Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05

blanch152

Cute Hoor wrote: »

Not alone does he/she want one rule for FG and one rule for others, he/she cannot even admit this

That is not what I said, you are making things up.

There are differences between issues of public policy and issues of national security.

If someone around here thinks that there is an equivalence between a negotiating document on GPs and a national security file, that is not me. If you go back to the discussion where I asked people on this thread to define "confidential" that distinction was to the forefront of my mind.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

That is not what I said, you are making things up.

There are differences between issues of public policy and issues of national security.

If someone around here thinks that there is an equivalence between a negotiating document on GPs and a national security file, that is not me. If you go back to the discussion where I asked people on this thread to define "confidential" that distinction was to the forefront of my mind.

You said it was for Varadkar to decide what to release and to who as he was Taoiseach. So it stands the same rule would apply to any other or none at all.
You must accept that or you are saying there's different rules and standards for Varadkar.

con·fi·den·tial
/ˌkänfəˈden(t)SHəl/

intended to be kept secret.
"confidential information"

Similar:
off the record
not for publication
not for circulation
not to be made public
not to be disclosed
under wraps
unrevealed
undisclosed
unpublished

(of a person's tone of voice) indicating that what one says is private or secret.
"he dropped his voice to a confidential whisper"
entrusted with private or restricted information.
"a confidential secretary"

You going back to try claim if it's not in legislation it's not confidential? Sad.

Cute Hoor

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.

blanch152 wrote: »

That is not what I said, you are making things up.

There are differences between issues of public policy and issues of national security.

If someone around here thinks that there is an equivalence between a negotiating document on GPs and a national security file, that is not me. If you go back to the discussion where I asked people on this thread to define "confidential" that distinction was to the forefront of my mind.

OK so it may be OK for a Taoiseach to give a document marked CONFIDENTIAL to a buddy, but also it may not be OK give a document marked CONFIDENTIAL to a buddy, depends on the situation and who the Taoiseach is, presumably the Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best, whether the document marked CONFIDENTIAL should be released or not.

blanch152

Cute Hoor wrote: »

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.




OK so it may be OK for a Taoiseach to give a document marked CONFIDENTIAL to a buddy, but also it may not be OK give a document marked CONFIDENTIAL to a buddy, depends on the situation and who the Taoiseach is, presumably the Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best, whether the document marked CONFIDENTIAL should be released or not.

Not all documents marked condidential are really confidential. I have said that from the start.

Cute Hoor

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.

blanch152 wrote: »

Not all documents marked condidential are really confidential. I have said that from the start.

So the Taoiseach of the day has the responsibility of determining whether they are CONFIDENTIAL or not and determining whether that document marked CONFIDENTIAL should be given to a buddy or not, is that correct

blanch152

Cute Hoor wrote: »

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.



So the Taoiseach of the day has the responsibility of determining whether they are CONFIDENTIAL or not and determining whether that document marked CONFIDENTIAL should be given to a buddy or not, is that correct

I have given you enough answers, you won't pigeon-hole those answers into the box you want. End of discussion.

Cute Hoor

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.

blanch152 wrote: »

I have given you enough answers, you won't pigeon-hole those answers into the box you want. End of discussion.

But that is what you are saying, albeit in a roundabout way, isn't it

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote:

The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.

Nothing more to be said really. In Blanche's world the Taoiseach has divine power, everything begins and ends on their say so. Doesn't matter if it's Leo or Danny Healy Rae, if they decide to take it upon themselves to share state secrets with the govt of North Korea or the Kinihan cartel, shut up and accept it because the Taoiseach in all their knowledge and wisdom decided it will be thus so . Now shut up and eat your gruel.


Painted himself into another corner yet again....

Reverse beeper going off now at max volume!


Beeeeeep.... Beep......Beeeeeep,

Beeeeeep.... Beep......Beeeeeep,

Beeeeeep.... Beep......Beeeeeep,

Bubbaclaus

I think it gets lost with some people that Varadkar gave the draft agreement to a party of that agreement, who was also the president of a body representing 40% of the people that would be parties to it.

To claim its the equivalent of giving a confidential government document to some random joe is just being disingenuous, either deliberately or by not innocent lack of understanding.

I'm not condoning it, so no need for someone to reply saying I am, just pointing out the flaws in the comparisons being made.

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I think it gets lost with some people that Varadkar gave the draft agreement to a party of that agreement, who was also the president of a body representing 40% of the people that would be parties to it.

To claim its the equivalent of giving a confidential government document to some random joe is just being disingenuous, either deliberately or by not innocent lack of understanding.

I'm not condoning it, so no need for someone to reply saying I am, just pointing out the flaws in the comparisons being made.

No he did not.
Where did you pull that out of?
It was between Health department and a rival union.

Be clear, you might not be condoning it but you are defending it.

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I think it gets lost with some people that Varadkar gave the draft agreement to a party of that agreement, who was also the president of a body representing 40% of the people that would be parties to it.

To claim its the equivalent of giving a confidential government document to some random joe is just being disingenuous, either deliberately or by not innocent lack of understanding.

I'm not condoning it, so no need for someone to reply saying I am, just pointing out the flaws in the comparisons being made.

Did the document have "Confidential/not for circulation" stamped on it?

Fann Linn

Cute Hoor wrote: »

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.



But that is what you are saying, albeit in a roundabout way, isn't it

Blueshirts were always fond of the Uno Doce, una voce form of leadership. Theyve history in it.

Bubbaclaus

James Brown wrote: »

No he did not.
Where did you pull that out of?
It was between Health department and a rival union.

Be clear, you might not be condoning it but you are defending it.

All GPs are parties to that agreement, including my other half.

To claim it just applies to GPs under the IMO is just factually incorrect. Pretty sure you know that too.

Bubbaclaus

Floppybits wrote: »

Did the document have "Confidential/not for circulation" stamped on it?

It did. And I asked in here before as to whether a party to an agreement would have a legal right to view it, regardless of what is stamped on the front of it, but not sure if anyone has the legal expertise on here to give an answer.

From a common sense perspective you would think they do, but then again the law and common sense can often differ.

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

It did. And I asked in here before as to whether a party to an agreement would have a legal right to view it, regardless of what is stamped on the front of it, but not sure if anyone has the legal expertise on here to give an answer.

From a common sense perspective you would think they do, but then again the law and common sense can often differ.

But the group that the document was given were not part of the negotiations and I assume that if a group is not part of a negotiation they should not privy to any documentation from those negotiations until they have been released publicly and it shouldn't be dependent on a whim of the Taoiseach either.

Bubbaclaus

Floppybits wrote: »

But the group that the document was given were not part of the negotiations and I assume that if a group is not part of a negotiation they should not privy to any documentation from those negotiations until they have been released publicly and it shouldn't be dependent on a whim of the Taoiseach either.

Is this assumption based on anything in law, or just an opinion?

I would have thought that a party to an agreement would have the right to see a document before it is publicly released. Again, this is just my opinion. I haven't seen anything in law to confirm either of our opinions.

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Is this assumption based on anything in law, or just an opinion?

I would have thought that a party to an agreement would have the right to see a document before it is publicly released. Again, this is just my opinion. I haven't seen anything in law to confirm either of our opinions.

It would be based on experience that if I have a confidential document that I can't go sharing it with whoever I like or else I would lose my job. I would assume that would apply to most of the people employed on here.

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

All GPs are parties to that agreement, including my other half.

To claim it just applies to GPs under the IMO is just factually incorrect. Pretty sure you know that too.

You are completely wrong on this. You've made this kind of claim before and it was disputed then.
Where are you getting your information?

Varadkar apologises over leak of confidential GP contract to rival group
Tánaiste Leo Varadkar has apologised for “errors of judgment” after he released a confidential document negotiated with the Irish Medical Organisation (IMO) to the president of a rival GP group last year.

The more time passes the more 'alternative truths' arise surrounding what Varadkar actually did.

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I think it gets lost with some people that Varadkar gave the draft agreement to a party of that agreement

This is simply incorrect, his buddy was not a party of that agreement

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

To claim its the equivalent of giving a confidential government document to some random joe is just being disingenuous, either deliberately or by not innocent lack of understanding.

If a Government document is CONFIDENTIAL, it is inappropriate to give it to a third party or it is not, you can't have it both ways. You cannot be a little bit pregnant.

blanch152

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Is this assumption based on anything in law, or just an opinion?

I would have thought that a party to an agreement would have the right to see a document before it is publicly released. Again, this is just my opinion. I haven't seen anything in law to confirm either of our opinions.

Look, that people are going to the lengths of considering the sharing of the document equivalent to a security breach just shows complete desperation to land some mud.

You are indeed correct, and to give another example, the GRA and PDFORRA are often given "confidential" documents relating to other negotiations that they are not part of.

blanch152

Cute Hoor wrote: »

This is simply incorrect, his buddy was not a party of that agreement




If a Government document is CONFIDENTIAL, it is inappropriate to give it to a third party or it is not, you can't have it both ways. You cannot be a little bit pregnant.

On what basis is it confidential? Is there a legal basis, or can you just write confidential on anything? Nobody has answered this question.


THIS POST IS CONFIDENTIAL, PLEASE DO NOT SHARE WITH ANYONE

McMurphy

Floppybits wrote: »

It would be based on experience that if I have a confidential document that I can't go sharing it with whoever I like or else I would lose my job. I would assume that would apply to most of the people employed on here.

It would most definitely apply in my industry. I have stated before, I'm involved in an industry that not many companies in Ireland can provide or cater for, specifically one aspect of the business we specialise in, there's probably only 4/5 on the whole of the island can offer it.

We do contracts with customers where we offer one stop shop solutions to our clients which is usually reviewed on a year to year basis, where we will submit prices / turn around times etc.

A few of our competitors will be jostling for the same contract, and there's no man, woman or beast alive that will tell me that if anyone in our company was caught passing our quotations to any of our rivals, that they'd not be out of a job the next day, wouldn't find it extremely difficult to find employment in our industry again, and they would most likely face legal action.

Some are talking absolute nonsense in here in order to protect the chosen one, and they bloody well know so too.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Look, that people are going to the lengths of considering the sharing of the document equivalent to a security breach just shows complete desperation to land some mud.

You are indeed correct, and to give another example, the GRA and PDFORRA are often given "confidential" documents relating to other negotiations that they are not part of.

It was in the least a breach of confidence. Varadkar showed a lack of respect for both the IMO and the Minister of Health and all involved.
He's not correct. This was a confidential negotiation document and he passed it to his pal, the head of a rival union.

Cute Hoor

Originally Posted by blanch152 View Post
It is a simple matter to me. The Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best.

blanch152 wrote: »

On what basis is it confidential? Is there a legal basis, or can you just write confidential on anything? Nobody has answered this question.


THIS POST IS CONFIDENTIAL, PLEASE DO NOT SHARE WITH ANYONE

I presume that you are OK with any Taoiseach sharing a document marked CONFIDENTIAL with a buddy, irrespective of who that Taoiseach is, after all the Taoiseach has the responsibility of deciding what is best, isn't that correct?

Fann Linn

blanch152 wrote: »

On what basis is it confidential? Is there a legal basis, or can you just write confidential on anything? Nobody has answered this question.


THIS POST IS CONFIDENTIAL, PLEASE DO NOT SHARE WITH ANYONE

So why did he apologise?

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

On what basis is it confidential? Is there a legal basis, or can you just write confidential on anything? Nobody has answered this question.


THIS POST IS CONFIDENTIAL, PLEASE DO NOT SHARE WITH ANYONE

Back to the legal claim. You can write confidential on anything. Yes. It's to let people know it's not for public consumption. Have you never worked in an office environment or position were you've access to personal information? A 16 year old helping out a HR department seems to know more than yourself.

You posted it in a public forum. You are either playing silly or not very, let's say 'informed'.

McMurphy

James Brown wrote: »

Back to the legal claim. You can write confidential on anything. Yes. It's to let people know it's not for public consumption. Have you never worked in an office environment or position were you've access to personal information? A 16 year old helping out a HR department seems to know more than yourself.

You posted it in a public forum. You are either playing silly or not very, let's say 'informed'.

On this very site posters can and have been banned or at the very least, severely reprimanded for publicly posting and sharing the contents of a pm between you and another poster.

It doesn't matter a dam whether the sender has "confidential" in the subject or the main body of the message either.

He's talking crap, he knows he's talking crap.

Bubbaclaus

McMurphy wrote: »

It would most definitely apply in my industry. I have stated before, I'm involved in an industry that not many companies in Ireland can provide or cater for, specifically one aspect of the business we specialise in, there's probably only 4/5 on the whole of the island can offer it.

We do contracts with customers where we offer one stop shop solutions to our clients which is usually reviewed on a year to year basis, where we will submit prices / turn around times etc.

A few of our competitors will be jostling for the same contract, and there's no man, woman or beast alive that will tell me that if anyone in our company was caught passing our quotations to any of our rivals, that they'd not be out of a job the next day, wouldn't find it extremely difficult to find employment in our industry again, and they would most likely face legal action.

Some are talking absolute nonsense in here in order to protect the chosen one, and they bloody well know so too.

So in your experience, if a party of an agreement asked for a copy of said agreement, you wouldn't be able to do so because its confidential?

The comparison you have made about passing quotations to rivals just goes to show you have no idea what the agreement was actually about. Perhaps you should do some research yourself before accusing people of talking nonsense.

All GPs are under the same GP contract in Ireland, there is no bidding or quotations or industry secrets. Dud comparisons aren't going to change that.

Floppybits

McMurphy wrote: »

It would most definitely apply in my industry. I have stated before, I'm involved in an industry that not many companies in Ireland can provide or cater for, specifically one aspect of the business we specialise in, there's probably only 4/5 on the whole of the island can offer it.

We do contracts with customers where we offer one stop shop solutions to our clients which is usually reviewed on a year to year basis, where we will submit prices / turn around times etc.

A few of our competitors will be jostling for the same contract, and there's no man, woman or beast alive that will tell me that if anyone in our company was caught passing our quotations to any of our rivals, that they'd not be out of a job the next day, wouldn't find it extremely difficult to find employment in our industry again, and they would most likely face legal action.

Some are talking absolute nonsense in here in order to protect the chosen one, and they bloody well know so too.

In my industry we have been asked to even switch off screens if we are working on something confidential if the customer is being showed around and the customer is always escorted.

There is definitely folks on here doing all sorts of twisting and turning and tying themselves in knots just excuse what Varadkar done especially the excuse he did it for the good of the country.

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

if a party of an agreement asked for a copy of said agreement

His buddy (and his organisation) were not party to the agreement