Aide-de-camp to the Taoiseach, why?

expectationlost

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

Ah so your initial question was rhetorical.

You don't actually want to know why, you just want people to know you are opposed to it.

no I want to know what _need_ there is? Im allowing that there is a need because I don't know all that a Aide-de-camp does but the necessity hasn't been explained, all I 'read is its tradition and things that don't require a military officer.

expectationlost

expectationlost wrote: »

no I want to know what _need_ there is? Im allowing that there is a need because I don't know all that a Aide-de-camp does but the necessity hasn't been explained, all I 'read is its tradition and things that don't require a military officer.

It doesn't make any sense, because the Tanaiste only has a meaningful role when he is acting in the absence of the Taoiseach. If the Taoiseach is not in the country, or is otherwise incapacitated, then the Taoiseach's Aide de Camp -obviously - accompanies the Tanaiste.

The Office of Tanaiste doesn't really have a purpose in its own right.

Honestly, I think people are obfuscating because they don't know the answer either. I don't think there is one.

expectationlost

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It doesn't make any sense, because the Tanaiste only has a meaningful role when he is acting in the absence of the Taoiseach. If the Taoiseach is not in the country, or is otherwise incapacitated, then the Taoiseach's Aide de Camp -obviously - accompanies the Tanaiste.

The Office of Tanaiste doesn't really have a purpose in its own right.

Honestly, I think people are obfuscating because they don't know the answer either. I don't think there is one.

you'll note I asked why the Taoiseach has an aide-de-camp not why the Tanaiste is now supposedly getting one.

expectationlost

expectationlost wrote: »

you'll note I asked why they Taoiseach has an aide-de-camp not why the Tanaiste is now supposedly getting one.

Ah. Well I thought the Taoiseach's would be obvious enough as a diplomatic courtesy.

You might say it's outdated, and so it is, but diplomacy doesn't pretend to be logical.

expectationlost

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Ah. Well I thought the Taoiseach's would be obvious enough as a diplomatic courtesy.

You might say it's outdated, and so it is, but diplomacy doesn't pretend to be logical.

Can we as a country try to be logical and thus expected it from others, rather then lowering the bar.

expectationlost

expectationlost wrote: »

Can we as a country try to be logical and thus expected it from others, rather then lowering the bar.

Diplomacy is a competitive process, just like differential rates of taxation.

Or maybe more like a commodity that is leveraged by Governments for influence and resources.

Of course you cannot ignore it.

ronivek

expectationlost wrote: »

Can we as a country try to be logical and thus expected it from others, rather then lowering the bar.

Why are you so opposed to Aide-de-Camps? If the Defence Forces are happy to allow what appear to be experienced and educated individuals into these positions; presumably they are valued and sought after postings? Has anyone from the Defence Forces made any claims to the contrary?

Would you not expect a certain amount of communication between Government and the Defence Forces? Ignoring for a moment anything that might relate to national security but simply from a logistical standpoint:

• Arranging transport via Government Jet; operated by the Air Corps.
• Arranging military escorts for visiting dignitaries and official functions.
• Arranging attendance of Government officials at Defence Forces functions and passing out parades; and vice versa for attendance of Defence Forces officials at Government functions.
• Collating any and all information that Government might request from the Defense Forces on any number of issues.

Is it your argument that a 'plain clothes civilian' would be better suited to liaise between the Defence Forces and Government Offices?

Rodney Bathgate

biko wrote: »

President Higgins also has one to follow him around for some military purpose.

He also has responsibility for lifting him up when he needs to go to the toilet and can’t reach.

Topgear on Dave

Gods Gift wrote: »

With the launch codes.

Its Michael D. If anything happens he'll fire a book of poetry at our enemies.

Manic Moran

ronivek wrote: »

Why are you so opposed to Aide-de-Camps? If the Defence Forces are happy to allow what appear to be experienced and educated individuals into these positions; presumably they are valued and sought after postings? Has anyone from the Defence Forces made any claims to the contrary?

Would you not expect a certain amount of communication between Government and the Defence Forces? Ignoring for a moment anything that might relate to national security but simply from a logistical standpoint:

• Arranging transport via Government Jet; operated by the Air Corps.
• Arranging military escorts for visiting dignitaries and official functions.
• Arranging attendance of Government officials at Defence Forces functions and passing out parades; and vice versa for attendance of Defence Forces officials at Government functions.
• Collating any and all information that Government might request from the Defense Forces on any number of issues.

Is it your argument that a 'plain clothes civilian' would be better suited to liaise between the Defence Forces and Government Offices?

In fairness, those aren't exactly things which require a military officer to draw up. You just have to have the right telephone numbers in the outlook contact list, it's not as if the ADC is going to be calling out drill commands to the President's motorcycle escort. A civilian will be able to do the co-ordination work just as easily, and I would submit that the correct channel for the Taoseach or President to obtain information from the DF is the Chief of Staff through the Minister of Defense. It's true that a military officer is going to (a) look good in uniform next to the politican, and (b) will have an attention to detail hammered into him/her, but I would submit that some civilians will have similar qualifications, especially including uniformed branches such as the Gardai or Fire Service. I mean, realistically, surely there's more routine co-ordination with the Gardai going on on a daily basis involving the Taoseach's or President's movements than the military, and I would like to think that a mid-grade Garda would be about as professional and detail-oriented as a mid-grade serviceman.

That's not to say there aren't good reasons to have a military ADC. It's an excellent broadening assignment for the officer in question, (s)he will get an insight into the workings of civilian leadership which few other officers will do. There will be, with international travel, great opportunity to interact with members of foreign military services. And, finally, it's sortof just plain tradition. Around the world, ADCs are often military.

expectationlost

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Diplomacy is a competitive process, just like differential rates of taxation.

Or maybe more like a commodity that is leveraged by Governments for influence and resources.

Of course you cannot ignore it.

if you start tip-toeing around foreign dignitaries then they can throw hissy fits and get upset about some minor thing, or you can ignore it and act like a grown up.

expectationlost

ronivek wrote: »

Would you not expect a certain amount of communication between Government and the Defence Forces? Ignoring for a moment anything that might relate to national security but simply from a logistical standpoint:

• Arranging transport via Government Jet; operated by the Air Corps.
• Arranging military escorts for visiting dignitaries and official functions.
• Arranging attendance of Government officials at Defence Forces functions and passing out parades; and vice versa for attendance of Defence Forces officials at Government functions.
• Collating any and all information that Government might request from the Defense Forces on any number of issues.

Does the Aide-de-camp do all those things?

ronivek

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, those aren't exactly things which require a military officer to draw up.

...

I would like to think that a mid-grade Garda would be about as professional and detail-oriented as a mid-grade serviceman.

I don't necessarily disagree; although without knowing precisely what the AdC does it's hard to say with any certainty either way. Indeed I'm sure anyone could be trained up to perform the requisite duties; and if there are any aspects of the role which require more specific military knowledge I'm sure those duties could be shifted over to the Defence Forces personnel who would be commanding the relevant escort/parade units.

I suppose what I'm trying to get at is the fundamental objection the OP seems to have with the role; I haven't quite been able to figure it out. I suspect he believes that having a serving member of the Defence Forces as a 'personal assistant' is somehow demeaning; maybe he can clarify.

expectationlost wrote: »

Does the Aide-de-camp do all those things?

I'm just throwing out suggestions; I have no direct experience with the Department of the Taoiseach or the Defence Forces. Indeed as Manic Moran suggests above the correct channel for many or all of those could be the Minister for Defence or some other member of the Defence Forces or Civil Service.

A cursory search through Oireachtas proceedings brings up the same description repeatedly:

The duties of the aide-de-camp to the Taoiseach by long practice and precedent are to attend with him, when required, at certain formal functions and to represent him on ceremonial and other occasions when it is not possible for the Taoiseach to be present personally.

The current AdC to the President, Cmdt. Dorothy Donnelly, describes her position thus:

Deputy Chief Aide De Camp to Uachtaran na hEireann, responsible for the day to day management of the Aide de Camp office at Áras an Uachtaran, key participant in planning and execution of State ceremonies and Presidential Protocol with both National and International Stakeholders. Confidential assistant to the President, representing the President at events as occasions demand.

Even if it were a purely ceremonial position; I honestly don't see the issue. What precisely is it you have a problem with? I haven't been able to figure it out from your posts.

NSAman

Maybe they just like having men in uniform in front of them?