Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Media silence over Niall Collins story

Options
1262729313247

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Do you think the other people who wrote to the council also had a defined beneficial interest in the property?

    If they were connected persons of councillors in the meeting in which decided to sell the land then absolutely.

    A beneficial interest is not dependent on who you are or who you are married to.


    Do these actions relate "to dealing in or developing land" - YES

    This is where your logic falls down. She was not "engaged or employed" by a business or occupation that was "dealing in or developing land"

    There was no engagement or employment to this effect. Both of these things require some form of legal contract.


    you are welcome to think it stinks, that is your right. He may face political ramifications in the next election. But its absolutely not illegal.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,407 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    I suspect hometruths cannot distinguish between an expression of interest in, and a beneficial interest in, a property.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Again, if NC is stupid enough to use that as an argument in his defence I'll believe he was stupid enough not to realise he needed to disclose his wife's interest.

    "Nothing to see here, my wife's a doctor, any of her property dealings is unlisted, just a bit on the side, off the books as it were, all perfectly normal FF fare, sure Bertie didn't even have a bank account and he was Minister for Finance"



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    She's a doctor, not a realtor. You said so yourself. She is licensed as the former, not the latter. The statute doesn't apply to her.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I suspect they are not the only one. It is potentially something of a failing in legal language, but it has specific meanings separate from colloquial meanings.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    This is where your logic falls down. She was not "engaged or employed" by a business or occupation that was "dealing in or developing land"

    Ok, as you understand it, what was she doing when she instructed her solicitor to contact the council to express an interest in purchasing the land in order to develop a medical centre?

    I think it's fair to say you wouldn't describe it as practicing medicine, so how would you describe it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal




  • Subscribers Posts: 41,469 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    So again, you haven't shown where Niall Collins had a pecuniary or beneficial interest in the land.

    All you are showing is your misunderstanding of the terms and the planning act



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Ok, as you understand it, what was she doing when she instructed her solicitor to contact the council to express an interest in purchasing the land in order to develop a medical centre?

    So wait you're admitting the lawyer expressed the interest to the council, not her

    So a doctor, went through a lawyer, neither of them were land or property developers or dealers?

    Sounds like the liability if anything would fall to the lawyer, not her, going through a barrister she had a reasonable assumption what was being done was perfectly legal. Try and impeach the lawyer's conduct so.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    She was asking if the council was interested in ever selling the land.

    That is not being "engaged or employed" by a business or organisation in dealing or developing land.

    All of these things require some kind of legal connection to the land in question or a legal connection to a party that has a legal connection to the land in question, of which she had none.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Again, are you willing to show me what I've misunderstood or are you just going to keep repeating this? It's not really an argument to just keep saying "You don't understand"

    I think the answers to the following questions are YES. Which do you think are NO?

    • Is Dr O'Connor a connected person to Niall Collins? - YES
    • Did Dr O'Connor plan to build a medical centre, identify a suitable site for the centre, found out who owned it, and then instruct her solicitor to contact the owners expressing an interest in purchasing the site in order to build a medical centre? - YES
    • Do these actions relate "to dealing in or developing land" - YES
    • Did Niall Collins have actual knowledge of his wife's interests relating to dealing in or developing land? - YES
    • Was Niall Collins wife's interest relating to dealing in or developing land material to the matter proposed? - YES
    • Did Niall Collins had a beneficial interest in the matter proposed? - YES




  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    .... "are you just going to keep repeating this?"

    lol



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,407 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    How the fuuck could he have a beneficial interest when his wife hadn’t even got to the point of bidding on the property, never mind profit from its sale to whomever bought it, at a later date?

    Three pages of utter shiite.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    She was asking if the council was interested in ever selling the land.

    Because she wanted to buy it, and develop it. Presumably for profit. Which sounds an awful lot like an activity that relates to "to dealing in or developing land".



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    She was not "employed or engaged" in anything related to dealing in or developing land.

    Again, these words require some kind of legal construct which did not exist.

    This is a very basic concept - there needs to be some legal connection between the person of interest and the land. Wanting to potentially in the future buy the land at market price in an open market is not a legal connection. A vague interest (in the colloquial sense) in doing something in the future is not a legal interest.



  • Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Sono Topolino


    No it’s not. A once off property development does not make you a property developer- there’s an extensive “Badges of Trade” test you have to meet before you are considered to carry on a trade of dealing in or developing land. Her motive was to secure a premises for her profession of being a medical doctor, not to make a profit by dealing in or developing land.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭jmcc


    There does seem to be a lot of panic over this story from FFG supporters here. Hypothetically, what would happen to the stability of the government if Collins is forced to resign now that the legacy media is reporting on the story and with AGS investigating it?

    Regards...jmcc



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,469 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Again, I'm not the one who literally posted a section of the planning act and who clearly did not understand the words you were reading.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Indeed the panic here has been kind of astonishing.

    We've had nothing to see here because:

    • She was not his wife
    • There was no vote
    • There was no discussion
    • There was no decision taken to put land on the market
    • He was not a councillor when the land was put on the market
    • She was not a councillor
    • She's a doctor
    • She wasn't involved in property dealing
    • She wasn't involved in enough property dealing
    • She hadn't bid on the land
    • It was the Russians
    • Paddy Cosgrave is a toerag

    all to defend somebody from what everybody seems to agree was a massive conflict of interest that he should have recused himself over.

    What is so important about this guy?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,407 ✭✭✭✭Dav010




  • Advertisement
  • Subscribers Posts: 41,469 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Whos defending the guy?

    all im doing is correcting the errors some posters are making (mainly because i work in the area of planning).

    i have zero time for Niall Collins, FF or FG



  • Registered Users Posts: 568 ✭✭✭72sheep


    • Collins household (husband) had been member of Council 2004-2007.
    • 6 months after Collins household (husband) left Council, Collins household (wife) sends an unsolicited enquiry about the site to same Council - the good lady doctor wanted to provide a medical centre as a "service to the local community", ahhh how touching.
    • 1 month later, Collins household (husband) attends meeting - in an official capacity - at which the site is recommended to be put on the market
    • 6 months later Collins household buys the site
    • For 15 years Collins household leave site vacant - adios medical centre!
    • Collins household battles ABP and local residents to get planning permission for five council houses
    • Collins household now in negotiations to sell site back to same Council

    Within recent weeks Collins household (husband) made fool of himself on TV explaining separate inaccuracies regarding yet other house planning matters. But remember we have a govmt that has wrought a monumental housing crisis on its citizens and so this is all trivial "lesser best practices". FFG leadership can't even comprehend why the husband (whose family has been on the Dail since 1948) should have to answer any questions. They see the above as basic business as usual and the public is so repressed they cannot bring themselves to say different.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭jmcc


    FFG can't afford to lose any more ministers especially because of investigative journalism by The Ditch and he's from an FF family.

    Regards...jmcc



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Do you mean it is not actually Niall Collins specifically that you are defending here, it's important to you because you are defending the truth?

    Who are you defending it from?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,407 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    I did wonder if you had some insight into planning/council workings. I now put even more stock in what you posted, good to have someone who actually knows for sure what the legalities are.

    Keep up the good work, I can only feel sorry for you having to deal with idiots on a regular basis.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I couldn't care less if Collins is turfed out at the next election. His previous scandal in terms of his planning applications seems actually potentially egregious. I do care that people are making claims about corruption and illegality that are not backed up by facts because that should be the bedrock on what everything is based on.

    But this story is concocted nonsense, and seems to be something of an Icarian moment for The Ditch.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,407 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Idiots who can’t understand the difference between an expression of interest like asking is something for sake, and a beneficial interest in a property.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


     6 months after Collins household (husband) left Council, Collins household (wife) sends an unsolicited enquiry about the site to same Council 

    Are you sure? She sent letter in December 2006, I thought he was still on council then?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,526 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Interesting development

    'He accepted that he should have recused himself from the meeting, but denied that his wife's interest constituted a "material" matter.' - so a €100k+ deal is not material now!

    Gardaí are investigating whether junior minister Niall Collins broke any laws when he was on Limerick County Council when his wife bought a plot of land in Patrickswell.

    However, gardaí stress that the investigation is not criminal at this time.

    Mr Collins addressed the Dàil two weeks ago about the disposal of the site which was later purchased by Mr Collins' wife Eimear O'Connor. He has maintained that he did not break any laws or guidelines while on the council.

    A spokesperson said that gardaí are assessing the complaint.

    "An Garda Síochána is carrying out an assessment, to examine whether there was any criminality involved in respect of certain matters related to alleged breaches of the Local Government Act 2001 in the Southern Garda Region.

    "This is not a criminal investigation at this time."

    Speaking about the issue for the first time outside of the Dáil on Tuesday Mr Collins told the Irish Examiner that he did know that his wife had expressed interest in the site in December 2006.

    He accepted that he should have recused himself from the meeting, but denied that his wife's interest constituted a "material" matter.

    Mr Collins said that the Dàil was not the forum to decide if he had broken any rules and that the issue would be discussed by SIPO, an investigation which is "in train".



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Thank you for your service.

    And who were you defending the truth from 10 days ago when you were peddling this version of events:

     He voted at commitee level for the lands to be forwarded to the Council for consideration to place on the market. The Council voted, and the lands were placed on the market, open to any bidder, after he had left the Council to become a TD.

    Do you still believe this to be truth?



Advertisement