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.
TAOISEACH LEO VARADKAR has defended the conduct of Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney, following a report today that he questioned the judgment of an Air Corps pilot who refused to fly him to Cork.
According to today’s Irish Times, Coveney – who was Defence Minister at the time of the incident in question, in 2015 – called the pilot after the morning flight was cancelled due to a fog forecast.
The article, based on FOIs of emails between Defence officials, says that the Air Corps was “very unhappy” at Coveney’s decision to call the pilot and question his decision.
The Minister commented in the course of that call that he had a very important meeting in Cork, one of the emails said.
Speaking on his way into this morning’s Cabinet meeting, Coveney said:
I don’t want to add to that story any further apart from to say that I have total respect for the judgment of military personnel whether they are in the Naval Service, the Air Corps or the Army – and I think my record [as Minister for Defence] will show that.
Micheál Martin raised the issue during Leaders’ Questions in the Dáil this afternoon, asking Varadkar whether his cabinet colleague had apologised for the phonecall to the pilot.
The Fianna Fáil leader said safety should never be compromised.
Varadkar, who defeated Coveney in the Fine Gael leadership contest earlier this summer, defended the former Defence Minister and said he did not think it was correct to describe his behaviour as “being intimidatory”.
“When it comes to aviation safety must come first,” the Taoiseach said.
“As far as we are concerned safety always comes first and it is always the pilot’s decision to fly, not the passenger,” he added.
Coveney’s intention, he said, “was just to ask a question … there is no suggestion that Minister Coveney or any minister would try and second guess the judgement of a pilot”.
When asked about the incident today, Education Minister Richard Bruton said he did not know the details of the conversation that took place, but reiterated what the Taoiseach said in Dáil today.
“He was very clear that Minister Coveney may have asked some questions, but at all times, as the Taoiseach said, aircraft safety was the primary concern,” Bruton told reporters today.
When asked if it was normal protocol for ministers to use Defence Force aircraft to travel to meetings, he said:
I don’t know what the protocol… As you know, we have sought to use aircraft on a minimal basis, but at times they are used. Of course a Minister for Defence is in a particular privileged position in that he has responsibility and his needs would be an important consideration.
In addition to holding the position of Taoiseach, Varadkar is currently Minister for Defence too. Enda Kenny also held both positions before his resignation as Taoiseach last month. Paul Kehoe is the Minister of State with special responsibility for Defence.
- With reporting from Christina Finn
Can we please stop propagating the lies of the English media? Brexit did the damage, not the protocol.
@James Pelow: Very well said. They’re actually using it as a distraction. And it’s drawing us into something that has nothing to do with us. Brexit is the problem. End of story.
You can’t hold a poll asking people if they think the Protocol is good for Northern Ireland without clarifying what the alternative is.
That’s like asking a child if they think the settlement that their parents agreed to after divorce is good.
Let’s be clear… article 16 does not end the protocol. It can suspend a part of it for a short period of time. When the UK says it will trigger A16, call it out for what they want to do….they want to scrap it and force a border on the island of Ireland or a border between Ireland and EU. That’s their plan and I believe it’s been the plan all along. This mess has been made by the UK and the protocol is a plaster. The GB companies that send those goods that will never end up back in the EU (including ROI) need to be better catered for. The issue is that there is no trust between the UK and EU as, so far, the UK hasn’t implemented main parts of the protocol so all at risk goods must be considered guilty until proven innocent.
Ok theJournal…. Time to correct your headlines… “Is Brexit bad or good for firms in Northern Ireland?”
The protocol is a workaround to the main issue, Brexit..
While I’ve no doubt it has caused some legitimate disruption for businesses heavily linked to GB, how did the study take into account costs (for consultancy etc) that would’ve been incurred without the procotol because they also trade with the EU?
Or how did it take into account all the paperwork NI businesses save because they can trade with the Republic and the rest of the EU freely?
All these analyses seem to assume that trade with Ireland was either insignificant, or its continuity was a a given (neither of these are true) and that any disruption with GB is a cost without any quantifiable benefit (again not true).
It’s not the protocol that’s not working. It’s brexit that’s not working.
How dare the EU break away from the United Kingdom. They’ve made things very difficult for everyone, especially the Brits!
By leaving the CU and SM and going for a Sharia Brexit GB turned itself into a legal and regulatory Kaliningrad. Their call-their choice…If they hadn’t CHOSEN that there would be no protocol. They want a hard border in IRL or IRL out the the EU-they will get neither but what they will get is humiliation.
It is improving trade between north and south.
have your say