Yis have done nothing of the sort. I’ve set out why the government took their action. You ignored (as usual) that and repeated (as usual) your false scenario. Once again, the government’s decision is a reflection on the competence and integrity of NPHET.
It’s quite telling that you think that how our democracy functions should be changed only in this one discrete policy area and in order to align with your personal views. Once again you’ve wound yourself up to ninety and find yourself having adopted a position with no reason or consistency to it.
This could apply to any body advising the government, they’re not allowed have press conferences either. The Civil Service Code still applies. It might be noted also that you didn’t just have 1 NPHET member giving press conferences and interviews, you had multiple and in some cases they were contradicting each other.
It’s possible to release NPHET recommendations without having NPHET members give interviews and become celebrities. As other posters have explained this is exactly what happens with every other government advisory body. NPHET would presumably be subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
It should be noted also that there’s actually not supposed to be transparency on Cabinet decisions - the Cabinet must be seen to act as one. That obviously is controversial but it has a Constitutional basis.
More fundamentally I just can’t see how the Civil Service Code should be disapplied to certain government bodies only. There are legal problems with unequal application of disciplinary procedures also. The whole thing could fall apart in the long term. You want to go down that road just because you happen to agree with these particular civil servants.
Sorry to go back but this gave me a good laugh. Where exactly did you call for this, on TFK? Thanks for doing your bit for the country mate.
i) The Government is taking the advice of NPHET. In which case, why muzzle NPHET?
ii) The Government is not taking the advice of NPHET. If so, what is the rationale for rejecting the advice of NPHET? Where’s the transparency about why they are doing so?
Again, either scenario is not transparent. And therefore terrible governance.
That you and a load of other posters have now turned into Fine Gael lickspittles is laugh out loud hilarious.
Yis are literally demanding secrecy. Why not go the whole hog and just call for the abolishing of democracy?
Sorry to go back to it but there’s a whole flip side to your point here that you’re not considering. ie - If the government follow NPHET advice then what’s the point in NPHET giving interviews? There’s an inherent confirmation basis underpinning your point here.
NPHET have leaked at various points. In October 2020 they were leaking everywhere to try and force a lockdown. That leaking stopped after the Government implemented one and also gave out about the leaking.
The Government “rejecting” NPHET advice last Christmas wasn’t leaked and the Government didn’t have an issue. It’s important to note that there were no issues with NPHET being muzzled- their advice was on the record and called back to repeatedly in January. If you go even further back, NPHET had asked for mandatory quarantine for travellers in a letter in May 2020 and it was rejected, the advice was there for all to see but the idiot journos and Twitterati who became Zero Coviders in January 2021 only noticed it then.
God bless yer stamina lads. The next two hundred thousand posts are vital, I can see someone being swayed to change their minds by the merits of the others argument before this is over. It’s too early to call yet though
David Quinn is very unhappy with a proposal to implement a varied 30 or 40 km/hr speed limit in some urban areas.
Nothing screams “freedom” like the right to force raped women to give birth and then run the child over with your American right wing dark money funded SUV.
Dave is the sort of guy that’s after your own little heart, bless you.
I explained why the government made its decision. You ignored that and repeated the same question back again. This is stupid.
Your scenario is false. I’ve explained why. I don’t see why you are repeating it again.
You want to change how our democracy functions in one discrete policy area in order to align with your views and are calling anyone that disagrees with undemocratic. You are unhinged.
There are three pillars to NPHET’s advice tbf and Holohan always cites them. One of them is to keep schools open, that was put in there by Martin when he was appointed because Holohan had refused to allow schools to be reopened in line with the rest of Europe in May 2020. Martin had to spend enormous political capital to get that in and try to maintain it because Holohan would probably have shut them otherwise.
Ok as ever there comes a point when debating with Sid that you’re talking with someone with the emotional age of a 12 year old.
This point has been reached so this will hopefully be my last post on this thread today and I will not be engaging further.
You’re misunderstanding my point.
I was aware that you had made these points on TFK, in fact I remembered you making them.
My point, which you failed to grasp, was that you are a parasitic waster who spends his entire life on TFK and never does anything useful for anyone. Making these points on TFK did absolutely nothing for anybody, including yourself. In fact, it probably just damaged you further to waste another day of your precious life on this site.
It would have been a fine contribution to our public life to make those points publicly, by writing to a politician about them perhaps, but you have made a very deliberate decision that you will never make any contribution to the country ever.
That was my point. It was a rhetorical question. I apologise for confusing you. I should have remembered … [I actually don’t even have the heart to finish this sentence]
We are in agreement that internal NPHET discussions should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act.