Category: Body Politic

Phil Hogan is a liar

Former Environment minister Phil Hogan is a liar. We know this by simply looking at the facts surrounding the establishment of Irish Water.

When the €50 million consultancy fees scandal broke Hogan effectively denied he knew anything about the details.

He claimed he was merely aware of the overall cost.

It’s not my job, (it actually was his job) it’s a matter for Irish Water, I allow the professionals to get on with their job.

Junior Minister Fergus O’Dowd supported the Minister saying that neither he nor the minister were sent the information regarding the €50 million.

We now know that Hogan signed off on a document which outlined in great detail the costs involved in setting up Irish Water.

The document in question was signed by Hogan and bore the stamp – Seen and approved by the Minister.

Now this stamp/signature is very important. It exists to protect civil servants from being blamed for making decision without authority. It exists to prove that a Minister has read and is fully aware of very important details on any particular matter.

Some journalists have suggested that perhaps the Minister signed the document but didn’t actually read the details. This doesn’t wash.

Seen and approved by the Minister means he has read and approved the entire document.

He did therefore, by his own admission (his signature) read and approve the documents and was, by extension, fully aware of all its details.

In other words, Hogan micromanaged this issue right down to his signature.

His denial of this fact makes him a liar.

But in common with most politicians Hogan is not worried about any possible consequences. His arrogance overrides any such concerns and his arrogance is justified – there won’t be any consequences.

Neither is he alone in his lying. Lying is an ingrained part of Irish political culture. Lying during elections, lying to constituents about favours, lying under oath – all part of the gombeen culture that destroyed our country.

Stephen Collins: A clueless journalist

After reading this article by Irish Times columnist Stephen Collins I’ve decided to add a new category to the blog – ‘Clueless journalists’.

I’m not going to waste valuable minutes of my life actually analysing the article.

The following quote will be sufficient to demonstrate that this particular journalist has no notion whatsoever of the actual underlying political reality in this country.

Since the economic crisis struck this country in 2008 there has been a lot of talk about the collapse of public confidence in our politicians and the need to reform our political system.

It’s an interesting subject for debate but doesn’t really affect the underlying political reality one way or another.

Democratic accountability – in 95 years time

I see former Taoiseach John Bruton thinks that the Easter Rising and subsequent War of Independence were completely unnecessary.

Now there are many who will criticise Bruton for his views but I think such people should take comfort from the fact that the reaction time to political events by Irish politicians is reducing.

Bruton’s reaction brings the time scale below the 100 years mark.

We can therefore look forward, for example, to a Fine Gael Taoiseach in, say 95 years time, courageously expressing the view that Enda Kenny did indeed fire a Garda commissioner and should make himself democratically accountable.

Willie O'Dea: Joker of the month

Fianna Fail TD Willie O’Dea on the jailing of Ivor Callelly.

Members of different political parties have over the years breached the trust of the electorate in this way. There are a number of examples of criminal proceedings against various members of various parties.

I think, in fairness, all parties have taken a similar approach here. They’ve dealt very firmly and very decisively with any such breaches.

Secrecy still protecting law breaking politicians

Dublin local authorities have issued more than 90 fines to political candidates who failed to remove posters on time after the local and European elections last May (Irish Times).

But once again it has been decided that the great unwashed are not be told the names of politicians/parties who have broken the law.

Fingal and Dublin/Rathdown County Councils said they couldn’t release the names for ‘data protection reasons’.

Dublin City Council did not reveal figures either, haughtily decreeing that:

Enforcement activity will be reported to the Elected Members in due course.

I rang the Data Protection Commissioner’s office to ask were these local authorities permitted to keep such information secret and, if so, under what section of the Data Protection Act they were exercising their power.

I received an acknowledgement and a promise that an answer would be forthcoming within the next 15 working days.

I rang Fingal County Council with the same question and, as usual, I was told to put my query in writing.

I did and received the following reply:

Dear Mr. Sheridan,

I refer to your phone call today and subsequent email. Unfortunately I am not in a position to offer you legal advice in relation to this matter.

Best Regards

My reply:

Dear…

Clearly, you have misunderstood my request. I am not seeking legal advice in any manner or form.

I am merely requesting the relevant section of the Data Protection Act under which Fingal County Council is basing its decision to keep confidential the names of candidates and political parties who have been fined for failing to remove election posters in the recent local and European elections.

My request is specifically focused on the following quote in today’s Irish Times.

She (a spokeswoman for Fingal County Council) said details of the candidates or parties that received fines would not be made available for data protection reasons.

It is reasonable to assume that the spokesperson is aware of the relevant section of the Data Protection Act to which she is referring.

I simply want to know that particular section.

Yours etc.,
Anthony Sheridan

Is the Iona Institute guilty of intellectually abusing schoolchildren?

Last April, religious militant and director of the Iona Institute David Quinn, delivered a lecture to fifth and sixth year students falsely informing them that the origin of the universe had nothing to do with science but was strictly a matter for religion/philosophy (See full article here).

There is an abundance of scientific evidence relating to the origin of the universe. Scientific discoveries such as background radiation, inflation and the recently discovered gravitational waves are all scientific facts supporting the idea that the origin of the universe is scientific.

In stark contrast, Mr. Quinn’s claim that the origin of the universe is a philosophical and religious one has no basis in fact whatsoever.

Despite centuries of philosophical and religious debate on the question of the origin of the universe not a single fact has been produced to confirm the myriad of speculative opinions emanating from that quarter.

What is really disturbing about this incident is the fact that Mr. Quinn and the Iona Institute appear to have unrestricted access to propagate what is effectively, religious propaganda to innocent students.

It is obvious from reading Mr. Quinn’s article that his lecture had nothing to do with genuine education, that it was not designed to inform students about the pros and cons in the debate between science and religion.

In addition to the lie concerning the origin of the universe Mr. Quinn’s lecture seems to have been nothing more than a vicious attack on New Atheism and in particular on Richard Dawkins.

Mr. Quinn regularly makes such attacks across various media outlets and, while rationally obnoxious, he is entitled to hold and express those views.

But what is not acceptable and what is deeply disturbing, is the apparent freedom extended to the Iona Institute to effectively intellectually abuse innocent schoolchildren.

I made a formal complaint on the matter to the Department of Education.

The response, while entirely predictable, was nevertheless shocking.

Effectively, the Department said – Nothing to do with us, it’s the responsibility of the boards of management and the patron of each school (See below for my formal complaint, reply from Dept. of Education and my response).

This is the same irresponsible response by the Dept/Government as that taken in the Louise O’Keeffe scandal.

Ms. O’Keeffe, who had been sexually abused by a teacher as a schoolgirl in the 1970s, lost her case for justice in the Irish High and Supreme Courts but finally found justice when the decision of the Irish courts was overturned by the European Court of Human Rights.

Although disgusting in the extreme it seems that this ‘legal arrangement’ is proving very useful to politicians and civil servants as a means of abdicating any responsibility whatsoever towards protecting children from abuse whether physical, sexual or intellectual.

Copy to:
Department of Education
Iona Institute
All political parties

Formal complaint:

10 April 2014

For attention of Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn

This is a formal complaint regarding a lecture delivered by the director of the Iona Institute David Quinn to a group of fifth and sixth year students earlier this month.

Mr. Quinn wrote about his lecture in an article in the Irish Catholic newspaper of 3 April last. The title of the article, which is provided in full below, is:

The atheist’s act of faith

The question of the origin of the universe isn’t a scientific one at all, but a philosophical and religious one.

My complaint is as follows:

Mr. Quinn’s lecture is based entirely on a falsehood; namely that the origin of the universe is not a scientific one at all but rather a philosophical and religious one.

There is an abundance of scientific evidence relating to the origin of the universe. Scientific discoveries such as background radiation, inflation and the recently discovered gravitational waves are all factual events that give the lie to Mr. Quinn’s claim that the question of the origin of the universe is not scientific.

Furthermore, Mr. Quinn’s claim that the question of the origin of the universe is a philosophical and religious one has no basis in fact whatsoever.

Despite centuries of philosophical and religious debate on the question of the origin of the universe not a single fact has been produced to confirm the myriad of speculative opinions emanating from that quarter.

In effect, Mr. Quinn was permitted to encourage students to ignore established scientific facts regarding the origin of the universe and instead accept that his Christian god created the universe.

It is unacceptable and indeed disturbing that somebody with a very strong religious bias like Mr. Quinn would be granted apparent unrestricted access to students to promote a religious viewpoint based on a falsehood.

It is unacceptable and indeed disturbing that any outside influence would be permitted apparent unrestricted access to students to promote a particular view without the long established safeguards of independent/objective supervision and the right to hear an opposing argument.

According to legislation the Board of Management of schools are accountable to the patron and to the Minister. This complaint is addressed to the Minister in this context.

Yours sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Response from Department of Education:

Dear Mr Sheridan

I refer to your letter addressed to the Minister for Education and Skills.

While this Department sets out the constitution of Boards of Management and rules of procedure it is not directly involved in the management of schools. Under the provisions of the Education Act, 1998, the Board of Management is the body charged with the direct governance of a school. The schools Board of Management is accountable to the school Patron.

Accordingly, whereas the Department provides funding and policy direction for schools, the Department does not have the power to instruct schools to follow a particular course of direction with regard to individual complaint cases.

Religious Education is one of 33 Leaving Certificate subjects available to schools. The selection of text books and classroom resources to support the implementation of the curriculum is made by schools, rather than by the Department of Education and Skills or the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment.

The Office of the Ombudsman for Children may independently investigate complaints relating to the administrative actions of a school recognised by the Department of Education and Skills, provided the complainant has firstly and fully followed the school’s complaints procedures. The key criterion for any intervention by the Ombudsman for Children is that the administrative actions of a school has, or may have, adversely affected the child. The office can be contacted at: Ombudsman for Children’s Office, Millennium House, 52-56 Great Strand Street, Dublin 1; tel. 1800 20 20 40 or (01) 865 6800 or email oco@oco.ie.

I hope the information that provided is of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely,

My response to the Department of Education

28 May 2014

To Whom It May Concern:

Your response to my formal complaint concerning a lecture delivered to fifth and six-year students by the director of the Iona Institute David Quinn is a disgrace for the following reasons.

One: Apart from issuing meaningless bureaucratic waffle, the decision to do nothing will almost certainly result in some degree of damage to innocent children.

After decades of horrific child abuse the very least we could expect of officialdom is to make some enquiries into the matter. Given the history of child abuse in Ireland it is highly likely that the Iona Institute is not the only organisation that enjoys unrestricted access to preach religious and other damaging propaganda to children.

Two: Your indifferent response is a further disturbing reflection of how unprofessional civil servants have become. Scandal after scandal, on an almost weekly basis, gives witness to this decay of professionalism right across all departments.

Three: Your response is an insult to my intelligence. It is an obvious fact that the Department of Education is intimately involved in every aspect of education across all levels. It is also a fact that if you wished, you could easily carry out an investigation into this matter.

That you chose not to thus placing children in potential danger is a disgrace on you and your profession.

Yours etc.,
Anthony Sheridan

Burton and Kelly: Political pygmies when it comes to Sinn Fein

Joan Burton and Alan Kelly have an almost impossible task ahead of them in repairing the serious damage done to the Labour Party as a result of the party’s participation in government.

So the question is – do they possess the vision and political nous for the job?

In a word – No.

The duo’s policy on coalition with Sinn Fein tells us all we need to know about their political intelligence.

Here’s Kelly’s take on the issue.

I’d be very reticent to go into Government with Sinn Féin. I think they’ve a road to travel yet.

Northern Ireland is a different space; it’s a different context. In the Republic we’ve a tradition of democracy. We’ve a tradition from a political point of view about being pretty open about where we come from and what we stand for.

I’m not sure Sinn Féin have got to the point of being totally up-front with people in regards where they come from and what they stand for.

Kelly uttered these hilariously hypocritical views without a grain of awareness of just how insulting they are to most people and particularly to those governing in Northern Ireland.

Joan Burton is in full agreement with his views.

So how do these views fit in with the rest of the world?

America, the most powerful country in the world accepts Sinn Fein as a bona fide political party.

The European Union fully accepts that Sinn Fein has given up its violent ways and is committed to the democratic process.

The United Nations is fully supportive of Sinn Fein’s democratic mandate and its continuing efforts to progress the Peace Process.

Unionist politicians and their supporters, even though it is extremely difficult for them, are prepared to share power with Sinn Fein.

The Queen of England, a woman who has more reason than most to hate and reject Sinn Fein is supportive, courteous and respectful to Sinn Fein.

The vast majority of Irish citizens in the Republic, the North, Britain and around the world accept unconditionally that Sinn Fein is genuine in their intentions.

Citizens of the Republic have demonstrated their support in referendums and elections on numerous occasions.

It seems it is only the political pygmies who inhabit gombeen land that have difficulty in accepting the reality that Sinn Fein is here to stay.

Copy to:
Labour Party

Eamon Gilmore: An insignificant footnote

Eamon Gilmore is gone; he will not be missed by the vast majority of Irish citizens.

He operated easily within our corrupt political/administrative system.

He leaves mainstream politics with the majority of the citizens he pretended to represent a great deal worse off.

On the 18 August 1991, 23 years ago, Gilmore had an article published in the Irish Times calling for Dail reform.

Here are some quotes from the article:

The Dail is becoming redundant; the government treats it with contempt.

Why should the Government control 80% of Dail time and dictate the agenda?

Most of the laws which now affect the daily lives of the people do not get discussed at all in the Dail.

It is a very secret system of law making.

Government accountability to the Dail is minimal.

The pretence at legislation and accountability which now characterises Dail Eireann cannot continue much longer. Politicians who cannot (or will not) reform their own jaded parliament cannot be expected to reform the country.

We can see from the article that Gilmore, just like the rest of our politicians, knows very well what needs to be done to improve governance for the good of all citizens.

We can also see that, instead of actually acting on his own proposals, he opted for the more comfortable and lucrative life of a gombeen politician.

The dysfunctional Dail he wrote about in 1991 is still just as corrupt, just as dysfunctional.

His career is nothing more than an insignificant footnote.

The full article:

18 August 1991
Eamon Gilmore
Irish Times

The Dail – a failed political entity in need of reform

Interest groups come to lobby it. School children come to look down at it. Television cameras have begun to broadcast it. Most people believe that the Dail is where the laws are made and where the Government is made accountable to the public.

But the reality is very different. The Dail is becoming redundant.

For 40% of the year it does not meet at all. For the remainder, we have a two and a half day week.

Output is low. Procedures are archaic. The Government treats it with contempt. And most TDs spend as little time as possible in the Dail chamber. The National Agenda – unemployment, crime, the North, European Union – gets a better airing in the pubs around the summer schools than in the national parliament.

Unless the Dail is reformed people will rightly see it as irrelevant. They will stop voting, just as happened at the recent local elections when the public lost confidence in their ineffective County Councils.

Dail reform has been talked about for a long time, but nothing has been done.

The Fianna Fail/PD programme for Government promised “to bring forward detailed proposals for the reform of the Oireachtas by the end of 1989.” Two years later, there are still no Government proposals.

A sub-committee of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges recommended some minor changes, but these have made matters worse.

“Priority Questions”, for example take the bite out of question time as ministers get an easy ride from mediocre Fine Gael questions.

So what must be done to transform the Dail?

Let us make a clean break with the colonial parliamentary baggage which was inherited at independence. The Dail is a hand-me-down copy of Westminster, with quaint procedures, dated language and a public-school style of debate.

It is time to make a fresh start, with new standing orders, a modern round-table approach to discussing the issues, and electronic voting which will reduce the time wasted on “divisions”.

Take legislation. In theory all TDs are legislators. In practice only ministers and Ministers of State can claim the title.

Government backbenchers can never propose a Bill, and while opposition TDs can circulate bills, there is not enough private members’ time to debate them and anyway they are defeated by the Government’s superior numbers.

Why should the Government control 80% of Dail time and dictate the agenda? Additional private members’ time could easily be found by extending Dail sitting times and there is no reason why reforming legislation, which does not require finance, cannot be advanced by individual TD.

The Government’s attitude to the Dail is increasingly contemptuous. Most major ministerial announcements are now made to press conferences outside the Dail and TDs are then prevented from pursuing the issue because of the absurd rule that “the legislation was not promised in the house.”

A simple change to standing orders would remedy that, by enabling TDs to question ministers about legislation whether it was promised in Leinster House or across the road in Buswell’s.

Most of the laws which now affect the daily lives of the people do not get discussed at all in the Dail. Your taxes and social welfare payments for example are rarely debated because the Finance and Social Welfare Bills are usually guillotined. The Local Government Bill was passed with only four of its 55 Sections examined.

Controversial bills are now usually published only at the last minute and then rushed through the Oireachtas in order to minimise public controversy.

Legislation like the Broadcasting Bill, the Local Government Bill and the Social Welfare Bill are published on a Thursday, the second stage debate is started on the following Tuesday and the Committee and final stages taken the week after that. So the opposition has little or no time to examine the Bill and interest groups outside the Dail have no time to organise themselves.

None of the hundreds of ministerial regulations which are made every year are ever debated in the Dail. Recent examples are the regulations to control dangerous dogs and the regulation banning smoky coal.

This style of government by ministerial diktat is likely to increase, because most of the primary legislation which is now passed by the Dail is “enabling” legislation, allowing ministers to make rules which will never have to be debated in parliament. It is a very secret system of law making.

Government accountability to the Dail is minimal. Each minister replies to Dail questions only three or four times per year. Even then, only about 10% of the Oral Questions which are tabled are ever answered in the Dail chamber.

Many of these are on matters about which the minister clearly knows nothing and is simply reading the civil servant’s prepared script. Since a Minister for Education, for example, can’t be expected to know about every school building and teacher in the country, why not have a two-tier system of questioning – one tier directly to senior civil servants about routine administrative matters, and the second addressed to a minister on general and policy matters on which she/he would be expected to answer without constant reference to the little pink file.

Politicians, who are now arguing that a change in the electoral system would improve Parliamentary performance, should first examine the failings of the Dail.

Legislative output would be greatly enhanced by having the Dail week on a normal five-day, year-round basis. There is understandable resistance to this from deputies who are based outside Dublin, but there is a solution – votes, especially if there were electronic voting, could be confined to two or three days of the week.

There is no good reason why the Dail, and especially its committees, should always meet in Dublin. Why not rotate the venues around the country?

The pretence at legislation and accountability which now characterises Dail Eireann cannot continue much longer. Politicians who cannot (or will not) reform their own jaded parliament cannot be expected to reform the country.

Copy to:
Eamon Gilmore
Labour Party

Senator Turnhout: 'We' are to blame for the horror

Senator Jillian van Turnhout tweeted the following in response to the nightmare conditions under which asylum seekers are subjected to by the State.

We cannot say we didn’t know how bad it was!

On the reasonable assumption that the ‘we’ Ms. Turnhout speaks of includes ordinary (powerless) citizens as opposed to those who wield power, my response is as follows:

Dear Ms. Turnhout,

You are a member of the body politic of this country. You were (allegedly) put there to serve the best interests of Ireland and its people. You and your fellow politicians created and sustains the political/administrative environment within which such injustices occur.

You can, at any time of your choosing, act to relieve the horror of Direct Provision.

You could, for example, begin a campaign among your fellow politicians; you could stand outside Dail Eireann with a placard demanding justice. You could, if all else fails, resign in protest.

You will not, of course, take any of these actions for one simple but disgraceful reason – your principal loyalty is to yourself and the government that bestowed upon you the power and privileges of public office.

The only action you are prepared to take, apparently, is to turn on those you claim to serve and blame them for the horror.

Such cowardly responses are the mainstay for what passes as political responsibility in our dysfunctional democracy.

Copy to:
Senator Turnhout

Labour senator Denis Landy is a traitor and a political coward

Labour senator Denis Landy is a traitor and a political coward.

In July 2013 he announced to the country that he had, effectively, been offered a bribe by a political person within the confines of the Oireachtas.

Despite the fact that this is probably one of the most serious crimes that a politician can become involved in, Landy refused to identify the person who offered him the bribe. He also refused to report the matter to the Gardai or Oireachtas authorities.

Landy is a member of a regime that promised a ‘democratic revolution’ in response to decades of political incompetence, arrogance and corruption.

In other words, he must be very aware of the damage done to Ireland and its people by irresponsible and corrupt politicians and so must also be aware of the urgent need for current politicians to stand up to the plate in order to root out the rot that has infected the body politic.

Landy’s failure to do the right thing, particularly in these times of great hardship and economic danger, makes him a traitor.

The official reaction to Landy’s bribery claims and his irresponsible decision to do nothing was entirely precictable. The Gardai showed no interest, Oireacthas officials ignored the matter.

But the reaction of the Labour Party, that the issue was a personal matter for Landy, demonstrated just how morally bankrupt our political system has become.

Labour’s disgraceful reaction makes the party just as traitorous as Landy himself.

In an attempt to force Landy to account for his (non) actions I made a formal complaint through the Clerk of the Seanad to the Committee on Members’ Interests of Seanad Eireann.

Senator Landy, a so-called public representative, refused to attend or co-operate with the committee in any form whatsoever.

He responded to all requests from the committee from behind the apron strings of his legal team.

In other words, in addition to being a traitor Senator Landy is also a political coward.

The behaviour and ultimate decision arrived at by the Committee on Members’ Interests of Seanad Eireann on this matter was just as disgraceful as the behaviour of Landy and the Labour Party.

I’ll be coming back to that later.

Copy to:
Senator Landy
Labour Party
Committee on Members’ Interests of Seanad Eireann.