Category: Government

E-voting machines: Everything must be destroyed

I see the e-voting machines have finally been shredded (Irish Examiner).

In June 2012 when the machines were sold to KMK Metals the owner of the company, Kurt Kyck, planned to sell 100 of the 7,500 machines and donate the funds to charity

Unfortunately, the Dept. of the Environment intervened and insisted that every machine must be destroyed.

At the time I rang the company anyway in the hope of purchasing parts of the machines, specifically motherboards and other electronic elements for an art project.

The manager, who clearly had the Department’s warnings still ringing in his ears, was adamant.

I’m sorry Mr. Sheridan but we have been instructed to destroy everything, even down to the smallest component.

It may be an unfair comparison but I was reminded of the Nazi’s destroying records as it became obvious that their crimes were about to be uncovered.

The most deadly animal of all: The raging elephant of corruption

Two recent events serve to demonstrate just how far this country is away from facing reality.

Labour Senator Denis Landy publicly announced that someone had attempted to bribe him within the confines of our parliament.

The media response to this sensational event was moderate at best. There was no state response whatsoever.

A mother and child were attacked by a Tapir in Dublin zoo.

The media response was wall to wall and even now, days after the event, it is still being reported.

Take RTE for example: The incident was reported and analysed at length on Morning Ireland, Today with Myles Dungan, News at One, Liveline and Drivetime.

It made headline news for several days in all the newspapers and some even felt the need to make editorial comment.

On Liveline we heard Joe Duffy asking a caller such penetrating questions as:

Would a sheep make such an attack?

Oh yes, replied the caller, but sheep are weak so wouldn’t do as much damage.

Another caller went into forensic detail about how she was savagely attacked by a cat fourteen weeks ago.

Was it painful, asked Joe?

I never felt pain like it said the savaged woman.

Describe the cat, prompted Joe.

After a detailed description of the deadly cat the woman pleaded with the nation to be on the lookout for the monster.

She finished by warning the nation of just how deadly cats can be.

Cats are more dangerous than dogs because they constantly clean themselves. It’s the salvia, you know, all the germs are collected in the salvia and if they bite you, well, you’re doomed.

Notwithstanding the horror and pain suffered by the victims in Dublin zoo, this event is a non-story. The mother tapir, like all mothers, acted to defend her offspring – end of story.

Meanwhile, the Labour Party, elected to power principally to deal with the rampant political and financial corruption that effectively destroyed the lives of a majority of Irish citizens, announced that the bribery allegations made by Senator Landy had nothing to do with them. It was a private matter for the Senator and they were going to do nothing.

As a country we have not moved ahead by one inch in tackling the disease of political/financial corruption since the days when the criminal politician Haughey made such activity an integral part of our national heritage.

Instead, we grasp at any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, to avoid talking about the most deadly animal of all – the raging elephant of corruption that’s dancing all over our lives.

Labour Party continues the betrayal of Ireland and its people

That’s a matter for himself.

With this short sentence the Labour Party has confirmed and condemned itself as part of the corrupt political/administrative system that has destroyed this country.

When asked if the party was concerned that one of its senators had alleged he was bribed a spokesperson said:

That’s a matter for himself.

So let’s be crystal clear about what’s happening here.

Labour is refusing to act on this extremely serious matter because it is presently holding power within our corrupt political/administrative system.

It hardly needs to be said that if Labour was in opposition and a senator from another party claimed he had been bribed they would be jumping up and down for a political and police investigation.

The first decision every person elected to our Dail or Senate must make, either consciously or subconsciously, is:

Will I challenge the corrupt system or will I say nothing and keep my head down?

The vast bulk of TDs and Senators decide, either consciously or subconsciously to support and, if necessary, defend the corrupt system.

Every such decision does enormous damage to Ireland and its people particularly since the economic collapse of 2008.

Every such decision puts off the day when the Irish people can enjoy the benefits of living in a functional democracy where the rule of law applies to all and not just to those without power and influence.

Every politican who courageuosly challenges the corrupt system is immediately attacked by its members and ejected from its ranks.

Roisin Shortall and Nessa Childers are among the very small number of politicians who had the courage and integrity to challenge the system.

Because courage and integrity are strictly prohibited within our corrupt political system they had to go in order for the system to survive.

Nessa Childers chillingly described what can happen to even the most idealistic politician:

I felt I was being corrupted by the system.

Unfortunately, the vast bulk of initially idealistic politicans allow the system to infect them, to one degree or another, with the disease of corruption.

Senator Landy’s refusal to report the very serious crime of attempted bribery is an indication of how the corrupt system can warp the principles and integrity of even the most patriotic politician.

The Labour Party’s absolute refusal to act on the matter is an indication of just how corrupt the entire political system has become.

And let me be clear, Labour are not alone in abandoning truth, honesty and intergrity when operating within the corrupt political system.

To date every Irish political party, when faced with scandal and corruption, have opted to defend the rotten system and thus preserve their power rather than standing up for Ireland and its people.

Here’s former Progressive Democrats TD, Fiona O’Malley’s response to scandal and corruption.

It’s something that has always annoyed me, that the PDs are watchdogs. We have our own standards. Every other political party is responsible for their own standards within their own party. We are not watchdogs for any other party.

Green Party leader and then Minister for the Environment John Gormley when he had to decide whether to challenge the corrupt system or remain in power.

We never assigned ourselves that role because it’s a role which you cannot fulfill properly and do your work as well. We’re not the moral watchdog of any political party…we look after our probity and our standards…we cannot be responsible for events that took place before our entry into government.

And current Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton effectively rejecting the ethical standards of Roisin Shortall in favour of Minister Reilly’s stroke politics.

The fortunes of individual politicians and political parties comes after the issue of restoring the fortunes and the businesses and the employment that’s been lost in this country, and that’s our objective.

These politicians are, effectively, denying that they have any responsibility to challenge, defeat and root out the disease of corruption that has inflicted so much pain and suffering on Irish citizens.

Labour’s short but extremely damaging response to the latest allegations of corruption continues the betrayal by the body politic of Ireland and its people in favour of retaining power and influence within a hopelessly corrupt system.

That deeply depressing situation will not change until the people of Ireland are blessed with a politician or political party that never sees corruption as a personal matter for individual politicians but rather as a dangerous disease that requires immediate extermination.

Copy to:

Senator Landy
All political parties

Formal complaint to Gardai and Clerk of the Seanad in response to Senator Landy's allegations of bribery

On 1 August last I submitted a formal complaint in writing to Cobh Gardai in response to allegations of bribery made by Labour Senator Denis Landy (See full complaint below).

I also submitted a formal request to the Select Committee on Members’ Interests Seanad Éireann to investigate the matter.

This submission was made to the Clerk of the Seanad by email.

The Clerk of the Seanad rejected my request on the following grounds.

One: It was made via email. Apparently, all such submissions must be made in hard copy and physically posted to the Clerk of the Seanad.

While endearing, this insistence on using an ancient communications system does not auger well for those who argue that the Senate is a viable institution that should be retained.

Two: I requested an investigation into the matter rather than making a complaint. Apparently, I should have made a formal complaint under Section 8 (2) of the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001.

Crucially, this legislation only allows for a member of the public to make a complaint against a member (of the Houses of the Oireachtas) who may have contravened Sections 5 or 7 or done a specified act.

In plain English, this means that a complaint must be made under Section 8 (2) of the Act and therefore must be made against a member.

The Catch 22 is, of course, that I am not making a complaint against a member. I am making a complaint regarding allegations of a very serious crime that took place within the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The strict adherence to the letter of the law/legislation by bureaucrats and the absence of any mechanism by which a complaint can be made regarding allegations of criminal activity within the confines of the Houses of the Oireachtas means that my complaint is likely to be rejected on the grounds that I am not making a specific complaint against a specific member.

The following exchange between myself and a senior official at the office of the Clerk of the Seanad makes this very clear.

Me: Should I submit it as a complaint?

Official: Yes, a complaint is the word used in the Act. You may make a complaint in respect of a specified act, as in an action. The Act says that a person who considers that a member (emphasised) of the Oireachtas may have contravened Sections 5 or 7 of the Act or done a specified act, something that is not permitted may make a complaint to the Clerk, so your complaint must relate to a member.

Me: In other words, my complaint must be against a member?

Official: Yes.

Me: So what you’re saying is that my complaint is going to be rejected because I will not be making a complaint against a member?

Official: I’m not saying that but I can see how that is a logical conclusion.

Me: I can’t see any other conclusion given what you’ve said to me.

Official: Yes.

Irish citizens who will be voting to abolish or retain the Senate later this year will be wise to consign this archaic, expensive and totally useless institution to the history books.

After all, that’s the bubble in which its members, regulations and procedures actually exist.

Copy to:
Clerk of the Seanad
All political parties
Michael McDowell

See below:
Complaint to Cobh Gardai
Request for investigation to Clerk of the Seanad
Reply (rejection email) from Clerk of Seanad
Second complaint to Clerk of Seanad

Cobh Garda Station
Cobh
Co Cork

1 August 2013

To Whom It May Concern:

I wish to formally report allegations of bribery made by Labour Senator Denis Landy as reported in the Irish Independent on 21 July 2013.

Senator Landy claimed that he was offered a plush holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy was 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.”

I have included below the full Irish Independent report.

Yours Sincerely

Anthony Sheridan

Signed:

——————————————————————————————————-

First submission to Clerk of the Seanad

29th July 2013

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a formal request to the Committee on Members Interests (Seanad Éireann) to investigate a claim by Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush foreign holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Senator Landy expressed the opinion that the offer was made in an attempt to defeat the Government or, that he was effectively offered a bribe.

I include a report on the matter published in the Irish Independent on 21st July last.

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Reply from Clerk of the Seanad

Dear Mr Sheridan,

I refer to your email of 29 July 2013 in which you make a request in the following terms:
“This is a formal request to the Committee on Members Interests (Seanad Éireann) to investigate a claim by Senator Denis Landy that he was offered a plush foreign holiday to coincide with a series of votes on the referendum to abolish the Seanad.”

While members of the public can correspond directly with Committees on any matter, I would note that there is no statutory procedure to request the Committee on Members’ Interests to commence an investigation.

There is however a statutory complaints procedure available to members of the public under the Ethics in Public Office Acts 1995 and 2001. 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 …”.

Under the same section, The Clerk of the Seanad refers complaints to the Members’ Interests Committee of Seanad Éireann unless s/he forms the opinion that the complaint is frivolous or vexatious or that there is “not sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case in relation to the complaint”.
If the complaint is rejected, the Clerk is obliged to send the complainant, the member concerned and the Committee a statement of reasons for so doing.

Therefore, please confirm if you wish for me to treat your correspondence as a formal complaint in line with the procedure under the Ethics Acts. If you confirm that you do not want to make such a complaint, your correspondence will then be forwarded to the Committee.

If you choose to follow the complaints procedure outlined it is crucial that you provide to me all evidence available to you which is relevant to your complaint.
This information will assist me in considering whether the complaint must be sent to the Committee. If you do choose to make such a complaint I should be obliged if you would also sign your letter and return the signed copy to me.

You may rest assured that on receipt of this further information, this matter will be dealt with promptly in so far as I and the Clerk are concerned.
Please find attached an appendix with certain relevant sections of the Ethics Acts enclosed.
Yours sincerely,

Second submission to Clerk of Seanad (By post)

8th August 2013

To: 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 19th July 2013.

The complaint 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 21st July 2013. I have included the complete report below.

The response of some politicians, as reported in the Irish Independent of 24th July, may be helpful in considering the matter.

Labour Seanad chief whip Aideen Hayden is reported as saying:

“It is obviously a very serious matter if someone has attempted to subvert the workings of the house in this way.

Seanad leader Maurice Cummins called on Mr Landy to report the matter to the Gardai. The Fine Gael senator told the Seanad that allegations of bribery and corruption were an extremely serious matter.

Rebel Fine Gael senator Fidelma Healy Eames also called on Mr Landy to give the “truth” about what had happened.

“If someone attempted to bribe him to absent himself from votes in this house last week, then that is very serious.”

Yours Sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Healy-Rae's gombeen influence

While going through some old newspapers in the Attic Archives I came across an article in the Irish Times (October 31st 2000) reporting how Jackie Healy-Rae sought and was granted an extension for tax relief for a multi-storey car park in Kenmare.

Healy-Rae was making the representation on behalf of Cork businessman Mr. Dermot Murphy who was building the contentious car park and apartment complex in Kenmare.

Can I appeal to your good office (Charlie McCreevy, Minister for Finance) to make certain that the time here for this tax incentive would be extended in the case of Kenmare.

McCreevy’s advisers supported the extension.

We feel there is a strong case for relaxing this deadline.

Well, of course there was a strong case. Healy-Rae was one of four independent TDs on whom the Government depended on for survival.

The liar Ahern had bought himself power by paying millions in taxpayer’s money in a secret deal with the independent TDs.

When asked by a reporter for details of the deal the liar, effectively, told the taxpayer’s of Ireland to take a hike.

The stats of a failed state

3,050 children are currently waiting on cardiac outpatient appointments (Irish Times).

4,200 children are waiting to be seen at outpatient clinics nationwide for eye problems.

One doctor said her department should have a dozen or so paediatric cardiologists – they have just five.

Some public patients have to wait two years just for an appointment.

No child of a politician, banker, barrister, property developer or senior civil servant has been, or will be, harmed in the creation of this situation.

Irish Examiner: Getting it right on corruption

Last Tuesday I posted an article entitled Flaccid editorials and political corruption in which I was critical of editors in general for their tame response to political corruption.

My criticism was too general particularly in respect of Irish Examiner editorials which invariably pull no punches.

The following hard-hitting and accurate editorial in today’s paper makes the point.

Fighting corruption – Inaction is destroying our country

Senior Government figures may not have been heartbroken that the final chapter in our €300m planning report was published just after the lights were turned off in Leinster House for the summer recess.

After a gruelling few months dominated by the economy and abortion, the issues around corruption and maladministration raised by the final chapter of the report, an astounding 16 years in the making, might have provoked some passing embarrassment.

Government ministers or deputies, each elected on a platform of reform and renewal, might have been less than comfortable if questioned about what proposals they have brought forward to try to confront the corruption eating away at the integrity of this increasingly shabby and discredited Republic.

It is natural to recoil, or at least it should be, from that description of our country, but how else can a place where a tribunal, after 16 years of deliberations, concludes that there was widespread, almost institutionalised, corruption in our planning process but only one person — the poisoners’ messenger boy Frank Dunlop — has been jailed over the issue?

How else can you describe a country where some of those found to be corrupt may have the legal bills they incurred at that tribunal paid by the State?

How else can you describe a country and a society seemingly content to be a spectator at its own implosion?

How else can you describe a country where a month short of the fifth anniversary of our banking collapse not one person — banker, regulator, auditor, bondholder, or director — has had to defend their behaviour in a courtroom?

Of course this situation is not new and it is not entirely surprising that the response to the latest outrage is not as strong as it should be.

Stretching all the way back to May 1991, when the Beef Tribunal was established, the absolute lack of consequences for wrongdoing has been recognised as a part of our national life.

Inured by this failure of government — and specifically our justice system — outrage seems a pointless, self-destructive response, so why bother?

It is possible to reach even further into the past and suggest that the property interests who ensured that the report presented to the then local government minister Bobby Molloy on the price of building land, by Judge Kenny in 1974, did no more than gather dust are culpable in today’s crisis.

They certainly are to some degree culpable in the situation described by the CSO yesterday when it said that almost half of households struggle to pay bills.

Equally their fingerprints are all over the mortgage crisis described yesterday in AIB’s annual report. The number of that bank’s loans which are more than 90 days in arrears rose to 22.7% in June compared with 20.7% at the end of December.

When the Dáil resumes well into the autumn, the Government is committed to a campaign to have the Seanad abolished.

In the grand scheme of things this is about as relevant to the crisis, and its causes, facing this country as the whereabouts of Shergar.

This Government is more than halfway through its term in office and it is well past the time we had the kind of legislation and cultural change needed to confront the corruption detailed in outrageously expensive report after report.

Why else were this lot elected?

© Irish Examiner Ltd. All rights reserved

State corruption subverting the Constitution?

The fact is that our parliament is functioning in a manner which in all likelihood subverts the Constitution.

This statement by outgoing Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly is, effectively, agreeing with what we here at Public Inquiry have been saying for many years – Ireland is an intrinsically corrupt state.

If such a damaging statement were made in a functional democracy by someone of the stature of Ms. O’Reilly there would be a national outcry and either immediate condemnation of the person making the claim or emergency action to remedy the grave situation.

Here’s what Taoiseach Enda Kenny thinks:

We will strive . . . and work even harder so that we will become the best small country in the world for business, to raise a family and to grow old with dignity and respect. This will be the republic of 2016.

This indeed will be the republic of 2016 – for politicians, bankers, the legal profession, senior civil servants, property developers and all the other individuals and groups who enjoy state protection as they plunder the State’s resources, legally and illegally.

For ordinary citizens 2016 and beyond will mean continuing to pay the cost of such state corruption.

Enough said

Letter in today’s Irish Times

A French comparison

Sir,

Just back from a visit to western France during which family members required visits to a doctor and dentist.

The charges paid bear comparison to what would be levied here.

Private GP practice consultation: France €27. Dublin €50-60. Dentist (consultation, X-ray and extraction): France €41. Dublin approximately €130.

Enough said.

Yours, etc,
Frank Khan
Dublin 16.

Mary O'Rourke and the Lenihan's: A family of traitors

On 29 June last I published a post entitled ‘The O’Rourke’s: A family of traitors’.

I have received a number of comments that require clarification.

Madeleine Cleary pointed out that my headline was incorrect. It should have read ‘The Lenihan family’ rather than ‘The O’Rourke family’.

I completely agree. My error can, I think, be attributed to the fact that the post was prompted after listening to comments by Mary O’Rourke. The headline has been corrected.

Fergus O’Rourke makes the odd claim that the post insults his family. He then goes on to accept that I was not referring to his family.

The only O’Rourke mentioned is a Lenihan by birth, and it is clearly Lenihans whom you intend to smear.

So why is Fergus insulted if he knows I was not referring to his family?

My intention was not to smear the Lenihan/O’Rourke family but rather to state a fact.

The definition of traitor, in the context of the term as I use it, is:

A person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

I have no doubt that the vast majority of Irish citizens are of the belief that their politicians have betrayed them.

I believe that our political system is hopelessly corrupt and totally incapable of reforming itself.

I believe that politicians who openly and shamelessly support that corrupt system are traitors.

Mary O’Rourke, Brian Lenihan Snr., Brian Lenihan Jnr., Haughey, Bertie Ahern, Brian Cowen, John Gormley, Mary Harney, Michael McDowell and all the rest of the same flawed pedigree are traitors to Ireland and its people.

We only have to look around at the financial damage and personal suffering inflicted on the Irish people to see the proof of their betrayal.