Will Bertie resign over payments???

Akrasia

Darragh29 wrote:

Hmmm, it seems you bought your house when houses in Dublin were affordable. I want to make the point that the ratio of income to property prices back then was normal. Last week property prices were 13+ times the yearly income of many workers such aqs Gardai, nurses, firemen, etc. Whatever about shi*te wages and the rest of it, you could actually still afford to buy somewhere due to the ratio of income to property prices which was probably about 3-4 to 1. Now you can't buy in Dublin because your competing with investors who have an equal right to buy the house that you might want to buy although all they are doing is making themselves incredibly wealthy.

For this, I'll never vote for FF again. I ended up having to buy an hour away from where I work in the back of fu*king beyond, spend 3 hours a day in traffic. Thanks but no thanks Bert, you've done fu*k all for me...

how much do you spend on petrol?
I've been having to commute from ennis to galway for the last month and it's costing me 75 quid a week just to put petrol in the car. I would take a bus, but I live 20 minutes away from the bus station and if it would add at least another hour onto my commute time every day

oscarBravo

johnnyrotten wrote:

Do you have any connection with Fine Gael ?

That's not an appropriate question for this forum.

On a more general note, I'd like youse all to stay on-topic, thanks.

sceptre

skearon wrote:

- In 1997 under Fine Gael & Labour PAYE rates were 27% and 48%
- Today under FF & the PDs the rates are 20% and 42%, respectively

- In 1997 a single PAYE payer was taxed at from €97.77. Today the figure is €300
- In 2006, a worker on the Average Industrial Wage will earn €12,600 more than in 1997 but pay over €400 less tax.

- In 1987 under FG & Labour every penny paid in income tax went on servicing the National Debt. In 1997, €1 in €6 of your tax went on servicing Debt. In 2004, under FF & the PDs less than €1 in €25 raised went in servicing the Debt.

- In 1997 14% of the income tax yield coming from those earning at or under the average industrial wage today the figure is 6% .

- And the Companies that create jobs pay less tax too. In 1997 the standard corporation tax rate was 36% today it is 12.5%.

Just so I can recap, how much were houses, TV licences, waste rates and bars of chocolate in 1997?

gandalf

In 1993 a crack Fianna Fail Fundraising unit was set up to help a Taoiseach imprisioned by an unhappy marraige. These men promptly had a whip around to arrange a "loan" to go to the Drumcondra underground. Today, still owed by the government, they survive as businessmen & deveolopers. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the Bass Brigade.

constitutionus

gandalf wrote:

In 1993 a crack Fianna Fail Fundraising unit was set up to help a Taoiseach imprisioned by an unhappy marraige. These men promptly had a whip around to arrange a "loan" to go to the Drumcondra underground. Today, still owed by the government, they survive as businessmen & deveolopers. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the Bass Brigade.

i can hear the theme tune now!

Darragh29

Akrasia wrote:

how much do you spend on petrol?
I've been having to commute from ennis to galway for the last month and it's costing me 75 quid a week just to put petrol in the car. I would take a bus, but I live 20 minutes away from the bus station and if it would add at least another hour onto my commute time every day

Spend 60 Euro a week on diesel, 15 hours a week in traffic just going to and from work if I'm lucky and 45 Euro a week on road tolls between Dublin & Westmeath. I have to struggle to pay this, on top of a mortgage and the outrageous cost of living and every cent I earn is taxed. Meanhile this fu*king clown has the brass neck to tell me that he got £40K back in 1993 for free, treats it as undeclared income, hides it from Revenue and then 13 years later when it comes to the surface, he tells me its a loan!?!?!?!

The only part of this I can't work out in my head is how the pr*ck could manage to keep a straight face in front of the RTE camera last night...

gandalf

Oh ho theres more according to Fine Gael.

http://www.finegael.ie/fine-gael-news.cfm/NewsID/29305/action/detail/level/page/aid/10/year/2006/month/9

Looks like Ahern likes Manchester for more than its football team.

Looks like the knifes are being sharpened...........

Darragh29

constitutionus wrote:

i can hear the theme tune now!

Yeah, to the soundtrack of the A Team, only we'd call these gang of tossers the B Team!

skearon

sceptre wrote:

Just so I can recap, how much were houses, TV licences, waste rates and bars of chocolate in 1997?

How much did you earn and more importantly what percentage was taxed, compared to now?

In any growing economy prices go up, you can't have low prices and high wages.

constitutionus

skearon wrote:

How much did you earn and more importantly what percentage was taxed, compared to now?

In any growing economy prices go up, you can't have low prices and high wages.

who gives a **** how much your taxed if your spending power is more and your services are better? im on 3 times what i was on in 93 and i cant go to the ****ing pub now. and if i didnt buy a house when i did i sure as hell couldnt afford one now

i think alot of people would like a 27% tax rate if a house was 3 times their annual wage instead of 13times ! :rolleyes:

johnnyrotten

oscarBravo wrote:

That's not an appropriate question for this forum.

Why not? Is it appropiate to consistantly Bertie Bash?

lostexpectation

I wonder have Manchester united ever given him a 'debt of honor' perhaps invited his daughters over to watch a match to get over their parents seperation?

I told ya nobody can be leader for 10 years without something coming back to haunt ya

gandalf

johnnyrotten wrote:

Why not? Is it appropiate to consistantly Bertie Bash?

Because he took monies from businessmen that he claimed is a loan where nothing, not even the interest has been paid back after 13 years. That in fact is a gift and is above the threshold where you are suppose to disclose it as a member of the Dail.

Because he admitted giving a place on a state board based on the fact it was a mate of his.

Because by his actions his decisions as Minister of Finance and Taoiseach can now be questioned because he is seen as being in the pocket of the Bass Brigade. And by this he has compounded the damage his mentor CJ did to the position.

Because he tried to dupe the irish public by playing the "sympathy" card and alot of us have seen through it.

Because it now looks like this is not the only illregular payment he is linked with.

If you roll in **** you shouldn't expect to come up smelling of roses now should you ?

He mentions a debt of honour but if there is even a shread of honour in the man he should resign now.

pete

Mr. J. Higgins: At every hand’s turn the Taoiseach has facilitated the powerful and the very wealthy. Therefore it is no surprise that wealthy businessmen should cough up €50,000 to him. What is shocking is that the Taoiseach still apparently does not see that a Minister for Finance taking large amounts of cash from businessmen is by any objective yardstick a massive conflict of interest. The Taoiseach minimises the amount of money, but in 1993 the average industrial wage was €13,416 per year, so that three times that amount, by any ordinary worker’s standard, would be colossal. By coincidence, two years after that I bought a semi-detached home for €47,000 with a mortgage that goes on until I am 65. At no stage should the Taoiseach have brought his personal life or difficulties into this issue. It is not relevant.

Again last night, deliberately, he cast RTE’s Brian Dobson in the role of agony aunt in order to divert attention from the critical issues which he is refusing to answer. The Taoiseach’s personal circumstances are irrelevant because he said, last night, that he had already got a bank loan to pay off pressing bills, that they were taken care of. Presumably he had a schedule of repayments to the bank. He then used what he says were personal loans to pay off the bank loan. Can he explain that conundrum to the House?

When the Taoiseach was in the Dáil in 1997 setting up tribunals on payments to politicians, it beggars belief that the alarm bells that should have been going off in his head were not so deafening as

---

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy’s time has concluded.

Mr. J. Higgins:

---

to tell him to pay back the €50,000. It was at the very least a catastrophic failure of political judgment. It further beggars belief that he could not give it back. Did the Taoiseach ever hear of a bank draft? This morning it took me two minutes to draft the letter the Taoiseach could send with it:

Ah Jaysus lads, you’ll have me in huge trouble if you don’t take back the €50,000. My circumstances are improved and I’ll have 50 reporters traipsing after me for the rest of my life if this comes out. Bertie.

It was as simple as that. Perhaps he might have said: “P.S. Tell Paddy the plasterer to steer clear of Callely’s house. He is in enough trouble with the painter already.”

A senior Minister gets substantial amounts of money from wealthy people. Half of them are subsequently lifted into influential positions on prestigious State bodies. What would any objective assessment of that be in any jurisdiction? That was nauseous patronage and cronyism. Incredibly, the Taoiseach blocked it out last night: the appointments were not because they gave him money but because they were his friends. That is just as bad. Can he not understand that appointing cronies to State boards because they are friends is the most despicable abuse of the State and of public bodies?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy’s time has concluded. He must give way to the Taoiseach.

Mr. J. Higgins: Finally, we had the hapless Deputy Callely. A businessman gave his house a slap of paint.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy to please give way to the Taoiseach.

Mr. J. Higgins: That caused the Taoiseach to show him the door, while he walked away with the whole house. By those standards, should the Taoiseach not go after the former Minister of State, Deputy Callely?

hammer. nail. head.

more here

pete

Sorry, but this is too good to be left out:

Mr. J. Higgins: I do not think it is a bit of fun, but sometimes one has to resort to ridicule to show the untenable position the Taoiseach is holding onto with his explanations. The Taoiseach is not the only person who has to offer an explanation to the House. In the face of patronage, cronyism and double standards we have the Trappist-like silence from the Tánaiste and leader of the Progressive Democrats. In a previous life in Opposition, one can only imagine the fulminations that would rain down from on high on the Taoiseach’s head from Deputy McDowell as regards these issues. To say he would become beetroot red is really only a pallid description of the shade of crimson verging on purple which would describe the glow irradiating from the indignant persona of Deputy McDowell.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy’s time has concluded.

Mr. J. Higgins: Far from standing up for standards, he is sitting neatly beside the Taoiseach today. Admittedly, his demeanour is rather tombstone like, without the moonlight even. However, since his appointment two weeks ago, Deputy McDowell is trying to work hard to have us believe he has no previous history in Government, that he has not been in Government for ten years, and that he has no responsibility for the billions of euro in stamp duty and the rest. He wants us to believe he is a political newborn, dropped by a stork, perhaps, into a basket outside Government Buildings two weeks ago, with Deputy O’Donnell playing along as the besotted nurse fetchingly referring to him as Michael, if one does not mind. That is somewhat different from the name she was spitting out two months ago from behind clenched teeth, when Michael was trying to take the PD rattler from Mary. What has the Tánaiste said to the Taoiseach about this and will he make a statement?

The image which Fianna Fáil has carefully cultivated of the Taoiseach, who is on €250,000 per annum, is that of an ordinary, struggling man like the rest of the ordinary people out there. This image has taken a fierce battering. Ordinary people do not have wealthy friends to do a whip around and the myth that Fianna Fáil is somehow the ordinary working person’s party will hopefully end with this episode, where rich people come to the assistance of senior politicians.

Dave!

lol, quality from Mr Higgins!

gandalf

Story-bud!! banned indefinately from the forum for contunueally spamming.

constitutionus

you have to admit, whatever your politics, higgins questions are the highlight of any dail sitting. he's the only guy who routinely gets past the teflon and gets an emotive response from bertie. ive never seen him lose the rag as much at anyone else's questions in the dail. im sure i heard a sigh of expectation when he stood up to make those remarks and the people werent disappointed. it'll be a sad day when he leaves politics.

god knows no one seem to go for the jugular like joe. pat and enda should take notes, that said sargents not done so bad lately. maybe the oppositions actually growing a pair!

pete

RTE1 23:55 Oireachtas Report

they better show all the highlights.

Zebra3

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1695557&issue_id=14693

Q: Were any favours done or any benefits conferred?

A: The Taoiseach denied there was any wrongdoing on his part as a result of their generosity or any favours given by him as a Minister or Taoiseach. He did admit, however, that some of them were appointed to State Boards "because they were friends and not because of anything they had given me." The Taoiseach has left a hostage to fortune with that remark.

Everyone knows ministers have appointed political cronies and friends to Boards but for the Taoiseach to admit he made appointments because they were his friends is damaging and whatever way he views it the public may see it as rewarding people who looked after him at a difficult time.

For this reason alone Ahern must go. Ahern has basically said that he has appointed people to State boards because they were his mates. This is basically abusing (robbing?) taxpayers money, and as a taxpayer, I deeply resent this abuse of money I have to pay, to grease the palms of Ahern's mates.

oscarBravo

johnnyrotten wrote:

Why not? Is it appropiate to consistantly Bertie Bash?

This topic of this thread is the Taoiseach's present woes, not any individual poster's party affiliation. Keep the discussion on topic, please.

Dave!

Zebra3 wrote:

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1695557&issue_id=14693



For this reason alone Ahern must go. Ahern has basically said that he has appointed people to State boards because they were his mates. This is basically abusing (robbing?) taxpayers money, and as a taxpayer, I deeply resent this abuse of money I have to pay, to grease the palms of Ahern's mates.

Agreed! I'd hate to turn attention away from the money issue, but since he actually admitted to nepotism, he can't possibly carry on like he's done nothing wrong.

ronbyrne2005

DaveMcG wrote:

Agreed! I'd hate to turn attention away from the money issue, but since he actually admitted to nepotism, he can't possibly carry on like he's done nothing wrong.

nepotism refers to giving family things not friends.

lostexpectation

whats interesting is the international coverage, a mintue piece on both sky and bbc1 and several newspapers around the world have a couple of wire stories on it.

PM accepted $70,000 from wealthy 'friends'

70,000$ makes it sound even worse...

Dave!

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

nepotism refers to giving family things not friends.

http://www.answers.com/nepotism&r=67

"Favoritism granted to relatives or close friends, without regard to their merit. Nepotism usually takes the form of employing relatives or appointing them to high office."

There's no need to be pedantic, you know what I meant.

sceptre

skearon wrote:

How much did you earn

That would fall into the box marked "none of your beeswax". I'll assume it was a rhetorical question and move on.

and more importantly what percentage was taxed, compared to now?

No, that's not more importantly at all. What's more important is how much the residual income buys, not how much of the gross income is taxed. If you don't understand that it's pointless my engaging you at all which I'd rather like to do; however if you did you wouldn't have made an asinine statement like the above.

In any growing economy prices go up, you can't have low prices and high wages.

See above. Purchasing power. That's what's relevant when buying peanuts, houses or TV licences. Obviously inflationary pressures push wages higher. or prices higher. or both. or each other. However that's the sort of vague statement that doesn't cut any mustard with me. I'm rather disappointed that you believe what matters most is the precise figure for earnings and how much of that is retained in taxation. I expect slightly better analysis than none at all.

Zebra3

Zebra3 wrote:

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1695557&issue_id=14693



For this reason alone Ahern must go. Ahern has basically said that he has appointed people to State boards because they were his mates. This is basically abusing (robbing?) taxpayers money, and as a taxpayer, I deeply resent this abuse of money I have to pay, to grease the palms of Ahern's mates.

I have to laugh at that for the simple reason that,friends get jobs right left and centre in this country due to political favouritism.It's far from being an exclusively Bertie thing or an FF thing.If you think that all governments dont appoint judges or senators or members of boards that are of their own political hue,then I'd look again on that one.
I suspect Kenny or Rabbitte wont be labouring that point.

Villain

Just to clear it up for johnnyrotten, I am have no affiliation to FG what so ever in fact I have no affiliation to any party.

I simply think Bertie has failed in so many areas, I think that he is a hypocrite of the highest standard and I have outlined my reasons for that in this thread.

Now I think the most interesting piece at the moment has to be Liz O'Donnells statement, she believes Bertie has questions to answer over the money he received in Manchester she said it would appear to be in breach of ethic rules now however she was unsure whether it was against any rules back in 1994, perhaps McDowell is letting Liz do the questioning.

Zebra3

Tristrame wrote:

I have to laugh at that for the simple reason that,friends get jobs right left and centre in this country due to political favouritism.It's far from being an exclusively Bertie thing or an FF thing.If you think that all governments dont appoint judges or senators or members of boards that are of their own political hue,then I'd look again on that one.
I suspect Kenny or Rabbitte wont be labouring that point.

So you think it's acceptable?

What Ahern has admitted to is basically corruption. Do people not expect Ireland in 2006 to be above and beyond a corrupt third world state?

Zebra3

Zebra3 wrote:

So you think it's acceptable?

I was waiting for that...
Did I say that??
Simple point.
Everybody knows and see's political appointments by all parties in this state and across the water going on all the time.
Companies give jobs to "friends" and merely advertise the job for to be seen to do it.
It's endemic and while,I'd like it to be different,voters seem indifferent and they are the people who decide on these things.
If they werent indifferent,then Labour,FG and FF wouldnt have 75% of the national vote between them.


Now you can keep asking for Utopia but you aint going to get it I'm afraid.