Results 1,681-1,700 of 2,156 for speaker:Tom Parlon

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: The Senator obviously was not invited.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: That sounds like sour grapes.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: If the Senator was not there he should not tell me about it.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: The Senator should not tell me about the Tánaiste turning on her heel if he was not there. He knows nothing about what took place. He did not have the good manners to attend.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: The Senator sounds very hurt to me.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I think the puncture was the bigger upset to the Senator.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: Keep it country.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: Boxcar Paschal.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I thank all the Senators for their contributions. In the main, they were positive, though there was at least one exception. Senator John Paul Phelan referred to the tax bill, an issue taken up by Senator Mansergh. The fact that we have the lowest unemployment rate in Europe and that wages have almost doubled contributes to the extremely substantial tax take we now enjoy. Despite the massive...

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: One hopes so. They may even get right up into the Slieve Blooms.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I do not want to get into this issue in too much depth, but the pass was designed with the best expertise of the Central Fisheries Board and the OPW. It has been found somewhat deficient and every effort is being made to sort that out. However, having visited it yesterday, I must say that the main reason that such a great deal of money was expended was to avoid flooding. I hope that Kilkenny...

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: Was there any flooding?

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: A total of 99.9% of the fish went up the river.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: People in Clonmel would be very happy to have the scheme they have in Kilkenny, and they would not be overly concerned about half a dozen fish.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: That is all the evidence I saw.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I like to deal with facts.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I have seen no evidence of any more.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: The Senator knows that if it was on a profit-making basis, Kilkenny would never have had its flood relief scheme.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: The Senator is the one who raised it and created a big issue about six fish.

Seanad: Appropriation Act 2004: Statements. (8 Feb 2005)

Tom Parlon: I spent the day there yesterday.