Mary Roche's comments on front of Munster

Jason Todd

Sully wrote: »

Merging the two Mary Roche scaremongering news threads together

How unbiased of you! (Joking)

Max Powers

thomasm wrote: »

From Mary Roches blog
http://cllrmaryroche.blogspot.ie/2012/09/proposing-speech-for-motion-that.html?m=1

Hmmm, nice speech talking about vikings etc. Does Phil Hogan give a f*$k, i doubt it. The only thing Phil HOgan cares about is € and costs of councils. If councillors reduced their costs, abolished town councils, reduced their massive costs/expenses (we saw the individual costs posted here) then he might drop it. Mary et al should look at themselves before they themselves collectively torpedo the city council.

martingriff

fricatus wrote: »

Well, if we try to think about it logically, where does a city get its status? From the law of the land.

What law of the land does Waterford derive its status from? The 2001 Local Government Act which sets out that it has a City Council.

If changes are made and it then has only a County Council (like Longford, say), then does it have the status of a city?

Your guess is as good as mine!

Do not get your there. Sure aren't they doing the same with Limerick does that mean they are losing there CITY status. Its called a county council as it serves the county

sparkling sea

Waterford City has been decimated, gone is our once vibrant city. Our city councillors sat back and allowed this to happen, I don't think we need a city and county council and I know we can't afford both.

Waterford is like a ghost town after 6 most evenings.

While businesses in the city close because of policies including ridiculous parking cost, €3.60 for 2 hours and then your car has to moved to another space, not likely to happen ; rates that businesses can't afford to pay being used to pay for status that people can't get into town to see; I could go on and on.

It amazes me that it takes so many councillors and so much money to kill a city, yet thats exactly what has happened here

Bards

sparkling sea wrote: »

Waterford City has been decimated, gone is our once vibrant city. Our city councillors sat back and allowed this to happen, I don't think we need a city and county council and I know we can't afford both.

Waterford is like a ghost town after 6 most evenings.

While businesses in the city close because of policies including ridiculous parking cost, €3.60 for 2 hours and then your car has to moved to another space, not likely to happen ; rates that businesses can't afford to pay being used to pay for status that people can't get into town to see; I could go on and on.

It amazes me that it takes so many councillors and so much money to kill a city, yet thats exactly what has happened here

Nero fiddled, while Rome burned - perhaps?

Cabaal

sparkling sea wrote: »

Waterford is like a ghost town after 6 most evenings.

Indeed it is, but this is certainly nothing new.
During the boom years I used to meet my now wife in john roberts square after work and we always used to comment on how dead the place was.

The recession didn't bring on the ghost town....it was always there

fricatus

sparkling sea wrote: »

It amazes me that it takes so many councillors and so much money to kill a city, yet thats exactly what has happened here

I think that's unfair. Waterford City Council has done a lot locally in the past ten years to bolster the place.

Look at their involvement in the Tall Ships and every other festival (Spraoi, Harvest, the new Winterval, etc.). Look at the way they managed to get the new Waterford Crystal into the city centre. Look at the Viking Triangle, the refurbishment of the Bishop's Palace and the new Medieval Museum. Look at the redevelopment of the Quay... ehm, well... look at it in three years' time maybe! (...at least the flood wall is pretty cool)

On the minus side, rates are a big problem, but where in the country aren't they a problem? That's why we need proper reform of local government, not just a few council mergers. Parking... well that's the most divisive bugbear on this forum, but where you have free all-day parking in town, people will just drive into town to work and leave their car in a prime spot all day, while shoppers are forced out... I don't like paying for parking either, but it beats not being able to find a space - you can't have it both ways.

The real problem that Waterford has is that it perennially just doesn't get its fair share of the national cake. The best place to compare ourselves to is Galway, as there's really only about 15k in the difference between our populations - especially if you measure a little further out to take in the true hinterland*.

First of all, they have a university and an IT; we only have an IT. Their hospital is better resourced, despite WRH having more patients. AFAIK, we have fewer Gardai, despite our station having about the same level of activity. The IDA has overseen the creation of about 1,300 jobs in Galway this year. How many in Waterford? RTE are looking at closing their Waterford studio - there are only about 15 people employed here, but about 160 or so in Galway if I remember right. Minister Hogan plans to abolish our city council, but keep Galway's!

I could go on and on, but one theme keeps recurring: we aren't resourced as well as other cities from the national pie, particularly when compared to Galway, which is about the level we should be at. When it's pointed out, it's dismissed as "whinging". That is not a local failing - it's a failure of equality at national level.



* Galway city: 75,000 - Waterford city: 50,000
Galway hinterland 10 kms: 90,000 - Waterford: 70,000
Galway hinterland 25 kms: 150,000 - Waterford: 140,000

Max Powers

Nice post Fricatus. I have e-mailed Taoiseach, our TDs, Phil Hogan and Brendan Howlin saying that this will be a further blow to the region. I will be posting a letter also as I often think you get a better response that way.

I would urge others to contact TDs/Hogan/etc and others also pointing out the illogical course they are on at the moment: trying to merge Waterford without looking at Cork, Galway; the fact that Waterford City has 20% unemployment and that not having a strong city will mean the region suffers as a result.

nice_very

if any of you are aware of the facebook page "Call for a revolution in Ireland" there is now a Waterford branch, aiming to bring together/support all local campaign groups to try and mutually strengthen each groups numbers

https://www.facebook.com/CallForARevolutionInWaterfordIreland

Sully

Christ almighty, are we really that bad? Misinterputing / selective quoting of legislation which isn't even built to allow for a type of merged council. Moaning when other places are selected by employers instead of Waterford for jobs. The Minister will need to amend legislation accordingly to allow for the merger. There is nothing to suggest he will go a step further and remove City Status, which would be separate to the merging. It would be a sudden move that would cause a LOT of tension and problems, and a HUGE backlash.

To suggest that he would do this, is scaremongering of the highest order and political posturing. Much like Fianna Fails sudden change of heart towards the Household Tax, which they were planning to introduce some years ago and agreed with the EU/IMF that would be brought in as part of this agreement but now are opposing it!

In addition, there is nothing to suggest that one whole body representing the whole of Waterford would erode the City and turn employers away from Waterford (there hardly coming in their droves while we are separate councils!). If anything could be clutched at in terms of wild silly speculation it would be less funding for the county. But with such a merger, how the system works will need to be changed.

For what its worth, I don't see the point in the merger and I don't grasp why its just Wateford and Limerick. This was suggested sometime ago by a report commissioned by Fianna Fail, so again we appear to have political posturing by a FF Cllr.

fricatus

Sully wrote: »

Moaning when other places are selected by employers instead of Waterford for jobs.

Why shouldn't we "moan" though, when we're clearly not seeing the same levels of economic activity in this city as in other equally peripheral cities of similar size?

And fair enough, it's the company investing that chooses where to put its investment, I understand that completely. But what galls me is that there is just not a level playing pitch to begin with.

That's the government's problem to sort out, and no government has ever really done anything to sort it, apart from when McCreevy brought in the National Spatial Strategy (and then did nothing to implement it :rolleyes: but that's another story).

If I was a woman being paid 60% less than a man for doing the same job, or if I was a member of an ethnic minority not being recruited by the Garda because of my skin colour or religious beliefs, I would have plenty of avenues for complaint and plenty of quangos standing up for me. However, if I live in a city where the government spends a lower per-capita amount on healthcare, education or public security than it does in other cities, I have no recourse; worse, I'm dismissed as a "whinger" or a "moaner" and told "you can't have a university/airport/hospital at every crossroads you know!"

But the point is: we know that that's the case. That's why Waterford people aren't "moaning" about not having the national children's hospital, an airport with transatlantic service, an arena to rival the O2, or a stadium like the Aviva. Certain facilities are appropriate to a capital city after all. But then certain facilities are appropriate to regional centres.

All that we're moaning about is that we're not being treated equitably with cities of similar size, serving regions of similar size. The employment issue is just a consequence of this lack of fair treatment.

Max Powers

to bring it back to Mary Roche/councillors and issue with Council merging:

• Councillors were voluntary up to early 2000, I doubt their work has changed much so I feel it should go back to voluntary, reign in expenses, the weekend conferences on fossil fuels etc
• Reduce the number of councillors in the city, we aint that big, lets show the rest of the country, you dont need all these people
• more proactive action by our councillors, who complain that there jobs may be cut/city demoted due to cutbacks instigated by Phil Hogan, but havent made any significant cutbacks themselves as seen in latest costings published. Their lack of action here I find depressing, what are they more concerned with, the city or themselves
• We need to inform those in power (TDs etc) that the current proposal will be detrimental to Waterford and the south east.
  
  Proper cost benefit analysis of any proposed trips/expenditure especially abroad, I was shot down on this forum for questioning the benefit of Mary Roche going to a few US cities a couple of years ago, what did that achieve that a phone call wouldnt have? Mary O Halloran too, god bless her, she brought the husband along too, the council were looking for money back of that at one stage, i dont know what happened in the end.

Roanmore

Max Powers wrote: »

to bring it back to Mary Roche/councillors and issue with Council merging:

• Councillors were voluntary up to early 2000, I doubt their work has changed much so I feel it should go back to voluntary, reign in expenses, the weekend conferences on fossil fuels etc
• Reduce the number of councillors in the city, we aint that big, lets show the rest of the country, you dont need all these people
• more proactive action by our councillors, who complain that there jobs may be cut/city demoted due to cutbacks instigated by Phil Hogan, but havent made any significant cutbacks themselves as seen in latest costings published. Their lack of action here I find depressing, what are they more concerned with, the city or themselves
• We need to inform those in power (TDs etc) that the current proposal will be detrimental to Waterford and the south east.
  
  Proper cost benefit analysis of any proposed trips/expenditure especially abroad, I was shot down on this forum for questioning the benefit of Mary Roche going to a few US cities a couple of years ago, what did that achieve that a phone call wouldnt have? Mary O Halloran too, god bless her, she brought the husband along too, the council were looking for money back of that at one stage, i dont know what happened in the end.

Lot of sense spoken here.
Just on the point of reducing Councillors, is there a legal limit to how many / how few you can have, who decides?

Also, one thing that really annoys me is when somebody who's trying to make a point refers to Cromwell or Thatcher. Always see it before an election, somebody comes up with a proposal and instead of debating it somebody says it's Thatcherite, cue end of discussion. Great way to spook people.

MOC88

Roanmore wrote: »

Lot of sense spoken here.
Just on the point of reducing Councillors, is there a legal limit to how many / how few you can have, who decides?

Also, one thing that really annoys me is when somebody who's trying to make a point refers to Cromwell or Thatcher. Always see it before an election, somebody comes up with a proposal and instead of debating it somebody says it's Thatcherite, cue end of discussion. Great way to spook people.

Its just changing the subject so the issues can't be debated, I get the feeling you know this already though. The politicians are getting progressively more patronising but a lot more people are listening than before and shaking their heads in disbelief as during the boom most people didn't really think it was neccesary to have an interest as people believed if they worked hard they got their deserved reward and politicians really didn't have to do too much.
Its also similar to an appeal to authority (I think its called). ie. its right because its right and nothing else can change it because its right- flawed logic. You're not of my party so you're wrong - how do I know becaus eyou're not part of my party.
It reflects the generally very low coliqual politics we have here
Agree with the idea that coucilors pay should be cut to a fraction of what it is along with senators, td.s, ministers, taioseachs, all the previous retired etc. etc. but they'd cut numbers not salaries because that my get them shifting a bit uncomfortably on their seats
rant over:pac::pac::pac:

jad2007

Personnaly I think all of political scaremongering is going on here by two city councillors.

A HUGE oppurtunity was lost here when this merger was tabled. It is a done deal that city and county will merge. What should of happened was local representatives sitting down with Phil Hogan and presenting some conditions ( such as protecting our city status) and agreeing to the merger. It was always going to happen.

Instead what we have is populist ranting in order to sway votes which will acheive nothing.

There is no link between merger and losing status being put forward by either councillor.

This country badly needs local authority reform. € 1.1 million spent last year on thirty councillors in the city and county is madness. This merger will go through whether we like it or not. People need to start thinking strategically rather than locally.

Sully

fricatus wrote: »

Why shouldn't we "moan" though, when we're clearly not seeing the same levels of economic activity in this city as in other equally peripheral cities of similar size?

And fair enough, it's the company investing that chooses where to put its investment, I understand that completely. But what galls me is that there is just not a level playing pitch to begin with.

That's the government's problem to sort out, and no government has ever really done anything to sort it, apart from when McCreevy brought in the National Spatial Strategy (and then did nothing to implement it :rolleyes: but that's another story).

If I was a woman being paid 60% less than a man for doing the same job, or if I was a member of an ethnic minority not being recruited by the Garda because of my skin colour or religious beliefs, I would have plenty of avenues for complaint and plenty of quangos standing up for me. However, if I live in a city where the government spends a lower per-capita amount on healthcare, education or public security than it does in other cities, I have no recourse; worse, I'm dismissed as a "whinger" or a "moaner" and told "you can't have a university/airport/hospital at every crossroads you know!"

But the point is: we know that that's the case. That's why Waterford people aren't "moaning" about not having the national children's hospital, an airport with transatlantic service, an arena to rival the O2, or a stadium like the Aviva. Certain facilities are appropriate to a capital city after all. But then certain facilities are appropriate to regional centres.

All that we're moaning about is that we're not being treated equitably with cities of similar size, serving regions of similar size. The employment issue is just a consequence of this lack of fair treatment.

Its not possible to force companies to locate here. A lot of recent jobs were expansions and people were annoyed that the companies expanded in their current location rather than coming down here.

I want jobs in Waterford just like you and everyone else here does. But I have to be realistic. There is **** all the government can do only promote Waterford as an option when investors come and even at that they can't do much. Neither can our local TDs or Senators, which is why they never have done anything about it - even Sinn Fein, who have an elected official in Waterford despite the Waterford people not giving him a nod for a seat in the Dail.

But when they do, whats to say they are saying "We want to be located in a particular part of your country" meaning Waterford is simply out of the question? The country is not flowing with jobs right now and Waterford cannot have an expectation, especially considering the economic crisis that is upon is, that we should be getting jobs ahead of anywhere else.

We have a right to complain and be unhappy, but its gone beyond a joke. We now we have a small group of people trying to put fear out there that jobs will be lost for Waterford and our great City (note that many are forgetting Waterford is more than just the City) will now be a town. Neither of which are even on the table, even as a slight consideration. This is a typical thing done during referendums and election campaigns by the opposition - making stuff up, plucking stuff from the air that is complete nonsense and doing anything to save their neck or push their own agenda.

1) Waterford is not being removed its City Status. Its not part of the proposals and the proposals do not have a resulted effect of the status being removed.

2) A merger of the councils will not harm our prospect of getting jobs.

3) A merger will probably mean reform in how council operates for the whole of Waterford and will probably see a reduction in Councillors.

Is it any wonder why two of them are going to try put fear into the people of Waterford City that Minister Hogan is trying to destroy us, when their jobs are at risk? For a Fianna Fail Cllr to suddenly give out about Hogan when it was his own party that put us into this mess to begin with and commissioned the report which put the merger on the table is absolutely ridiculous.

MOC88

Sully wrote: »

Its not possible to force companies to locate here. A lot of recent jobs were expansions and people were annoyed that the companies expanded in their current location rather than coming down here.

I want jobs in Waterford just like you and everyone else here does. But I have to be realistic. There is **** all the government can do only promote Waterford as an option when investors come and even at that they can't do much. Neither can our local TDs or Senators, which is why they never have done anything about it - even Sinn Fein, who have an elected official in Waterford despite the Waterford people not giving him a nod for a seat in the Dail.

But when they do, whats to say they are saying "We want to be located in a particular part of your country" meaning Waterford is simply out of the question? The country is not flowing with jobs right now and Waterford cannot have an expectation, especially considering the economic crisis that is upon is, that we should be getting jobs ahead of anywhere else.

We have a right to complain and be unhappy, but its gone beyond a joke. We now we have a small group of people trying to put fear out there that jobs will be lost for Waterford and our great City (note that many are forgetting Waterford is more than just the City) will now be a town. Neither of which are even on the table, even as a slight consideration. This is a typical thing done during referendums and election campaigns by the opposition - making stuff up, plucking stuff from the air that is complete nonsense and doing anything to save their neck or push their own agenda.

1) Waterford is not being removed its City Status. Its not part of the proposals and the proposals do not have a resulted effect of the status being removed.

2) A merger of the councils will not harm our prospect of getting jobs.

3) A merger will probably mean reform in how council operates for the whole of Waterford and will probably see a reduction in Councillors.

Is it any wonder why two of them are going to try put fear into the people of Waterford City that Minister Hogan is trying to destroy us, when their jobs are at risk? For a Fianna Fail Cllr to suddenly give out about Hogan when it was his own party that put us into this mess to begin with and commissioned the report which put the merger on the table is absolutely ridiculous.

Everyone here understands that Waterford city's status is not being removed- whatever idiotic party tried that wouldn't have a td here for the next 50 years- of that I've no doubt
What people are generally annoyed about is constantly removing bits and pieces of Waterford over a continual period (vec etc. etc. I'm not getting in to an argument about how this makes sense when it doesn't) . Rather than reducing the number of councils why not reduce the numbers and wages of them. The Hse was made out of the four health boards- when they were consolidated it just wound up being a bloated beuruacracy, less councils won't mean better returns just less councils- the people elected will still get paid the same, it will reduce the costs but also the output, much less expenditure on wages drastically and reduce a small number of councillors with maintaining the same councils would be more effective. One of the big problems with this is it would probably have to be made nationwide which would erode the political election machines support at a ground level nationwide so this will be very unlikely.

Another argument made by others above is the lack of investment in to Waterford and its hinterland in relative terms to toehr areas... the govenment can't force jobs ehre but they certainly aren't helping --- they amde a laod of promises about how they were going to help and had plans to help waterford when talk talk closed for the rte cameras- haven't heard much about that since.

If you're replying to this post I really don't want to hear about any other party previous government's policies, don't want to hear about sinn fein, fine fael etc. etc. - I am not affiliated with any party and I really don't see the point of being- they are in my view electoral machines that have no purpose other than to get those in senior positions and their followers elected in to positions of power so they can ''buy votes'' to get re-elected

Sully

MOC88 wrote: »

Everyone here understands that Waterford city's status is not being removed- whatever idiotic party tried that wouldn't have a td here for the next 50 years- of that I've no doubt
What people are generally annoyed about is constantly removing bits and pieces of Waterford over a continual period (vec etc. etc. I'm not getting in to an argument about how this makes sense when it doesn't) . Rather than reducing the number of councils why not reduce the numbers and wages of them. The Hse was made out of the four health boards- when they were consolidated it just wound up being a bloated beuruacracy, less councils won't mean better returns just less councils- the people elected will still get paid the same, it will reduce the costs but also the output, much less expenditure on wages drastically and reduce a small number of councillors with maintaining the same councils would be more effective. One of the big problems with this is it would probably have to be made nationwide which would erode the political election machines support at a ground level nationwide so this will be very unlikely.

Another argument made by others above is the lack of investment in to Waterford and its hinterland in relative terms to toehr areas... the govenment can't force jobs ehre but they certainly aren't helping --- they amde a laod of promises about how they were going to help and had plans to help waterford when talk talk closed for the rte cameras- haven't heard much about that since.

If you're replying to this post I really don't want to hear about any other party previous government's policies, don't want to hear about sinn fein, fine fael etc. etc. - I am not affiliated with any party and I really don't see the point of being- they are in my view electoral machines that have no purpose other than to get those in senior positions and their followers elected in to positions of power so they can ''buy votes'' to get re-elected

Some would argue that a merger of councils will benefit the county, which is generally ignored. Stan Nangle, who ran for the local council for the Green Party, raised a valid argument:

From my perspective, a merger will allow the people of Tramore, Dunmore, Passage, Cheekpoint, Butlerstown, Kilmeaden, Dunhill and Fenor, who were born in the City, educated in the City, work in the City and shop in the City, to see their taxes being spent in the areas where they live, rather than having the money stop at an artificial line near the Ring Road.

Waterford County is the 2nd poorest Local Authority in the Country because the revenue from the economic activities of half its Citizens goes to the City Council and not to all the people of Waterford.

It also means that people who live in the City will be able to go out the road to Dunmore and Tramore on properly surfaced roads, to places with proper infrastructure - such as a sewage treatment plant for Dunmore, a park around the boating lake, regular bin collection on the beach in summer, and all the rest - and not be forced to suffere second class amenities because the City Council isn't responsible for the places they go to for recreation.

You cant brandish this government with the same stick that was/is being used for Fianna Fail. Nor can you claim its just this governments fault, when the opposition don't care either. That is why I am bringing other parties in.

What has the government done for Waterford in terms of jobs since the election? Probably not a lot, but I think they are trying to attract jobs to Ireland full stop without getting into specific locations as much. They have setup a programme for the South East and additional measures which were announced on the forum. But they are not in power that long. Rome wasn't built in a day, for a start!

Professey Chin

Thats a terrible argument since it simply wont happen. The only way any of those things would happen is if the City Councils boundary is extended (like it should be) to take those areas into account.
What would happen in reality is arguments about what councillors are on this new all encompassing council followed by lots of infighting over how much money goes to the east and how much to the west. Basically it'll be like the GAA county board we currently have which is a mess with constant bickering and absolutely zero focus.

Whats the point in bringing other parties in when they dont have any power? Opposition in our entire government system is pretty much pointless since all theyll do is whinge against whatever the parties in power say then vote against but be outnumbered and in the end not achieve anything.
FG/Labour hold all the cards and its their decisions being made now. Terrible decisions are being made but instead of actually explaining why all we hear is "we were left with a worse mess then we thought" but wont actually explain the mess.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

For a Fianna Fail Cllr to suddenly give out about Hogan when it was his own party that put us into this mess to begin with and commissioned the report which put the merger on the table is absolutely ridiculous.

That is a ludicrous statement. Many other things were "on the table' from the previous Government and have been scrapped. Are you actually putting a political party before your City? If so, the mind truly boggles.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

What has the government done for Waterford in terms of jobs since the election?

Fcuk all.

7upfree

fricatus wrote: »

* Galway city: 75,000 - Waterford city: 50,000
Galway hinterland 10 kms: 90,000 - Waterford: 70,000
Galway hinterland 25 kms: 150,000 - Waterford: 140,000

And a Uni in Galway and Limerick but none here......even though FG/Lab promised to move the earth for this to happen. Power, funny thing the way it makes liars of people.

Fine Gael nationally has finally, officially, pledged to join in the fight for a university for Waterford. And its Education Spokesman Brian Hayes promised this week not to drop the cudgel until it is delivered.

http://www.munster-express.ie/local-news/fine-gaels-university-pledge/

I suppose you'll defend this as well Sully??

comeraghs

It's shocking how FF & FG members put their party before the national or even local interests!


FG / Labour have abandoned this city & county. It's hard to believe that they could be worse than FF buts it's looking like they are.

7upfree

comeraghs wrote: »

It's shocking how FF & FG members put their party before the national or even local interests!


FG / Labour have abandoned this city & county. It's hard to believe that they could be worse than FF buts it's looking like they are.

They are. And after all that's happened in this country it is hard to believe that educated people still swallow this crap up.

7upfree

jad2007 wrote: »

People need to start thinking strategically rather than locally.

Can you please elaborate on that? What exactly do you mean?

fuzzy dunlop

The proposed merger would be a disaster for the City (imediately) and County (In the longer term). It is also by no means a foregone conclusion.If it was it would be announced already.Remember the County Council is Bankrupt. This means the city would be taking on the debts Waterford County Council acquired through their mismanagement. It would also effectively remove our City status as we would only be a City on paper like Kilkenny is now.And the fact that Phil Hogan seems to be the prime mover here makes it look like this is the real agenda. The fact that in theory it would be good for the County is a red herring.Anything that is bad for the City is bad for the County and wider region. This is just the country and western set that control FG implementing the hillbilly mentality that the money in “town” has to be shared with country.Think continuity Fianna Fail! because this is what Fine Gael are. Also if there was any equitable or proper policy motivating this it would have been proposed across the board for the other cities and some of the counties as well. It is only proposed for Waterford because they think it is politically easy.There is a dozen counties that could be merged in pairs e,g, Sligo-Leitrim that have a smaller population than Waterford

Sully

7upfree wrote: »

That is a ludicrous statement. Many other things were "on the table' from the previous Government and have been scrapped. Are you actually putting a political party before your City? If so, the mind truly boggles.

Not its not. Its a very valid point. Was there a word from him when this was first proposed by his party? Most items from Fianna Fail are very much on the table.

7upfree wrote: »

Fcuk all.

They were not elected to just govern and satisfy Waterford. The country as a whole is in dire straits and the government is doing (not its best, may I add) the job of trying (again) to put it back on the road to recovery as a higher priority. Jobs as a whole is on the agenda, but because companies are not all flowing to Waterford - its the governments fault!

We have recently received a nice investment from the government for a large tourism project which is what Waterford relies on considerably. Not every single county across Ireland, small or large, has gained significant attention or funding from the government to-date. Its not how it operates, regardless of who is in power.

7upfree wrote: »

And a Uni in Galway and Limerick but none here......even though FG/Lab promised to move the earth for this to happen. Power, funny thing the way it makes liars of people.

Fine Gael nationally has finally, officially, pledged to join in the fight for a university for Waterford. And its Education Spokesman Brian Hayes promised this week not to drop the cudgel until it is delivered.

http://www.munster-express.ie/local-news/fine-gaels-university-pledge/

I suppose you'll defend this as well Sully??

The issue for University for the South East is in the Programme for Government and movements have already been made on this matter since the election. It wont happen over night, regardless of who is in power.

On a jobs / University related point: The government are also not even in power two years. They were elected in February 2011. Rome was not built in a day, but people seemed to think they would do everything in a year - loads of jobs, economy spiraling upwards with a new Celtic tiger, delivery on all promisses and the programme for government as a whole etc. Its not possible, regardless of who was elected.

comeraghs wrote: »

It's shocking how FF & FG members put their party before the national or even local interests!


FG / Labour have abandoned this city & county. It's hard to believe that they could be worse than FF buts it's looking like they are.

7upfree wrote: »

They are. And after all that's happened in this country it is hard to believe that educated people still swallow this crap up.

Well since your aiming that at me but wont name me - I am far from putting my party before the county. I am being realistic. I have pushed the issue of University to Fine Gael, I wasn't pleased with some of the proposals and phrasing of this and I know locally at least one of our Fine Gael TDs, Paudie Coffey, has not forgotten it. The government, Labour & FG, are aware of jobs being an issue here in Waterford, but jobs is an issue all over Ireland so its hard to just focus on one county.

But we are not being forgotten. If something goes against Waterfords way, you wont see me agreeing with the party or trying to defend them here. I disagree - publicly - with the party on a lot of things and find overall the job they are doing so far isn't as good as they can do.

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

It would also effectively remove our City status as we would only be a City on paper like Kilkenny is now.And the fact that Phil Hogan seems to be the prime mover here makes it look like this is the real agenda.

Just on this absolutely stupid theory, the proposal in any shape or form is not to remove our City Status or change it in anyway. It wont be a "You can call yourself a City folks, but you wont have the same treatment or legality like Cork or Dublin". This indeed is the way Kilkenny is, as per the law. They can describe it for historical purposes but its not a City.

Waterford is specifically stated, without the need for a City Council, that its a City. Removing a City Council does not remove the big black text that delivers the names of the Cities of Ireland - the lines of text which sit independent of any other sub text or part of legislation within.

For what its worth, in relation to merging other locations, I would agree it should have been examined and the questions asked. But christ, we cant even merge hospitals. Everyone wants everything in their backyard and if its taken from them, there is all out murder.

fuzzy dunlop

http://www.politics.ie/forum/current-affairs/196655-differences-between-fianna-fail-fine-gael-3.html

Post 21 summs it up perfectly

"

You get a better class of criminal filth in Fine Gael.

"

fuzzy dunlop

Sully wrote: »

Waterford is specifically stated, without the need for a City Council, that its a City. Removing a City Council does not remove the big black text that delivers the names of the Cities of Ireland - the lines of text which sit independent of any other sub text or part of legislation within.

This is laughable man:D Waterford the City without the need for a city council.Cop the f*ck on. The big black text can be forty feet high it is only in lines of text we will be a city. There will be three cities effectively in Ireland and that is what the optics as well as the reality will be. There will be town councils with more power than Waterford City. Christ FG would try and spin silk out of pig sh!t. We can't force companies to come here.but we can if you're Galway or some sink hole in Bandit country.You're a city but don't worry you don't need a city council. Jesus wept.This government is emasculating the city county AND region and we're expected to believe it is a part of some cunning methodical plan.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

Everyone wants everything in their backyard and if its taken from them, there is all out murder.

No. Everyone in Waterford wants the promises delivered that were made. It is very simple. And we don't want to hear lame-ass excuses regarding FF and the state of the country at every turn. It is a smokescreen for Hogan and those of a like mind. With - amazingly - some local people attempting to defend it, because they are, as you are, putting a political party before your City.

And as for FG/Lab councillors - these are the same gob****es who clapped Minister Hogan into the Tower Hotel for a conference not too long ago.

Turkeys, Christmas, etc.