Fann Linn wrote: » More leaks in this govt than in the Lusitania. You only have to go on Twitter anytime there is a Cabinet meeting to know what's gonna come out. Then again, con#idering all govt parties hired media goons as advisors is anyone surprised by this?
golfball37 wrote: » Minister O Gorman is irate that someone leaked the mother and baby home report to the media. The leak could only have come from cabinet ultimately. How did he vote on the confidence motion about a current member leaking confidential information again?
I am writing to you in light of coverage today of the Final Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes, which is to be published on Tuesday. It was always my intention that survivors should be the first to hear of the main conclusions of the Commission’s Report, and the actions the Government plan to take on foot of it. My Department has worked hard to maintain the confidentiality of the Report prior to publication, and to arrange for the first public airing of its contents to be with survivors in the online forum being hosted by the Taoiseach and myself on Tuesday, following the Cabinet meeting. I was deeply angered to see details of the reported leaked in a newspaper this morning. I am very sorry that many of you have found out elements of the Report in this way. It is not acceptable. My Department will be engaging colleagues across Government to ensure that no further information becomes public until the official publication on Tuesday.
Wesekn. wrote: » And the independent then monetises the story
Bowie wrote: » Its ridiculous. This government has no credibility.
smurgen wrote: » Probably leaked intentional knowing the controversy of a leak would help distract from the contents and Covid catastrophe. Disgusting news management. All at the expense of victims.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I wonder has the penny dropped with Roderick that if you want to stop leaking of documents you should not be involved in circling the wagons to avoid sanctioning a minister who confesses to leaking documents.https://www.thejournal.ie/roderic-ogorman-angered-mother-and-baby-home-report-5321335-Jan2021/?utm_source=twitter_short
blanch152 wrote: » Sorry, don't buy that at all. A true "all-island" approach would see the same policies adopted North and South. However, Sinn Fein simultaneously oppose whatever the Irish government want and whatever the DUP want, just from a position of opposition for opposition's sake. A truly cynical approach to people dying - but not unfamiliar to Sinn Fein. The "all-island" approach proposed by Sinn Fein is purely for political purposes, to create an illusion of a unitary political unit. It is cynical, it is opportunistic, and it does nothing to save lives, only sow further division. Anyone who is not a SF supporter can see this clearly.
smurgen wrote: » So political sources who in the space of a few weeks went from respecting survivors so much we have to seal the records have now anonymously leaked the mother and baby homes report to the Sunday Independent. Jesus wept what a government.
FrancieBrady wrote: » It was clear as day the government were taking a 'balanced' decision. How were projections of 1200 per day around Christmas balanced christy? Exactly they weren't in fact 'balanced', they were ignored. And people are dying and paying a high price for that. That is the criticism. You can waffle on as much as you want...that is my last word with you on it.
christy c wrote: » It was as clear as day that advice was being ignored, the advice wasn't given for the sake of it. It would stand to reason that things would get worse if recommendations were not followed. You, the government, or the opposition parties cannot hide behind that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » And it turned out they ignored projections that turned out to be spot on, almost to the day - over 1000 cases per day by Christmas day. What is it you fecking want here christy??? I wasn't aware of the data those projections were based on at the time nor was Alan Kelly and I presume the rest of the opposition parties. Please read what is being said. FFS it's a joke the way you divert into this interrogative nonsense.
christy c wrote: » I'm asking you questions because you made a statement below that is complete rubbish. The government did ignore the advice, and that was abundantly clear at the time. "Everybody sane (I include myself in that) 'welcomed' the decision to open up. BUT it was based on the government not ignoring the data or the advice."
FrancieBrady wrote: » Why are you interrogating me christy? You agree the decision was wrong. But you are trying to stop anyone saying that. Weird defence.
christy c wrote: » What were you aware of? Were you aware of the Government ignoring advice as per the article I linked?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Go find Leo's explanation of that. They balance the risk. I was unaware that the data contained projected figures of over a 1000 cases a day by Christmas.
christy c wrote: » How was it balanced if ignoring expert advice? As I said, it was plain as day that this is what they were doing.
is_that_so wrote: » They were told by NPHET on the Thursday that Level 3 was fine, on Saturday that Level 4 was being considered and that morphed into a Level 5 by Sunday. That's not good communication at all.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Not sure which bit of 'I thought the government had made a balanced decision' you don't understand christy.
christy c wrote: » I am not the one being dense, you completely missed the fact that the easing of restrictions was going against advise, despite it being national news. That decision by the government was wrong, and people were aware that it was not the recommended action.
FrancieBrady wrote: » No christy...not sure why you are being so dense on this. I thought the government had made a 'balanced decision'. They hadn't, they made a hugely mistaken one and they are being held to account for that. I, the people, the opposition etc are not the ones ultimately responsible...the buck does not stop with me, the people, or the opposition, it stops with those tasked/elected to make a 'balanced' decision. They got it tragically wrong, it wasn't a 'balanced' decision at all, and people are dying as a result.
Deleted User wrote: » Don’t make excuses for their nonsense. Being passionate about people exercising personal responsibility isn’t in any way, shape or form the same as a Covid denier.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Don’t make excuses for their nonsense. Being passionate about people exercising personal responsibility isn’t in any way, shape or form the same as a Covid denier.
christy c wrote: » I know what thread it is. And I have said it was a huge mistake. I took issue with your statement and have made a revised one based on our discussion. Do you agree with the wording below: "I 'welcomed' the decision to open up. BUT it was based on the government not ignoring the data or the advice. I was completely unaware that the government were going against advice and data despite it making national headlines". If you accept we can move on.
