Shatter insists Wallace has no credibility on penalty points

Sully

Minister for Justice Alan Shatter has again insisted that Independent TD Mick Wallace escaped penalty points last year because of “discretionary consideration afforded to him by An Garda Síochána”.

He said this evening it was a “matter of public importance” that people were able to “assess the credibility of the Deputy’s position.”

Mr Wallace has disputed Mr Shatter’s claim that a garda let him off with a warning about using his mobile phone while driving last year, when the pair appeared on RTÉ’s Prime Time last night. This afternoon Mr Wallace said he was “unware of the incident that the Minister is referring to”.

But Mr Shatter has released a statement this evening in which he said:

“Following upon his asserting last night that the Gardaí should not, in any circumstances, use their discretionary powers to terminate Fixed Charge Notices regardless of any humanitarian issue, I believed it was a matter of public importance that those viewing the programme be in a position to assess the credibility of the Deputy’s position.

“By making a pretence, for political purposes, that he is of the view that gardaí should not use their discretionary powers in ease of a member of the general public whilst concealing the fact that Garda discretion had been exercised in relation to himself, Deputy Wallace was last night effectively asserting that discretionary consideration afforded to him by An Garda Síochána should not be extended to others. I do not believe such an approach to be either acceptable or credible.”

..

More: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/shatter-insists-wallace-has-no-credibility-on-penalty-points-1.1397353

So basically, Shatter revealed on RTE Prime Time last night that Wallace also benefited of discretionary consideration when caught driving while holding a mobile phone. This, along with Luke 'Ming' Flanagan also getting lucky by having points removed, makes the whole campaign (if the accusation is true) by the various TDs a complete shambles and hypocritical. Its purely politically motivated and a campaign to damage the Justice Minister, the Gardai and the government while making them look like a saint. Odd they would take a moral high ground when benefiting from the system themselves.

Saying all that, I don't think it was appropriate for Shatter to release the information like he did. While it is in our public interest, it wasn't the appropriate time or place and smacked of a political attack - reaching the same low levels as these individual TDs.

Following this, Wallace claims he doesn't recall the incident and is making a complaint to the Standards in Public Office Commission and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

This evening the TD said he was in the process of lodging a formal complaint with the Standards in Public Office Commission, alleging that Shatter’s comments were in breach of the legally binding code of conduct for people elected to public office.
He said he was also asking the Data Protection Commissioner to investigate “any possible breach of the Data Protection legislation, the basis for the Minister’s allegation, the circumstances surrounding the seeking and providing of any personal data to the Minister in preparation for the Prime Time debate”.

More: http://www.thejournal.ie/mick-wallace-complaint-alan-shatter-powers-914247-May2013/

So Wallace is hitting back and appears to be trying to deflect attention on what he describes as a "serious abuse of powers". If Wallace did indeed benefit, he wont resign of course as its not exactly much worse than the tax bill dodging he done. But its another discredit to his name and doesn't exactly hold him very well when having a go in the Dail or anywhere else.

Banjo String

Derek Keating last week, Mick Wallace this week.....

are there any decent TDs left in D.E?

20Cent

Shatter is in the wrong here, a minister for justice using Garda information for political gain is very inappropriate whoever he is using it against.
No fan of Wallace actually think he should have been kicked out of the Dail but Shatter is well out of order in this situation.

I don't get it.

What I don't get is that these TD's (Wallace, Ming, Daly and co.) want the waiving of penalty points stopped. That they have themselves benefited from the waive in the past seems to discredit them.

The waiving of penalty points is a scandal and fair play to them for bringing it to national attention. It should be stopped. Why should their campaign stop purely because they took advantage while it was happening?

I'm sure if the halting of these waivers happened, they wouldn't try it.

flutered

i cannot understand why wallace has not lost his dail seat and future pension, but this does not give any goverment minister the right to check all garda files on him prior to a tv show, would shatter have found out this cotentious item and revieled it publicy, if he was not appearing on the plank show?.

Sully

flutered wrote: »

i cannot understand why wallace has not lost his dail seat and future pension, but this does not give any goverment minister the right to check all garda files on him prior to a tv show, would shatter have found out this cotentious item and revieled it publicy, if he was not appearing on the plank show?.

More than likely.

Mr.Micro

Alan Shatter wants this matter put to bed clearly and is not happy to have Wallace, apparently a beneficiary of discretion, to keep stirring the pot and causing discomfort to the Government. It is awesome that so many people had/has access to the data base where points could be expunged by whoever?

Hootanany

Yes very bad show for Shatter shows just what type of person he is.

mikom

I presume Shatter will be naming all the other big shots that got let off?
Come on Alan................ or will it not make political hay.........

Mr.Micro

Hootanany wrote: »

Yes very bad show for Shatter shows just what type of person he is.

If its true that Wallace benefited from, erm.... discretion, then what sort of fool can he be going on about the penalty points....total hypocrisy and foolish.

hfallada

Who cares? FG and labour are loving the fact that the negative press isnt about them for a few days.

donegal11

Is Wallace saying it didn't happen ? if so why is he involving the data commissioner if it was made up?

joe swanson

Both are complete idiots. I just think Wallace is a complete hypocrite though. I think that he has no right to pontificate about anything given his past. The scandal here is that there are no procedures in place to remove him following his past.

Fred Cohen

Minister Shatter said

“Deputy Wallace himself was stopped on a mobile phone last May by members of An Garda Síochána and he was advised by the guard who stopped him that a fixed ticket charge could issue and he could be given penalty points,” he said. “But the garda apparently, as I’m advised, used his discretion and warned him and told him not to do it again.”

So who advised him of this? It could have come from two sources

1. Mr Wallace. Very unlikely.

or

2. An Garda Siochána. From which I can see 3 sources

2.1. The Garda who stopped him. How often do ordinary members of AGS get to have a chat and gossip with the Minister for Justice about who they saw driving while on a mobile phone. As well as that, given the antipathy that the Minister is held in by the ordinary member on the street I find this equally unlikely. Also why would they risk their job by disclosing confidential information.

2.2. The stop was logged somewhere and given to the minister. This opens up a whole new can of worms such as why was it logged, who gave him the file, what else is in the file, are their files on other politicians, what is the purpose of these files, etc,etc,etc. i.e. Political policing.

2.3. The Guard who stopped him said it to someone else who told the Minister. Given that (imho) most Guards are more likely to describe their sexual fetish with ostriches rather than discuss their days work with a civilian, I also find this unlikely and as a solicitor I'm sure he knows not to rely on hearsay.

Fred Cohen

donegal11 wrote: »

Is Wallace saying it didn't happen ? if so why is he involving the data commissioner if it was made up?

I would think that because if there is an electronic record created in the Dept. of Justice about Deputy Wallace it has to be disclosed.

Sierra Oscar

How the hell did Shatter come across such information regarding a private citizen?

Fred Cohen

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

How the hell did Shatter come across such information regarding a private citizen?

That is the question and I pity the poor mule that has to answer it, because the're the one who will take the rap.

M three

Its starting to look like there is something dodgy going on here. Seems to be a concerted effort to gather info about opposition tds who are most vocal in opposing the government. Lets face it, 75% of the population could be done for holding a phone while driving. But there isnt a word about ming doing it until he highlights corrupt garda deleting penalty points, claire daly happens to have cops following her who arrest her for a u turn and say that she was drunk, now shatter spills what is supposed to be confidential garda info on primetime tv.

Watergate isnt a patch on the dirty little shatter show

sullanefc

Sounds like a conspiracy theory, but if I was a Guard who wanted to discredit Wallace over his stance on penalty points, then I wouldn't try to charge him for using a mobile phone, I would let him off and make him look like a hypocrite. With the revelations about Ming and Daly also, the whole thing stinks to high heaven. I really don't trust Alan Shatter.

Edit: And what choice did Wallace have in all this. If he is pulled over and the Guard said I'm going to leave you away with a warning, what can Wallace do?
Wallace: "Please Guard, you have to charge me."
Guard: "You're alright, just don't do it again."
Wallace: "But I will look like a hypocrite otherwise"
Guard: "You're grand."
Wallace: "Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on...." (Mrs Doyle impression)
Guard: "No."

I'm sure it didn't go exactly like that, but can a citizen insist they get charged for an offence that a Guard is willing to turn a blind eye to? It wasn't like he actually go the ticket, and did everything in his power to get them quashed afterwards (which would be a much more serious scandal).

wolfpawnat

Shatter seems to think he is Big Brother, very 1984. Not that anyone will even question him on his clearly ill-gotten knowledge. Fair dues to Kenny for saying it to him last night.

Phoebas

Fred Cohen wrote: »

I would think that because if there is an electronic record created in the Dept. of Justice about Deputy Wallace it has to be disclosed.

In which case, why does Alan Shatter have access to it?

If its found that someone has been trawling the PULSE system for dirt on political opponents, then Shatter has to be sacked.

It smacks of the goings on in the IRS that came to light last week.

cyberhog

sullanefc wrote: »

Edit: And what choice did Wallace have in all this. If he is pulled over and the Guard said I'm going to leave you away with a warning, what can Wallace do?

Wallace: "Please Guard, you have to charge me."
Guard: "You're alright, just don't do it again."

If Wallace had asked for the points he WOULD have got them.

Guard: I'm going to leave you away with a warning.

Wallace: Thanks all the same but I'll take the points.

Guard: Have it your way.

sullanefc

cyberhog wrote: »

If Wallace had asked for the points he WOULD have got them.

Guard: I'm going to leave you away with a warning.

Wallace: Thanks all the same but I'll take the points.

Guard: Have it your way.

Not if the Guard wanted to discredit him.

M three

sullanefc wrote: »

Sounds like a conspiracy theory, but if I was a Guard who wanted to discredit Wallace over his stance on penalty points, then I wouldn't try to charge him for using a mobile phone, I would let him off and make him look like a hypocrite. With the revelations about Ming and Daly also, the whole thing stinks to high heaven. I really don't trust Alan Shatter.

Edit: And what choice did Wallace have in all this. If he is pulled over and the Guard said I'm going to leave you away with a warning, what can Wallace do?
Wallace: "Please Guard, you have to charge me."
Guard: "You're alright, just don't do it again."
Wallace: "But I will look like a hypocrite otherwise"
Guard: "You're grand."
Wallace: "Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on...." (Mrs Doyle impression)
Guard: "No."

I'm sure it didn't go exactly like that, but can a citizen insist they get charged for an offence that a Guard is willing to turn a blind eye to? It wasn't like he actually go the ticket, and did everything in his power to get them quashed afterwards (which would be a much more serious scandal).

Dont agree with the use of the term conspiracy. If the government needed the dail votes of the technical group you'd have newspaper stories embellishing their reputations.

But the govenment doesnt need the votes of wallace, flanagan or daly, not right now anyway, and doesnt like the criticism coming from them, so you have an effort to discredit them.
Not a conspiracy, just a pretty simple plan.

hyperborean

Shatter needs to clarify were this information came from.
and if it is within his remit as MoJ to use information in this manner,


But as a FG member of government I doubt there will be any forthcoming, FF lite

bmaxi

Maybe he gets his info from Mossad. From previous opinions given he appears to be a big fan of theirs and there's not much those guys don't know. :rolleyes:

Weevil

While I can see why the Minister for Justice would have access to otherwise restricted information, I can't see how the incident he alleges fits that privilege. Is he using this access, or is he relying on hearsay, for political gain?

20Cent

Weevil wrote: »

While I can see why the Minister for Justice would have access to otherwise restricted information, I can't see how the incident he alleges fits that privilege. Is he using this access, or is he relying on hearsay, for political gain?

Heard on the radio that questions have been tabled to answer that, either way not looking good for Shatter.

John_C

A Guard letting someone they stop off with a warning isn't the same as a Guard going into the computer system and deleting points for someone they know.
Shatter's argument was that Guards can use discretion in minor traffic offences, therefore they must also be allowed delete points from the the record of family/friends. And that Wallace is a hypocrite for favouring one but not the other.

It seems to me that Shatter's argument has absolutely no merit, and that's before we consider where he's getting his info on Wallace from.

Fiery mutant

I've been let off by An Garda before for road indiscretions, and I wholeheartedly thanked the Garda for it. By there is something unnerving about what Shatter is up to.

Using his position like that is disgusting, and shows that politics in this country is still sliding into the gutter.

mikom

How did "deep throat" work out for Nixon?

Although in this case the cart is pulling the horse.