Minister Shatter and Commissioner Callinan should both resign in disgrace

Fred Cohen

Re: Godge - Please don't feed the troll.

Martin Callinian to resign today ?

Fred Cohen

bubblypop wrote: »

Yes I'm not saying the information they gave in relation to tickets being cancelled was unlawful.
But the information given by Wilson to Clare Daly was specifically personal info relating to her attending a meeting. This information was captured on the garda intelligence and handed out by a guard to her.
Are you saying that because she is in the oireachtas she is entitled to confidential info on the garda system that relates to her?
Why should she be different to everyone else in the country?

OK I'll bite.

The reason she is different is because she was elected to Dail.

Not sure what meeting you're talking about but why shouldn't she know about it?

bajer101

@Godge - it's late and it is quite complicated to try and respond to multiple quotes from you that span across posts - so I will try to respond with the benefit of embedded quotes, if you don't mind. If there are any particular issues or points that I miss, feel free to call me on them. I enjoy engaging with you.

Firstly, your accusation that I did not read the report and that I based my opinion on tabloid reporting is ridiculous, and IMO is an attempt to discredit my posts. We have debated strongly on this subject over the last few weeks and you have always viewed my posts seriously, and taken time to quote them and respond. To suddenly accuse me of me of basing my opinions on tabloid headlines is below par.

To address the main point of your rebuttal, that Shatter has been vindicated by this report - he really hasn't. The problem is that Shatter tried to discredit McCabe. It really is that simple.

bajer101

@Godge

Just pretend that you are in opposition.

aloyisious

As far as I can see, last night's reported statement by Comm Callinan is back-pedalling on what he clearly originally meant, that is that the public whistle-blowing by Gardai on other serving Gardai was "disgusting". He did not like what had been kept under wraps being revealed by a serving member, because it meant his power to keep Garda abuse of administrative powers secret was lost. If Comm Callinan repeat's his claim that his original statement to the Dail committee, and his broadcast comment to the same effect, was misunderstood, then he doesn't understand the obvious fact that his credibility is gone. Such a failure is cause enough for him to go before he destroy's the force by internal splits. Is it going to take another Judge having to sit and investigate Garda actions, (in this case Comm Callinan's) before he is fired?

As for Alan Shatter, his refusal to accept the fact that his overt support of the official Garda line on the whistle-blowing (as lead by Comm Callinan) is wrong, and his stone-walling statement to the Dail last night (broadcast on the national news) was a denial and failure to accept the truth that Sgt McCabe was right, something is rotten within an Garda Siochana. The Garda Inspectorate report - which Alan Shatter is (coincidentally) being credited with by some sources as initiating, clearly show's the last. He clearly owes an official apology to Sgt McCabe and to the other (retired) Gda involved in the whistle-blowing. Hopefully it won't blow over while the St Paddy's Day Dail recess is (coincidentally) on.

Edit:The Irish Times has reported why Alan Shatter won't (apparently) apologise; because of the way the whistleblowers accessed the PULSE system and liberally released the information publicly. That (IMO) is being as "Jesuitical" as condemning a whistle-blowing priest revealing the secrets of the confessional admissions of an abuser. The wrong of going outside the ranks to reveal wrongdoing being concealed within the force obliged and paid to enforce legal adherence to our state's laws are NOT EQUAL. The claim that the Points Penalty issue is only a Garda Policy Matter (as mentioned in the Irish Times report: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/cabinet-agrees-to-overhaul-penalty-points-regime-1.1722838) is hogwash.

expectationlost

bubblypop wrote: »

seriously to give information about the person themselves to those people because they are members of the oireachtas.
do you find this fair?
why should these members find out from individual members what information about themselves is captured on the Garda information site?

why are they different from everyone else in the country?
if you want to know what information is held about you, you have to apply.why should it be ok for any Guard to give information to anyone just because they are in the dail?
he didnt give her this information for any whistleblowing reason, it was private info about her.

because clare daly was victim of a leak from elsewhere in the gardai

expectationlost

bubblypop wrote: »

so if someone in the dail was stopped by a guard last week, you think they should be entitled to whatever information is on the Garda system in relation to them? do you think some friend of theirs or a Guard that they know should give them this info just because they are a member of the oireachtas?

but it wasn't last week it was a meeting she was at lawfully, years ago, theres a question as to why it s recorded at all.

expectationlost

its possible that more pulse information came out through journalists spinning for the gardai then came from mccabe and wilson on penalty points issue

bajer101

expectationlost wrote: »

its possible that more pulse information came out through journalists spinning for the gardai then came from mccabe and wilson on penalty points issue

The big question - which has been alluded to - is did someone who had points removed, go on to kill someone.

gizmo555

expectationlost wrote: »

its possible that more pulse information came out through journalists spinning for the gardai then came from mccabe and wilson on penalty points issue

This is always the way. You can leak as much as you like as long as it's in the government and authorities' favour.

If you're shedding light on misconduct you're demonized like McCabe & Wilson, or as they did in the USA, you're banged up for decades like Private Manning.

Fred Cohen

Fred Cohen wrote: »

OK I'll bite.

The reason she is different is because she was elected to Dail.

Not sure what meeting you're talking about but why shouldn't she know about it?

If ordinary Joe on the street wants to know what information the gardai have about them then they apply under the data protection act.

Sure if a dail member got stopped by gardai, then its OK for them to find out from some other guard what information is on the system in relation to the incident?
Surely that's abuse of power.

expectationlost

expectationlost wrote: »

but it wasn't last week it was a meeting she was at lawfully, a years ago, theres a question as to why it s recorded at all.

There's no question why its recorded.
That's a matter for the guard who entered the information.
Its not for the public to decide.

Anyway, back on topic, I think its fairly clear at this stage that shatter and callinan are not going to go easy!

I think shatter will eventually force callinan to retire, behind the scenes, to save himself.

Godge

Fred Cohen wrote: »

OK I'll bite.

The reason she is different is because she was elected to Dail.

Not sure what meeting you're talking about but why shouldn't she know about it?

Yes, let's go back to the days when TDs had a special relationship with the Gardai.

When a Garda arrived to shut a pub after hours and a TD was there he could be told to walk away.
When a Garda stopped the same TD an hour later he could be told to forget about breathalysing him.
When a Garda had arrested a friend of a TD for being drunk and disorderly, he could be told to let it drop.

Many other similar examples over the years. The Gardai must be independent and the Garda Inspectorate and GSOC must be independent.

Godge

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/alan-shatter-reforms-ensure-penalty-points-will-be-handled-without-fear-or-favour-30088359.html

Shatter speaks out on the issue.



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inspectorate-findings-are-embarassing-for-the-garda-but-not-devastating-1.1722785


"There is no claim of corruption, which was the central accusation of the Garda whistleblowers and those who supported them, including a number of independent TDs."

Interesting conclusion by Conor Lally in the Irish Times.

K-9

Godge wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/alan-shatter-reforms-ensure-penalty-points-will-be-handled-without-fear-or-favour-30088359.html

Shatter speaks out on the issue.



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inspectorate-findings-are-embarassing-for-the-garda-but-not-devastating-1.1722785


"There is no claim of corruption, which was the central accusation of the Garda whistleblowers and those who supported them, including a number of independent TDs."

Interesting conclusion by Conor Lally in the Irish Times.

Well, errr, with such a lax system with little to no controls it would be very hard to prove corruption. Shatter is complimentary enough about the whistleblowers, they helped bring the issue to wider attention so its all good!

Sierra Oscar

Is that not a very narrow definition of corruption - i.e. money having to exchange hands? What about the good aul barter system? Some people would argue that removing penalty points for a friend, even if they did not give you money, would be a corrupt act in itself as it is an abuse of power.

Anyway, an absolutely stupid comment for Shatter to make. The Garda Siochana Inspectorate does not (actually CANNOT) investigate alleged corruption. It is specifically setup to examine the institutional framework of the force and its operation.

The Inspectorate specifically highlighted this when asked to comment on the Minister's reaction this morning.

Undertaking inspections in relation to any particular aspects of the operation and administration of the Garda Síochána, as requested to do so by the Minister and;

http://www.gsinsp.ie/

The Minister knows this, so why make the stupid comment?

Godge

K-9 wrote: »

Well, errr, with such a lax system with little to no controls it would be very hard to prove corruption. Shatter is complimentary enough about the whistleblowers, they helped bring the issue to wider attention so its all good!

There was never anything in this issue to cause a problem for Shatter especially as he acted quickly on the earlier reports he got last year and asked for a better system.

The next set of reports may give him a problem depending on what they say.

Godge

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Is that not a very narrow definition of corruption - i.e. money having to exchange hands? What about the good aul barter system? Some people would argue that removing penalty points for a friend, even if they did not give you money, would be a corrupt act in itself as it is an abuse of power.

Anyway, an abolustel stupid comment for Shatter to make. The Garda Siochana Inspectorate does not (actually CANNOT) investigate alleged corruption. It is specifically setup to examine the institutional framework of the force and its operation.

The Inspectorate specifically highlighted this when asked to comment on the Minister's reaction this morning.



http://www.gsinsp.ie/

The Minister knows this, so why make the stupid comment?

It was Conor Lally I was quoting who said there was no corruption found.

Banjo String

Has Shatter or Callinan apologised to McCabe or Wilson? (now they've been vindicated)

flutered

on the six one news last night, shatter stated that the report proved that he had nothing to apolagoise for.

Sierra Oscar

Godge wrote: »

It was Conor Lally I was quoting who said there was no corruption found.

The government have been spinning the 'no corruption' line since the report was released - hence why the inspectorate made his comments this morning dismissing that line of thinking.

The government made a political decision weeks back to keep Shatter in power no matter what. Perfect for the opposition really, he is damaged goods and there is a serious whiff of toxicity about him. He certainly wont be making the government any more popular from here on in, another Minister for people to vent their anger at. At the very least though he should apologize for dragging the good name of the whisteblowers into the gutter.

crafty dodger

I have been tracking this story since the start and overall I think the actions and inaction by both Callinan and Shatter is 'disgusting'

As a result of what I have read,and listened to, from both Shatter and Callinan leaves me cold and I have no longer any faith in the way the Garda Siochana is managed and by the way Shatter seeks to squirm is way out of addressing the issues by supporting the Commissioner no matter what prima facie evidence appears before him.

He is supposed to be the Minister for JUSTICE! Maybe he should reflect on this particularly in relation to the whistleblowers.

I am in the Dublin South constituency and voted for Shatter in the last General Election. But never again. There is a bad smell emanating from him and Callinan to with the whistleblowers and frankly I dont want a vindictive, score settling TD representing me.

I dont know why Kenny continues to support him!

He should resign as Minister and TD and disappear off into the sunset.

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/alan-shatter-reforms-ensure-penalty-points-will-be-handled-without-fear-or-favour-30088359.html

Shatter speaks out on the issue.



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inspectorate-findings-are-embarassing-for-the-garda-but-not-devastating-1.1722785


"There is no claim of corruption, which was the central accusation of the Garda whistleblowers and those who supported them, including a number of independent TDs."

Interesting conclusion by Conor Lally in the Irish Times.

It all depends on how you define "corruption". Transparency International's definition is "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain".

Was entrusted power abused? Definitely.

Was there private gain? Yes, those who had fixed penalty notices quashed without valid reason gained by not having to pay the monetary penalty and by not getting points on their licences.

Godge

gizmo555 wrote: »

It all depends on how you define "corruption". Transparency International's definition is "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain".

Was entrusted power abused? Definitely.

Was there private gain? Yes, those who had fixed penalty notices quashed without valid reason gained by not having to pay the monetary penalty and by not getting points on their licences.

You are misunderstanding the definition of corruption.

There was private gain for those who had fixed penalty notices quashed without valid reason but for there to be corruption there must be private gain for those doing the quashing i.e. gardai get money/gifts/favours in return for quashing points. There is no evidence of gardai being corrupt in this way.

Sierra Oscar

Godge wrote: »

There is no evidence of gardai being corrupt in this way.

I would like to point out, again, that the inspectorate were not looking for evidence of corruption as investigating corruption is outside of its remit.

Therefore, it is not surprising that there is no evidence of corruption in the report. It was made very clear by the inspectorate this morning that it could not find evidence of corruption because that is outside its remit.

That is not to say there was no corruption, but the report does not rule it out as some people seem to like to suggest.

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

You are misunderstanding the definition of corruption.

I most certainly am not.

"corrupt: (2) influenced by or using bribery or fraudulent activity."
(Concise English Dictionary)

Shatter and the Commissioner would like to use your more restrictive definition because, so far at least, there's no evidence of individual Gardaí actually being paid to get fixed penalty notices quashed.

But the inspectorate's report found that , according the the Irish Times report you linked to, "in some cases Garda members “borrowed” the numbers of retired colleagues when amending the Pulse computer database to terminate points. In other cases when members who had cancelled points were moving on to other posts or were retiring they shredded any documents connected to the points they had terminated."

That is, official records were falsified and destroyed to conceal who had arranged for notices to be quashed, resulting in a monetary loss to the exchequer and drivers escaping penalty points.

That's "fraudulent activity" a.k.a. "corruption" in any man's language.

Godge

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I would like to point out, again, that the inspectorate were not looking for evidence of corruption as investigating corruption is outside of its remit.

Therefore, it is not surprising that there is no evidence of corruption in the report. It was made very clear by the inspectorate this morning that it could not find evidence of corruption because that is outside its remit.

That is not to say there was no corruption, but the report does not rule it out as some people seem to like to suggest.

gizmo555 wrote: »

It all depends on how you define "corruption". Transparency International's definition is "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain".

Was entrusted power abused? Definitely.

Was there private gain? Yes, those who had fixed penalty notices quashed without valid reason gained by not having to pay the monetary penalty and by not getting points on their licences.

Which is it? Gizmo says the report found there was corruption using one definition. When I show him that the report doesn't say that, he moves the goalposts to another definition. That gets me in trouble with you because I state the fact that the report didn't find any corruption.

If people are saying that the report found corruption, you should be challenging them on the basis that it didn't look for it.

Have you a link to what the inspectorate said?

Unfortunately for those looking to get Shatter, there is nothing in this report to bring him down (or Callinan).

As I said already that doesn't mean the next reports will be as generous to them. Let us wait and see before jumping in with the lynch mob.

Sierra Oscar

Godge wrote: »

Have you a link to what the inspectorate said?

I do of course, you can listen to the conversation here. Select the "Recommendations for change following penalty points report", then move to the 04.35 mark.

Here, I even made a transcript for you - always happy to help when it comes to combating misinformation.

Interviewer: Can we talk about corruption? Because your report says that rather than there being corruption involved here, as alleged by the whisteblowers, there is mismanagement. How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Inspectorate: Well on the mismanagement, and I think we outlined it pretty well there, there was no audit trail at all. There was clear violations of policy, nobody was masking sure that that was happening, there was lost notes that just disappeared. The CNAG report also noted this stuff. That's mismanagement.

Interviewer: And its not corruption?

Inspectorate: The Garda Inspectorates remit is not about investigating wrongdoing. We went in and did an inspection of the process and we didn't go into, and its not our role to do investigations of individual incidents that may or may not have been more than just mismanagement. There are other agencies, that's up to the Commissioner (!) and GSOC. I know that there are a couple of investigations at the minute that the Minister has got going now that will probably look into that and find it (!). That wasn't the track of the inspectorates remit.

So can we stop with the claptrap now that this report ruled out corruption? It didn't even investigate it, that is up to others to judge.

Godge wrote: »

Unfortunately for those looking to get Shatter, there is nothing in this report to bring him down (or Callinan).

Did they not try and undertake a character assassination on the whistleblowers?

Ill just leave this here.

Interviewer: Whats your view, because we spoke to John Wilson - the retired Garda Sergeant - who was one of the so called whistelbowers. What is your view of how whisteblowers, potential whisteblowers, looking ahead from all of this will feel about talking about what they perceive to be mismanagement in the Gardai?

Inspectorate: Well I believe that it was a very good move to go forward and to take a look at the law and the regulations and firm them up. I think that that will go a long way to bring more confidence to any Garda who wants to come forward with some serious matter that they cant get resolved internally. I think that is clearly the position of the government. I think this situation that has gone on for the last year has shown that the current regulations as they are need to be reworked and I am very happy to see that the government will do that.

Interviewer: Morris McCabe and John Wilson, vindicated men today?

Inspectorate: I would say, and I said last night at the press conference, when we got the remit Seargant McCabe asked and come to see us. Mark Tolhan and I had a very good conversation with him, and he provided us with a lot of information - significant information - regarding the fixed charged processing system. Everything that he presented to us on the fixed charged processing system was clearly credible. Ill leave it at that.

Interviewer: Without his participation, would we be where we are today with this?

Inspectorate: If you look at the report you will see that if it had not been for the significant public interest that came out initially, even the senior Garda that I talked to said that this whole issue would not even have been up on the radar.

What about the claims made by the Minister that the whistleblowers did not co-operate with inquiries? Shatter lied to the Dáil to begin with.

Godge

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I do of course, you can listen to the conversation here. Select the "Recommendations for change following penalty points report", then move to the 04.35 mark.

Here, I even made a transcript for you - always happy to help when it comes to combating misinformation.



So can we stop with the claptrap now that this report ruled out corruption? It didn't even investigate it, that is up to others to judge.

I never said it ruled out corruption, I said it didn't find any corruption in response to those who said it did. There is a difference.

I quoted Conor Lally of the Irish Times who said "There is no claim of corruption, which was the central accusation of the Garda whistleblowers and those who supported them, including a number of independent TDs", and I said that was an interesting comment. If you have a problem with that, take it up with him.

You can stop putting words into my mouth and twisting them.

The corruption allegations have been referred separately to GSOC by Shatter for GSOC to investigate once again and as I keep saying there are more reports to come.

So long as we are agreed that the report does not mention or find any corruption, then we can move on.

droidus

Its simple. Saying 'they did not find any corruption' implies they looked for individual examples of corruption. They didnt, and couldnt if they had wanted to.

Certain people in the media and Dail (and other places) are spinning this to suggest that there was no corruption, when you would have to be blind and deaf not to come to the conclusion that there was. Its almost as if the terms of the investigation were somehow planned to allow for this rhetorical fig leaf.

What this investigation has found is that there were no systems in place to prevent abuse of 'discretion' with regard to penalty points. The incidents it points to as examples imply abuse of power and corruption in the force.

Godge

droidus wrote: »

Its simple. Saying 'they did not find any corruption' implies they looked for individual examples of corruption. They didnt, and couldnt if they had wanted to.

Certain people in the media and Dail (and other places) are spinning this to suggest that there was no corruption, when you would have to be blind and deaf not to come to the conclusion that there was. Its almost as if the terms of the investigation were somehow planned to allow for this rhetorical fig leaf.

What this investigation has found is that there were no systems in place to prevent abuse of 'discretion' with regard to penalty points. The incidents it points to as examples imply abuse of power and corruption in the force.

If that is the case GSOC should find the corruption.

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR14000075


"GSOC
Following on additional allegations being made with regard to the operation of the Fixed Charge Penalty System, the Minister on 28 January 2014 referred all allegations in relation to the cancellation of fixed charge notices and the circumstances surrounding them to GSOC."


An accurate factual statement would say that allegations of corruption remain unproven and we await the GSOC report.

Sierra Oscar

Godge wrote: »

I never said it ruled out corruption, I said it didn't find any corruption in response to those who said it did. There is a difference.

OK, well looking back at my posts perhaps they come across as being abrasive against you but that's not the intention. As you say, there is a huge difference.

I am just pointing out that people shouldn't be using the report to discuss corruption at all considering it is outside of the remit of the inspectorate. That is for others to decide. You cannot rule out or say that corruption did occur based on the report. In saying that, it is interesting that the inspectorate let it slip that he believes the investigations into corruption will find that corrupt acts occurred. Slip of the tongue maybe?

Inspectorate wrote:

I know that there are a couple of investigations at the minute that the Minister has got going now that will probably look into that and find it.

droidus

Godge wrote: »

If that is the case GSOC should find the corruption.

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR14000075


"GSOC
Following on additional allegations being made with regard to the operation of the Fixed Charge Penalty System, the Minister on 28 January 2014 referred all allegations in relation to the cancellation of fixed charge notices and the circumstances surrounding them to GSOC."


An accurate factual statement would say that allegations of corruption remain unproven and we await the GSOC report.

Sure, because GSOC are immune to political pressure, have full access to all Gardai files and systems, have powers to interview and compel testimony from gardai, have the full support and cooperation of the Gardai commissioner and the Minister for Justice and can work safe in the knowledge that their investigations are completely confidential.

norrie rugger

And still not a sign of the people that bugged GSOC huh?

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

Which is it? Gizmo says the report found there was corruption using one definition. When I show him that the report doesn't say that, he moves the goalposts to another definition. That gets me in trouble with you because I state the fact that the report didn't find any corruption.

I'm not moving the goalposts, merely pointing out that the definition of corruption is much broader than you, the Minster and the Commissioner are willing to admit.

If anything, you're trying to squeeze the goalposts together to stop anything that doesn't suit your argument getting between them.

Here's a 3rd definition of corruption, this time from an official Irish government website, www.anticorruption.ie:

"Corruption is an abuse of a position of trust in order to gain an undue advantage."

Beyond any shadow of a doubt the abuse of positions of trust to gain undue advantage - i.e., "corruption" as defined by the Irish government - has occurred in the penalty points system.

Godge

gizmo555 wrote: »

I'm not moving the goalposts, merely pointing out that the definition of corruption is much broader than you, the Minster and the Commissioner are willing to admit.

If anything, you're trying to squeeze the goalposts together to stop anything that doesn't suit your argument getting between them.

Here's a 3rd definition of corruption, this time from an official Irish government website, www.anticorruption.ie:

"Corruption is an abuse of a position of trust in order to gain an undue advantage."

Beyond any shadow of a doubt the abuse of positions of trust to gain undue advantage - i.e., "corruption" as defined by the Irish government - has occurred in the penalty points system.

Again what undue advantage accrues to a garda who cancels the penalty points of a sports personality?

Yes, there has been abuse of a position but the second part is again missing.

Floppybits

If wiping out penalty points is not corrupt or seen as nothing wrong with it, then why did the Commissioner, AGS and Shatter try to bury this?

The only reason this was ever brought to the publics attention was because the Whistleblowers were stonewalled by the Commissioner and AGS, when they followed the whistleblowing process to the letter, it was only as a last resort they used the part of legislation where they told members of the Dail, which they were perfectly within their right to do.

Shatter and Callinan have no else to blame but themselves for the mess they made of this. If they had of treated the whistle blower complaints with seriousness that they should have been then this would not have been a problem. Instead they did the irish thing and that was to try bury this and bury the whistle blowers. The pair of them are a disgrace simple as that.

As for whether a guard writing of penalty points for their mates or celebrites being corrupt, to me it is, it is the same as a councillor accepting a bribe to rezone land, we dont know what these guards got for writing off the penalty points and knowing the culture in this country you can be sure the Gardai werent writing on points as a act of Kindness.

norrie rugger

Remember when Callinan restricted the whistleblowers access to computers, to supervised and under appointment?
Really treated well there

aloyisious

Another definition of corruption, using corrupting as the search-word, ends in the reply: cor·rupt (kə-rŭpt′)
adj.
1. Marked by immorality and perversion; depraved.
2. Venal; dishonest: a corrupt mayor.
3. Containing errors or alterations, as a text: a corrupt translation.
4. Archaic Tainted; putrid.
v. cor·rupt·ed, cor·rupt·ing, cor·rupts
v.tr.
1. To destroy or subvert the honesty or integrity of.
2. To ruin morally; pervert.
3. To taint; contaminate.
4. To cause to become rotten; spoil.
5. To change the original form of (a text, for example).
6. Computer Science To damage (data) in a file or on a disk.

Source.... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CFYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefreedictionary.com%2Fcorrupting&ei=dMQhU9GFFOaL7Aae_oDQBQ&usg=AFQjCNFzcJ0yKN9wuCSXAOMFAR0cBRiwbw&sig2=BrDzlv3uSx0RSljvk674-w&bvm=bv.62922401,d.ZGU

Banjo String

norrie rugger wrote: »

Remember when Callinan restricted the whistleblowers access to computers, to supervised and under appointment?
Really treated well there

Maurice McCabe is still restricted from using it. Heard it being discussed on newstalk earlier.

droidus

Why do people do favours for other people? Is it because the expect reciprocation at some point? because it boosts their standing with others or in their community? For reputational purposes?

Maybe its just because they're nice.

hatrickpatrick

droidus wrote: »

Why do people do favours for other people? Is it because the expect reciprocation at some point? because it boosts their standing with others or in their community? For reputational purposes?

Maybe its just because they're nice.

We have a horrible deference to authority among some sections of Irish life and this manifests by treating them as if they are above the law.
Hell, look at Godge's persistent defence of the establishment in literally any thread in which dishonesty, bending of rules or anything else is discussed.

To be honest Godge, I'm actually hopeful that you have allegiances to a particular party for whatever reason and wouldn't be so eager to defend, for instance, FF if they were the ones in power at the moment. Might sound strange to say I hope for this, but in my view someone being a party hack is actually by far the lesser of two evils when compared with the idea that someone simply believes that important / powerful people in general should have their wrongdoing excused.

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

We have a horrible deference to authority among some sections of Irish life and this manifests by treating them as if they are above the law.
Hell, look at Godge's persistent defence of the establishment in literally any thread in which dishonesty, bending of rules or anything else is discussed.

To be honest Godge, I'm actually hopeful that you have allegiances to a particular party for whatever reason and wouldn't be so eager to defend, for instance, FF if they were the ones in power at the moment. Might sound strange to say I hope for this, but in my view someone being a party hack is actually by far the lesser of two evils when compared with the idea that someone simply believes that important / powerful people in general should have their wrongdoing excused.

No, not a party hack.

Have voted for Greens, PDs, FG, Labour, FF and Independents over the last 30 years of voting. Will never vote for SF and will never vote for FF again because they destroyed the country.

There is no wrongdoing by Shatter to excuse. Yet. He may yet have to resign but there was nothing in this report, let us wait for the next one.

Over the years I haven't excused Haughey, Ahern, Burke, Lowry etc. and wouldn't ever excuse them. At the same time, we live in a democracy and while it baffles me that the people of Tipperary North elected Lowry time and again, that is their right. Similarly, other constituencies elect known terrorists.

hatrickpatrick

Godge wrote: »

No, not a party hack.

Have voted for Greens, PDs, FG, Labour, FF and Independents over the last 30 years of voting. Will never vote for SF and will never vote for FF again because they destroyed the country.

You actually sound fairly similar to myself when you put it like that

There is no wrongdoing by Shatter to excuse.

In your opinion. To take a different but related case, would you agree that his smearing of Wallace using a report from a Garda should have been enough to cost him his ministry?

Yet. He may yet have to resign but there was nothing in this report, let us wait for the next one.

Over the years I haven't excused Haughey, Ahern, Burke, Lowry etc. and wouldn't ever excuse them. At the same time, we live in a democracy and while it baffles me that the people of Tipperary North elected Lowry time and again, that is their right. Similarly, other constituencies elect known terrorists.

Ok, but this is what confuses me - you defended Noonan and Kenny breaching a salary cap to award a pay rise to an old friend of theirs, even though this is an incredibly obvious example of both double standards and cronyism. You seem to also have defended Shatter's attack on GSOC, although perhaps I've misunderstood you and you haven't actually in fact defended it?

Genuinely not trying to troll you or anything I'm just curious, as whenever I've ended up in a debate with you along any of these issues you've tended to have no common thread throughout your political arguments other than a persistent defence of those in power when their behavior is called into question,. The reason I asked you about parties was simply because I've seen you write very scathing posts about FF before and wasn't sure whether this was merely because they are not currently in office If it had been Ahern and Cowen who breached salary caps to reward old mates would you have reacted the same way?

Perhaps you simply have a different threshold for what should count as "wrongdoing" to the threshold I have, in which case the issue is that I'd hold people to far higher standards and be far less forgiving of general shenanigans. Not saying that my way is right and yours is wrong btw, but that's a potential explanation for our repeated clashes on these subjects

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

Again what undue advantage accrues to a garda who cancels the penalty points of a sports personality?

Yes, there has been abuse of a position but the second part is again missing.

We're into Alice in Wonderland territory here. It appears when you use the word corruption "it means just what you choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

Nowhere in the definition from the Irish government anti-corruption website does it say that undue advantage must accrue directly to the persons who abuse their positions for their conduct to amount to corruption. That distinction exists only in your imagination.

Godge

gizmo555 wrote: »

We're into Alice in Wonderland territory here. It appears when you use the word corruption "it means just what you choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

Nowhere in the definition from the Irish government anti-corruption website does it say that undue advantage must accrue directly to the persons who abuse their positions for their conduct to amount to corruption. That distinction exists only in your imagination.

The distinction is implicit in the definition. Not everything has to be spelled out.

If that is the case, then any public servant in using their discretion steps outside certain strict guidelines is automatically guilty of corruption in your eyes.

So if a teacher gives some extra help to a student (rather than to all students in their class) that is corruption.
So if a public servant keeps the passport office door open for two minutes past closing time to let in someone who has a flight to catch, that is corruption.

Both cases are an abuse of position to favour certain people and there is a gain for those people.

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

The distinction is implicit in the definition. Not everything has to be spelled out.

If that is the case, then any public servant in using their discretion steps outside certain strict guidelines is automatically guilty of corruption in your eyes.

So if a teacher gives some extra help to a student (rather than to all students in their class) that is corruption.
So if a public servant keeps the passport office door open for two minutes past closing time to let in someone who has a flight to catch, that is corruption.

Both cases are an abuse of position to favour certain people and there is a gain for those people.

OK Humpty.

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ok, but this is what confuses me - you defended Noonan and Kenny breaching a salary cap to award a pay rise to an old friend of theirs, even though this is an incredibly obvious example of both double standards and cronyism. You seem to also have defended Shatter's attack on GSOC, although perhaps I've misunderstood you and you haven't actually in fact defended it?

Genuinely not trying to troll you or anything I'm just curious, as whenever I've ended up in a debate with you along any of these issues you've tended to have no common thread throughout your political arguments other than a persistent defence of those in power when their behavior is called into question,. The reason I asked you about parties was simply because I've seen you write very scathing posts about FF before and wasn't sure whether this was merely because they are not currently in office If it had been Ahern and Cowen who breached salary caps to reward old mates would you have reacted the same way?

Perhaps you simply have a different threshold for what should count as "wrongdoing" to the threshold I have, in which case the issue is that I'd hold people to far higher standards and be far less forgiving of general shenanigans. Not saying that my way is right and yours is wrong btw, but that's a potential explanation for our repeated clashes on these subjects

Don't remember the salary cap thing, but three points on it, one, if you set a cap yourself, why can't you change your mind, two, if you want the best person you don't pay peanuts to a monkey and three, to every rule there is an exception, unless you believe that is corruption too.

Now you won't find me defending Flannery and Rehab. That one smells.

I actually have a lot of respect for the Gardai. I know several Gardai and have had dealings with some of their management over the years when I was in the public service and have respect. Don't know any of the current lot though. Maybe I am blinded by that.

If you go back 30 years, you will also have respect for Shatter. He has also made powerful enemies in his attempts to reform the Law Library. No surprise to see someone like McDowell offering his services to Shatter's opponents as a result.

In the case of the penalty points, what is clear is that there was a ramshackle system with no oversight but in the greater scheme of things, when you are dealing with murder, rapes, drugs and serious crime, I can see why penalty points were off in the corner not being reformed. I really don't see this as corruption or a resigning issue.

Donegal was different and there was something nasty up there. Some of the other stuff coming out may be the same and if Callinan was covering it up, he may have to go. But it is too early to say.

I think the difference between us is I don't rush to judgment on everything, I want to see the hard evidence and I do believe that the penalty should fit the crime. (For example, on the Callely thread, people were calling for his pension to be taken off him - we don't take pensions off people in this country for serious crimes (Burke got his despite time in jail), why should we take it off him for fiddling expenses. I am not saying it is not a serious issue and he definitely should never be let near public office again but a short jail sentence, a heavy fine and repayment of all fraudulent expenses is sufficient punishment.)

aloyisious

One thing I'm actually surprised at is that no one seem's (apart from AS and the Comm) to have been aware of the Gda Inspectorate looking into what's now described as an dysfunctional system. That's been kept very well below the parapets, given how it started to look at the Garda Penalty Points system handling in May of 2013, almost ten months ago. Comm Callinan is the CEO of an Garda Siochana and is responsible as the Chief Reporting Officer of that force to the Minister of Justice, who is (in turn) responsible directly to the Dail. I suppose AS was not too anxious to piss off that group, unlike how he turned on the GO.