LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRed Rose admits that Martin was hard done by -But in a legitimate way. A bit like saying Bertie Ahern is a ganster who robbed the nation but did it legitimately.
I guess by that admition it makes Red Rose a legitimate Pr--K!
Red Rose admits that Martin was hard done by -But in a legitimate way. A bit like saying Bertie Ahern is a ganster who robbed the nation but did it legitimately.
I guess by that admition it makes Red Rose a legitimate Pr--K!
Whats strange to me is J Quinlan sayin that lookin for a computer is sending out the wrong signal in these difficult times. What about payin teachers for 3 months during which they don't work at all????
3 months,thats only the summer,add up all the other days off,mid term,holy days,xmas,easterOriginally Posted by Sassy Susie
The three best words in a teachers vocabulary are June,July and August, because they dont work them !!!!!
Of course Mull you would have orchestrated the whole event at and before the AGM and you have typically kept your head down and allowed Whitty take all the heat. At least you acknowledge he was hard done by.
I'm less inclined to jump on Quinlan and into the public-private sector debate. Neither he or any other teacher decided what holidays they get, though he should be a bit embarrassed by it.
I instead tend to look at his 'giving out the wrong signals cry' as a load of hollow bullocks. I wonder how many free conferences he and his fellow Labs have attended since being elected? I'm also told there wasnt a whisper from him, Finbarr or Red when the mayor started on about civic receptions later on at that meeting.
The problem for Quinlan is he is trying to give out the right signals but has made a balls of it. Victor might well be right and perhaps Mr Mull has used him out front to have a go at M Martin.
You cant make statements like Quinlan has and get away with it, unless you mean it and are genuine!
The computer thing is ridiculous it really is a non story and last week's effort was an effort by oneupmanship by Cllr Quinlan that came across as being more petty than the original proposal and the way it was covered in the "apolitical" GICN was a disgrace both the headline and article and did not fairly reflect the meeting that I too attended. I'm awaiting to see what the O'Connors write this week but if there is no further coverage of the meeting or clarification of their previous article I will be writing a letter to the editor concerning this, we rightly expect our press to adopt in as far as possible a neutral position and not engage in this kind of politicing.Looks like Cllr. Martin and the straight talking press had it wrong about the AGM. Described as "perfectly legal" in the local newsletter today after the council sought clarification on the claim made by Cllr. Martin.
One thing I still cannot understand about the AGM and again at the recent meeting - why is Cllr. Martin being nominated for committees that he is already on? I felt at the time that he was hard done by but now I'm wondering what he's doing. Apparently he is already Chairperson of a committee that he was nominated for at the last meeting. Does he want to be on the committees on his own or something?
Rebelman, you must have been having a nap when all this was going on?Probably better off at home watching paint dry in future
Lastly, I have a computer going spare for any councillor in need........Enough about the computers for God's sake!
The challenge to proceedings at the AGM was always going to be a long shot and I was not surprised at the legal response they received. However it did achieve in one sense in that it put the spotlight back on what happened on the night.
Regarding Ml. Martin trying to be nominated to a committee he is already a member of, this is an old tactic and one I and most other people involved in committees at various levels would have engaged in down through the years. If Michael had been a council nominee to the spike island committee, then we could get someone else suitable on as a community nominee in his old seat. I spent a period of time on a national board previously representing a member organisation, I subsequently became a ministerial nominee freeing up my old seat for a nominee of another organisation. I'm not sure if that explanation helps or further confuses but putting it simply there is nothing stopping any councillor to go forward for committees they already sit on wearing a different hat, this enables other worthy candidates to take over their seats that they had vacated then,
Regarding staying awake, I actually did manage to stay awake for the duration which all things considered was a remarkable achievement, that said I intend to keep attending meetings where I can as it really is something that has to be seen to be believed.
Lads can we stay away from the teacher bashing comments on this thread, if need be start a new thread about them elsewhere. I will criticise Cllr Quinlan when necessary in the performance of his duties as one of our elected representatives but his teaching is an entirely separate matter. The only time since his candicy was announced that his day job was relevant was I and others would have expected more of him in the bullying incident involving Mullvihill Snr. and Martin, I do think a teacher given the seriousness of these matters in schools would have handled this incident very differently but unfortunately he did not,
I agree and have stated as much in my last post. Every councillor should be judged on their actions or lack of in the chamber -not the work place.
I also agree with rebelmans one-upmanship explanation for J Quinlans comments and petty behavior. I honestly think it backfired on him because it wasnt very well thought out, though the headline in the Great Island Snooze might have given out a very different impression. Shock -Horror
As for rebelman napping at the meeting -does that mean Pearce was wide awake at it?
[QUOTE=Rebelman;2211122]The computer thing is ridiculous it really is a non story and last week's effort was an effort by oneupmanship by Cllr Quinlan that came across as being more petty than the original proposal and the way it was covered in the "apolitical" GICN was a disgrace both the headline and article and did not fairly reflect the meeting that I too attended. I'm awaiting to see what the O'Connors write this week but if there is no further coverage of the meeting or clarification of their previous article I will be writing a letter to the editor concerning this, we rightly expect our press to adopt in as far as possible a neutral position and not engage in this kind of politicing.
Looking forward to reading your letter to the editor in next week's GICN then!
I wonder when Inside Cobh is going to adopt a neutril position?
Reply With Quote
