No, youâve made that up.
Weâre about 2 years behind the States on these cultural/ social issues that usually derive from there⌠Look at the mess their schools, prisons and public places in general are in due to this gender ideology nonsense. In some states if a child rocks up to a psychologists or psychotherapists and says i think Iâm (insert opposite sex) then the are compelled there and then to affirm this or they will be disbarred⌠In other words the whole exercise of going through the therapeutic session to get the patient to come to realizations is thrown out the window⌠Itâs totally out of control and itâs just beginning here. A world of pain awaits and weâre introducing legislation to shut down discussion on an ideology that insists there are 19 different sexes, or that males and females donât exist. That thinks itâs ok for biological males to enter female changing rooms⌠And the control of language os already happening. Women are now - people who menstruate, people who give birth, people who lactate etc etc.
Thatâs the door weâre opening.
OK, so we agree Cosgraveâs ranting about Collins being a criminal was unhinged claptrap.
Itâs sad to see you resort to such shit argumentation when clamped.
Yeah, whatever.
Collins had no beneficial or pecuniary interest in the property. Christ, his wife didnât even have.
An intention to acquire property on the open market is not a pecuniary or beneficial interest.
Entirely legal.
The government held a public consultation on the proposed new laws and over 70% of those they petitioned were against the introduction of the new bill⌠Thatâs some rotten luck to randomly pick so many scumbags and racists 
âŚ
Of course they ignored the feed back and are ploughing on regardless.
1 Like
Firstly, incorrect. Secondly, your continued denial that Collins acted improperly - which is what I actually said - is bizarre.
I expect youâve made that up also.
Whatâs incorrect?
What you want to true carries zero weight in legal matters.
False.
Collins was compelled to disclose his interest and withdraw from the meeting. Instead he was party to the decision to put the land up for sale, that he knew his wife was interested in purchasing.
His wife subsequently bought the property on step of it being put on the market and his wife will subsequently gain a huge financial profit by completion of the transaction of the property back to Limerick County Council.
What you are saying is emphatically rejected by the documents released.
You are incorrect.
Under your definition of pecuniary or beneficial interest, no councillor could ever vote on anything to do with land, ever, as long as they at some point in their life wish to inhabit a dwelling.
Also the âvoteâ in which Niall Collins was involved carried zero legal weight.
Criminal Cosgrave should be up before the courts.
How?
Ignore the messenger. He acknowledges the 70% but waffles off an excuse of groups organising to oppose.
he is right
these public consultations are hijacked by nimbys , if there is a small response that is mostly against then most people are in favour but dont care enough to do the consultation
In fairness Governments have to govern not implement the results of opinion polls.
3 Likes
They could.
The issue you ignore is Collins wife expressed an interest in the land a month before that meeting, Collins was compelled to notify the council of that interest when the issue arose and withdraw from it. Instead he did not do that, breached Section 177 of the Local Government Act and was party to the decision to sell the land that his wife subsequently bought.
Why are you ignoring this fact - itâs clearly catered for in Section 177
Whatâs the point of public consultation on new laws ?
Thatâs fair enough⌠But Iâd still like an apology from @glasagusban for calling me a liar. Weâve had a very dignified back and forth amongst us on this today but as soon as his opinions arenât being validated he tends to lash out calling people very hurtful names. I wonât be calling the guards tho.
1 Like