Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE OIREACHTAS PUBLIC Accounts Committee is not giving up on conducting the forthcoming banking inquiry according to its chairman John McGuinness TD.
The inquiry was announced last week by An Taoiseach but there has been much debate about whether the PAC or the finance committee will be in charge of looking into the period up to the 2008 bank guarantee.
The PAC last year published a framework for the inquiry but finance committee chairman Ciarán Lynch TD has said it’s been a “number of years” since the PAC has undertaken such an inquiry and that the finance committee is better placed for the undertaking.
The decision on who carries out the inquiry and what exactly it investigates will ultimately be decided by the Oireachtas Committee on Procedures and Privileges.
Speaking this morning, McGuinnness said that the PAC will be forwarding its report from last year to the CPP as it seeks to reaffirm its commitment to conducting the probe:
The PAC did a lot of work last year on scoping out the issues that should be addressed in any such inquiry, these were laid down in our report which was published in July 2012. In that report the committee indicated clearly that it was best placed to conduct such an inquiry and that remains the position.
“In order to inform the CPP, we’re going to forward them our report and indicate to them our interest in it,” he added.
The CPP has begun procedures to work on what should be investigated and Fine Gael TD Eoghan Murphy outlined his belief that PAC members who worked on last year’s report should be consulted.
Murphy said that he supported the efforts of the PAC to push to hold the inquiry as he feels they are best placed to do so:
My position would be that given the work we’ve done in the PAC, the extensive work and the very good work, that we are best placed to hold this inquiry and I would hope that the committee is making every effort to see that it can.
McGuinness said that his information was that it would be “some time” before the CPP makes any decision on how the banking inquiry will proceed and who should be consulted along the way.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Religious beliefs should be kept within the privacy of the home.
@Leadóg: Same with liberalism.
@specialsue: I disagree. Liberalism is based on real life, religion on fairy tales.
@Leadóg: you have proof of this?
@Seamus Mac: Read the old testament and tell me its not pure fantasy.
@Leadóg: that wasn’t what i asked.
@Seamus Mac: Why are you so against the removal of the reference to blasphemy in the Constitution?
@Seamus Mac: you can’t prove a negative. There is a teapot orbiting the sun. Prove it wrong.
@Seamus Mac: you have a holiday entitlement at work yeah? Liberalism.
@Kian: i didn’t say anything about liberalism.
@tel: maybe there is
@CrabaRev: because it’s a waste of time & money. It’s being done because it annoys atheists.
Vote no to keep separation of church and state. The government shouldn’t have the right to attack the sincerely held religious beliefs of those who elected them and pay their salaries. Catholic and proud, no apologies.
@specialsue: if you believe in separation of church and state, how do you feel about the church having control over most of the school and hospitals in this country?
@Tweety McTweeter: Nothing stopping the government setting up their own schools and hospitals. The church built these institutions and managed them for decades. Now somehow it’s the church being interfering by running the schools and hospitals they have always run, that the government showed no interest in until recently.
@specialsue: No thanks. I value freedom of speech not theocracy.
@Daniel Donovan: Hate speech isn’t free speech. It’s wrong to use slurs against racial groups, why not religious groups?
@Tweety McTweeter: specialsue is an especially poor troll. You’re wasting your time pointing out the obvious flaws and contradictions in their posts.
@specialsue: “interfering” is the appropriate word. No better establishment can beat them on that.
@specialsue: You should look up the Scientology policy of fair gaming and then see if you feel the same way…
@specialsue: “The government shouldn’t have the right to attack the sincerely held religious beliefs of those who elected them and pay their salaries. Catholic and proud, no apologies.”
This will be the people voting to remove the stupid law, I can’t wait to see it gone.
@specialsue: Emmm..Not so sure about that. The country was on it’s knees post – independence and so the church was in an ideal position to fill that vacuum having gone pretty much unchallenged for decades and perhaps centuries, British interference and opposition accepted, for better or worse, depending on your view. Regarding religious convictions or lack thereof, noone should have to apologise for their views on religion.
@specialsue: if they run all these institutions without touching kids, selling babies or murdering babies then people might have a different view. Personally I think it’s about time any sort of religion was kept private.
The website to check if you are registered is appalling
@Ross Fehily: I am registered, and it took me ages to find myself on the check the register yolk.
@Ross Fehily: all you have to do is put in your name and address (and not use a space at the end)
I have no understanding of apathy towards voting.
@2thFairy: Same pal, its funny that you always hear people complain about things and when you ask do they vote and its always the same “whats the point, nothing ever changes”.
@2thFairy: Maybe you didn’t have the experience of voting for a Social Democrat who switched to a party you’ve never voted for not long after he was elected.
How can some voters not be apathetic with those shenanigans?
I’ll be voting for Gemma Doherty
I was registered, voted in every referendum and election for the past 16 years but checked there and it says im not registered. Bit odd that, id recommend everyone who is registered to double check to confirm it.
Phukin Jayzz
Likely to be perceived as 9.8 toxic (but only 1.2 as spelt)
- will the Journal recalibrate this scale if the old blasphemy is given the ok?
I’m being extorted for PRSI, USC (Bank Bail Out Tax), Family home tax and work tax aka Income tax. For some reason, I got this letter through the door from the state on blasphemy.
Total bullshit the taxpayerpaid full stop
have your say