FG to still just do nothing for the next 5 years - part 2

JohnnyFlash

Bowie wrote: »

Trying to score points trumps debate with FG. Using the topic of suicide to do it is cool too apparently.

Dude, what a seriously bad read. Only one person point scoring here and it isn’t me. Just pointing out a fact.

McMurphy

Bowie wrote: »

Trying to score points trumps debate with FG. Using the topic of suicide to do it is cool too apparently.

No, I think the point being made sailed over both their heads.

FG posters in here, "Some people unfortunately don't want to be homed as they have addiction and psychiatric problems" (see Jonathan Corrie thread)

Also FG posters in here. "Homelessness has nothing to do with people with mental illnesses and psychiatric problems"

But hey, when there's money to be made, - straight in like a ferret down a rat hole.

Brendan Bendar

McMurphy wrote: »

No, I think the point being made sailed over both their heads.

FG posters in here, "Some people unfortunately don't want to be homed as they have addiction and psychiatric problems"

Also FG posters in here. "Homelessness has nothing to do with people with mental illnesses and psychiatric problems"

But hey, when there's money to be made, - straight in like a ferret down a rat hole.

Ferrets prefer rabbit holes dude.

Stop digging coach.

Bishop of hope

Lads I don't know what yiz are at, but pieta house is a worthy charity imo.
I hope this, thread hasn't stopped to trying to dismantle charities over political point scoring.

JohnnyFlash

Bowie wrote: »

Trying to score points trumps debate with FG. Using the topic of suicide to do it is cool too apparently.

Who are you accusing of using suicide to score political points? That’s a tremendously serious accusation in fairness. Like it’s very much out there as an accusation. I’d consider it far outside the pale to be honest and think you should withdraw it.

Serious Flash for a moment.

FrancieBrady

Is the Pieta House board gig a charity one or is she getting paid?

McMurphy

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Lads I don't know what yiz are at, but pieta house is a worthy charity imo.
I hope this, thread hasn't stopped to trying to dismantle charities over political point scoring.

I have given my own personal reasons for refusing to donate to it in the future Bishop, I made no mention of dismantling it or otherwise.

Leo sounded as surprised that Regina Doherty was on the board as many other people did.

Someone maybe sent him a WhatsApp about it, and he deleted it could be used as a plausible excuse now I suppose.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is the Pieta House board gig a charity one or is she getting paid?

I will bet good money (donated to a good cause) that she is not doing it for free.

Anyone want to take me up?

Bishop of hope

McMurphy wrote: »

I have given my own personal reasons for refusing to donate to it in the future Bishop, I made no mention of dismantling it or otherwise.

Leo sounded as surprised that Regina Doherty was on the board as many other people did.

Someone maybe sent him a WhatsApp about it, and he deleted it could be used as a plausible excuse now I suppose.



I will bet good money (donated to a good cause) that she is not doing it for free.

Anyone want to take me up?

Very few do Mc.

JohnnyFlash

McMurphy wrote: »

I have given my own personal reasons for refusing to donate to it in the future Bishop, I made no mention of dismantling it or otherwise.

Leo sounded as surprised that Regina Doherty was on the board as many other people did.

Someone maybe sent him a WhatsApp about it, and he deleted it could be used as a plausible excuse now I suppose.



I will bet good money (donated to a good cause) that she is not doing it for free.

Anyone want to take me up?

I’ll take you up on that, Murphy. I’ve no idea to be honest.

Bishop of hope

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I’ll take you up on that, Murphy. I’ve no idea to be honest.

You lose Johnny, she is a board member.
Quite what differ it makes i dont know.

James Brown

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Who are you accusing of using suicide to score political points? That’s a tremendously serious accusation in fairness. Like it’s very much out there as an accusation. I’d consider it far outside the pale to be honest and think you should withdraw it.

Serious Flash for a moment.

Nobody, bad read dude.
The topic was homelessness and suicide, you and maryanne side stepped to try get a dig in. Its not new behaviour. Its behaviour common on these threads when there's criticism of FG.

McMurphy

McMurphy wrote: »

Leo Varadkar said today that "he didn't know Regina Doherty was on the board of Pieta"? house?

Considering the previous govts attitude to housing and homelessness in general, i can add them to the list of charities I completely refuse to contribute to.

Bowie wrote: »

Nobody, bad read dude.
The topic was homelessness and suicide, you and maryanne side stepped to try get a dig in. Its not new behaviour. Its behaviour common on these threads when there's criticism of FG.

McMurphys post didn’t mention suicide. He seemed to be associating Pieta House with housing and homeless. That’s how it read to me.

blanch152

McMurphy wrote: »

I have given my own personal reasons for refusing to donate to it in the future Bishop, I made no mention of dismantling it or otherwise.

Leo sounded as surprised that Regina Doherty was on the board as many other people did.

Someone maybe sent him a WhatsApp about it, and he deleted it could be used as a plausible excuse now I suppose.



I will bet good money (donated to a good cause) that she is not doing it for free.

Anyone want to take me up?

I won't take you up on that bet, it would be like taking candy from a child. Like a typical Sinn Fein supporter, you think everyone else is on the take. Not so.

In fact, you don't realise how serious the allegations you are making are.

https://www.charitiesregulator.ie/media/1078/guidance-for-charity-trustees-july-2017.pdf

"Will I get paid for being a charity trustee?
Charity trustees may not profit from carrying out their duties as a charity trustee.
You cannot accept a salary specifically for acting as a charity trustee, or receive other
benefits for this. However, you may be reimbursed for reasonable expenses, which
you incur in carrying out your duties. There is provision in section 89 of the Charities
Act 2009 for charity trustees to enter into a written service agreement with a charity
but this section is not yet operative. The Charities Regulator will provide further
guidance on remuneration in due course. "


Pieta House confirm that they comply with all such requirements:

https://a.storyblok.com/f/63481/x/462e76f838/pieta-house-financial-statements-2019.pdf

"21. TRUSTEES' REMUNERATION
None of the trustees received any remuneration during the year. Incidental travel and meeting expenses are
reimbursed where incurred. These expenses amounted to €1,842 for the year (2018: €2,205).
"


Once again we have a sneering post from a poster sympathetic to Sinn Fein who makes unsubstantiated allegations, not just against a Fine Gael politiciain but alleging illegal activity at a charity.

Either it is done out of complete ignorance of the legislation governing charities or it is done with a malevolent and untrue bias.

It is illegal to pay a fee to a board member of a charity.

Brendan Bendar

The Shinners now proposing a vote of no confidence in the Táiniste.

This in the middle of a pandemic and Brexit.

Pure arse boxing just trying their usual negativity and deflecting the country from its task.

A few sour operators on FF throwing their hats into the negativity swamp.

Wasters with nothing positive to offer.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The Shinners now proposing a vote of no confidence in the Táiniste.

This in the middle of a pandemic and Brexit.

Pure arse boxing just trying their usual negativity and deflecting the country from its task.

A few sour operators on FF throwing their hats into the negativity swamp.

Wasters with nothing positive to offer.

At least they arent corrupt though,and hiding behind a pandemic to justify it??

Brendan Bendar

Deleted User wrote: »

At least they arent corrupt though,and hiding behind a pandemic to justify it??

What!!!!

Didn’t they lose three ‘activists’ including a Senator over money issues recently.

C’mon horse.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

At least they arent corrupt though,and hiding behind a pandemic to justify it??

FG using the pandemic to hide their blushes is par for the course. They use victims of the troubles and unrelated killings to divert and cover. It's low grade but as I say par for the course with them.

McMurphy

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

What!!!!

Didn’t they lose three ‘activists’ including a Senator over money issues recently.

C’mon horse.

They got out in front of it when it became known to them, people involved told it wasn't acceptable, and three people were made resign.

That's accountability Brenner. That's why there's not a long running thread about it still Brenner, FG could learn a lot from that accountability Brenner.

Maybe the Shinners should reinstate them, and make them resign again, would that please you some?

Yurt2

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The Shinners now proposing a vote of no confidence in the Táiniste.

This in the middle of a pandemic and Brexit.

Pure arse boxing just trying their usual negativity and deflecting the country from its task.

A few sour operators on FF throwing their hats into the negativity swamp.

Wasters with nothing positive to offer.

Lol, you're shook

Mod

1 day ban for breach of threadban

FrancieBrady

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The Shinners now proposing a vote of no confidence in the Táiniste.

This in the middle of a pandemic and Brexit.

Pure arse boxing just trying their usual negativity and deflecting the country from its task.

A few sour operators on FF throwing their hats into the negativity swamp.

Wasters with nothing positive to offer.

I was waiting for the 'it's in the middle of a pandemic' panic call alright.

smurgen

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The Shinners now proposing a vote of no confidence in the Táiniste.

This in the middle of a pandemic and Brexit.

Pure arse boxing just trying their usual negativity and deflecting the country from its task.

A few sour operators on FF throwing their hats into the negativity swamp.

Wasters with nothing positive to offer.

Lieo should have stood down for the sake of the country. Too busy making anti sf videos during a pandemic. Covid brexit the usual excuses for not dealing with an egotistic head the ball.

smurgen

The same lads that were laughing at the notions of an effective opposition are now doing a Helen Lovejoy won't someone think of the children act lol.

smurgen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I was waiting for the 'it's in the middle of a pandemic' panic call alright.

I know ya. If they managed to find the time to hire a load of advisors and give themselves a payr rises during the pandemic i'm sure they've enough time to back a crooked politician aswell.

Bishop of hope

smurgen wrote: »

The same lads that were laughing at the notions of an effective opposition are now doing a Helen Lovejoy won't someone think of the children act lol.

Seen that on the Leo thread last night too, from a poster definitely not on Leo's side.

Bishop of hope

smurgen wrote: »

I know ya. If they managed to find the time to hire a load of advisors and give themselves a payr rises during the pandemic i'm sure they've enough time to back a crooked politician aswell.

So far the only resignations lately have been a senator an MLA and party officials over not paying back money they shouldn't have gotten.
And that's the party bringing forward a confidence motion.
Jesus there has to be irony in there.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So far the only resignations lately have been a senator an MLA and party officials over not paying back money they shouldn't have gotten.
And that's the party bringing forward a confidence motion.
Jesus there has to be irony in there.

If the implication here is that only parties that are squeaky clean can put forward motions of no confidence then there would never be any motions of no confidence.

FG should have done what SF did, realised that there was no excusing what happened and taken action. So also should FF.

They now reap what they sow.

smurgen

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So far the only resignations lately have been a senator an MLA and party officials over not paying back money they shouldn't have gotten.
And that's the party bringing forward a confidence motion.
Jesus there has to be irony in there.

No irony. They resigned. Leo didn't.

Bishop of hope

smurgen wrote: »

No irony. They resigned. Leo didn't.

LOL OK.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the implication here is that only parties that are squeaky clean can put forward motions of no confidence then there would never be any motions of no confidence.

FG should have done what SF did, realised that there was no excusing what happened and taken action. So also should FF.

They now reap what they sow.

And again, lol OK.

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So far the only resignations lately have been a senator an MLA and party officials over not paying back money they shouldn't have gotten.
And that's the party bringing forward a confidence motion.
Jesus there has to be irony in there.

For not paying back quicker surely? Even if they hadn't, so what?
Let he without sin? Give me a break.