Government incompetence

From Attic Archives.

Letter to Irish Times April 29 2003

Madam,

In his strong attack on government incompetence over the handling of the SARS crisis (Irish Times, April 25th) Jasper Becker makes the following points.

1. Government leaders have been caught lying about the scandalous, half-baked reform of the health system.

2. A two-tier health service is paid for by the poor but favours the rich.

3. Government control of the media prevents them from reporting freely and fully on matters of public concern.

Mr. Becker was writing about the Chinese government but Irish citizens will not be unfamiliar with this type of system.

Yours etc.,
Anthony Sheridan

Senate referendum: A once in a lifetime chance to damage our corrupt political system

I don’t know nor care why Enda Kenny decided to allow Irish citizens an opportunity to abolish the Senate in a referendum on 4 October next.

What I do know with absolute certainty is that it is the greatest opportunity Irish citizens have ever been granted to do serious damage to the corrupt system that has betrayed and destroyed their country.

The Senate is much more than an exclusive club for the ruling/ privileged elite. It serves two other crucially important purposes.

It is an important visible symbol of the ruling elite’s power and it serves as an invaluable networking base to maintain that power and privilege.

I have no doubt that people such as Michael McDowell, David Norris, Mary O’Rourke and others are horrified at the prospect of losing this powerful institution that has, over the decades, been corrupted out of its original, legitimate use to become an exclusive club where political and business insiders look after each other’s interests.

The arguments put forward by the NO side are, for the most part, dishonest and ridiculous.

For example, the campaigning group Democracy Matters is asking citizens to vote in favour of retaining the Senate in order to revive the economy.

This ridiculous idea demonstrates the dearth of genuine reasons on the NO side for retaining the rotten institution.

The principal argument put forward by the NO side is political reform. Retain the Senate and we will (really, honestly this time) reform it to serve the people.

Well, we’ve heard that promise many, many times over the decades and 12 reform reports later we’re still waiting.

In 1979 the people voted in favour of a tiny, insignificant reform, the extension of the Senate franchise to graduates of all universities.

What happened?

Government after government, political party after political party contemptuously ignored the will of the people.

This elite club just couldn’t bring itself to share any power whatsoever with the great unwashed.

There will be no real political reform for so long as the corrupt political/administrative system responsible for destroying the lives of so many citizens remains in place. This will be the case whether or not the Senate is abolished.

If the referendum is defeated and the Senate remains in place those promising to reform the institution will, without a shadow of doubt, break their promise, it’s the way of Irish politics.

Instead, we will see the usual pretence of reform that will have just one principal aim – to ensure the Senate remains an exclusive club for the ruling elite.

The YES side led by Enda Kenny is just as dishonest when it promises major political reforms to compensate for the loss of the Senate.

There will be no substantial reform of our corrupt political system. The entire political system needs to be abolished and replaced with a truly democratic system that is publicly accountable and subject to the rule of law.

It is obvious that a great many people will be tempted to vote NO in order to punish this government or because they have given up on politics in general.

This would be a great pity.

This government will go; another will be installed. There will be no change; the corrupt system will continue to exploit Irish citizens as it has done for decades.

Any satisfaction gained by punishing this government will be short-term only.

If, however, the Senate is abolished it will send an earth-shattering shock through the corrupt political/administrative system. It will inflict permanent damage on the system from which it is unlikely to recover.

A vote to abolish will remove, in one decisive blow, a major source of support for those who desperately want to maintain the current rotten political system.

A vote to abolish could see the beginning of the end for the corrupt system that has blighted our country for so many decades and perhaps, just perhaps, set us on the road to building a new republic where politicians of vision and courage work for the good of the country and its people.

Copy to:

All political parties

Senator Landy to be investigated

I rang the Clerk of the Seanad during the week for an update on my two complaints against Senator Landy.

I was informed that they have been passed to the Committee for Members Interests for further investigation.

As usual I was treated with barely concealed contempt particularly when I asked some questions about procedures within the office of the Clerk of the Seanad

For example I wanted to know:

Is the office officially required to acknowledge receipt of complaints?

Where would I find the legislation covering complaints to the office?

Bizarrely, I was told I would have to get my own legal people on that, that the office was not in a position to give legal advice on such matters.

Eventually I got answers to my straight-forward questions but, as usual, I had to wrestle with the non-cooperative bureaucratic mindset first.

UK Parliament: Real democracy in action

It’s always refreshing to witness a real democracy at work.

The British Parliament defeated the Government on the question of military action against Syria.

It’s refreshing to see articulate, intelligent politicians debate the matter in front of a packed house without the crutch of zombie statements prepared by anonymous civil servants.

If the same situation existed in our gombeen parliament the decision would be made by three or four individuals behind closed doors covered by a blanket of absolute secrecy.

The Dail, Opposition and the people would then be informed of what action was going to be taken in their name.

And fuck anyone who had a problem with it.

Morgan Kelly: Straight talking and accurate

While looking at the Village Magazine website I came across a very interesting clip from RTE’s Prime Time in which Professor Morgan Kelly valiantly warns of the impending economic disaster that was about to hit the country.

His warnings were summarily dismissed by economists Brendan Keenan and Jim Power.

It’s noteworthy that we now seldom hear from Professor Kelly while Keenan and Power, who got it so wrong, are a constant presence on the airwaves analysing the disaster that they didn’t see right in front of their eyes.

It’s well worth having a look at the short clip for the full impact of Professor Kelly’s accurate forecast.

Pat Rabbitte: Wouldn't know a caveman if he met one in Dail Eireann

According to Pat Rabbitte there are no cavemen in the country (Morning Ireland).

Clearly, Mr. Rabbitte has never met a caveman otherwise he would be aware that the Houses of the Oireachtas are full of this particular species.

Indeed, Mr. Rabbitte is himself an excellent example of what a political caveman sounds like given his primitive response to a government invitation to businessman Denis O’Brien to attend the Global Irish Economic Forum in October (Irish Times).

I don’t know what kind of tests you would expect the Government to cause invitees to the Global Economic Forum to jump through.

Clearly, Mr. Rabbitte’s caveman brain has never heard of concepts like – ethics, morality, the public good, a country’s international reputation or even respect for a political system although, in fairness, respect for the latter predates even Mr. Rabbitte’s time in politics.

Two more complaints against Senator Landy:

As I mentioned in a previous article the Clerk of the Seanad has rejected my complaint regarding bribery claims by Labour Senator Denis Landy on the grounds that I did not make a complaint against a specific member of the Senate.

During my research compiling a new complaint I came across a code of conduct for members of Seanad Eireann on the Standards in Public Office (SIPO) website.

Delighted with this new information I rang SIPO to enquire about the procedure for making a complaint.

Sorry, Mr. Sheridan, we only deal with complaints against office holders. We cannot accept a complaint against an ordinary member of the Dail or Senate.

So why is this code of conduct published on your website?

Oh that’s just to inform citizens that such a code exists but it has nothing to do with us.

So what authority does a citizen submit a complaint to for breach of this code?

The Clerk of the Seanad or Dail.

So here I am again – back at the start of yet another circle.

I have now submitted two complaints to the Clerk of the Seanad specifically against Senator Landy (See full complaints below).

The first complaint is made under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) and is centred on the fact that Senator Landy did not report the bribery allegation to the relevant authorities and that he has refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe.

The second complaint is made under the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann, specifically under sections 1, 2, 3(i) and 3(ii) which states.

Members must interact with authorities involved with public administration and the enforcement of the law in a manner which is consistent with their roles as public representatives and legislators.

Complaints to Clerk of the Seanad.

15 August 2013

For attention of: The Clerk of the Seanad.

This is a formal complaint made under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) regarding a reported incident that occurred within the Houses of the Oireachtas on a date between the 1st and 19 July 2013.

The incident concerns a claim by Labour Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy is reported as saying:

I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government.

According to the report Senator Landy has refused to name the person who approached him but he did describe the person as a political figure.

The incident was first reported in the Sunday Independent on 21 July 2013. I have included the complete report below.

My complaint against Senator Landy is that he has failed to report this incident to the relevant authorities. He has also refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe.

I base my complaint on the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001, Section 8 (2) and specifically on the words “or done a specific act” contained in the legislation.

Senator Landy’s failure to report allegations of a serious crime to the relevant authorities is a specific act of omission.

Senator Landy’s refusal to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe is also a specific act.

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

15 August 2013

For attention of: Clerk of the Seanad.

This is a formal complaint against Senator Denis Landy for breaches of the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann.

The incident concerns a claim by Labour Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy is reported as saying:

I was approached by an individual in Leinster House and offered flights and a stay in a top hotel in New York should I go missing during this week.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government.

According to the report Senator Landy has refused to name the person who approached him but he did describe the person as a political figure.

The incident was first reported in the Sunday Independent on 21 July 2013

My complaint against Senator Landy is that he has failed to report this incident to the relevant authorities. He has also refused to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered what is, in effect, a bribe.

Senator Landy’s failure to report the alleged crime and his failure to reveal the identity of the person alleged to have offered the bribe are in breach of the following sections of the Code of Conduct for Members of Seanad Eireann and in particular is in breach of Section 3 (ii).

1. Members must, in good faith, strive to maintain the trust placed in them, and exercise the influence gained from their public office to advance the public interest.

2. Members must conduct themselves in accordance with the provisions and spirit of the Code of Conduct and ensure that their conduct does not bring the integrity of their office or the Seanad into disrepute.

3. (i) Members have a particular obligation to behave in a manner which is consistent with the proper performance of the functions of the Office of Member of Seanad Éireann and with the maintenance of confidence in such performance by the general public.

(ii) Members must interact with authorities involved with public administration and the enforcement of the law in a manner which is consistent with their roles as public representatives and legislators.

Yours Sincerely

Anthony Sheridan

Senator Landy complaint rejected by Clerk of the Seanad

I received a letter today from the Clerk of the Seanad rejecting my complaint regarding an alleged attempt to bribe Senator Denis Landy (See letter below).

As I wrote previously, it’s a catch 22 situation. If a complaint is not specifically made against a member of the Dail or Senate the State will not act.

In other words, corruption and all other kinds of skullduggery can take place within the confines of our parliament without any response from the State, unless a ‘member’ can be indentified as being involved.

Oh wait, that actually has been the reality for many decades now.

I will now submit a complaint against Senator Denis Landy.

Copy to:
Clerk of the Seanad
Senator Landy
All political parties

Letter from Clerk of the Seanad.

Dear Mr. Sheridan,

I refer to your our previous correspondence and your letter of 8 August 2013.

As you are aware there is a statutory complaints procedure available to members of the public under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001 (“the Ethics Acts”).

Section 8 (2) states “a person…who considers that a member…may have contravened sections 5 or 7 or done a specified act may make a complaint…to the Clerk…” (emphasis added)(by the Clerk of the Seanad).

Thus, as can be seen from s.8 (2) it is a fundamental requirement of the Act that a complaint is made against a member (which is defined in the Acts as a member of Dail or Seanad Eireann).

The member, who should be named or otherwise identified, must be alleged to have contravened s.5 or s.7 or have done a specified act. While you name Senator Landy in your correspondence, it is still not clear that you seek to make a complaint in line with the Ethics Acts. about him or indeed any other Senator.

In the absence of a complaint which meets the requirements of the legislation, including that the complaint should be against a member, I cannot deal with your complaint under the Ethics Acts.

Therefore no further action will be taken by my Office unless a complaint which meets the requirements of the Acts is submitted.

If at any point you do wish to make a complaint in accordance with the Ethics Acts about a Senator, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,
Clerk of the Seanad