Should another Garda Commissioner resign?

Seth Brundle

FTA69 wrote: »

I never said he was personally colluding with Loyalists I said he was involved in a force that was.

So was he involved in collusion, which is what you seem to have a problem with?
If he wasn't then what's the problem?

hatrickpatrick

Posted this on AH about Drew Harris, pretty much sums it up IMO:

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

FTA69 wrote: »

The Gardai are in serious need of deep reform, I don't think drawing from another poisoned well is the route by which to achieve that.

This sums up my own feeling about it, in all honesty. I don't know much about this individual and I sincerely wish him well and hope that he manages to sort out the unimaginable clusterf*ck omnishambles which is our police service, but it feels like he's starting the job with a cloud already hanging over him due to his former membership of what was in essence a state-sponsored terrorist group. The thing is though, he could easily have been one of the good people who joined it in the hopes of trying to fix that clusterf*ck, and I don't know enough about him as an individual to say one way or another. So let's give him a chance and hope for the best.

Phoebas

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If he wasn't then what's the problem?

He's a northern protestant/unionist.

And you know the way 'republicans' are always going on about people in NI being Irish and entitled to be treated equally to every other Irish citizen? -. that doesn't appear to apply to northern unionists by the looks of some of the boards posts about the new Garda commissioner.

hatrickpatrick

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So was he involved in collusion, which is what you seem to have a problem with?
If he wasn't then what's the problem?

If someone was an executive in Anglo Irish Bank, but wasn't known to have been one of the people personally involved in the various scandals that went on, would you be happy for them to take up a position in the central bank or financial regulator? Many would argue that being deeply involved in a toxic organisation at a high level should rule one out for a role which involves trying to police or reform a different toxic organisation, whether the individual themselves can be specifically proven to have been involved in the wrongdoing.

FTA69

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So was he involved in collusion, which is what you seem to have a problem with?
If he wasn't then what's the problem?

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t. He was certainly working alongside and supporting those who were. How do we reform one rotten mess by drawing personnel who were involved in anther rotten institution?

As I said on another thread, it’s also hilarious how FG were jumping up and down about SF politicians and political
violence when they’re perfectly happy to facilitate ex combatants from the British state who were equally as bad.

blanch152

FTA69 wrote: »

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t. He was certainly working alongside and supporting those who were. How do we reform one rotten mess by drawing personnel who were involved in anther rotten institution?

As I said on another thread, it’s also hilarious how FG were jumping up and down about SF politicians and political
violence when they’re perfectly happy to facilitate ex combatants from the British state who were equally as bad.

Is he an ex-combatant? Strange logic of yours.

hatrickpatrick

blanch152 wrote: »

Is he an ex-combatant? Strange logic of yours.

Many of us regard the entire RUC as an entity to have essentially been a state-sponsored terrorist group. You can't look at videos of the civil rights march in Derry in the late 60s, with that famous shot of a woman lying on the ground having the sh!t beaten out of her by "policemen", and not conclude that it was a militant organisation in and of itself, not a civilian police force but a part of the establishment's machine of oppression.

That doesn't mean there were no good people in it, it just means that the organisation itself is a toxic one. To some people, that automatically means a black mark against anyone who was a senior person within it. See my analogy above about Anglo Irish Bank.

Chips Lovell

OK Folks. This a thread about the Gardai. Let's not turn this into Yet Another Northern Ireland Thread.

Since the RUC wasn't a proscribed organisation and there is no evidence or suggestion that Harris did anything illegal or unethical, let's leave it there.

Thanks

James Brown

It must be a stark wake up call for an organisation left to it's own devices for so long, requiring an outsider to clean up after them. A testament to Callinan and O'Sullivans leadership, or lack thereof. 'full confidence' all round...

tayto lover

FTA69 wrote: »

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t. He was certainly working alongside and supporting those who were. How do we reform one rotten mess by drawing personnel who were involved in anther rotten institution?

As I said on another thread, it’s also hilarious how FG were jumping up and down about SF politicians and political
violence when they’re perfectly happy to facilitate ex combatants from the British state who were equally as bad.

There was a SF spokesman on RTE supporting his appointment today so I'm finding it hard to understand their position on this. In fact they seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouth.
I don't think that bringing in someone who was close to "bad practice" to replace another who was close to "bad practice" is any kind of solution.
On this issue it seems that FG and SF are united. Both could suffer as a result.

Seth Brundle

tayto lover wrote: »

There was a SF spokesman on RTE supporting his appointment today so I'm finding it hard to understand their position on this. In fact they seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouth.
I don't think that bringing in someone who was close to "bad practice" to replace another who was close to "bad practice" is any kind of solution.

SF has given many ex-terrorists positions of authority. They can't now turnaround and say that an ex member if the PSNI shoukdnt get the job because of any possible but as yet unproven links to loyalists.

tayto lover wrote: »

On this issue it seems that FG and SF are united. Both could suffer as a result.

How would either suffer given that most of the electorate couldn't care less. In fact I'd say that a significant percentage of the electorate are too busy with the good weather, the world cup and the Kildare Mayo saga to be aware of some Nordie getting the commish job!

tayto lover

Seth Brundle wrote: »

SF has given many ex-terrorists positions of authority. They can't now turnaround and say that an ex member if the PSNI shoukdnt get the job because of any possible but as yet unproven links to loyalists.


How would either suffer given that most of the electorate couldn't care less. In fact I'd say that a significant percentage of the electorate are too busy with the good weather, the world cup and the Kildare Mayo saga to be aware of some Nordie getting the commish job!

It seems very hypocritical to back a "might have" with another "might have" and it seems like they just want to be included in a policing forum just to be in the tent.
Anything for a wee bit of power.

Captain Obvious

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It must be a stark wake up call for an organisation left to it's own devices for so long, requiring an outsider to clean up after them. A testament to Callinan and O'Sullivans leadership, or lack thereof. 'full confidence' all round...

Nobody seems too bothered really.

tayto lover

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Nobody seems too bothered really.

Exactly. Replacing like with like just for the sake of it.
They've completely fooled the Shinners.

James Brown

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Nobody seems too bothered really.

We all seem to be any way. Law and order is very important, as is how tax payer money is spent.

tayto lover wrote: »

Exactly. Replacing like with like just for the sake of it.
They've completely fooled the Shinners.

Loving how this seems to have more to do with 'shinners' than a not fit for purpose law enforcement agency and the 'full confidence' given to various failed commissioners and MoJ's.

tayto lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We all seem to be any way. Law and order is very important, as is how tax payer money is spent.



Loving how this seems to have more to do with 'shinners' than a not fit for purpose law enforcement agency and the 'full confidence' given to various failed commissioners and MoJ's.

It has.
They were the party constantly requiring change. Now they have got it.
Wool pulled completely over their eyes imo.

James Brown

tayto lover wrote: »

It has.
They were the party constantly requiring change. Now they have got it.
Wool pulled completely over their eyes imo.

The wool pulled over their eyes? I think it's valid to state concerns without needing to take away from the fact An Garda have major problems that need addressing.
We've an outsider entering into the organisation for the first time, to clean up the rot or numerous scandals and the take away is, 'the shinners must be going mad'? Fair enough.

Personally, If a political party gave 'full confidence' in two commissioners who by all accounts failed to improve the lot of An Garda and also gave 'full confidence' to two failed MoJ's only to need the assistance of an outsider to come in a try fix the mess...but 'shinners' and what not :rolleyes:

tayto lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The wool pulled over their eyes? I think it's valid to state concerns without needing to take away from the fact An Garda have major problems that need addressing.
We've an outsider entering into the organisation for the first time, to clean up the rot or numerous scandals and the take away is, 'the shinners must be going mad'? Fair enough.

Personally, If a political party gave 'full confidence' in two commissioners who by all accounts failed to improve the lot of An Garda and also gave 'full confidence' to two failed MoJ's only to need the assistance of an outsider to come in a try fix the mess...but 'shinners' and what not :rolleyes:

Nah. The Shinners signed up to the first proposal that was offered.
I can't see much reform happening in the Garda at all now. Even the Miami survivors showed more balls when they heard the news.
SF were sold a pup.

Captain Obvious

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We all seem to be any way. Law and order is very important, as is how tax payer money is spent.

I meant nobody in the organisation seems bothered.

blanch152

Phoebas wrote: »

He's a northern protestant/unionist.

And you know the way 'republicans' are always going on about people in NI being Irish and entitled to be treated equally to every other Irish citizen? -. that doesn't appear to apply to northern unionists by the looks of some of the boards posts about the new Garda commissioner.

It is very funny to see some of those who were loudest in calling for change in the Gardai so upset at a senior PSNI officer becoming Garda Commissioner.

You see the agenda is clear, some parts of Sinn Fein and some of their supporters see change in the Gardai as meaning the force goes soft on good republicans and dissidents. This appointment is the opposite, and what is worse, it has he potential to reform the gardai in a positive way.

tayto lover

blanch152 wrote: »

It is very funny to see some of those who were loudest in calling for change in the Gardai so upset at a senior PSNI officer becoming Garda Commissioner.

You see the agenda is clear, some parts of Sinn Fein and some of their supporters see change in the Gardai as meaning the force goes soft on good republicans and dissidents. This appointment is the opposite, and what is worse, it has he potential to reform the gardai in a positive way.

I'm not a SF voter yet I think it's a poor choice. In fact I think it was sold to SF to appease them as they were very vocal on the issue and they bought into it.
I think the new Commissioner should not have come from this island at all.

blanch152

tayto lover wrote: »

I'm not a SF voter yet I think it's a poor choice. In fact I think it was sold to SF to appease them as they were very vocal on the issue and they bought into it.
I think the new Commissioner should not have come from this island at all.

I am willing to reserve judgement until he does the job.

I have still reserved judgement on the previous commissioner until we see what the Tribunal says.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is very funny to see some of those who were loudest in calling for change in the Gardai so upset at a senior PSNI officer becoming Garda Commissioner.

You see the agenda is clear, some parts of Sinn Fein and some of their supporters see change in the Gardai as meaning the force goes soft on good republicans and dissidents. This appointment is the opposite, and what is worse, it has he potential to reform the gardai in a positive way.

If the 'agenda is clear', then by all means show examples of it.
i.e. A member of SF looking for a commissioner who will be 'soft' on 'good republicans' and 'dissidents'.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the 'agenda is clear', then by all means show examples of it.
i.e. A member of SF looking for a commissioner who will be 'soft' on 'good republicans' and 'dissidents'.

I could just dig out Gerry Adams remarks on the Special Criminal Court and that good republican smuggling fellow who was convicted there, but that would be too easy and simple and you know it anyway, so I just won't bother.

Now I know it wasn't "SF looking for a commissioner" but you misquoted me, as you do. My original remark was "change in the Gardai as meaning the force goes soft on good republicans and dissidents". The change could be a new Commissioner, it could be a policy change, it could be (and hope springs eternal) a SF MOJ directing change. In this case, the chance of change was dashed.

Very amusing all the same to see the reaction on social media. Plenty of them out there very upset.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I could just dig out Gerry Adams remarks on the Special Criminal Court and that good republican smuggling fellow who was convicted there, but that would be too easy and simple and you know it anyway, so I just won't bother.

Now I know it wasn't "SF looking for a commissioner" but you misquoted me, as you do. My original remark was "change in the Gardai as meaning the force goes soft on good republicans and dissidents". The change could be a new Commissioner, it could be a policy change, it could be (and hope springs eternal) a SF MOJ directing change. In this case, the chance of change was dashed.

Very amusing all the same to see the reaction on social media. Plenty of them out there very upset.

You said

it was clear ...some parts of Sinn Fein etc

I asked you to give us examples of some parts of Sinn Fein (i.e. someone from SF) looking for a commissioner who would be soft on 'good republicans' etc etc


Try again there will you?

mattser

So, now that the dust has settled, who should have got the job ?

hatrickpatrick

I honestly don't see how "maybe someone who wasn't part of an organisation which committed horrific atrocities as a matter of policy" somehow translates to "someone who'll be soft on dissident terrorists".

I'm willing to give this guy a fair chance, but FFS people have very legitimate reasons for being wary that someone who comes from an RUC background might not be the kind of person to ideologically believe in getting tough on police wrongdoing.

EDIT: Since the Anglo analogy seems to have been lost on people, here's another one: If someone who was a senior party member of FF during the Haughey years was appointed to a political ethics watchdog, would it be unreasonable for people to at least question whether they have the right ideological mindset for that particular role?

James Brown

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I meant nobody in the organisation seems bothered.

Well I hope for the sake or morale and the tax payer it all works out for them.

Seth Brundle

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Well I hope for the sake or morale and the tax payer it all works out for them.

There's a long way to go before anything works out.
Harris will need to identify all of the core issue before coming up with a plan on how to tackle them.
As such, I can see a number of high profile resignations from the force within the next few weeks as the old guard are squeezed out.

I wonder will he make sure that his contract allows high profile sackings without interference from the government or DoJ.

James Brown

Let's revisit here for a minute;
We had Fine Gael handing out 'full confidence' to all the key players despite their failures and short comings, yet now that the state needs look to an outside source to clean up the mess left by the 'full confidence' folk, it's all talk about Sinn Fein? It's laughable. Does anyone know what Mick Wallace thinks?
Talk about spin.
This is an embarrassment for the Fine Gael government, and so what? But if folk are going to distract by turning it into a Sinn Fein debate, Fine Gael should get a most valuable player mention one would think.

The states police force and DoJ are in a mess, so much so that an outsider was needed to come in and clean house, but Shinners :rolleyes: