The Frances Fitzgerald controversy. Are we heading for an election?

Odhinn

Stheno wrote: »

If its proven yes it is and he should be prosecuted as should Fitzgerald

If its found that senior officials in the DOH conspired to withhold evidence in the the interest of "national security" they should be prosecuted

As I said in another thread, there is a deeply entrenched belief amongst some gardai (and evidently in the DOJ) that anything that undermines the gardai undermines the state and thus has to be buried. Whatever 'noble intentions' this might have had at some stage, its led to the "blue wall of silence" and unaccountability of the force.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-revisiting-the-blue-wall-of-silence-on-garda-corruption-1.2672035

It also isn't helped by the attitude often seen whereby someone deemed a criminal, subversive or "gurrier" is somehow less worthy of rights than the next citizen of the state.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Prober order as well. We live in a republic, where everyone is entitled to due process. If the Disclosures Tribunal clear her of any wrong doing, there should be nothing to stop Leo bringing her back into the Cabinet.

There are many other politicians out there from all sides who have done far far worse and are still around.

Isn't part of the issue that the tribunal might not have been privy to all the facts because of Fitzgerald and Flanagan's ineptitude? And if Fitzgerald has absolutely nothing to hide but her incompetence, does she deserve any seat at the big table?

FrancieBrady

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Isn't part of the issue that the tribunal might not have been privy to all the facts because of Fitzgerald and Flanagan's ineptitude? And if Fitzgerald has absolutely nothing to hide but her incompetence, does she deserve any seat at the big table?

Open to correction but you would imagine the minister would be ultimately responsible for complying with a request for information from a tribunal.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Isn't part of the issue that the tribunal might not have been privy to all the facts because of Fitzgerald and Flanagan's ineptitude? And if Fitzgerald has absolutely nothing to hide but her incompetence, does she deserve any seat at the big table?

If the tribunal finds that the DOJ deliberately withheld information from it and the Minster of the day, then does that make the minster guilty as well?

It seems many recognise the culture of secrecy within the DOJ and accept that it was they that are the root cause of this issue, yet some are happy to blame the Minster because they are the public face of the problem. Firing them doesn't make an iota of difference.

So, yes, if the Tribunal finds that the Minster did no wrong doing, then why deny a person a job?

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

If the tribunal finds that the DOJ deliberately withheld information from it and the Minster of the day, then does that make the minster guilty as well?

It seems many recognise the culture of secrecy within the DOJ and accept that it was they that are the root cause of this issue, yet some are happy to blame the Minster because they are the public face of the problem. Firing them doesn't make an iota of difference.

So, yes, if the Tribunal finds that the Minster did no wrong doing, then why deny a person a job?

If you fire the minister you do make a difference, the next minister will make sure their department is compliant. Win win.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you fire the minister you do make a difference, the next minister will make sure their department is compliant. Win win.

Ah, yes. The Donald Trump method of running a country.

Jesus Weeps.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Ah, yes. The Donald Trump method of running a country.

Jesus Weeps.

What?
If you don't do your job in the real world what happens? What do you propose?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?
If you don't do your job in the real world what happens? What do you propose?

The idea of using a Donald Trump analogy and vocabulary to run a country or a department is frankly nonsense. Firing a minister actually changes nothing on the ground.

tomwaterford

markodaly wrote: »

The idea of using a Donald Trump analogy and vocabulary to run a country or a department is frankly nonsense. Firing a minister actually changes nothing on the ground.

Your essentially trying to argue againest political.accountability?


Taught this day was gone for ireland

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Open to correction but you would imagine the minister would be ultimately responsible for complying with a request for information from a tribunal.

Does nobody ever read the links I provide? Here it is again, Section 4 of the Public Service Management Act 1997 which sets out the duties of the Secretary General:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1997/act/27/section/4/enacted/en/html#sec4

"(e) ensuring that appropriate arrangements are put into place that will facilitate an effective response to matters that pertain to both the Department or Scheduled Office and other branches of the public service;"

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

The idea of using a Donald Trump analogy and vocabulary to run a country or a department is frankly nonsense. Firing a minister actually changes nothing on the ground.

You mentioned Trump, not me.

Is a Minister responsible for their dept or not?

markodaly

tomwaterford wrote: »

Your essentially trying to argue againest political.accountability?


Taught this day was gone for ireland

No, there is a difference between accountability and thinking Ireland should be run as if its season 14 of The Apprentice.

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

If the tribunal finds that the DOJ deliberately withheld information from it and the Minster of the day, then does that make the minster guilty as well?

It seems many recognise the culture of secrecy within the DOJ and accept that it was they that are the root cause of this issue, yet some are happy to blame the Minster because they are the public face of the problem. Firing them doesn't make an iota of difference.

So, yes, if the Tribunal finds that the Minster did no wrong doing, then why deny a person a job?

The circle you will have trouble trying to square is how (presuming neither was aware of any strategy) the DOJ had 2 x successive different ministers under FG govts, both minister being of FG stock.

Frances Fitzgerald forgot emails about a very high profile whistleblower, already responsible at that time for several high profile resignations, (including her predecessor), which made her aware of a strategy to undermine McCabe, and further coached her on what she could say, if asked anything about it. Bearing in mind she 'noted' same email. I'm having difficulty believing that she simply "forgot" the emails in question.

Period.

Next justice minister in charge of the dept waltzes in, and the same very important emails are somehow not forwarded on to the tribunal. Bearing in mind Frances 'forgot' even receiving these mails?

The day the innocuous emails suddenly get mentioned in the media, general secretary announces retirement plans.

The day Fitzgerald goes, he brings his resignation forward there and Then, clears his desk and skidaddles.

That's some amazing series of unrelated unfortunate chain of coincidental events.

And I say that after hearing about the explanations for the copied and pasted files for TUSLA.

But..... due process and all.

tomwaterford

markodaly wrote: »

No, there is a difference between accountability and thinking Ireland should be run as if its season 14 of The Apprentice.

So you don't think this minister should been sacked??


By any reasonable measure she fcuked up....if you want jobs at the top....yous take the responsibility what comes with em?
(Fcuk. Knows they get paid enough)



How badly do you think ministers should perform and how many lies and misleading info should they give before being sacked.....

Only for varadkar is in relative honeymoon period,he's emerging politically unscathed by this.....

he sent out senior ministers out to argue in favour of the taniste while knowing she was a dead duck with the info he had......another similar episode and people won't do what he tells em as blindly again?

FrancieBrady

tomwaterford wrote: »

So you don't think this minister should been sacked??


By any reasonable measure she fcuked up....if you want jobs at the top....yous take the responsibility what comes with em?
(Fcuk. Knows they get paid enough)



How badly do you think ministers should perform and how many lies and misleading info should they give before being sacked.....

Only for varadkar is in relative honeymoon period,he's emerging politically unscathed by this.....

he sent out senior ministers out to argue in favour of the taniste while knowing she was a dead duck with the info he had......another similar episode and people won't do what he tells em as blindly again?

Doesn't really matter what he thinks, Ministers get sacked/resign primarily because they haven't done their jobs in one way or another.
They are responsible for their Dept's.

Unfortunately they aren't held responsible often enough here.

Tell me how

tomwaterford wrote: »

Only for varadkar is in relative honeymoon period,he's emerging politically unscathed by this.....

I think it could be argued he has been weakened on all sides. FF have amunition for future, FG backbenchers likely feel he was indecisive.

Seth Brundle

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you fire the minister you do make a difference, the next minister will make sure their department is compliant. Win win.

Like when Shatter was fired and Fitzer brought in?

FrancieBrady

Tell me how wrote: »

I think it could be argued he has been weakened on all sides. FF have amunition for future, FG backbenchers likely feel he was indecisive.

Let's face it, FF had huge influence before this, they own Leo for the foreseeable.

FrancieBrady

kbannon wrote: »

Like when Shatter was fired and Fitzer brought in?

You know what angers me?
Listening to FG FF TDs whinging that the DOJ has been like this for years and we only got a commitment to do something about it (split it up) when Leo looked like he was gonna loise his government.

Shatter Fitz and those before were clearly happy to play along with the antics.

tomwaterford

Tell me how wrote: »

I think it could be argued he has been weakened on all sides. FF have amunition for future, FG backbenchers likely feel he was indecisive.

It should be interesting to see how he fares in these brexit talks

As he was willing to push to the brink to try save someone he shouldn't

,I suspect he'll do much better than when ff went to bailout negotiations...and might be hard nosed enough to veto it,inspite of eu pressure?

(Hopefully for irelands sake he will)

Stheno

Rick Shaw wrote: »

So maybe she had lost the support of cabinet?

It's a fair assumption after all.

According to the article I linked earlier no fewer than seven of her cabinet colleagues expressed regret at her resignation.

Now discounting the IA,that's a sizable minority

Odhinn wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/read-justice-minister-charlie-flanagans-address-to-the-dail-on-email-scandal-in-full-816223.html

Seems to be blaming the civil servants. There seems to be more of it when he says



..which is presumably in relation to the first e-mail that Noel Waters mentioned to him while retiring.

Having worked both in and as a consultant to the public sector, I'd not be in anyway surprised at any malarky going on at different levels tbh

It's a level of dysfunction that is hard to believe

markodaly wrote: »

Prober order as well. We live in a republic, where everyone is entitled to due process. If the Disclosures Tribunal clear her of any wrong doing, there should be nothing to stop Leo bringing her back into the Cabinet.

There are many other politicians out there from all sides who have done far far worse and are still around.

I'm not so sure, I once had a rather bad **** up in a job and it took me several years to recover from it and get back to where I was. It impacted me professionally as it was well known throughout my industry and I was judged on it

Thankfully it was many years ago.

For someone in public office to screw up in such a way that the country almost ends up in election mode is slightly more serious

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Msleading'?
We clearly have different definitions of 'suppoirt'.

Try it in reverse, if Leo had not said he would not accept her resignation or that he would ask for it, how long would she have lasted?
Her position became untenable because he could no longer support her.

Her position became untenable because it was she resigned or the confidence and supply agreement would collapse and trigger an election?

Odhinn wrote: »

As I said in another thread, there is a deeply entrenched belief amongst some gardai (and evidently in the DOJ) that anything that undermines the gardai undermines the state and thus has to be buried. Whatever 'noble intentions' this might have had at some stage, its led to the "blue wall of silence" and unaccountability of the force.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-revisiting-the-blue-wall-of-silence-on-garda-corruption-1.2672035

It also isn't helped by the attitude often seen whereby someone deemed a criminal, subversive or "gurrier" is somehow less worthy of rights than the next citizen of the state.

This imo is deeply engrained in the culture of the gardai and needs to be stamped out,.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Isn't part of the issue that the tribunal might not have been privy to all the facts because of Fitzgerald and Flanagan's ineptitude? And if Fitzgerald has absolutely nothing to hide but her incompetence, does she deserve any seat at the big table?

No she doesn't, but how is Flanagan accountable for the failures of Fitzgerald and the DOJ if they obstructed his access to what they were doing/had done?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Open to correction but you would imagine the minister would be ultimately responsible for complying with a request for information from a tribunal.

Again if the Secretary General of the DOJ puts obstruction in place of releasing information and the Minister is not informed, how can they be accountable for this behaviour? Should they be rocking down to the IT dept in the DOJ and overseeing email trawls?

Accountability is not equal to responsibility

markodaly wrote: »

If the tribunal finds that the DOJ deliberately withheld information from it and the Minster of the day, then does that make the minster guilty as well?

It seems many recognise the culture of secrecy within the DOJ and accept that it was they that are the root cause of this issue, yet some are happy to blame the Minster because they are the public face of the problem. Firing them doesn't make an iota of difference.

So, yes, if the Tribunal finds that the Minster did no wrong doing, then why deny a person a job?

Agreed

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you fire the minister you do make a difference, the next minister will make sure their department is compliant. Win win.

How so unless you address the inherent culture in the DOJ which supports behaviour which essentially ignores the Minister?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?
If you don't do your job in the real world what happens? What do you propose?

Plenty of examples I can give you of it having no effect, especially in the wider public sector

Rick Shaw wrote: »

The circle you will have trouble trying to square is how (presuming neither was aware of any strategy) the DOJ had 2 x successive different ministers under FG govts, both minister being of FG stock.

Frances Fitzgerald forgot emails about a very high profile whistleblower, already responsible at that time for several high profile resignations, (including her predecessor), which made her aware of a strategy to undermine McCabe, and further coached her on what she could say, if asked anything about it. Bearing in mind she 'noted' same email. I'm having difficulty believing that she simply "forgot" the emails in question.

Period.

Next justice minister in charge of the dept waltzes in, and the same very important emails are somehow not forwarded on to the tribunal. Bearing in mind Frances 'forgot' even receiving these mails?

The day the innocuous emails suddenly get mentioned in the media, general secretary announces retirement plans.

The day Fitzgerald goes, he brings his resignation forward there and Then, clears his desk and skidaddles.

That's some amazing series of unrelated unfortunate chain of coincidental events.

And I say that after hearing about the explanations for the copied and pasted files for TUSLA.

But..... due process and all.

3 Ministers no?

tomwaterford wrote: »

So you don't think this minister should been sacked??


By any reasonable measure she fcuked up....if you want jobs at the top....yous take the responsibility what comes with em?
(Fcuk. Knows they get paid enough)



How badly do you think ministers should perform and how many lies and misleading info should they give before being sacked.....

Only for varadkar is in relative honeymoon period,he's emerging politically unscathed by this.....

he sent out senior ministers out to argue in favour of the taniste while knowing she was a dead duck with the info he had......another similar episode and people won't do what he tells em as blindly again?

A recent indo poll gave FG a 52% majority in any election

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/revealed-independentie-readers-take-to-the-polls-and-heres-who-theyd-vote-for-in-a-snap-election-36353134.html

And no I'm not an FG supporter

markodaly

Rick Shaw wrote: »

Next justice minister in charge of the dept waltzes in, and the same very important emails are somehow not forwarded on to the tribunal. Bearing in mind Frances 'forgot' even receiving these mails?

The day the innocuous emails suddenly get mentioned in the media, general secretary announces retirement plans.

The day Fitzgerald goes, he brings his resignation forward there and Then, clears his desk and skidaddles.

That's some amazing series of unrelated unfortunate chain of coincidental events.

And I say that after hearing about the explanations for the copied and pasted files for TUSLA.

But..... due process and all.

Yes, due process, this is a Republic is it not? Not all the facts are in the public domain, some would like to trial this on the net, but we all know that is not wise or warranted. There is no evidence that the Government conspired in these events and all data so far shows that they were bystanders as the Gardai and the DOJ did what they did.

Ironically, when Leo stated that he was going to launch an external review into the DOJ, you had all the journalists who wanted that head on a plate, all scoff and say 'Good luck with that, those boys are a law onto themselves'. The media are quick as always to point out the wrong, but when the hard graft of fixing a problem is on the table they are empty vessels.

bladespin

Stheno wrote:

A recent indo poll gave FG a 52% majority in any election

A day is a long time in politics they say, I'd be surprised if FG had anything close to that now.

Stheno

bladespin wrote: »

A day is a long time in politics they say, I'd be surprised if FG had anything close to that now.

I'd be surprised if the events of the five days since that poll have changed public views significantly tbh

Most people I spoke to last week were sick of the current structure and the shambles it is

FrancieBrady

Stheno wrote: »

Her position became untenable because it was she resigned or the confidence and supply agreement would collapse and trigger an election?

That was the position before the release of the trawl as well.
It was the release of the trawled docs and the change in the Taoiseach and Cabinet's attitude (which was strong support) that made her position untenable.
Untenable - indefensible, undefendable, unarguable, insupportable,

Again if the Secretary General of the DOJ puts obstruction in place of releasing information and the Minister is not informed, how can they be accountable for this behaviour? Should they be rocking down to the IT dept in the DOJ and overseeing email trawls?

This apparently is how the DOJ has behaved for years. Has a Secretary General ever been penalised, or called to account?

If you do nothing about it, of course the situation will pertain and worsen.

Stheno

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That was the position before the release of the trawl as well.
It was the release of the trawled docs and the change in the Taoiseach and Cabinet's attitude (which was strong support) that made her position untenable.
Untenable - indefensible, undefendable, unarguable, insupportable,

Precisely the point I made earlier, in that Leo exercised poor judgement in realising her position was untenable.

Doesn't mean he withdrew his support rather that he recognised he stayed on as Taoiseach if she resigned or he faced an election.

He's publicly stated he supports her both yesterday and today

This apparently is how the DOJ has behaved for years. Has a Secretary General ever been penalised, or called to account?

No and perhaps we adopt the american system which sees acountabilty for Secretary Generals, rather than a Minister with vague oversight and no insight into the day to day operation of departments?

Dyr

Stheno wrote: »

A recent indo poll gave FG a 52% majority in any election

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/revealed-independentie-readers-take-to-the-polls-and-heres-who-theyd-vote-for-in-a-snap-election-36353134.html

And no I'm not an FG supporter

It's not an indo poll its a poll of indo readers, big difference

That's a bit like quoting a thejournal.ie poll.

bladespin

Stheno wrote:

I'd be surprised if the events of the five days since that poll have changed public views significantly tbh

Stheno wrote:

Most people I spoke to last week were sick of the current structure and the shambles it is

Maybe but am picking up a distinctly anti fgff vibe around, surprisingly and especially off some more right tinking types, wouldn't stretch it so far as to mention the dreaded shinners but there's certainly an appetite for something new rather than the stale old bread dished out by the 'traditional' parties.

Stheno

Bambi wrote: »

It's not an indo poll its a poll of indo readers, big difference

That's a bit like quoting a thejournal.ie poll.

The result was rather startling given that the indo is usually an anti-FG hotbed.

I genuinely expected to see SF/FF leading the poll.

I was amazed at the result

Seth Brundle

FG just don't get it...
"Former tanaiste Frances Fitzgerald received a standing ovation from Fine Gael colleagues in Leinster House tonight"
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/standing-ovation-for-frances-fitzgerald-as-she-returns-to-leinster-house-36365455.html

FrancieBrady

Stheno wrote: »

Precisely the point I made earlier, in that Leo exercised poor judgement in realising her position was untenable.

Doesn't mean he withdrew his support rather that he recognised he stayed on as Taoiseach if she resigned or he faced an election.

He's publicly stated he supports her both yesterday and today


No and perhaps we adopt the american system which sees acountabilty for Secretary Generals, rather than a Minister with vague oversight and no insight into the day to day operation of departments?

I live in the world of real politics Steno, not optics.
Maybe that is where we are confused.

I think if a Ministers job is on the line because of failing to do it, then yes, you have to give them the ability/environment to do the job.

Stheno

kbannon wrote: »

FG just don't get it...
"Former tanaiste Frances Fitzgerald received a standing ovation from Fine Gael colleagues in Leinster House tonight"
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/standing-ovation-for-frances-fitzgerald-as-she-returns-to-leinster-house-36365455.html

They should really just banish here to the back bench and see what happens in the tribunal.

I can half see why they feel they need to support her, but they are over exuberant about it at this stage

Sign of the shambles I mentioned earlier

FrancieBrady

Stheno wrote: »

I genuinely expected to see SF/FF leading the poll.

In the Indo????

Stheno

FrancieBrady wrote: »

In the Indo????

The indo tend to be extremely anti FG, pro FF pro labour and to a lesser extent SF

This was in the week SF said they would entertain being a junior partner.

Fg came out with a 52% majority that's shocking and it was less than a week ago

markodaly

kbannon wrote: »

FG just don't get it...
"Former tanaiste Frances Fitzgerald received a standing ovation from Fine Gael colleagues in Leinster House tonight"
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/standing-ovation-for-frances-fitzgerald-as-she-returns-to-leinster-house-36365455.html

Was she meant to beg and grovel for forgiveness, 10 lashes of the whip?

FG may be bruised over this, but this is just a precursor for what is to come. They know that FF, SF and everyone else is going to come after them, whether is merited or now. A bit of sparring before the main fight is just what they need to get fighting fit and stay on top when the next GE happens.

Stheno

markodaly wrote: »

Was she meant to beg and grovel for forgiveness, 10 lashes of the whip?

FG may be bruised over this, but this is just a precursor for what is to come. They know that FF, SF and everyone else is going to come after them, whether is merited or now. A bit of sparring before the main fight is just what they need to get fighting fit and stay on top when the next GE happens.

She and FG should have put there hands up, said "we ****ed up, sorry, we'll investigate for the future and fix the wrongs"

They did everything but say they ****ed up

Tell me how

Stheno wrote:

Fg came out with a 52% majority that's shocking and it was less than a week ago

I think that's as relevant as a poll from 12 months ago given what has happened in the last few days.

markodaly

Stheno wrote: »

She and FG should have put there hands up, said "we ****ed up, sorry, we'll investigate for the future and fix the wrongs"

They did everything but say they ****ed up

Privately they will be having these conversation but publicly political parties of all hues across the world rarely if never admit wrong doing whether its merited or not. FF will barely acknowledge their role in the crash, Sinn Fein think 30 years of war in the North was worth it, just to pick two simple examples. Across the water Labour and the Tories are just like that as well. If people are going to want to hear a "I am sorry" from FG over this, they will be a long time waiting.

Seth Brundle

Stheno wrote: »

The indo tend to be extremely anti FG, pro FF pro labour and to a lesser extent SF

Aah no. The indo loathes SF and make no effort to hide their contempt.

Seth Brundle

markodaly wrote: »

Was she meant to beg and grovel for forgiveness, 10 lashes of the whip?

FG may be bruised over this, but this is just a precursor for what is to come. They know that FF, SF and everyone else is going to come after them, whether is merited or now. A bit of sparring before the main fight is just what they need to get fighting fit and stay on top when the next GE happens.

Im not convinced that you want to see clearly but as a relatively impartial observer, I can see absolutely no way in which she did not act appropriately. She either is incompetent or she stood by whilst an innocent man's reputation was to be attacked by lies.
She is a disgrace to the office.

Stheno

kbannon wrote: »

Aah no. The indo loathes SF and make no effort to hide their contempt.

That was the surprise about their poll.

I was incorrect in my figures it was 54% FG 23% FF and 15% SF

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/revealed-independentie-readers-take-to-the-polls-and-heres-who-theyd-vote-for-in-a-snap-election-36353134.html

I was frankly amazed, allegedly it was 7000 voters

15% for SF is very high for the indo, third largest party in the country

Stheno

kbannon wrote: »

Im not convinced that you want to see clearly but as a relatively impartial observer, I can see absolutely no way in which she did not act appropriately. She either is incompetent or she stood by whilst an innocent man's reputation was to be attacked by lies.
She is a disgrace to the office.

I'd agree, I'd have a lot more respect for FG and the personalities involved if they came out and said they screwed up and addressed it but they didn't.

If they had a majority I suspect it would be a non issue.

Have we ever had a majority FG govt?

robbiezero

kbannon wrote: »

She either is incompetent or she stood by whilst an innocent man's reputation was to be attacked by lies.
She is a disgrace to the office.

how would she have known his reputation was about to be attacked with lies?

Hitman3000

Stheno wrote:

I was frankly amazed, allegedly it was 7000 voters

It was a readers poll of the Indo. Not representive of the wider population just representive of the Indo readership.

Bass Reeves

Some people consider that Leo Vradker made a huge slip pushing FF as far as he did. However neither FF or SF will now push for a vote of NC in Charlie Flanagan unless they have strong evidence. FF was reacting to a SF NC motion and nearly got caught on the hop. SF taught they can always play the high moral ground without conquences. Now both know that LV will go toe to toe with them and if they are caught offside it could end in an election.

Not a brillant week for him but not the disaster that some think it is. It is possible now that the Government can carry until next summer, the independents do not want an election either and those in cabinet were caught off side in the Korean stunt. It all system go now as long as no real scandal develops over the next while but a lifting economy over the next 6-8 months could see a possible return to Government of a similar FG led government unless FF and SF are willing to get engaged after the next election and for that they will need an overall majority or support from some realistic independents like the Healy Rae's . But Leo looks in the driving seat for now

Fann Linn

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Some people consider that Leo Vradker made a huge slip pushing FF as far as he did. However neither FF or SF will now push for a vote of NC in Charlie Flanagan unless they have strong evidence. FF was reacting to a SF NC motion and nearly got caught on the hop. SF taught they can always play the high moral ground without conquences. Now both know that LV will go toe to toe with them and if they are caught offside it could end in an election.

Not a brillant week for him but not the disaster that some think it is. It is possible now that the Government can carry until next summer, the independents do not want an election either and those in cabinet were caught off side in the Korean stunt. It all system go now as long as no real scandal develops over the next while but a lifting economy over the next 6-8 months could see a possible return to Government of a similar FG led government unless FF and SF are willing to get engaged after the next election and for that they will need an overall majority or support from some realistic independents like the Healy Rae's . But Leo looks in the driving seat for now

Most people will probably say now: 'Look at Leo, says one thing and does another'.

Edward M

robbiezero wrote: »

how would she have known his reputation was about to be attacked with lies?

Publicly backing his stance while privately knowing that the garda legal team were going to try and discredit him, that could be their only defence.
Its like talking out of one side of your mouth and keeping tight lipped with the other.
Sometimes, doing nothing wrong is a lot worse than doing nothing at all.

McMurphy

Stheno wrote: »

That was the surprise about their poll.

I was incorrect in my figures it was 54% FG 23% FF and 15% SF

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/revealed-independentie-readers-take-to-the-polls-and-heres-who-theyd-vote-for-in-a-snap-election-36353134.html

I was frankly amazed, allegedly it was 7000 voters

15% for SF is very high for the indo, third largest party in the country

That poll (when live) gave readers the opportunity to vote on multiple occasions with absolutely no effort whatsoever (ie refreshing the page gave me another vote when I seen it at the time)

About as representative of the true intention of the publics feelings as reading tea leaves tbh.

Surely considering the events of the last week there's a public opinion poll not open to manipulation this coming weekend?

FrancieBrady

robbiezero wrote: »

how would she have known his reputation was about to be attacked with lies?

Not being on top of the brief and knowing everything that was going on in one of the most important cases to be dealt with in dept is a sacking offence imo.
And I think it would be in the mind of most citizens Robbie, being reasonable. And once the party political bruhahaha dies down that really should be the main lesson.
Of course I don't for a second believe she or any MOJ was not on top of what was going on in this case and I think the tribunal has a good chance of exposing that.

robbiezero

Edward M wrote: »

Publicly backing his stance while privately knowing that the garda legal team were going to try and discredit him, that could be their only defence.
Its like talking out of one side of your mouth and keeping tight lipped with the other.
Sometimes, doing nothing wrong is a lot worse than doing nothing at all.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not being on top of the brief and knowing everything that was going on in one of the most important cases to be dealt with in dept is a sacking offence imo.
And I think it would be in the mind of most citizens Robbie, being reasonable. And once the party political bruhahaha dies down that really should be the main lesson.
Of course I don't for a second believe she or any MOJ was not on top of what was going on in this case and I think the tribunal has a good chance of exposing that.

But neither of those replies answer my question. All I am wondering is where the poster got the information that Frances F knew that the guards were going to attack his credibility with a bunch of lies at O'Higgins.