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

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

Fann Linn

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

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.

The health minister or main opposition speaker couldn't get a copy at the time, yet Zero Craic could?

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

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.

If a party wants a copy of the agreement there are proper channels and protocols to follow to get a copy of the agreement.

Bubbaclaus

Cute Hoor wrote: »

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.

My entire point, which you seem to have ignored, is that it wasn't a third party, given it was a GP Contract that would apply for all GPs. People seem to think it was a GP Contract for GPSs represented by the IMO only, which is not the case.

I get why people that have a hatred for Varadkar might want to big it up as a Watergate, but he hasn't exactly disclosed a random confidential document to a random joe that wasn't a party to it.

A good comparison would be teachers. If Varadkar had given a new teachers pay scale agreement to the ASTI, whilst the negotiations were with another union. A bad comparison would be comparing this to a bidding or tendering process, there was none of that going on in this agreement.

Bubbaclaus

Floppybits wrote: »

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.

Another bad comparison of private sector "customers" that is not in any way comparable to the issue at hand. I think you are aware of that too.

People tying themselves in knots to come up with comparisons to their own particular roles and not getting anywhere

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

My entire point, which you seem to have ignored, is that it wasn't a third party, given it was a GP Contract that would apply for all GPs. People seem to think it was a GP Contract for GPSs represented by the IMO only, which is not the case.

I get why people that have a hatred for Varadkar might want to big it up as a Watergate, but he hasn't exactly disclosed a random confidential document to a random joe that wasn't a party to it.

A good comparison would be teachers. If Varadkar had given a new teachers pay scale agreement to the ASTI, whilst the negotiations were with another union. A bad comparison would be comparing this to a bidding or tendering process, there was none of that going on in this agreement.

I think you are totally missing the point, this was an agreement between the Government and the IMO, Zero Craic and his buddies had no hand act or part (other than possibly what was being fed to them unofficially) in the discussions, and they had no business whatsoever receiving it (or even being updated on contents) until the i's were dotted and t's crossed by the participants in the negotiations. Even the Minister for Health couldn't get his hand on a copy. If you cannot understand that.....

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Another bad comparison of private sector "customers" that is not in any way comparable to the issue at hand. I think you are aware of that too.

People tying themselves in knots to come up with comparisons to their own particular roles and not getting anywhere

Nope not really and again you are missing the point and doing it on purpose. It is quite clear what you are trying to do on here and it is not working.

Bubbaclaus

Cute Hoor wrote: »

I think you are totally missing the point, this was an agreement between the Government and the IMO, Zero Craic and his buddies had no hand act or part (other than possibly what was being fed to them unofficially) in the discussions, and they had no business whatsoever receiving it (or even being updated on contents) until the i's were dotted and t's crossed by the participants in the negotiations. Even the Minister for Health couldn't get his hand on a copy. If you cannot understand that.....

If it was just an agreement between the government and the IMO, then why would it also apply to non-IMO GPs?

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

If it was just an agreement between the government and the IMO, then why would it also apply to non-IMO GPs?

IT WAS JUST AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE IMO

FACT

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

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.

To recap;

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.

Are you just ignoring this?

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

If it was just an agreement between the government and the IMO, then why would it also apply to non-IMO GPs?

If this was the case they why did Leo's mate have to ask him for the document rather than just put in a request for the document?

Also why did Varadkar admit to the wrong doing in giving the document to his mate?

Bubbaclaus

Cute Hoor wrote: »

IT WAS JUST AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE IMO

FACT

Saying something in all capitals to me doesn't make it true, just makes you appear a bit rude.

Pretty clear you had no actual response of substance for me anyway.

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Saying something in all capitals to me doesn't make it true, just makes you appear a bit rude.

I don't know how many ways I can say this, Zero Craics crowd were not party to the agreement or any of the discussions pertaining to it - fact, this was an agreement negotiated between the IMO and the government - fact.

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

My entire point, which you seem to have ignored, is that it wasn't a third party, given it was a GP Contract that would apply for all GPs. People seem to think it was a GP Contract for GPSs represented by the IMO only, which is not the case.

I get why people that have a hatred for Varadkar might want to big it up as a Watergate, but he hasn't exactly disclosed a random confidential document to a random joe that wasn't a party to it.

A good comparison would be teachers. If Varadkar had given a new teachers pay scale agreement to the ASTI, whilst the negotiations were with another union. A bad comparison would be comparing this to a bidding or tendering process, there was none of that going on in this agreement.

It was a confidential negotiation document between the IMO and the department of health.

To reduce this down to a hatred for Varadkar ignores the plain facts you are...well, ignoring.

Bubbaclaus

Floppybits wrote: »

If this was the case they why did Leo's mate have to ask him for the document rather than just put in a request for the document?

Also why did Varadkar admit to the wrong doing in giving the document to his mate?

He admitted he didn't do it via the right channels and apologised for that. However he said in the Dail he still would have made it available for him if he was doing it all again. So he wasn't apologising for actually giving NAGP sight of the document.

People seem confused as to what he apologised for.

Bubbaclaus

Cute Hoor wrote: »

I don't know how many ways I can say this, Zero Craics crowd were not party to the agreement or any of the discussions pertaining to it - fact, this was an agreement negotiated between the IMO and the government - fact.

All GPs are party to the agreement, whether they were IMO, NAGP or neither.

"Fact"

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

He admitted he didn't do it via the right channels and apologised for that. However he said in the Dail he still would have made it available for him if he was doing it all again. So he wasn't apologising for actually giving NAGP sight of the document.

People seem confused as to what he apologised for.

He apologised for passing a confidential document to a rival union headed by his pal.
His pal's union was looking to appease members as was Varadkar.

By your logic, all Varadkar did wrong was not let folk know what he was doing. If he was doing nothing wrong why didn't he and why did he apologise?

Are you taking the piss at this point?

McMurphy

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

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.

What, never? /Sarcasm.

The analogy was to do with this bit.

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.

If an employee in my organisation (that would be Leo) was found to have passed a quotation/details of an agreed contract to a competitor (rival gp group in this case) they'd be out the door quicker than they could tippex out the word "confidential" bubbs.

Zero craic was the head of a rival organisation, they weren't privy to the details of the contract, hence why Leo sent him the details in an underhanded way.


This is what he (Leo) apologised for, and that the Gards will be basing their investigation on should it be decided one is merited.

You know this. Trying to ok or normalise something Leo himself has apologised for, and a statement has been taken from the then health minister for is just making yourself look silly, but have at it.

James Brown

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

All GPs are party to the agreement, whether they were IMO, NAGP or neither.

"Fact"

Not the confidential document negotiated between the IMO and Health, that's why it was marked 'confidential' :rolleyes:

Cute Hoor

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

All GPs are party to the agreement, whether they were IMO, NAGP or neither.

"Fact"

No they weren't, bloody hell, just do a google search 'agreement between government and imo'

Bubbaclaus

James Brown wrote: »

He apologised for passing a confidential document to a rival union headed by his pal.
His pal's union was looking to appease members as was Varadkar.

By your logic, all Varadkar did wrong was not let folk know what he was doing. If he was doing nothing wrong why didn't he and why did he apologise?

Are you taking the piss at this point?

You should probably listen to Varadkar's apology, particularly the part where he said he would have invited him in to officially meet and present it to him if he had the opportunity to redo it.

I'm not taking the piss at all. I'm giving my thoughts based on the facts available.

Bubbaclaus

Cute Hoor wrote: »

No they weren't, bloody hell, just do a google search 'agreement between government and imo'

I said "Fact" at the end of my post cute hoor, which as you know makes it factual.