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

President Michael D Higgins’ €3,000 a night hotel stays

Options
1…34689…17

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Hitman3000 wrote: »
    There was no allegation in the article. Maybe read it. Rooms cost up to 3k a night. Craughwell has called for the office of President to be subject to FOI. I fully agree with him as a taxpayer whose money is being used to massage Higgins ego.




    for a non-allegation you seem to have spent a lot of time talking about it in this thread. I think this is the first time you have even mentioned FOI.


  • Options
    #153
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    BailMeOut wrote:
    This stupid articles in this rag is just click bait.


    You and others are at great lengths to also ignore or deflect from the lack of FOI regarding the office of President. Why do you think the taxpayer should be clueless as to how our money is spent?


  • Options
    #154
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    ohnonotgmail wrote:
    for a non-allegation you seem to have spent a lot of time talking about it in this thread. I think this is the first time you have even mentioned FOI.


    Have you read the article, a simple yes or no will suffice instead of a personal jibe?


  • Options
    #155
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    Similarly, you seem quite sure than only a €3,000-per-night suite could have provided the security and prestige that the president requires.
    No, I think you'll find I never said anything even remotely like that.

    I don't claim the breadth of knowledge on these matters that you do.
    I am questioning the entire purpose and cost of the president's trip to Switzerland, undertaken so that he could deliver a keynote address to a conference criticizing globalization and capitalism. Of what benefit was this undertaking to the Irish people? Why should the taxpayer be forking out lots of money so that Higgins can jet around the world airing socialist views that I'm fairly certain the majority of the population do not endorse?
    If you don't like it, vote for someone else. Simple.
    Hitman3000 wrote: »
    Whatever the cost we can be fairly sure he didn't pay it .
    A man on a business trip not paying his own expenses? That's unheard of!


  • Options
    #156
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    There’s probably a lot you could get Micky D on, and I don’t like the man. Although he is ok as a president.

    This is stupid though.

    Of course presidents stay in top hotels and suites within those hotels.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    xi5yvm0owc1s2b
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭xi5yvm0owc1s2b


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    You wouldnt get that from reading this thread. It is all about the €3000 a night hotel suite. Craughwell is a bitter little man who is best ignored. I'm disappointed the independent ran the article. If they really wanted to write an article about the president's office being exempt from FOI they should have done just that, not sink to the level of the Daily Mail.

    The subtitle of the article is "Office of President is exempt from Freedom of Information legislation." The entire body of the article is about efforts by Craughwell and the Irish Independent to obtain information about costs incurred due to the president's visit to Geneva.

    Higgins himself will not respond to Craughwell's requests on social media.

    The Office of the President did not respond to the Independent's questions for more than four weeks, and then made only a generic statement with no details about expenses.

    The Department of Foreign Affairs also refused to respond.

    The article concludes:
    The Office of the President is exempt from Freedom of Information legislation despite receiving more than €30m from taxpayers over the past seven years.

    Government departments are also prevented from releasing details of money they spend on the President's Office. Presidential candidates Pádraig Ó Céidigh and Gavin Duffy have said the office should be covered by the legislation.

    The real story here is about the opacity and lack of accountability from multiple government departments when it comes to releasing details about the president's expenses. If the taxpayer is expected to pump millions annually into the Office of the President, surely the public deserve greater transparency?


  • Options
    #158
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    He’s the President - do people really expect him to stay in squalor?

    Why is it that when someone does well for themselves or can afford the finer things in the country that people assume there must be dodgy dealings afoot?

    Michael D is the leader of our country and a fine leader at that. He deserves to and is entitled to be treated with the highest regard.

    Don’t any of you complainers try to tell me that you wouldn’t stay in such luxury if you could afford it.


  • Options
    #159
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    The whole point of the article is to argue that it shouldn't be exempt.

    Why should Higgins's office not be accountable for the taxpayers' money it spends?

    Of course Higgins wasn't spending personal funds. This is the same man who used the government jet to fly from Dublin to Kerry to attend a concert, at a cost to the taxpayer of over €11,000. He didn't pay out of his own pocket for that little jaunt either.

    How do people work out this cost? Is it the fuel? Because everything else with the private jet costs the same anyway.


  • Options
    #160
    Turnipman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Turnipman


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »

    He’s the President - do people really expect him to stay in squalor?


    In your monochrome view of the world is there really no middle ground between luxury and squalor?


  • Options
    #161
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,749 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    I can think of far worse uses of money that the President staying in the Presidential Suite.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    The subtitle of the article is "Office of President is exempt from Freedom of Information legislation." The entire body of the article is about efforts by Craughwell and the Irish Independent to obtain information about costs incurred due to the president's visit to Geneva.

    Higgins himself will not respond to Craughwell's requests on social media.

    The Office of the President did not respond to the Independent's questions for more than four weeks, and then made only a generic statement with no details about expenses.

    The Department of Foreign Affairs also refused to respond.

    The article concludes:



    The real story here is about the opacity and lack of accountability from multiple government departments when it comes to releasing details about the president's expenses. If the taxpayer is expected to pump millions annually into the Office of the President, surely the public deserve greater transparency?




    well then that is the article they should have written instead of the sub-Daily Mail ****e they did write.


  • Options
    #163
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Hitman3000 wrote: »
    You and others are at great lengths to also ignore or deflect from the lack of FOI regarding the office of President. Why do you think the taxpayer should be clueless as to how our money is spent?

    Maybe, but nothing to do with Micky D specifically.


  • Options
    #164
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    Higgins himself will not respond to Craughwell's requests on social media.
    It is beneath the dignity of the President to comment directly on such matters over Twitter. That's exactly why Craughwell is not Presidential material.
    The Office of the President did not respond to the Independent's questions for more than four weeks, and then made only a generic statement with no details about expenses.

    The Department of Foreign Affairs also refused to respond.
    They don't have to. So why is it a problem that they didn't?
    The real story here is about the opacity and lack of accountability from multiple government departments when it comes to releasing details about the president's expenses. If the taxpayer is expected to pump millions annually into the Office of the President, surely the public deserve greater transparency?
    Sure. The President doesn't make the law though. Why is this whole thing directed at Higgins and not at Simon Coveney, who has competence in this area?

    Maybe it's because it's not about FOI at all? Maybe it's about Craughwell's tantrum?


  • Options
    #165
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Hitman3000 wrote: »
    Have you read the article, a simple yes or no will suffice instead of a personal jibe?


    It was an observation not a jibe. You claim the article is about FOI yet that is not what you posted about.


  • Options
    #166
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Turnipman wrote: »
    In your monochrome view of the world is there really no middle ground between luxury and squalor?

    A president probably isn’t going to stay in the mid ranked room 615, executive suite with free coffee and a larger king sized bed. Breakfast not included.


  • Options
    #167
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    Higgins himself will not respond to Craughwell's requests on social media.


    We should be grateful that we have a president that does not demean the office by conducting it's business through twitter or instagram.


  • Options
    #168
    xi5yvm0owc1s2b
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭xi5yvm0owc1s2b


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Why is it that when someone does well for themselves or can afford the finer things in the country that people assume there must be dodgy dealings afoot?

    He's not affording anything. He's taking advantage of his position to jet around attending non-essential conferences, concerts, etc., staying in luxury hotels, and heaping expenses upon the taxpayer.

    E.g., flying from Dublin to Kerry on the government Learjet at a cost of over €11,000. Why is that necessary? So he can save a few hours in the car?


  • Options
    #169
    Turnipman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Turnipman


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    A president probably isn’t going to stay in the mid ranked room 615, executive suite with free coffee and a larger king sized bed. Breakfast not included.

    So nothing but the absolute best is appropriate for lifelong socialist Pres. Stumpy!

    Because he's worth it! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #170
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,907 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    It is ALL about the FOI exemption, nothing else. I'd guess there is quite a struggle going on about this, but it will require a change to FOI legislation to remove the exemption. Hmmm who will bring forward that Bill in the Dail?

    Taxpayers deserve better than a blanket NO Comment, Exempt!

    Whether you like Craughwell or not, he has raised an important issue, that might just grow legs in the Silly Season!


  • Options
    #171
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    He's not affording anything. He's taking advantage of his position to jet around attending non-essential conferences, concerts, etc., staying in luxury hotels, and heaping expenses upon the taxpayer.

    E.g., flying from Dublin to Kerry on the government Learjet at a cost of over €11,000. Why is that necessary? So he can save a few hours in the car?

    How did you cost that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Turnipman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Turnipman


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    We should be grateful that we have a president that does not demean the office by conducting it's business through twitter or instagram.


    Instead, he chose to demean the Office by slobbering all over Fidel Castro's corpse.


  • Options
    #173
    xi5yvm0owc1s2b
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭xi5yvm0owc1s2b


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    We should be grateful that we have a president that does not demean the office by conducting it's business through twitter or instagram.

    Er ... @presidentirl


  • Options
    #174
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    It is ALL about the FOI exemption, nothing else. I'd guess there is quite a struggle going on about this, but it will require a change to FOI legislation to remove the exemption. Hmmm who will bring forward that Bill in the Dail?

    Taxpayers deserve better than a blanket NO Comment, Exempt!

    Whether you like Craughwell or not, he has raised an important issue, that might just grow legs in the Silly Season!


    If he wanted to raise the issue he went about it arseways. Which is not in the least surprising given how much of an idiot he is.


  • Options
    #175
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Turnipman wrote: »
    In your monochrome view of the world is there really no middle ground between luxury and squalor?

    Of course there is but I fail to see why the head of state should stay in a 2 or 3 star mediocre hotel just because staying in anything better might make some folks jealous that they can’t afford to do the same (which is what I think the whining is really all about).


  • Options
    #176
    Turnipman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Turnipman


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    How did you cost that?

    The costings were provided by the Army Air Corps.


  • Options
    #177
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,211 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Luka Broad Bassist wrote: »
    Er ... @presidentirl


    Does he conduct his business through it? No he doesn't.


  • Options
    #178
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,777 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    'Because I'm worth it'.


  • Options
    #179
    DickSwiveller Returns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller Returns


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Of course there is but I fail to see why the head of state should stay in a 2 or 3 star mediocre hotel just because staying in anything better might make some folks jealous that they can’t afford to do the same (which is what I think the whining is really all about).

    Why not set an example?


  • Options
    #180
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Turnipman wrote: »
    So nothing but the absolute best is appropriate for lifelong socialist Pres. Stumpy!

    Because he's worth it! :rolleyes:

    The same with any president.

    I’m be surprised if the whole floor isn’t booked out in fact. Security etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Turnipman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Turnipman


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Of course there is but I fail to see why the head of state should stay in a 2 or 3 star mediocre hotel just because staying in anything better might make some folks jealous that they can’t afford to do the same (which is what I think the whining is really all about).

    In your monochrome view of the world is there really no middle ground between a 2 or 3 star budget hotel and a high-end five star hotel luxury suite?


Advertisement