Former Union boss paid €100k fees by housing quango over 4 years

anymore

Shane Ross has an article in todays's Sun Indo pointing out that "
Des Geraghty, former President of SIPTU, has in recent years earned more than € 100 k as Chairman of the Affordable Homes Partnership. "

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/shane-ross-union-boss-takes-euro100k-fees-from-housing-quango-2151667.html

" The chairman's fee was originally set at around €13,000 in 2005 -- but it had more than doubled by 2006 due to what a spokesman at the partnership yesterday described as the "extra work" done by Mr Geraghty."
Until his resignation last year, Mr Geraghty had also been on the board of FAS.
These lucrative directorships and Board seats for union bosses and executives underline how much they were and are of the golden inner circle of Irish Society and not the helpless bystanders they are now portraying themselves to be in the aftermath of the collapse of the economy. For more than ten years they were an integral part of the group that worked with Bertie Ahern to chart the course of this country and beneffited from the perks and priviliges that Ahern and his Government doled out to the members of the inner circle.
It is little wonder there is so little appetite for dismantling the two hundred or so of this country's quangos.
Is it time to end the lucrative quango gravy train ?

P. Breathnach

It might be more honest to recognise is that Des Geraghty is not a union boss, and has not been one for several years. It might also be more fair if the headline indicated that the €100,000 was earned over a period of more than four years. But it wouldn't have made such a good headline.

It would also be interesting to know how much work he did for the money.

Nodin

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It might be more honest to recognise is that Des Geraghty is not a union boss, and has not been one for several years. It might also be more fair if the headline indicated that the €100,000 was earned over a period of more than four years. But it wouldn't have made such a good headline.

It would also be interesting to know how much work he did for the money.

Shane Ross, having emulated the broken clock for a time and been right, has gone back to fate of all broken clocks it seems. From the article...

The chairman's fee was originally set at around €13,000 in 2005 -- but it had more than doubled by 2006 due to what a spokesman at the partnership yesterday described as the "extra work" done by Mr Geraghty.
Mr Geraghty earned only €8,000 in 2005 (it was not a full year), €30,000 in 2006, €30,000 in 2007, €25,000 in 2008 and €14,000 in 2009.

....those are not exorbitant sums - unless he did nothing to earn them (and what he did isn't touched on, for some reason).

It's rather pathetic that given the amount of muck that can be cast at Geraghty due to FAS, that this is the best they can come up with. Shabby effort, from a shabby paper. If this was about Glenda Gilson, we'd be drowning in detail.

rightwingdub

Its not bad money for a former Marxist:D

SeanW

yeah, but the "Affordable Housing Partnership ..." what the hell is that? Sounds like just another semi-useless quango that costs a lot of money for shag-all benefit.

P. Breathnach

SeanW wrote: »

yeah, but the "Affordable Housing Partnership ..." what the hell is that? Sounds like just another semi-useless quango that costs a lot of money for shag-all benefit.

So you don't like the name? That's hardly a basis for a considered judgement.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It might be more honest to recognise is that Des Geraghty is not a union boss, and has not been one for several years. It might also be more fair if the headline indicated that the €100,000 was earned over a period of more than four years. But it wouldn't have made such a good headline.

It would also be interesting to know how much work he did for the money.

The fourth word of the article ( did you read it ?) was 'FORMER', so I cannot see why anyone would be in any doubt as to whether he was or not still a serving union boss ! The link is clearly provided. So the question of honesty seems to be a bit of a red herring. The article did make very clear that the € 100 k had been received over a period of years from 2005 - again, this is very clear to anyone reading the article.
Now the question of whether it had been earned or not is another question. Board members simply need to turn up for meetings, they do even have to turn up for all meetings to get full pay - and no, Doctor's notes are not needed. There may not even be very many meeetings in a year, six, seven - so quango's even rarely meet. So who decides as to whether board members are putting in a good performance or not ?There are full staff for the normal routine work.
As for doubling his fees for ' extra work' done, what was this work ? Turn up for a meeting, listen, throw in a few comments ? What does it say about this quango, that many people are surprised that it exists at all !
In these situations, having a chat over your expense lunch counts as lunch.
And of course very people do not sit on just one Board, but have multiple direstorships. As we see Mr Geraghty was one of those gentlemen who were on the FAS Board - well FAS deserves several threads all for itself, doesn't it ?

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So you don't like the name? That's hardly a basis for a considered judgement.

No he didnt say he didnt like the name ! He asked " what the hell is that....."
Its is question I would like to ask as well ?

anymore

Nodin wrote: »

Shane Ross, having emulated the broken clock for a time and been right, has gone back to fate of all broken clocks it seems. From the article...



....those are not exorbitant sums - unless he did nothing to earn them (and what he did isn't touched on, for some reason).

It's rather pathetic that given the amount of muck that can be cast at Geraghty due to FAS, that this is the best they can come up with. Shabby effort, from a shabby paper. If this was about Glenda Gilson, we'd be drowning in detail.

Perhaps the amount of work done wasnt touched on because we dont know what work at all was done ! Do you know ?
As for not being exorbitant sums, then they are far more than many ordinary people have worked full time, all year around, have earned. But that is probably irrelevant to those who hold our elitie in high esteem.

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

The fourth word of the article ( did you read it ?) was 'FORMER', so I cannot see why anyone would be in any doubt as to whether he was or not still a serving union boss ! The link is clearly provided. So the question of honesty seems to be a bit of a red herring. The article did make very clear that the € 100 k had been received over a period of years from 2005 - again, this is very clear to anyone reading the article.

That is specious. The Indo headline and your header are what first engage attention, and they give a distorted impression.

Now the question of whether it had been earned or not is another question. Board members simply need to turn up for meetings, they do even have to turn up for all meetings to get full pay - and no, Doctor's notes are not needed. There may not even be very many meeetings in a year, six, seven - so quango's even rarely meet. So who decides as to whether board members are putting in a good performance or not ?There are full staff for the normal routine work.
As for doubling his fees for ' extra work' done, what was this work ? Turn up for a meeting, listen, throw in a few comments ? What does it say about this quango, that many people are surprised that it exists at all !
In these situations, having a chat over your expense lunch counts as lunch.
And of course very people do not sit on just one Board, but have multiple direstorships. As we see Mr Geraghty was one of those gentlemen who were on the FAS Board - well FAS deserves several threads all for itself, doesn't it ?

For somebody who suggests that he doesn't even know what the Affordable Homes Partnership did, or does, you are now painting a picture of how it operates, and what Geraghty's contribution to the work was.

Do you actually know how many meetings a year were held? Do you know if Geraghty missed any of them? Do you know if he undertook any work in addition to chairing meetings?

Or do you simply want to engage in a campaign of unsubstantiated innuendo?

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That is specious. The Indo headline and your header are what first engage attention, and they give a distorted impression.



For somebody who suggests that he doesn't even know what the Affordable Homes Partnership did, or does, you are now painting a picture of how it operates, and what Geraghty's contribution to the work was.

Do you actually know how many meetings a year were held? Do you know if Geraghty missed any of them? Do you know if he undertook any work in addition to chairing meetings?

Or do you simply want to engage in a campaign of unsubstantiated innuendo?

Are questioning whether or not Mr Ross is correct in the amount paid to Mr G ?
If not then what way would you like the headline to be phrase ?
How : Former President of Siptu underpaid for his heroic work ?

As for your comments on my knowledge of how boards operate, Leaving Cert business students would have that information
Well as you are your presenting yourself as Mr Geraghty's champion, perhaps you can answer those questions.
I can tell you that when given the opportunity to elect Mr Geraghty as an MEP, the electorate in their wisdom said " No"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Geraghty
Desmond "Des" Geraghty (born 27 October 1943) is a former Irish politician and trade union leader. He was president of SIPTU from 1999 to 2004. He stood unsuccessfully at the 1984 European Parliament election for the Dublin constituency as a Workers' Party candidate. In 1992 he joined the newly founded Democratic Left party. He was appointed to the European Parliament in 1992 for the Dublin constituency following the resignation of Proinsias De Rossa.[1] He was a member of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy in the European Parliament. He did not contest the 1994 European Parliament election. He stood unsuccessfully as a Labour Party candidate in the 2002 Seanad election for the Labour Panel.

In fact the most notable fefeature of MR Gerghty's political career is the number of times he has failed to be elected and the number of APPOINMENTS to political roles he has received. This tends to happen to those who are amongst the Golden Elite !

I forgot to mention he was also previuosily a me,ber of the RTE Authority -salary for that - I dont know, do you ?

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

Are questioning whether or not Mr Ross is correct in the amount paid to Mr G ?

No. I'm suggesting that the way the story has been presented does not seem fair or honest -- in particular, that the headline (which you also use) is misleading.

If not then what way would you like the headline to be phrase ?
How : Former President of Siptu underpaid for his heroic work ?

Understand this: I believe in fairness. I have no way of knowing if this is a fair representation of the story.

As for your comments on my knowledge of how boards operate, Leaving Cert business students would have that information

I didn't make a general comment about your level of knowledge. I questioned your knowledge of a particular body, and the role of one person in that body.

Well as you are your presenting yourself as Mr Geraghty's champion ...

No, I am not. My interest is in fairness. In effect, I am challenging you to justify your imputations as, on the surface, they have the appearance of being unfair. So far, you have not done so.

Nodin

anymore wrote: »

Perhaps the (.....)elitie in high esteem.

I've no idea, therefore I can't comment - the article doesn't contain even a cursory amount of detail in that regard. However, don't let my need of facts before pronouncing judgement hold you back.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

No. I'm suggesting that the way the story has been presented does not seem fair or honest -- in particular, that the headline (which you also use) is misleading.



Understand this: I believe in fairness. I have no way of knowing if this is a fair representation of the story.



I didn't make a general comment about your level of knowledge. I questioned your knowledge of a particular body, and the role of one person in that body.



No, I am not. My interest is in fairness. In effect, I am challenging you to justify your imputations as, on the surface, they have the appearance of being unfair. So far, you have not done so.

The headline is at least as fair as the response you posted to in regard to SeanW's post. Where was your sense of fairness then ? I posted the headline and a short extract - copyright rules would not have allowed me to quote the article in full nor I think, would the general rules of this site.
I did post the link allowing any interested party to read further.
Where is the unfairness ?

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

The headline is at least as fair as the response you posted to in regard to SeanW's post. Where was your sense of fairness then ? I posted the headline and a short extract - copyright rules would not have allowed me to quote the article in full nor I think, would the general rules of this site.
I did post the link allowing any interested party to read further.
Where is the unfairness ?

I have already told you. You seem not to be really interested.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I have already told you. You seem not to be really interested.

I wouldnt really have any objection to editing or altering the headline; I am really more interested in the substance of the story.
So from what I see Mr geraghty must or probably has a pension from his time in the EU, presumably he enjoys a very lucrative pension as former President of SIPTU and he has been on the boards of RTE Authority, FAS and of course the housing quango.
Very nice indeed.

sceptre

Thread title changed to something that no rational person should disagree with. Probably a good time to talk about the actual topic now.

/mod

anymore

sceptre wrote: »

Thread title changed to something that no rational person should disagree with. Probably a good time to talk about the actual topic now.

/mod

Thank you. My basic position is that there seems to be a golden circle of people in Irish life who have access to a whole range of positions on semi state baords, quangos etc and it is not clear what thier particular qualifocations or suitability for these positions are. It is clear that many of those who participated in the Social partnership process with Bertie Ahern have access to this golden circle.
..
Mr Ross's article highlights some of the fees paid out to Board members.

P. Breathnach

sceptre wrote: »

Thread title changed to something that no rational person should disagree with. Probably a good time to talk about the actual topic now.

/mod

We're not all rational around here!

[I could quibble over the verb "takes".]

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

We're not all rational around here!

[I could quibble over the verb "takes".]

You are in a good position to give a left wing or socialist wing perspective on whether or not the taxpayer gets good value from this type of appointment.

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

You are in a good position to give a left wing or socialist wing perspective on whether or not the taxpayer gets good value from this type of appointment.

On what basis do you say that? I do not advocate a left-wing position here.

So far, all we have is that Geraghty was chairman of the Affordable Housing Partnership and that he was paid about €100,000 in a period lasting over four years. Shane Ross has made a song and dance about it, and you have brought the matter here.

I don't know what Geraghty did to earn the money, but I am sure there was work involved. Whether the payment was commensurate with the work, I cannot say. I suspect that neither Ross nor you can, either.

I think that those who suggest that there is something wrong have the responsibility for making a case. It should not fall to me, whose position is that no case has been made, to answer an unsupported suggestion that some wrong has been done.

Nodin

anymore wrote: »

I wouldnt really have any objection to editing or altering the headline; I am really more interested in the substance of the story.
So from what I see Mr geraghty must or probably has a pension from his time in the EU, presumably he enjoys a very lucrative pension as former President of SIPTU and he has been on the boards of RTE Authority, FAS and of course the housing quango.
Very nice indeed.

There is no substance, which is what came up in the first few posts on the thread. When substance emerges, then we can talk.

FlutterinBantam

anymore wrote: »

Thank you. My basic position is that there seems to be a golden circle of people in Irish life who have access to a whole range of positions on semi state baords, quangos etc and it is not clear what thier particular qualifocations or suitability for these positions are. It is clear that many of those who participated in the Social partnership process with Bertie Ahern have access to this golden circle.
..
Mr Ross's article highlights some of the fees paid out to Board members.

Everybody knows that.

The Express

Some nice little numbers in quangoland. I've heard of one outfit with two people in 'HR'. the quango, incidently, has a staff of 12.

Always have some silly advisory report or 'leaflet' on the go, these quangos. Grandiose titles but f-all substance beneath or benefit to the real world.

Was looking at 'The Poor Can't Pay' campaign website that was all over the news before Christmas. Fair campaign and all that, but spotted something interesting...

One of the quangos involved in it is The National Womens' Council. The council has a budget of €1m a year to run. And to do what, exactly?

With taxpayers' money being blown on quangos like this it's no bloody wonder that the poor can't pay.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

On what basis do you say that? I do not advocate a left-wing position here.

So far, all we have is that Geraghty was chairman of the Affordable Housing Partnership and that he was paid about €100,000 in a period lasting over four years. Shane Ross has made a song and dance about it, and you have brought the matter here.

I don't know what Geraghty did to earn the money, but I am sure there was work involved. Whether the payment was commensurate with the work, I cannot say. I suspect that neither Ross nor you can, either.

I think that those who suggest that there is something wrong have the responsibility for making a case. It should not fall to me, whose position is that no case has been made, to answer an unsupported suggestion that some wrong has been done.

I would have thought the case was fairly evident, but then again, i am not a supporter of any particular political view point.
I am glad you were instrumental in having the title changed as it now reflects that this man received on average € 25,000 a year for this sinecure. The minimum wage at present is around €15/16,000 and I am just wonder of many of SIPTU's membership earn between , €15,000 and € 25,000 ? Quite a few I should imagine. And this is not taking inflation into account - I imagine the minimum wage was significantly lower in 2005, 2006.
I also wonder what Mr Geraghty would have thought of this kind of thing when he was a Workers Party candidate in 1984 - kinda funny he ran in 1984 ! Would he have approved or would he have objected long and loudly ?

Has anybody any info' on Worker's Party agenda in 1984, please ?

sensibleken

is someone who earned 25k a year for being chairman of the afordable housing commitee really the enemy here. thats less than i make a year and its a hell of allot less than the people who caused this mess continue to get

anymore

sensibleken wrote: »

is someone who earned 25k a year for being chairman of the afordable housing commitee really the enemy here. thats less than i make a year and its a hell of allot less than the people who caused this mess continue to get

No I am not saying that people like Geraghty are the enemy; I am saying there is a golden circle of people from different political viewpoints who were part of that group of people who participated in and with Ahern's so called ' Social Partnership' to and who all enjoyed very lucrative perks, privileges and substantial incomes from the directorships on quangos and semi state bodies which Ahern and his Ministers distributed like goodies at a party. And I think this mentality was the reason why so many people in politics, including the opposition parties were will not to raise their heads above the parapets and cry stop !

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

... this man received on average € 25,000 a year for this sinecure...

Has it been established that it was a sinecure?

sensibleken

anymore wrote: »

No I am not saying that people like Geraghty are the enemy; I am saying there is a golden circle of people from different political viewpoints who were part of that group of people who participated in and with Ahern's so called ' Social Partnership' to and who all enjoyed very lucrative perks, privileges and substantial incomes from the directorships on quangos and semi state bodies which Ahern and his Ministers distributed like goodies at a party. And I think this mentality was the reason why so many people in politics, including the opposition parties were will not to raise their heads above the parapets and cry stop !

was there a culture of greed in society? yes of course there was. public and private sector were both taking as much as they could. was someone who was taking 25k a year for being chairman of the affordable housing scheme one of the worst offenders? no, definetly not, its hardly a substantial income.

Nodin

anymore wrote: »

I would have thought the case was fairly evident,

As has been pointed out a number of times, theres been no detail of what he did or did not do in relation to the monies received. Your comments about it being a sinecure are - at this point in time - pure speculation. Rather than look for obscure pamphlets your time would first be better spent trying to ascertain exactly what he did in order to receive that money.

anymore

sensibleken wrote: »

was there a culture of greed in society? yes of course there was. public and private sector were both taking as much as they could. was someone who was taking 25k a year for being chairman of the affordable housing scheme one of the worst offenders? no, definetly not, its hardly a substantial income.

From my personal point of view, yes it is a substantial income and one which many who work a full time week do not earn.

So tell me what kind of hours were invloved in earning this income ?
How many Board meetings were held each month ? 2 or 3 or perhaps even fewer ?

anymore

Nodin wrote: »

As has been pointed out a number of times, theres been no detail of what he did or did not do in relation to the monies received. Your comments about it being a sinecure are - at this point in time - pure speculation. Rather than look for obscure pamphlets your time would first be better spent trying to ascertain exactly what he did in order to receive that money.

No my comments are based on the general practice of irish Governments doling out ' plum little earners' to its friends and supporters.
Remember this is a country of 4 million which has in excess of two hundred quangos. Now it these were generally effficient bodies, I presume we would not be in the predictament which we actually are in !
You of course may be more experienced in these matters than me - perhaps you could give us your analysis on our economic situation and the role the brave Chairmen/women of these quangos have played in it ?

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

No my comments are based on the general practice of irish Governments doling out ' plum little earners' to its friends and supporters.
Remember this is a country of 4 million which has in excess of two hundred quangos. Now it these were generally effficient bodies, I presume we would not be in the predictament which we actually are in !

well you have a valid point here but unfortunately your (and Shane Ross) approach has personalised the issue and so appears to simply be an attack on Des Geraghty

its the current system that is at fault, there are far too many political appointees to quangos recieving payment for little work...generally speaking...I have no evidence one way or the other for Des Geraghty's workload in this instance

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

From my personal point of view, yes it is a substantial income and one which many who work a full time week do not earn.

So tell me what kind of hours were invloved in earning this income ?
How many Board meetings were held each month ? 2 or 3 or perhaps even fewer ?

You are suggesting that there is something wrong about Geraghty's role in the Affordable Housing Partnership. You have failed to produce any evidence in support of your view. And now you demand that people disprove your unsubstantiated claim.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You are suggesting that there is something wrong about Geraghty's role in the Affordable Housing Partnership. You have failed to produce any evidence in support of your view. And now you demand that people disprove your unsubstantiated claim.

This was the questionI asked :

Is it time to end the lucrative quango gravy train ?
Fell free to address the question if you wish - after all the moderator went to the trouble of changing the thread's title to accomodate you.
Of course you may feel that the quango sysytem we have is appropriate for us !

anymore

Riskymove wrote: »

well you have a valid point here but unfortunately your (and Shane Ross) approach has personalised the issue and so appears to simply be an attack on Des Geraghty

its the current system that is at fault, there are far too many political appointees to quangos recieving payment for little work...generally speaking...I have no evidence one way or the other for Des Geraghty's workload in this instance

Well how can you not personalise the issue if you are talking about very substantial fees for an agency whose work has little public profile and whose workings seem to be such a mystery to everyone ?
Now if i had posted a thread about mary harney, then i am quite sure there would have much, much more 'personalisation' of Miz Harney and a great deal more critical comment, would you agree ?
Mr Geraghty is a public figure who has taken appoints to several public bodies who has taken an apointment to the EU as MEP, the Seanad and who as president of SIPTU has taken part in decisions and negotiations that has affected the lives of every signle citizen of this country.

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

Well how can you not personalise the issue if you are talking about very substantial fees for an agency whose work has little public profile and whose workings seem to be such a mystery to everyone ?

the issue should be that there are quangos with political appointees who seem to recieve significant amounts without transparancy of the work they do

it should not matter who that person happens to be

Now if i had posted a thread about mary harney, then i am quite sure there would have much, much more 'personalisation' of Miz Harney and a great deal more critical comment, would you agree ?

thats because the issue would be how she performs and the state of the health system

Mr Geraghty is a public figure who has taken appoints to several public bodies who has taken an apointment to the EU as MEP, the Seanad and who as president of SIPTU has taken part in decisions and negotiations that has affected the lives of every signle citizen of this country.

some would say that makes him a very experienced public sector linked person and perhaps ideal for the role he is in?

anymore

Riskymove wrote: »

the issue should be that there are quangos with political appointees who seem to recieve significant amounts without transparancy of the work they do

it should not matter who that person happens to be





thats because the issue would be how she performs and the state of the health system




some would say that makes him a very experienced public sector linked person and perhaps ideal for the role he is in?

some would say that makes him a very experienced public sector linked person and perhaps ideal for the role he is in?[/QUOTE

It follows on from this that he and others like him must accept a portion of the balme for the near destruction of the Irish economy and the impoverishment of so many -

So is there so rule that public figures associated iwth the trade unions must be treated differently from other public figues ?
And if if the question of how harney has performed can be discussed, then why not the performance of a Trade union leader ?

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

This was the questionI asked :

Is it time to end the lucrative quango gravy train ?

Really? That's not in the post that I was responding to.

Fell free to address the question if you wish - after all the moderator went to the trouble of changing the thread's title to accomodate you.

I rather thought that it was altered in the service of accuracy.

You have made a large number of posts attacking Des Geraghty's relationship with the Affordable Housing Partnership, yet it appears that you have no knowledge of what he did or did not do in exchange for the payments he received.

I operate on the basis of an apparently strange idea: if you accuse a person of doing something wrong, you have some obligation to back up that accusation.

Of course you may feel that the quango sysytem we have is appropriate for us !

Oddly, that's not the topic of this thread. Not only are you changing the point of attack; you are changing the target.

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

It follows on from this that he and others like him must accept a portion of the balme for the near destruction of the Irish economy and the impoverishment of so many -

So is there so rule that public figures associated iwth the trade unions must be treated differently from other public figues ?
And if if the question of how harney has performed can be discussed, then why not the performance of a Trade union leader ?

every post you seem to either twist the comments around or deliberately miss the point

IBEC were just as involved as SIPTU in social partnership agreements, are business leaders to blame? Neithrr Unions nor business leaders are elected as public officials, they may lobby but politicians, Government in particular are the ones who made the decisions

there are far more political types appointed to quangos than there are Union people...but you seem to be actually be about Des geraghty as oppossed to the wider issue, if thats the case then say so

I said that there would be much more debate about Mary harney because of her current position and what people hold her responsible for

Des Geraghty's perfromance as Chairman of the AHP would not be as interesting or high profile to most people...indeed even you have nothing to say about his performance

anymore

Riskymove wrote: »

every post you seem to either twist the comments around or deliberately miss the point

IBEC were just as involved as SIPTU in social partnership agreements, are business leaders to blame? Neithrr Unions nor business leaders are elected as public officials, they may lobby but politicians, Government in particular are the ones who made the decisions

there are far more political types appointed to quangos than there are Union people...but you seem to be actually be about Des geraghty as oppossed to the wider issue, if thats the case then say so

I said that there would be much more debate about Mary harney because of her current position and what people hold her responsible for

Des Geraghty's perfromance as Chairman of the AHP would not be as interesting or high profile to most people...indeed even you have nothing to say about his performance

Start a thread about any business people or politicians invloved in quangos and I will contribute to it -
This thread is about Mr Geraghty becuase he is/was the chairman of this particular quango and there was an interesting story in the papoer about it ! Read the article, comment on it if you like. At least i have taken a position and offerd a point of view. How do you approach threads you post ?

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

Start a thread about any business people or politicians invloved in quangos and I will contribute to it -
This thread is about Mr Geraghty becuase he is/was the chairman of this particular quango and there was an interesting story in the papoer about it ! Read the article, comment on it if you like. At least i have taken a position and offerd a point of view. How do you approach threads you post ?

my point is that it is not clear exaclty what your point is

is it

(a) there is a big issue with political appointees to quangos, lack of transparancy on what they do for their money etc

(b) I have an issue with des geraghty and I dont think he should have this job

anymore

Riskymove wrote: »

my point is that it is not clear exaclty what your point is

is it

(a) there is a big issue with political appointees to quangos, lack of transparancy on what they do for their money etc

(b) I have an issue with des geraghty and I dont think he should have this job

Perhaps I might be permitted to ask you if you are a trade union supporter or labour party or other socialist political party supporter ?
You seem very sensitive about the issues i have raised.

SlabMurphy

rightwingdub wrote: »

Its not bad money for a former Marxist:D

Yes, a former comrade of Eoghan Harris and co. in the Stickies ( Sinn Fein the Workers Party )

anymore

In response to posts, i have a little extra information on this housing quango, this time courtesy of the irish Indo :
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/developers--net-8364210m-in-land-swap-with-state-2029294.html

" In 2005, Bertie Ahern's government faced massive pressure to speed up affordable housing provision against the background of looming social partnership talks with the trade unions. It was also getting flak for diluting Part V of the Planning Act that stipulated 20 per cent social housing in developments, letting developers pay their way out of the provision instead.
Its big new idea was to swap state-owned land for cheap housing. Bertie announced the plan at ICTU's annual conference in Belfast in June of that year. The Affordable Housing Partnership (AHP)
would be set up, with former ICTU leader Des Geraghty cannily selected as chairman, and it would oversee this land swap for affordable housing drive. "

Now I am sure the information in this article will help shed some light on what it was that the Housing Body did.

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

Perhaps I might be permitted to ask you if you are a trade union supporter or labour party or other socialist political party supporter ?
You seem very sensitive about the issues i have raised.

so you wont answer the question, that's fine but how you expect people to discuss the issue if you wont say what the issue is I dont know!

Riskymove

anymore wrote: »

Now I am sure the information in this article will help shed some light on what it was that the Housing Body did.

i think this might shed more

http://www.ahp.ie/

P. Breathnach

anymore wrote: »

... Now I am sure the information in this article will help shed some light on what it was that the Housing Body did.

But it sheds little light on what Des Geraghty did.

It looks to me as if the journalist was quite willing to comment on the fall in value of the houses and apartments acquired under the scheme, but presumes that the property exchanged in part-payment for them holds its value.

anymore

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But it sheds little light on what Des Geraghty did.

It looks to me as if the journalist was quite willing to comment on the fall in value of the houses and apartments acquired under the scheme, but presumes that the property exchanged in part-payment for them holds its value.

You are quite right to emphasise that we dont actually know very much about what he did !
I mean, as i have said before, the quango has full time staff to do the daily work, so what did the board members actually do ?
It is a puzzle to be sure.
Thank you for raising the point again !

Nodin

anymore wrote: »

No my (.....)have played in it ?

So you're applying the general to the specific.....Great stuff. Fallacy of accident, though I'm open to correction on that.

Why are you trying to shift the focus to quangos generally?

anymore wrote: »

Well how can you not personalise the issue if you are talking about very substantial fees for an agency whose work has little public profile and whose workings seem to be such a mystery to everyone ?

...but you aren't criticising the lack of openess, you're criticising the fees, despite having no idea whatsover what was involved in the job.

anymore wrote: »

This thread is about Mr Geraghty becuase he is/was the chairman of this particular quango and there was an interesting story in the papoer about it ! Read the article, comment on it if you like.

I think the majority of us already have, and judge it as a shoddy piece. Theres no details as to the number of meetings, responsibilities or duties involved. How can we criticise Geraghty with no information?

anymore wrote: »

Perhaps I might be permitted to ask you if you are a trade union supporter or labour party or other socialist political party supporter ?
You seem very sensitive about the issues i have raised.

In other threads when questioned closely, you've raised the political affiliations of the Posters, as well as their membership of other boards and Forums. Here, as then, I fail to see the relevance.

anymore wrote: »

Now I am sure the information in this article will help shed some light on what it was that the Housing Body did

....but has no real bearing on the article you opened the thread with.

anymore

Nodin wrote: »

So you're applying the general to the specific.....Great stuff. Fallacy of accident, though I'm open to correction on that.

Why are you trying to shift the focus to quangos generally?



...but you aren't criticising the lack of openess, you're criticising the fees, despite having no idea whatsover what was involved in the job.



I think the majority of us already have, and judge it as a shoddy piece. Theres no details as to the number of meetings, responsibilities or duties involved. How can we criticise Geraghty with no information?




In other threads when questioned closely, you've raised the political affiliations of the Posters, as well as their membership of other boards and Forums. Here, as then, I fail to see the relevance.



....but has no real bearing on the article you opened the thread with.

I assume your contributions here are linked to my posts on other threads !:D:D:D