Slugger O'Toole

This user has not yet written a description

Latest comments from Cato (see all)

Cato has commented 5 times (0 in the last month).

1. Comment on “I am fully conscious that I am not the unanimous choice of this assembly…”
   on 13 April 2010 at 3:33 am

   Policing and justice has been transferred. If you get time between furiously spinning away from your previous position that it was unlikely to happen towards your new position that it is unlikely to last, accept a towel to wipe the egg of your face. Fool.

   Go to comment

2. Comment on “At no time did Sinn Fein contact any of the Councillors…”
   on 9 April 2010 at 10:01 pm

   jtwo

   Clearly some people weren’t listening. Loupers.

   Go to comment

3. Comment on BBC goes on the attack against Robinson tonight…
   on 31 March 2010 at 2:20 am

   If the standard of a blog is defined by the quality of those who read and comment on them, then this one must have lost all pretence of being anything other than a forum for puerile drivel. I think by any measure, this was a serious and important piece of journalism. Would the report stand up to objective criticism of whether it raises important questions? I venture that it would but whether it does or not, then the people who comment on this blog will have had absolutely no role in defining it. Instead of dopey slanging matches about what type of person Peter Robinson is and the secondary question of its impact on him politically, why not address some of the issues raised in the report? Why not unpack it and see if we can raise further questions?

   For example:

   For what reason(s) might Fred Fraser have effectively gifted a piece of land to Peter Robinson despite previously demanding a higher price for it?

   Who might have leaked some of the details about the previous attempt to purchase it from Fred Fraser? The builder who attempted to do so? Someone else?

   Why is the DUP suggesting that there is no tax liability because the land changed hands for a nominal sum? Surely the fact that it granted access to a licence to print money (capital gains tax free) subjects the strip to a capital gains liability in relation to its real market value rather than that scant sum of five pounds?

   Why might the DUP not comment on Mr Robinson’s failure to declare his interests in the respective places he was required to do so? Surely if it was simply a matter of political convention to omit these requirements, it would be simple enough to say so. Perhaps that is the reason though. If so, let us discuss it.

   At what stage might we get to a point where there is a requirement for a fully-fledged inquiry into planning matters? Who would order such an inquiry? The Environment Minister, Mr Poots? OFMDFM?

   What to make of the DUP’s attack on the BBC for its alleged omissions in dealing with other important stories? I once remember a headmaster telling an errant me that to excuse my own behaviour by accusing him of picking on me in a way he did not with others, did not mitigate an iota my own behaviour.

   At least let us have a proper discussion.

   Go to comment

4. Comment on Hiding behind a poster
   on 27 March 2010 at 2:10 pm

   The regulations are not as clear as they might be. They refer only to posters being permissable when an election is pending without definitively stating when that time begins. There is no mention anywhere in the regulations of an election having to have been called. You could argue that there is always one election or another pending in NI but, for the avoidance of doubt, he is not breaking the rules.

   Go to comment

5. Comment on “Don’t forget that we are talking about the Eurovision”
   on 12 February 2010 at 12:50 am

   My first post – what is with the strange attitude on the Ireland/RTE issue? Louper

   Go to comment