"Political Football"
After twice failing to bring the Victims Commission Bill forward for debate, the Office of the First and Deputy First Minister broke their duck today having agreed amendments designed to resolve the deadlock.
The proposals would give the First and Deputy First Ministers the option to appoint a Chief Commissioner, without requiring them to do so. The commission could decide some matters by a majority vote, but others, involving finance and its plan of work, would require unanimity. No one with a criminal conviction would be allowed to work for the Commission, unless the First and Deputy First Ministers give their prior approval.
Jim Shannon, Naomi Long, Basil McCrea (and then I lost count) insisted that noone should play "political football" with the victims. Of course this didn't stop anyone continuing to wrangle about the amendments. Despite that, the DUP and Sinn Fein have the votes to push their proposals through.
Going back to Jim, Naomi and Basil ( and I suppose Jennifer McCann too although she talked about "political point scoring"), it made me wonder which issue is it alright to play "political football" with? I suppose the Maze stadium might qualify, as that might be the only kind of football which ever gets played there. But I am open to any other suggestions.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~48~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
Why do Jeffrey and Basil hate each other so much? Is it to cover up their love affair in Lagan Valley?
Complain about this comment
I suggest they are so alike
Complain about this comment
MLA?S OUTRAGEOUS INFAMY...
The obnoxious backing by the Northern Ireland Assembly for the proposal to give power to the First and Deputy First Ministers the option to appoint a convicted criminal (terrorist) as Chief Commissioner for victims and survivors must rank as the most outrageous infamy and villainous twisted logic ever to be dreamt up by a so-called democratic legislative body.
One can just imagine the job description:
?only those with a proven track record in terrorism need apply and the applicant must demonstrate their experiences by listing all relevant atrocities in which they have participated and state the number of victims murdered and maimed, together with the methods employed. The appointment will be made strictly on merit?
It is unfortunate that Heinrich Himmler is no longer available as he would be a shoe-in for the job.
Irrespective of political party, those MLAs who voted in favour of such an amendment should be voted out by the electorate. Those unionist MLAs who supported this amendment should be publicly pilloried in front of Lord Carson?s statue at Parliament Buildings as a fitting end to their political careers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark
WHY NOT APPOINT A CONVICTED CRIMINAL AS CHIEF COMMISSIONER? [THE TRUTH HURTS!]
[Following on from the censorship of my Post (No 4) I?ll give this one another go.]
Pandora?s outrage that a convicted criminal could become a Chief Commissioner is understandable but my view is that such an appointment would be entirely consistent with the current mores of this society.
Pandora assumes that ours is a civilized society ( eg moral, ethical, humane, law-abiding). Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed it will not be long before the Assembly proposes that a criminal record will be a requirement for anyone seeking public office.
Susie
Carryduff
8 May, 2008
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS