denis o brien takes out yet another high court action, this time against RTE/Pravda

Carawaystick

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Man you need to take off the tin foil hat. I just checked CRO and SIERRA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED Company # 105844 was incorporated on 19/02/1985 (over 30 years ago)

Consider the string unravelled -

gmc / sierra ltd. was registered on the 15th July 2013. sierra communications ltd. is not relevant to this.

Chips Lovell

It was a joint venture. The entity didn't have to exit prior to submission of tender.

Under EU procurement rules, it is not permissible to require groups of economic operators, bidding together as a consortium, to assume a specific legal form before a tender is awarded.

54and56

Playboy wrote: »

Are you smoking crack? In what world is bribing a public official to win a contract equate to not being a crook. It is the definition of a crook and its the type of behaviour we associate with countries we look down our nose at.

I don't look down my nose at any country or any person. That is bigoted behaviour but I understand why some people do and I feel sorry for them for holding such crass prejudicial opinions.

Who said bribing an official/politician isn't crooked behaviour? I certainly didn't and I don't condone it. What I've been saying is we need stronger laws to act as a deterrent which if broken result in prosecutions and punishment. DOB hasn't been charged with anything because there isn't enough evidence to charge him with anything. We may believe he is a crook but believing it and proving it are very different things.

Playboy wrote: »

Lowry wasn't a crook, he was worse than that, he betrayed the people who elected him for his own personal gain... a number of words come to mind and all of them a lot stronger than crook.

I fully agree with you yet his constituents have consistently re-elected him despite FG tossing him out of their party. What does that tell you about what the people of this country want and the standards they hold their public officials to?

54and56

Carawaystick wrote: »

gmc / sierra ltd. was registered on the 15th July 2013. sierra communications ltd. is not relevant to this.

Wrong.

Thanks for saving me 10 seconds of research there Jep

darkpagandeath

darkpagandeath wrote: »

http://europa.eu/youreurope/business/public-tenders/rules-procedures/index_en.htm

For all tenders, public authorities:

may not discriminate against a business because it is registered in another EU country
may not refer to specific brands, trademarks or patents when describing the characteristics of products & services they wish to purchase
may not refuse to accept supporting documents (certificates, diplomas, etc.) issued by another EU country, as long as they provide the same level of guarantee
must make all information regarding tenders available to all interested companies, regardless of what EU country they are registered in.

A public authority has the right to exclude your business from a call for tenders if it:

is bankrupt or being wound up
has suspended its activities or its activities are administered by a court
has been found guilty of grave misconduct
has not paid taxes or social security contributions
has made false declarations to a public authority.

Far from EZ best practice.

54and56

falan wrote: »

Do yourself a favour and type 'garda corruption' into Google and see what comes up...

Do it for the craic ;-)

What organisation of any size does not have a small percentage of individuals who behave in a corrupt manner? It's life. All we can do it keep tightening the rules, improve detection of corruption and elect politicians who will champion openness and transparency in public office but given Lowry's re-election time and time again it seems honesty and transparency don't rank very high when the electorate collectively decide who they want to represent them does it?

_Kaiser_

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

What organisation of any size does not have a small percentage of individuals who behave in a corrupt manner? It's life. All we can do it keep tightening the rules, improve detection of corruption and elect politicians who will champion openness and transparency in public office but given Lowry's re-election time and time again it seems honesty and transparency don't rank very high when the electorate collectively decide who they want to represent them does it?

It's true, the electorate has a big part to play in demanding better from our elected representatives and choosing people on merit and track record rather than name recognition, parish pump gombeenism or because mammy and daddy voted for them.

But weaknesses in the current selection process or oversight doesn't mean we excuse questionable behaviour until those shortcomings are fixed. You'll never catch everything, but where there are questions to be asked, they should be pursued fully.

darkpagandeath

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's true, the electorate has a big part to play in demanding better from our elected representatives and choosing people on merit and track record rather than name recognition, parish pump gombeenism or because mammy and daddy voted for them.

But weaknesses in the current selection process or oversight doesn't mean we excuse questionable behaviour until those shortcomings are fixed. You'll never catch everything, but where there are questions to be asked, they should be pursued fully.

Is that not a problem with the party though putting the same candidate in for realection. Odd in other countries anyone with a sniff of wrong doing gets booted from their political party. No here they keep getting voted in so the party want to guarantee seats over actual transparency.

falan

Je_suis_Jean wrote:

What organisation of any size does not have a small percentage of individuals who behave in a corrupt manner? It's life. All we can do it keep tightening the rules, improve detection of corruption and elect politicians who will champion openness and transparency in public office but given Lowry's re-election time and time again it seems honesty and transparency don't rank very high when the electorate collectively decide who they want to represent them does it?

Wow! There are many, many organisations who are not corrupt in any way.

54and56

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's true, the electorate has a big part to play in demanding better from our elected representatives and choosing people on merit and track record rather than name recognition, parish pump gombeenism or because mammy and daddy voted for them.

But weaknesses in the current selection process or oversight doesn't mean we excuse questionable behaviour until those shortcomings are fixed. You'll never catch everything, but where there are questions to be asked, they should be pursued fully.

No argument with you there providing they are pursued within the law and not by a lynching mob who seem to think that because it's DOB the laws of the land should be suspended. He's entitled to the same protections and due process as any other person. If there is enough evidence to charge him with a crime it should be done otherwise it should be dropped just as many many cases are dropped each day due to lack of evidence. We might all "know" deep down that the likelyhood is a crime was committed and the Moriarity Tribunal spend an awful lot of time and a huge amount of €'s investigating this but they still couldn't produce enough evidence to lead to a charge being made. That might be frustrating for some people with an anti DOB or anti "elite" (whatever that means) agenda but that's the ways the cards fell. He got away with it. It happens. Learn the lessons from it and implement change to make sure it can't happen again.

54and56

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Is that not a problem with the party though putting the same candidate in for realection. Odd in other countries anyone with a sniff of wrong doing gets booted from their political party. No here they keep getting voted in so the party want to guarantee seats over actual transparency.

You do know Lowry was kicked out of FG right and that he now stands and is repeatedly re-elected as an independent?

54and56

falan wrote: »

Wow! There are many, many organisations who are not corrupt in any way.

If there so many well established (more than 25 years) and sizeable organisations (say with at least 500 employees/staff/members) who have never ever in their entire history had any internal issue with corruption would you mind listing 5 of them?

falan

Je_suis_Jean wrote:

If there so many well established (more than 25 years) and sizeable organisations (say with at least 500 employees/staff/members) who have never ever in their entire history had any internal issue with corruption would you mind listing 5 of them?

Stupid question. ..next!

renegademaster

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

If they have enough to make it stick they should bring charges, what can they be waiting for?

He's the richest man in Ireland

Birneybau

Why are so many people on this thread trying to justify the actions of a clearly corrupt individual?

It's baffling, but then again, Denis has thousands of loyal employees.

54and56

falan wrote: »

Stupid question. ..next!

Predictable response about a stupid assertion which cannot be supported by any evidence.

Next.

54and56

Birneybau wrote: »

Why are so many people on this thread trying to justify the actions of a clearly corrupt individual?

It's baffling, but then again, Denis has thousands of loyal employees.

If it's so clear why hasn't he been charged with corruption?

54and56

renegademaster wrote: »

He's the richest man in Ireland

Is he not the richest man in Malta?

right back at ya!!

darkpagandeath

renegademaster wrote: »

He's the richest man in Ireland

No he is not. He does not live here.

hatrickpatrick

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

If it's so clear why hasn't he been charged with corruption?

Because in Ireland, the law does not apply to the upper echelons of the political elite. Simple as.

If this is not true, then questions have to be asked about why it is so widely perceived as being true. I posted a thread about this in the Politics Cafe a while ago - if all of the thousands of people who believe that this country maintains a toxic political elite whose actions are above the law and who are given preferential treatment in many forms are incorrect, and no such elite exists, then how have so many people been misled? Who is responsible for that?

Banjo String

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

What organisation of any size does not have a small percentage of individuals who behave in a corrupt manner? It's life. All we can do it keep tightening the rules, improve detection of corruption and elect politicians who will champion openness and transparency in public office but given Lowry's re-election time and time again it seems honesty and transparency don't rank very high when the electorate collectively decide who they want to represent them does it?

Like last time ?

Confronted with a spreading revolt among his own backbenchers the Taoiseach (below) finally put his hands up and admitted that he had appointed Seanad by-election candidate John McNulty to the board of IMMA.

This was, of course, stroke politics and cronyism in its most arrogant and barefaced manifestation.

The whole purpose of this shameful exercise was to boost John McNulty's credentials so that he would have sufficient qualifications for the Seanad's culture and education panel.

Turmoil

McNulty, who later resigned from IMMA's board after being nominated as a Seanad candidate, eventually withdrew from the Seanad by-election yesterday.

But the Taoiseach's statement was issued as a result of the growing turmoil caused by the affair within the party. The revolt was led by Fine Gael TD John Deasy, who launched a withering attack on Enda Kenny's style of authoritarian and dictatorial leadership.

To add to the Taoiseach's woes he then, seperately, had to contend with a document which showed that Phil Hogan knew of fund totalling some €40m to be spent on Irish Water's consultants, and that he had personally signed off on the spend.

Hogan has rejected this claim but it remains a very serious matter and could bring into question his suitability as a candidate for EU commissionership.

Of course, before the last general election in 2011 Enda Kenny campaigned against the previous crony-ridden Fianna Fail administrations.

He promised that if elected his government would herald in the dawn of a new political era in Irish politics.

patronage

He promised us that his guiding principal as a politician would be transparency, honesty and government free from petty parish pump politics.

He promised he would put an end to shady 'Tammany Hall' type political strokes, jobs for the boys culture and political patronage.

HandsomeDan

Birneybau wrote: »

Why are so many people on this thread trying to justify the actions of a clearly corrupt individual?

It's baffling, but then again, Denis has thousands of loyal employees.

The DOB defensiveness is strange.

Wouldn't put it passed the guy to have shills on a public forum.

falan

Je_suis_Jean wrote:

If it's so clear why hasn't he been charged with corruption?

Too much to lose I'd say. Too much influence. Never bite the hand that feeds you springs to mind.

darkpagandeath

falan wrote: »

Too much to lose I'd say. Too much influence. Never bite the hand that feeds you springs to mind.

The public purse is the one doing the feeding.

54and56

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because in Ireland, the law does not apply to the upper echelons of the political elite. Simple as.

If this is not true, then questions have to be asked about why it is so widely perceived as being true. I posted a thread about this in the Politics Cafe a while ago - if all of the thousands of people who believe that this country maintains a toxic political elite whose actions are above the law and who are given preferential treatment in many forms are incorrect, and no such elite exists, then how have so many people been misled? Who is responsible for that?

Such an easy argument to debunk - oh where to start.

You do know that repeating a falsehood many many times doesn't make it true right?

Thousands of people in Ireland believed the statue in Ballinaspittle was moving - did that make it true? Mass hallucination is pretty common.

Disgruntled angry people and begrudger's in general always like to have a poster boy they can vent their frustration at without letting either the facts or the law get in the way. DOB is currently that boy. Lucky him I guess.

54and56

HandsomeDan wrote: »

The DOB defensiveness is strange.

Wouldn't put it passed the guy to have shills on a public forum.

Oooh more tin foil hattery :eek:

HandsomeDan

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Oooh more tin foil hattery :eek:

The lady doth protest too much

_Kaiser_

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because in Ireland, the law does not apply to the upper echelons of the political elite. Simple as.

If this is not true, then questions have to be asked about why it is so widely perceived as being true. I posted a thread about this in the Politics Cafe a while ago - if all of the thousands of people who believe that this country maintains a toxic political elite whose actions are above the law and who are given preferential treatment in many forms are incorrect, and no such elite exists, then how have so many people been misled? Who is responsible for that?

It all goes back to the admiration of the "cute hoor" - something that hasn't gone away despite the damage it's done particularly in the last 7/8 years, but on an ongoing day-to-day basis as well.

There are far too many people out there who think that "pulling strokes" or getting one over on "the system" are perfectly acceptable as long as they benefit from it, and as a result they elect people with the same attitude - because they know that given the chance, they'd do exactly the same!

Everything runs on the "nod and a wink", "who you know/who you get" approach. Add in the "ah shure it'll be grand" mentality and it's no wonder the country is the mess it is when it comes to cronyism, incompetence and corruption.

Those who have the chance get out and don't look back.. those who are tied to this country by family or circumstance have to endure it because doing things right in this country only leaves you more exposed to cleaning up - and paying for - the shyte caused by the first group above.

54and56

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It all goes back to the admiration of the "cute hoor" - something that hasn't gone away despite the damage it's done particularly in the last 7/8 years, but on an ongoing day-to-day basis as well.

There are far too many people out there who think that "pulling strokes" or getting one over on "the system" are perfectly acceptable as long as they benefit from it, and as a result they elect people with the same attitude - because they know that given the chance, they'd do exactly the same!

Everything runs on the "nod and a wink", "who you know/who you get" approach. Add in the "ah shure it'll be grand" mentality and it's no wonder the country is the mess it is when it comes to cronyism, incompetence and corruption.

Those who have the chance get out and don't look back.. those who are tied to this country by family or circumstance have to endure it because doing things right in this country only leaves you more exposed to cleaning up - and paying for - the shyte caused by the first group above.

Well said.

As I've been arguing we need much stronger anti graft laws and prosecution of same PLUS we need a cultural change from secretly admiring the "cute hoor" to publicly shaming "cute hoor" behaviour. When someone pulls a small stroke they are smugly admired for getting one over on the big boys or whatever but when someone pulls a bigger stroke and gets away with it they are the worst in the world.

You can't beat double standards

stan larsen

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because in Ireland, the law does not apply to the upper echelons of the political elite. Simple as.

A more mundane explanation is I think that we require a high standard of proof before we find an individual guilty.

An unfortunate consequence of this is that you have to be a little bit dumb (successful business / political folk usually are not) or a but unlucky to get caught.