irishbucsfan wrote: » I’d imagine they want to hear that they can all invest here for absolutely nothing, and we’ll throw money and shamrocks and pots of gold at them. That doesn’t mean we should do it for them.
irishbucsfan wrote: » None of those things are remotely the same. The government should facilitate the private sector where it suits the Irish people, not take their orders from it. That’s exactly what has happened here. Telling stories about stepping in on top of a renewable energy program at the behest of a foreign billionaire has embarrassed a lot of people. You’d think a minister for tourism would have better judgement, but I suppose he hasn’t really shown that in his other briefs either. It may not have embarrassed you, fair play, but it’s headline news for a reason and has completely undermined the trip. The Americans probably won’t bat an eye because their system is completely under the thumb of the private sector. Ours shouldn’t be though and the leader of our government has let us down by trying to paint the picture that it is.
irishbucsfan wrote: » No one is remotely surprised that ministers get involved. Obviously they shouldn’t be getting involved if they were following the rules as has been pointed out this morning, but we know they are.
stephen_n wrote: » Do you have a viable alternative to FDI, or are you just another hurler on the Ditch?
prawnsambo wrote: » Is this a first? :pac:
[Deleted User] wrote: » It's headline news because people love to complain about the Government, warranted or not. It will sell papers and clicks regardless of whether the accusations have substance. And the government was facilitating the Irish people. Everyone employed in Dunbeg along with the other local businesses that benefit from the Tourism. I can't stand Trump and I'm no fan of Leo but this is a laughable and petty attempt to create news. For all we know Leo asked the planning authority to consider local tourism in their decision. As minister for Tourism that is his brief.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I’d be interested to know how installing wind farms would affect tourism negatively. Particularly in contrast to the benefit of renewable energy on our environment and it’s benefit to our tourism industry. Where are you getting that information from? I’m sure Leo had a very thorough report done on that before inserting himself into the situation.
irishbucsfan wrote: » What are you on about? Have I said we should just scrap foreign investment somewhere and just forgotten that I wrote it? This is a case where a locally owned company invested a lot of money into renewable energy and were directly opposed, off the books, by a minister under the orders of a foreign owned golf course. Do you have an alternative for developing Irish business? Do you have an alternative for renewable energy? Or is a foreign owned golf course more important to the nation?
Zzippy wrote: » A large proportion of people consider wind turbines a blight on the landscape. Whether you agree or not, it's not hard to see how that would affect tourism.
irishbucsfan wrote: » On another note, I’ve always wondered if renewable energy is a necessary long term alternative, why aren’t we working with Irish companies to try to improve the appearance of wind farms? Wonder if there’s an avenue for that, do they have to be big ugly white things in order to work?!
Podge_irl wrote: » Under the orders :rolleyes: He was the Minister for Tourism. He received concerns from the owner of a large tourist business and made some inquiries to help alleviate his concerns. I have little doubt the Minister for the Environment was pushing the planning permission for another private company.
irishbucsfan wrote: » He was under the orders. He specifically spoke about how direct Trump was in their conversations. Does anyone really think the conversation was Trump voicing his concerns?! This is Donald Trump we’re talking about, there’s quite a bit of coverage of him in the media if anyone is unaware of his character.
Podge_irl wrote: » I am fully aware of his public character yes. He was not under the orders. He could easily have told him to go **** himself. That, of course, while cathartic probably would not have been the most sensible thing to do - particularly given the sensitive nature of the person he was dealing with. Shock horror - in public office you deal with obnoxious, demanding people at times. Some times you end up placating them, sometimes you don't.
irishbucsfan wrote: » He didn’t though. He did exactly as he was told. Then he went over to America and reported on his good behavior to the rest of the class.
Podge_irl wrote: » He chose to make a phone call to placate the concerns of a businessman with tourism interests - which as far as I am concerned is within his brief. i.e. he was doing his job. If your philosophy in life is to refuse to do anything demanded of you out of spite you're not going to get very far.
prawnsambo wrote: » Lots of thing we* don't know here: Was it an unreasonable request? And what exactly was the request? Did the request have a direct result on the planning decision? Did the development go ahead somewhere else? *I really mean me.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I didn’t say he should have refused to do it out of spite. He should absolutely not have done it because he was asked to however. He should have done it because on the weight of evidence it was the right thing to do for the people of Ireland. He didn’t even, according to his story, attempt to collect that evidence. And the fact this all happened off the books makes it extremely unsettling and unpalatable.
Podge_irl wrote: » Well at least we've gone from "ordered to" to "asked to". His brief was tourism and I would argue he does not need to take a holistic approach to the issue. That is for the planning board to do. There is also no indication whatsoever that he pressured the council into making any decision. A businessman called Leo. Leo called someone on the council. Turns out the project had loads of objections and given the history of these things in Ireland was always likely to get turned down. Worth noting that ABP upheld the decision without any nefarious intervention from Leo. The response to it has been hysterical and embarrassing as far as I'm concerned.
irishbucsfan wrote: » Why on earth would our minister for tourism not take a holistic approach to this, given our environment and landscape is the single biggest draw in tourism to Ireland? Catherine Murphy put it right in her statement. This is not normal politics and we shouldn’t just believe it is because they tell us it is. It’s exactly the sort of backhanderism we need to eliminate from our political culture.
prawnsambo wrote: » Does this not depend on what Leo was asked? If he was asked a simple "what's the story, is planning going to be approved?", which question he then put to the CC, then it's hardly worth getting our knickers in a twist over. If on the other hand it's "Can this be stopped?" which then was translated to the CC as "Can you stop this?", then we are indeed not talking about normal politics.
prawnsambo wrote: » In other Trump related news, Don Junior's wife is divorcing him. An uncontested divorce which means no fight over custody or money. Cynical me is wondering if this is a means of banking money away from pesky creditors.
Podge_irl wrote: » I would suggest she doesn’t know what a backhander is then. So no, she didn’t put it right.
Bazzo wrote: » The Trump organisation, of which Jr is now an executive director, was just subpoenaed for documentation by special counsel...
Bazzo wrote: » As for Leo, whatever about anything else I find it pretty pathetic that the Taoiseach feels the need to publicly ram his nose up anyone's hole, let alone that particular stain on humanity.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6081e4655739e0887aaf16222f88b015.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dd23f423fe14831a2a84d9f17c825ecc.svg)
