Today’s Irish Daily Mail
The Irish Daily Mail (not online) is reporting this morning that Tánaiste Joan Burton is facing a motion of no confidence today over her appointing former head of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions David Begg as chair of the National Pensions Authority.
The position did not go through the public service advertising or the appointments process.
In addition, the paper reports Ms Burton appointed Ita Mangan as chair of the Citizens Information Board, also without advertising the post.
The Independent Alliance has tabled the motion.
Tánaiste facing no-confidence motion (RTE)
Sponsored Link
May as well grease a few palms before you go Joan
ha! off you go, madame. i hope they strip her of her pension if she gets a no-confidence vote.
Not going to happen. Shane Ross grandstanding.
she should be made to do cerce lannister’s walk of shame.
except, eeewwww!
One of the best studies on pensions came out of the Dept. Social Welfare, not by a pension company, Revenue or dept of Finance.
https://www.welfare.ie/en/pressoffice/pdf/pr220413.pdf
It covers what needs to change so that workers can have affordable pensions.
Which is why David Begg, as some one who is experienced in a range of necessary areas to see it through.
But lets not policy details get in the way of a good kicking of a politician who actually is looking deeply at problems and trying to put solutions in place.
Why don’t you just marry her?
Abandon all reason, all ye who enter here!
don’t mind Fergus, he posts LOLs at his own comments
What the fupp are you talking about?
This I suspect. And while I see what’s happened here, in her defence…
https://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/01/18/its-not-a-caption-competition-16/#comment-1513500
spot on!
The lol was because my caption was edited by the mods, changing the wordC U ^ t, to silly billy.
Maybe not as obvious as I thought it was.
@Starina: How did your spot on comment go above my reply which was made earlier? :/ Anyone?
You cannot blame the electorate for getting angry with politicians for making unilateral appointments when for decades those appointments were not done on merit but as favours to friends.
Although technically she didn’t break a rule, she should show integrity and put the appointment process through by use of recommended best practice. That is what helps instill faith in the political system, as opposed to Joan going it alone which does the opposite.
Completely understand why people are peed off.
There is provision in the updated legislation that allows ministers to appoint suitable qualified candidates. Its not a decision made on a whim. David Begg is qualified for the task
The bigger issue is actually dealing with a pension crisis. But like everything in this country, we have to wait until the evidence of a crisis is see before we take action.
You’re just repeating back to me what I said in fairness.
The bigger issue is restoring faith in a political process that voters are apathetic too.
Joan is adding to that apathy by doing what she did and in the manner she did as pointed out by Scottser here as well.
Does the legislation set out criteria to demonstrate what is a ‘suitable qualified candidates’?
she didn’t technically break a rule, she helped to WRITE a rule with a get-out clause in it while trumpeting that this rule would END cronyistic appointments. she’s not a rule breaker, she’s a cynical liar.
Relax, babes.
No one is actually saying Begg isn’t qualified. All we’re saying is that Joan, after kicking up so much stink about FF dropping their cronies onto boards left right and centre with no oversight, could at the very least follow procedure, go through an interview process and basically do it all above board, before appointing her friend and colleague to a job. I’ve no doubt he’d pass with flying colours.
It really isn’t a lot to ask from someone who promised that that is how she would do business, is it? It was Labour that called attention to cronyism in the last government, made us angry about it, fanned the flames of that anger and canvassed our support off the back of that anger and the desire to change it – we have a right to be spitting with rage when the party that did that doesn’t fix it, but continues the tradition, don’t we? I feel like a fupping idiot for voting for someone to end something then goes on to luxuriate in it.
+1
+1
Remember Labour? Before the pulled the trojan horse stunt? Those were the days.
cronyism is the appointment of someone you know not qualified for the job. That isn’t the case here.
Cronyism “the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.”
Labour leader clandestinenly and unilaterally appointing a union man to a state job with no procedures to verify and interrogate his qualifications is cronyism. Appointing your buddy without competition, oversight and by fiat.
He may be qualified – there may be people more qualified, there may not. But it should not be in the gift of a minister alone and without accountability. For every Begg there’s ten McNultys.
And again, this is the woman and the party that ran for election expressly to stop this. I voted for them to stop this.
They wont with an election coming up
I was going to take this seriously, but then I saw it was the Daily Mail. Ah well…
Please do tell us the name of the publication you consider worthy of your time. The Irish Independent are a REDACTED mouthpiece, and the Irish Times sold their souls to a property mogul many moons ago.
Moanin’ Joan the Phone loves Multi Crones
Let’s face it, the appointments process is a farce and a waste of tax payers’ money and interested candidates’ time. They appoint their anointed one even when forced to advertise – to satisfy the optics. Bring on the election.
Why did she not use the Jobbridge Scheme their must be aspiring talent in
this cohort, she should be made a “Freewoman of Jobstown”, or is she still
waterlogged from the Thomastown adventure.