‘Ministers should be allowed take spouses on foreign trips’ – McGuinness

serfboard

The Irish Indo is obviously gunning for John McGuinness these days - for what reason I don't know (because his work as Chairman of the PAC is threatening to somebody?).

Anyway, he's not helping himself by what he's saying. Here's a flavour:

The Irish Independent wrote:

Spending watchdog asked to bring wife on trips

THE chairman of the Dail public spending watchdog tried to bring his wife with him on foreign trips while he was a junior minister – and argued that the taxpayer should foot the bill for ministerial spouses to travel abroad.
Related Articles

link.

The Irish Independent wrote:

‘Ministers should be allowed take spouses on foreign trips’ – McGuinness

THE chairman of the Dail public spending watchdog claims there is a case to be made the taxpayer to pay for ministers to take their spouses abroad while on official travel.

from here.

Then he goes on RTE and digs himself in deeper:

RTE wrote:

Fianna Fáil TD John McGuinness said the rules on spouses travelling abroad with ministers should be updated to take account of "the modern family context".

...

speaking on RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, Mr McGuinness said it was always his intention to pay for his wife.

He said there was case to be made sometimes for ministers to bring their spouses on foreign trips and for the 1959 regulations governing the area to be revised.

He said: "In terms of trade missions, the protocol is that the wife does not travel.

"But there are circumstances that should be considered when ministers are away on State business for long periods of time and, where they believe that their wife should travel, they should pay.

"There may be other circumstances where the minister can then make a case, within a new set of guidelines, where he believes the State should pay because work practices have certainly changed.

"The family is now central to everything and it may be that a minister might want to make that case."

Mr McGuinness said the minister could make such a case on family or health grounds.

leading to calls for him to resign from the PAC.

RTE wrote:

Call for McGuinness to consider PAC position

There have been calls for the chairman of the Dáil Public Accounts Committee to consider his position after he said the State should pay for ministers' spouses to travel on some trade missions.

...

Independent TD Finian McGrath called on Mr McGuinness to resign as chairman of the committee.

Fine Gael TD Simon Harris, who is a member of the committee, said Mr McGuinness should consider whether its credibility is being undermined.

He said the "revelations" about Mr McGuinness are "hugely distracting" to the work of the committee.

Minister of State for European Affairs Lucinda Creighton described the revelations as "bizarre", especially as Mr McGuinness has "very much taken the high moral ground on these issues" as chair of the PAC.

People Before Profit Alliance TD Richard Boyd Barrett has said Mr McGuinness's positon as chair of the Public Accounts Committee is "pretty untenable".

Mr Boyd Barrett said it was absolutely pathetic that a leading figure in the Opposition is still defending his position that overpaid ministers should be allowed to bring partners on trips abroad.

John McGuinness has always come across to me as a very straight talker - someone who is genuinely trying to do good work, and, in the unlikely event that I'd ever vote Fianna Fail, the only FFer I'd ever vote for. However, these comments are bizarre, and smacks of someone who still believes the Celtic Tiger is alive and well.

serfboard

Jeez, reading that second article I quoted in more detail:

The Irish Independent wrote:

... after getting into a row with civil servants over a trade mission to Dubai in August 2007, he went back and asked for his wife to accompany him on a trip to Canada later that same year.

...

The documents show civil servants felt his request was "quite inappropriate", and Mr Martin had ethical concerns about wives travelling with ministers.

Mr McGuinness, who eventually did not bring his wife, then wrote a scathing letter to a senior civil servant.

"I am entitled to some comforts while on state business, and an important one, in my case, is having my partner by my side," he said.

"I am perfectly happy to state my case, point to my desire to preserve and nurture my marriage, and my own well-being, and show I have paid the fare myself or defend the State for doing so."

Mr Martin had "very strong ethical views" that wives should not travel, but Mr McGuinness said "strong views do not ethics make".

"He could be mistaken. Nietzsche says the morality is the herd instinct of the individual and Proust says one becomes moral as soon as one becomes unhappy," he added.

and

The Irish Independent wrote:

The Carlow-Kilkenny deputy was only two months in the job when he made his request to bring his wife on a trade mission, and it led to a flurry of emails between civil servants.

"I would have to advise that this is quite inappropriate – even more so if it is to be charged to the public purse," one civil servant wrote.

The official then said they had checked with Mr Martin's office, and as well as the ethical views, they said the now-Fianna Fail leader has "never brought his wife on official business trips".

"The minister's office have advised that they will be obliged to mention Minister McGuinness's intentions to Minister Martin, given his likely concern if any adverse publicity arises from it."

On the Dubai trip, an email exchange between civil servants included one that read: "I'm refusing for the moment to sign the ATO which is solely for the minister's wife." The Department of Enterprise said ATO "stands for Air Ticket Order and is an internal form that is used to record the advance authorisation for officers to book flights on . . . account".

Even after the Dubai incident, Mr McGuinness again wanted to bring his wife on another trade mission, this time to Canada in October 2007.

That request was outlined in an email from an assistant secretary in the department to the secretary general, which read: "I've been asked to sign an ATO for the minister for the above."

Another email the next day said: "Had an affable session with the minister (though it took place in the context of my refusing to sign an ATO which included bringing his wife on a trade mission to Canada!)."

When contacted, Mr McGuinness last night said he was only "contemplating" bring his wife and was raising queries because it was his first trade mission.

"I was raising the question but it was forever the position that I was going to pay for my wife," he said. "At no stage did I ask or expect the department to pay for my wife to travel."

In his letter he said he was pointing out the importance of "family and wife" and said "there would be trips that perhaps consideration should be given to his wife and spouse or family and for the minister to pay".

When asked why he raised the possibility of the taxpayer paying, he said he was arguing a "general position".

Really bizarre. Given that Micheál Martin seems to come out well from it, could it be that he sees JMcG as a threat to him, and could he be responsible for this? (i.e. could he be responsible for pointing the journalist in the direction of the FOI request?).

kippy

I'll tell you what's goin on here. Classic distraction from another story.
FG have had this in the cupboard for a while. The decided to throw it to the media now in an attempt to take the spotlight off Shatter.
Happens all the time, the media report a bit story, lots of talk, no action, next big story is leaked, other story all but forgotten...........
This time FG might actually kill two birds with one stone as well.

FG spinners earning their money.

coolhull

Jeez, if it was me, I'!d be delighted to get away from the wife for a few days!

RATM

I'd agree with you that this story has been stored in the cupboard for some time but think it is more to do with powerful interests trying to scuttle McGuinness before he embarks on a pesky banking inquiry. He is already on record about retired senior civil servants and former polticians being dead against it and the timing of this story is very much a shot across his bows.

kippy

RATM wrote: »

I'd agree with you that this story has been stored in the cupboard for some time but think it is more to do with powerful interests trying to scuttle McGuinness before he embarks on a pesky banking inquiry. He is already on record about retired senior civil servants and former polticians being dead against it and the timing of this story is very much a shot across his bows.

I dont think so to be honest. The banking enquiry, in the form and forum it is going to take place in is impotent, pointless and a waste of time.
It's interesting that enda came out against mcguinness today, that says it all for me. Purely a tool to take the heat of shatter.

Fr Tod Umptious

kippy wrote: »

I dont think so to be honest. The banking enquiry, in the form and forum it is going to take place in is impotent, pointless and a waste of time.
It's interesting that enda came out against mcguinness today, that says it all for me. Purely a tool to take the heat of shatter.

But Shatter has not been in the news for at least two weeks, that story is well gone at this stage

I don't see the big deal myself.

Why not bring the partner?

starviewadams

As long as the taxpayer isn't picking up the partners tab I couldn't give a toss.

djk1000

I don't really understand why it's inappropriate to bring a spouse. I'm not sure how you could justify the state paying though.

I think the problem here as usual is the breathtaking arrogance and brass neck of some politicians who refuse to back down or apologise for mistakes or misstatements because they know they just have to outlast the news cycle and it will be forgotten.

Cody Pomeray

Two issues here.

1. When an employee is strongly encouraged by his or her boss to work away from home over a holiday period, there is a legitimate case to be made for the 'company' paying for his or her spouse to accompany him or her. There is an important pro-family trend developing in European employment conditions, and I think this is a great thing. God knows, if politics were more family friendly, we might have more women engaging in political careers too.
So he's right. The 1959 regulations are outdated. My opinion is that politicians' wives or husbands should be granted a place on foreign trips that occur during public/ family holidays.

2. Where did this information come from? It is not acceptable that FG-Lab are releasing work correspondence of a private and family nature. There is no legitimate public interest in this information, and it is highly inappropriate for a Government to raid the chests of the civil service for privileged information which attempts to undermine their opposition. Does this Government really want another Data Protection investigation?

To sum up - fair enough to seek flexible, family-friendly arrangements. Completely unacceptable to abuse Government privilege for political attacks.

Cookie_Monster

There is no benefit to the state or public by allowing family to travel and the costs being picked up, any more than there is a benefit to my company by paying for my wife to come on a trip with me abroad. Infact you could easily argue having family there will result in a less productive trip.

With Skype etc nowadays it's not like it is difficult to maintain contact.

If someone is away for a long period of time for work you could argue that family costs for a visit should be allowable but 2-3 weeks away is nothing.

eigrod

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Two issues here.


2. Where did this information come from? It is not acceptable that FG-Lab are releasing work correspondence of a private and family nature. There is no legitimate public interest in this information, and it is highly inappropriate for a Government to raid the chests of the civil service for privileged information which attempts to undermine their opposition. Does this Government really want another Data Protection investigation?

I think you're way off there. This type of information is subject to FOI rules. As far as I can see, the Independent ran this story first (I could be wrong ?). McGuinness is chair of the PAC - the Independent will have been sniffing around him for a while trying to get something. A simple FOI request to the Department regarding publicly funded trips for Ministers and Officials will have given them all they need.

Nothing to do with FG-Lab - just FOI working well.

Cody Pomeray

eigrod wrote: »

I think you're way off there. This type of information is subject to FOI rules.

My reading of it was that FOI info was released after the information became known to the Indo. Even in relation to the FOI aspect of this, I can't say I agree that there is any public interest in releasing data of a family nature. There is an adequate FOI threshold reached when the Minister actually succeeds in taking his wife abroad at the expense of the State. But questions relating to the pair maximising their personal time together is a level of prying I'm not comfortable with.

I think most people agree that politics is not a family-friendly pursuit, and that we should try to improve that the same as we do for employees. I am sure there are many people in the FG-Lab parliamentary party - probably on the front benches too - who can completely see where McGuinness was coming from.

Cookie_Monster

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I think most people agree that politics is not a family-friendly pursuit, and that we should try to improve that the same as we do for employees. I am sure there are many people in the FG-Lab parliamentary party - probably on the front benches too - who can completely see where McGuinness was coming from.

on the contrary it seems to be excessively family friendly, with many inter-generational families 'ruling' many areas.

raymon

kippy wrote: »

I'll tell you what's goin on here. Classic distraction from another story.
FG have had this in the cupboard for a while. The decided to throw it to the media now in an attempt to take the spotlight off Shatter.
Happens all the time, the media report a bit story, lots of talk, no action, next big story is leaked, other story all but forgotten...........
This time FG might actually kill two birds with one stone as well.

FG spinners earning their money.

That is not correct at all. The Fianna Fail independent newspaper started this digging and has been running this story to death for the last few weeks.

The Fianna fail rag has been relentless.

It is a Fianna Fail witchhunt. This guy must have been getting too close to some prominent Fianna Failer's dirty linen. .

OU812

Once the spouse is not a distraction to the duties to be performed & all expenses (including hotel & subsistence) are paid in advance by the TD, I don't think anyone would have any issues with this.

There's a hint of smokescreen about it, combined with Leo calling for a penelty points enquirey again today. Is there a big FG story about to surface?

yara

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see the big deal myself.

Why not bring the partner?

because there's anecdotal evidence from reporters sent out to cover trade missions that some people do little enough at these things already, goin for the junkets and free food/drink, grab some leaflets there on the way out, great trade mission

with wifey coming too they mightn't bother getting out of bed

raymon

yara wrote: »

because there's anecdotal evidence from reporters sent out to cover trade missions that some people do little enough at these things already, goin for the junkets and free food/drink, grab some leaflets there on the way out, great trade mission

with wifey coming too they mightn't bother getting out of bed

I agree , I don't want to be paying for Fianna Failers spouses to be going on trips. ( or any party for that matter).

The chairman of the public accounts committee is a disgrace for suggesting this.

Spendthrifts should not be chairmen of committees that control spending.

Very peculiar that the indo FF party faithful are gunning for him . Must be more to this story.

Sierra Oscar

raymon wrote: »

I agree , I don't want to be paying for Fianna Failers spouses to be going on trips. ( or any party for that matter).

In the case of John McGuinness you would not have been, as even the FOI shows that he made it clear from the beginning that he would foot the bill if he wanted to bring his spouse.

He conceded that there could be occasions where it might be best for a spouse to officially accompany a Minister on delegations, which would have the knock on effect of the state covering those costs. This in turn has been spun to make it look like McGuinness has been doing this, where in fact the FOI clearly shows that he has not - as he always intended to cover the costs themselves.

I can understand the point McGuinness was making regarding significant delegations, such as those that take place around St. Patricks day, in so far as that there may be benefits with having a spouse accompany a minister to get work done which results in the benefits outweighing the costs. I personally wouldn't do that though - I guess I am a bit like John McGuinness then.

Talk about a non-story. The Independent have been targeting McGuinness for months now. They made up a cock and bull story about McGuinness requesting luxury toilet paper and demanding a full refurbishment of his office suite. McGuinness happily vacated the chair in the Public Accounts Committee when these 'revelations' came to light. He was then completely cleared of any wrongdoing by the Office of Public Works, who outlined that all office works were done without the prior knowledge or consent of the Minister. The Independent didn't bother reporting on that though and then moved on to another story to try and make out there was wrongdoing where there was not. This is just more of the same.

Also, your seriously clutching at straws if you think the Independent is run by Micheál Martin. This whole targeting of McGuinness, which has been going on for months now, clearly rubbishes that conspiracy theory. There would be many in FF who would have a right old laugh if you tried telling them that the Independent is a staunch FF paper! The fact of the matter is that the Independent is a bit of a rag when it comes to journalism. It likes to throw mud at any politician and political party to see if it will stick.

raymon

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

In the case of John McGuinness you would not have been, as even the FOI shows that he made it clear from the beginning that he would foot the bill if he wanted to bring his spouse.

He conceded that there could be occasions where it might be best for a spouse to officially accompany a Minister on delegations, which would have the knock on effect of the state covering those costs. This in turn has been spun to make it look like McGuinness has been doing this, where in fact the FOI clearly shows that he has not - as he always intended to cover the costs themselves.

I can understand the point McGuinness was making regarding significant delegations, such as those that take place around St. Patricks day, in so far as that there may be benefits with having a spouse accompany a minister to get work done which results in the benefits outweighing the costs. I personally wouldn't do that though - I guess I am a bit like John McGuinness then.

Talk about a non-story. The Independent have been targeting McGuinness for months now. They made up a cock and bull story about McGuinness requesting luxury toilet paper and demanding a full refurbishment of his office suite. McGuinness happily vacated the chair in the Public Accounts Committee when these 'revelations' came to light. He was then completely cleared of any wrongdoing by the Office of Public Works, who outlined that all office works were done without the prior knowledge or consent of the Minister. The Independent didnt bother reporting on that though.

Also, your seriously clutching at straws if you think the Independent is run by Micheál Martin. This whole targeting of McGuinness, which has been going on for months now, clearly rubbishes your various conspiracy theories that you have tried to float for years now.

Wrong , the taxpayer did pay for his wife on trips. I hope he repays these expenses.

The Sunday Independent is a weekly Fianna Fail newsletter. Very strange they are attacking one of their own.

touts

Does Phil Hogan's wife still leave him out of the country without her?

http://www.joe.ie/pic-of-the-day/not-the-sort-of-front-page-enda-kenny-would-want-to-see-on-budget-day/

lOWCOUNTRY

OU812 wrote: »

Once the spouse is not a distraction to the duties to be performed & all expenses (including hotel & subsistence) are paid in advance by the TD, I don't think anyone would have any issues with this.

There's a hint of smokescreen about it, combined with Leo calling for a penelty points enquirey again today. Is there a big FG story about to surface?

It is inevitable that the spouse is going to be a distraction. When a delegation goes abroad all members normally dine together at night and see a lot of each other. Rules of confidentiality apply and if there was a spouse present a lot of important dialogue could not take place.
There is also potentially a lot of hassle if the spouse gets into trouble of some kind, e.g. lost in a shopping centre, falls ill from eating local food.
Normally there is transport provided to take the delegation from place to place. Trying to move spouses around also causes infinite hassle.

Fr Tod Umptious

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

In the case of John McGuinness you would not have been, as even the FOI shows that he made it clear from the beginning that he would foot the bill if he wanted to bring his spouse.

He conceded that there could be occasions where it might be best for a spouse to officially accompany a Minister on delegations, which would have the knock on effect of the state covering those costs. This in turn has been spun to make it look like McGuinness has been doing this, where in fact the FOI clearly shows that he has not - as he always intended to cover the costs themselves.

I can understand the point McGuinness was making regarding significant delegations, such as those that take place around St. Patricks day, in so far as that there may be benefits with having a spouse accompany a minister to get work done which results in the benefits outweighing the costs. I personally wouldn't do that though - I guess I am a bit like John McGuinness then.

Talk about a non-story. The Independent have been targeting McGuinness for months now. They made up a cock and bull story about McGuinness requesting luxury toilet paper and demanding a full refurbishment of his office suite. McGuinness happily vacated the chair in the Public Accounts Committee when these 'revelations' came to light. He was then completely cleared of any wrongdoing by the Office of Public Works, who outlined that all office works were done without the prior knowledge or consent of the Minister. The Independent didn't bother reporting on that though and then moved on to another story to try and make out there was wrongdoing where there was not. This is just more of the same.

Also, your seriously clutching at straws if you think the Independent is run by Micheál Martin. This whole targeting of McGuinness, which has been going on for months now, clearly rubbishes that conspiracy theory. There would be many in FF who would have a right old laugh if you tried telling them that the Independent is a staunch FF paper! The fact of the matter is that the Independent is a bit of a rag when it comes to journalism. It likes to throw mud at any politician and political party to see if it will stick.

Maybe the FF hierarchy are out to get McGuinness
McGuinness is a bit of a maverick within FF
He was very outspoken against some of Lenihan's budgets in the final years of the FF govt and I'm sure the likes of Martin who was quiet senior in the disaster that was the FF led Govt between 07 and 11 would prefer to see rid of him.

Sierra Oscar

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Maybe the FF hierarchy are out to get McGuinness
McGuinness is a bit of a maverick within FF
He was very outspoken against some of Lenihan's budgets in the final years of the FF govt and I'm sure the likes of Martin who was quiet senior in the disaster that was the FF led Govt between 07 and 11 would prefer to see rid of him.

Micheál Martin has given McGuinness his full backing on the national airwaves twice within the last twenty four hours, and he gave his backing for McGuinness to take on the role of Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee in the first instance.

raymon

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Micheál Martin has given McGuinness his full backing on the national airwaves twice within the last twenty four hours, and he gave his backing for McGuinness to take on the role of Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee in the first instance.

Come on , why should you believe a word Michael Martin says ???

Anyway it may not be Martin, but it is definitely someone in FF who wants Mc Guinness gone.

Sierra Oscar

raymon wrote: »

Anyway it may not be Martin, but it is definitely someone in FF who wants Mc Guinness gone.

Do you have any evidence to back that up? I would be far more inclined to think that certain individuals in government are behind these so called 'revelations'. There are still some people who are very sore that McGuiness got the chairmanship of the Public Accounts Committee. The tussle over as to whether the PAC should undertake the banking inquiry clearly demonstrates that, amongst other things. The very fact that the Taoiseach waded into the debate this morning tells a lot in itself. There are some in FG who are furious with Enda today, as his intervention clearly shows that FG are involved in this attempt to remove the chairman of the PAC.

McGuinness wont be going anywhere, so expect the orchestrated campaign to oust him to continue.

OU812

Actually I'm going to change my opinion based on iowcountry's response.

This is a very well paid position with a lot of benefits.

If you're not up to doing it on your own, you shouldn't be doing it.

Cody Pomeray

raymon wrote: »

Wrong , the taxpayer did pay for his wife on trips. I hope he repays these expenses.

The Sunday Independent is a weekly Fianna Fail newsletter. Very strange they are attacking one of their own.

The Sindo is controlled by Arch FG supporter Denis O'Brien, as is the Irish Independent: things have moved on in Independent Newspapers since the O'Reilly era. Denis O'Brien has a lot to thank FG for.

These documents were released to the Irish Independent which you ought to know has traditionally been a Fine Gael newspaper.

I think it is clear to most people that there is a deliberate attack going on here. I have no time for FF, and frankly I never really liked John McGuinnes's political attitude either. But John McGuinness is a well respected chairman of the PAC, even Leo Varadkar is reluctant about him resigning. It's clear that his style of criticism and questioning the civil service doesn't suit some people in the public service.

raymon

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The Sindo is controlled by Arch FG supporter Denis O'Brien, as is the Irish Independent: things have moved on in Independent Newspapers since the O'Reilly era. Denis O'Brien has a lot to thank FG for.

These documents were released to the Irish Independent which you ought to know has traditionally been a Fine Gael newspaper.

I think it is clear to most people that there is a deliberate attack going on here. I have no time for FF, and frankly I never really liked John McGuinnes's political attitude either. But John McGuinness is a well respected chairman of the PAC, even Leo Varadkar is reluctant about him resigning. It's clear that his style of criticism and questioning the civil service doesn't suit some people in the public service.

Denis O Brien doesn't control what the Independent prints despite his large shareholding.
The Fianna Fail editorial team of the Sindo controls what it prints.
In fact the Sunday Independent regularly prints anti Denis oBrien articles.

Cody Pomeray

ok you're obviously posting from an alternative universe on this one raymon.