General Irish politics discussion thread

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121741566#Comment_121741566

Conspiracy theories reaching new levels when the appointment of a British CEO is claimed to lead to more British news stories on RTE.

A clear example of low-level racism as well.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121741489#Comment_121741489

They had no option but to agree to release the documents once they had been laid before the Oireachtas! Until then they were bound by confidentiality.

SIPO: The documents have been laid before the Oireachtas

Ditch: We still want the documents

SIPO: Ok, we will give them to you now that they have been laid before the Oireachtas

Court: OK, SIPO agrees to release the documents now, so I will make the order to release the documents.

Nothing more, nothing less than that. All the rest is conjecture, including your reference to costs.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121744367#Comment_121744367

There is something very strange about a state body deciding to make up its own rules as it goes along. Especially the state body responsible for upholding standards in public office. There is nothing in the Act that says SIPO must lay every statement before the Houses. It states that it must lay every written report provided to the Chairman of the Dail. Ditch didn't request a report provided to the Chairman of the Dail so the issue of laying was completely irrelevant.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121744878#Comment_121744878

It is not making up its rules, it is subject to the Freedom of Information Act, just like every other body. You won't get any piece of documentation that has to be laid before the Oireachtas under statute from any State body until it has been laid before the Oireachtas.

If I am wrong, you will be able to give me hundreds of example of documents that were released to the public before they were statutorily laid before the Oireachtas.

pureza

Bakhurst was head of news at RTÉ for 4 years 2012 to 2016

To suggest he infiltrated the newsroom then or now with British news is fairyland stuff

expectationlost

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121737971#Comment_121737971

the court case at that point was about the decision not the documents

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121745500#Comment_121745500

But the documents requested did not have to be laid before the Houses, that's the part you seem to be missing.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121745897#Comment_121745897

The documents requested were drafts of the documents that had to be laid before the Houses, under the FOI Act, they would not be releaseable until the final document.

Read Section 14 of the FOI Act.

deirdremf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121746270#Comment_121746270

Are you suggesting that Varadkar's documents were drafts? Because as I understand it is the documents he supplied to the Oireachtas that were requested.

Hotblack Desiato

Jesus Christ it's like a dog with a bone.

Let's see how keen the likes of the Ditch are on government accountability if SF get in.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121746270#Comment_121746270

There is no need to read the FOI act, it has nothing to do with the FOI Act as the request was not made under the FOI Act.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121752429#Comment_121752429

SF are called to account all over the media already. Can't see anything different if they get into government.

Will they be entitled to MSM silence if something is uncovered about them is the question here maybe.

pureza

Ah here now,nothings ever been uncovered about Sinn Féin ever,they're saints 😁

What I find amusing about the ditch is the 1st 3 pages that I looked at are all anti government negative puff pieces including the Sipo stuff

On the latter,if you had a look at the declarations of All t.d's and senators in the Dáil,how many would you find genuine mistakes or corrections in ?

I guess we'll never know because MSM are too busy ignoring the tiny inconsequential things whilst anti government publications are busy banging on about the tiny inconsequential things to the converted in the hope the un converted will listen

It was ever thus

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121752830#Comment_121752830

What I find amusing about the ditch is the 1st 3 pages that I looked at are all anti government negative puff pieces including the Sipo stuff

Their goal is to hold power to account and they have featured other TD's including SF ones.

Nobody has said SF are saints and SIPO belongs or represent us ALL including SF

So something a TD can do a custodial sentence for if guilty of, is a 'tiny inconsequential' thing now?

pureza

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121752844#Comment_121752844

A publication supported by or set up by anti government elements and Sinn Féin supporters,are not an impartial judge of anything in my opinion

That being said they're entitled to do this in a free country

The problem for them is,it's preaching to the converted,to people who want to hear this kind of stuff all the time hyped up into what the unconverted think it's mostly not

That's evidenced in the fact that 4 years on I'd expect the government to be returned based on current polling

At least we are lucky to live in a free open democracy where voters deliver verdicts on various viewpoints

There are countries like Russia,Cuba and Venezuela where that doesn't happen and despite all the nay saying we're considerably better off and clearly much more transparent than those and more

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121752883#Comment_121752883

A publication supported by or set up by anti government elements and Sinn Féin supporters,are not an impartial judge of anything in my opinion

They are publishing facts though, not 'judgements'

If MSM media is choosing not to publish some stuff while publishing other stories that is making a 'judgement' on what the public should know about. And therein lies a danger for democracy.

Take for instance these two in order of 'priority'

A front page story about a TD making a claim for a relatively small amount of compensation 12 years ago.

Or

A judgement against a state regulatory body involving an ongoing investigation and possible wrongdoing (which can carry a custodial sentence if proven) involving the current Taoiseach.

As an impartial editor, which one would you think it is more important the public should know about?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121752660#Comment_121752660

There is no other way to make a request for such a document. If it wasn't made under the FOI Act, there is zero obligation to release it.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121754617#Comment_121754617

There is. Section 73 of the Electoral Act.

pureza

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121753076#Comment_121753076

There's plenty discussion here to show the angle of the dangle is to make out a whiff of wrong doing with no evidence of such and no crime committed

I'll leave Mr/Mrs Blanch to treat ye on the ridiculousness of trying to claim a report from Sipo under FoI before its report goes to the oireachtas

Even Gavin Reilly's not interested because he can see a flopping attempt at Varadkar bashing from the usual suspects when he see's one

We already know how his detractors feel about him so trying and failing to make a hoo ha over nothing just looks silly

You won't get any more attention from me on this one,I prefer genuine debate

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121754970#Comment_121754970

So having to have 4 goes to satisfy the regulations is a ‘hoo ha’ over nothing and losing a case in the high court is inconsequential.

That is worrying

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121754909#Comment_121754909

Under Section 73, SIPO is required to retain statements for three years under Sections 23 or 24 and allow them to be inspected (not released by the way), but those statements only become valid once laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas as they are not statements until laid before the Oireachtas.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121755074#Comment_121755074

Yes, they must allow them to be inspected and no where in section 73 does that say they can only be inspected once they have been laid before the Houses. That's why the High Court judge quashed the decision by SIPO. The lengths SIPO went to hide the additional documents that Leo gave was quite extraordinary.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121755114#Comment_121755114

I haven't seen where the High Court judge quashed the decision by SIPO, that is an interpretation of the article which doesn't stand up. SIPO consented to the Court ordering the release of the documents AFTER they had been laid before the Dail.

Section 73 must be read in conjunction with the relevant other sections that apply i.e. Sections 20, 23, 24, 36, 48 and 56. Where one of them provides for laying before the Oireachtas, that must happen first before Section 73 comes into play.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121756894#Comment_121756894

The Ditch judicial reviewed the decision to refuse to inspection of the documents prior to then being laid before the Houses. Just because they were laid before the Houses subsequently doesn't change the original decision i.e that SIPO feels it can refuse inpsection of documents until they are laid before the Hiuses. SIPO asked the court to overturn that decision as they knew they didn't have a leg to stand on. So in future situations SIPO have accepted they won't be able to refuse inspection requests under Section 73 even if the document hasn't been laid before Houses. The Court was never really asked to grant the documents to be released. It was asked to determine if the decision made by SIPO, at the point they made the decision, was lawful.

I don't where in the Act it says that document must be laid before the Houses before they can be inspected. AFAIK it doesn't.

The Standards in Public Office Commission (Sipo) has agreed to a High Court order quashing its decision to refuse to provide the Ditch media company with an annual political donation statement.

Barrister Stephanie Lawless, for Ditch Media Limited, told the court on Tuesday the parties had reached an agreement in the case and the other side was consenting to an order for its decision to be overturned.

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/02/06/sipo-agrees-to-order-quashing-refusal-to-provide-ditch-with-political-donation-statement/

Brussels Sprout

Michael Fitzmaurice has finally made the leap and joined the new Independent party. That's 3 sitting TDs they have now. I'll be very interested to see their policy platform. Roughly speaking I'd imagine if the Green party is on one side of an issue they'll likely be other other other side.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2024/0212/1431794-independent-ireland/

Hotblack Desiato

Calling a party "independent" is just daft.

He says they will come up with detailed manifesto proposals - the problem with these "don't play well with others" TDs is getting them to agree on anything. We'll see how that works out.

pureza

Would Verona Murphy be a good fit with that party? She also seems to be on the opposite end of some of the cracky pot ideas of the greens and EU bureaucrats most of the time

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757118#Comment_121757118

The Court Order can only be made at the point in time that it is made, in this case, when the documents have already been laid before the Oireachtas. Where in the article or where in the court ruling does it state that SIPO have accepted in future situations that they won't be able to refuse inspection requests?

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757714#Comment_121757714

A judicial review is a challenge on a decision that is made. The job of the court is to determine whether that decision was legally sound. What happens after the fact is irrelevant. The court quashed the decision that SIPO can refuse access to files that haven't been laid before the court. SIPO agreed to having the decision quashed and were not willing to challenge it. If SIPO wanted to to keep doing that they would have defended the case, but they didn't.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757768#Comment_121757768

The court didn't quash any decision. An agreement between the parties was reached. If there is a court decision, please link to it from the Courts Service website - I couldn't find it - as it will give the details and the basis for the decision. SIPO didn't keep defending the case as they agreed to release the documents, now that they had been laid before the Oireachtas.