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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Time all candidates came clean?

  • 04-10-2011 11:26pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 919 ✭✭✭


    In light of current revelations perhaps it's time that all prospective candidates for the Presidency publish the following
    Their PPS Numbers last 3 digits and when issued, to prove they have a PPS number
    Their P60's for the last 10 years, to prove they are compliant taxpayers
    Their Disability/Social Welfare payments
    Their remuneration/expenses/pensions from political office
    Their remuneration from State Boards/Quango's
    Their relationship, if any, with criminals/criminal organisations
    Their interventions on behalf of criminals/convicted persons

    Feel free to add suggestions, it should make for interesting reading


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,986 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    Ah, like Richard Nixon's Checkers speech :)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checkers_speech


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    jbkenn wrote: »
    In light of current revelations perhaps it's time that all prospective candidates for the Presidency publish the following
    Their PPS Numbers last 3 digits and when issued, to prove they have a PPS number
    Their P60's for the last 10 years, to prove they are compliant taxpayers
    Their Disability/Social Welfare payments
    Their remuneration/expenses/pensions from political office
    Their remuneration from State Boards/Quango's
    Their relationship, if any, with criminals/criminal organisations
    Their interventions on behalf of criminals/convicted persons

    Feel free to add suggestions, it should make for interesting reading

    Monies earned from consultancies and name of organisation/company.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    All candidates come clean?!? There is not enough soap in tesco's or pressure washers in B&Q to get any of them clean except maybe Michael D.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    One would end up in a mental institution and the other in jail.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    What kind of an almighty screwed-up country do we have if the only standard we have for president is that they are clean ?

    Do we really expect that little from our politicians these days ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    What kind of an almighty screwed-up country do we have if the only standard we have for president is that they are clean ?

    Do we really expect that little from our politicians these days ?

    I wouldn't see it as the only standard - more the base line standard.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I wouldn't see it as the only standard - more the base line standard.

    Yes, but that should be a given. Unfortunately, in this country, it's not.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Yes, but that should be a given. Unfortunately, in this country, it's not.

    Which is why we should lay down a few ground rules first.

    A poster over in another thread suggested a 5 year residency and no criminal convictions in that time rule before a person can run for any public office.

    I really like the idea of a residency rule - as for the convictions, I would prefer that a criminal conviction would ban result outright but I do understand that in certain cases - esp where people were release under the Good Friday Agreement - that this could be tricky.

    I do think that any public figure who is convinced of a criminal offence during their term of office should immediately be impeached, forced to stand down and forfeit any pension/golden handshake rights.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    - as for the convictions, I would prefer that a criminal conviction would ban result outright but I do understand that in certain cases - esp where people were release under the Good Friday Agreement - that this could be tricky.

    Why would it be tricky ? They committed crimes and were let free from prison in return for not committing more crimes; no-one guaranteed them the right to run for office.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I do think that any public figure who is convinced of a criminal offence during their term of office should immediately be impeached, forced to stand down and forfeit any pension/golden handshake rights.

    I would go a step further on this aspect, considering that Ahern & Callely & O'Dea - just three examples - were never convicted of any offence, and yet are completely unfit for office.

    Given the unwillingness to even deal with their unethical-yet-vaguely-legal behaviour, I'm not sure how this should be phrased; but I do know that someone who follows the letter of the law without following the spirit of it - particularly in terms of expenses and shafting the state - should be immediately deemed unfit for office and stripped of all pension entitlements.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Why would it be tricky ? They committed crimes and were let free from prison in return for not committing more crimes; no-one guaranteed them the right to run for office.


    I think it would end up in a whole messy and divisive debate about the difference between a 'criminal' conviction and a 'political' conviction.
    If there was a blanket ban accusations would be laid that it was preventing former Republican (and possibly Unionist - stranger things have happened) 'political' prisoners from engaging in the political process and charges could be laid (with some validity) that paramilitaries were encouraged to abandon violence in favour of the ballot box but were now being denied access to that same ballot box.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    ...... charges could be laid (with some validity) that paramilitaries were encouraged to abandon violence in favour of the ballot box but were now being denied access to that same ballot box.

    No, with no validity whatsoever. Where did I say that they shouldn't be allowed to vote ?

    Actions have consequences though - or at least should have - if you've murdered someone then you are not suitable to uphold a constitution that protects everyone's right to life. It's not exactly a biased or agenda-driven argument - just a statement of fact and common sense, really.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 196 ✭✭Wider Road


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    No, with no validity whatsoever. Where did I say that they shouldn't be allowed to vote ?

    Actions have consequences though - or at least should have - if you've murdered someone then you are not suitable to uphold a constitution that protects everyone's right to life. It's not exactly a biased or agenda-driven argument - just a statement of fact and common sense, really.


    Who Murdered who?
    All I know is that Brendan Lynch, husband of Kathleen Lynch & brother of Ciaran Lynch murdered Larry White.
    Where does that leave Michael D?


Advertisement