Frank Fahey - Lost at Sea

[Hound]

Frank issued a stack of mussel farm licenses in 2000 to new comers in Killary harbour. The resultant over intensifycation of mussel farms has destroyed the incomes of the original farms. According to a report in the Inshore newspaper of Oct 2008, "the Department of communications Marine and Natural resources decided to over-licence Killary Harbour by 167%" Frankeen was the minister who issued the licenses. There is a deep divde between the original farmers and the latecomers.

Some of the original farms and the Western Regional Fisheries board objected to the licence applications on the very grounds that now prevail.

Thanks Frank......what did you gain from this?

[Malbekh]

What did you to say to Sargent?

Can't recall fully. I left it on his website in email format. It wasn't a rant as such but I made it pretty clear that there's a difference between voting with the government for political expediency on one hand, and voting against the Ombudsman getting a fair hearing and supporting Frank Fahey on the other.

Didn't get a response, but there's no harm in keeping the pressure up.

Incidentally, I have heard from another source that Fahey and Sargent had a 'encounter' some time ago, they think about 2002/2003 when Sargent made various references to Fahey's investments in the Dáil.

Sargent complained to the Committee on Privileges but they found no case to answer. Of course, all of this, including the alleged incident with Ferris, is conjecture.

[dglsouthwest]

Would this not be an oppurtune matter for the Greens to walk on ?...

I repeat the above....

[RichardDeClare]

I repeat the above....

Concur. Gormley seems to be turning up the heat

RTÉ News: Gormley supports Lost At Sea hearing

[dglsouthwest]

Will Faheys next property be c/o The Governor, The Joy, Dublin?....

[dglsouthwest]

Lost at Sea Scheme

The report the Government dont want you to read.
The report the Government are trying to bury

[Mitsui2]

Lost at Sea Scheme

The report the Government dont want you to read.
The report the Government are trying to bury

Excellent work, dglsouthwest!

The most interesting findings (for those without the time to go through it & with apologies for any typos that resulted from hurried copying) -

... 2.The way the Lost at Sea Scheme was designed was contrary to fair and sound administration. The specific weaknesses of the design process included lack of adequate research, lack of thorough documented analysis of the pros and cons of the various criteria and a failure to include provision for discretion in the vetting of applications.

3.Given that this was a finite, once-off Scheme, aimed at a specific class of individuals the Scheme was not advertised adequately. The advertising process should have been more thorough, comprehensive and targeted. In addition some prospective applicants were put in a more advantageous position than others as they were written to directly by the Department and the Minister to inform them about the Scheme when it was launched. Overall, the manner in which the Scheme was advertised was contrary to fair and sound administration.

4.There is clear evidence of poor record-keeping practices leading up to the sign-off of the Scheme, including a paucity of records, lack of written records of meetings and deliberations, a lack of written analysis of the various drafts of the Lost at Sea Scheme and limited records of the interactions/directions between the Minister and his officials

(Finding number 1, by the way, was that the Byrne family - who originally applied to the Ombudsman - didn't meet two of the criteria of the scheme as finally published; but Ms O'Reilly wasn't happy with these terms and recommended that they be compensated anyway. And that bit in Finding 2 about some applicants being "written to directly by the Department and the Minister" actually refers to the Minister himself, who seems to have done the equivalent of personally notifying the successful applicants that - so to speak - the job was oxo).

Reading through the polite officialese, and knowing what we know of the bould Frank.....

[Malbekh]

Yesterday's Independent had the following article Cowen and Gormley at loggerheads over report - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie.

FG are going to address this through a private members motion - I think through Billy Timmins. The issue here is to exploit the fault line between the government parties.

Again, if even the Dáil decides to send it on the the Agricultural Committee, there's no guarantee that the government would fail to use their majority to find against the Ombudsman.

For reasons I cannot understand, FF seem dead set against letting it go even that far, presumably to protect Fahey from further embarrassment. It is the little things that trip up governments, and this is such a irrelevancy in terms of government strategy as well as the current occupational hazards, that it seems nonsensical to have let it fester into a row with the ombudsman, and create further division within the government.

[dglsouthwest]

Ombudsman's office - The Irish Times - Fri, Mar 19, 2010
Irish Times 19th March 2010

[Mitsui2]

For reasons I cannot understand, FF seem dead set against letting it go even that far, presumably to protect Fahey from further embarrassment.

With his history, it's a fair bet that Frank knows the burial sites of more dead bodies than the average undertaker. And somehow he just doesn't strike me as the type who'd be too honorable to suggest that he might point a few of these sites out if he's left swinging in the wind. Perhaps it's not just Frank that FF are protecting.