN’S rights referendum is to be held on Saturday 10 November, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has announced.
He gave the announcement in the Dáil chamber just before 4pm this afternoon.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0918/childrens-referendum-to-be-held-on-10-november.html

Taoiseach Enda Kenny has announced the Children’s Referendum will be held on Saturday, 10 November.

Right - got it!

latenia

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

She is hardly a tart now in fairness and he is not an inbred.

Consorts are really just fancy prostitutes IMO. William's grandparents are 3rd cousins.

Fratton Fred

I'm off to buy myself a super long lense and take a picture of Colette McArdle's baps. They should earn me a few quid when I sell them to British newspapers.

ilovesleep

ejmaztec wrote: »

He's only using the royal boobs controversy as a means to an end i.e. to stop people slagging him off in the media.

Ireland is a dictorship dressed up as a democracy.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

ilovesleep wrote: »

Ireland is a dictorship dressed up as a democracy.

And this is different to everywhere else in the world because....?

Seriously. Privacy exists. Live with it.

ilovesleep

Jake1 wrote: »

I find it hilarious that the one time the Justice minister pops his head from out of his ......, thats its because some english womans breasts are in the papers.:rolleyes:

Not once have I heard anything about the crime thats getting out of hand in this country. Nah he wants tighter privacy laws for himself and his cronies in gov, so we cant tell whos living high on Cotton Hill and sucking us dry.

God forbid he sort out the crime rates. Pity he wasnt so upset about the people of rural Ireland being left as sitting ducks in some areas due to lack of policing,

:mad:

I believe in this. Kate is living in the uk. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, those photos were taking in france.

Fratton Fred

ilovesleep wrote: »

I believe in this. Kate is living in the uk. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, those photos were taking in france.

So why are an Irish newspaper publishing them?

Fenian Army

Fine Gaelers have a fetish for censorship, sure he wants to bring back section 31

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/minister-criticises-rte-over-platform-given-to-dissidents-3228142.html

HeyThereDeliah

latenia wrote: »

Consorts are really just fancy prostitutes IMO. William's grandparents are 3rd cousins.

It's not the fact he dated her for years loves her and wanted to marry her same as other couples?
You think she is just a prostitute and he married her for what ?
His grandparents are cousins what of it lots of cousins marry.

Alan Shatter is overreacting IMO no need for new laws.

ilovesleep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So why are an Irish newspaper publishing them?

I don't know and I don't fcuking care.

Biggins

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

...Alan Shatter is overreacting IMO no need for new laws.

He's simply using the latest excuse to curtail the abilities of media to delve into the actions of those that oft times does not want to be exposed for their double -standard, corruption and lies.

It will in theory make it illegal to use a name or image of any person without their express permission.

That mean if a minister is found surrounded and involved in corruption, lies or double-standards, a paper cannot name them!

Priests, or politicians, their actions, inactions, their affairs (external to marriage) would be curtailed upon reporting on.

Draconian is the measures. The latest move of a few that have slipped in already!

ilovesleep

ilovesleep wrote: »

I believe in this. Kate is living in the uk. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, those photos were taking in france.

Far as I know they were taken in France yeah.

We had a paramilitary funeral on the streets of Dublin, wonder was he so worried about that?? Maybe he did make a statement and I missed it, but if he did, pity I didnt hear as much about it as I have regarding Kates breasts and the privacy issue here in Ireland.

To me this is just an excuse for him to make sure that what he and the rest of that shower are at, are kept hidden from us .

Will the papers be able to report on the private lives of Ministers in the future?

It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

Fratton Fred

Jake1 wrote: »

Far as I know they were taken in France yeah.

We had a paramilitary funeral on the streets of Dublin, wonder was he so worried about that?? Maybe he did make a statement and I missed it, but if he did, pity I didnt hear as much about it as I have regarding Kates breasts and the privacy issue here in Ireland.

To me this is just an excuse for him to make sure that what he and the rest of that shower are at, are kept hidden from us .

Will the papers be able to report on the private lives of Ministers in the future?

It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

he said quite a lot actually, enough to make the guards get off their arses and arrest 14 people.

c_man

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

he should be more concerned with internal affairs than some foreign tart that married an inbred

Jeez, what did they do to you? Don't disagree with the initial part.

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

he said quite a lot actually, enough to make the guards get off their arses and arrest 14 people.

Ok fair enough, but I certainly didnt hear about it as much as Ive heard about this Kate thing.

ilovesleep

Jake1 wrote: »

Far as I know they were taken in France yeah.

We had a paramilitary funeral on the streets of Dublin, wonder was he so worried about that?? Maybe he did make a statement and I missed it, but if he did, pity I didnt hear as much about it as I have regarding Kates breasts and the privacy issue here in Ireland.

To me this is just an excuse for him to make sure that what he and the rest of that shower are at, are kept hidden from us .

Will the papers be able to report on the private lives of Ministers in the future?

It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

And look what happened in private and behind closed doors:

The bank guarantee

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Fenian Army wrote: »

Fine Gaelers have a fetish for censorship, sure he wants to bring back section 31

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/minister-criticises-rte-over-platform-given-to-dissidents-3228142.html

Are you capable of forming any political opinion wihtout basing it on the Civil War?

rgmmg

I thought this thread was about his family tree.

Fenian Army

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Are you capable of forming any political opinion wihtout basing it on the Civil War?

what does what I said have to do with the civil war? (dare I ask)

galgar

One of Shatter's first Bills was the Legal Service Bill which contains a section that allows solicitors become Senior Counsel, a vanity piece of legislation on his behalf. The Personal Insolvency Bill should have been the first thing that was drafted by the new Government and we still haven't got it.
All this outcry about a foreign monarchs topless photos is laughable, would there be as much outcry if it was the future queen of Spain, Holland or Monaco that was photographed.
At the start of this month a young boy in Co. Cork was found dead, within hours of this being reported it emerged that the family had been involved with the HSE. Besides the data protection and confidentiality aspects of this, there has been no outcry about this invasion of a family's privacy, especially at such a tragic time. A similar incident occurred with the tragic death of 2 young men in Kinsale due to an alleged drug overdose, which was reported within hours of the news breaking, before any autopsy was done and any proof that the deaths were due to drugs. Still no outcry about privacy.
But a topless picture of a lady who lives in the world of celebrity and everyone gets their knickers in a twist.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Alan ****ter has shown himself time and time again to be a jumped up little dictator. He couldn't care less about ordinary people or crime levels. He hasn't introduced a single law that will make any difference to crime levels in this country. He's out for himself and his cronies and no one else. This new privacy bill is for his benefit, not Kate middletons or any other famous person. It's because the vast majority of current politicians are rotten to the core and he knows they will all eventually be found out. He's on a damage limitation exercise for the future.