[ad_1]
Scarleh for everyone at RTÉ. Thoughts and prayers and all that.
But the photographs of several of the national station’s top news anchors and managers posing without masks, up close and in person, with a beloved colleague on the occasion of their retirement was a monumental mistake.
A hastily taken shot or two with a friend is one thing, but unfortunately the Irish Sun got hold of a slew of footage involving a procession of heavyweights from television and radio smiling for the camera. These are people who make their living by questioning people or directing others to question them about alleged transgressions of the kind they just committed.
Nobody stopped to think? Didn’t anyone see the big Social Distance posters painted on the floor where they were standing?
No. They didn’t because they made a mistake that will be returned in a mortifying way when they do their work in the future.
In a stroke of good fortune for Sinn Féin, they have also bolstered the case for the full canonization of the tough IRA Bobby Storey, who did not die for Ireland and received a mock funeral with hundreds of grieving activists recruited in West Belfast for a choreography. . fired only to be martyred at the hands of RTÉ supporters so they hate Shinner.
We hear they are totally and utterly mortified at Montrose. And so they should be.
Especially since RTÉ has been very meticulous in complying with Covid regulations. A recent victim of this determination to rigidly observe social distancing protocols is Katie Hannon’s political talk show Late Debate on Radio One. Her nightly panel discussions based on the Oireachtas procedures of the day have been much lost during these days. last weeks of twists, turns and rows.
The show was stopped due to difficulties in maintaining social distancing between guests.
Punished celebrities should weather the storm.
But here’s the thing: If a long-time and beloved member parliamentary aide left a political party after years of appreciated service and TD colleagues momentarily let down their Covid guard to snap a quick photo with the current favorite, would what would happen? if those images were made public?
We all know what would happen. And it wouldn’t be pretty.
When all sense of perspective flies out the window, there is nothing but the grace of God, etc. . .
Up to the job
We wouldn’t blame Seán Ó Feargháil if he felt a little upset this week. Because it seems that the Government did not give much thought to Ceann Comhairle’s ability to do his job.
If so, why would they object to the Minister of Justice entering the House to answer questions about the selection process used to appoint Séamus Woulfe to the Supreme Court? The Taoiseach, Tánaiste and a large number of ministers have gone out of their way to publicly point out that they would have no problem with Helen McEntee presenting herself to her colleagues in Dáil Éireann and explaining to them the mechanics of the appointment and how the process was perfectly in order and had nothing to do with the formation of the government, if they could be sure that the Opposition would not turn it into a personalized witch hunt of named individuals.
But they say they can’t be sure. And everything you hear on the subject of the court appointments of people like Mary Lou McDonald and Alan Kelly and Catherine Murphy and Paul Murphy confirms it.
You just couldn’t let the Opposition TDs loose on McAbsEntee in Dáil’s chamber because they don’t know how to behave.
That may be the case. And if the Minister suddenly decided to grant your request, it might be a good idea to search Alan Kelly for bladed weapons on his way. Twice, on Tuesday and Wednesday, he declared that he was going to reach the end of the Supreme Court. Appointment puzzle in court: “portion, by portion, by portion, by portion.” Oh!
Although the chances of McAbsEntee suddenly switching to McPresentee seem slim. The news that he was to appear on the Six-One news on Friday was met with surprise in political circles. While it did not crash or burn, the minister sounded somewhat defensive and evasive in her interview with David McCullagh. Perhaps Helen and her advisers made a calculated decision to challenge the studio with Dave, since the scathing announcer was still in the doghouse as one of The Undistanced. In fact, McCullagh had to do a big piss on the air before sitting down to interview her.
But let’s get back to Ceann Comhairle, who made it pretty clear in the Dáil Tuesday that he had no problem with McAbsEntee showing up to the Casas to make a statement and answer questions.
“As far as I am concerned, it is in order to discuss the selection process within the Chamber here, as long as we do not deviate into the area of personal suitability that would reflect on any individual who has been selected,” he said.
By not allowing the Minister to appear to answer legitimate questions, the Cabinet heavy hitters are essentially telling Ó Fearghaíl that they don’t trust his ability to keep the discussion on track.
We think you are more than ready for the job.
Silent silk vision
Those members of the Oireachtas who are members of the bar have remained deeply silent about the Supreme Court debacle, although we would all love to hear their valuable insights.
Former Attorney General and Chief Lead Counsel Micheal McDowell has been busy with remarks on all manner of issues, from the American elections to the bronze statues outside the Shelbourne Hotel. But he has yet to find a minute in his busy schedule to enlighten us with his views on the Séamus Woulfe / Frank Clarke situation.
Fianna Fáil’s resident lead attorney, Jim O’Callaghan, is also disappointingly reticent, with people wondering why he hasn’t caused any problems in the parliamentary party over their leader’s handling of the Woulfe issue. The talk around Fianna Fáil is that Jim is a former colleague from the Woulfe Law Library, but they would say that, right?
Members who are loyal to Micheál Martin say O’Callaghan is now conducting visible leadership maneuvers among MPs. Every time someone has a media appearance, they look like a flash of lightning and tell them how wonderful they were.
Silks have been having a great time watching the fiasco unfold. An eminent lawyer, echoing the prevailing political understanding at Leinster House that not all judicial appointments are pure as snow, brought this scathing observation to us during the week: “Judges who complain about Séamus Woulfe’s advance are like people who they celebrate their birthdays, but not wanting to think about the act between their parents that made them possible. ”
He also found it funny that some judges might resign. “Over the years, some members of the Supreme Court have barely been speaking for long periods of time.”
Remove that note
Stephen Donnelly had a slight setback with Sculling Pints’ publicly hastily drafted memo to cabinet Tuesday.
Following the usual outrage after an image was posted on social media showing people attacking the drink in and around Dublin’s South William Street over the weekend, the Health Minister took action to crack down on the sale of Drinks to go from hatches in a closed public houses. He proposed a ban on takeout pints during level 5.
But government politicians, fearing a backlash, brought him down. Why the knee-jerk response to an episode posted on Twitter?
Stephen came to the Cabinet with his memorandum prepared. There have been unkind suggestions that his colleagues threw more or fewer copies in his face when he presented them. It included the observation: “Given the tight deadline involved, it was not possible to consult with the Ministers prior to the distribution of the Memorandum.”
Don’t argue with that.
The government’s official line after the meeting is that it was decided in a pre-Cabinet meeting with the three Coalition leaders and Donnelly that their memorandum would not be accepted. This contradicts the line he delivered, they said “No” and I had to remove all copies.
However, a high-level snitch tells us it was distributed in the Cabinet, but “we did not return them, so he did not have to collect them.”
Plague of plates
It’s a plague of plaques all over their homes this week with a dispute over whether or not to erect a commemorative plaque at the housing museum on Dublin’s Henrietta Street and Senator Michael McDowell criticizing the Shelbourne Hotel for its decision to put up explanatory plaques. below each of the four statues, controversially removed from the exterior of the historic building in July, when they return to their rightful plinths after the remodel.
Our Dublin editor, Olivia Kelly, reported Thursday that council heritage and conservation officials are unhappy with the plan for a plaque honoring Thomas Bryan, one of the “forgotten 10” executed during the Revolutionary War. It also tells us that Bryan, who was hanged in Mountjoy prison in 1921 for his involvement in an ambush attempt at Drumcondra, is the great-uncle by marriage of singer Boy George.
In a letter to members of the commemoration committee, the city’s deputy librarian, Brendan Teeling, said that he had been informed by architectural conservation officer Mary McDonald and heritage officer Charles Duggan that the plaque could create “an undesirable precedent.” .
Independent Councilman Mannix Flynn says his objections are “ridiculous.”
Meanwhile, the Shelbourne statues saga looks set to continue to rumble. They disappeared from the front of the building, a protected structure, at the height of the global Black Lives Matter protests when hotel management mistakenly believed that two of the statues were representations of Nubian slaves. Senator McDowell dubbed the 153-year-old bronze statues “The Shelbourne Four” and called for them to “break free from waking activism.”
She was one of many people who filed complaints with the council’s planning execution section calling for the life-size pieces to be restored.
The hotel announced in September that the statues would be reinstalled. “I hope they have not been damaged during their illegal removal,” said the former tanaiste in a statement this week, adding that he has been informed that the city council decided on November 4 to grant an exemption for reinstallation work including the addition of new explanatory plates. under the statues.
“This is a bit ridiculous. Surely there is no need for plaques to explain what everyone knows now: statues are not and never were statues of slaves. They are not and never were offensive or controversial. Their expulsion was illegal and unjustified, ”he said.
“We cannot go down the path of having to explain our architectural and artistic heritage as a condition of keeping it exposed to the public in the open air or in galleries and museums.
“I wouldn’t mind a temporary notice being posted for a few weeks in case some people still have the wrong side of the stick on the statues. That could keep them safer while the story wears off. But the permanent plates to explain and excuse them are a bit outlandish, I think. “
[ad_2]