Local Politician Does His Bit For The Disabled..

Dr.Sanchez

Ah he's jus an idiot, and the only people that'll vote for him are old people because they love his ould lad!

road_high

This family remind how somehow of the mafia. Doing very nicely indeed out of the politics gravy train and "keeping it (all) in the family". And throw in the good looking Polish chick for good measure to hoover up some of the many foreign votes over around Lintown Hall and the like.

That Range Rover is vulgar to say the least. And as for the cock and bull story about the elderly lady and the van...give us some credibility Andrew please!

Cabaal

mick_irl wrote: »

Anyone know if this would be a parking offense?

Back wheel on the footpath, plus parking like that makes it difficult for cars coming off the junction (Michael St onto John St), as the vehicle is protruding onto the street as well.

Also, the reg plates on that vehicle are illegal according to the rules set down by the Revenue Commissioners.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/press/2005/pr_plate.html

Think that's a fine of €1,265...

While I'd agree that this is also dodgy is it no different to the average joe and how badly so many other motorists park?

Yes its wrong but this is turning into a witch hunt now, if I wanted I could go out and take pictures of SUV that are parked illegally and claim all SUV drivers don't give a crap about the laws.

However given the two photos posted so far its clear that words perhaps need to be had with a few drivers, but then I've seen other partys park up on footpaths while displaying whats on there banners/vans/pictures

Sully

D_Red_Army wrote: »

I never thought it would make it that far!!! Might send the Herald my address so they can post the check.....;)

They should never have published your photo without permission for a start, and they never gave credit.

Andrew McG wrote: »

Sully and Cabaal thanks for the response and I will do my best to keep an eye on the forum and take part in the discussions. I have been reading a few threads here and it seems to be a good way to keep informed.

Good stuff. More local politicans should be active on the forum, you have to hand it to Murphy for getting out there and joining such a popular forum to here the peoples views and respond to them. Its not all about canvassing on the door and having cars parking illegaly with your name on it!

Secondly, I first found out about that van parking in a disabled bay when a friend told me to check this forum. It was here I read that the van owners relative was in a wheelchair. Then the Herald phoned me and and I told them exactly what I read here. After speaking with the owner of the van, whom you also know, he informed me that it was his elderly grandmother that he was taking to the shop. I was not there and I can only go by what I have been told in good faith. Like I said, I asked him to park responsibly in future. I think thats an understandable explanation Darren

From the looks, you need to call a meeting with your drivers and remind them of the laws and regulations surrounding parking. If it was me, I would have sacked the driver for parking in two disabled spaces. It has damaged your campaign image so much it reached national papers. A witness clearly has said he was on his own, which contradicts what you were told. That would annoy me further, as I would only want people on my campaign trail that I can trust. Hence, it has damaged your image even further by refusing to do anything bar having a talk with the driver.

Cabaal wrote: »

While I'd agree that this is also dodgy is it no different to the average joe and how badly so many other motorists park?

Yes its wrong but this is turning into a witch hunt now, if I wanted I could go out and take pictures of SUV that are parked illegally and claim all SUV drivers don't give a crap about the laws.

However given the two photos posted so far its clear that words perhaps need to be had with a few drivers, but then I've seen other partys park up on footpaths while displaying whats on there banners/vans/pictures

I think the issue is, a local election candidate should be setting the right image. Daily people break the law, park illegaly and get away with it. Its not right and its not fair on people who might need to use that disabled space but because some person decided to take up two spaces, its made it more awkward on them. For an election candidate to ignore the law, and he wanting the public to give him a vote - is a bit rich.

brettmirl

Cabaal wrote: »

While I'd agree that this is also dodgy is it no different to the average joe and how badly so many other motorists park?

Yes its wrong but this is turning into a witch hunt now, if I wanted I could go out and take pictures of SUV that are parked illegally and claim all SUV drivers don't give a crap about the laws.

However given the two photos posted so far its clear that words perhaps need to be had with a few drivers, but then I've seen other partys park up on footpaths while displaying whats on there banners/vans/pictures

A witch hunt? No. I would have taken the pic had it been any other election candidate either.

Yes, plenty of people do park on paths/illegally, BUT, they are not elected representatives (or people that represent them).

Our Councillors write, vote on and enact the parking laws through out the city. The council employs the people that enforce these laws. They should be leading by example.

EKRIUQ

I'm just getting the impression that people think they can park anywhere once they have a sticker on their car/van/suv because their on official campaign business. And coming on here and telling lies is just a sign of arrogance.

highgiant1985

nameuser wrote: »

Guys are ye stalking out all vehicles with his face on them?

in fairness its hard to miss them. When you plaster your face on a vehicle its going to get attention!

For the record - IMO I wouldn't blame Andrew for this unless he was the driver of either of the vehicles in question. I would blame the driver(s). People are imperfect. To f up is in their nature. Its easy to say they should have parked correctly and they should have but we all know of someone be it friend relative work colleague or neighbour who has been caught (or should have been) for speeding or parking offences. Andrew can't control what they do. He can tell them how they should behave but ultimately its each person who makes up their OWN mind.

if Andrew was the driver of one of these vechicles then I take the above back and it was fully his fault


Also just to point out I've no interest in politics and I'm from Offaly originally so I'm not even sure I can vote in these elections.

Cabaal

Sully wrote: »

I think the issue is, a local election candidate should be setting the right image. Daily people break the law, park illegaly and get away with it. Its not right and its not fair on people who might need to use that disabled space but because some person decided to take up two spaces, its made it more awkward on them. For an election candidate to ignore the law, and he wanting the public to give him a vote - is a bit rich.

I'd fully agree, I'm just merely suggesting this is starting to look like a witch hunt

Its bad form for any body working for ANY party to start breaking the law and then expect votes in their direction

jiggajt

Lets not be too harsh here. I mean clearly in the first photograph this type of parking was necessary in order to ensure the driver's chicken fillet roll didnt go cold. If he had to park across the car park the butter on his roll clearly would have melted and curdled and mixed with the bacon and we all hate that!

And clearly in the second photo the driver is dropping back a dvd to the shop on john's st. Another instance where ridiculous parking is legitimised by the excuse, " ah sure i'll only be a minute."

brettmirl

jiggajt wrote: »

And clearly in the second photo the driver is dropping back a dvd to the shop on john's st. Another instance where ridiculous parking is legitimised by the excuse, " ah sure i'll only be a minute."

Nope, the two occupants were heading for their lunch (to Langtons or Ming Court I believe), so they would have been there more than a minute.

rosel

darren its not very fair what you are doing you know the driver and his family very well. and the ealdery woman is your gan aunt and mine too. you know that he does bring her shopping when ever she go's. we were voting for you until you went stiring it about this. and when every one else in the family find's out or those that know about it will hardly vote for you either.

EKRIUQ

rosel wrote: »

darren its not very fair what you are doing you know the driver and his family very well. and the ealdery woman is your gan aunt and mine too. you know that he does bring her shopping when ever she go's. we were voting for you until you went stiring it about this. and when every one else in the family find's out or those that know about it will hardly vote for you either.

It's not stirring its a legitimate argument, people aren’t allowed to park illegally even if they have a sticker of a local councillor on the vehicle!. Its politics and as of yet we have only seen a brief response then it’s been ignored. I’m sure the number people who read this thread and comments have been influenced on their choices on June 5th. I’m a neutral and have no ties to any candidate but I believe with my own eyes.

And it’s a bit childish threatening to tell the whole family, grow up.

Cabaal

EKRIUQ wrote: »

And it’s a bit childish threatening to tell the whole family, grow up.

agreed, rosel are you seven?

rosel

am i 7 when all you freaks do is go around the place with camera's taking picture's of day to day life and make a big thing out of sombody bringing there grandmother shopping

Dr.Sanchez

rosel wrote: »

darren its not very fair what you are doing you know the driver and his family very well. and the ealdery woman is your gan aunt and mine too. you know that he does bring her shopping when ever she go's. we were voting for you until you went stiring it about this. and when every one else in the family find's out or those that know about it will hardly vote for you either.

You might as well have posted... "Darren, Im telling Mammy on you!"

Cabaal

rosel wrote: »

am i 7 when all you freaks do is go around the place with camera's taking picture's of day to day life and make a big thing out of sombody bringing there grandmother shopping

Didn't we already establish that a witness at the scene has already confirmed there was only one person in the van (the person driving), we have also confirmed there is very much conflicting information regarding who was supposed to be in the van with the driver.

At the end of the day who ever took the photo didn't break any laws in Ireland, you welcome to query this over at the Photography forum where people will confirm this.

Nobody is a freak just because the take photos of the world around them.

If somebody is running for council/gov then they must expect to be in the public eye and as such should act accordingly if they don't want slack from the general public when they don't.

JohnC.

rosel wrote: »

darren its not very fair what you are doing you know the driver and his family very well. and the ealdery woman is your gan aunt and mine too. you know that he does bring her shopping when ever she go's.

Even if that was true (and it appears it isn't), how does it excuse parking in a disabled space without the permit in the windscreen?

He said in the Herald, "The reality is that the van driver's mother is disabled. His mother was shopping in the Eurospar and he was perfectly entitled to park there."

The reality is that without a permit, nobody is perfectly entitled to park there. If he even has a permit for legitimate use, he should be well aware of this.

brettmirl

Not so Kahless. As I've said previously on this thread, the car park at Eurospar is a private car park and as such, is not bound by the laws of land with regard to parking permits.

It is up to the operator of the car park (I assume Eurospar or whoever owns the Newpark Shopping Centre) to enforce their own parking rules.

Sully

rosel can take a break from the forum for his "contribution".

This thread seems to have no point since the candidate has responded.. ill see how it pans out before closing it.

ergonomics

Cabaal wrote: »

Didn't we already establish that a witness at the scene has already confirmed there was only one person in the van (the person driving), we have also confirmed there is very much conflicting information regarding who was supposed to be in the van with the driver.

I completely agree that the van shouldn't have parked there but the OP has no proof that he only saw one person in the van. Everyone keeps pinning everything on the fact that he saw the van driver on his own but he could easily be lying, just as the driver of the van could have easily lied and said he had a disabled person with them.

It's one person's word against another, and I don't see how the OP can be any more believable when they don't have proof. The photo is not proof that there was one person in the van, just proof that the van was parked there.

Unless someone goes to Eurospar and gets video footage I don't see how anyone can be 100% of what happened on that day.

tbh

+1. And lets remember, the guys running for Fianna Fail. If that's the only thing the FG guy has over him, he's the luckiest FF'r in the country. And if it's not, I'm not sure why the FG guy is hammering the point home over and over on here, and that's coming from someone who's always voted FG.

Sully

tbh wrote: »

+1. And lets remember, the guys running for Fianna Fail. If that's the only thing the FG guy has over him, he's the luckiest FF'r in the country. And if it's not, I'm not sure why the FG guy is hammering the point home over and over on here, and that's coming from someone who's always voted FG.

Young new candidate, trying to hit the point home. Not as much experience I guess. Not exactly the biggest issue worth debating about!

ChristIsMurph

Ok I have no idea who Rosel actually is to point that out. However, I only got involved to point out there was no disabled mother. I then left the argument since. I can't get overly involved as I am another candidate. The thing that I was simply commenting on was that Andrew McGuinness stated to the newspaper there was a disabled mother when he actually knows the mother himself and knows she is not disabled.

Sully

Thanks Chris, but it gets tiring when you slip into repeat. Your biased, so its harder for you to comment with a clear mind. I would suggest stepping back a bit.

ChristIsMurph

Sully wrote: »

Thanks Chris, but it gets tiring when you slip into repeat. Your biased, so its harder for you to comment with a clear mind. I would suggest stepping back a bit.

My name is actually Darren Sully :P

I have stepped back a bit as I was saying. I only had one point to make was all, and I made it.

Sully

ChristIsMurph wrote: »

My name is actually Darren Sully :P

Your nick isnt though :P

I have stepped back a bit as I was saying. I only had one point to make was all, and I made it.

Yup, we all agree and made the point with you

fabbydabby

The grandmother must suffer from invisibility as well as immobility because according to the photographer, the driver of the van was alone.

ergonomics

fabbydabby wrote: »

The grandmother must suffer from invisibility as well as immobility because according to the photographer, the driver of the van was alone.

To reiterate...

ergonomics wrote: »

I completely agree that the van shouldn't have parked there but the OP has no proof that he only saw one person in the van. Everyone keeps pinning everything on the fact that he saw the van driver on his own but he could easily be lying, just as the driver of the van could have easily lied and said he had a disabled person with them.

It's one person's word against another, and I don't see how the OP can be any more believable when they don't have proof. The photo is not proof that there was one person in the van, just proof that the van was parked there.

Unless someone goes to Eurospar and gets video footage I don't see how anyone can be 100% of what happened on that day.

Seriously guys, change the record.

Cabaal

Since this thread has led its course more or less how about Darren replying to questions and views on http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055559840

fabbydabby

Apologies, those last few posts occured between me reading the last one, clicking reply, eating my chicken curry, writing it out, editing it and clicking submit.

And for the record, it was delightful.