Mick Fealty on November 24, 2010, 3:06 pm | Readers 27
That’s what we’re hearing, although nothing’s officially been broken to the media as such. We understand that despite some internal lobbying from senior civil servants he is to recommend disciplinary action against Paul Priestley, the Permanent Secretary who drafted a letter attacking members of the Public Accounts Committee.
It is also our understanding that the investigation went wider than Mr Priestley. As ever, be restrained in your comments!
Mick is founding editor of Slugger. He has written papers on the impacts of the Internet on politics and the wider media and is a regular guest and speaking events across Ireland, the UK and Europe. Twitter: @MickFealty
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We are reader supported. Donate to keep Slugger lit!
For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.
Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger. While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.
If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.
That’s what we’re hearing, although nothing’s officially been broken to the media as such. We understand that despite some internal lobbying from senior civil servants he is to recommend disciplinary action against Paul Priestley, the Permanent Secretary who drafted a letter attacking members of the Public Accounts Committee.
