Council pursues former mayor for €7,200 New York trip

west101

The country is in an economic state and the former mayor is getting free holidays.

Link: http://www.waterford-news.ie/news/story/?trs=mhcwqlojmh&cat=news

kayaksurfbum

1166spuds on a trip to Donegal. Explain that.

Yes Boss

That is actually disgusting and i am sure unjustifiable..Hats off to Mary Roche for coming in last on this one!!

Isn't it mad that you have a couple of lefties coming in first and third!!

Odats

Who vouches for the expenses but sure that's Ireland. Even so there should be a cap on expenses for each councilor and the rest coming out of their own pockets. She should be made hand back every penny for the junket.

Smiley Burnett

Those figures are way higher than most other local authorities! (even those at the bottom of the list!)

Deise Tom

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

Those figures are way higher than most other local authorities! (even those at the bottom of the list!)

there is 18 councillors that served in the county council during 2009 that got €17,591.96 so it might not be that high after all. The figure i gave is a Representational Payment and does not include junket expenses, monthly allowances, pauments for chairing spc, and for Mayor/vice mayor allowences where applicable.

robtri

Odats wrote: »

Who vouches for the expenses but sure that's Ireland. .

iirc, there is no voucher system, no recipts needed, you just tell them how much you spent and they cut you a check...

AdMMM

robtri wrote: »

iirc, there is no voucher system, no recipts needed, you just tell them how much you spent and they cut you a check...

Receipts need to be submitted and signed off on.

Seeing as the whole world and their dogs knew about this almost two months a go, I find it hard to believe that Mary O'Halloran hasn't got the opportunity to discuss this yet with the Council. The issue arose when she upgraded herself to business class for the trip and billed the City. It was only discovered during the annual audit which means it would have been approved originally.

I'd imagine that a lot of the newly elected councillors will see their expenses soar in the coming months as the conference season kicks in. I'm very surprised that someone like Dick Roche, with no experience, hasn't attended any. There were conferences aimed especially at people who were newly elected to help them learn the ropes of local government. While I understand some people might like to find their own way, such stubbornness often results in under-performance and therefore a loss of value in their work and contribution to their role.

Those figures are way higher than most other local authorities! (even those at the bottom of the list!)

Unfortunately, not many conferences are held down in Waterford City. This means that as well as petrol expenses, there's also accommodation expenses involved in the case of a conference running over more than one day. Of the conferences that I've seen in Waterford, I can certainly say that they don't live up to their perceived reputation of being an excuse to drink late into the night and barely take in anything that's being said. They're pretty anti-climatic in their boredom actually.

west101

AdMMM wrote: »

Unfortunately, not many conferences are held down in Waterford City. This means that as well as petrol expenses, there's also accommodation expenses involved in the case of a conference running over more than one day. Of the conferences that I've seen in Waterford, I can certainly say that they don't live up to their perceived reputation of being an excuse to drink late into the night and barely take in anything that's being said. They're pretty anti-climatic in their boredom actually.

In fairness these expeneses are running into the thousands, how much should a conference cost 300 or 400 max. I wonder if the taxpayer is paying for the late night drinking sessions.

Yes Boss

It would be nice to see what benefit these conferences are having for Waterford!

AdMMM

Yes Boss wrote: »

It would be nice to see what benefit these conferences are having for Waterford!

Conferences educate Councillors (who we must remember are not all full-time politicians) on the issues of key areas of policy. Yes, those that run the conferences are profit-making organisations and there's definitely an oligopoly of sorts which leads to what I'd consider to be inflated costs but I'd really hate to see the performance of a Council that didn't avail of any of these conferences.

Think of it as you being in charge of putting together some IKEA flat pack monstrosity only without a picture or instruction manual to go on. You might eventually put something that resembles a shelf together (it's meant to be a desk though) but you would have made a tonne of mistakes along the way and end up with something completely different to what it was supposed to be! (apologies for the IKEA analogy, only I've spent the last 2 days putting together some desk/shelf unit and it's really getting to me!)

Yes Boss

Surely, Councilors are informed by the public servants. Also, the money they are on, it should be a full time job! Why should a Councilor be paid over 30k in goodbye money for not being re-elected if it is not a fulltime position?

Banana Republic!!

AdMMM

I agree, that was a complete farce.

Smiley Burnett

Yes Boss wrote: »

Surely, Councilors are informed by the public servants. Also, the money they are on, it should be a full time job! Why should a Councilor be paid over 30k in goodbye money for not being re-elected if it is not a fulltime position?

Banana Republic!!

the councillors are there to represent the public and to hold the public servants to account. you can be sure that the officials are well versed with regard to all aspects of their job. why shouldnt the councillors recieve training etc???

if you want to get rid of public representatives, go right ahead! but dont complain afterwards when there is a democratic deficit and unelected and unaccountable officials are making decisions that you are unhappy about!

AdMMM

I don't have any of the papers to hand but am I right in saying that Mary told one of the newspapers that it was a clerical error i.e. blaming the staff! Probably the worst way she could have handled it if it's true!

Junior

so when's the next election then ?

/me strokes chin and considers business idea ..

Smiley Burnett

AdMMM wrote: »

I don't have any of the papers to hand but am I right in saying that Mary told one of the newspapers that it was a clerical error i.e. blaming the staff! Probably the worst way she could have handled it if it's true!

if it was a clerical error, what's wrong with saying that it was a clerical error??

Deise Tom

Junior wrote: »

so when's the next election then ?

/me strokes chin and considers business idea ..

2014

AdMMM

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

if it was a clerical error, what's wrong with saying that it was a clerical error??

Because it wasn't a clerical error.

Max Powers

Mary O Halloran and the outrageous amounts paid to councillors and mayor are an embarassment, incompetent and only successful of robbing the Waterford people of money that could be spent on worthwhile isues, of which there are many in Waterford. All councillors and mayors shoud be a voluntary position with a payment of expenses of about 100 to each (for petrol, transport etc) per month sufficing. Its a job you should do for the love of your hometown, not to line your pockets.

The former mayor, Mary O Halloran claims in The Munster Express that is was a clerical error. I personnaly believe it is an error to send councillors on what effectively is holdiays (with their husband, WHY?). She did not succeed in securing Waterford Crystal investment nor any of our councillors. The re-birth of 'the glass' is mainly down the efforts of city manager, Michael Walsh.

Sully

AdMMM wrote: »

Because it wasn't a clerical error.

She has came out and said it was a clerical error in todays Munster Express. She was invited by Waterford Crystal to NYC, it was an official visit, and because somebody in City Hall never entered it onto the list which covers such expenses - the auditor has an issue. In the event it was put on the list, there would be no issue.

Deise Tom

If what Mary O'Halloran (who i do not know from Adam) made a mistake, or there was a mistake made on her behalf, why is she not answering her phone's to the likes of WLR. By staying quiet she could be seen as someone trying to bite a bit of time to come up with a story that is believable. If she is inocent, she should be availing of every single oportunity to clear her name and to show all that a mistake was made. I know i would if it was me. Its also interesting to see Fine Gael are staying very quiet, as are all the parties. I cant but feel if it was a member of another party FG would be out shouting off the roof tops looking for something to be done.

Sully

Deise Tom wrote: »

If what Mary O'Halloran (who i do not know from Adam) made a mistake, or there was a mistake made on her behalf, why is she not answering her phone's to the likes of WLR. By staying quiet she could be seen as someone trying to bite a bit of time to come up with a story that is believable. If she is inocent, she should be availing of every single oportunity to clear her name and to show all that a mistake was made. I know i would if it was me. Its also interesting to see Fine Gael are staying very quiet, as are all the parties. I cant but feel if it was a member of another party FG would be out shouting off the roof tops looking for something to be done.

She has responded. I think she wanted to speak with the auditor/city manager before making a public statement which I think is fair.

AdMMM

Sully wrote: »

She has came out and said it was a clerical error in todays Munster Express. She was invited by Waterford Crystal to NYC, it was an official visit, and because somebody in City Hall never entered it onto the list which covers such expenses - the auditor has an issue. In the event it was put on the list, there would be no issue.

I was under the belief that it was because she upgraded to business class?

She knew this was going to be an issue a few months back when it was discovered and she was informed. She has had plenty of time to speak with the city manager and I'll hazard a guess and say that the only reason why it's come to public light is because she's refusing to pay it.

Sully

AdMMM wrote: »

I was under the belief that it was because she upgraded to business class?

She knew this was going to be an issue a few months back when it was discovered and she was informed. She has had plenty of time to speak with the city manager and I'll hazard a guess and say that the only reason why it's come to public light is because she's refusing to pay it.

I'm only going by whats in the public domain. Contacts within the council aside, we can only report on whats public knowledge (and factual).

Am I missing one of the papers which has this covered, or are you just using information from inside sources?

Overature

dirty ****s, like mary harney who spent over €600 on a meal in new zealand

old gregg

Overature wrote: »

dirty ****s, like mary harney who spent over €600 on a meal in new zealand

there are so many jokes in there waiting to spew forth that this sub-topic should be on AH, again and again and again ....

west101

Sully wrote: »

She has came out and said it was a clerical error in todays Munster Express. She was invited by Waterford Crystal to NYC, it was an official visit, and because somebody in City Hall never entered it onto the list which covers such expenses - the auditor has an issue. In the event it was put on the list, there would be no issue.

Seems a bit of a cop out to me to say it was a clerical error. The News and Star reports that normal procedure for the the trip was not carried out including not getting clearence from fellow councillers, this cannot all be down to clerical error.

baronflyguy

AdMMM wrote: »

Receipts need to be submitted and signed off on.

If this was signed off on then I would be more interested in the person who signed off on expense, maybe they should be answering the questions.

Max Powers wrote:

All councillors and mayors shoud be a voluntary position with a payment of expenses of about 100 to each (for petrol, transport etc) per month sufficing. Its a job you should do for the love of your hometown, not to line your pockets.

That's not realistic to be honest. Personally I have no problem for councillors to be paid for their time.
If you have ever done voluntary work (which I have done numerous times) you will quickly realise how much of your own personal money and time is consumed, it adds up after a while. Of course you do things for the love of it but paying 100 euros as one example on phone calls bills a month organising things takes it toll.

jayboi

Further proof we don’t need a mayor if you ask me!

Having a moyor is an absolute waste of money. can some one tell me exactly what the wage for the mayor is i know its considerably higher than that a councillor.

I actually saw a letter for the mayor before and it said 'his worship the mayor' I nearly got sick!!

I say we sell the chains to 'cash for gold' put the proceeds to something useful.

I’m sure the mayor had some important jobs to do but sure I reckon we can just send all the kids who didn’t miss a day of school all year a letter or cert from Santa instead!

Deise Tom

Sully wrote: »

She has responded. I think she wanted to speak with the auditor/city manager before making a public statement which I think is fair.

Was not aware she had responded. You are right its only fair she also spoke with the auditor/city council before going public.