# McDowell's Departure



## ang1170 (30 May 2007)

Anyone else feel that Michael McDowell’s departure was oh-so typical of the man?

His precipitous quitting had all the hallmarks of a spoiled child throwing his toys out the pram when told he couldn’t play anymore. Add to that the arrogance of not bothering to consult his colleagues beforehand and not being interested if he couldn’t be the boss anymore, and you have the measure of the man.

Can’t see Mary Harney lacking the balls to continue when the going gets tough if she were in his position.

Retiring from public life? Er, I think you were just sacked by the people, Michael!


----------



## Gabriel (30 May 2007)

Leader of a political party not getting voted back in = automatic retirement...at least in my mind anyway.

You can dislike McDowell if you like...but I think you're making too much of an issue of what was a very obvious choice for him.


----------



## Caveat (30 May 2007)

Think you are at least half right Ang1170

McDowell has been prone to plenty of ill-considered outbursts in the past.
Certainly not consulting with his own party prior to his rejection/retirement was unprofessional.  

Bertie wouldn't be above a bit of a smirk over all this...


----------



## gonk (30 May 2007)

Under the PD's rules the party leader must come from the parliamentary party, so McDowell could not have remained on as party leader anyway. That didn't mean though that he had to leave politics - like many an ex-TD before him he could have, for example, sought election to the Senate. In fact, in this scenario, he could have been reappointed to the Cabinet - Senate members are eligible for this and there is also a precedent. In 1981 Taoiseach Garret Fitzgerald nominated Prof. James Dooge to the Senate and subsequently appointed him Minister for Foreign Affairs without Prof. Dooge ever having stood for election.

That said, it is clear from news reports that McDowell did not consult any of his party colleagues before making his announcement and many of them, such as John Minihan, were very put out by that. I'd have to sympathize with them - the manner of the announcement lacked any class.


----------



## ang1170 (30 May 2007)

Gabriel said:


> Leader of a political party not getting voted back in = automatic retirement...at least in my mind anyway.


 
Automatic resignation from leadership, certainly, but hardly from politics



Gabriel said:


> You can dislike McDowell if you like...but I think you're making too much of an issue of what was a very obvious choice for him.


 
It may be an obvious choice, but it was the manner of his departure I was commenting on. Big difference between running away from a train wreck and staying on for a while to help salvage something from it and wave it on its way...


----------



## z108 (30 May 2007)

did McDowell do some kind of 'I did the state some service' speech to the media outside the RDS ? I wanted to hear it but RTE cut it off .


----------



## ClubMan (30 May 2007)

Wasn't that the _"I love my country" _one that they did broadcast?


----------



## Gabriel (30 May 2007)

ang1170 said:


> Automatic resignation from leadership, certainly, but hardly from politics



Surely the resignation from politics is/was his own personal choice and that of his family? Hardly anyone elses business is it?

Sounds like he was ony guilty of not discussing it with his party...which was a bit unprofessional alright.



ang1170 said:


> It may be an obvious choice, but it was the manner of his departure I was commenting on. Big difference between running away from a train wreck and staying on for a while to help salvage something from it and wave it on its way...



Fair enough...but hasn't he been involved in the talks in Leinster House with the PD's today? So it would look like he's not running away...

From...
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0530/election.html

"Members of the outgoing parliamentary party of the PDs, including the six defeated TDs, are taking part in this meeting, which will look at the outcome of the election and its implications.

Michael McDowell and Mary Harney are among those attending."


----------



## z108 (30 May 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Wasn't that the _"I love my country" _one that they did broadcast?



Im not sure if he made 1 or 2 speeches but I tuned in at some point to see which TD got elected in my area and  it went over to McDowells speech as he was outside the RDS maybe next to a LIMO/Merc  then it cut him off in mid flow. The speech IMO seemed pretty well done at the time from the about 20 seconds I saw of it . Seemed to add some extra drama to the whole situation to see him on his way out this way as hes normally so full of himself.


----------



## elefantfresh (30 May 2007)

About time he was cut off mid flow


----------



## Protocol (30 May 2007)

I always liked McDowell.

He is intelligent and forthright, qualities which are sometimes lacking in the Dail.  He had the strength and courage of his convictions.

To me, he would seem to be a far better parlimentarian than many TDs.

I can't understand why people don't like him.

His policies on justice and immigration were sensible, though maybe not always populist.


----------



## ang1170 (30 May 2007)

I don’t buy the "he’s intelligent, so he must be good" argument. He’s certainly an effective public speaker and as a parliamentarian he’s head and shoulders above the vast majority of TDs (not exactly a high standard, though).

Does that make him an effective politician? Don’t think so! Look at the record: didn’t even deliver on something simple like Garda numbers (and displayed an inability to count in the process), no real Garda/prison reform, a last-minute, rushed Criminal Justice Bill that no doubt will come back to haunt us, and (the icing on the cake), a few millions wasted on overpaying for land for a new prison. 

I’d certainly give him credit for forcing the criminality/Sinn Fein issue on the North’s settlement and various other minor achievements, but does that make him the great politician that he clearly thinks he is? I’d say he’s about average in terms of what he’s actually done: not the worst, certainly, but he’s not exactly the towering colossus his supporters tend to claim.


----------



## elefantfresh (30 May 2007)

The final sting eh?


----------



## ClubMan (30 May 2007)

ang1170 said:


> I don’t buy the "he’s intelligent, so he must be good" argument. He’s certainly an effective public speaker and as a parliamentarian he’s head and shoulders above the vast majority of TDs (not exactly a high standard, though).


I would disagree with most of that. I never saw any real evidence to suggest that he was particularly intelligent, never mind more so than most other citizens or members of the _Oireachtas _(in general) as some might claim, and I never considered him to be much of a public speaker.


----------



## Purple (30 May 2007)

ang1170 said:


> Anyone else feel that Michael McDowell’s departure was oh-so typical of the man?
> 
> His precipitous quitting had all the hallmarks of a spoiled child throwing his toys out the pram when told he couldn’t play anymore. Add to that the arrogance of not bothering to consult his colleagues beforehand and not being interested if he couldn’t be the boss anymore, and you have the measure of the man.
> 
> ...



ang1170, I find your post mean spirited and small minded. The man lost his job, it must be a terrible blow for any TD and I would not gloat the way you are about any of them loosing their seats, no matter what the party.
McDowell did himself no favours but I think that the campaign waged against him by the Irish Times, and to a lesser extent RTE, over the last few years was a major factor in his defeat.


----------



## polaris (30 May 2007)

To paraphrase Ruairi Quinn, I liked his politics but had reservations about the man. 

His impulsive behaviour since he became leader of the PDs, and especially during the election, was directly responsible for the loss of a couple of PD seats, namely those of Tom Parlon and Tim O'Malley.


----------



## oopsbuddy (30 May 2007)

Purple said:


> ang1170, I find your post mean spirited and small minded.




Isn't this the "Letting Off Steam" section!?


----------



## Caveat (30 May 2007)

ClubMan said:


> I would disagree with most of that. I never saw any real evidence to suggest that he was particularly intelligent, never mind more so than most other citizens or members of the _Oireachtas _(in general) as some might claim, and I never considered him to be much of a public speaker.


 
Tend to agree there...it's also been said that he was 'witty' ?!

When??

A few obvious schoolboyish putdowns and ill tempered retorts do not a witty person make


----------



## Purple (30 May 2007)

Caveat said:


> A few obvious schoolboyish putdowns and ill tempered retorts do not a witty person make


 Shut up red-nose


----------



## ClubMan (30 May 2007)

polaris said:


> To paraphrase Ruairi Quinn, I liked his politics but had reservations about the man.


Didn't he say that he admired the man but hated his politics?


----------



## Purple (30 May 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Didn't he say that he admired the man but hated his politics?


 That does make more sense allright.


----------



## Delboy (30 May 2007)

ang1170 said:


> Anyone else feel that Michael McDowell’s departure was oh-so typical of the man?



i though he behaved well considering what was done to him when he conceded defeat...he was chanted at by the shinners and a few of them jostled hon and threw rubbish at him as he left. absolutely shocking behaviour in a democracy but then the shinners are'nt real democrats.

ireland will be a poorer place for not having him serve the people....


----------



## ang1170 (30 May 2007)

Purple said:


> ang1170, I find your post mean spirited and small minded. The man lost his job, it must be a terrible blow for any TD and I would not gloat the way you are about any of them loosing their seats, no matter what the party.


 
OK, point taken - not the best time to offer criticisms of the man's character, which is what the post was about.

I certainly wasn't gloating, and I think it's very distaseful some of the comments that have been made and more especially the abuse that's been heaped on him, especially by those who'd never dream of putting themselves up for election in the first place.

By the way, I couldn't help notice the difference between Mary Harney on Drivetime this evening and himself. I though her comment about not being a quitter and best when her back's against the wall made quite a contrast with his own behaviour (maybe deliberately so?). As I said, although I'm not a fan of either of them, I think she's a lot more balls than he does.


----------



## Caveat (30 May 2007)

Purple said:


> Shut up red-nose


 
cheers for that...


----------



## Trafford (31 May 2007)

ang1170 said:


> OK, point taken - not the best time to offer criticisms of the man's character, which is what the post was about.
> 
> I certainly wasn't gloating, and I think it's very distaseful some of the comments that have been made and more especially the abuse that's been heaped on him, especially by those who'd never dream of putting themselves up for election in the first place.
> 
> By the way, I couldn't help notice the difference between Mary Harney on Drivetime this evening and himself. I though her comment about not being a quitter and best when her back's against the wall made quite a contrast with his own behaviour (maybe deliberately so?). As I said, although I'm not a fan of either of them, I think she's a lot more balls than he does.


 

I didn't hear Drivetime myself but your comment above made me smile. After the way McDowell and O'Donnell shafted Mary Harney over the leadership I wouldn't blame her at all.

I thought his desertion while his troops were still battling it out around the country was despicable. Tom Parlon intereviewed live shortly after looked livid and totally broken. McDowell showed very poor leadership when his party's back was against the wall. His announcement would have been much more appropriate on the following Sunday or Monday when all votes were counted. On Sunday morning on Marian Finucane's show, Parlon (The PD President) said he still hadn't been speaking to McDowell. He still sounded angry over it all. BTW, I'm not a pro PD or Parlonite person!


----------



## ang1170 (31 May 2007)

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at the PD's meetings yesterday!


----------



## gipimann (31 May 2007)

Does anyone think that Mary Harney boxed extremely clever?   She saw the writing on the wall for the PDs last summer so decided to resign as leader, and now that the party's been decimated, she'll take over again.....thereby avoiding the blame which leaders often get for disastrous election results!


----------



## ang1170 (31 May 2007)

I think you'e both right and wrong: right in that she probably saw election problems and "Bertiegate" coming down the tracks (anyone else think she was tipped off beforehand by Madam Editor at the IT on the latter?). Wrong in that it was all part of a master plan to regain control when the dust settled: I'm guessing, but I suspect the last place she wants to be now is back in charge.


----------



## almo (31 May 2007)

McDowell made a big mistake in the run up to the election, he brushed away Berties troubles and figured that letting it all slide was showing how he would put politics and progress above knifing his boss.  However his bosses are the Irish people and while a large percent were willing to turn a blind eye to Bertigate, obviously a substantial amount were not.  I wonder if he could turn time back would he have stepped away from Bertie and gained respect from the voters?  We have to wonder.


----------



## ubiquitous (31 May 2007)

I thought it ironic that both Joe Higgins & Michael McDowell, two of the best speakers in the Dail, although on opposite sides of the political spectrum, both lost their seats, while a whole raft of lesser lights (Jackie Healy Rae, anyone?) had no problem in retaining theirs. It would seem that the electorate prefers harmless, inoffensive, anonymous TDs than those who make a virtue of being challenging and/or controversial.

McDowell's main misfortune was that he was handed the poisioned chalice of the PD leadership a week or two before the "Bertiegate 1" story emerged. Had Mary Harney held onto the leadership, my own view is that she would have lost her seat & McDowell would have survived.

I think McDowell has a lot to be proud of in his tenure as Minister for Justice, particularly the brave stance he took against Sinn Fein/IRA. Many in our leftie-dominated media never forgave him for this, and several commentators seemed to have personal campaigns to vilify him at every opportunity. Mick Clifford of the Sunday Tribune might even be out of a job now because he seemed to write about nothing else apart from McDowell's faults in the past 12 months or so.


----------



## ang1170 (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> I think McDowell has a lot to be proud of in his tenure as Minister for Justice, particularly the brave stance he took against Sinn Fein/IRA.


 
I'm not knocking what is after all his main achievement, but you'll have to explain why his stance on this is in any way brave. Why is something that gets support from the vast majority of people (in the republic) in general, and his own constituency of PD voters in particular, considered brave?

Brave politicians (and there aren't many) are those that stand up for their beliefs that run counter to the current popular opinion.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> I think McDowell has a lot to be proud of in his tenure as Minister for Justice, particularly the brave stance he took against Sinn Fein/IRA. Many in our leftie-dominated media never forgave him for this, and several commentators seemed to have personal campaigns to vilify him at every opportunity. Mick Clifford of the Sunday Tribune might even be out of a job now because he seemed to write about nothing else apart from McDowell's faults in the past 12 months or so.


 I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Vanilla (1 Jun 2007)

ang1170 said:


> I'm not knocking what is after all his main achievement, but you'll have to explain why his stance on this is in any way brave. Why is something that gets support from the vast majority of people (in the republic) in general, and his own constituency of PD voters in particular, considered brave?


 
Maybe in private, but very few people have the guts to stand up and be counted in making public anti-IRA/Sin Fein statements out of fear of reprisals.

Totally agree with Ubi in relation to McDowell. I for one will miss him in politics.

In relation to Jackie Healy Rae- he DID have a bit of a battle to retain his seat but he managed it in the end. Healy Rae likes to play the buffoon but underneath the act there's a very shrewd character. He is ceaseless when it comes to acting for the ordinary joe on the street in south kerry.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Maybe in private, but very few people have the guts to stand up and be counted in making public anti-IRA/Sin Fein statements out of fear of reprisals.


 I agree.



Vanilla said:


> In relation to Jackie Healy Rae- ... He is ceaseless when it comes to acting for the ordinary joe on the street in south kerry.


 That's the problem; he's meant to be a national politician and legislator, instead he's like a local councillor on steroids.


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

McDowell was being anti IRA/Siinn Fein very much for his own political benefit as the PDs were getting thrashed in the polls, not for the good of the country. I also question his misuse of confidential information to make himself look good , he was not befitting of the post of Tanaiste or Justice


he may have been forthright, clever and have the conviction of his views but he's supposed to represent the views of his constituents and not some personal vendetta against those who stand in his way, he became increasingly alienated from those who voted for him in the first place and was rightly kicked out of office


----------



## ubiquitous (1 Jun 2007)

woodseb said:


> McDowell was being anti IRA/Siinn Fein very much for his own political benefit as the PDs were getting thrashed in the polls, not for the good of the country.



Really? I'm not sure there were ever many votes in this country in actively opposing and facing down SFIRA. It certainly did no good in the 1970s for Conor Cruise O'Brien who (just like McDowell) lost his seat while while a sitting minister. Likewise John Bruton's brave anti-SFIRA stance arguably cost him the Taoiseach's job in 1997.

I think you unwittingly admit as much when you say 



woodseb said:


> he became increasingly alienated from those who voted for him in the first place and was rightly kicked out of office





woodseb said:


> I also question his misuse of confidential information to make himself look good , he was not befitting of the post of Tanaiste or Justice.


I presume you mean the release of Frank Connolly's falsified passport application before he travelled to Colombia. Well, McDowell did release this information in a reply to a Dail question from Finian McGrath TD, one of Connolly's supporters. Had McDowell concealed this information in answering the question, McGrath and the SFIRA TDs would have been telling him to "put up or shut up"


----------



## shnaek (1 Jun 2007)

I think it is plain to see, both in Ireland and abroad, that democracy has been a fine experiment but a failure. It is all about perception - more like a beauty contest really. We should send them all out in their swimsuits for the next election.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

shnaek said:


> I think it is plain to see, both in Ireland and abroad, that democracy has been a fine experiment but a failure. It is all about perception - more like a beauty contest really. We should send them all out in their swimsuits for the next election.


 So whats the alternative?


----------



## elefantfresh (1 Jun 2007)

Let Michael O'Leary take over for a while.


----------



## gonk (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> I presume you mean the release of Frank Connolly's falsified passport application before he travelled to Colombia. Well, McDowell did release this information in a reply to a Dail question from Finian McGrath TD, one of Connolly's supporters. Had McDowell concealed this information in answering the question, McGrath and the SFIRA TDs would have been telling him to "put up or shut up"


 
This is not true. Here's how the _Irish Examiner_ described the leaking of the information on Frank Connolly:

"The Justice Minister gave documents to Sam Smyth of the Irish Independent alleging that Connolly had applied for a false passport and went to Colombia, where his brother was jailed as one of the notorious Colombia Three. 

The Justice Minister had a right to declassify and release material. He claimed he was putting the information into the public domain and justified this in the national interest. This may well have been true, but the manner he used was judicially cavalier and smacked of political self-interest."

[broken link removed]

He also disclosed the same information to a foreign national, Chuck Feeney, at a private meeting with Mr Feeney.

If McDowell had, as you assert, placed the information in question before the Dáil in the first instance, he might - just -  have been able to plausibly argue it was done in the public interest.

In fact, Connolly was beginning, through the Centre for Public Inquiry for which he worked, an investigation into the circumstances of Minster McDowell's department paying millions of Euros over the odds for Thornton Hall. Mr Feeney was funding the Centre and McDowell gave him the information to (successfully) discourage him from doing so. It is fair to infer that McDowell's actions were taken primarily to prevent this investigation going ahead. As a result of his intervention, Mr Feeney withdrew his funding, the Centre closed down, and Frank Connolly lost his livelihood.

Here is how Judge Fergal Flood, retired High Court judge and Chairman of the Centre for public inquiry described McDowell's actions:


Despite the DPP’s decision in March 2003 not to prosecute Mr Connolly, a private and public blackening of his character has been unleashed by the Minister.
This shows a signal departure from principles of fair dealing and respect for justice to the individual citizen by the State which are absolute, save in the most exceptional cases and where legislated upon by the Oireachtas.
The methods adopted by the Minister may well have undermined the status, authority and the statutory independence of the DPP.
 
Minster McDowell's actions in leaking this information were an absolute disgrace to his office and should have resulted in his immediate dismissal. It is to Bertie Ahern's shame that he did nothing at all in repsonse.


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> Really? I'm not sure there were ever many votes in this country in actively opposing and facing down SFIRA. It certainly did no good in the 1970s for Conor Cruise O'Brien who (just like McDowell) lost his seat while while a sitting minister. Likewise John Bruton's brave anti-SFIRA stance arguably cost him the Taoiseach's job in 1997.


 
why is it so "brave" to face down Sinn Fein? i think most of the irish people know what they are about and are well capable of making their own choices. If Bruton kept up with his stance and stayed in power there would have been no Good Friday agreement and the ensuing peace. Politicians like Ahern and Blair are also both well aware of Sinn Fein's activities but used a level of diplomacy for the good of the peace process. 

There was no silent majority supporting McDowell, we have a secret ballot in this country and the PDs were soundly beaten and the the Shinners picked up more seats than them. There is no other better barometer of public opinion than that. If he wanted to show real bravery he would've have tackled crime in places like West Dublin and Limerick (although i am aware of the provo connections).


----------



## ubiquitous (1 Jun 2007)

gonk said:


> This is not true. Here's how the _Irish Examiner_ described the leaking of the information on Frank Connolly:...
> 
> Here is how Judge Fergal Flood, retired High Court judge and Chairman of the Centre for public inquiry described McDowell's actions:
> 
> ...




The fact that McDowell initially gave this information to Sam Smyth is immaterial, as a number of days later, Finian McGrath filed his Dail Question on this issue to McDowell and McDowell could not have meaningfully replied to McGrath without citing this evidence.

It is a matter of opinion as to whether the giving of the information to Sam Smith was proper or not - one's opinion on this will depend ultimately on one's opinion of McDowell. However I am continually mildly amused when SFIRA figures stress their outrage at McDowell's actions in this case, given that for a number of years prior to that one of the leading figures in SFIRA Denis Donaldson was running a spy ring at Stormont designed to leak confidential state security info to SFIRA. (By the way, isn't it telling that the same outrage among SFIRA people was mysteriously missing when Donaldson was later found murdered in Donegal?)

(Another By the way; the former Justice Flood is hardly a reliable commentator on this matter given that Connolly appointed him to chair the so-called Centre for public inquiry.)

Most mysteriously of all, while Frank Connolly and others have been so busy denouncing McDowell for bringing this affair to the attention of the public, Connolly has not yet had the time to confirm once and for all (1) his explanation for the falsified application for his passport (2) whether or not he actually travelled to Columbia when alleged by McDowell. It is a pity that he is so busy as it makes innocents like myself wonder why he is so silent on these key issues.


----------



## ubiquitous (1 Jun 2007)

woodseb said:


> There was no silent majority supporting McDowell, we have a secret ballot in this country and the PDs were soundly beaten and the the Shinners picked up more seats than them. There is no other better barometer of public opinion than that.



My point exactly - there were never any votes to be got in facing down SFIRA. I don't know how you can then conclude that McDowell's attacks on SFIRA were "very much for his own political benefit"


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> My point exactly - there were never any votes to be got in facing down SFIRA.


 
why did he do it then? 

One word. Ego.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

woodseb said:


> why did he do it then?


Because he thought it was the right thing to do?


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> I don't know how you can then conclude that McDowell's attacks on SFIRA were "very much for his own political benefit"


 
that wasn't my conclusion, it was my understanding on McDowell's rationale. 

i think he thought by exposing Sinn Fein/IRA it would paint himself in a good light, despite the fact that the dogs in the street know what Gerry Adams' day job is. In the end, in tackling the real issue of criminality McDowell did very little but talk and mudsling


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

Purple said:


> Because he thought it was the right thing to do?


 
maybe so but he didn't back it up with any substantive action against criminality did he?


----------



## polaris (1 Jun 2007)

woodseb said:


> maybe so but he didn't back it up with any substantive action against criminality did he?


 

What about the recently introduced Criminal Justice Act which contains tough (some say too tough) measures against crime?

[broken link removed]


----------



## gonk (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> The fact that McDowell initially gave this information to Sam Smyth is immaterial, as a number of days later, Finian McGrath filed his Dail Question on this issue to McDowell and McDowell could not have meaningfully replied to McGrath without citing this evidence.


 
It is not in my view immaterial. The information first came into the public domain as an anonymous leak given by McDowell to his drinking buddy Sam Smyth. If McDowell was so sure of his justification in releasing it, why didn't he go on the record? I note you have not commented on the "coincidence" of Connolly's imminent investigation into the purchase of Thornton Hall . . .



ubiquitous said:


> It is a matter of opinion as to whether the giving of the information to Sam Smith was proper or not - one's opinion on this will depend ultimately on one's opinion of McDowell. However I am continually mildly amused when SFIRA figures stress their outrage at McDowell's actions in this case, given that for a number of years prior to that one of the leading figures in SFIRA Denis Donaldson was running a spy ring at Stormont designed to leak confidential state security info to SFIRA. (By the way, isn't it telling that the same outrage among SFIRA people was mysteriously missing when Donaldson was later found murdered in Donegal?).


 
Indeed it is a matter of opinion. I've made mine clear and I'm sure the Connolly affair had at least some influence on public opinion in the election, contributing to McDowell losing his seat. As for SFIRA, I am no supporter of theirs either, and I doubt McDowell would appreciate you justifying his actions by reference to SFIRA doing similar things. Two wrongs don't make a right after all . . . 




ubiquitous said:


> (Another By the way; the former Justice Flood is hardly a reliable commentator on this matter given that Connolly appointed him to chair the so-called Centre for public inquiry.)


 
It is true Justice Flood is not disinterested, but as an ex-High Court judge he may be presumed to know what he is talking about when he comments on breaches of the separation of powers. Let's be clear about this - no other minister for justice has ever done what McDowell did - with good reason.



ubiquitous said:


> Most mysteriously of all, while Frank Connolly and others have been so busy denouncing McDowell for bringing this affair to the attention of the public, Connolly has not yet had the time to confirm once and for all (1) his explanation for the falsified application for his passport (2) whether or not he actually travelled to Columbia when alleged by McDowell. It is a pity that he is so busy as it makes innocents like myself wonder why he is so silent on these key issues.


 
Connolly, like every other citizen, is entitled to the presumption of innocence - he does not have to prove it, it's up to the state to prove he committed an offence - if he did. The DPP examined the evidence as to Connolly's alleged falsification of a passport application and decided there was no case to answer. That should have been the end of the matter.


----------



## woodseb (1 Jun 2007)

polaris said:


> What about the recently introduced Criminal Justice Act which contains tough (some say too tough) measures against crime?
> 
> [broken link removed]


 

i wouldn't count that piece of legislation as a particular triumph for mcdowell, you just have to look flak it has taken from his peers on the bar. Its pratically guaranteed to face a supreme court challenge when they try to use it. Alas, the protection of the right to silence is a whole other debate...


----------



## ubiquitous (1 Jun 2007)

gonk said:


> It is not in my view immaterial. The information first came into the public domain as an anonymous leak given by McDowell to his drinking buddy Sam Smyth. If McDowell was so sure of his justification in releasing it, why didn't he go on the record?



The "leak" wasn't anonymous. As soon as Smyth published the story, it was McDowell who stated that he was the source.



gonk said:


> I note you have not commented on the "coincidence" of Connolly's imminent investigation into the purchase of Thornton Hall . . .



For what its worth, I think that McDowell erred gravely on the subject of Thornton Hall. That said, if Connolly wants or wanted to investigate this topic via the CPI, what was to stop him pursuing this via his work for the Irish Daily Mail or the Village magazine, once the CPI had bitten the dust?  Its not as if Connolly has been thrown in jail or murdered (_a la_  Denis Donaldson) or anything...




gonk said:


> It is true Justice Flood is not disinterested


'nuff said.



gonk said:


> . The DPP examined the evidence as to Connolly's alleged falsification of a passport application and decided there was no case to answer.


This isn't exactly true. The DPP decided it would not be worthwhile bringing a case against Connolly because the alleged offence in question merits only a token penalty on conviction, and on the basis that it would be disproportionately expensive and cumbersome to bring to trial as much of the evidence concerning the allegation involves officials in Columbia.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

gonk said:


> Connolly, like every other citizen, is entitled to the presumption of innocence - he does not have to prove it, it's up to the state to prove he committed an offence - if he did. The DPP examined the evidence as to Connolly's alleged falsification of a passport application and decided there was no case to answer. That should have been the end of the matter.


 Connolly was the head of a privately funded organisation that wrapped itself up in quasi-judicial clothing. His motivations and actions are not just fair game; there is an onus on the media and those in public life to question them. When the media failed to do so the minister of Justice stepped in. I do not condone his actions but it is beyond any rational logic to suggest that Michael McDowell ever sunk anywhere near the level that Frank Connelly and his SFIRA friends call home.   



woodseb said:


> i wouldn't count that piece of legislation as a particular triumph for mcdowell, you just have to look flak it has taken from his peers on the bar. Its pratically guaranteed to face a supreme court challenge when they try to use it. Alas, the protection of the right to silence is a whole other debate...


 Yes, and his suggestion that Judges comply with the will of the people, sovereign under the constitution, and adhere to the legislation that they, through their elected representatives, have seen fit to pass into law. When the Judges wax lyrical about the separation of powers and how the bogey man McDowell has damaged them, I hope they highlight their own flagrant disregard for the same.


----------



## shnaek (1 Jun 2007)

Purple said:


> So whats the alternative?



I'm working on it.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2007)

shnaek said:


> I'm working on it.


Well when you are dictator for life just remember your old friend Purple


----------



## RainyDay (1 Jun 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> McDowell's main misfortune was that he was handed the poisioned chalice of the PD leadership a week or two before the "Bertiegate 1" story emerged. Had Mary Harney held onto the leadership, my own view is that she would have lost her seat & McDowell would have survived.


Didn't Mad Mullah McDowell snatch the leadership out of her hand, rather than waiting for it to be handed to him?


----------



## z108 (2 Jun 2007)

I thought Harney resigned of her own free will? Was she forced to resign as you are implying Rainyday?


----------



## RainyDay (2 Jun 2007)

From [broken link removed]


> Progressive Democrats leader Mary Harney reportedly threatened to sack Minister for Justice Michael McDowell from the cabinet after he attempted to mount a leadership challenge this week.
> 
> Reports this morning say the row erupted when Mr McDowell threatened not to run in the next General Election unless Ms Harney stepped down as leader before then.
> 
> McDowell reportedly claimed he had an arrangement with Ms Harney that she would stand aside before the election.


----------



## ubiquitous (8 Jun 2007)

RainyDay said:


> Didn't Mad Mullah McDowell snatch the leadership out of her hand, rather than waiting for it to be handed to him?



Indeed, but had he known that Bertiegate I was on the horizon, surely he would have been tempted to sit tight for a while and let Mary H sort out the "digout" mess...?


----------



## z108 (8 Jun 2007)

RainyDay said:


> From [broken link removed]



Thanks for the info Rainyday. I have to admit I don't watch much TV (apart from familyguy) and I'm reading fewer and fewer newspapers.

But I seriously thought Harney was way more popular than McDowell and that noone could challenge her. This was my impression.


----------

