FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

FrancieBrady

Nobotty wrote: »

I think though,if you are to be in favour of inclusion and a renewed relationship both on and between the islands, you can't wholesale rail against a Taoiseach attending Enniskillen IMO
Then there's the 300,000 Irish who fought in the two world wars ,to whom we owe some gratitude for their part in saving us from Nazi and other tyranny

No issue with that at all. Remember the dead, but also remember who you are hurting too, if you are genuine.
The issue here, as it always is, is an 'optics' one. Respectful commemoration and appropriate commemoration (the issue at the heart of the B&T proposal) is what it is about.
I apply that to all commemoration BTW.

smurgen

Triangle wrote: »

The scandal with the Wolfe controversy for me is that when Shane Ross tried to reform how judges were nominated - he was blocked everywhere.
It's not a government thing, it's an Irish political system (opposition/government, Dail/seanad) gone wrong.
Too many vested interests have too much sway.

Correct. This is an interesting article looking back now.

https://amp.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/political-favouritism-is-no-way-to-appoint-top-judges-30013723.html?__twitter_impression=true

Floppybits

smurgen wrote: »

Correct. This is an interesting article looking back now.

https://amp.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/political-favouritism-is-no-way-to-appoint-top-judges-30013723.html?__twitter_impression=true

You can bet this is going to come back to haunt FG and anyone who was involved in blocking it.

Cluedo Monopoly

There isn't a single person in Ireland today who thinks this wasn't a crony FG appointment.

Floppybits

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

There isn't a single person in Ireland today who thinks this wasn't a crony FG appointment.

There are. They are here posting

Bishop of hope

Floppybits wrote: »

There are. They are here posting

So the jaab are all FG cronys?

McMurphy

Floppybits wrote: »

There are. They are here posting

They don't think it either, but the facade has to be maintained.

Bannasidhe

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So the jaab are all FG cronys?

JAAB are a 'clearing house' who vet any applicants not currently sitting judges as to suitability in terms of qualifications, experience etc. If the applicant passes JAAB will then 'recommend' they become a candidate to be considered alongside any candidates from the Bench.
It is a box ticking exercise - an applicant either meets the criteria to become a candidate or they do not.

What JAAB do not do is recommend who gets the job.

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So the jaab are all FG cronys?

The minister picked who 'she' thought was best :rolleyes:

Floppybits

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So the jaab are all FG cronys?

Do you really want to open that can of worms?

Bishop of hope

Floppybits wrote: »

Do you really want to open that can of worms?

Well why not?
This has to be the hidden contention of all of this really.

McMurphy

Bowie wrote: »

The minister picked who 'she' thought was best :rolleyes:

That Leo is some scallywag, if he's not leaking documents or telling ministers what fg flunky to give SJ positions to, he's leading them to their second worst elections in the party's entire history, being leapfrogged by his greatest obsession, the Shinners.

He's an awful ticket altogether that Leo fella.

Bannasidhe

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Well why not?
This has to be the hidden contention of all of this really.

No - that is, imho, just another way to try and deflect away from the fact that based on her own criteria (and an alleged off the cuff remark from her party leader) the Minister who has zero legal experience decided all by herself that a candidate who had never sat on the bench was better qualified to become a Justice in the highest court in the State than any one of a number of experienced and sitting members of the judiciary.
And that candidate just happens to be a faithful member of her own political party.

But sure - try and make this about the people with the clipboard who tick boxes.

blanch152

Bannasidhe wrote: »

JAAB are a 'clearing house' who vet any applicants not currently sitting judges as to suitability in terms of qualifications, experience etc. If the applicant passes JAAB will then 'recommend' they become a candidate to be considered alongside any candidates from the Bench.
It is a box ticking exercise - an applicant either meets the criteria to become a candidate or they do not.

What JAAB do not do is recommend who gets the job.

From the Act, the Government is obliged to consider first those whose names have been recommended to the Minister by the JAAB:

"(6) In advising the President in relation to the appointment of a person to a judicial office the Government shall firstly consider for appointment those persons whose names have been recommended to the Minister pursuant to this section."

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1995/act/31/section/16/enacted/en/html#sec16

I have been pointing this out for weeks, yet nobody has pointed to any piece of legislation that allows them to do something different. So they have to be considered first, not alongside.

RandomViewer

FG can triumphalise all they want Woulfe will never be acceptable to anyone taking anything to the supreme court, especially anything involving known FG capos

jmcc

RandomViewer wrote: »

FG can triumphalise all they want Woulfe will never be acceptable to anyone taking anything to the supreme court, especially anything involving known FG capos

This abject FG cronyism has damaged the credibility of the SC.

Regards...jmcc

Fann Linn

RandomViewer wrote: »

FG can triumphalise all they want Woulfe will never be acceptable to anyone taking anything to the supreme court, especially anything involving known FG capos

As Senan Moloney remarked in his piece today, .... 'make a good judge-he couldn't judge his first big dinner. '

Bannasidhe

blanch152 wrote: »

From the Act, the Government is obliged to consider first those whose names have been recommended to the Minister by the JAAB:

"(6) In advising the President in relation to the appointment of a person to a judicial office the Government shall firstly consider for appointment those persons whose names have been recommended to the Minister pursuant to this section."

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1995/act/31/section/16/enacted/en/html#sec16

I have been pointing this out for weeks, yet nobody has pointed to any piece of legislation that allows them to do something different. So they have to be considered first, not alongside.

And your contention is that 'shall firstly consider' means 'shall give preference to'?

I disagree.

The very bext section makes it clear what this 'recommendation' consists of, and the role of JAAB as a 'clearing house'.

7) The Board shall not submit or recommend the name of a person to the Minister under this section unless the person satisfies the requirements of section 5 (2) (as amended by this Act) of the Act of 1961 (in the case of an appointment to the Supreme Court or High Court), section 17 (2) (as amended by this Act) of the Act of 1961 (in the case of an appointment to the Circuit Court) or section 29 (2) and (3) of the Act of 1961 (in the case of an appointment to the District Court), as regards the proposed appointment, and the Board shall not recommend the name of a person to the Minister unless, in the opinion of the Board, the person—

(a) has displayed in his or her practice as a barrister or solicitor, as the case may be, a degree of competence and a degree of probity appropriate to and consistent with the appointment concerned,

(b) is suitable on grounds of character and temperament,

(c) is otherwise suitable, and

(d) complies with the requirements of section 19 of this Act.

Significantly - no where does it say the Minister shall give preference to those candidates whose names are put forward by JAAB which is what is being claimed. It says 'firstly' which is legalise for 'at the start'.

Fann Linn

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And your contention is that 'shall firstly consider' means 'shall give preference to'?

I disagree.

The very bext section makes it clear what this 'recommendation' consists of, and the role of JAAB as a 'clearing house'.



Significantly - no where does it say the Minister shall give preference to those candidates whose names are put forward by JAAB which is what is being claimed. It says 'firstly' which is legalise for 'at the start'.

The lecturer Laura Cahaline keeps making that point. In actual fact she's gone further today to say that politicians will need training/education on this matter as she is basically fed up with Govt TDs trotting this out.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

From the Act, the Government is obliged to consider first those whose names have been recommended to the Minister by the JAAB:

"(6) In advising the President in relation to the appointment of a person to a judicial office the Government shall firstly consider for appointment those persons whose names have been recommended to the Minister pursuant to this section."

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1995/act/31/section/16/enacted/en/html#sec16

I have been pointing this out for weeks, yet nobody has pointed to any piece of legislation that allows them to do something different. So they have to be considered first, not alongside.

She picked Woulfe after Varadkar told her he'd make a good judge. She put him forward.
Do you dispute any of this?

Cluedo Monopoly

FFG go on about cabinet confidentiality when they don't want to answer questions and yet we knew all the contents of Martin's speech hours before he made it. It cannot be just Leo leaking the details in advance.

Cluedo Monopoly

McMurphy wrote: »

They don't think it either, but the facade has to be maintained.

Correct. They know full well that it was a crony appointment. Without a shadow of a doubt. They know.
But they still have to provide some kind of plausible deniability as instructed by HQ.

Solutionking

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

There isn't a single person in Ireland today who thinks this wasn't a crony FG appointment.

Have you asked them all? what information have you to back up this claim out of interest?

Solutionking

Good announcement from MM. Great to see the hard work of the majority is starting to work.

jmcc

Solutionking wrote: »

Have you asked them all? what information have you to back up this claim out of interest?

Wonder if there have been any opinion polls that have asked about FFG cronyism?

Regards...jmcc

FrancieBrady

Solutionking wrote: »

Good announcement from MM. Great to see the hard work of the majority is starting to work.

No idea why they leak all the info first then have an address. Didn't bother tuning in myself.

Solutionking

jmcc wrote: »

Wonder if there have been any opinion polls that have asked about FFG cronyism?

Regards...jmcc

No idea, if you find can you share? thanks

Solutionking

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No idea why they leak all the info first then have an address. Didn't bother tuning in myself.

I would expect they give to news agencies so everyone gets updated at the same time, so radio etc have the updates. Not everyone can watch the 6 news, I watched the replay to see what it covered.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No idea why they leak all the info first then have an address. Didn't bother tuning in myself.

Solutionking wrote: »

I would expect they give to news agencies so everyone gets updated at the same time, so radio etc have the updates. Not everyone can watch the 6 news, I watched the replay to see what it covered.

So they unofficially leak the info a few days before doing an official press conference so "everyone gets updated at the same time"


















Even you don't believe that.





:pac:

FrancieBrady

Solutionking wrote: »

I would expect they give to news agencies so everyone gets updated at the same time, so radio etc have the updates. Not everyone can watch the 6 news, I watched the replay to see what it covered.

If that were the case they would all report at the same time, they certainly don't, if you are familiar with Twitter and the state broadcaster is rarely firstwith the news.