Friday, January 08, 2010
Councillor Forde adds to Sinn Fein’s southern brain drain…
As noted in our post Christmas blogburst, Dublin Sinn Fein councillor Killian Forde, defied the party whip… As noted in that same blogburst, the precedent suggested he would be punished for his efforts… His ‘crime’? Voting for a Labour party budget he had worked with them on… His reasons? Well, before P.ie broke the new (and we have independent confirmation of the resignation), he told the Herald he wanted to avoid being accused of ‘chancerism’... From the Herald report:
Mick Fealty @ 09:23 PM | Comments (9)
“exactly the kind of building that conservation area designation set out to protect.”
The BBC reports that a High Court judge has quashed decisions to demolish a 19th Century linen warehouse within the Belfast City Centre Conservation Area after the Department of Environment withdrew their objections to a legal challenge brought by the Ulster Architectural Heritage Society. They don’t detail whether the original decision was made by a Minister, and if so which one. From the BBC report
A lawyer for the DOE said it was recognised that the conservation area architect should have been consulted. It was also accepted that the Society had a strong argument over costs for alternative schemes not being prepared.
The lawyer added that it was “not obvious” why the strong recommendations of the conservation officer were not followed. “We recognise that there is a public interest in this type of case, in ensuring these things are conducted properly and also there is an interest in ensuring developers’ planning permission applications are dealt with expeditiously and properly,” he said.
Pete Baker @ 08:54 PM | Comments (3)
Our first home-grown political scandal…
My extended thoughts on the bigger picture implications of this story... Not simply for Robinson, but for the whole settlement… Sinn Fein clearly view this relationship as their second failed arrangement with Unionists at Stormont… Back to the drawing board… Maybe, but whatever comes out of this mess has to be decided politicians and not social scientists… The so-called Good Friday Agreement seems to have delivered us into a particularly nasty form of the Belgian disease (ie, only with added Ulster terror)... More over at the Telegraph…
Mick Fealty @ 08:24 PM | Comments (11)
And yet there is still compassion (in some parts)...
Given the proximity of the pretty toxic case of Liam Adams, I am not sure Iain Dale’s reference to pedophilia was the most appropriate description of the relationship in question… Even if he has legitimate anger over Iris Robinson’s famously intemperate outbursts… Cranmer, however, has a more compassionate response. And he hits the nail on the head regarding precisely why we may be moving inexorably into a post Robinson era:
Mick Fealty @ 06:53 PM | Comments (13)
And the ridicule continues…
Be warned it’s a bit a rude, in a quaint sort of way…
Mick Fealty @ 06:43 PM | Comments (9)
Empey: “We are moving steadily towards a post Robinson era…”
Reg Empey is the first political leader to come out with a combative statement on the future position of Peter Robinson… Below the fold…
Mick Fealty @ 06:37 PM | Comments (22)
That officers meeting still going on….
Our understanding is that the following MLAs are still in the crisis meeting over ‘the Robinson Affair’... Stephen Moutray, David Simpson, Willie McCrea, Jonthan Craig, Ian Paisley Senior, Arlene Foster, Sammy Wilson, Nigel Dodds, Edwin Poots and Duncan Morrow. There may be others, but that’s what we know about… There’s likely to be a fair mix of opinion in there… They’ll need to come to some fairly robust conclusions… I doubt the devolution of Policing and Justice is taking a top priority…
Mick Fealty @ 06:30 PM | Comments (5)
Mr Robinson’s QC is not good enough
So the First Minister is defying his critics and demanding a speedy resolution of the crisis swirling around his head. In doing so, he is attempting to keep as much control as he can over events. But what he’s actually agreeing to do in response to the investigation is far from clear. Is he implying that he might resign or withdraw if a QC’s investigation he himself has asked for finds he broke the law or the parliamentary rules by failing to report Iris’s financial dealings with her young lover? Lambasting the BBC for “smears and innuendo,” he has rejected slower options: defamation action against the BBC “which would take years” and an inquiry by one of the standards watchdogs “ which would take months.” He may yet be unable to avoid the latter, especailly if someone makes a complaint against him.
Here is his pledge. “ I have to concentrate on clearing my name speedily. I’m advised the smears by association cannot be sustained. I am happy to answer the question if there was any obligation to disclose.. I am happy to abide by the outcome of the investigation rather than the smears and innuendos by some section of the press.”
Peter Robinson may have come out fighting but he won’t have silenced his critics. Iris Robinson remains an MP tonight. From Mr Robinson’s interview, it is not clear that her conduct will be investigated in full. If so, this is either a staggering ommission, or an inquiry is about to launched into her alone.
He says he was “shocked by some elements in the Spotlight programme “that put an obligation on me.. and that Iris had a duty to disclose details of the financial arrangements.” In his brief account of what he understood had happened up to the time he had seen the programme he says: “ I was told she had assisted a young man and that the cheques had been paid directly to the enterprise. I insisted that the repayments be made directly to the individuals, through a solicitor.” But was that enough? “The only information I had was that There was no obligation on me on the basis of what I knew. That was completely new to me”.
But why did he not ask her to come clean at the time? She was no mere postie , channel or conduit for the two donors. Or why did he not ask Selwyn Black what was going on. when he was plainly lumbered with the fixing ? Mr Robinson will have to allay the impression that he wanted to keep his own hands clean and avoid the murky details.
On the wounding charge that he abandoned Iris after her suicide attempt to answer Assembly questions, his reply is more convincing. Iris was “lucid “ when he left her to go to the Assembly. The family had called a doctor earlier and accepted medical advice to let her sleep before taking her to hospital. Perhaps he was a little detached at the time, understandably in the circumstances. But he was assured she was cared for.
What now? He is prepared to “act in accordance with the investigation”. But he doesn’t say how he will act and unfortunately he doesn’t seem to have been asked. Possible responses to a critical report could range from an apology to the Houses or Houses to resignation. This is too vague
Why should Mr Robinson himself stipulate how he should be investigated? Sir Reg Empey may be right, that both Robinsons still might face “ a plethora of investigations.” A complaint could – indeed should - be made to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards John Lyon to which the commissioner would be bound to respond. Iris’ conduct seems so glaring that this is surely inevitable in her case. On Peter, the investigation need not take long. This might still be necessary whether or not the local QC appointed reaches a firm conclusion. It is still the better course, as this is the commissioner’s statutory function.
The FM and DFM still haven’t talked, though each now knows how the other is proceeding. .Martin McGuinness is asking the departmental solicitor to investigate the implications for the joint office. Mr Robinson wasn’t consulted though would have given his approval if asked, he says. The no speaky must be a nightmare for officials to handle.
What we now need to know are the terms of investigation by a QC and a time scale. This it seems will be handled by officials - just like Direct Rule.
Finally, why an embargoed interview? This is a local anachronism in the age of continuous news. In this case, there are no markets waiting to close or grieving relatives to inform. The media should not have submitted to this minor attempt at news management, the second in as many days.
Brian Walker @ 06:17 PM | Comments (9)
“not only do I believe that but I’m putting it to the test.”
As Mick has said, and this UTV report reiterates, Peter Robinson has “asked officials in the OFMDFM to look at the allegations and indicate whether the First Minister should have been responsible for disclosing the information to the Assembly or Westminster.” Although, I’m not entirely convinced that the departmental solicitor’s opinion will be a sufficiently independent response to what the Guardian’s Michael White identifies as the political problem - “the political problem is transparency and accountability in a world which now demands it even in Northern Ireland, as it does for the once untouchable Adams.” Anyway, here’s UTV’s Ken Reid’s interview with NI First Minister, the DUP’s Peter Robinson.
Video courtesy of UTV
Pete Baker @ 06:10 PM | Comments (3)
Robinson: I am fighting to clear my name…
On Radio Ulster just now… Peter Robinson gave a brief but tough interview with Mark Devenport… several things came out it… Martin McGuinness, without reference to his ‘joint’ First Minister, asked the departmental solicitor for advice on the consequences of what would happen were Robinson found in breach of his ministerial oath… (understandable of course, but finger slipping a little too quickly onto the trigger for public decency’s sake perhaps…) Robinson is asking the same office to investigate the BBC’s allegations to find whether he has actually breached the code…
Mick Fealty @ 04:56 PM | Comments (11)
Robinson taking steps to clear his name in office…
Peter Robinson taking steps to clear his name. He is not stepping down. More later…
Eamonn Mallie @ 04:09 PM | Comments (10)
Spotlight on YouTube (part 1)..
Mick Fealty @ 03:59 PM | Comments (1)
“We would like to know what happened”
According to an Irish Times report the European Commission want a word in Slovakia’s shell-like about that explosives incident earlier this week. And in a separate report Daniel McLaughlin, in Budapest, notes further discrepancies in the Interior Ministry’s version of events
One of the key questions surrounds how and why the pilot of the Dublin-bound flight was allowed to take off with some 96g of high-grade plastic explosives on board. The Slovak interior ministry insists the explosives were not a safety risk because they were in a stable condition and not linked to a detonator. It also claimed that before take-off “the pilot of the plane was contacted via airport tower . . . The pilot evaluated the situation as not dangerous and he took off with the plane.”
However, both Danube Wings and Czech Airlines – from whom Danube Wings leased the Boeing 737-400 and crew – insist the pilot was not told he had explosives on his aircraft. “According to the current findings, the crew was only informed by the control tower while taxiing before take-off that a harmless box had been left after the exercise in one of the checked bags in the hold, which did not compromise the safety of the flight and contained a scent track for dog training,” said Czech Airlines spokeswoman Hana Hejskova.
Pete Baker @ 02:17 PM | Comments (3)
The Adulterous Female
Much of the coverage of the Robinson Affair has been focussed on the financial aspects of the story and naturally enough the potentially devastating political implicatons for Northern Ireland.
I’ve been trying to watch the story from a different persective, with most of my interest on the infidelity angle. I haven’t been able to get my head around Peter Robinson’s valiant coping mechanisms to the revelations of the affair, mainly because my personal and professional experiences tend toward the usage of hysterical weeping and gnashing of teeth in the face of such heartbreak. The end of a relationship is very much like a death and while we all grieve in very different ways, such stoicism is relatively unusual. That is not a criticism, merely an observation. Perhaps the fact the he was the cuckolded spouse is what is causing the difficulty coping with the idea, as we seem to have become more accustomed to the idea of male politicians having affairs. However, the idea of the adultering female is much less common.
Miss Fitz @ 02:03 PM | Comments (50)
Devenport’s blog round up…
Nice set of blog picks from the BBC’s Online team... please feel free to share your own best picks… we’ve a surge of traffic at the moment, so its time to share the linky love… Please… Let’s show Una the blogosphere’s still alive and got some great insights!!!
Mick Fealty @ 02:01 PM | Comments (3)
When does Iris actually resign?
Jim Allister made an important point on the Nolan Show this morning that Peter Robinson can ‘resign’ his wife automatically since in 2007 he insisted all his MLAs sign resignation letters in advance so that if they went off piste he could remotely pull the trigger… Allister was obviously trying to pile the pressure on Robinson, but it does actually put the timing of his wife’s departure back in the hands of the First Minister…. For the record, Mrs Robinson is on her way to Chamonix for a winter holiday next week…
Mick Fealty @ 01:54 PM | Comments (36)
“You have simply made this up in a desperate attempt to explain the obvious.”
The Belfast Telegraph has an update on the re-trial of Nick Mullen, 61, from Acton, west London, and Máirtín’s “mate”, Ronald McCartney, 56, from Belfast, in the Provisional IRA extortion case. As noted previously McCartney’s early release licence was revoked by Shaun Woodward in May 2008. From the Belfast Telegraph report
[McCartney] claimed that he had been attempting to patch up a dispute between a bankrupt businessman called Declan O’Hara and one of the alleged victims. McCartney told Southwark Crown Court that O’Hara had been so furious with the man — who had Sinn Fein connections — that he had blackmailed the party. He claimed that O’Hara had threatened to contact the DUP with false information about Sinn Fein which would be potentially damaging to the entire political settlement.
McCartney said he decided to threaten the businessmen in a bid to alert senior Sinn Fein members so that the problem would be resolved “within the republican family”. McCartney said: “This was a risky strategy. “I believed he (O’Hara) has suffered from mental illness, and was very dangerous. I did not go to the police. “I advised him to seek psychiatric help.”
He added: “I had studied politics in Ireland for 40 years and I believed that this here had the potential to undermine the peace process. “I wrote a letter to a prominent republican with connections in the republican movement, and hoped that he would be angry and deal with it. “I believed that this here would be resolved internally within the republican family. It’s a high-risk strategy, it’s a stupid strategy , it was ham-fisted, but I believed it was the only thing that would work.”
Pete Baker @ 01:47 PM | Comments (3)
Summing up the morning - waiting for Peter
By lunchtime, doubts from across the political spectrum that Peter Robinson could survive hadn’t hardened into clear calls for him to quit. Quite a lot depends on whether he can find a temporary platform to stand on this afternoon when the talks with his lawyers are over. While he insists he will contest “unsupported “ allegations in Spotlight, he would be well advised in his own interest to withdraw any threat to sue the BBC. Politicians who sue in such circumstances seldom win the verdict of their peers and public opinion.
The DUP silence is loud but not yet deafening. According to Newsletter editor Dale Templeton many of the details of the money affair were new to Peter himself, so he will need time to reply. This I guess will also affect the timing of a meeting with DFM McGuinness, however insistent are Sinn Fein’s demands. In a Talkback discussion ( up soon in BBC iPlayer), Templeton and Belfast Media chief Mairtin O muilleoir agreed that revelations probably aren’t over and journalists will follow the money to see if the trail exposes a wider pattern of close relationships between developers and politicians. Templeton echoed the verdict of the morning, that Iris should resign from all offices immediately
“I’m amazed that Iris is still holding to her post and hasn’t resigned with immediate effect and/or hasn’t been suspended by the party.”
.
O Muilleor reflected what is probably the present Sinn Fein position that they would like Peter to survive and would expect him to fight.
“People like a fighter but they also like a bit of contrition. The Robinson’s aren’t big on that. If he doesn’t survive I don’t think the institutions will survive.”
Templeton pointed to the” very significant” but overlooked ( though not by Slugger) statement of Lord Morrow, that the devolution of justice and policing “will not happen in the life of this Assembly. This probably set the scene for yesterday’s failed talks between Robinson and McGuinness. Although partly masked by the Robinson scandal, this is surely the big question. My own hunch is that while the survival of the Assembly is so intertwined with Peter’s position, the verdict on the Assembly’s future will be delayed. Update. The cancellation of tomorrow’s Sinn Fein executive meeting in Dublin is good news.
Why are so many overlooking the one heartening bit of news - decommissioning by the UDA. If they think the process is worth a candle, who are the main parties to disagree?
Brian Walker @ 12:34 PM | Comments (19)
Rumour Mill: dFM asks for Departmental Solicitor’s opinion?
There are rumours that McGuinness has called for the departmental solicitor to look at whether last night’s story entails a breach of the code… and the Ard Comhairle meeting for tomorrow has, we are told, been postponed, because of the weather… ..
Mick Fealty @ 12:28 PM | Comments (2)
Where’s Spotlight on the iPlayer BBC?
Come lads, what is going on…
Update: Ah, we hear it is going out on the News Channel at 1430 this afternoon…
Update to the Update: They’ve been having coding troubles, should be ready at 12.30...
Update to the Update to the Update: Oh no it’s not!
Update to the Update to the Update to the Update: Further hitches related to the ad hoc scheduling of the programme… might be while yet…
Mick Fealty @ 10:41 AM | Comments (10)
Cui bono?
Just a mental exercise to get my head around the figures (my head is spinning, I don’t know about yours)... Money wise there is 50k involved… Iris Robinson organises two cheques of 25k from the two developers, made out to McCambley for the business… She’s carrier of the cheques, but at this stage she does not touch the money… Then when the arrangement goes bad, McCambley pays back two cheques of £20k to Ken Campbell and “the estate of the late Fred Fraser”...
The issue of Robinson’s sister’s church appears to have been resolved by Peter… £5k in cash (ie no record) according to McCambley is paid back to Robinson (the ‘kick back’)... He’s the only source…
Peter Robinson’s alleged role is to tell his wife that her agency in this deal was wrong and that the money had to be paid back (even though Iris is not benefiting from any of the reverse transactions)... So the critical question of benefit boils down to one figure… the £5k that McCambley says Iris forced him to pay her (The BBC makes no mention of the other £5k)... which may otherwise be a matter of “he said, she said”...
Mick Fealty @ 10:10 AM | Comments (50)
Poots drops the first DUP ball of the morning…
At 7.52 this morning, Ed Poots, unprompted by the interviewer, suggested that Robinson’s difficulty was not comparable with covering up child abuse… Of course, on one level he is dead right… But the comparison was foolish coming as part of a defence… It suggests the party was not prepared for the emotional impact of the programme…
Mick Fealty @ 09:27 AM | Comments (43)
Robinson faces a political rather than a legal problem…
Well after days and days of rumours we have some concrete details. Or at least some pretty stiff accusations. Peter Robinson has said he can answer them directly. He should at least be given the chance to be heard. But if yesterday’s testimony on the sex end of the story looked good, the BBC’s case looked just as bad. But I think of all the early analysis, Splintered Sunrise sketches out the political (as opposed to strictly legal) problem for Peter Robinson:
Mick Fealty @ 09:23 AM | Comments (16)
Policeman in hospital after car bomb attack
The BBC are reporting that a policeman has been taken to hospital after a bomb exploded under his car in Randalstown this morning.
The Police Service of Northern Ireland said the officer has been seriously injured. There is an ongoing security alert at the scene of the explosion on Milltown Road in Randalstown. No one has claimed responsibility for planting the bomb, which exploded at 0630 GMT.
Pete Baker @ 09:10 AM | Comments (56)
Are the British and Irish really ” two different civilisations?”
If you want a break from the Robinsons as I do - although keeping one ear on Nolan’s mawkishness in spite of myself - try this from that Slugger favourite John Waters in the Irish Times, who makes the provocative case for saying that future trends in Ireland “ can be picked up from Radio 4. ” That is, what happens first in Britain happens next In the Republic. Is this a local version of the old saying, when the US sneezes, we in these islands catch a cold? Or is Waters arguing something more? Extracts below the fold.
