FrancieBrady wrote: » You said there would be loads of 'comparisons' made. I compared the leaders. MON of SF and RObert Swann of the UUP are performing better than Boris Johnson of the Tory's and Arlene Foster of the DUP in their area of responsibility and positions. Leo Varadkar is performing very well in his. That would tally with my opinion actually. Is there anything else to 'compare'?
all about the mane wrote: » Yes.i.did. Have.another.look...
FrancieBrady wrote: » ?? You posted a link and said nothing about it.
all about the mane wrote: » Point made and backed up with link. Try to keep up
FrancieBrady wrote: » So you have no 'point' to make. OK
FrancieBrady wrote: » Jaysus jh79...he was processing the payment. He had an agreement, contracts would probably have being signed before he hit send on that payment. You are looking for malice were even the UUP don't see it. :rolleyes:
all about the mane wrote: » Jaysus francie, go back and read the thread for feck sake
Pkiernan wrote: » I haven't seen or heard anything from Mary Lou, Slab Murphy and other good Republicans in ages. What's going on?
FrancieBrady wrote: » The point being that MON of SF and RObert Swann of the UUP are seen to be performing better than Boris and Arlene in their positions and area of responsibilities. What do you think the point is?
jh79 wrote: » On MON 's part fair enough but CM said he never mentioned signed contracts to anyone yet still announced the deal was done. So what's the explanation for his part in this?
FrancieBrady wrote: » As I said, somebody using the wrong terminology seems to be the extent of the issue here.
all about the mane wrote: » Francie missing the point again
jh79 wrote: » I can only offer my opinion on his motivations for announcing it prior to contracts being finalised. Only he can explain why he messed it up. Another explanation would be him and MON not being very good at their jobs.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The reaction in the UK and NI was too slow...why? In NI because the DUP took the usual, back Westminister line. Who has polled ahead of Boris and Arlene on that poll? Take your time. Leo is the leader of a different jurisdiction and his caretaker gov. is doing well and it is reflected in that poll. I would imagine he'd be in the same position in a poll here...maybe higher, if the same question was asked.
FrancieBrady wrote: » No, the conspiracy theory was you suggesting he did it for vanity/political oneupmanship reasons. That hasn't stuck so you may withdraw it, if you are man/woman enough. I never accused the HSE of anything...conspiracy or incompetence.
all about the mane wrote: » Poor francie. Have a good read. You’ll see loads of comparisons being made based on the findings. #spoonfeedinghttps://www.irishnews.com/coronavirus/2020/03/31/news/nationalists-almost-twice-as-likely-as-unionists-to-say-covid-19-response-too-slow--1884490/?fbclid=IwAR1VPiltMlwBWmhDOc-kWzRd2xFBdCBtXxkZbz9QRmaGfeF3bZd3ypiE5k8
jh79 wrote: » He said that Ms O’Neill’s claim that an order had been placed “was in fact correct – we had in fact placed an order; at no stage had I said anything about signing contracts. I said we had placed an order.” When asked about comments from Justice Minister Naomi Long and Ms O’Neill about the supposed order, he said: “I can’t account for the interpretation of what I say by other people...” To be fair the conspiracy angle was you suggesting a need for transparency from the HSE. SF made a balls of it end of.
FrancieBrady wrote: » How the f*** do you know what he told her? What he said from day one seems to be now accepted. MON used the wrong term. Unfortunate, but I think the big conspiracy theory here is in the bin. As I said at the start, I was perplexed as to what was in it for him or MON to gloat/brag when it was going to become evident very quickly there was nothing coming. It's not credible to believe that it was anything other than a cockup around terminology.
jh79 wrote: » PM is more culpable in my opinion. He knew that he only had an agreement and not an actual signed contract, he should of told MON that it was only an agreement.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Oh FFS. Poor poor you. Lordy! :D
FrancieBrady wrote: » ??? You didn't believe what he had to say. I didn't know if he was telling the truth. How do you normally arrive at the truth of what happened? How does it work in a court? You GET both sides of the story. If the HSE said nothing was agreed then that contradicts Murphy's story and you believe whoever you want to. As it turns out it seems it was agreed and went south as Murphy said and it was MON using the word 'contract' that sparked the confusion. She should be more precise in future.
jh79 wrote: » If you believed the HSE didn't do anything wrong why are you asking for transparency from them? He announced the order before it was finalised, it's up him and SF to explain why they did this before the final sign off.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I NEVER said it was an issue with the HSE. All I said was, that in the interests of transparency, the HSE should say what happened at their end. Another lie/misrepresentation amid a plethora of them on here. You guys are a disgrace to honest debate. And in case you don't understand, NOBODY can assess if somebody 'has done their best' until they know what it was that was done. Hence the reason people are asking questions.
jh79 wrote: » So you agree it was poor communication and a lack of diligence on the part of the SF ministers rather than an issue with the HSE?Mr Aiken concluded by saying that, having heard the evidence, he was “content” and had “no doubt that you were doing your best and were trying to do your best in particularly trying circumstances”. He made an understandable mistake in the circumstances maybe you should show the same level of understanding to our Ministers.Mr Murphy replied: “Well, I think that anybody who places an order like that from China is basing it on the fact that there are people on the ground to try to establish the quality of it, the quantity of it and...we were operating on the back of an established supply line.” That shows a lot of naivety and lack of understanding of logistics in healthcare on his part to assume a team where on the ground especially for an established supply line.
FrancieBrady wrote: » So this whole thing was about a 'contract' or an 'agreement' and the interpretation of same. Michelle O'Neill used the wrong term - what an appaling blunder, off with her head. He seems to have satisfied the moderate Unionist anyhow: Interesting in his answers that he understood that there were people on the ground monitoring the quality of the items and that it was an 'established supply chain'.
all about the mane wrote: » It’s an assessment of each leader. These are then all put on the same graph to allow comparison. This is really simple stuff francie
FrancieBrady wrote: » What does, 'How has each performed in the context of their own position and responsibilities?' mean to you?
all about the mane wrote: » Then you need to look harder
jh79 wrote: » https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coronavirus-conor-murphy-denies-misleading-assembly-over-ppe-1.4224390https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/coronavirus-hse-confirms-no-joint-order-for-ppe-with-northern-ireland-1.4220378https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/when-starting-pay-ps170m-ppe-stormont-minister-was-told-it-wasnt-coming-2533723 Bit more detail above. SF simply jumped the gun before the order was finalized to try and show they were in control of the situation. MON claimed a contract had been signed, PM says he never said a contract was signed just an order placed. Did MON see a signed contract or did his department say one was signed? SF made a mess of it, HSE has no questions to answer.
Mr Aiken concluded by saying that, having heard the evidence, he was “content” and had “no doubt that you were doing your best and were trying to do your best in particularly trying circumstances”.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4b1a2e86cedae1628937f4503f2281da.svg)
