Dail Suspended - Debate and Voting

FreudianSlippers

the groutch wrote: »

do you remember the last time she was removed from the Dail?
Barrett did it because she addressed a TD directly rather than through the chair, something that government TDs do all the time.

Sinn Fein had long before yesterday lost any confidence in the Ceann Comhairle, and yesterday's sit-in was a result of it.

I'm sorry, that's not factually accurate. She was reminded of the rule not to address the TD directly, she was removed for flat out ignoring the CC and continuing her nonsensical diatribe.

If you're going to make **** up, at least try to go for things that are not factually on the record.

walshb

The problem here is that when rules are enforced and applied we get the whole "anti Sinn Fein" reply. Democracy must always prevail. If not we aren't too far from anarchy. That is how delicate these issues are. I respect SF, but I am losing confidence in them.

FreudianSlippers

The reality is that the rules are enforced all the time. If Mick Wallace can follow the rules when told to do so, I expect someone like MLMcD (on the same intellectual level) to be able to follow the rules too.

She didn't, rightfully was expelled and that's that.

walshb

Well, IMO these issues should be stamped out authoritatively. No ifs and buts. If a Dail TD refuses to obey a 'legal command,' then they should be forcibly removed and punished for their actions. These people are the supposed pillars of the community. The people influencing society. Is it in our laws that she should have been forcibly ejected from the Dail?

crusher000

Godge wrote: »

Yes, but the democratic way of responding to that is to put forward a motion of no-confidence in the Ceann Comhairle and have a debate.

The bullyboy, just one step removed from violence tactic is to have a sit-in and ignore the democratic procedures of the Dail.

The first one is the right thing to do, the second one is publicity-grabbing thing to do.

becuase sit ins are so violent , process is the correct way but in my view some people in the dail have to follow process and others don't. Why is this?

crusher000

If the captain of the guard being a man physically man handled Mary Lou can you imagine the ire that would fall on his head. You'd have every womans rights organisation screaming blue murder and in fairness rightly or wrongly is it right to have someone physically removed from the Dail in a democratic society whether it's a man or a woman ?.

walshb

crusher000 wrote: »

If the captain of the guard being a man physically man handled Mary Lou can you imagine the ire that would fall on his head. You'd have every womans rights organisation screaming blue murder and in fairness rightly or wrongly is it right to have someone physically removed from the Dail in a democratic society whether it's a man or a woman ?.

Right or wrong to remove shouldn't come into it. If it's in the law then it should be enforced. I was wondering it it is in the law that it should happen.

FreudianSlippers

walshb wrote: »

Right or wrong to remove shouldn't come into it. If it's in the law then it should be enforced. I was wondering it it is in the law that it should happen.

The standing orders:

61. (1) The Ceann Comhairle shall order a member whose conduct is
grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the Dáil for the
remainder of that day's sitting. If, however, on any occasion the Ceann
Comhairle deems that the powers conferred under this Standing Order are
inadequate to deal with the offence, he or she may, in accordance with the
next succeeding Standing Order, name such member for misconduct, or he
or she may call on the Dáil to adjudge upon his or her conduct. Members
ordered to withdraw in pursuance of this Standing Order, or who are
suspended in pursuance of the next succeeding Standing Order, shall
forthwith withdraw from the precincts of the Dáil.

(2) A member may be named or the Dáil called on to adjudge upon his or
her conduct only when the Ceann Comhairle is in the Chair.

It's unambiguous that the member shall (which is an important word in legislation) withdraw. My reading would be that they cannot be forcibly removed, but they are expected to remove themselves when direct to do so.

I'm not entirely sure where the question of her removal comes into it though? She refused to leave and the CC had no option but to suspend the Dail - revolting behaviour by MLMcD and SF.

raymon

the groutch wrote: »

do you remember the last time she was removed from the Dail?
Barrett did it because she addressed a TD directly rather than through the chair, something that government TDs do all the time.

Sinn Fein had long before yesterday lost any confidence in the Ceann Comhairle, and yesterday's sit-in was a result of it.

This has nothing to do with anything other than the fact that she wants to move on from the abuse discourse and put her face in the papers for something populist.

It was a carefully choreographed stunt.

By sitting on the ball with her arms folded, she prevented the rest of the dail from holding the government to account.

I didn't see Pearse Doherty standing shoulder to shoulder with her in the press conference on the plinth ...... was he hiding again ?

Godge

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The standing orders:



It's unambiguous that the member shall (which is an important word in legislation) withdraw. My reading would be that they cannot be forcibly removed, but they are expected to remove themselves when direct to do so.

I'm not entirely sure where the question of her removal comes into it though? She refused to leave and the CC had no option but to suspend the Dail - revolting behaviour by MLMcD and SF.

Yes, but you have to be a democrat to follow the rules. If you don't believe in democracy or don't respect the legitimacy of Dail Eireann, you are not bound by the Standing Orders and you can stage a sit-in.

raymon

A question for the Sinn Fein reps :

Does Mary Lou MacDonald plan to apologize to Maureen O'Sullivan TD for preventing her from having her say ??

FreudianSlippers

raymon wrote: »

A question for the Sinn Fein reps :

Does Mary Lou MacDonald plan to apologize to Maureen O'Sullivan TD for preventing her from having her say ??

I'd doubt that highly.

walshb

I didn't get time to study the tape, but I take it that Burton could not answer the question with a yes or no because the measures to take water charges from revenue have not been agreed upon yet, if they will at all be agreed upon? MLM was insistent on a yes/no answer? Didn't get it and then resorts to that choreographed stunt?

Little CuChulainn

walshb wrote: »

I didn't get time to study the tape, but I take it that Burton could not answer the question with a yes or no because the measures to take water charges from revenue have not been agreed upon yet, if they will at all be agreed upon? MLM was insistent on a yes/no answer? Didn't get it and then resorts to that choreographed stunt?

She wasn't actually finished talking.

walshb

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

She wasn't actually finished talking.

Mary Lou?

Little CuChulainn

walshb wrote: »

Mary Lou?

Bruton. She got interrupted by some opposition back benchers and as the CC was asking them to stop Mary Lou decided it was her turn again.

raymon

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

She wasn't actually finished talking.

She wasn't actually finished acting.

Bravo , bravo !!

duckcfc

[quote="Spon Far. When is she going to realise that she and Sinn Fein will be much better off without Adams.

And I'm no Sinn Fein supporter, so if I can see it, why can't Sinn Fein?[/quote]



You are wrong lol. Do you not look at the stats to see your 100% wrong!! Maybe if sinn fein weren't getting any votes your comments would hold true but the fact remains, SF are the most popular party on this island.

hatrickpatrick

Joan Burton really is one of the most appalling politicians I've had the misfortune of being represented by. Just as in a Prime Time debate or Vinnie B debate, the chair (in this case the Ceann Comhairle) should be charged with making sure deputies answer straight questions and don't give completely irrelevant generic responses. The entire concept of Dail question time is rendered an absolute farce by this kind of nonsense - and I apply this to all politicians, not just the current government. The number of times this kind of incident happens is ridiculous and I'm glad someone has finally spoken out about it.

Sean Barrett, who received my #4 in the last election (and in a four seat constituency, I therefore consider to have received my vote) is an atrocious Ceann Comhairle, and I and several others I know who voted for him in some capacity have stated that they will never do so again if given the opportunity. His entire tenure as Ceann Comhairle has been marked both by bias and by an utter failure to hold deputies on both sides of the house to relevant answers and relevant debate. He may or may not make a good government TD, but he is certainly unfit to hold the office of Ceann Comhairle. He genuinely doesn't seem to understand what his role as chair actually is.

tayto lover

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Don't worry. Sinn Fein have decided to suspend democracy until they can force an answer. An interesting insight into what they would be prepared to do on power.

How does that answer the 2 questions I asked?

FreudianSlippers

tayto lover wrote: »

Did Mary-Lou hit a nerve with the questions she asked and why did Joan Burton not answer the questions?
Have the Govt plans to take water charges from SW and also to use Revenue?

Would love to know this.

No, she did and we don't know yet.

listermint

Godge wrote: »

Two young boys were abused in Louth and the perpretrator was let go by SF/IRA in the early 2000s.

Liam Adams was working in Dundalk in the relatively recent past.

An unknown number of SF/IRA child abusers were rehoused in the South and free to reoffend.

You obviously don't have children or don't know anyone who does.

Its interesting that you have no history of concern for the thousands of children abused in this state. But when an issue is something required to crutch on you suddenly become quite concerned by abuse.

As i said, its a political football, nothing more. I dont see genuine concern from anyone using this in the manner its being used.

Sad really.

crusher000

What I find remarkable is that TD's stand up in the Dail knowing the names of sex offenders (one back bencher from FG claims to know 8) and rather than go directly to the authorities brings it up on the dail on Tuesday and says i'll meet with the Garda on Friday. Lord help us if these sex offenders are roaming amonsgt us and so dangerous I think holding onto the information so you can use it as point scoring is despicable and another abuse of the victims.

Happyman42

crusher000 wrote: »

What I find remarkable is that TD's stand up in the Dail knowing the names of sex offenders (one back bencher from FG claims to know 8) and rather than go directly to the authorities brings it up on the dail on Tuesday and says i'll meet with the Garda on Friday. Lord help us if these sex offenders are roaming amonsgt us and so dangerous I think holding onto the information so you can use it as point scoring is despicable and another abuse of the victims.

If they existed they wouldn't have any problems operating in our schools because of Enda and Joan's failure to introduce proper safeguards. But sure, that isn't important at all. That is just deflecting.:rolleyes:

Miall108

listermint wrote: »

Perhaps the more enlightened among us as to how a Debate and a Vote of important legislation can take place with a suspended Dail.

Is there precedent for this, is this the done thing ?

I am having trouble understanding how the government debates or votes or enacts legislation in this sort of situation

Or is the debate and subsequent vote cancelled in these situations ?



I thought this warranted a discussion thread of its own.

Im sorry to inform you but is the sort of crap that goes on all the time in Dail Eireann. When a situation like Mary Lous isnt occurring, the whole lot of them are acting like a bunch of secondary school children shouting and jeering when theres a debate going on and this is going on the whole time. Im glad to see that the idiots we have in power can afford to act like a bunch of school kids and gain such amusement from serious matters when the country is in the state it is in. Its just fantastic that they can completely take the piss out of the rest of us, some of whom are struggling to scrape pennies together to put food on the table let alone pay these water taxes. It really makes me sick. If they had really taken it seriously all along instead of fooling around we might not have had to resort to these water taxes. The funniest thing is that they all get rewarded for their incompetance and fooling around with a big fat pension at the very end when things go south. It really is a great country

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Joan Burton really is one of the most appalling politicians I've had the misfortune of being represented by. Just as in a Prime Time debate or Vinnie B debate, the chair (in this case the Ceann Comhairle) should be charged with making sure deputies answer straight questions and don't give completely irrelevant generic responses. The entire concept of Dail question time is rendered an absolute farce by this kind of nonsense - and I apply this to all politicians, not just the current government. The number of times this kind of incident happens is ridiculous and I'm glad someone has finally spoken out about it.

Sean Barrett, who received my #4 in the last election (and in a four seat constituency, I therefore consider to have received my vote) is an atrocious Ceann Comhairle, and I and several others I know who voted for him in some capacity have stated that they will never do so again if given the opportunity. His entire tenure as Ceann Comhairle has been marked both by bias and by an utter failure to hold deputies on both sides of the house to relevant answers and relevant debate. He may or may not make a good government TD, but he is certainly unfit to hold the office of Ceann Comhairle. He genuinely doesn't seem to understand what his role as chair actually is.

The problem here isn't the Ceann Comhairle.

The problem is the hypocrisy of Sinn Fein in demanding answers from Joan Burton when they didn't demand them from Gerry Adams the day before. I can post nine questions asked by Regina Doherty but not answered by Gerry Adams.

Now, he is well within his rights to refuse to answer something that might incriminate him (which probably explains his silence) but then to stage a sit-in the following day because someone else refuses to answer questions exposes rank hypocrisy on the part of Mary Lou and the rest of the SF parliamentary party.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

The problem here isn't the Ceann Comhairle.

The problem is the hypocrisy of Sinn Fein in demanding answers from Joan Burton when they didn't demand them from Gerry Adams the day before. I can post nine questions asked by Regina Doherty but not answered by Gerry Adams.

Now, he is well within his rights to refuse to answer something that might incriminate him (which probably explains his silence) but then to stage a sit-in the following day because someone else refuses to answer questions exposes rank hypocrisy on the part of Mary Lou and the rest of the SF parliamentary party.

What questions has Gerry Adams not answered?
Don't you mean Gerry Adams hasn't given the answers you want

hatrickpatrick

Godge wrote: »

The problem here isn't the Ceann Comhairle.

The problem is the hypocrisy of Sinn Fein

Of course it is. :rolleyes:

So you don't find it remotely problematic that the Tainiste be allowed to give an entirely irrelevant response to a question by the man who is supposed to be chairing the debate?

StudentDad

Spon Farmer wrote: »

If that is the case, isn't it better to behave like adults and get some actual work done instead of carrying on like idiots, as Sinn Feinn has done?

No, getting rid of Adams won't make the party more "PR friendly" - it would just make them better.

There was a time when I would would never have believed McDonald would behave like she did today. Since Adams came south, she has gone downhill.

Matter of perspective. If by 'work' you mean letting things go on without challenge then sure. Hopping up and down and making a nuisance of yourself in Parliament isn't new. Parnell used it to good effect. We need a parliament where the govt is held to account. Not a talking shop where the whips can guillotine legislation through to committee stage and essentially say 'sod off' when the opposition say 'hang on a minute, we have a few questions.'

SD

Rightwing

Miall108 wrote: »

Im sorry to inform you but is the sort of crap that goes on all the time in Dail Eireann. When a situation like Mary Lous isnt occurring, the whole lot of them are acting like a bunch of secondary school children shouting and jeering when theres a debate going on and this is going on the whole time. Im glad to see that the idiots we have in power can afford to act like a bunch of school kids and gain such amusement from serious matters when the country is in the state it is in. Its just fantastic that they can completely take the piss out of the rest of us, some of whom are struggling to scrape pennies together to put food on the table let alone pay these water taxes. It really makes me sick. If they had really taken it seriously all along instead of fooling around we might not have had to resort to these water taxes. The funniest thing is that they all get rewarded for their incompetance and fooling around with a big fat pension at the very end when things go south. It really is a great country

That's the most constructive thing they do, we'd be lucky if they confined themselves to that, the real problems occur when the geniuses decide to 'work'.

coldcake

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course it is. :rolleyes:

So you don't find it remotely problematic that the Tainiste be allowed to give an entirely irrelevant response to a question by the man who is supposed to be chairing the debate?

You do know that the Ceann Comhairle has no power over what reply is given to question.

Yes he must make sure Members speak to the Bill, but if the Taoiseach gives an answer that just rambles and says nothing during Leaders Questions, the Ceann Comhairle has no power to call him up on it. That is the job of the opposition but they can only do this within the time-frame as set out in the Standing Orders of the Dáil. He can hardly let Mary Lou go on and on while Deputy O'Sullivan is waiting to speak. You would just have anarchy. It was the House who voted her out and she refused to abide by the decision of the House.

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course it is. :rolleyes:

So you don't find it remotely problematic that the Tainiste be allowed to give an entirely irrelevant response to a question by the man who is supposed to be chairing the debate?

She said the information would be provided next week. What was wrong with that answer? Do you want her to break the Constitution and reveal Cabinet discussions? She is not a Sinn Fein representative who plays hard and fast with democracy.

walshb

Godge wrote: »

She said the information would be provided next week. What was wrong with that answer? Do you want her to break the Constitution and reveal Cabinet discussions? She is not a Sinn Fein representative who plays hard and fast with democracy.

This was my understanding. The answer was not available to Burton at the time. This being the case, I don't see how anyone can defend Mary Lou.

Godge

Miall108 wrote: »

Im sorry to inform you but is the sort of crap that goes on all the time in Dail Eireann. When a situation like Mary Lous isnt occurring, the whole lot of them are acting like a bunch of secondary school children shouting and jeering when theres a debate going on and this is going on the whole time. Im glad to see that the idiots we have in power can afford to act like a bunch of school kids and gain such amusement from serious matters when the country is in the state it is in. Its just fantastic that they can completely take the piss out of the rest of us, some of whom are struggling to scrape pennies together to put food on the table let alone pay these water taxes. It really makes me sick. If they had really taken it seriously all along instead of fooling around we might not have had to resort to these water taxes. The funniest thing is that they all get rewarded for their incompetance and fooling around with a big fat pension at the very end when things go south. It really is a great country

You should watch or listen to the debate on the Sinn Fein child sexual abuse scandal. There was no shouting and jeering during the speeches by Ruth Coppinger, Maureen O'Sullivan, Regina Doherty, Ciara Conway and the other women who were exposing the lies of SF/IRA. It was quite chilling listening.

hatrickpatrick

coldcake wrote: »

You do know that the Ceann Comhairle has no power over what reply is given to question.

I'm pretty sure as the chair of the debate, the Ceann Comhairle has the right to tell them to stay on topic? If he doesn't, a new standing order is required as a matter of urgency. Absolute farce.

Yes he must make sure Members speak to the Bill, but if the Taoiseach gives an answer that just rambles and says nothing during Leaders Questions, the Ceann Comhairle has no power to call him up on it. That is the job of the opposition but they can only do this within the time-frame as set out in the Standing Orders of the Dáil. He can hardly let Mary Lou go on and on while Deputy O'Sullivan is waiting to speak. You would just have anarchy. It was the House who voted her out and she refused to abide by the decision of the House.

I'm not suggesting Mary Lou be allowed to go on and on. I am suggesting that it is the duty of any debate chair to make sure the debate is civilised and remains on topic - if as you say the Ceann Comhairle is not entitled to act as a chair in this manner, the rules are absurd and should be changed immediately.
Why is it that amidst all the talk of political reform, nobody is talking about the potential rewriting of Dail standing orders...?

Godge wrote: »

She said the information would be provided next week. What was wrong with that answer? Do you want her to break the Constitution and reveal Cabinet discussions? She is not a Sinn Fein representative who plays hard and fast with democracy.

Had she specifically told Mary Lou that the answer to her question would be revealed next week, I would have been ok with that and so I'm sure would many others. She said nothing of the sort - there was no indication whatsoever that the information to be revealed next week would include, specifically, an answer to the question asked.

The following would be a good analogy:
"Can you tell me when the shop might have Pink Lady Apples back in stock?"
"The shop will next week publish a wide ranging management plan for the year..."

raymon

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The following would be a good analogy:
"Can you tell me when the shop might have Pink Lady Apples back in stock?"
"The shop will next week publish a wide ranging management plan for the year..."

Thats a terrible analogy

What has pink lady apples got to do with anything ? or a shop ?

The question was - will you be taking IW debts from wages and dole ?
The answer was - it hasnt been decided ?

Did you watch the debate before Mary Lou threw a strop?

Rightwing

SF are sticking to their guns, the poor and the dole.
FG/Lab are sticking up for their cronies in IW & PS.

What a poor choice the electorate has.

Happyman42

raymon wrote: »

Thats a terrible analogy

What has pink lady apples got to do with anything ? or a shop ?

The question was - will you be taking IW debts from wages and dole ?
The answer was - it hasnt been decided ?

Did you watch the debate before Mary Lou threw a strop?

Her is what she asked Burton to do;

She had earlier insisted that Joan Burton should “put people’s minds at rest” and make it clear today that there would be no deductions of unpaid water bills from wages, pensions and social welfare, and no attachment orders made.

Burton evaded the request for whatever reason.

capnblack

It was a stunt, but also a bloody good stunt. it worked

hatrickpatrick

raymon wrote: »

Thats a terrible analogy

What has pink lady apples got to do with anything ? or a shop ?

It's an analogy.

The question was - will you be taking IW debts from wages and dole ?
The answer was - it hasnt been decided ?

If the answer had been that clear cut, I for one wouldn't be complaining about it nor would I be supporting what Mary Lou did - but Burton said nothing of the sort. The question was whether IW debt will be taken from wages and dole, the "answer" given was "we will be finalizing the package in relation to Irish water" essentially - no specific reference to whether that will include clarity on the deduction issue or not. Had Burton made this absolutely clear, there would have been no complaints.

I await eagerly the publication of said "package" to see whether it does indeed include any reference to how unpaid bills will be dealt with. Nothing I've heard so far indicates that it will - the "package" is about costs etc. If it will include such clarity, then great! Why was it so difficult for Burton to give a simple answer in this way?

Did you watch the debate before Mary Lou threw a strop?

Absolutely.

FreudianSlippers

Happyman42 wrote: »

Her is what she asked Burton to do;

Burton evaded the request for whatever reason.

I'm sorry that's ridiculous. Burton had no ability to comply with the request and stated flat out that there would be clarity next week. This is ridiculous - you're upset because SF failed to coax Burton into another solo-run? :rolleyes:

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's an analogy.



If the answer had been that clear cut, I for one wouldn't be complaining about it nor would I be supporting what Mary Lou did - but Burton said nothing of the sort. The question was whether IW debt will be taken from wages and dole, the "answer" given was "we will be finalizing the package in relation to Irish water" essentially - no specific reference to whether that will include clarity on the deduction issue or not. Had Burton made this absolutely clear, there would have been no complaints.

I await eagerly the publication of said "package" to see whether it does indeed include any reference to how unpaid bills will be dealt with. Nothing I've heard so far indicates that it will - the "package" is about costs etc. If it will include such clarity, then great! Why was it so difficult for Burton to give a simple answer in this way?



Absolutely.

I can give a reasonable explanation. The issue is under consideration by cabinet so cabinet confidentiality rules apply. No decision has been made. Perhaps the question was raised and before deciding on it, legal advice was sought. If the legal advice says it is not possible, there is no point considering it etc. etc.

hatrickpatrick

Godge wrote: »

I can give a reasonable explanation. The issue is under consideration by cabinet so cabinet confidentiality rules apply. No decision has been made. Perhaps the question was raised and before deciding on it, legal advice was sought. If the legal advice says it is not possible, there is no point considering it etc. etc.

And this would have been a perfectly acceptable answer, had this been what Joan Burton said in the Dail, as opposed to the generic bilge we were instead subjected to.

To give you another analogy, I am reminded of trying to switch from NTL to Sky digital a couple of years ago. At the time, there had been controversy over E4's availability on Sky. Phoning Sky customer service, the following exchange took place:

"Hey, before I switch over I was just wondering, can you confirm whether or not E4 is available on Sky at the moment?"
"Our Digital TV package includes a whole range of incredible channels, including RTE, TV3, TG4, BBC 1 -"
*Hangs up impatiently and doesn't bother switching over*

Now my point here is that E4 could well have been available as part of the package I had been considering, but I'll never know one way or another because the eejit on the phone was incapable of giving a direct answer and I didn't have time for the rest of the BS.

FreudianSlippers

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And this would have been a perfectly acceptable answer, had this been what Joan Burton said in the Dail, as opposed to the generic bilge we were instead subjected to.

To give you another analogy, I am reminded of trying to switch from NTL to Sky digital a couple of years ago. At the time, there had been controversy over E4's availability on Sky. Phoning Sky customer service, the following exchange took place:

"Hey, before I switch over I was just wondering, can you confirm whether or not E4 is available on Sky at the moment?"
"Our Digital TV package includes a whole range of incredible channels, including RTE, TV3, TG4, BBC 1 -"
*Hangs up impatiently and doesn't bother switching over*

Now my point here is that E4 could well have been available as part of the package I had been considering, but I'll never know one way or another because the eejit on the phone was incapable of giving a direct answer and I didn't have time for the rest of the BS.

Do you deny that SF and all other people in that madhouse answer questions in the same round-about, back-slapping and infuriating manner?

hatrickpatrick

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Do you deny that SF and all other people in that madhouse answer questions in the same round-about, back-slapping and infuriating manner?

Absolutely not, and had any member of the house decided to make the same kind of stand Mary Lou has made this week at any time, I would be backing them 100%. I'd even go so far as to shake Alan Shatter's hand if he had made such a stand, such is my frustration with how the Dail is run - and you know how much that would pain me.

FreudianSlippers

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Absolutely not, and had any member of the house decided to make the same kind of stand Mary Lou has made this week at any time, I would be backing them 100%. I'd even go so far as to shake Alan Shatter's hand if he had made such a stand, such is my frustration with how the Dail is run - and you know how much that would pain me.

Ok, fine... can you also admit that it does look a bit convenient that MLMcD would decide to take a stand at a time of inconvenience for the party?

Dan_Solo

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Ok, fine... can you also admit that it does look a bit convenient that MLMcD would decide to take a stand at a time of inconvenience for the party?

Inconvenience? They are the most popular party in Ireland with the most popular leader.
Keep it coming would be more like it.

FreudianSlippers

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Inconvenience? They are the most popular party in Ireland with the most popular leader.
Keep it coming would be more like it.

Ok, by some polls they are - if they were that popular they'd be in government. Obviously, if they are riding as high as you claim, they will want to avoid any seriously negative press for as long as possible. Or do you think that if they get a high opinion poll they are just invincible forever?

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And this would have been a perfectly acceptable answer, had this been what Joan Burton said in the Dail, as opposed to the generic bilge we were instead subjected to.

To give you another analogy, I am reminded of trying to switch from NTL to Sky digital a couple of years ago. At the time, there had been controversy over E4's availability on Sky. Phoning Sky customer service, the following exchange took place:

"Hey, before I switch over I was just wondering, can you confirm whether or not E4 is available on Sky at the moment?"
"Our Digital TV package includes a whole range of incredible channels, including RTE, TV3, TG4, BBC 1 -"
*Hangs up impatiently and doesn't bother switching over*

Now my point here is that E4 could well have been available as part of the package I had been considering, but I'll never know one way or another because the eejit on the phone was incapable of giving a direct answer and I didn't have time for the rest of the BS.

But cabinet confidentiality rules as determined by the Supreme Court would not allow that amount of information.

As for the SKY example, SKY don't have to answer your question the way you want and Joan Burton doesn't have to answer Mary Lou's question the way you want.

She gave an answer. People don't like it, well the ballot box is the place to deal with that, not by breaking democratic rules as SF did.

Dan_Solo

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Ok, by some polls they are - if they were that popular they'd be in government. Obviously, if they are riding as high as you claim, they will want to avoid any seriously negative press for as long as possible. Or do you think that if they get a high opinion poll they are just invincible forever?

Well their current popularity can hardly get them into government in the absence of an election. I think that's assumed?
The thing is, this "negative press" appears to be coinciding with their rise in popularity. Either the golden circle parties are just slinging more mud than usual as they cack their collective pants while SF benefit from a backlash against policy, or the public is actually supporting SF more as they see straight through government spin and smear campaigning.