nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

Beasty

Following on from this thread

Threadbans carry over

Please remain civil or posting privileges will be removed

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Brendan Bendar

Solutionking wrote: »

So you think they shouldn't check social welfare?

Not sure how you connect the children hospital and social welfare fraud

These lads think that checking on social welfare is akin to serious crime, King.

That anyone who tries to shine a light on abuse of taxpayers money is some kind of quisling.

Just marking your card, kohsan.

smurgen

Solutionking wrote: »

So you think they shouldn't check social welfare?

Not sure how you connect the children hospital and social welfare fraud

The difference in the discretion that is allowed with some involved with government contracts is a startling contrast to the authoritarian style monitoring of those less well off in society.

Solutionking

smurgen wrote: »

Zero accountability in this country it seems. Sure they'll check your social welfare entitlements if you're flying to another country but run one of the biggest projects with highest overspend and you don't even have to produce meeting minutes.

https://twitter.com/ciananbrennan/status/1324475277318279169?s=19

So you think they shouldn't check social welfare?

Not sure how you connect the children hospital and social welfare fraud

[Deleted User]

smurgen wrote: »

Zero accountability in this country it seems. Sure they'll check your social welfare entitlements if you're flying to another country but run one of the biggest projects with highest overspend and you don't even have to produce meeting minutes.

https://twitter.com/ciananbrennan/status/1324475277318279169?s=19

Not if you’re traveling to the UK.

Nobotty

smurgen wrote: »

Zero accountability in this country it seems. Sure they'll check your social welfare entitlements if you're flying to another country but run one of the biggest projects with highest overspend and you don't even have to produce meeting minutes.

https://twitter.com/ciananbrennan/status/1324475277318279169?s=19

All that information has to be released to the public accounts Committee when its requested
Theres no hiding from them

smurgen

Zero accountability in this country it seems. Sure they'll check your social welfare entitlements if you're flying to another country but run one of the biggest projects with highest overspend and you don't even have to produce meeting minutes.

https://twitter.com/ciananbrennan/status/1324475277318279169?s=19

FrancieBrady

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Francie, you keep saying that I am trying to “derail” threads.

You accuse me of ‘decrying ’ moderation on radio programmes.

Guilty m’lud, as charged- that’s my opinion.

Listen to the programme.

As I said before, the person who fly tips rubbish has not credibility campaigning against others who do the same thing.

It’s a discussion Francie, if you have a dog in the fight, you have to expect he will get attacked

You can’t attack a party for doing one thing on one thread and defend another party for the same thing on another thread.

Totally ridiculous.

Who did I attack?

I never 'attack' on foot of allegations brendi. That is the fiefdom of others here.

I merely assumed that this was trouble for The greens (as it would be for any other party) and asked about actions taken.

Instead of addressing that you pointed at another party.

Brendan Bendar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, I do believe it was discussed on the relevant thread. As this is a thread about the 3 government parties maybe you should head to that thread and discuss it.

For a guy who decries the moderation on radio programmes and the inability of presenters to keep discussions on topic, you sure make a huge effort to derail discussions around here.

Francie, you keep saying that I am trying to “derail” threads.

You accuse me of ‘decrying ’ moderation on radio programmes.

Guilty m’lud, as charged- that’s my opinion.

Listen to the programme.

As I said before, the person who fly tips rubbish has not credibility campaigning against others who do the same thing.

It’s a discussion Francie, if you have a dog in the fight, you have to expect he will get attacked

You can’t attack a party for doing one thing on one thread and defend another party for the same thing on another thread.

Totally ridiculous.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

I answered in my previous post. I wasnt aware of one. Are you?

No.

Perhaps some of the Green supporters might know.

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't ask you about 'the specific case'.

I asked has the party leader addressed the allegations from different sources of sexual harassment, bullying and sexism with in the party?

You are either aware of a statement or you aren't.

I answered in my previous post. I wasnt aware of one. Are you?

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

As you are aware I have no affiliations or like for any political party. I don't know of any party that comments on actions taken in an ongoing sexual harassment case. Similarly its very rare that they comment on a concluded sexual harassment case.

But to answer your question I am not aware of one.

I didn't ask you about 'the specific case'.

I asked has the party leader addressed the allegations from different sources of sexual harassment, bullying and sexism with in the party?

You are either aware of a statement or you aren't.

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Apparently, yes they are. Are they being investigated though.

Are you aware of a statement from the leader about what actions will or won't be taken.

Other leaders have addressed these issues, as I have said, outlining what will be done.

If you aren't aware of one, that's fine.

As you are aware I have no affiliations or like for any political party. I don't know of any party that comments on actions taken in an ongoing sexual harassment case. Similarly its very rare that they comment on a concluded sexual harassment case.

But to answer your question I am not aware of one.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

Are the allegations not ongoing?

Apparently, yes they are. Are they being investigated though.

Are you aware of a statement from the leader about what actions will or won't be taken.

Other leaders have addressed these issues, as I have said, outlining what will be done.

If you aren't aware of one, that's fine.

joeguevara

Ten of Swords wrote: »

joeguevara and grayzer75 let's get back to the topic of the thread please

Apologies.

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I specifically asked has the leader addressed these allegations (nobody has been named) and outlined a course of action?

One of the allegations by the way was that the party has no policy on harassment.

Are the allegations not ongoing?

Ten of Swords

joeguevara and grayzer75 let's get back to the topic of the thread please

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

I have never heard of any party publicly discussing actions prior to a final decision. Similar to lets say a private company. As it would be a breach of innocent until proven guilty. Do you have any examples? Do you know whether they had indeed made any formal complaints?

I don't think its considered victim blaming if a person is called out on going to media without concluding appropriate channels.

I specifically asked has the leader addressed these allegations (nobody has been named) and outlined a course of action?

One of the allegations by the way was that the party has no policy on harassment.

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I disagree about that. It was an a clear attempt by Brendi to divert as the poster made absolutely no comment on what was claimed/alleged about the government party involved.

So you claim that the alleged victim was 'seeking attention'? Would that be defined as 'victim blaming'?

3-4 women have complained of a

Now correct me if I am wrong, but when complaints were made in other parties the leaders very much publicly addressed them outlining what actions would be taken.

Has this happened with these allegations do you know?

I have never heard of any party publicly discussing actions prior to a final decision. Similar to lets say a private company. As it would be a breach of innocent until proven guilty. Do you have any examples? Do you know whether they had indeed made any formal complaints?

I don't think its considered victim blaming if a person is called out on going to media without concluding appropriate channels.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

At least you didn't call someone a creep Francie. I dont think it was an attempt to divert, just a comparison as a question was asked what the member knew of actions taken. Firstly there is no evidence that an allegation was made only someone looking for media attention. Secondly it would not be made public, same way that someone working in a company wouldnt know that HR actions are in force. But I think you already knew that.

But my dear friend Grayzer seemed to use the Is it a SF thread immediately without warrant while regularly raising FF/FG out of context in the SFR thread to deflect from real questions.

I disagree about that. It was an a clear attempt by Brendi to divert as the poster made absolutely no comment on what was claimed/alleged about the government party involved.

So you claim that the alleged victim was 'seeking attention'? Would that be defined as 'victim blaming'?

3-4 women have complained of a

"toxicity" within the party, including issues with sexism and complaints procedures

Now correct me if I am wrong, but when complaints were made in other parties the leaders very much publicly addressed them outlining what actions would be taken.

Has this happened with these allegations do you know?

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No issue with somebody referencing other parties at all, and would never describe it as an attempt to divert.

What was done here was a blatant attempt to deflect from the actions or inactions of an on topic government party.

At least you didn't call someone a creep Francie. I dont think it was an attempt to divert, just a comparison as a question was asked what the member knew of actions taken. Firstly there is no evidence that an allegation was made only someone looking for media attention. Secondly it would not be made public, same way that someone working in a company wouldnt know that HR actions are in force. But I think you already knew that.

But my dear friend Grayzer seemed to use the Is it a SF thread immediately without warrant while regularly raising FF/FG out of context in the SFR thread to deflect from real questions.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

Your last two posts on the SF thread are about FF/FG. Make up your mind.

No issue with somebody referencing other parties at all, and would never describe it as an attempt to divert.

What was done here was a blatant attempt to deflect from the actions or inactions of an on topic government party.

grayzer75

joeguevara wrote: »

Apologies for pointing out your hypocrisy on a public forum.

Nope. Wrong. Creep.

joeguevara

grayzer75 wrote: »

Your creeping astounds me.

Apologies for pointing out your hypocrisy on a public forum.

grayzer75

joeguevara wrote: »

On my lunch in work.

Your hypocrisy astounds me.

Your creeping astounds me.

joeguevara

grayzer75 wrote: »

It was answering a post relating to social housing in the north. Go back to bed.

On my lunch in work.

Your hypocrisy astounds me.

grayzer75

joeguevara wrote: »

It was specifically in relation to FF/FG.

It was answering a post relating to social housing in the north. Go back to bed.

joeguevara

grayzer75 wrote: »

Not that it's any of your business but the last post was about social housing you. Creep.

It was specifically in relation to FF/FG.

And how dare you call someone a creep for having a look at your hypocrisy when you were also randomly posting abount another posters questions.

grayzer75

joeguevara wrote: »

Your last two posts on the SF thread are about FF/FG. Make up your mind.

Not that it's any of your business but the last post was about social housing you. Creep.

McMurphy

joeguevara wrote: »

Your last two posts on the SF thread are about FF/FG. Make up your mind.

One lad in here was bemoaning the official FG Twitter feed being linked to in the actual FG thread. :pac:

FrancieBrady

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Seems to go on in most parties Francie

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2020-sinn-f-in-has-not-learned-lesson-over-bullying-claims-wtzrq5xm6

Can you as a supporter point to any action taken?

Yes, I do believe it was discussed on the relevant thread. As this is a thread about the 3 government parties maybe you should head to that thread and discuss it.

For a guy who decries the moderation on radio programmes and the inability of presenters to keep discussions on topic, you sure make a huge effort to derail discussions around here.