Ireland politics (Part 2)

[Cheasty]

How? Show me the law that says it’s improper? Remember now, Cosgrave has consistently said what Collins did here is criminality.

[Juhniallio]

@Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy

You seemed to be trying to muddy the waters here and deflecting.

It’s irrelevant whether there was an official vote, there was a vote to action selling the land, Collins, a month after his wife had written to the council and expressed interest in buying the land, declined to remove himself from the meeting, declined to state his conflict of interests and a vote or agreement was undertaken by the councillors present, including Collins, to sell the land.

Following this meeting, Collins wife made at least 2 of 3 bids for the land, one of which happened shortly after the meeting when Collins was still a cllr. The 3rd bit was accepted and Collins wife became the landowner of which she is now due to make a tidy profit on.

Collins unquestionably knew about his wife’s interest. He unquestionably got the ball rolling on the disposal and his wife unquestionably benefitted from its purchase. Trying to find semantics and loopholes to defend this corruption is an act of desparation.

You’re wrong. On two counts. Your post is wrong, as in the things you claim happened. He didn’t vote.
Youve also said i was muddying the waters. Wrong again. I’m trying to clear it up for people after your poor, lazy attempt at a post. There’s no point arguing about something if your facts are wrong. It seems your obsession with attacking me has blinded you to your own inaccuracies. Which is a shame.
I’d imagine a fella with anything about him would admit his wrong and recognise it but I’ve seen some of the batman films and it’s not his style so i won’t hold my breath.

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

You are wrong and deliberately trying to muddy the waters on the facts collected.

He is in clear breach of Section 177 of the Local Government Act.

Collins has not contended one thing The Ditch have reported on.

[tallback]

@Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy

@tallback

I don’t understand this. Are you saying that Collin’s wife was bidding herself up? Why?

That’s an incredibly stupid post.

One bidder can have multiple bids rejected until it meets an asking price. There is no need for another bidder to be involved.

Did the council not set the asking price at the time of sale?

[Juhniallio]

Woah. There it is mate. Where’s the goalposts gone? You were wrong. Collins didnt vote. You said he did. I corrected you.
And now you’re telling me it’s about whether collins was wrong or not. Goals moved. Good stuff Batman.
By the way no sign of @Little_Lord_Fauntleroy with the kleenex yet. Is he ok?

[glasagusban]

@Cheasty

Show me the law that says it’s improper?

Local Government Act 2001 section 176.

[tallback]

@glasagusban

I find your take on this weird, and obviously coloured by your dislike of the publication. If Collins’ wife approached the council to sell her the land, Collin voting on whether to consider the matter (as you’ve phrased it) is clearly improper.

I think it’s possible that it is not illegal while certainly having a terrible look about it

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

I don’t see the relevance to your initial post. Do you now concede that a singular person can have multiple bids before one is accepted.

[Juhniallio]

@Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy

Yes this is 100% correct.

• Collins wife approached the council in Dec 2006 to buy the land
• Council engineer then noted at an area meeting that expressions of interest had been made on the piece of land in January 2007
• Collins party colleague then put forward a motion of whether the land should be disposed of, Collins didn’t note a conflict of interest with his wife’s interest and voted to put the land up for sale
• Collins wife puts bid in on land in March 2007 while Collins is still a councillor

Here you are mate. It’s your own post. In bold print there. You’re wrong. Factually incorrect. And fighting for it.

[tallback]

@Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy

I don’t see the relevance to your initial post. Do you now concede that a singular person can have multiple bids before one is accepted.

Of course. Usually though it is when the offers are below the asking price. Is that what happened here?

[glasagusban]

Of course. Although I haven’t read the related sections of the local government act but there are offences specified there also.

Sid’s take is silly, it’s very clearly improper behaviour.

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

You are muddying the waters, Collins was privy to a decision to sell public land his wife had previously expressed interest in and subsequently bought. He should have recused himself, he did not. This was in clear breach of Section 177 of he Local Government Act whereby he should have dislcosed his interest and withdrawn. Instead he was part of the decision to sell the land whereby his wife gained a pecuniary or other beneficial interest in by purchasing the land Collins agreed to put up for sale.

As a guy who has violated planning laws yourself we know you are very much pro-corruption.

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

Neither of us know.

The facts are 2 of the 3 bids came from Collins wife, the second bid is not disclosed but from the refusal of the council to release I too would suspect it was Collins wife too. There is zero evidence of any expressions of interest from other parties despite what the council have claimed.

[Thomas_Brady]

@Batigol @Juhniallio have any of our esteemed newspapers or journalists got into the weeds of the new hate laws? Has there been any kind of analysis and questioning?

[Juhniallio]

Still no acceptance that your post was wrong. Thats pretty clear. We’ll move on.
I’m coming round to corruption over the last few years i have to say. There’s a local family down the road were instrumental in this. My position on Haughey has mellowed slightly. The middle fella, a techie type was instrumental in this conversion. A kind of wistful longing for the cunts who robb us to have some panache and style rather than be gormless fuckwits used by vested interests to enact favourable legislation for a pat on the head.
Only this morning after boxing i was introduced to the concept of someone being semi-corrupt. I enjoy that concept. A continual assessment of the state of play and making moral decisions based on objective assessments of a protagonist. Basically, it’s grand to rob from Applegreen. Like if a fella tells me he paid for my coffee and i believe him, has a theft for the possibly unpaid coffee actually occurred? I’d like to thank the philosopher @SealGeal for the education…and the coffee.

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

My post was not wrong. Saying it over and over again in a passive aggressive manner without any substance doesn’t make it true no matter how many times you try.

[Juhniallio]

You said he voted. He didnt. You were wrong. You still havent explained or addressed that fact. And its a central part of Collins’ ‘defence’. Dont worry about it though. Grift is more straight forward up north i suppose.

[Juhniallio]

No idea mate. I haven’t read about the new hate crime legislation yet. Looking forward to it based on today’s musings on this thread.

[Fulvio_From_Aughnacloy]

I’m not wrong though. The decision was taken to sell the land on result of the meeting and no councillors raised any objections, or cited any conflict of interests.

It’s bizarre how Martin, Varadkar and Ryan can all say he should have recused himself yet believe he did nothing wrong - a contradictory standpoint.

[Thomas_Brady]

One quick Google didn’t return much. Very interesting that our media are not writing about it one way or the other.

The part in the bill where a person can be charged for having material deemed hateful is very strange. How does something held privately incite violence or hate towards someone? This little beauty suggests there’s far more at play here than ‘protecting’ minorities. It’s a form of thought control.