Presidential Election 2025

I didn’t listen to that spoken part yet. But will comment on it in due course. You already muddied the water though saying “abolished or reformed”. Connolly wants it’s abolished. SF excepts it in “exceptional circumstances”.
You mention AI and ICC.

Sorry, I never can take them seriously always airey fairy, no practicality or accountability. They can just live in an idealistic world.

Meanwhile the government of the day have to get on with hard choices. Amnesty International and ICC can make pronouncements without accountability. Constant “nicey nicey” stuff. I can’t take them seriously. If you are doing a dissertation looking for “radical soft touch” changes/ideas to law. Amnesty International or ICC are the first place you go.

Personally I think the SCC has served the state well and is continuing to do so. The courts need somethjng with teeth to fight organised crime or subversives. Without putting Irish civilians in danger.

I always think of this case if there was no SCC this type of thing would be liable to happen - see below

https://m.independent.ie/regionals/herald/ratt-blitz-ordered-after-jury-list-found/27944391.html

So you think “defence” was a priority for Ireland in 2009-2015?

And yes I will bring the opposition into the mix - if they’re not shouting about defence being important for the last 16 years, there’s no point crying about it now.

I think SF are a lot more happy to forget about Dowdall. Than Gardai the DPP or the Monk!

If I was HH I would just have mentioned Dowdall’s surname and said “former SF councillor” in relation to the SCC. Easy points score. But HH is not a Dub it wouldn’t be on the forefront of her mind.

Would love to see how CC would wriggle out of it. Dowdall is very fresh in most of the electorates mind. And it is gangland not just Republican.

Connolly in the Dáil within a year of being elected to it.

My question was on what steps the Minister was taking to reduce the number of persons in the Defence Forces in receipt of family income supplement.

If the Minister tells me he is happy that our Army is dependent on family income supplement, we are in serious trouble. In previous questions, he has repeatedly said he is committed to increasing the expenditure on defence and he acknowledges there is a crisis, with more people leaving the services than going into them.

I understand that approximately 580 leave every year so when I ask what steps he is taking, the Minister might say what the Government is doing to address the crisis in addition to what has been agreed with unions or representative bodies.

It seems to have any amount of money to spend on a European basis but not on basic salaries to lift basic conditions in the forces.

But but ….they’re the fabric of Palestinian society- that along with their penchant for allowing domestic abuse of women - a right jolly bunch they are

I listened to the full PK debate now. Thought it was HH strongest performance so far. Possibly because PK style of interviewing is more confrontational. Leading to HH being more fiery. She didn’t shirk questions. Even stayed firm when Pat said “what if, what if?” etc.

CC - I sensed Pat became more and more frustrated with her as the interview went on. Not answering a direct question time and again. He even commented on it.
And later dismissed her comments as reforming the UN as “a big days work”

—

Best debate performance so far from HH.

Real star of the show ? Pat Kenny!

Edit - UN not NATO

Correct it was the UN.

Pat Kenny aged 77 would have made a great President. He had more sense than to run though. Will be too old in 7 years.

Heather Humphries was her usual drab self, completely unconvincing on most things she was asked about, few flashes of life here and there.

Catherine as usual was twice the speaker, loved the random question/answer on the 130 acres at the Aras, but I think she came across really poorly on the staff member, again.

Her insistence on rehabilitation and no rules being broken is just an exceptionally poor strategy. You can believe someone is rehabilitated yet also acknowledge they are completely unsuited for very specific roles as a result of their crime.

Pat did well enough on pushing that point - is she seriously contending there was no-one else in the country that could do the job and be a more appropriate pick.

I think there is a very large degree of ego there in that she she cannot accept even the notion of the idea that it was simply a poor judgement call on her part no manner what way she dances around it.

Thought Pat was actually very good. Right amount of firm and some decent laughs sprinkled in.

Good hour of radio. Not particularly great for either candidate. Doubt many minds will have changed at all.

Trump had-or rather thought he has leverage with Putin and nobody else has ever persuaded the Ruzzians to even moderate their demands…if anything they have become even more uncompromising. The only people with any influence are the Chinese and they seem to be happy to see Ruzzia, Europe and the USA embroiled. Putin won't even talk to Zelensky. I fail to see any other way out of this except hurting Ruzzia so much that it will want a way out of the war.

It is a grossly offensive posture to take towards those worried about their safety.

I can guarantee she won't like the speech by Martin Fraser to the British-Irish parliamentary Assembly.

CC’s game is passive aggressiveness. If she went the other way she could no longer credibly go that route. Her tactic is Presidential sounding, calling for “mature debate” etc. But without answering any questions directly if at all possible, where it could get her into trouble.

You are correct about the HH Trump comment. It was too loose. Then she realised it. Corrected her position and commended Trump for his efforts in Gaza.

Then successfully fielded PK’s legitimate comment that Trump armed Israel. HH said the world is a complex place. And answered it well then. Quick on her feet.

I thought HH line earlier of “don’t give a bank robber a job in a bank” re Ni Shionnain would play well with those who prefer analogy / imagery.

Connolly does not deal in that style of debate, more intellectually idealistic.

certainly….according to various members of Boards.ie posting on this thread.

yeah I was trying to figure out that one myself. bit of a leap