Mary Harney article in Tribune

Bill2673

Anyone else see this? Anyone else think it was a bit unfair.

The way they were going on about it on the Marion Finucane show yesterday, I thought it was some big state junket she was on.

But it turns out, she was on a personal holiday, that she stayed in the five star hotel for just 3 nights, that they didn't know the price of the room she stayed in, but just published the most expensive room price instead.......FFS, the woman is wealthy - we know what she earns, she doesn't have kids so her disposable income is high, whatever else you think about her, there is no denying she works hard. Is she not entitled to splash out a bit? Is she not entitled to some privacy? Its not like there were cocaine and lady boys involved. Was this not a bit rich from the Tribune (owned by lets not forget the jet setting Sir AJF O'R).

Any thoughts?

DrumSteve

that you mary?

Bill2673

DrumSteve wrote: »

that you mary?

Very good, very good.

Not its not.

I actually asked the question about the media......would have been the same if the article had been about Willie O'Dea or Martin McGuiness or Pat Rabitte.

Biggins

Any thoughts? She knew exactly what she was doing and the money involved

I present the prologue of a book now available to buy (Wasters by Shane Ross and Nick Webb) - the latter part refers to Harney but I provide the whole thing to show context:

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/6776/20110110085354.jpg
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/1604/40021927.jpg
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/1573/90842955.jpg
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/2807/37493508.jpg
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/8183/59161514.jpg

Her actions are nothing new and she and many others have a LONG history of screwing the state (YOU!) and the money your handing over to them every week from your pay/hard work.

If a rare time popped up that she actually paid for something substantial herself, right now that would come as more of a shock!

southsiderosie

Bill2673 wrote: »

Anyone else see this? Anyone else think it was a bit unfair.

The way they were going on about it on the Marion Finucane show yesterday, I thought it was some big state junket she was on.

But it turns out, she was on a personal holiday, that she stayed in the five star hotel for just 3 nights, that they didn't know the price of the room she stayed in, but just published the most expensive room price instead.......FFS, the woman is wealthy - we know what she earns, she doesn't have kids so her disposable income is high, whatever else you think about her, there is no denying she works hard. Is she not entitled to splash out a bit? Is she not entitled to some privacy? Its not like there were cocaine and lady boys involved. Was this not a bit rich from the Tribune (owned by lets not forget the jet setting Sir AJF O'R).

Any thoughts?

The fact that a woman who has never worked a day in her life in the private sector yet somehow managed to become wealthy says it all, really.

Nodin

Biggins wrote: »

Any thoughts? She knew exactly what she was doing and the money involved

....because she paid for it herself.......

Nodin

southsiderosie wrote: »

The fact that a woman who has never worked a day in her life in the private sector yet somehow managed to become wealthy says it all, really.

She's married to a business man of some means, but don't please let that get in the way of the rant.

Bill2673

southsiderosie wrote: »

The fact that a woman who has never worked a day in her life in the private sector yet somehow managed to become wealthy says it all, really.

When she was in TCD she was a scholar, best in her class, a leading light in the debating societies......I'd think if she'd become a barrister she'd be earning a lot more than she does as a politician.

When i said wealthy, I didn't mean she is a millionaire, I just meant she earns a decent bit more than the average joe, which is what you'd expect (ok, what I'd expect) of someone who has been one of the five most senior politicians in the country for the past twenty years.

Anyway, I;m not here to debate politicians wages. I'm just asking why is it newsworthy if she decides to spend a couple of hundred euros of her own money on a nice hotel.

hardCopy

I thought it was sensationalist rubbish. They had half a story and decided to devote two pages to attacking her without knowing any details.

As long as it wasn't state financed, I don't see the problem with it.

Just wait until Paddy's Day, then you'll see the real waste of taxpayers money.

r3nu4l

I've no time for Mary Harney as a politician or Minister but if she paid for this holiday herself, out of her own money then the cost has nothing to do with the public.

As for her not coming home from holidays to attend to the beds crisis, can anyone tell me what she could do in Ireland that she couldn't do abroad by means of telephone, email, videoconference? As Minister, her job is to take briefs, decide on strategy presented to her and make it happen.

If she spent a lot of her holiday time on the phone trying to sort this out then fair play to her. If she didn't and just ignored it and continued on her holiday then she should be thrown out of office when she gets back.

Bill2673

And i would add; RTE is spending more of YOUR money to pay Marion Finucane to crib about it than Mary Harney spent on the actual hotel room. (based on hourly salary for a journalist that is paid half a million a year to do a one hour show each week, or so I've been told is the case).

ISAW

Bill2673 wrote: »

And i would add; RTE is spending more of YOUR money to pay Marion Finucane to crib about it than Mary Harney spent on the actual hotel room. (based on hourly salary for a journalist that is paid half a million a year to do a one hour show each week, or so I've been told is the case).

Definition time again

In the public public interest real definition= "out of the public purse"
Public interest ( tabloid definition) = "something in which we think the public might be interested"

And sure enough they might. But just because people are interested does nt mean it is in the public interest.

thebaldsoprano

Nodin wrote: »

She's married to a business man of some means, but don't please let that get in the way of the rant.

I can imagine, being a chairman of FAS must have had its advantages

southsiderosie

Nodin wrote: »

She's married to a business man of some means, but don't please let that get in the way of the rant.

According to Wikipedia she got married in 2001. Her record of profligate spending while Minister of Enterprise - with PUBLIC money, I might add - predates her marriage.

Bill2673 wrote: »

When she was in TCD she was a scholar, best in her class, a leading light in the debating societies......I'd think if she'd become a barrister she'd be earning a lot more than she does as a politician.

When i said wealthy, I didn't mean she is a millionaire, I just meant she earns a decent bit more than the average joe, which is what you'd expect (ok, what I'd expect) of someone who has been one of the five most senior politicians in the country for the past twenty years.

Anyway, I;m not here to debate politicians wages. I'm just asking why is it newsworthy if she decides to spend a couple of hundred euros of her own money on a nice hotel.

Because if she (or the leadership of the party) had any sense, given the current economic and political climate she would not have gone on such an extravagant holiday. You have to have some neck to be in a government that lectures the public about tightening their belts and then go jetting off to Asia for three weeks.

PCPhoto

I think the key to who pays for the "holiday" is in the other people.

was she with family/friends....or co-workers, cllrs, or other civil servants ?

if she was with family its fair to assume it was paid for by herself and/or friends/family.

if she was with co-workers or other state paid minnions.... then we all paid for it.

Nodin

southsiderosie wrote: »

According to Wikipedia she got married in 2001. Her record of profligate spending while Minister of Enterprise - with PUBLIC money, I might add - predates her marriage.
.

...thats not the case here, however.

southsiderosie

Nodin wrote: »

...thats not the case here, however.

Yes and the second part of my post was that if anyone in the leadership of her party had and sense of prudence or propriety, they would have quietly told her ix-nay on the 5-star epic adventure.

As for the previous poster's comment on Finucane, all I have to say about her is people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Her salary is astronomical as well; it's a disgrace that RTE "stars" get paid so much on a public network, especially considering RTE's current financial situation. I'm sure a few dozen lowly staffers will get axed to save Finucane and Turbidy's pay packets. But that is a matter for another thread.

Biggins

Boiled down to brasstacks as they say, if she paid for something herself, there should be no comeback.
If there is doubt, there should be questions - and if there is abuses, she should be sacked (but hell will freeze over quicker!).

Mary has a lot to answer for, this episode aside. Its not as if she hasn't given the public reason to want her answerable for her spending (and cronyism).

thebaldsoprano

Nodin wrote: »

...thats not the case here, however.

In all likelihood, public money financed at least some of the trip through Harney's salary. Harney and Geoghan's lifestyle has been helped along by public money both through exorbitant salaries/fees and more directly by FAS/Government junkets. Having being treated so generously at taxpayers' expense, they might have shown a little cop on.

The article is sensationalist, but they bought it on themselves and I hope there are more of them in future. With 440,000 now on the live register because of their policies, many Government TDs are afraid to face the music and are retiring on fat-cat pensions. A few more of these articles and we might yet see those pensions/salaries/expenses reduced.

paulaa

I think what angers people most is not the fact that she takes frequent, 5 star holidays, it's her total lack of communication with those , the taxpayers, who are paying her grossly inflated wages. She could have given an interview by 'phone last week while the crisis was happening in A & Es up and down the country but she couldn't be ar*ed. She should have left a deputy to fill in for her while she was away but I imagine that she is arrogant enough to think that no one else is fit to take that role.

She has been a complete self-serving disaster to the health of the people of this country and that is the best I can say about her

Biggins

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

In all likelihood, public money financed at least some of the trip through Harney's salary. Harney and Geoghan's lifestyle has been helped along by public money both through exorbitant salaries/fees and more directly by FAS/Government junkets. Having being treated so generously at taxpayers' expense, they might have shown a little cop on...

Speaking of which Harney has been called by some journalists, one of the biggest junketeers and perk-merchants anyway.
For example a quote from the book "Wasters" - page 118: A breakdown of her expenses published in the Sunday Tribune October 2009 demonstrated that between Feb' 2006 and Sep' 2008 around €529,000 was spent transporting the minister on the government jet and another €65,000 on hotels and limo hire.
The Sunday Tribune Ken Foxe loaded up 600 pages of expenses and claims relating to her jaunts.

Here is what the book records - and these examples are just a few amid many:

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/3781/harney1.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/1085/harney2.jpg

P. Breathnach

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

In all likelihood, public money financed at least some of the trip through Harney's salary....

That is a grossly unreasonable argument. Once her salary has been paid to her, it is no longer public money.

I once stayed in a five-star hotel in Thailand (they are surprisingly cheap in comparison to Irish prices). The money I used to pay for it came from my salary as a public servant. You didn't pay for my holiday: I did.

southsiderosie

Biggins wrote: »

Speaking of which Harney has been called by some journalists, one of the biggest junketeers and perk-merchants anyway.
For example a quote from the book "Wasters" - page 118: A breakdown of her expenses published in the Sunday Tribune October 2009 demonstrated that between Feb' 2006 and Sep' 2008 around €529,000 was spent transporting the minister on the government jet and another €65,000 on hotels and limo hire.
The Sunday Tribune Ken Foxe loaded up 600 pages of expenses and claims relating to her jaunts.

Here is what the book records - and these examples are just a few amid many:

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/3781/harney1.jpg
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/1085/harney2.jpg

Those figures are shocking. Dennis Kozlowski would be proud.

Einhard

So, lemme get this straight. Mary Harney goes on a holiday, which she pays for herself, and during which, AFAIK, she didn't break any laws. My question therefore has to be, what bloody business is it of the Tribune or anyone else? Seriously, we complain about our politicians the parish pump style of their politics, and then we resort to immature, almost prurient, sensationalism and outrage over entirely reasonably private activities. Ridiculous article, and frankly ridiculous attempts to defend it here. I thought this place was a tad above Joe Duffy style, knee jerk outrage.

bleg

Bill2673 wrote: »

When she was in TCD she was a scholar, best in her class, a leading light in the debating societies......I'd think if she'd become a barrister she'd be earning a lot more than she does as a politician.

When i said wealthy, I didn't mean she is a millionaire, I just meant she earns a decent bit more than the average joe, which is what you'd expect (ok, what I'd expect) of someone who has been one of the five most senior politicians in the country for the past twenty years.

Anyway, I;m not here to debate politicians wages. I'm just asking why is it newsworthy if she decides to spend a couple of hundred euros of her own money on a nice hotel.

Because there are hundreds of people in hospital on trolleys, the health service is in crisis and the Minister is away on a month long holiday, staying in fairly exclusive resorts.

Biggins

Einhard wrote: »

So, lemme get this straight. Mary Harney goes on a holiday, which she pays for herself, and during which, AFAIK, she didn't break any laws. My question therefore has to be, what bloody business is it of the Tribune or anyone else? Seriously, we complain about our politicians the parish pump style of their politics, and then we resort to immature, almost prurient, sensationalism and outrage over entirely reasonably private activities. Ridiculous article, and frankly ridiculous attempts to defend it here. I thought this place was a tad above Joe Duffy style, knee jerk outrage.

The Tribune (if your referring to the ones I quoted) are strictly referring to ones that she claimed OFF THE STATE (thats you and I in tax) - 600 pages of them for that period alone, never mind before and after.

southsiderosie

Einhard wrote: »

So, lemme get this straight. Mary Harney goes on a holiday, which she pays for herself, and during which, AFAIK, she didn't break any laws. My question therefore has to be, what bloody business is it of the Tribune or anyone else? Seriously, we complain about our politicians the parish pump style of their politics, and then we resort to immature, almost prurient, sensationalism and outrage over entirely reasonably private activities. Ridiculous article, and frankly ridiculous attempts to defend it here. I thought this place was a tad above Joe Duffy style, knee jerk outrage.

It is not reasonable private activity, given the circumstances. If the CFO of a large corporation took an expensive three week holiday while the company was in bankruptcy proceedings and slashing wages, both shareholders and staff would be rightly outraged. I see this as essentially the same situation.

I would agree that the media coverage is overly hysterical and from some parties pretty hypocritical, but that is pretty typical of the Irish media in general, and doesn't take away from the fact that this trip was really, really bad form.

reprazant

southsiderosie wrote: »

The fact that a woman who has never worked a day in her life in the private sector yet somehow managed to become wealthy says it all, really.

So you are only allowed to earn a good wage in the private sector?

Bill2673

southsiderosie wrote: »

Because if she (or the leadership of the party) had any sense, given the current economic and political climate she would not have gone on such an extravagant holiday. You have to have some neck to be in a government that lectures the public about tightening their belts and then go jetting off to Asia for three weeks.

When did she or the government lecture anyone on tightening their belts...? I know Charlie Haughey did it in 1979, but thats a while ago now.

Einhard

southsiderosie wrote: »

It is not reasonable private activity, given the circumstances. If the CFO of a large corporation took an expensive three week holiday while the company was in bankruptcy proceedings and slashing wages, both shareholders and staff would be rightly outraged. I see this as essentially the same situation.

I'm sorry, I don't. Politicians personal lives are of no interest to me, as long as they're not up to anything illegal or unethical. What you're suggesting is that Mary Harney pander to public opinion, and I'm just about fed up with the levels of pandering that goes on in Irish political discourse as it is.

thebaldsoprano

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That is a grossly unreasonable argument. Once her salary has been paid to her, it is no longer public money.

Ordinarily I'd agree, and a more reasonable argument would be that their salary/expenses/pension package is simply too much. However, politicians have had no problem calling those using this argument begrudgers.

At this stage they're taking the piss - 190k + expenses + fat pension + Government jet for wrecking the health service isn't acceptable, and if a journalist wants to focus on the lifestyle that all this funds rather than directly on the package then fair play to them. It might well be the only way to bring the gravy train to a stop.