I think he’s right on this one. Super juniors were only created to sweeten up people who didn’t get a ministerial portfolio. And a means of trying to allow more people a seat at Cabinet which they aren’t entitled to.
It’ll be an interesting case and to see what a court says about who can generally attend Cabinet meetings. I’d be inclined to agree with Murphy here because the Constitition clearly envisaged that Cabinet wouldn’t be more than 15 people. And yet it seems every Tom, Dick and Harry is invited into Cabinet meetings.
It definitely seems at odds with the constitution and against the need for privacy and confidentiality at Cabinet meetings. Super Junior Minister is such a ridiculous term too.
Jacksonriverboy on
I don’t think I’ve ever agreed with Paul Murphy before. But yeah, he’s right.
hcpanther on
Can I ask, if anyone is knowledgeable on it, aside from paying them what is the issue with having more people in key sections at cabinet? I know what the constitution says but a limit of 15 set 90 years ago maybe just doesn’t fully countenance the issues we face today/the future.
You have to follow the law of course and there’s merit in these cases for that alone. But for the ultimate good, should if there are let’s say 16/17 important enough portfolios, why shouldn’t there be scope to have someone there
D-onk on
Good
ShouldHaveGoneToUCC on
One of the rare occasions I agree with Paul Murphy.
bathtubsplashes on
Are the opposition actually going to put themselves out there this cycle instead of sitting back and hoping the government trip over themselves?
Have they potentially learned that that cowardly approach doesn’t work in a country so wedded to the status quo?
Massive-Foot-5962 on
This type of gobshiteology is why the current government has been reelected for the last hundred years and will be reelected for the next hundred years.
Usheen_ on
If any FFG fan complains about this I can’t wait to point out that it is at least partially due to Leo bragging about dodging the constitution in his column
Ok-Coffee-9587 on
But they have super powers, surely they must attend.
9 commenti
I think he’s right on this one. Super juniors were only created to sweeten up people who didn’t get a ministerial portfolio. And a means of trying to allow more people a seat at Cabinet which they aren’t entitled to.
It’ll be an interesting case and to see what a court says about who can generally attend Cabinet meetings. I’d be inclined to agree with Murphy here because the Constitition clearly envisaged that Cabinet wouldn’t be more than 15 people. And yet it seems every Tom, Dick and Harry is invited into Cabinet meetings.
It definitely seems at odds with the constitution and against the need for privacy and confidentiality at Cabinet meetings. Super Junior Minister is such a ridiculous term too.
I don’t think I’ve ever agreed with Paul Murphy before. But yeah, he’s right.
Can I ask, if anyone is knowledgeable on it, aside from paying them what is the issue with having more people in key sections at cabinet? I know what the constitution says but a limit of 15 set 90 years ago maybe just doesn’t fully countenance the issues we face today/the future.
You have to follow the law of course and there’s merit in these cases for that alone. But for the ultimate good, should if there are let’s say 16/17 important enough portfolios, why shouldn’t there be scope to have someone there
Good
One of the rare occasions I agree with Paul Murphy.
Are the opposition actually going to put themselves out there this cycle instead of sitting back and hoping the government trip over themselves?
Have they potentially learned that that cowardly approach doesn’t work in a country so wedded to the status quo?
This type of gobshiteology is why the current government has been reelected for the last hundred years and will be reelected for the next hundred years.
If any FFG fan complains about this I can’t wait to point out that it is at least partially due to Leo bragging about dodging the constitution in his column
But they have super powers, surely they must attend.