Zappone appointment a step too far...

I really want to be righteously angry with Coveney on this, after all he is responsible for the NI protocol. But I just don't see the victims, or the egregious self enrichment or the naked nepotism that I demand of my scandals. Now CJH knew how to do scandal.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
But I just don't see this, or that or the other that I demand of my scandals.
Click to expand...

I get it. Repeatedly lying is not enuff for you. You want more and are not alone here. I'm amongst the outliers.

May I ask some genuine questions? The code of conduct for actuaries presumably prescribes that actuaries act honestly and with integrity. Do you subscribe to such notions? Should a government minister have a lower professional standard?

Anyway, I written a song

Oh when the sinners,
When the sinners.
When the sinners go marching in
I don't want to be
In that number
When the sinners go marching in
 
SGWidow genuine question, how do you ever bring yourself to vote for anyone? You know well that every single politician who puts themselves up for election changes their story if/once elected. You call it lying, politicians no doubt call it a misunderstanding.
 
I heard some 'wan on the radio running for the Blueshirts in Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown in the last election saying that politicians should have the same standards as 'Professionals' since, at their level, they were almost professionals. Thankfully she wasn't elected as that sort of elitist rubbish really gets to me.

Are you suggesting that actuaries don't tell lies? If they do and they are caught are the struck off?
What about solicitors? They've hardly covered themselves in glory in the last few decades. Do they get struck off if they are caught lying?
What about doctors? What does it take for them to get struck off their professional register? Writing prescriptions for themselves, using class A drugs, tax evasion etc are all dealt with without them being struck off.
Then there's the newer groups that now call themselves professional like Engineers and Teachers and Nurses and Architects. Are you seriously suggesting that they all adhere to their 'professional' code of conduct and that any who don't are struck off? Should every nurse that steals from a hospital (and that's a big chunk of them) get struck off? What about Teachers doing nixers and not paying their taxes? Should they be fired?
 
Politics is the art of the possible. In a representative democracy things are done through negotiation, not dictate. Therefore every one of them who wants to be effective has to compromise.
 
Good man, Purple.........in just before the lunch break - fair play!

Seriously, am happy to answer questions once Duke responds. There's too much evasion of questions here - in my opinion I'm a FAFA gal......first asked, first answered
 
SGWidow said:
I get it. Repeatedly lying is not enuff for you. You want more and are not alone here. I'm amongst the outliers.
Click to expand...
True story. It's a long time ago so my misdemeanour is probably covered by the statute of limitations. But I was stopped by a Garda at Leeson St. Bridge who asked was I aware that I had been in the bus lane. I said "no". He then asked me where I worked and advised me that people who work for banks should be honest (it was before the Anglo meltdown). This guy was an Out Liar for sure. I was ashamed and indeed my cover up was worse than the original offence of driving in the bus lane.
But still I think we need a bit of proportion when it comes to Outing Liars - where are the victims, where is the greed etc.
 
Last edited:
SGWidow said:
Good man, Purple.........in just before the lunch break - fair play!

Seriously, am happy to answer questions once Duke responds. There's too much evasion of questions here - in my opinion I'm a FAFA gal......first asked, first answered
Click to expand...
T'is a staggered lunch break but I'm not complaining.

It would be lovely if everyone behaved in an exemplary manner all the time but they don't.
Labour probably have the best record in that regard, followed by FG, then there's aa fair bit of open ground, then there's FF and then there's the child killers that we both want to keep out of office.
 
I don't want to get involved in this discussion it saddens me to see how the main political parties including what is left of Labour set the bar so low and leave the door open so SF look good,
For the first time in my lifetime, FF under Michael Martin acted as the main Government party should and removed Ministers whose actions did not reflect what the Government under Michael Martin stood for,
The leader of the opposition Mary Lou leader soon found herself in the same position over Covid 19 grants worth 33K as Michael, Martin,

Elisha McCallion apologized unreservedly for her poor judgement and resigned as a member of Seanad Eireann with immediate effect, Mary Lou also issued an apology saying she wished to acknowledge and apologise for these failures two other members of SF also resigned,

I was wondering could the Government and SF keep it up until the next General election well we know who won that contest,
Mary Lou Earned her armchair ride,
Michael / LEO and Eamon are getting Their well-earned hatchet job,
Purple said:
I heard Mary Lou on Morning Ireland getting her usual armchair ride of an interview.
Contrasted to the hatchet job they did on FG yesterday it's laughable how the Shinners have become the darlings of the unionised media.
Click to expand...

hatchet job
 
I thought my response #87 answered these questions but for total clarity.

The code of conduct for actuaries presumably prescribes that actuaries act honestly and with integrity. It does.
Do you subscribe to such notions? I do.
Should a government minister have a lower professional standard? No.

I haven't been following the minutiae of this Kapponegate but I accept your assessment that Coveney has not lived up to this standard.
For me it is a question of the proportionality of any consequences for Coveney and indeed the proportionality of the reaction of the body politic and the media.
So even accepting your assessment that he lied I personally do not think that he should be fired. Even SF kept us guessing as to whether they thought he should be fired, finally deciding they had more to gain form the political theatre of a no confidence motion.

So a question from me to you. Do you think sacking Coveney is a proportionate response?
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
Do you think sacking Coveney is a proportionate response?
Click to expand...

He should be sanctioned because he repeatedly told lies and has got other ministers involved in the porkies. For my sins, I did get under the bonnet on this one.

What are the range of sanctions available in respect of a minister lying and collaborating with other ministers in such lies?

As you will, no doubt, have worked out, I'm a very reasonable and sympathetic person - so I am coming to understand that perhaps I should be a little more proportionate and shouldn't call for Simon's head - just maybe his legs and arms. So I could live with his demotion. If was good enough for Coveney's old man, it's good enough for sincere Simon! [Did you know that apart from the reason old man Coveney got demoted - he (Hugh) also had money in those infamous off-shore accounts of yesteryear - a fact which Mr Integrity (Simon) strenoulsy denied. Trouble is, the off-shore money did show up alright.]

Yes demotion it is. More proportionate (but obviously less......clean-cut) than the guillotine but still serves the remove the smug faux-earnest halo worn by sincere Simon!

All this is just my opinion. It will be very interesting what savaging Purple will inflict on my feeble thoughts - presumably we'll all have to wait until the morning at this stage?!
 
@SGWidow I have from past engagements found you a clued in type of gal. So I did try to meet you on Zapponegate but failed. I think a suitable punishment for Simon would be 3 Hail Marys and 50 quid in the black babies' box.
Not that I am a fan of Simon's, as I say he way overplayed the green card on Brexit.
 
SGWidow said:
So I could live with his demotion.
Click to expand...

There is the problem right there.

With respect I think you are absolutely right on the technicalities and the letter of the rules and standards.
But you have avoided the real politik of the situation, and that is, as it always is, strength in numbers. And the reality is that the cosy, inside nature of awarding this position is not the juicy stroke-pulling of multi-million euro contracts, home extensions and extravagant lifestyles of yesteryear. It was tokenistic.

Albeit in principle you are correct, Coveney has built a lot of political capital for himself and this episode is going to damage it but not derail it all.

And what punishment should he have to endure? That is subjective. Some want sackcloth and ashes, others just his arms and legs. The rest, a simple reprimand will do.
What is the appropriate penalty? The strength in numbers determines that.

That said, it is a gift for SF. And as the political opposition they are totally right to try exploit it to the max. Albeit, personally speaking I don't envisage much capital to be gained out of it.
 
Last edited:
SGWidow said:
Yes demotion it is. More proportionate (but obviously less......clean-cut) than the guillotine but still serves the remove the smug faux-earnest halo worn by sincere Simon!
Click to expand...
I'd say your interest in this had as much or more to do with your personal dislike of Simon as it had to do with the substance of the issue but sure we're all guilty of that.
In general when people are throwing stones at politicians (metaphorically, unless you're a Shinner) it's worth mentioning that they are a reflection of the public at large and the biggest gombeens are the ones that top the polls. We don't do accountability in this country, from the Churches to the public service, to doctors and teachers and builders and bankers to politicians.
 
Are you saying we should continue as before and let any gains in accountability slide back,

I think change coming and people who hold views like you and I would be better served holding the main political parties to account
when the present Government was formed Michael Martin was and I suppose on paper still is head of the Government And FF knew their weakness was accountability in the public eye, and Michael set out to address

To outflank SF the new FF was all about accountability under Michael Martin as head when the present government was formed,

Michael Martin has all but given up on the new FF I suppose who could blame him he found it almost impossible to get enough ministers without having to dip into the old embedded Gombeen FF you correctly pointed out still get elected to make up the numbers,

now he seems to have handed the new accountable FF over to the Gombeens in FF and The gombeens in other political parties and in the process
allow Mary LOU to finish picking anything of the good off the carcass of FF, There is a very good chance SF will take the new accountable part of FF to make up for their past history, and leave the Gombeens to FG,
 
Last edited:
kinnjohn said:
Are you saying we should continue as before and let any gains in accountability slide back,
Click to expand...

Well that was my impression. Seems to be confirmed by the following ad:

COMING SOON

To a cinema near You

From Purple

- the people who brought us "Beatings will continue until morale improves"

The new Autumn Blockbuster

"Lying, lobbying and cronyism will continue until standards improve"

Starring........
 
SGWidow said:
"Lying, lobbying and cronyism will continue until standards improve"
Click to expand...
Lying, lobbying and cronyism will continue until the electorate stop electing people who Lie, lobby and engage in cronyism.
Unfortunately the alternative on offer at the moment is a bunch of pseudo-socialist populist apologists for child killers (and actual child killers).
Given that unsavoury scenario I'll take smug Simon, even smugger Leo and as-limp-as-a-wet-hanky Michael. I'd take Paul Murphy ahead of the Shinners. As far as I know he's never robber a bank, disappeared anyone or blown up any Nuns or children and he doesn't make apologies for those who do.
 
Purple said:
Given that unsavoury scenario I'll take smug Simon, even smugger Leo and as-limp-as-a-wet-hanky Michael. I'd take Paul Murphy ahead of the Shinners.
Click to expand...

Agreed. [Broadly, one can say that the Sinners are the evil of two lessers here.]


Purple said:
Lying, lobbying and cronyism will continue until the electorate stop electing people who Lie, lobby and engage in cronyism.
Click to expand...

is a variation of your earlier

Purple said:
When people are throwing stones at politicians (metaphorically, unless you're a Shinner) it's worth mentioning that they are a reflection of the public at large
Click to expand...

which is, I believe, a variation, of my earlier

SGWidow said:
After all, we get the politicians we deserve....
Click to expand...

See - we have some points in common!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register