The Taoiseach pays over 70 grand to Revenue

Lennoxschips

Well my point of view is that taking of loans & donations is not wrong of itself. Instead, it is only when you can prove that the donation to the politician resulted in, for example, planning permission being granted for a shopping centre that it becomes corruption

Appointing people to influential state boards after they gave you cash gifts (undeclared to taxman) is corruption. Especially if your best defense is because they were appointed because they are your friends. Who happened to give you loadsamoney.

That is corruption in every sense of the word. This has nothing to do with opinion anymore, it is fact.

johnnyskeleton

Lennoxschips wrote: »

Appointing people to influential state boards after they gave you cash gifts (undeclared to taxman) is corruption. Especially if your best defense is because they were appointed because they are your friends. Who happened to give you loadsamoney.

That is corruption in every sense of the word. This has nothing to do with opinion anymore, it is fact.

So you're agreeing with me.

Lennoxschips

Yeah, we have the smoking gun(s) already.

I'm not so much disappointed in Bertie Ahern at this point as in the inability of the Irish state to tackle corrupt politicians. It shouldn't be up to the people to decide.

Zombrex

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

My point is that what you say is not axiomatic, it's just your point of view. So it's not that the Irish people "don't get that fact", it's just they don't take such a hard line theoretical approach to politics.

Its not a "hard line" Johnny, its the basis of democratic representation :rolleyes:

I completely agree with that the "Irish people" don't care, but that is the whole probably in the first place.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That's an unrealistic stance in my view, because politicians in the real world need funding for each campaign, and the vast majority of people owe money to one of the big banks, for mortgages etc.

Funding for political campaigns are handled (or should be handled) very carefully without personal donations to individuals. The way political donations are handled already is cause for concern. Transparency is very important. If I decide to support my local TD with a donation of 500 euro he can't go out and buy a Playstation with that money. :rolleyes:

Any public official in debt to a bank must handle that debt with utter transparency, in such a way that the debt does not put the politician in a compromised position. I would have serious reservations about any politician running up large debt with a bank who's business is influenced by the decisions of the politician.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Well, the fact that he is your mate probably weighs just as heavily on your mind as the gift. Should politicians not be allowed to have friends too?

They shouldn't have "friends" that they owe large sums of money to, no, particularly if these friends do business in areas influenced by the politician.

I mean seriously, are you trolling? Do you honestly not see a problem with this?

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That's not my point; if you want to prove corruption on the part of a politician, you must show how the money affected his judgement in a specific instance.

No you don't. You have to show that he has been put in a compramised position.

If you had to demonstrate that money affected his judgment no one would ever be shown to be corrupt without a signed confession, since a persons judgment is in their head!

"Wicknight, you decided to award this license to your personal friend "Billy Scumbag". Did the gift of €50,000 he gave you a year prior to this have any influence on your judgment to award this to him and not other companies?"

"No, no it didn't. I awarded this license to my friend, Billy, because his company was, in my opinion, the best tender. The private "loan", which I plan to eventually pay back, had absolutely nothing to do with that decision what so ever"

"Ok, that is convincing, we all believe you. No further questions"

I mean seriously! If you ask Bertie did this money ever influence any of his political decisions he will just say "No".

Is that honestly good enough for you?

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Otherwise, it's entirely possible that, notwithstanding the gift, he did not provide any benefit to them.

Of course its possible. Its possible that Bertie is actually an alien. But it ain't likely, and neither is the idea that these "gifts" never influenced any of Bertie's decisions.

If Bertie was the moral person that would not let something like this influence his public service he would not have accepted the money in the first place because of the murky ethics of the whole things. He should have turned it down. The idea that he would accept all this money and yet not act in favorable ways towards the interests of those who gave him the money is just preposterous.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Well my point of view is that taking of loans & donations is not wrong of itself.

Well your wrong, and that attitude is what is wrong with this country.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

that the people of Ireland lack understanding about these things.

If the people of Ireland are perfectly happy that their politicians are corrupt so long as they are careful enough to anything that would stand up in your made up low standards of political ethics (do anything, just don't get caught), no matter how dodgy, unethical or sleazy it actually looks, then they deserve this government.

Bertie should go not because he put himself in a compromised position by accepting personal gifts from people who had a vested interest in the outcome of his political activities.

Not only is that bad in of itself, but it shows incredible lack of ethical awareness on Bertie's part to put himself in that position in the first place, before we consider did that ever effect his judgment (which of course it would).

He's crap, he is corrupt, he should go.

Red Alert

According to today's Mail on Sunday the taoiseach's definition of 'tax authorities' means his own advisers :eek:

gurramok

Well, the courageous opposition intend to raise it in the dail whenever the whole lot of them come back from their 6 week stint.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1230/politics.html?rss

rte wrote:

Fine Gael and the Labour Party have said that they intend to raise what they say are new concerns about the Taoiseach's tax affairs when the Dáil returns next month.

Both parties said that a report in the 'Irish Mail on Sunday' newspaper raised extremely serious issues concerning Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's dealings with the Revenue Commissioners.

The Labour Party leader Eamon Gilmore said that Mr Ahern's credibility was being undermined and his authority was being eroded by each new revelation about his finances.
Advertisement

The Fine Gael Justice Spokesperson, Senator Eugene Regan, said it was now time for the Taoiseach to come clean on all matters relating to his tax affairs.

A spokesman for Fianna Fáil said that issues relating to the Mahon Tribunal should be dealt with by the tribunal and that matters relating to the tax affairs of any individual should be dealt with by the individual concerned and the Revenue Commissioners.

mike65

Ahern did declare himself to be tax compliant during the election campaign.

Mike.

A Dub in Glasgo

Tax compliant probably meant he took measures not to declare :eek:

LostinBlanch

Now it looks like the revenue commissioners disagree. :rolleyes:


From todays indo.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ahern-faces-grilling-over-more-cheques-1255190.html

Meanwhile, the Taoiseach's problems mounted yesterday when details of correspondence to him from the Revenue Commissioners were revealed.

Mr Ahern had said in his famous RTE news interview in September 2006 that he had "dealt with this properly in terms of taxes" when referring to money gift of around stg£8,000 he received in Manchester.

But a Revenue district manager has written to Mr Ahern to say: "I can find no record of this issue having been addressed."

The Taoiseach also said his two claimed dig-outs in Ireland -- which supposedly netted him IR£22,500 and around IR£16,500 respectively -- had been cleared with the authorities, telling the Dail on September 27, 2006: "I checked the matter with senior counsel and the tax authorities long ago."

But the Revenue have told the Taoiseach in writing that they have no record of the matter ever being raised with them.

Last night Labour leader Eamon Gilmore said the disclosures raised "new and extremely serious issues for Mr Ahern".

Fine Gael said the latest disclosures further undermined Mr Ahern's credibility.

Mr Ahern, meanwhile, is not expected to resume giving evidence before February.

So whose version of "tax compliant" do we accept? The Revenue or Berties? Part of me is almost looking forward to seeing what verbal gymnastics he's going to try and do to get out of this one.

Duckjob

LostinBlanch wrote: »

So whose version of "tax compliant" do we accept? The Revenue or Berties? Part of me is almost looking forward to seeing what verbal gymnastics he's going to try and do to get out of this one.

i'd go with the Revenue's. They're probably the most well-organised state department in the country, and if Bertie did sort it out with them then all he has to do is produce some sort of receipt/balancing statement to them and the case is closed. Somehow though, I get the feeling he's not going to be able to do that...

Lest we forget, this is the elected leader of government of this country and, leaving aside the the huge issue of what he accepted all that money for as a then Minister for Finance, he is now being chased by the tax-man for allegedly not declaring that questionable income to the revenue.

I mean.....WTF !!!!!!!!

murphaph

If this were Britain, the PM would resign. There's no way his party would stand by him. They'd all leap to disassociate themselves from him. Here, FF stick together like mud. And get re-elected.:rolleyes:

mike65

This is being discussed on www.newstalk.ie

Mike.

juuge

Let us not forget that Bertie would have some very close friends within the revenue department and what we are seeing now is no more than behaviour akin to a banana republic. Why are we surprised ?

Colonel Sanders

juuge wrote: »

Why are we surprised ?

Don't think many people are. This country gets worse by the day

Liam Byrne

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

there must be a payment of funds, and an instance of favouritism or a bending of the rules for it to be corruption

No, there doesn't:

The only explanation he can come up with is that "they weren't appointed because of the money, but because they are my friends."

That in itself is corruption. People should be appointed because they are the best people for the job in the interests of the country.

Of course, since even the electorate don't seem to believe that, what hope is there for someone who's actually corrupt.

No wonder John "zero-tolerance" O'Donoghue didn't follow through with his election promises - Ahern would have been jailed by now.

LostinBlanch

It looks like the Standards in Public Office Commission could get involved.

http://www.examiner.ie/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=ireland-qqqm=ireland-qqqa=ireland-qqqid=51602-qqqx=1.asp

POLITICAL standards watchdogs may probe Bertie Ahern’s tax affairs, it emerged last night.


As Labour turned up pressure on the Taoiseach by claiming he had deliberately misled the Dáil, the Standards in Public Office Commission confirmed a formal hearing could follow complaints about Mr Ahern.

Labour leader Eamon Gilmore went on the offensive over reports Mr Ahern had not settled his full tax liabilities, despite claims to the contrary from the Taoiseach. Mr Gilmore demanded an urgent public statement from Mr Ahern.

“Mr Ahern would have, as all TDs do, submitted a statement to the commission that his tax affairs were compliant following his election, and he would have put in a tax clearance certificate to support that. If he can make a statement which confirms that, then there shouldn’t be a problem with it,” said Mr Gilmore.

The commission would consider investigating Mr Ahern’s tax position if it receives complaints on the matter, it said.

The commission said former TD Michael Collins had been prosecuted and fined for failure to comply with rules.

TDs have nine months from the May general election to supply tax certificates, and those “in negotiations” with the Revenue could gain an extension, the spokesman said, adding no formal complaints about Mr Ahern had yet been received.

The commission could decide to investigate claims regarding Mr Ahern without receiving a complaint, but would not be able to appoint an inquiry officer to conduct preliminary investigations in such a scenario.

Former Fianna Fáil TD Mr Collins was found guilty in September of obtaining a tax clearance certificate under false pretences in 2002 in order to comply with new ethics rules for elected members to the Dáil. Mr Collins was fined €25,000 and given a 12-month suspended sentence for fraud.

The Taoiseach’s spokesperson said every citizen had the right to keep their dealings with the Revenue private and it would be “unprecedented and unfair” for that right not to apply to Mr Ahern.

A Labour spokesperson said it was difficult to conclude Mr Ahern had not deliberately misled the Dáil on his tax position if reports of the Revenue being unaware of payments were true.

Mr Gilmore insisted the “speculation and doubt” could not be allowed to drag on until the Dáil returned on January 30.

“We also need clarity on the €70,000 he is reported to have lodged with the Revenue Commissioners to clear up any liabilities,” the Labour leader told RTÉ’s Morning Ireland.

All they need is someone to make an official complaint. I wonder is it going to be Gilmore?

edanto

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/Complaints/ComplaintsProcedures/InvestigationofcomplaintsundertheEthicsActsandElectoralActs/

The following persons can make a complaint to the Standards Commission about an alleged contravention of the disclosure provisions of the 1995 Act:

* a member of the public can complain about an office holder (i.e. the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, a Minister, a Minister of State and the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of Dáil Éireann and of Seanad Éireann);

To make the complaint, you need to specify the "alleged contravention of the provisions of the 1995 Act and/or the 2001 Act which is the subject-matter of the complaint and set out in detail the basis for alleging that contravention."

sipo@sipo.gov.ie

I sent a brief email complaint, but not in the level of detail that they require. Anyone happen to know the details of the acts referred to above?

Liam Byrne

Sorry for stating the obvious, but can I ask who appointed the members of the Standards Commission that we should complain to ? Any chance there's a few of Ahern's "friends" in there too ?

edanto

The Standards Commission received 21 complaints during 2006. Of these, 13 were considered to be invalid complaints in that they did not concern a contravention by a person of a provision of the Ethics Acts, such as a failure to disclose an interest where required to do so, or an alleged 'specified act’ by a ‘specified person’.

So, I guess that means my brief email complaint will be ignored since it's invalid.

Members of the SiPO commission are (no idea if any of them were appointed because they were Bertie's friends):

Justice Matthew P. Smith, Chairman
Deirdre Lane, Clerk of Seanad Éireann
Liam Kavanagh, Former member of Dáil Éireann
John Purcell, Comptroller and Auditor General
Kieran Coughlan, Clerk of Dáil Éireann
Emily O’Reilly, Ombudsman

Incidentally, the SiPOC cost us €927,000 last year.

So, if Bertie declared himself tax compliant during the last election, does that mean that he did so without a tax clearance cert? Or do SiPOC have one on file for him? In their literature, they seem to be pretty insistent that every politician has to file one with them - is it enforced?

jmayo

Lennoxschips wrote: »

Ireland isn't a Banana Republic. Bananas don't grow here for a start.

The Wild West of Europe would be a more apt description. If you need something done then you meet the sheriff down the saloon bar and slip him a few grand.

Hmmm actaully we are a more of a banana republic than people think
Since fyffes buy the entire banana crop of Belize and then re-export them, we are biggest banana exporters in Europe.

The majority of the electorate haven't cared about what the politicans have been getting up to because things have been good. The majority voted for bertie the last time because they were conned into thinking he would keep the good times rolling.
Over the next couple of years as the cr** really hits the fan, the voters will turn nasty and then start remembering all the dodgy deals. Until then he is safe.

Regarding his tax exposure, he showed some neck in admitting he consulted tax advisor/specialist to explain his money before he commented to tribunal.
The UK money was a gift and the Irish digouts were loans. That way neither was susceptible to tax.
I always think the Europeans must be laughing their asses off at how gullible a bunch of eejits he has as an electorate.

lostexpectation

so the indo says he willa temp tax clearance and the times says he won't.

sams smyth says that he expects to get most of the 70,000 he lodge with the revenue back,, well why would you give them that much if you were get say 60,00 back?

I don't want to hear from FG that they are thinking of making a complaint I want them to make a complaint.

SF should do it like the snp tried with the cash for peerages

mike65

In the Sindo, Bertie claims he expects to be tax-compliant. He is not now and does'nt have to be for up to 9 months after an election. However he does'nt even have to manage that due to his finance affairs being tied up with the tribunal. So he has a "holding compliance" cert. I wonder if you or I could get anyway with that?

Mike.

juuge

Where my Dad works, practically every day he is asked to forward on an up-to-date 'tax clearance certificate'.
The various government departments he deals with will not do business with his company without one.
Yet it's OK for Bertie ! - we're a banana republic.

Colonel Sanders

juuge wrote: »

Yet it's OK for Bertie ! - we're a banana republic.

As so many people have already said, the fact the Taoiseach of this country is still in a job with all this muck flying around proves what a joke this country actually is.