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

lOWCOUNTRY

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Sure, if you're a public service worker, or employed by a private firm.

It's not a popular thing to say, but political careers are badly suited to a healthy family life. .

Politicians generally spend relatively little time abroad with the exception of the minister for foreign affairs and the MEPs. There is no need for politicians who are abroad on official business for a few days at a time a few times a year to be accompanied. Just because politician pays the fares and the accommodation costs doesn't mean that they wont be making demands on the civil service entourage. These are working trips where every minute counts and it is hard enough in a foreign country without babysitting spouses.

PRAF

lOWCOUNTRY wrote: »

Politicians generally spend relatively little time abroad with the exception of the minister for foreign affairs and the MEPs. There is no need for politicians who are abroad on official business for a few days at a time a few times a year to be accompanied. Just because politician pays the fares and the accommodation costs doesn't mean that they wont be making demands on the civil service entourage. These are working trips where every minute counts and it is hard enough in a foreign country without babysitting spouses.

Are you sure? I would've thought that the Taoiseach, Tanaiste, and President all travel quite regularly. Similarly, I would've thought that quite a few of the cabinet ministers would all travel regularly on EU business, trade missions, etc. We are a small country on the periphery of Europe. If our leading politicians are not travelling then I would be pretty disappointed in them. As much as technology (skype, etc.) has reduced the need for travel, the reality in business and politics is that most business deals get signed off in person. If our politicians are staying at home in order to save a few pennies, the reality is that it is probably costing us millions (if not hundreds of millions)

On your other point you are probably correct. I'm sure spouses can be an inconvenience at times when there is official business to be done and when schedules are tight. However, I do think there are exceptions to the rule. Some of the events that our politicians attend do require spouses to attend with them (or at least it would be socially frowned upon if they were not there).

Sierra Oscar

Well the proceedings in PAC went exactly as expected today - McGuinness spent nearly three hours outlining the situation and responding to queries, and there is broad agreement that he didnt do anything wrong.

Interestingly, FG's John Deasy has said what many of us are thinking - i.e. senior civil servants are trying to undermine the Public Accounts Committe.

Deasy backs embattled McGuinness

Claims that powerful forces are at work to oust the head of a parliamentary public spending watchdog have been backed by a Government TD.

Fine Gael’s John Deasy turned on his own party to support Fianna Fáil’s John McGuinness, who has alleged senior figures within the civil service are plotting to remove him from the Dáil’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

“People dance around these things but the reality is everybody in this room knows why or what has been driving this the last couple of weeks,” Mr Deasy said.

raymon

I watched the grilling and he came across as very Callelyesque.

Shocking that this guy is head of the PAC . However I really can't see anyone trustworthy in FF who could take his place.

creedp

PRAF wrote: »

However, you're in danger of missing the real point here. The real point is that (potentially) there are a group of senior civil servants who are interfering in the workings of the Dail with a view to ensuring they get away scott free for their incompetence

You're very definitive on this point .. presumably you can back it up? Or are you looking for a job with the Sindo

PRAF

creedp wrote: »

You're very definitive on this point .. presumably you can back it up? Or are you looking for a job with the Sindo

I said that "(potentially) there are a group of senior civil servants who are interfering in the workings of the Dail". There is nothing definitive in this, however, I'd be amazed if it weren't true.

I'm just reading between the lines. Is Fiach Kelly that good of a journalist that he he uncovered this by chance? Does he just randomly go around issuing FOI requests on every Dail politician. Of course not. There is a source for his stories operating out of Dail Eireann. Given the volume of leaks, IMO it is likely to be more than one person.

What's your take on it out of interest?

EricPraline

Meanwhile, at the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade...

Concern was first raised in 2010 when it emerged that the official residence in Ottawa, Canada, had been refurbished to a luxury standard.

A jacuzzi, sauna, powder-room, art gallery, and wine cellar were all included in the revamp of the Rockcliffe property which dwarves the official residence of the Canadian prime minister.

At the time the expenditure was defended by the then foreign minister, Micheál Martin, who said overseas missions played an important role for the country.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/embassies-lose-tabs-on-refurbishment-projects-234277.html

Godge

PRAF wrote: »

I said that "(potentially) there are a group of senior civil servants who are interfering in the workings of the Dail". There is nothing definitive in this, however, I'd be amazed if it weren't true.

I'm just reading between the lines. Is Fiach Kelly that good of a journalist that he he uncovered this by chance? Does he just randomly go around issuing FOI requests on every Dail politician. Of course not. There is a source for his stories operating out of Dail Eireann. Given the volume of leaks, IMO it is likely to be more than one person.

What's your take on it out of interest?

There is a real disconnect in your post.

You say "potentially", you say "just reading between the lines" so that you don't have to back it up. Yet at the same time, you state the bit in bold. You could certainly get a job working for the Sindo with that logical leap.

The FOI request put in by Fiach Kelly would be quite simple:

"all documentation including correspondence (written and email) between civil servants relating to any trip abroad taken by John McGuinness when Junior Minister".

That is a bog-standard FOI request and was probably submitted in respect of a few Ministers. The problem for mcGuinness is that the journalist hit paydirt.

creedp

PRAF wrote: »

I said that "(potentially) there are a group of senior civil servants who are interfering in the workings of the Dail". There is nothing definitive in this, however, I'd be amazed if it weren't true.

I'm just reading between the lines. Is Fiach Kelly that good of a journalist that he he uncovered this by chance? Does he just randomly go around issuing FOI requests on every Dail politician. Of course not. There is a source for his stories operating out of Dail Eireann. Given the volume of leaks, IMO it is likely to be more than one person.

What's your take on it out of interest?

McGuinness has made a career out of hounding people for their prolifigate spending of public money and people are surprised that a journalist might actually have the pertinene to ask him about his own spending arrangements? But of course its much better to be sensationalist and to conjure up a dark conspirancy theory invlolving senior civil servants trying to bring down the State ...

As a matter of interest do you think it is appropriate for a guy whose role is to hound others about inappropriate spending to be defending his own record by saying sure it was the done thing at the time .. seems to be a reasonable defence for pretty much all the excesses of the time!

raymon

creedp wrote: »

McGuinness has made a career out of hounding people for their prolifigate spending of public money and people are surprised that a journalist might actually have the pertinene to ask him about his own spending arrangements? But of course its much better to be sensationalist and to conjure up a dark conspirancy theory invlolving senior civil servants trying to bring down the State ...

As a matter of interest do you think it is appropriate for a guy whose role is to hound others about inappropriate spending to be defending his own record by saying sure it was the done thing at the time .. seems to be a reasonable defence for pretty much all the excesses of the time!

So Mc Guinness is totally unsuitable for the role and has lost all credibility. But who can replace him ?? The post has to go to Fianna Fail , but just name one person from FF who could be trusted.

Cody Pomeray

Godge wrote: »

You say "potentially", you say "just reading between the lines" so that you don't have to back it up. Yet at the same time, you state the bit in bold. You could certainly get a job working for the Sindo with that logical leap.

The FOI request put in by Fiach Kelly would be quite simple:

"all documentation including correspondence (written and email) between civil servants relating to any trip abroad taken by John McGuinness when Junior Minister".

That is a bog-standard FOI request and was probably submitted in respect of a few Ministers. The problem for mcGuinness is that the journalist hit paydirt.

Funny how you went on to commit the same error of which you accuse another poster, i.e. of reaching a conclusion that is merely supported by possibility.

Perhaps Fiach Kelly submitted FOI requests for every committee member, minister, junior minister and related office holder. He certainly hasn't mentioned that, despite being subjected to scrutiny on his motivations on live tV. If that were the case, the issue would be put to bed. Why would he not mention this?

creedp

raymon wrote: »

So Mc Guinness is totally unsuitable for the role and has lost all credibility. But who can replace him ?? The post has to go to Fianna Fail , but just name one person from FF who could be trusted.

OK leave him there, I couldn't care less .. I was only responding to the point that there is deep and dark conspirancy theory developing to bring down the white knight saviour of the taxpayer. You're bottom line is that no FF politician, including McGuinness can be trusted .. would you limit that assertion to FFers?

Mr.Micro

raymon wrote: »

So Mc Guinness is totally unsuitable for the role and has lost all credibility. But who can replace him ?? The post has to go to Fianna Fail , but just name one person from FF who could be trusted.

WOD, lol.:D

raymon

creedp wrote: »

OK leave him there, I couldn't care less .. I was only responding to the point that there is deep and dark conspirancy theory developing to bring down the white knight saviour of the taxpayer. You're bottom line is that no FF politician, including McGuinness can be trusted .. would you limit that assertion to FFers?

I agree this conspiracy thing is ridiculous.
It's a simple case of a FF journalist stabbing a FF politician in the back in broad daylight here.

You ask if I limit my assertion to FF? No , there are bad eggs in every party. I would have to assess the individual on their merits. But FF are one party I can say I have no trust in.
I distrust FFers individually and collectively.

Godge

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Funny how you went on to commit the same error of which you accuse another poster, i.e. of reaching a conclusion that is merely supported by possibility.

Perhaps Fiach Kelly submitted FOI requests for every committee member, minister, junior minister and related office holder. He certainly hasn't mentioned that, despite being subjected to scrutiny on his motivations on live tV. If that were the case, the issue would be put to bed. Why would he not mention this?

I can't speak for now but when the FOI Act first came in, the place I worked at the time was regularly subject to "fishing" type FOI requests from journalists.

You sometimes see the same thing with PQs in the Dail.

It is only the ones that yield something turn into news articles. I remember spending time collating material to answer an FOI request made by a journalist on a sunday newspaper and then buying the newspaper for the following three Sundays to see whether he used any of the material. It was only later that I realised that while the information that we had given the journalist under FOI was interesting and informative, it wasn't newsworthy which was why an article based on it never appeared.

Finally, I didn't reach a conclusion that the information came from a routine FOI request unlike the way PRAF concluded it was a conspiracy. I suggested it was the most likely explanation and explained how it could have happened. He dreamed up a non-existent conspiracy without explaining how and why such a conspiracy would take place and said he would be amazed if it weren't true.

There are a number of other ways it could have happened. The journalist could have been chatting to McGuinness/another politician/a civil servant who mentioned the incident in the pub and that led to the FOI request. A FF backbencher could have known about it and spoke to the journalist. To sum up:

(1) routine FOI request gets information
(2) routine FOI request yields information that leads to second more specific FOI request
(3) Somebody - government politician (Minister or backbencher), opposition politician, senior civil servants, junior civil servant, former adviser - mentions the issue to journalist or journalist's friend who follows up with FOI request
(4) Group of senior civil servants meet over cigars and decide to collude in getting that McGuinness fellow (Who? say some) and deliberately give information to journalist.

The idea that a group of civil servants got together and colluded to nobble McGuinness is the least likely of all the explanations. I would be amazed if it were true because it goes against everything the civil service has stood for over the years. Also because of the scale of the corruption involved it would be a much bigger story than McGuinness's wanting to bring his wife away with him on a minor trip.

Cody Pomeray

Godge wrote: »

I suggested it was the most likely explanation and explained how it could have happened.

You suggested it was the most likely explanation but only explained how it was merely possible... this is the problem.

Everybody knows how FOI works, that's not up for debate.

The question is why you have any reason to believe your version of events is "the most likely explanation" - given that
(i) Fiach Kelly hasn't employed this simple explanation, even when quizzed on live TV and
(ii) such a defence, if used, would immediately have put this "conspiracy theory" about his journalistic integrity to rest.

creedp

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

You suggested it was the most likely explanation but only explained how it was merely possible... this is the problem.

Everybody knows how FOI works, that's not up for debate.

The question is why you have any reason to believe your version of events is "the most likely explanation" - given that
(i) Fiach Kelly hasn't employed this simple explanation, even when quizzed on live TV and
(ii) such a defence, if used, would immediately have put this "conspiracy theory" about his journalistic integrity to rest.

So you'd prefer to believe the story that senior civil servants have decided that McGuinness is a danger to their cushy existence and decided to tell a startling yarn that he travelled in the company of his wife while on official travel .. they must have been bursting at the seams to tell that one for a while now. I suppose it would go down well in a scene on Irish Pictorial Weekly.

PRAF

To the people who believe that this controversy just arose out of nowhere based on a speculative FOI request, are you for real? A govt TD is quoted on the record as saying there were moves afoot


“People dance around these things but the reality is everybody in this room knows why or what has been driving this the last couple of weeks,” Mr Deasy said.

Seeing as some of you seem to take Fiach Kelly at face value, I presume you read the Sindo yesterday which seemed to confirm that there was a plot to remove McGuinness from his post because he has been asking a few too many questions lately.

Interestingly the allegation was that it was the Taoiseach and other senior ministers who were making these moves. However, they would not be able to do so without the help of a complicit civil service.

Cody Pomeray

creedp wrote: »

So you'd prefer to believe the story that senior civil servants have decided that McGuinness is a danger to their cushy existence and decided to tell a startling yarn that he travelled in the company of his wife while on official travel

No, I have no idea as to the identity of the source.

I'm telling you it is scarcely credible that Fiach Kelly would have simply 'forgotten' to mention, or otherwise neglect to mention, an explanation such as as is being proposed.

Given the amount of political and media criticism of a witch-hunt, we really would have expected the Independent to raise such a simple explanation, if true.

This observation does not prove any positive fact. It simply diminishes the credibility of what Godge is proposing.

Godge

PRAF wrote: »

To the people who believe that this controversy just arose out of nowhere based on a speculative FOI request, are you for real? A govt TD is quoted on the record as saying there were moves afoot


“People dance around these things but the reality is everybody in this room knows why or what has been driving this the last couple of weeks,” Mr Deasy said.

Seeing as some of you seem to take Fiach Kelly at face value, I presume you read the Sindo yesterday which seemed to confirm that there was a plot to remove McGuinness from his post because he has been asking a few too many questions lately.

Interestingly the allegation was that it was the Taoiseach and other senior ministers who were making these moves. However, they would not be able to do so without the help of a complicit civil service.

The bit in bold is simply not true and reflects a lack of knowledge of the operation and adminsitration of the civil service, real life isn't like Yes Minister.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

No, I have no idea as to the identity of the source.

I'm telling you it is scarcely credible that Fiach Kelly would have simply 'forgotten' to mention, or otherwise neglect to mention, an explanation such as as is being proposed.

Given the amount of political and media criticism of a witch-hunt, we really would have expected the Independent to raise such a simple explanation, if true.

This observation does not prove any positive fact. It simply diminishes the credibility of what Godge is proposing.

Even if my most likely explanation is incorrect, I posted two other explanations which are more credible than the conspiracy theory approach. If you read the articles and the halo that surrounds Martin's words on the subject, it would be easier and simpler to suggest a FFer had a word with Mr. Kelly in the bar or a restaurant. If the job is an FF one and Martin has someone else in mind, getting rid of McGuinness in this way makes sense.

I repeat my point, the least credible explanation is the "senior civil servants in conspiracy to destroy McGuinness" one. It is laughable.

Sierra Oscar

Godge wrote: »

If the job is an FF one and Martin has someone else in mind, getting rid of McGuinness in this way makes sense.

Absolute nonsense. Martin has expressed confidence in McGuinness - if he wanted rid of him he would not have went and put his neck on the line all of last week.

Your dismissing others as being conspiracy theorists, but what you are hinting at is a conspiracy theory in itself. The fact is that there is now a broad consensus that McGuinness has been the subject of an attempted character assassination, and government TD's are on the record as saying that figures in government were responsible for pushing the story in the first instance.

raymon wrote: »

I agree this conspiracy thing is ridiculous.

Says he who then goes and posts a conspiracy of his own.

:rolleyes:

Cody Pomeray

Godge wrote: »

I repeat my point.

I have a feeling that's inevitable with you.

Godge

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Absolute nonsense. Martin has expressed confidence in McGuinness - if he wanted rid of him he would not have went and put his neck on the line all of last week.

Your dismissing others as being conspiracy theorists, but what you are hinting at is a conspiracy theory in itself. The fact is that there is now a broad consensus that McGuinness has been the subject of an attempted character assassination, and government TD's are on the record as saying that figures in government were responsible for pushing the story in the first instance.

No, I am just suggesting that an easier and simpler (and more plausible) conspiracy theory would see Martin leaking the information through a FF hack while at the same time praising mcGuinness in public but also pointing to his own clean record on the issue.

But I don't believe either conspiracy theory is likely.

The balance of probabilities is something like this in my opinion:

FOI work: 50%
Accidental tip-off to journalist: 35%
Deliberate tip-off by government advisor or politician: 10%
Leak or conspiracy theory by FF: 4%
Collusion by civil servants: 1%

raymon

FF hack stabs FF TD in the back repeatedly.
There is another story in the Independent today.

This is FF attacking itself.


The motives are unclear, but Fianna Fail and their journalistic wing aren't going to let this one go.

Sierra Oscar

raymon wrote: »

FF hack stabs FF TD in the back repeatedly.
There is another story in the Independent today.

This is FF attacking itself.


The motives are unclear, but Fianna Fail and their journalistic wing aren't going to let this one go.

Why don't you post a link to the story in question? You are quite clearly trying to make it appear that the story claims that McGuinness has come under attack from a Fianna Fáil figure - yet that is not what the story claims, nor has any journalist claimed that to date. It seems to be only in your head.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/mcguinnesss-suitability-for-banking-inquiry-questioned-29352172.html

raymon

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Why don't you post a link to the story in question? You are quite clearly trying to make it appear that the story claims that McGuinness has come under attack from a Fianna Fáil figure - yet that is not what the story claims, nor has any journalist claimed that to date. It seems to be only in your head.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/mcguinnesss-suitability-for-banking-inquiry-questioned-29352172.html

The story does not claim that he is under attack from a Fianna fail figure. This is not mentioned anywhere.

The journalist in question is a Fianna Fail cheerleader.

Very strange that they are targeting one of their own.

creedp

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I have a feeling that's inevitable with you.

If it is he's certainly in good company.

golfball37

The same people giving out about John McGuinness have been fawning over another Politicans wife on a paid up foreign junket for the last two days.

We do hypocrisy better than any other nation.

raymon

golfball37 wrote: »

The same people giving out about John McGuinness have been fawning over another Politicans wife on a paid up foreign junket for the last two days.

We do hypocrisy better than any other nation.

Who ?

kippy

raymon wrote: »

Who ?

Michelle Obama I assume...........The poster failing to realise the importance of the first lady..........as opposed to every Tom Dick and Harrys wife in Irish Politics......