Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
I’ve always felt that RTEs Sean O’Rourke doesn’t get the recognition he deserves.
He’s always well briefed on his subject and has a uniquely forceful and penetrating technique of interviewing.
He’s also always scrupulously balanced as evidenced by his excellent interview with Fine Gael’s Fergus O’Dowd on yesterday’s News at One (2nd item).
He put O’Dowd through the wringer over the allegations concerning Ahern’s tax affairs. Great radio.
It’s clear that Bertie Ahern and his cohorts had a carefully devised strategy for the trip to South Africa.
No spokespersons were to be available at home and Bertie made it abundantly clear that he would not be answering any questions whatsoever about his personal finances.
In a word, the Government decided to impose a news blackout on the matter.
RTE did, however, manage to get reaction to the attacks by Enda Kenny from some Fianna Fail backbenchers (Morning Ireland, 7th item).
Laois-Offaly TD, Sean Fleming said that the attacks on Ahern were good for the morale of the Fianna Fail troops, it would galvanise them into protecting the leader.
Another TD, probably taking his lead from Ahern’s attitude to the tribunal, said that Enda Kenny should mind his own business.
Cavan Monaghan TD, Margaret Conlon spouted the usual party line drivel.
“We are united behind the Taoiseach, we have a job of work to do, let the tribunal as speedily as possible finish their work, produce the report and let’s move on.”
In an angry and impatient tone she finished:
“People are sick of this.”
Within hours of arriving in South Africa the strategy was in tatters with Ahern accusing Kenny of being a bare faced liar.
There was a curious incident when RTEs David-Davin Power was reporting from Cape Town (Morning Ireland, 7th item). Asked about the Taoiseach’s staff back in Dublin reporting on the situation back home Power replied.
“There’s one of them listening to this programme. He’s in front of me here at Cape Town on the telephone.”
The Government has always claimed that the special media monitoring unit is simply to keep it informed of what’s happening out there among the ordinary people.
It is strongly denies that the unit is used to monitor the media, at great cost to the taxpayer, so that politicians can head off potential trouble.
So why are members of this special unit in South Africa monitoring media reports?
In a previous posting regarding Bertie Ahern’s fantasies I wrote;
“Only a fool would believe he is telling the truth and only someone from Mars would be in any doubt as to what really happened.”
Ulick McEvaddy of Omega Air is one of the richest men in Ireland and is obviously nobody’s fool when it comes to business but he is a fool when it comes to the subject of Bertie Ahern.
Here’s what he had to say on the matter during yesterday’s Marian Finucane Show.
“I worry more about the precarious state of our economy; meanwhile we’re taking the chief executive of Ireland Inc. and having him pilloried in a public session.
It’s almost as if we’re pressing a self destruct button. When Ireland needs clear leadership and clear challenges out there for our economy and what we’re doing, we’re taking our chief executive and rubbishing him.
Clearly, he’s diminished in the eyes of the world; he deals with politicians in foreign climes and instead of being credible as a prime minister, negotiating Ireland’s future he’s being diminished by those of us at home who want to take him down. I think that’s wrong for Ireland Inc.”
I can understand Ahern’s supporters and especially Fianna Fail politicians coming out time after time and telling us that black is white.
They have a long and infamous tradition of putting their own interests before that of the Irish people. We know these people, we know how dishonest they are; we know that the interests of the Irish people are way down their list of priorities.
Mc Evaddy opinion is different in that he seems to genuinely believe what he’s saying, that’s what’s really disturbing.
This letter in yesterday’s Irish Independent gets right to the point.
Taoiseach gives cause for shame
Thursday January 10 2008
I am very sorry if Ms Martin (Letters, January 8) feels embarrassed at our prime minister trying to answer questions about large cash transactions that defy rational explanation.
We have a man who received an unsolicited non-repayable loan of IR£39,000, mostly in cash, to pay off legal debts which he already had taken out a bank loan to pay off.
A non-repayment loan which had no term, rate of interest, or schedule of repayments.
A non-repayment loan which he never seriously made an effort to pay back for over a decade.
A non-repayment loan which some of his close personal friends have said was a gift that they never wanted paid back.
A man who didn’t have a bank account for several years, but managed to save IR£50,000 in cash.
Who received stg£30,000 in cash to refurbish a house which he didn’t own.
Who has no explanation to how $45,000 in cash was lodged to his bank account.
Who has no memory of why he withdrew IR£50,000 in cash from his former girlfriend’s bank account.
Who has no memory of why or how he purchased stg£30,000 in cash.
All this from a man who was the Minister for Finance. A man who told the Irish people in the infamous interview with Brian Dobson that: “I know the tax law. I’m an accountant.”
Ms Martin is dead right, it is farcical and enough to make one feel ashamed of one’s roots.
JASON FITZHARRIS
SWORDS, CO DUBLIN
“Have you no shame about the way you’ve talked about our children, they’re Irish children, they’re American children.”
This was the cringe inducing challenge made to Presidential candidate Mitt Romney by Ciaran Staunton of the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform (Six One News, 1st item).
While Staunton was delivering his whine several of those present reminded him that the people he represented were illegal.
The whining of this group who believe the illegal Irish in America should get special treatment is an embarrassment.
Romney replied, to loud applause, that there should be no special pathway placing the Irish ahead of the millions who are waiting legally in line around the world.
The group is, of course, entitled to lobby just as other countries do but the key point is that they actually believe the Irish should be placed first, that somehow the Irish are more entitled, more deserving, that they should get special consideration above and beyond everybody else.
Anyone willing to listen is solemnly informed that the 50,000 or so Irish illegals in the US are suffering terribly because they can’t come home to Aunt Mary’s funeral or young Jimmy’s First Communion. Such torture, surely there’s a case here for intervention by the United Nations.
Meanwhile, many of the other 12 million illegals in the US, mostly from Latin America, face abject poverty, torture and even death if they are forced to return to their home countries.
But sure what’s that against missing young Jimmy’s First Communion?
A recent episode of the popular BBC programme TopGear featured a race to the North Pole between a traditional sled and a heavily modified Toyota pick-up truck. It was the first time a car had been driven to the North Pole.
The show made great television but ultimately it was a depressing demonstration of human stupidity. The show had no value other than the ‘entertainment’ of television viewers.
As always with this kind of stupidity the impression was given that this was a heroic event; man against the elements, striving to prove the unrivaled courage and determination of the human species.
It was, of course, no such thing. The ‘stars’ of the show were supported and protected by a large group of other humans with more vehicles, aircraft, film crews and mechanics.
Much was made of the courage of the ‘stars’ as they struggled through bear infested country. In fact they were never in any danger whatsoever. They were armed with what the programme production notes described as a plentiful supply of “anti-bear weaponry.”
Should any of these magnificent beasts get in the way of this human entertainment they would have been blasted into eternity.
Television programmes of this sort have a powerful influence on human behaviour. If a highly respected institution like the BBC thinks it’s ok to exploit endangered environments for ‘entertainment’ then ordinary people cannot be blamed if they follow the example.
I can just imagine the reaction of a bored Mr. and Mrs. Yuppie who have been to all the usual holiday resorts and are determined to outdo the Jones’ this year.
“Darling, why don’t we do that. We can take all the family and have wonderful time.”
I’ll get right on it dear, I’ll have James modify the Merc tomorrow.”
Businessmen are probably already planning the construction of staging posts to accommodate tourists – hotels, car parks, fuel depots and of course lots of anti-bear weaponry.
I have long held the view that the human brain is not sufficiently evolved to ensure the survival of the species. While we have the ability to realise the massive damage we’re causing to the environment we do not have sufficient brain cells to actually take effective action to prevent the process.
That leaves only one question. Will we kill ourselves off before we kill everything else?
I hope so.
Copy: BBC
I love the headline on the RTE News website (News highlights column)
“Tree emissions damage cars.”
It’s a clever play on the old journalistic adage about what makes news: ‘Dog bites man/Man bites dog’.
The story concerns Dublin residents suing the council for damage caused to their cars by sap falling from trees.
Irish Times columnist John Waters does not approve of the internet,
“There’s nothing in it that’s nice and uplifting” he says. It hasn’t lived up to its expectations and as we go forward we will see the more insidious and dangerous side of it, he says
(Morning Ireland, 3rd item).
Waters is especially scathing on the subject of blogging.
Nothing but content-less spice, vitriolic poison, aggression and hate that poses a danger to vulnerable, isolated young people.
These views are not at all surprising coming from a man who doesn’t actually understand what the internet is.
Waters tells us that up to 70% of traffic on the net is pornography and asks the question:
“How seriously would we take a TV station or newspaper with such a high content of pornography?”
Obviously, he thinks the internet is a single unit phenomenon controlled by an editor with a strong interest in pornography.
The obvious question follows; should John Waters be seen as a serious and well informed journalist?
The controversy surrounding Bertie Ahern is simple. An allegation was made that he received a large amount of money from a property developer. The allegation is connected to alleged planning corruption in county Dublin.
The Mahon Tribunal is investigating these allegations and as a result called in Ahern to give his side of the story in private. If Ahern had given a reasonable explanation for the large amounts of cash he had received at the time there would have been no problem.
No more questions would have been asked, no further investigation and no details of Ahern’s private life would have become public.
Ahern’s explanations were not acceptable to the tribunal and this resulted in him appearing in public session to explain his finances
Polls have indicated that a majority of Irish people do not believe Ahern’s explanations either. They are fantastic, contradictory and details often change depending on what questions are being asked.
Everything else surrounding the scandal, his exploitation of his family to elicit sympathy, his ruthless and systematic attack on the tribunal, his constant attack on the media, his angry charge that the matter is none of our business, all this bluster, all this hot air is peripheral to the core of the matter – Ahern cannot give a believable explanation for the source of large amounts of accepted cash.
The suspicion is that Ahern did accept money from property developers and others and is now desperately trying to cover up. The more he ‘explains’ the deeper the hole gets.
He was on This Week today attempting to explain the tax difficulties that have arisen in connection with his various ‘dig outs’ and ‘gifts’.
Essentially, he is claiming that the large amounts of money that he accepted when he was Minister for Finance and for which he is unable to provide a credible explanation and for which there are still outstanding tax implications, should be a private and confidential matter between himself and Revenue.
My understanding of his tax problems is: He received large amounts of cash in the early 1990s on which there are outstanding tax implications. If this is the case then he has been in breach of tax regulations for all his time as Taoiseach.
He stated on This Week that he was tax compliant for the 2002 election. It’s difficult to see how this claim could be true if his problems originated in the early 1990s.
Perhaps it’s time for a formal complaint to the Standards in Public Office Commission.
Labour Party leader, Eamon Gilmore was interviewed by RTEs Aine Lawlor (1st item) on the serious questions surrounding Bertie Ahern’s tax affairs.
Here’s an extract:
Gilmore:
“It is now in the public domain. I suppose the argument could be made that correspondence between him and his tax advisors and the Revenue Commissioners shouldn’t be in the public domain.”
Aine Lawlor:
“Well, it’s more than an argument, it’s a fact. An individual’s tax affairs are supposed to be private.”
Gilmore:
“Absolutely, correspondence between an individual and the Revenue Commissioners should not be published, no doubt at all about that.”
The Minister for Education, Mary Hanifin, was equally adamant on the matter (RTE Six One News, 4th item).
“The Taoiseach’s tax affairs are a private matter between him and the Revenue Commissioners.”
An article on the controversy by Senan Molony of the Irish Independent began:
“FIANNA FAIL sources are apoplectic with fury at the disclosure of his private correspondence with the Revenue Commissioners.”
I genuinely believe that I’m missing something here. All these people are speaking as if Bertie Ahern was an ordinary private citizen who was the victim of a malicious leak about his private tax affairs.
They seem to be totally unaware that he is the most powerful politician in the country; that he has failed to answer very serious questions about his acceptance of large sums of money from questionable sources and that he has, by his own admission, yet to fully deal with the matter from a taxation point of view.