McMurphy wrote: » Whoever thought it was a cute idea plonking a failed business owner, and a failed political figure onto the board of that charity made it "a political football" That's not on me I'm afraid.
smurgen wrote: » If FFG were serious about mental health would we need so many charities to plug the gap where government resources should be? "The budgetary allocation of €50 million for mental health is just 1% of the overall health budget for 2021 and is “totally inadequate” to meet the growing demand for services and support a new mental health strategy, the Psychiatric Nurses Association (PNA) has said"https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40065236.html
Bishop of hope wrote: » Sinn féin are thin on charitable donations Maryanne, but taking advantage of mental illness may well be part of their mechanism.https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mary-lou-mcdonald-wont-commit-to-giving-to-charity-any-of-47m-gifted-to-sinn-fein-by-ill-man-38777266.html
FrancieBrady wrote: » So Mary Lou doesn't want to virtue signal about what SF do with the money. Maybe she should wave it around for political advantage? We can all do that, 'look at me, shure I give them 10,000 a week, every week, look at me, amint I a good person and here's the proof'.
Nobotty wrote: » Whats that Francie? It looks like the letter we get from the church every year (except the amount) I don't wave it about
Bishop of hope wrote: » OK, I'm out of this one. I won't contribute any mór comments to you lads absolutely ridiculous bull**** on this subject. Just ****ing ridiculous.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Just demonstrating that some people virtue signal about charity donations and others like yourself and myself (incidentally) don't. The Indo article Bish posted is classic 'have you stopped beating your wife' territory. Ask a question when you don't get the answer you think you should, infer. A hallmark of bad or sinister journalism.
Bishop of hope wrote: » Just a pointer Francie to the depths SF supporters and by virtue probably the party's attitudes to anything or anybody that that doesn't toe their line. A nice little inside to the boloxology that that and your type of politics can be. A wake up to posters that I had some respect for previously. Just pathetic really, God help us, tiochaidh ar lá.
Deleted User wrote: » Rattled :pac: Seems to me,people do get paid form pieta house,wheter its the bould reggie deos is another qs,(which is somewhat irrelevant)
McMurphy wrote: » Regina has been asked to clarify whether she is being paid for her role, you would think a clear and decisive "no" would be the answer if she's legally not supposed to be. In other news - it's great to hear of all our resident FG and Green supporters being on boards of several charities (like Regina is), now might be the apt time for me to announce being on the board of the charity for retired and injured Santa's elves.
smurgen wrote: » Don't feel disappointed. Your respect means very little to me if it's any consolation.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » That really sums attitudes up Randall. Regina took risks, didn’t work out, put herself up for election and told it as it was. She paid the price for outing the various layers of scrotes who are gaming the system, by the cretins whose contribution is to sit on the sidelines and sling mud, nothing positive, nothing risky, just jockey their ‘support’ which is the entitlement brigade,to expect the money tree to keep blooming on the backs of those who get up early. Kinda know why you hate that kind of attitude, dude.
McMurphy wrote: » Anyone hear Callans Kicks last night? He ripped the absolute piss out of the Leo gate thing, but the thing that stole the show for me was his Michael/Danny Healy Rae skit. Go to 14 mins in :pac: https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/#/radio1/21861831
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Would’nt give that tosser any credence Randal. Meanwhile we have the Shinners wasting taxpayers coin on a stupid ‘confidence’ motion they know they can’t win. Certainly gives one a steer on what direction these negative tossers would try to drive the taxpayer if in the unlikely event they ever got near power.
smurgen wrote: » The only way you could see a demand for accountability as negativity is if you're a crook. As regards taxpayers coin it's essential those that leak confidential information are removed. They cannot be involved in contract or tendering work. Especially those that do it to benefit friends. There's no way to have taxpayers money is safe with such a person in government.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » You see dude, coming up with crud like that kind of crystallizes your mindset You splatter out a ream of generalized cock, and disregard the fact that this issue has been dealt with and is now history. What’s happening here is a bunch of negatives trying to extend an issue which has been dealt with. Fauxe indignation and fauxe concern is all this rubbish is about..