Tubridy and Ireland's 'reputation'

Ahhhh…. You have to feel sorry for poor old Ryan Tubridy.

He’s all upset because the New York Times told the truth about Ireland.

The article has embarrassed us as a nation he said.

The article could be damaging to Ireland’s reputation, he said.

The journalist who wrote the article should be brought before some regulator or other, he said.

The New York Times should hang their heads for getting it so wrong, he said.

Well, from what I’ve read, the NYT got it absolutely right except for the funny claim that some guy was living on pigeons to survive.

Tubridy talks about Ireland’s reputation.

I ask – what reputation?

The Irish Law Society is, to a large extent, a discredited entity and as such its members should not be trusted

In 2001 solicitor Thomas Byrne, now serving 12 years for theft and fraud, removed over €500,000 from a client’s account without the client’s permission.

The Director General of the Law Society Ken Murphy described this sum as ‘not a huge amount’ and proceeded to defend what Byrne had done (The Pat Kenny Show, 6th minute).

It wasn’t a huge amount, it was made good immediately, there was no client loss; it was down to poor book keeping by Byrne.

To my knowledge, no action was taken against Byrne.

In 2012 postmaster Derek Tierney removed €4,000 from a client’s account without the client’s permission (Irish Independent).

Tierney claimed he took the money to cover shortfalls in the daily cash flow. The full €4,000 was returned, there was no client loss.

The full force of the criminal justice system was brought to bear on Tierney for his crime. He was quickly brought to court, sentenced to four months jail, lost his job and is publicly disgraced.

The judge in the case said Tierney had been in a position of trust and he had breached that trust.

In 2005 solicitor Byrne removed €1.7 million from a client’s account without the client’s permission.

The Director General of the Law Society, Ken Murphy, made the following excuses for Byrne’s actions.

His bookkeeper had died, his records were in a mess, the loss was made up immediately, there was no loss to the client.

On this occasion the Law Society decided to act, presumably because Byrne had moved on from removing ‘small’ half-million sums from his client’s accounts to somewhat larger amounts.

Byrne was not dragged through the public courts as postmaster Derek Tierney was.

Instead he was brought before the Solicitor’s Disciplinary Authority. This ‘court’ is, effectively, a private ‘justice system’ for solicitors and is, effectively, conducted behind closed doors.

Byrne was fined a paltry €15,000 for illegally removing the €1.7 million from a client’s account.

Remember, postmaster Tierney got four months jail and lost his job for illegally removing a mere €4,000.

The Director General of the Law Society, Ken Murphy was asked did he expect Byrne to be struck off for his actions.

There would need to be evidence of dishonesty and theft really before somebody would be likely to be struck off, to lose their livelihood.

Independent of the Disciplinary Authority, the Law Society appointed a forensic accountant to keep an eye on Byrne.

This accountant was required to report to the Law Society on Byrne’s activities every two months.

Apparently, under the ‘watchful’ eye of this forensic accountant Byrne went on to rob and defraud his clients of €54 million.

The Director General of the Law Society is a past master in waffle and the art of doublespeak but neither he nor his fellow solicitors can deny the disgraceful reality:

The Irish Law Society is, to a large extent, a discredited entity and as such its members should not be trusted.

Copy to:
The Irish Law Society

Fianna Fail and the lucrative CRC connections

The connections between Fianna Fail and the Central Remedial Clinic (CRC) tell us all we need to know about how our banana republic operates.

Lady Goulding, founder of the CRC, recruited the criminal politician Haughey in the 1970s to head up its fund raising arm. This is akin to hiring a burglar to protect your home.

Since then a lot of senior Fianna Fail people have, somehow, found a comfortable nest within the CRC.

Des Peelo, accountant to the criminal Haughey and the liar Bertie Ahern, was chairman for a period.

James Nugent, who contributed €2,500 to Bertie Ahern’s so-called whip around, is on the board of directors.

Vincent Brady, former Fianna Fail Chief Whip and member of the criminal Haughey’s cabinet, is on the board of directors.

Paul Kiely, former member of Bertie Ahern’s Drumcondra mafia, was CEO of CRC until he left last July.

He was on an income of €242,000 at a time when disabled people were being forced to suffer the effects of major cutbacks.

Bryan Dobson: RTE replies

RTE have replied to my complaint regarding the Bryan Dobson ‘idiot’ incident.

Good Evening,

Your complaint regarding Wednesday’s Six One News has been forwarded to me as Managing Editor of Television News.

Let me start by saying that we take all complaints very seriously, and that you were not alone in contacting us. Your complaint has been discussed with the editorial team and with Bryan Dobson.

As you know, Bryan Dobson was interviewing the Economist Ronan Lyons outside Government for the programme when a number of protesters walked into shot behind him during live transmission and began moving about.

The studio team believed the result was very distracting and made the interview difficult to follow for the audience.

RTÉ is also obliged to consider the welfare of the guest/correspondent and cameraman in situations like this.

A decision was taken to conclude the interview earlier than planned and Bryan Dobson communicated this.

He then made an off the cuff remark caused by the frustration of having to cut the interview short.

Bryan’s remark was solely about the interruption to the live broadcast and was not in any way a reference to the subject of the protest, or the right of people generally to protest.

RTÉ was not in any way trying to muzzle protest by pulling out of the broadcast early.

Bryan’s Dobson’s comment came in the heat of the moment but RTÉ accepts it would be better if the remark had not been made.

Best regards, and many thanks for viewing our programmes.

I’m not entirely happy with this reply and will therefore forward my complaint to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland for further consideration.

My reply to RTE

Dear …

Your comments on the Bryan Dobson incident were interesting but, unfortunately, did not address the substance of my complaint.

My submission focused entirely on the belief that Bryan Dobson was in breach of sections 21 and 22 of the Code of Fairness, Objectivity and Impartiality in News and Current Affairs which specifically debars Irish broadcasters from expressing a personal opinion on air.

I will forward my complaint to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland for further consideration.

Thank You

Anthony Sheridan

Bryan Dobson: Formal complaint

Under draconian legislation introduced this year Irish broadcasters are strictly forbidden from expressing an opinion on air.

Clearly Bryan Dobson expressed an opinion when he referred to protesters as idiots.

I have submitted the following complaint to RTE.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wish to lodge a formal complaint against RTE news presenter Bryan Dobson for a breach of sections 21 and 22 of the Code of Fairness, Objectivity and Impartiality in News and Current Affairs which came into effect on 1 July 2013 under Section 42 of the Broadcasting Act 2009.

Under this code Irish broadcasters are specifically forbidden from expressing an opinion on air.

On Six One News of 27 November last, while interviewing economist Ronan Lyons, Mr. Dobson expressed a very strong opinion regarding protesters who had gathered behind Mr. Lyons.

Mr. Dobson said:

I’m going to stop that there because the idiots behind you are a bit of a distraction so we will try to get rid of those and get back to you.

Clearly Mr. Dobson had formed and expressed an opinion that the protesters were idiots.

That Mr. Dobson expressed an opinion in breach of the Code is further corroborated by his subsequent actions.

He made an immediate and independent editorial decision to terminate the interview based on his opinion that the ‘idiot’ protesters were a distraction.

He expressed an intention to ‘get rid of’ the idiots before resuming the interview at a later time.

Yours sincerely
Anthony Sheridan

Bryan Dobson: Respect for idiot politicians but not for peaceful protesters

The reaction of RTEs Bryan Dobson to the arrival of protesters during a live interview is very revealing of RTEs attitude to those who dare to question the authority of the State.

It wasn’t the actions of the protesters that so annoyed Mr. Dobson. It wasn’t that they were jumping up and down shouting slogans and insults.

It wasn’t that they were interfering with the interviewee or the RTE crew, as Mr. Dobson later claimed.

Indeed the protesters were a model of decorum; they merely placed themselves behind Mr. Lyons in order to take advantage of a media event to quietly and peacefully express an opinion.

Such protests are very common in all functional democracies.

No, it seems it was the mere fact that the protesters were present at all that so annoyed Mr. Dobson.

Dobson’s extraordinary reaction can be reasonably compared to state controlled media in non-democratic states like Communist China.

He made an immediate and independent editorial decision to terminate the interview based on his opinion that the protesters were a distraction.

He expressed an intention to ‘get rid of’ the protesters before resuming the interview at a later time.

I suspect that Dobson was personally upset to see one of the protesters disrespecting our ‘Great Leader’, Enda Kenny, by using his photograph as part of the protest.

It’s typical that Dobson has no tolerance for ‘idiot’ protesters but seems to have endless tolerance and respect for idiot politicians as evidenced by his warm and cuddly interview with a previous ‘Great Leader’, Bertie Ahern.

Freedom of Information and the (failed) Progressive Democrats

The following letter, written by Progressive Democrats councillor Victor Boyhan, was published in the Irish Times on Tuesday 1 April 2003.

Boyhan was pleading with the then PD/Fianna Fail government not to subvert the Freedom of Information Act. The issue would, he said, put the party to the test.

The party, as we know, failed that test just as the current parties are failing the test when it comes to transparency and accountability.

Freedom of Information

Madam,

Further to your recent articles on the Freedom of Information Act I am reminded of Milton’s words in his Areopagitica (1644).

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely, according to conscience, above all liberty.

Surely, Milton’s words after nearly 360 years are as relevant today as they were then. Excessive secrecy damages the democratic process and leads to poor decision-making because ministers and bureaucrats become isolated from the real world.

Secrecy means that both individuals and pressure groups are unable to get information that would enable them to challenge what has been decided by Government.

This Government must not curtail the freedom of information process. An opening up of the process will lead to an improvement both in the way the decisions are taken and in the quality of these decisions.

Openness, transparency, accountability and active engagement with the citizens are core principles of the Progressive Democrats and the current issue regarding freedom of information will put the party to the test.

Yours etc.,
Cllr. Victor Boyhan
Progressive Democrats
Dun Laoghaire
Dublin

The Senate: We had our chance

Letter in today’s Irish Examiner

We had our chance to get rid of Seanad

Taoiseach Enda Kenny and his coalition government will, by now, have recovered from the effects of the ‘wallop’ that they received from the electorate on the occasion of the referendum to abolish the Seanad.

Seanad personnel, too, can now rest easy, safe in the knowledge that for the foreseeable future they can continue laughing all the way to the bank at the expense of a country in the grip of bankruptcy. The real victim of the ‘wallop’ was the country and its people as a whole, not the Government.

It follows, that recovery in the case of the latter category will take considerably longer than it took in the case of our rulers mentioned above.

When it came to marking ballot papers, the popular idea of getting rid of that useless, expensive, institution did not seem to be of any importance any longer. Likewise, dispensing with the services of overpaid, over-pensioned senators was shelved. Instead of concentrating on what was best for the country and its people a majority of the electorate decided upon a futile, irresponsible course of action to cut off their own noses to spite their faces.

I can think of only one reasonable rational reason why anybody would vote in the way that the majority did and it is this; the democratic system allows the electorate to make a fool of themselves every now and then and so they decided to do just that.

In my view, those who voted in this way relinquish the right to blame Government for anything henceforth.

Pat Daly
Midleton
Co Cork

The hypocrisy of Pat Rabbitte

Responding to media and other criticisms of the Government’s recent attempt to substantially increase the cost of submitting a freedom of information request the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Pat Rabbitte said:

To present it as killing off the Freedom of Information Act is the kind of hyperbole that is just not worthy of respectable public discourse.

Responding to the Fianna Fail/Progressive Democrats Government’s plan to subvert the Freedom of Information Act in 2003 the then leader of the Labour Party Pat Rabbitte said:

It is a sad commentary on the self-appointed watchdogs of the Progressive Democrats that they are prepared to collude in shutting out the public and the media.