The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Buildin

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby vca » Sun Nov 07, 2010 3:30 pm

onq wrote:

So instead I have taken on board the advice received from many parties, including yours.
I have been moving forward for registration through the Option C route for mature Graduates.
I will see whether my latest correspondence with the RIAI will bring me to a resolution in due course.

ONQ.


Congratulations ONQ on your decision.
Based on your erudite contributions to this forum I am confident that you will have absolutely no difficulty in registering through the Option C procedure.
Both you and the RIAI should benefit from your membership and registration.
Good luck (but you don't need luck!).
vca
Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sun Nov 07, 2010 3:55 pm

vca wrote:Congratulations ONQ on your decision.
Based on your erudite contributions to this forum I am confident that you will have absolutely no difficulty in registering through the Option C procedure.
Both you and the RIAI should benefit from your membership and registration.
Good luck (but you don't need luck!).


:gobsmacked:

(seldom I'm left speechless)

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PVC King » Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:25 pm

I also want to add to VCA's comments on this; you have moved a long way from taking a literal interpretation of a single piece of legislation which was contradicted another.

Unlike so many people who simply act hard done by you have worked hard to take a position which seeks to work to my mond what is a FAIR consensus; I strongly hope that post election the significant injustice of the way that a barrier of €10k that was put up against those with knowledge skills and experience to secure recognition will be righted by the new government. If the RIAI had any sense they would seriously look at their responsibilities to wider society and their duty to provide the profession the best possible education system for those who secure either a recognised qualification or say 10 years experience; not farm it out to a third party who no-one has heard of outside the state; or inside the state typically either. Instead of CPD costing serious money they should make use of the vast body of CPD gpoing elsewhere and provide access to webinars etc.


They need to hire someone to advise them what to do about the many who graduated from approved courses and need to secure or complete part 3 to emmigrate. It seems to be a uniquely Irish approach not to secure professsional qualification in the shortest possible timeframe; I worked with 2 colleagues in Dublin who if in the UK would have certainly qualified in 2 years in their field; 6.5 years later they passed first time. But make no mistake the quality of advice they provided their clients pre qualification was a lot higher than many post qualified people in the UK with 10 years experience.
PVC King
 

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:10 am

Well, between you and VCA you have blown me away PVC King.

Yes, you have seen me take a position on something and try to do something about it that I consider fair and equitable - contribute to the JOC Committee and lobby for John O'Donoghue's 2010 Bill.
Depending on what's decided at the next meeting of the Fianna Fáil and Green Party parliamentary meetings, it may be dealt with one way or the other in the life of this government.
This was intended as a fairer means to assessment, not a carte blanche to automatic Registration or a denial of the RIAI's requirement for Grandfathers to be assessed.
I dion't think you can claim to be a professional with awarness and a social conscience and not apply this to people claming to be members of your own profession.

I still think there is a case to be made for a level playing field across Europe based on the Part II qualification as a basis for use of the title.
Nowhere is the former better underlined than the circumstances described in this recent thread.
http://www.archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?p=111753

However, I have come to accept the need for Graduates to be mentored by a Part III qualified architect until they gain experience sufficient to allow them to operate in the legal and contractual environment in which they must operate competently as professionals.

And although I have made the case strongly for Part II Graduates to use the title and still beleive this is correct, I have revised my position on allowing them to issue certification.
My own progress through the levels of the profession was a process of mentoring under not one but several members of the institute from 3rd year summer work right though fourth and fifth year and on for the next two or three years.
But when I considered the restriction of use of the title in the context of a license to practise [which would have bee na cleaner way to do this IMO] I began to accept the RIAI position.
I still fail to see the RIAI's concern in relation to Grandfathers who have been safely and successfully practising as Architects for twenty years, and so I continue to support fair assessment.
Because the qualifying phrase is "safely and successfully practising as architects" - I have no time for schoolteachers who are masquerading as archtiects and/or doing the odd planning application.
To endorse them would be to look the other way while people who aren't making a living at my profession are taking the work away from those who are trying to survive - that needs to stop in short order.

So the past year has been a bit of a journey of personal development.
To the degree it has involved an acceptance of a situation that has been thrust upon me it could be described as an amor fati.
But it has also caused me to go beyond my own limited existence and start questioning a lot of other things, which may have further repercussions in the publid domain at some point.

In the meantime thanks to you PVC King for the quality of your arguments which helped me realsie the shortcomings in ny own position and to VCA, whoever he or she is, for the kind words of support above.
Whatever happens, this has certainly been one of the most interesting years of my life.
And its not over yet!

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:28 am

BTW, has Paul Clerkin or anyone done some demographics on the poll at the top of this thread?
Its now up to 518 from what I seem to remember was a total figure of circa 320 last year.
It never seems to get above 30%support for the RIAI as Registrar, does it?
Is it just that the 2850+ Members don't know about this forum?
Do they have some deep seated antipathy to the BCA 2007?

I would have expected all 1,000 [est.] of the Architects Alliance to have registered and voted against, while almost three times that number should have waded in to support the Registrar.

Very strange.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PTD » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:43 am

Hi All,

I am currently preparing a Technical Assesment submission.

My progress so far includes a substantial part of Volume 1 complete and some work on Volume 2. I wondered if there were any others in a
similar position and if they would be interested in meeting as
a group at intervals as a means to help each other by sharing information and approaches. I'm in the Leinster area and could travel.
Please feel free to PM or email me if you are in a similar position.
PTD
Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 pm

Hi PTD,

This website - BRILLIANT THOUGH IT IS [waves: Hi Paul] - has a limited circulation, like any website.

You therefore might need to consider broadening the coverage of your message.

Can I respectfully suggest you -

  • start a new thread on Archiseek on this matter using the wording above.
  • start a new thread on boards.ie on the Planning Forum - many of the guys there are technicians and may be interested in taking the TA.
  • consider writing a letter to the Times or the Independent advertising your group - this is in the public eye and you may get some column inches.
  • consider contacting the RIAI, explaining about setting up the study and support group and ask them to put your name out there as a contact point.
  • consider setting up a social networking forum - Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter - or a BBS or Blog using proprietary software or perhaps using Wordpress.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:18 pm

batten wrote:not correct - read the documentation, the RIAI is saying, correctly in my opinion, that EU directives / regulations require BOTH quantitative AND qualitative assessment.
O'Donoghue's Bill would require quantitative only.
Anyone seeking registration should know whether they can satisfy both requirements and should not be shy about providing them.


All right Batten,

If you do not believe me, ask the RIAI and they will tell you that if you regsiter through the Technical Assessment as per Section 22 of the Act, you will have the option to become a member of the institute using the affix MRIAI(Irl) which was created for those whose qualification does not comply with the EU Directive 2005/36/EC.

Basicaly, it means that you will be entitled to use the title "Architect" in Ireland only.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:57 pm

I have received the following as some of you did.

----------------------------------------------------------------
QUERIST: ROYAL INSTITUTE
OF THE ARCHITECTS OF
IRELAND

AGENT: HAYES

RE: BUILDING CONTROL (AMENDMENT)
BILL 2010

OPINION OF COUNSEL

Gerard Hogan SC,
Distillery Building,
145-151 Church Street,
Dublin 7.

September 23, 2010
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have prepared an email that I am willing to sent to Gerard Hogan and all TDs about his opinion. However, I am not confident enough that the opinion emailled to me was realy drafted by Gerard Hogan.

Does any one know how I can verify the authenticity of the document?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:45 pm

CK wrote:I have received the following as some of you did.

----------------------------------------------------------------
QUERIST: ROYAL INSTITUTE
OF THE ARCHITECTS OF
IRELAND

AGENT: HAYES

RE: BUILDING CONTROL (AMENDMENT)
BILL 2010

OPINION OF COUNSEL

Gerard Hogan SC,
Distillery Building,
145-151 Church Street,
Dublin 7.

September 23, 2010
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have prepared an email that I am willing to sent to Gerard Hogan and all TDs about his opinion. However, I am not confident enough that the opinion emailled to me was realy drafted by Gerard Hogan.

Does any one know how I can verify the authenticity of the document?



If you'd like to send me a copy CK I'll take a look at it.

To answer your question - ring him and ask him.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PVC King » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:48 pm

The opinion is private property and as such the only warrantee that is ever offered with a reasoned opinion is that the author's reputation may suffer damage if it were widely distributed and the opinion was not confirmed in a subsequent judgement when put to trial. An opinion is generally that of advocate as opposed to independent expert. That said Gerard Hogan is a well respected Senior Council; I'd look very carefully at the caveats which will be works of art.
PVC King
 

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:50 pm

PVC King wrote:The opinion is private property and as such the only warrantee that is ever offered with a reasoned opinion is that the author's reputation may suffer damage if it were widely distributed and the opinion was not confirmed in a subsequent judgement when put to trial. An opinion is generally that of advocate as opposed to independent expert. That said Gerard Hogan is a well respected Senior Council; I'd look very carefully at the caveats which will be works of art.


I received what is supposed to be an opinion from Gerard Hogan. This opinion was sought by the RIAI if I believe the document.

The opinion states that the Building Control Amendment Bill 2010 is not compatible with EU Law. However, the references to the EU Directives do not contain any provision of this type.

He talks about the EU Directive 2005/36/EC and the EU Directive 2006 for the provision of services. Those are his 2 only references to EU legislation. He concludes that it would not be compatible with EU Law to have a registration system that would be for architects to practice in Ireland only and that the Building Control Amendment Bill 2010 is not compatible with EU Law.

This does not make sense because in the UK for example non-architects can provide architectural services when it is different in France or Germany where only architects can provide architectural services.

There is not a norm within the EU. Anyone can practice as an architect in Sweden or Denmark. The EU never imposed minimum standards for the practice of architecture within a state or for the use of the title "architect". The EU only set some qualification standards that EU states must recognize. However, if a state decides not to regulate the profession, it can do so. The only EU concern is related to the movement of architects and some standards were set for trans-border services. Someone practicing architecture in the UK may not be able to practice in Germany because not having a qualification in compliance with the EU Directive.

In fact it seems that he states his position rather than his opinion. Or it seems that his opinion is not based on European Law but on his vision of how Europe shall work in the future.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:55 pm

onq wrote:If you'd like to send me a copy CK I'll take a look at it.

To answer your question - ring him and ask him.

ONQ.


I am home now... I will do it from my office tomorrow... But I doubt that I will be able talking to him. I am told that this opinion was emailed to TDs with RIAI briefing, it is designed to influence the motion of the Bill.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PVC King » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:19 pm

I would be very surprised if he were to talk to you as he is instructed by the RIAI and may be conflicted from talking to you. It is fair to say that the Act is an ill considered piece of legislation in that it did not deliver a viable and workable set of rules to govern an important profession.

To concentrate on a potential breach of an EU directive misses the point of why the system as drafted is not fit for purpose to represent a watershed for all existing market contributors; the intention of the legislation was to regulate the profession; to do that it needed to deal with 5 classes of individuals

1. FRIAI
2. MRIAI
3. Those with recognised degrees but not MRIAI
4. Students of recognised courses
5. Those with extensive relevant experience who in other systems would become ARIAI following an assessment of competence

I would concentrate your efforts on clases 3 - 5; should you highlight the deficiencies in the manner that the legislation deals with those three classes you will win the PR battle and possibly legally if the legislation were to be challenged through the courts. This legislation needed to be right; it still does.
PVC King
 

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:28 pm

CK wrote:I received what is supposed to be an opinion from Gerard Hogan. This opinion was sought by the RIAI if I believe the document.

The opinion states that the Building Control Amendment Bill 2010 is not compatible with EU Law. However, the references to the EU Directives do not contain any provision of this type.

He talks about the EU Directive 2005/36/EC and the EU Directive 2006 for the provision of services. Those are his 2 only references to EU legislation. He concludes that it would not be compatible with EU Law to have a registration system that would be for architects to practice in Ireland only and that the Building Control Amendment Bill 2010 is not compatible with EU Law.

This does not make sense because in the UK for example non-architects can provide architectural services when it is different in France or Germany where only architects can provide architectural services.

There is not a norm within the EU. Anyone can practice as an architect in Sweden or Denmark. The EU never imposed minimum standards for the practice of architecture within a state or for the use of the title "architect". The EU only set some qualification standards that EU states must recognize. However, if a state decides not to regulate the profession, it can do so. The only EU concern is related to the movement of architects and some standards were set for trans-border services. Someone practicing architecture in the UK may not be able to practice in Germany because not having a qualification in compliance with the EU Directive.

In fact it seems that he states his position rather than his opinion. Or it seems that his opinion is not based on European Law but on his vision of how Europe shall work in the future.


If I wanted a Frenchman whose command of English is imperfect to paraphrase a legal opinion I'd have asked you to do that.

Send me the opinion or not, just don't give me your opinion of the opinion.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:36 pm

onq wrote:If I wanted a Frenchman whose command of English is imperfect to paraphrase a legal opinion I'd have asked you to do that.

Send me the opinion or not, just don't give me your opinion of the opinion.

ONQ.


shame that you need a frenchman to give you an Irish opinion on an Irish Bill...:D

What is wrong with my English... I am now home in my bedroom with my children just going to bed and shooting... No time to check my grammar or trying to speak a professional English...

I have worked all day on this opinion only to realise that it may be a prank because of its poor content.

The Opinion is stored in my office C/ drive. I do not have access to it from home.

Be patient and I will send it tomorrow.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:52 pm

PVC King wrote:I would be very surprised if he were to talk to you as he is instructed by the RIAI and may be conflicted from talking to you. It is fair to say that the Act is an ill considered piece of legislation in that it did not deliver a viable and workable set of rules to govern an important profession.

To concentrate on a potential breach of an EU directive misses the point of why the system as drafted is not fit for purpose to represent a watershed for all existing market contributors; the intention of the legislation was to regulate the profession; to do that it needed to deal with 5 classes of individuals

1. FRIAI
2. MRIAI
3. Those with recognised degrees but not MRIAI
4. Students of recognised courses
5. Those with extensive relevant experience who in other systems would become ARIAI following an assessment of competence

I would concentrate your efforts on clases 3 - 5; should you highlight the deficiencies in the manner that the legislation deals with those three classes you will win the PR battle and possibly legally if the legislation were to be challenged through the courts. This legislation needed to be right; it still does.


It seems that you have the document too...

I do not remember how the parts are organised but I am aware that the EU does not regulate the provison of architectural services or the use of the title "architect" in EU states.

The EU only regulates the recognition of standard qualification and the provision of services between one state and another. I have talked to EU legal representatives before and I was told that the registration of architects in Ireland is not related to EU Law unless there is an approach that would be dicriminative such has not recognising experience gained with the EU.

If Dr Hogan found a discriminative content in the Bill as per EU Law, it can only be related to what is already in the Act. The non recognition of experience gained within the EU. However, Dr Hogan never make a reference to what is the problem at EU level. He only states qualification standards as expressed in Directive 2005/36/EC. Dr Hogan, if it is realy his opinion, does not refer to any part of the EU legislation that would make the Building Control Bill 2010 not compatible with EU Law.

I have read the document 4 or 5 times and all I found is Dr Hogan's position on how the provision of architectural services should evlove in Europe. Within his opinion, the non compatibility with EU Law is not a legal mater I think, but a political one.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PTD » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:56 pm

deleted
PTD
Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PTD » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:58 pm

ONQ,

Re
Hi PTD,
etc.

Good stuff thanks for the advice.
Rgds
PTD
PTD
Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:13 pm

CK wrote:shame that you need a frenchman to give you an Irish opinion on an Irish Bill...:D


(nods)

The irony of this had occurred to me.

What is wrong with my English... I am now home in my bedroom with my children just going to bed and shooting... No time to check my grammar or trying to speak a professional English...


What is wrong with your English? :D

What are your children "shooting" CK?

I have worked all day on this opinion only to realise that it may be a prank because of its poor content.

Perhaps that is why they didn't forward it to me...
The Opinion is stored in my office C/ drive. I do not have access to it from home.

Be patient and I will send it tomorrow.


I wait with bated breath.

Try not to get shot in the meantime by your kids :D

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:15 pm

PTD wrote:ONQ,

Re
Hi PTD,
etc.

Good stuff thanks for the advice.
Rgds
PTD


Hi PTD,

Looking at posts 1043 and 1044, either you have an itchy "send" finger or you're developing a stutter. :)

You're very welcome regarding the advice BTW, and I'm sure you can think of ways to improve getting your message across and out there.

Don't get swallowed up in the Alliance, do bring some new thinking to the situation and in particular, read PVC King's posts above which seem to show a lot of common sense.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby PTD » Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:31 pm

:):)
ONQ
Itchy finger syndrome. Trying to figure out how to delete post??
Yes im not an Alliance Member but don't disagree completely with
their views and at least they are asking some questions about
this entire debacle.

PTD
PS. Route C Looks almost as time consuming as TA but maybe
not with the same price tag. Best Of Luck
PTD
Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Tue Nov 09, 2010 6:54 pm

Christophe,

Check your mail and revert.

The MRIAI(IRL) suffix and its implications for both Grandfathers and people doing the TA route need careful evaluation.

I think the profession will end up tying itself in knots over this, but this is what happens when clueless people assume omnipotence - like the Oireachtas allegedly does.

The Oireachtas is omnipotent only up to a certain point - Acts get challenged in the Supreme Court and rulings are given, which may be referred to Europe in certain cases.

Thus the omnipotence of the Oireachtas is not unlimited and while it may deem a person or body to be competent, that is an assertion which can be disproved where matters of factual error arise.

Making an assertion such that the Oireachtas is IN FACT omnipotent seems to be a bit like assuming that priests are all morally incorruptible or that bankers know about money markets and the economy.

In other words, it should be a heavily qualified comment and not used as a plank on which to build an edifice which on first review looks like someone trying to hide an elephant with a postage stamp.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Tue Nov 09, 2010 7:05 pm

PTD wrote::):)
ONQ
Itchy finger syndrome. Trying to figure out how to delete post??

Not sure how to do that myself - think I asked the site owner to do that once.
Yes im not an Alliance Member but don't disagree completely with
their views and at least they are asking some questions about
this entire debacle.

Its not over yet it seems to me, and matters will develop as they will for a while before we get clarity.
The regulation of three professions - one of which confers automatic recognition throughout Europe, is a burden which I am sure weighs heavily on the Registrar's shoulders.

He will want to do this correctly and will no doubt seek perhaps more than one legal opinion on the matter - I know that I would where I in his position, given what I have experienced in the legal profession over the years.
There is no mystery to this latter comment by the way - review any court case, threre are two parties testing the law in an adversarial arena - it stands to reason that one or the other is going to fail to a greater or lesser degree.
PTD
PS. Route C Looks almost as time consuming as TA but maybe
not with the same price tag. Best Of Luck


Yep the Option C route is arduous - but in the end its a matter of application and intent.
Once you have defined your intent - you just have to apply yourself to writing the submission.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Tue Nov 09, 2010 7:08 pm

onq wrote:Christophe,

Check your mail and revert.

The MRIAI(IRL) suffix and its implications for both Grandfathers and people doing the TA route need careful evaluation.

I think the profession will end up tying itself in knots over this, but this is what happens when clueless people assume omnipotence - like the Oireachtas allegedly does.

The Oireachtas is omnipotent only up to a certain point - Acts get challenged in the Supreme Court and rulings are given, which may be referred to Europe in certain cases.

Thus the omnipotence of the Oireachtas is not unlimited and while it may deem a person or body to be competent, that is an assertion which can be disproved where matters of factual error arise.

Making an assertion such that the Oireachtas is IN FACT omnipotent seems to be a bit like assuming that priests are all morally incorruptible or that bankers know about money markets and the economy.

In other words, it should be a heavily qualified comment and not used as a plank on which to build an edifice which on first review looks like someone trying to hide an elephant with a postage stamp.

ONQ.


:confused:??????????????:eek:????????????:confused:

Can you translate that in plain English? Thank you...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland