Four Commissioners instead of one…
Slugger has just heard that the logjam over the appointment of a Victims Commissioners has finally been cleared by a deal within OFMDFM that will allow for, not one, not two, not three, but FOUR, yes, FOUR Victim Commissioners… No wonder they were keen to drop the Shared Future objectives… with that many pasts, how many futures can a tiny place like Northern Ireland have… And with the sell off of public lands in train, money, for now, would appear to be no object… More details later…
Tags: Government
Leaving aside speculation about perceived political affiliations, I predict trouble ahead in respect of one of the named individuals whose personal life may not stand up well to the scrutiny of the Sunday tabloids, should they scratch the veneer. Even without that, there could be a faux pas ahead.
Complete farce.
Pity Seamus Close if he had kept his name in the hat there would be 5 and he would be on 65k.
Looking at the proposed commissioners only one is actually a victim.The rest seem to be there to even the sides up.
I stand corrected in relation to my earlier post above. I just heard on the six o’clock news that Patrica Mc Bride’s brother also lost his life as a result of the conflict.
Surely to accept the diminished position of one amongst four is to accept that one could not be Commissioner on behalf of all communities in the North/NI? Were I on the (short-)list, I’d be forced to refuse on these grounds; by the same token, I’d have difficulty taking anyone appointed in this way seriously, once on the job.
For the parties who correctly predicted that Stormont under SF/DUP would be a rule of division and not cohesion, this is the time to point that out. The question is not would four be better, the question is what makes each inappropriate for a section of the community? If one’s answer is simply his/her religious background, surely each is entitled to claim they are being discriminated against? This is especially true in the case of Bertha McDougall. If none are suitable, that should have been said months ago. But none can be ‘a bit’ suitable, let alone all.
This ought to be rejected en masse, for the sake of victims of all communities. Even if, as Brian Feeney correctly asserted, the Consultative Group will have more powers, that removes nothing from the principle at hand in this issue.
beano,
we all it increasingly difficult to disagree with Brian Feeney as we grow older. Its a cleansing process. Feeling dirty is just a psychological reaction of shock, it will pass.
Try “arnica” or a warm bath
Cynic I think you have missed the point I was trying to make.
That its possible, in creating jobs for individuals to even up sides or possibly watch over those who are victims and have a vested interest, Therein lies the danger of creating a victims industry.
Patricia’s father was also riddled with bullets by loyalists in the early 70s never recovering and dying months later – a death not noted in Lost Lives. Her teenage brother Antoine, later killed by the SAS while unarmed and lying on the road, was wounded in the attack that claimed their father’s life.
I did’nt relaise that Aontoin Mac Giolla Bhride and Patrica were brother and sister, when I wrote my original post.
According to Wikipedia, one of McBride’s other brothers voted against policing recognition at the 2007 SF ard fheis.
Is this appointment a bit of patronage to sweeten up a family described by Ed Moloney as “hard line”?
Nice little bit of self-exposure by Mark McGregor there by the way. Shinners hate “Lost Lives” for daring to point out that the IRA committed so many indefensible sectarian murders, and for becoming a standard text of the Troubles purely on the basis of incontestible facts which can’t be spun by the Sinn Fein bullshít machine. Listen closely and you’ll hear these unguarded little snipes at “Lost Lives” all the time. A true insight into the republican attitude to victims.
SRS,
You seem to be making up your own version of my post as you go along.
1. I’m not a shinner
2. There was no snipe at Lost Lives
3. I treat it as a seminal work but inevitably given the topic not 100% authoritative
Now, anything to say on the actual topic or is that beyond you?
Lets wait and see what happens in respect of those who applied and didn’t get one of these 4 posts. I predict some challenges. I know at least two st these 4 names. I wonder if the appointment process deemed all the candidates equally appointable or if they are the top four or if they were the four that Ian and Martin could agree on? Where might that leave others who had applied and say came fifth in the pecking order.
WRT Michael Shillidays post I had a look at the Act. It is very clear , one commissioner for victims.
Regardless of whether or not this is a clever fix to a problem. Fact of the matter is that the office has no powers and when the last incumbent was in post nothing was achieved. Ok — there might be some influence or pressure brought to bear ( usually representing individuals or groups to statutory or funding bodies etc) ; but no long term strategy has yet been developed for victims, there is a core funding scheme that is due to end this March but no replacement yet.
I’ll expect a lot of hot air and squabbles between these commissioners whilst victims will be left to get on with living
i see there is no representative for victims of loyalist para? i would guess the d.u.p. won that toss of coin!!
anyone who accepts this farce should hang there heads as to the rest of us it is clearly a balls up from start to finish.
why is it that two men who have been and deny being up to there necks in dirty dealings should be allowed to decide on such a sensitive post??
then again all the paid british agents are now rising to the top as part of the plan!!
Gareth,
Do the dozen bullets they pumped into Patricia MacBride’s father causing his untimely death not qualify her for that role?
Part of the definition of a victim in the ACT is “someone who is or has been physically or psychologically injured as a result of or in consequence of a conflict-related incident” Wasn’t everybody at least psychologically injured? Can everyone claim monetary compensation for their injury? If not, how will it be decided who is eligible for compensation?
mark [play the ball - edited moderator]
just for once admit these appointments are based on keeping politics working and not results for victims.
as for mrs macbride i have never heard of her so cant say of her troubles but if someone is based on the post because they had a loved one brutally murdered then hopefully the thousands who qualify can expect the 65 k a year or maybe it only suits those who are controlled by the party they are alligned to?
i wish them all luck but will put a wager on with anyone that it will come falling down sooner than later due to the british agents picking gutless commisioners!
Gareth,
[see previous edit - moderator]
I don’t think it could have been clearer that the selection process was open to political interference and all the stormont administration parties got to interfere.
mark like i said the cream(agents) is rising and will do so over the near future but does anyone care who is in charge even though they killed tortured and judased their OWN to get were they are now?
one thing is for sure it will be one good read when the touts are outed.
i just hope they and their handlers get what they deserve according to the good book “an eye for an eye”.
i wish the gutless moderators would wise up as i thought a good journalist is not afraid of the TRUTH and reporting it. Or r they part of the inner circle? or maybe they have to wait like my early articles on informers which were deleted but now allowed due to the fact that the b.b.c has reported the same names. WISE UP and grow some.
It’s not clear above, but I didn’t break a Slugger rule just replied to a message that was deemed to.
Sorry Gareth, a discussion that was often initiated by a former member of FRU on Slugger is now off limits, though it never was when the agent runner, now desisting, was contributing.
As an aside Patricia’s brother produced one of the most compelling, if uncompromising, photo-records of the conflict – Family, Friends and Neighbours.
http://oistin.com/oistin/political/index.html
Try and focus on outcomes to this.
Outcomes:
Each of the Executive parties gets one of their mates in a prime job.
‘Everybody’ gets a Commissioner to advance the interests of ‘their’ victims. (Probably a bit hard on the people who’ve actually got the jobs, but that’s the way it looks.)
The general public get to be even more cynical about what the folks on the hill actually are intend to do with power.
The Commissioners are expected to deliver the appropriate outcomes for their sponsoring party, whether they want to be as constrained as that, and the past continues to be a battlefield, now with sponsorship from our power ‘sharing’ government.
Er, that’s it.
I’d hazard a guess this will cause more problems for the DUP than anyone else.
Aren’t the Ministers going to have some explaining to do when they eventually go to the Assembly?
They were going to announce a Commissioner before the summer break (first week in July? – 2007) Then they were going to announce by Christmas (2007) and rushed the second round of interviews in December but still didn’t manage. Now they have failed to make an appointment, but are about to name four possible Commissioners.
How quickly can the Assembly pass a new Act to amend the existing one? What happens if they fail to do so? Has anyone even written the new Act? – that takes a while usually. What happens in the meantime to this important issue?
Appointing four people gives credence to the theory that the chuckle brothers couldn’t agree. Was it one each plus two apparently more neutral or one for each of the four parties?
Was this proposal shared with other Ministers? Durkan was quite positive yesterday but Kennedy was a bit negative. None of their Ministers have spoken. Of MLAs I heard, only Naomi Long said how dangerous this was, though some victims (Alan McBride) seem to agree.
Yet again, victims are being treated as political footballs.
Just read over most of the comments made and it seems that most people agree that it is one huge joke at the expense of all those who have been bereaved or injured as a direct result of the Troubles. I have myself lost my husband and am bringing up our children. I worked in the victims sector for ten years and know a good deal of how it has turned out. Groups all fighting for their corner, that their objectives outway another groups objectives, that funding is spent more on wages and courses for those who have lost and been mentaly/physically damaged is the likes of computers. The whole ethos has been lost. This appointment of 4 pople is the most sickening thing I have had the misfortune to witness since I lost my husband. I am on income support after sufferung a mental breakdown due to the lack of support from the Victims groups and the victimisation I sufferd by victims groups as my circumstances didn’t fit in with what they deemed worthy. I was going to apply for the role myself but when I took a look at the job spec I realised this is going to a joke and I was right. I look at my kids and see the future but unfortunatley its very black. £65,000 per year to each of these individuals to do what? What most of us have been doing over the years – moving on and trying to deal with all our hurt with NO help. Too many ego’s doing a lot of talking. I somehow do not think these appointments will do anything. The money should be put into mental health, community groups and youth groups/facilities. All victims groups – which are nothing more than glorified community groups – should be closed or turned into fully functional facilities for ALL the community.
mrs owens totally agree just a pity the powers to be cant put themselves in your shoes for a day and realise what and who is needed to help families like yours. My advice to you is dont let the b******s get you down and i hope things pick up. good luck