Welcome to GUBU.ie - lurkers are obviously welcome but please consider joining in the discussion!! Register here to create an account and start posting.
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 6:47 pm
Oh shock, he used the rules that applied at the time.....
Sure a "neighbour" tried to get planning here in a A3 zoned area. Well, former neighbour. She fudged the address by making up a new townland to say that's where she was from when she lived 25km away......
Was he not caught out lying on his application??
Your neighbour is prime example of why lack of ethics in establishment causes social rot.....this bloke,and rest of em lying on applications,makes critism of your neighbour pointless.....the big shots ruling the country are free to blaggard the rules,why wouldn't everyone else?
Ethically speaking,his position is simply untenable IMO..,...if you ever want to effect proper change,you must decapitate (figuratively) the tradional establishment and let newer blood into run the country....older generations are mostly ruined by poor ethics,younger folk the likes of Holly cairns are needed to effect change....in both political and civil service
"Celtic jerseys are not for second best, they don't shrink to fit inferior players." - Jock Stein
Setanta wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 7:18 pm
Was he not caught out lying on his application??
Ah no. The address he was sleeping at had no influence of the application going off the rules at the time. It's a different story based on the rules now but he was following the rules in place at the time.
Sure when I moved out of home first I still used the home address for some correspondence (bank, etc). When I lived in the midlands for short term contracts (less than a year) I kept using the address in Cork for most things. There are legitimate reasons for having two addresses on the go at the one time.
Edit Sure wasn't he a member of Joe Public at the time. He wasn't an elected official at the time. He wasn't a TD or a councilor when applied for planning.
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:06 pm
Ah no. The address he was sleeping at had no influence of the application going off the rules at the time. It's a different story based on the rules now but he was following the rules in place at the time.
Sure when I moved out of home first I still used the home address for some correspondence (bank, etc). When I lived in the midlands for short term contracts (less than a year) I kept using the address in Cork for most things. There are legitimate reasons for having two addresses on the go at the one time.
Edit Sure wasn't he a member of Joe Public at the time. He wasn't an elected official at the time. He wasn't a TD or a councilor when applied for planning.
Nonsense, he's up to his neck in lies and sneaking into the Dail while nobody else is there to avoid questioning is a real FFG way of doing things. This will not go away. He'll be resigning
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 10:18 pm
He's going nowhere. Listening to RTE, the political correspondents are saying this is over.
Lol you're having a giraffe .
Both Niall Collins and Neill O'Connor are trending
His planning application is all over Twitter where he stated he would move out of his parents home if he could build a home for his family, when he already owned a house. And he told the Dail today he wanted to move closer to his parents. You need to have a good memory to be a good liar
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:06 pm
Ah no. The address he was sleeping at had no influence of the application going off the rules at the time. It's a different story based on the rules now but he was following the rules in place at the time.
Sure when I moved out of home first I still used the home address for some correspondence (bank, etc). When I lived in the midlands for short term contracts (less than a year) I kept using the address in Cork for most things. There are legitimate reasons for having two addresses on the go at the one time.
Edit Sure wasn't he a member of Joe Public at the time. He wasn't an elected official at the time. He wasn't a TD or a councilor when applied for planning.
His stated reason,was he wanted to move out of family home....which he wasn't living in
To my eyes this would constitute a lie.....if we let em lie about the small stuff easily disproved via paper trail.....how can we honestly expect em to operate honestly/in national interest on the big stuff??
Zero ethics,breeds corruption......no wonder everyone thinks the country is corrupt as feck.... this type stuff is blindly accepted and cheerlead by the establishment..... meanwhile they'll feck you or I into jail for no TV licence....deosnt seem right to me anyway
"Celtic jerseys are not for second best, they don't shrink to fit inferior players." - Jock Stein
kadman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 11:21 pm
When will Joe public realise there is one rule for them, and no rules for a politician. This is a government that is welcoming back berty FFS.
He was a member of Joe Public when he got the planning. This was years before he was first elected to the council.
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:51 am
He was a member of Joe Public when he got the planning. This was years before he was first elected to the council.
What does that matter. He committed fraud and now he's lying about it to the Dail.
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
PogMoThoin22 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:07 am
What does that matter. He committed fraud and now he's lying about it to the Dail.
I just had a look at what he said and can’t identify the lie.
This part seems to exonerate him:
“ I clearly met the planning criteria on two grounds by virtue of being the son of a long-term resident landholder and having lived in the pressure area prior to 1990.”
If his parents lived there when he was born then he must have lived there at some stage prior to 1990.
knownunknown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:21 am
I just had a look at what he said and can’t identify the lie.
This part seems to exonerate him:
“ I clearly met the planning criteria on two grounds by virtue of being the son of a long-term resident landholder and having lived in the pressure area prior to 1990.”
If his parents lived there when he was born then he must have lived there at some stage prior to 1990.
Exactly. He used the rules that applied at the time, along with a LOT of other ordinary people.....
knownunknown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 7:21 am
I just had a look at what he said and can’t identify the lie.
This part seems to exonerate him:
“ I clearly met the planning criteria on two grounds by virtue of being the son of a long-term resident landholder and having lived in the pressure area prior to 1990.”
If his parents lived there when he was born then he must have lived there at some stage prior to 1990.
He said in the Dail he wanted to move closer to his mother, he said in his planning application he wanted to move out from his parents house. He committed fraud as he wasn't living there and he had a property so didn't meet the criteria for planning
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
Has it been established yet if he would have been refused planning had he given his actual address on the application? Him saying the incorrect address was not material doesn't prove anything.
It should be easy to determine this by referring to planning policy at the time. Then again, as this is Ireland, policies and legislation are often (deliberately?) poorly written, enabling slippery individuals to engage in cute hoorism.
If we assume that Collins would still have received PP had he been truthful about his address, why lie? IME people will lie even when they don't need to, a "belt and braces" approach. Add to that sloppiness and poor attention to detail with people throwing down any ould sh*te on application forms while moaning about having to fill out the form.
BrianD3 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 11:23 am
Has it been established yet if he would have been refused planning had he given his actual address on the application? Him saying the incorrect address was not material doesn't prove anything.
It should be easy to determine this by referring to planning policy at the time. Then again, as this is Ireland, policies and legislation are often (deliberately?) poorly written, enabling slippery individuals to engage in cute hoorism.
If we assume that Collins would still have received PP had he been truthful about his address, why lie? IME people will lie even when they don't need to, a "belt and braces" approach. Add to that sloppiness and poor attention to detail with people throwing down any ould sh*te on application forms while moaning about having to fill out the form.
Giving his correct address would have eliminated his application at that stage of the process
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
Hairy-Joe wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 3:23 pm
From what I can find, the address given had no impact on the planning restrictions that applied at the time.
You had to have a need for housing, he already owned a house and said he lived with his parents on his application. If he said he owned a house his application would not be processed. It's as clear as day
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
PogMoThoin22 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 4:38 pm
You had to have a need for housing, he already owned a house and said he lived with his parents on his application. If he said he owned a house his application would not be processed. It's as clear as day
It's not really that clear. Reference needs to be made to the county development plan and policies that were in place at the time. And in typical Irish fashion, the policies may well be ambiguous, flawed and open to interpretation.
If we infer the policy from the wording on the form - the applicant is asked to demonstrate their need for "the proposed dwelling" not their need for "housing". If it was the latter then yes, owning a house already would weaken their position. As it was the former, he could possibly have been truthful on the form and still been granted PP.
BrianD3 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:35 pm
It's not really that clear. Reference needs to be made to the county development plan and policies that were in place at the time. And in typical Irish fashion, the policies may well be ambiguous, flawed and open to interpretation.
If we infer the policy from the wording on the form - the applicant is asked to demonstrate their need for "the proposed dwelling" not their need for "housing". If it was the latter then yes, owning a house already would weaken their position. As it was the former, he could possibly have been truthful on the form and still been granted PP.
So why use fake names? He's another rotten liar and he told lies to the Dail. Another little piggie with his nose in the through
Remember, a few hours of trial and error can save serval minutes of reading the README!
PogMoThoin22 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:58 pm
So why use fake names? He's another rotten liar and he told lies to the Dail. Another little piggie with his nose in the through
You won't get much disagreement from me on that. However as I said, the issue with the address on the form may not have been the difference between being granted or refused PP.
Why put the wrong address on the form in that case? Sloppiness or cute hoorism - lie even if you don't have to. If in doubt, lie. This and sloppiness are endemic in Irish society. Re: names, everyone from newspapers to planning agents routinely get names wrong, spell them incorrectly etc. Now if Collins or his wife have signed an incorrect name then that is a different story, then again they may try to claim that someone else signed on their behalf which also goes on a lot as people cannot be arsed doing anything right.
It's good that the address and names are not the only issues that The Ditch uncovered and perhaps they are holding back more stuff to deploy when the time is right.
Well I see Holly Cairns has secured the backing off Una Mullally. Well, that's the election over. Just give her the keys to the Taoiseachs office now and spare us the expanse of an election
Happy Days wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 2:38 pm
Well I see Holly Cairns has secured the backing off Una Mullally. Well, that's the election over. Just give her the keys to the Taoiseachs office now and spare us the expanse of an election
Joking aside, with an electorate/audience hungry for change and currently SF the only viable alternative, the media are between a rock and a hard place.
Wouldn't be surprised to see an organised media push behind Soc Dems and Holly Cairns, raising her profile and that of the party, with a view to them running candidates in as many constituencies as possible, and eating SFs lunch in the next election.
. 
