The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

drdidlittle wrote: »

Can you post the link to the SF explanation on the whole FB issue?

No more than any other party, SF are unlikely to be answerable to a journalist nor random people on the internet.

Have SIPO and The Revenue requested answers? I'm not aware if they have.

celt262

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Pearse, the SF spokesperson on Finance, doesn’t know that he’s a PEP, and is therefore subject to higher levels of AML/KYC oversight. Oh dear. Maybe shouting at Revolut might make them change their mind??

https://twitter.com/pearsedoherty/status/1379368805793726465?s=21

Making the right fool of himself there.

[Deleted User]

celt262 wrote: »

Making the right fool of himself there.

Like it's something that all politicians have to do. Family members of senior bank employees have to do a variation on it as well. I can't believe he hasn't had to do it before.

Then he goes off and tries to make some sort of conspiracy theory/is this appropriate song-and-dance about it.

Now I've heard he isn't the sharpest knife in the block, but he really should have deleted it after the first response he got explaining that it was perfectly normal for a bank to ask a politician for this information. Then that Farrell SF TD pipped in to say she wouldn't open an account because of it.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like it's something that all politicians have to do. Family members of senior bank employees have to do a variation on it as well. I can't believe he hasn't had to do it before.

Then he goes off and tries to make some sort of conspiracy theory/is this appropriate song-and-dance about it.

Now I've heard he isn't the sharpest knife in the block, but he really should have deleted it after the first response he got explaining that it was perfectly normal for a bank to ask a politician for this information. Then that Farrell SF TD pipped in to say she wouldn't open an account because of it.

He actually asked a question in the Dáil about it in 2017.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2017-11-21/268/

This gaffe is way worse than Simon Harris with the 18 other Coronaviruses.

Thousands of Irish people work in financial services, how can this clown be responsible for them when he doesn't know something this basic?

Incompetent and unfit for office, he needs to be gone from the opposition front benches pretty quick.

walshb

Been saying it a while now. Politicians need to put the internet down. It’s too exposing for them..

Fann Linn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like it's something that all politicians have to do. Family members of senior bank employees have to do a variation on it as well. I can't believe he hasn't had to do it before.

Then he goes off and tries to make some sort of conspiracy theory/is this appropriate song-and-dance about it.

Now I've heard he isn't the sharpest knife in the block, but he really should have deleted it after the first response he got explaining that it was perfectly normal for a bank to ask a politician for this information. Then that Farrell SF TD pipped in to say she wouldn't open an account because of it.

From the two parties who featured so heavily in Moriarty I'm prepared to put up with a speed wobble from Doherty.

The double standards are great on here.

smurgen

a very cool kid wrote: »

This gaffe is way worse than Simon Harris with the 18 other Coronaviruses.

Thousands of Irish people work in financial services, how can this clown be responsible for them when he doesn't know something this basic?

Incompetent and unfit for office, he needs to be gone from the opposition front benches pretty quick.

Worse than someone inventing illnesses and cures that didn't exist managing a pandemic that was literally life and death for thousands?

Deleted User wrote: »

Like it's something that all politicians have to do. Family members of senior bank employees have to do a variation on it as well. I can't believe he hasn't had to do it before.

Then he goes off and tries to make some sort of conspiracy theory/is this appropriate song-and-dance about it.

Now I've heard he isn't the sharpest knife in the block, but he really should have deleted it after the first response he got explaining that it was perfectly normal for a bank to ask a politician for this information. Then that Farrell SF TD pipped in to say she wouldn't open an account because of it.

Sinn Fein spokesperson complains about money-laundering legislation shocker. The lads on the border must have been giving him a hard time about it. Sort it or we'll bring you to Slab.

Not sure what the issue is when you get engagement and an apology from the bank. Seems like a job well done to me.

https://twitter.com/PearseDoherty/status/1379458054165557249

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not sure what the issue is when you get engagement and an apology from the bank. Seems like a job well done to me.

https://twitter.com/PearseDoherty/status/1379458054165557249

Quite concerned about the use of a 10-year old child in this case.

Did Revolut disclose to Pearse that they were asking about a 10-year old child?

Or did Pearse reveal the age of a person to Revolut and to the public?

One or the other has serious GDPR questions to answer.

smurgen

And the issue is how do revolut know the name of his child? If they child doesn't have an account where did the information come from? Data gathered on children needs to be consented to by a parent or guardian under European laws.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rights-citizens/how-my-personal-data-protected/can-personal-data-about-children-be-collected_en

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite concerned about the use of a 10-year old child in this case.

Did Revolut disclose to Pearse that they were asking about a 10-year old child?

Or did Pearse reveal the age of a person to Revolut and to the public?

One or the other has serious GDPR questions to answer.

What are you asking me for?
This is what he said.

Thanks to Revolut for engaging with me today to resolve outstanding issues. Also glad to receive a phone call from Revolut apologising for asking questions about a minor who doesn’t have an account with them. Glad they are making changes to their system.

Revolut apologised. When you apologise, it's usually because you are wrong.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What are you asking me for?
This is what he said.

Revolut apologised. When you apologise, it's usually because you are wrong.

Depends on the amount of credibility you give Pearse. Given that he didn't know why he was subject to extra questioning, I wouldn't give him any.

Also, I don't think a Sinn Fein representative knows what an apology is. Revolut probably apologised for any upset that Pearse felt, but not for their actions. Pearse would have thought that was an apology.

smurgen

On a side note I went to open a trading account with Revolut and the detail in the questions seemed a bit OTT. Salary, job title, savings etc. Seemed a bit like data mining. I did not have that granular level of questions opening a Degiro account.

blanch152 wrote: »

Depends on the amount of credibility you give Pearse. Given that he didn't know why he was subject to extra questioning, I wouldn't give him any.

Also, I don't think a Sinn Fein representative knows what an apology is. Revolut probably apologised for any upset that Pearse felt, but not for their actions. Pearse would have thought that was an apology.

An apology and they are changing their systems.

That seems like a good day's work for any politician.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

An apology and they are changing their systems.

That seems like a good day's work for any politician.

Your faith is strong. Can't say I believe him, his credibility is in tatters, and that could be all made up to reassure the believers.

blanch152 wrote: »

Your faith is strong. Can't say I believe him, his credibility is in tatters, and that could be all made up to reassure the believers.

Well if he is lying, I'm sure Revolut will clear it up...until then....

They have to know details of anyone in his family who could have a bank account that could be used to send him money. He's a public representative and his finances should be held to a higher standard.

If his children had accounts anywhere else they'd be marked. I'm not sure what apology he got....

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well if he is lying, I'm sure Revolut will clear it up...until then....

Why would a private company risk the public relations nightmare of challenging a public representative on a social media platform?

He didn't know what a PEP was despite asking a question about it in the Dáil in 2017. Everything else after is window dressing.

smurgen wrote: »

On a side note I went to open a trading account with Revolut and the detail in the questions seemed a bit OTT. Salary, job title, savings etc. Seemed a bit like data mining. I did not have that granular level of questions opening a Degiro account.

It's because it's effectively a credit agreement depending on what you're dealing.

a very cool kid wrote: »

Why would a private company risk the public relations nightmare of challenging a public representative on a social media platform?

He didn't know what a PEP was despite asking a question about it in the Dáil in 2017. Everything else after is window dressing.

THEY (Revolut) asked him on that social media platform to contact them. He has posted the outcome.

Apology and a change in their systems.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

THEY (Revolut) asked him on that social media platform to contact them. He has posted the outcome.

Apology and a change in their systems.

The change won't be that they'll ask him that stuff. It might be that they won't list names on the app or something but it's stuff they need to know.

It still doesn't cover for the fact he didn't know why he was being scrutinized

a very cool kid wrote: »

The change won't be that they'll ask him that stuff. It might be that they won't list names on the app or something but it's stuff they need to know.

It still doesn't cover for the fact he didn't know why he was being scrutinized

Here's more:

Yes Paul children come under the PEP guidelines. Those questions are fine if children have their own accounts however in my case they don’t & that’s why it’s inappropriate for a financial institution to ask those questions. In fairness they have apologised & are making changes.

Still looks like a good days work to me.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here's more:

Still looks like a good days work to me.

What's to stop his kids getting bank accounts tomorrow and sending him money in that case?

a very cool kid wrote: »

What's to stop his kids getting bank accounts tomorrow and sending him money in that case?

This is what happened according to him, anything else ask him or Revolut about.

it’s inappropriate for a financial institution to ask those questions. In fairness they have apologised & are making changes.

BTW, in his original tweet, he does not say he doesn't know why he is being scrutinised. He doesn't know why a child with no account is being involved. He seems to have gotten satisfaction and changes.