New Programme for Government agreed

Grudaire

dfbemt wrote: »

Touchy !

I am just expressing My Opinion - sorry

Not touchy (sarcasm doesn't read well), however it's not as if they're hiding the fact that it's a tax, when the word TAX is in the title:rolleyes:

However your blaming of the Greens for more taxes is just irrational, judge things on their own merit. THERE IS GOING TO BE MORE TAXES, the Greens seem to want to use the taxes in a productive way - I don't see that as a bad thing

The_Minister

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Excuse me ? I gave them a vote or two because they'd promised that. :mad:

*SIGH*
They never promised that.
They NEVER promised that.
Sergent promised that he would not lead the Greens in with Fianna Fail, but it was made clear that the Greens might go i with them.

taconnol wrote: »

-26 Jan 09: Europe announces it will ban energy inefficient lightbulbs. Following Ireland’s lead the EU phases out will begin in September 2009.
.

Sorry, but I'm not letting you get away with that.

Europe was planning to ban incandescent bulbs for months before the Greens ever got into power.
The Government are implementing it a few months before Europe, but Europe isn't 'following' them - they are just legislating early for something we have to do anyway.



By the way, anyone notice how bizzare the donations rule is?

Put in place the legal mechanisms to restrict direct political donations to political
parties or candidates to individual Irish citizens and residents only and facilitate a
system where donations from private bodies, including businesses and
corporations, can be made to a political fund which will be distributed to political
parties in accordance with their electoral performance in the previous Dáil
election.

So....a company has to donate to ALL political parties in the Dail, including Sinn Fein, or none at all?
Why would anyone, anywhere do that?

Also, can anyone confirm if this bans union donations?
That should piss off Labour.

The_Minister

There is a small error in the first sentance of the Preface.

dresden8

The_Minister wrote: »

*Sergent promised that he would not lead the Greens in with Fianna Fail,

He led them through the talks on government. He led them through the party meeting which agreed it. He led them into government and then nominated Bertie in the Dail as Taoiseach.

And when he did eventually resign he took the junior ministry.

Unfortunately in this country this is what passes as acting honourably and honestly.

I gave Trev a preference on the basis that he would not lead his party in with FF.

Do I feel fncking stupid.

Grudaire

The_Minister wrote: »

There is a small error in the first sentance of the Preface.

The word good!?:p:D

skelliser

this pfg has to be the biggest load of waffle iv ever read!

Grudaire

dresden8 wrote: »

I gave Trev a preference on the basis that he would not lead his party in with FF.

So that means that in all likelihood your vote didn't count for him. For feck sake, I give Sinn Féin a preference (Not a high one, somewhere above FF!).

Being fair if everyone who says that they gave the Greens a vote, or a second preference did, we'd have a majority green government. I can't accept this argument from everyone!

dresden8

Cliste wrote: »

So that means that in all likelihood your vote didn't count for him. For feck sake, I give Sinn Féin a preference (Not a high one, somewhere above FF!).

Being fair if everyone who says that they gave the Greens a vote, or a second preference did, we'd have a majority green government. I can't accept this argument from everyone!

Are you calling me a liar?

skelliser

sorry but most of the current crop didnt get in until 4th/5th counts thus needing loads of transfers, you are wrong.
Doesnt matter anyway cause your gonna lose most of them come next election.

Euro_Kraut

skelliser wrote: »

this pfg has to be the biggest load of waffle iv ever read!

How do you think it compares to other Programmes for Government that you have read? What would be your favorite one?

The_Minister

Can some explain what exactly this means:

Participating institutions in NAMA will be obliged to offer a deposit account to consumers which will be ringfenced for lending to Green projects.

Euro_Kraut

Ludo wrote: »

*EDIT* never mind...found the complete waffle.

Public Service Reform

· Value for Money reviews on all large capital projects

· Full review of expenses system for the public service

· All senior positions in the public service to be open to people from the private sector

· We will reform how senior positions are filled by having an ‘outside’ chair on appointment boards

· Equal number of civil servants and private sector membership on senior appointment panels

· Seniority eliminated as a factor in promotion appointments

· ‘cooling off’ period for public servants in the acceptance of outside appointments or consultancies

These are all excellent reforms to the Public Sector. By far my favorite part of the Programme. It will be another battle to get the Unions to sign up to that but the public appetite for reform is there.

Darragh29

I see lot of people getting excited about the notion of a new "programme for government". Just look at the track record of BOTH PARTIES, in implementing already existing policies. USELESS!

skelliser

well i ranks up there with the last green pfg in which they didnt get any of there mandate implemented, so nothing much has changed.

Rb

I'm glad I'm a student

However, I have to laugh at the people who rant about increased taxes, it's as though they haven't the foggiest idea exactly stuck this country is for money.

In fact, any party that wasn't proposing further taxes at this time shouldn't be let near the controls of this country.

dfbemt

Cliste wrote: »

Not touchy (sarcasm doesn't read well), however it's not as if they're hiding the fact that it's a tax, when the word TAX is in the title:rolleyes:

However your blaming of the Greens for more taxes is just irrational, judge things on their own merit. THERE IS GOING TO BE MORE TAXES, the Greens seem to want to use the taxes in a productive way - I don't see that as a bad thing

Blaming the greens? Absolutely. FF said there would be no tax hikes.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lenihan-read-my-lips-no-tax-hikes-1890200.html

Bring in the greens and their demands in the PFG.

Removing the PRSI ceiling means paying more tax which is a new tax, IMO. Sorry !

Introducing a carbon tax is a new tax as up to now we paid a zero carbon tax. This is a new tax IMO.

Introducing a water tax is a new tax as up to now we paid a zero water tax. This is a new tax IMO.

Well at least there will be a phase out of fur farming and this will save the country. Good stuff greens. I pay more and the minks run free

Grudaire

dresden8 wrote: »

Are you calling me a liar?

No - I would say that you're a liar if I was to say that.

skelliser and dresden - it really depends on who you voted for in what order on whether it'll make a difference. Yes if you voted for someone who is eliminated early your second and third preferences will count. But just because it's on the 4/5th count doesn't mean we're onto 4/5th preferences as people get elected, and their excesses redistributed.

Anyway I don't want to drag this woefully off topic!

I'd say it's civil war in the RDS today!

Rb

The_Minister wrote: »

Can some explain what exactly this means:

I wonder do they mean offer deposit accounts that the consumer knows will fund green projects, or deposit accounts that are ringfenced for said projects without telling the consumer. It shouldn't make a difference regardless but for transparency reasons I would hope it's the former.

I'd be a lot more annoyed if it were ringfenced for social welfare lending to be honest!

Ludo

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

These are all excellent reforms to the Public Sector. By far my favorite part of the Programme. It will be another battle to get the Unions to sign up to that but the public appetite for reform is there.

Where is the money saving though? Something vague about value for money on capital projects and curtailing expenses fair enough...but it is gonna take a LOT more than that to bring the public sector spending in line with reality.

skelliser

watch/read live updates from the convention here
http://www.scribblelive.com/Event/Green_Party_Convention_on_NAMA_and_the_Programme_for_Government

Grudaire

dfbemt wrote: »

Blaming the greens? Absolutely. FF said there would be no tax hikes.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lenihan-read-my-lips-no-tax-hikes-1890200.html

Bring in the greens and their demands in the PFG.

Brian Lenihan - Barrister to be fair. Honestly as Rb says - anyone who is suggesting no extra taxes is plain bonkers.

And I advise you read the article - Lenihan actually says that there will be a carbon tax, but no water tax, so scratch the carbon tax off your list. PRSI - tax or insurance?

dfbemt

Ludo wrote: »

...but it is gonna take a LOT more than that to bring the public sector spending in line with reality.

Agreed, and that is speaking as a public servant.

Unions need to be taken on. Good thing about the greens is that they have no union affiliations nor do they oew the uniuons anything. Problem as the junior coalition partner is that FF are in hock up to their necks with the unions through ICTU. Look at all the semi state appointments that are from the union ranks.

I certainly will not be supporting the national day of action in Nov.

Greens need to do more in this area.

The_Minister

dfbemt wrote: »

Introducing a water tax is a new tax as up to now we paid a zero water tax. This is a new tax IMO.

This was coming in from Europe anyway, and tbh it is probably a good thing.

Dublin is going further and further into the country to getour water, and we don't really need to. All we have to do is reduce the amount of water we waste, and a water charge (starting after a certain volume of water) combined with repairing the water pipes, will do that.

Macha

The_Minister wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not letting you get away with that.

Europe was planning to ban incandescent bulbs for months before the Greens ever got into power.
The Government are implementing it a few months before Europe, but Europe isn't 'following' them - they are just legislating early for something we have to do anyway.

Well what do you take by leading? We were the first country in the EU to propose the legislation at national level and planned for it to be implemented BEFORE the EU aimed for the ban to take place. The EU's plans were for post-2009.

dfbemt

Cliste wrote: »

- Lenihan actually says that there will be a carbon tax, but no water tax, so scratch the carbon tax off your list. PRSI - tax or insurance?

Carbon tax is a green agenda item from their first agreement.

Don't know about you but PRSI appears in my deductions column and appears as a tax credit every year.

Het-Field

Cliste wrote: »

Not touchy (sarcasm doesn't read well), however it's not as if they're hiding the fact that it's a tax, when the word TAX is in the title:rolleyes:

However your blaming of the Greens for more taxes is just irrational, judge things on their own merit. THERE IS GOING TO BE MORE TAXES, the Greens seem to want to use the taxes in a productive way - I don't see that as a bad thing

Prima facie, that doesnt seem like a bad motive at all. However, in the current climate, it is completely unsustainable. It's not dissimilar to Labour's attempt to raise taxes to put extra money into cervical cancer/cerebral palsey services. There is nothing inoble about that. However it is untenable. The size of the defecit ensures that the country must work within itself, and spend conservatively. In reality, it will be impossbile to ignore every sector of society, particularly when the public sector, and social welfare budgets amount to almost 50 Billion per annum. Equally, the health budget (Around 6 Billion) is too large, and encourages wanton waste. Cuts from these sectors will drive people crazy. However, a longer term mal-effect will result if the current reticence to adequatly cut is continued.

dfbemt

The_Minister wrote: »

This was coming in from Europe anyway, and tbh it is probably a good thing.

Dublin is going further and further into the country to getour water, and we don't really need to. All we have to do is reduce the amount of water we waste, and a water charge (starting after a certain volume of water) combined with repairing the water pipes, will do that.

But the way I read the PFG it says that this will apply to 'treated water'.

Does this mean that people with their own supply will not have to pay? Totally unfair. Urban dwellers get hit hardest again.

Het-Field

Rb wrote: »

I'm glad I'm a student

However, I have to laugh at the people who rant about increased taxes, it's as though they haven't the foggiest idea exactly stuck this country is for money.

In fact, any party that wasn't proposing further taxes at this time shouldn't be let near the controls of this country.

With due respect, it was consistent 10% + increases in public spending which landed us in this mess. It was through borrowing, and windfall taxes that we managed to live the "high life" after the small slump in 2002. Bertie pragmatism is to blame for this.

Internationally, all countries are having difficult times (we just happen to be having much worse !). However, they have all had alternative tax regimes, some high, and some low. Low taxation is not the main contributing factor to this mess, it was ludicriously wanton and lack of frugality which has driven us to this point.

Grudaire

dfbemt wrote: »

Carbon tax is a green agenda item from their first agreement.

Don't know about you but PRSI appears in my deductions column and appears as a tax credit every year.

Ok - but FF had agreed to it, and never promised that it wouldn't happen in this next budget (I was dealing with the "FF said there would be no tax hikes." remark) You're throwing out statements, and not accepting anything that I am saying - Tóg go bog é, I'm trying to deal with things, but you're changing the bar all the time.

And are you sure about the tax credit? http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it1.html it's treated as seperate as far as I know...

efb

If anyone here is complaining about removing the PRSI ceiling you don't have my sympathies! You know what it is? Some of us are at the other end!