The plans of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform had predecessors; the odd thing is they were not generated here, but in the UK.

Now the Independent has a report on the consequences.

What Irish newspaper will report our consequences?

It is generally felt in the chattering classes (politicians and their friends and allies) that the delay to the formal start of the general election campaign was undesirable.

They might be right.

In defamation law, election campaigns represent the paradigm case for informing the public about matters they should know about; like the character of the opposition parties or candidates.

Outside the campaign, issues of malice and relevance arise; not so much in the campaign.

In addition, opponents of a candidate have a privilege for statements about the candidate for which, made bona fide, they are not answerable in the absence of malice. A privilege is a stronger defence than the defence of fair comment.

With the commencement of the campaign they can look to Crawford v Vance (1908) 2 IR 521 and read the remarks of Holmes LJ where he said “[in election campaigns]… acts are often described as bribery which are not only not indictable, but comparatively harmless�.

RTE recently featured a photograph of the Fianna Fail party tent at the Galway races as the icon of the alleged corruption and favouritism of and by that party. [Such few builders/developers, as are known to the writer, do not consider themselves as "privileged" by the tent opportunity].

The journalists may have been running ahead of themselves.

Accusations of that kind should have awaited the commencement of the campaign (unless the journalist is fortunate to have the incriminating evidence in his/her possession).

Whether privilege arises prior to an election campaign is, legally, an unsettled question.

NOTE; Fianna Fail, although an organisation, could [unwisely] sue for defamation; hence the use of “alleged�, in association with the remarks above about the Fianna Fail tent.

NOTE: Party political spin doctors may note the excellent defence presented by Holmes LJ; appropriately construed, he could be read as condoning bribery and corruption when occurring in political life, as opposed to commercial life, say.

The calling of the General Election brings me to reach to my bookshelf for “Strategy in a Nutshell� by Captain F. F. Boyd [1915] Gale & Polden Ltd.

It was a pricey book in its day, at one shilling and six pence for 66 small pages (it was sized to fit in a jacket pocket).

The occupants of the parties’ election war rooms (they are referred to as such) might note some of the contents.

At page 37 there is a sketch map of the area around Salamanca (through which the river Tormes passes). The Tormes, in summer, is a slow weedy river (I can report from personal inspection). The map illustrates the geography of the encounter in that area, in 1812, of Wellington and Marmont.

At page 9 there is a sketch map of the ground from Chesapeake Bay to the Alleghanies and north to Harrisburg from Manassas Junction. This was the theatre of operations (the book is good on terms like that) for Bull Run, the first full battle of the American Civil War.

Captain Boyd’s copyright has expired and the following are some of his dictums;

“Strategy is the method by which a commander seeks to bring his adversary to battle.

The fruits or objects of strategy are two:-

(1) To place your army in such a position that the chances of victory owing to superiority of numbers, position, morale, etc. are greatly in your favour.
(2) That having secured the victory, the fruits of it may be very great.

Tactics is the method employed by a commander to defeat his adversary in battle.

Base. These are of two kinds, base of operations and base of supply. These may or may not be the same. Base of Operations is the fortress or frontier or tract of land, from which the army starts on a hostile expedition, as for instance, the German armies were based on the German Frontier in 1870, or the British were based on the lines of Torres Vedras in the Peninsula. The Base of Supplies is the town, district, or country from which the army draws its supplies, i.e., England in the Peninsular War.

Lines of Communications are the lines of road, railway, river etc., connecting an army with its base. Along these lines all supplies, etc., are passed to the army, and down which prisoners, wounded, etc., are sent to the base…�

This is clearly good stuff for the people in the war rooms.

Now some things are immediately obvious; Fianna Fail should avoid the Corrib as a base of supplies. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has waged a burnt earth campaign and denied the use of the water there to the opponents (and his party).

Again, Fianna Fail should instruct canvassers to take no chances with dogs and the like. The party has opened pre-election hostilities with the nurses and hospital consultants, and cannot expect medical treatment for any injuries sustained in the campaign.

Therefore the Fianna Fail lines of supply will, of necessity be long.

Further ruminations await the progress of the campaign.

THE HIGH COURT
RECORD NO. 2819P/2007

Between

CATHERINE MURPHY and
FINIAN McGRATH

Plaintiffs

And

THE MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Defendants

26th April 2007

1. The Defendants have served a Defence.
2. The parties will exchange legal submissions (sequentially).
3. The proceedings will be listed for mention before Clarke J. on Wednesday, 2nd May 2007.
4. It is hoped the trial will commence on Thursday, 3rd May 2007

THE HIGH COURT
Record No: 840P/2005

BETWEEN:

SHELL E & P IRELAND LIMITED

Plaintiff

And

PHILIP MCGRATH, JAMES PHILBIN, WILLIE CORDUFF,
MONICA MULLER, BRID MCGARRY, PETER SWEETMAN

Defendants

And

THE MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Defendants to the counterclaim of second and fifth defendants

Update (26th April 2007)

1. On Monday 23rd April 2007, Judge Laffoy dealt with the issue of costs on a number of Motions in the proceedings.
2. On the Plaintiff’s application for leave to discontinue the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants, the court awarded the costs of that Motion to the Defendants (to be taxed in default of agreement).
3. On the State parties’ application for extension of time within which to make discovery, the State parties conceded the Defendants were entitled to costs on the Motion and they were awarded to the Defendants.
4. On the Plaintiff’s application for an extension of time to make discovery to the 2nd and 5th named Defendants, the court awarded the costs to the 2nd and 5th Defendants.
5. On the Motion of the 2nd and 5th Defendants to strike out the pleadings of the Plaintiff for default in making discovery, the court declined to award costs and struck out that motion with no order as to costs.
6. On the Motion of the State parties seeking directions and the trial of a preliminary issue, the court reserved the costs of that motion to be costs in the cause.

The Irish Times informs us that a coalition of Irish organisations entitled “Stop Climate Chaos� has been formed to lobby and campaign: “…to ensure Ireland plays its part in preventing runaway climate change�.

The coalition calls on the Government to

1. Ensure Ireland does its fair share to prevent climate chaos by immediately bringing in a climate change law which provides for an annual Carbon Budget and 3% year-on-year reductions in Irish greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Push for an international agreement to keep the rise in global temperatures to 2 degrees C or less. This means global greenhouse gas emissions must reach their peak and begin to decline irreversibly within 10 years.
3. Support developing countries to adapt to the unavoidable effects of climate change.

So, climate change has now definitely joined Godzilla and pasta in the ranks of “political� issues, requiring the Broadcasting Commisison of Ireland (by its lights) to ensure that any radio advertisements of the Stop Climate Change coalition are not aired on Irish commercial radio.

Furthermore, on the available report it would appear the the Standards in Public Office Commision also has a role to play in keeping track of, and curbing, this “third partyâ€?. (See Section 23C of the Electoral Act 1997, as inserted by Section 49 of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2001) where you will find a definition of “political purpose”.

THE HIGH COURT
RECORD NO. 2819P/2007

Between

CATHERINE MURPHY and
FINIAN McGRATH

Plaintiffs

And

THE MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Defendants

25th April 2007

The proceedings are listed for mention at 9.30 am on 26th April 2007 in Court 1, Distillery, Church St. Dublin 7. (Clarke J.)

For Employers’ duties see HERE

Asthma is not well understood, and occupational asthma is frequently defined in terms of exclusion from other definitions. It consists of a constriction of the airways resulting in shortness
of breath, sometimes accompanied by hay fever-like reactions or a cough or both. These symptoms can be mild or severe in degree. An attack of asthma can be very distressing, on occasions requiring hospitalization and can last up to 2 hours. They vary in frequency, but often occur at night. In the case of some people an attack comes on within minutes of exposure, while in others the attacks occur later. There is usually no attack on the occasion of first exposure to the asthma-causing agent. Typically in occupational asthma there is a relief over a holiday or week end period.
The following is a selection of substances causing occupational asthma:

Substance Occupation

2,4-dinitro-O-cresol : Farming and Horticulture
Acrolein : Chemical workers Diazomethane : Chemical workers
Dinitro-phenols : Printing and Dying
Isocyanates : Paint & Chemical Workers
Toluene di-isocyanate : Plastic & Rubber Workers
Salts of Platinum : Platinum refining
Epoxy resins : Chemicals & Construction
Rosin in soldering flux : Soldering
Small animals : Vets & Lab Workers
Grain and flour and
mould and mites of same : Millers & Bakers
Antibiotics : Farmers & Health Workers
Wood dust : Carpenters
Oysters : Oyster Workers
Tea dust : Tea Workers
Tobacco : Tobacco Workers
Colophony : Electronics Workers
Gum acacia : Printers
Papain : Meat processors
Subtilisins : Detergents Workers

Not every worker will contract asthma on exposure but the estimates of proportions of workers who do varies from 5% to 50% depending on the relative substance. Usually, removal from exposure will relieve symptoms but not in all individuals. In addition these may be sensitized to other substances which will also bring on attacks. In the United Kingdom it has been estimated that 40% of workers in the grain business have occupational asthma and in bakers the level is 5 -10%.
The incidence of asthma in workers in the electronics industry is increasing due to metal soldering

The Irish Times (21st April 2007) has, in the person of a regular columnist, condemned an expression of scepticism about politicians (some) from Ryanair.

The offering from the columnist is an unabashed case of special pleading for (those?) politicians.

The case is flawed.

It misleadingly implies, at least, that “self denying� politicians are at a disadvantage, compared to anyone else in society, in representing themselves and their policies to the public. The “self denial� consists, allegedly, in the establishment of legislation limiting expenditure by politicians at elections.

Of the Ryanair “contribution� to the election campaign (in full swing, but undeclared) he claims that it is “damaging to the democratic process�.

In the course of making his case he points to the obligation of “third parties� to register with the Standards in Public Office Commission if they are in receipt of contributions in excess of a certain limit. That limit is tiny, unlike the spending limits to be adhered to by politicians.

He confesses the purpose of the obligation on them to register with the Standards in Public Office Commission was to limit the expression of views and opinions in opposition (yes, in support of also, but he does not mention that) to politicians. What he fails to say is that the legislation is protective not only of politicians but of specific politicians.

He identified the “third parties� he or his political friends had had in mind: trade unions, lobby groups, community organisations. He fails to mention that the definition of “third parties� was much more extensive than that. It covers everbody other than a politician.

“political purpose� has been very fully defined in Section 49 of the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2001.

Under the Act of 2001, only “third parties� pursuing “political purposes� are obliged to register with the Standards in Public Office Commission. See HERE for an earlier posting on the topic.

Section 49 reads:

‘political purposes’ means any of the following purposes, namely -

(i) (I) to promote or oppose directly or indirectly, the interests of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas or a representative in the European Parliament, or

(II) to present, directly or indirectly, the policies or a particular policy of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas, a representative in the European Parliament or a third party, or

(III) to present, directly or indirectly, the comments of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas, a representative in the European Parliament or a third party with regard to the policy or policies of another political party, political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas, representative in the European Parliament, third party or candidate at an election or referendum or otherwise, or

(IV) to promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, the interests of a third party in connection with the conduct or management of any campaign conducted with a view to promoting or procuring a particular outcome in relation to a policy or policies or functions of the Government or any public authority;

(ii) to promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, the election of a candidate at a Dáil, Seanad or European election or to solicit votes for or against a candidate or to present the policies or a particular policy of a candidate or the views of a candidate on any matter connected with the election or the comments of a candidate with regard to the policy or policies of a political party or a political group or of another candidate at the election or otherwise;

(iii) otherwise to influence the outcome of the election or a referendum or campaign referred to in paragraph (i)(IV) of this definition;

On this definition an effort, collective or otherwise, to deprecate or oppose the government of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe would, if in receipt of more than €125 in a year, oblige the recipient to register with the Standards in Public Office Commission. (Mugabe is a “third party” and his government is a “public authority”)

The Irish Times would be better off defending freedom of expression and the right to communicate rather than making special pleading for politicians seeking to protect themselves from accountability to the electorate.

THE HIGH COURT
RECORD NO. 2819P/2007

Between

CATHERINE MURPHY and
FINIAN McGRATH

Plaintiffs

And

THE MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Defendants

23rd April 2007

1. The Plaintiffs’ motion for directions came before the Court.

2. Counsel for the Plaintiffs indicated that the respective counsel for the parties had discussed the issues and the Defendants had indicated that their defence was being drafted and was expected to be completed shortly.

3. Counsel for the Plaintiffs said that the Plaintiffs had written to the Defendants seeking an Appearance from the Defendants and also seeking agreement for an application to get directions from the court. In these circumstances, he said, the Plaintiffs were applying for costs on the motion.

4. Counsel for the Defendants opposed the application for costs and said he was sure the court would have many more important things to consider than the costs on the motion and he would be satisfied to have the costs reserved. He indicated that he believed the parties would need to exchange witness statements and hoped that he might be ready by Thursday in this regard and in regard to the service of a defence.

5. Counsel for the Defendants said, in so many words, it was undesirable that the issue should be left unresolved with an election in the offing.

6. The judge indicated that, without binding anyone, he felt it might be a case where particular matters might be agreed between the parties, with a consequent saving in time; that the outstanding issues might be reduced to legal argument.

7. The parties indicated they would commence the necessary work and hoped to be in a better position by Thursday to say when they would be ready for trial. They said a trial on Thursday of next week might be achievable.

8. The court indicated the matter would be listed again on 26th April 2007 to review the situation. The court reserved the costs on the Motion.