Mary Roche's comments on front of Munster

jad2007

The qoute of the campaign has to go to Mary, Damien Tiernan just retweeted. Its fairly hilarious.

From the Six One news " You can tell a chicken its a duck but unless it has the paraphanelia of a duck its not a duck"

Havent a clue what it means however.

Trotter

jad2007 wrote: »

The qoute of the campaign has to go to Mary, Damien Tiernan just retweeted. Its fairly hilarious.

From the Six One news " You can tell a chicken its a duck but unless it has the paraphanelia of a duck its not a duck"

Havent a clue what it means however.

At least she got on the news and spoke up for the city. It's more than any other representative I've seen.

Dicky Pride

And she said spoke about them taking our shirts which was a great line in support of the facebook campaign. I applaud her.

Bards

Sully wrote: »

Unless I am missing something but what exactly are people unhappy about? The merger or something else? The merger has been on the cards for a long time now and I thought people only had concerns in regards to;

1) Location of Administrative point,
2) Loss of City Status,
3) General fear of being a second class City.

Paudie Coffey (FG TD) release a statement some days ago about this already.

I haven't looked into the announcement today yet, but maybe someone can clarify for me as it wont be till later this evening before ill get a chance to see what the plan is for Waterford.

From my quick read of it, it certainly has some good points for waterford, espcially with regards to planning and admin over north waterford/south kilkenny which reflect the metropolitan area of waterford city.

If the HQ is going to be located in the city then it works out quiet well for us.

Trotter

Bards wrote: »

From my quick read of it, it certainly has some good points for waterford, espcially with regards to planning and admin over north waterford/south kilkenny which reflect the metropolitan area of waterford city.

If the HQ is going to be located in the city then it works out quiet well for us.

The mention somewhere that council meetings could be held alternatively in Dungarvan and Waterford would be a mess and a windfall for those claiming milage!

Bards

Trotter wrote: »

The mention somewhere that council meetings could be held alternatively in Dungarvan and Waterford would be a mess and a windfall for those claiming milage!

That sounds daft, would be same as kkcc holding meetings in the shed in newrath evry so often

thomasm

Not sure if it's a windfall for milage. Current revenue rates allow 59.07 cent per km for a car over 1501cc. Round trip to Dungarvan generates an expense claim of €52 minus the actual cost of your fuel which is probably near €10.

7upfree

Annnnnd Galway remains untouched. Being the smokescreen that it was. Plus the "Southern Region" now has its university. And the FG hacks still defend it.:D

Aquos76

@7upfree

I've read all of your posts in this thread and you make some valid points in some of them alright but your seriously your in danger of getting yourself a ban from here, everyone likes a good lively debate but your FG bashing is starting to override all the good points your making and it's not to far from been described as trolling.

We get your not a fan of FG, nor am I btw, lay off of the FG bashing and atleast engage it valid discussions.

deisedevil

Bards wrote: »

That sounds daft, would be same as kkcc holding meetings in the shed in newrath evry so often

It's not exactly a shed in Dungarvan:

http://maps.google.ie/?ll=52.091834,-7.621593&spn=0.005781,0.016512&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=52.091783,-7.621701&panoid=iTNisQkU4cb2HwixoUKKaw&cbp=12,31.63,,0,4.09

road_high

deisedevil wrote: »

It's not exactly a shed in Dungarvan:

http://maps.google.ie/?ll=52.091834,-7.621593&spn=0.005781,0.016512&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=52.091783,-7.621701&panoid=iTNisQkU4cb2HwixoUKKaw&cbp=12,31.63,,0,4.09

Some of the County Council Offices are absolutely stunning. Private comapnies could not afford them. Wexford's new one is some building as is Kildare's. No doubt they will all be retained of course...

Dicky Pride

I agree with Sully. I think people are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. In the greater scheme of things, what's really changing?

I believe the responsibility still lies with the people of Waterford and its representatives to carry on doing things like winterval etc to promote our city.

Silverado

This is an issue of representation. At the moment there are 15 members of Waterford City Council, 23 members of Waterford Co. Council and approximately 8 members each in Tramore, Dungarvan and Lismore town councils. This comes to about 62 representatives in all. Granted some of them are doubling up with town and county councils but they are to be rationalised to 32 members for all of Waterford. This is a reduction in representation and giving us a narrower choice as the electorate.

At present it is reasonably easy to get hold of your local councillor but if this number is halved then it won't be so, which is a lessening of our democratic rights.

Mary Roche is also quite correct in her duck simile in that they are trying to persuade us that this is a good option but it is not, it is a bad one. And, in addition we are losing exclusive control of our City which has a list of Mayors going back to 1284 and city provosts before that. Does Big Phil really think that we will allow him to change that? This is part of our heritage and we cannot allow him to force us.

Professey Chin

I know it said town councils are being abolished and mergers in Waterford, Limerick and Tipp. Does the plan say that borough and county councils are merging too? There's no mention of them that I can see

Max Powers

I think the city council is gonna lose 2 councillors, what a f-ing joke, get rid of half of them and half the county ones.

Psychedelic

Silverado wrote: »

Mary Roche is also quite correct in her duck simile in that they are trying to persuade us that this is a good option but it is not, it is a bad one. And, in addition we are losing exclusive control of our City which has a list of Mayors going back to 1284 and city provosts before that. Does Big Phil really think that we will allow him to change that? This is part of our heritage and we cannot allow him to force us.

A few questions:

• Was Waterford a city when it did not have a city council? i.e. for most of its 1,100 year history. Didn't they used to be called Waterford Corporation up until the 90's? Was it a city then?
• Where in Hogan's reports published yesterday is there reference to the legislative change to the Local Government Act 2001 that would be necessary to remove Waterford's city status?
• How have we lost exclusive control of our city when there will still be a council that will control it? The council will be made up of existing staff (i.e. including city people) and councillors directly elected from the city to the new council. The city will also have its own mayor.
• What has having a city council to do with investment from the Government? We are already behind the other cities in terms of favouritism, not having a city council won't change this, but perhaps having a stronger, unified council will.

As for the stupid "paraphernalia of a duck" simile, just because Mary Roche says Waterford won't be a city because it doesn't have a city council does not make it true. Is Limerick now also not a city? That's her opinion, not a fact.

Let's deal with facts, such as the 72 page Report of the Waterford Local Government Committee which has recommended a merger instead the other options. The committee is made up of local, successful and highly respected business people who surely have Waterford's best interests at heart. People who have done more for the city than all those councillors put together ever will.

This whole issue has completely lost the run of itself judging by some of the hysterical comments I've seen online and in the media. For example, the comparisons of Hogan to Cromwell trying to "take" the city, such bull.

One thing I will say is though, why can't the new Waterford council be called "Waterford City & County Council"? Maybe it will! Might shut up all this city status nonsense.

old gregg

I'm with Psychedelic on this one. Well put there.

O Riain

Psychedelic wrote: »

A few questions:

• Was Waterford a city when it did not have a city council? i.e. for most of its 1,100 year history. Didn't they used to be called Waterford Corporation up until the 90's? Was it a city then?
• Where in Hogan's reports published yesterday is there reference to the legislative change to the Local Government Act 2001 that would be necessary to remove Waterford's city status?
• How have we lost exclusive control of our city when there will still be a council that will control it? The council will be made up of existing staff (i.e. including city people) and councillors directly elected from the city to the new council. The city will also have its own mayor.
• What has having a city council to do with investment from the Government? We are already behind the other cities in terms of favouritism, not having a city council won't change this, but perhaps having a stronger, unified council will.

As for the stupid "paraphernalia of a duck" simile, just because Mary Roche says Waterford won't be a city because it doesn't have a city council does not make it true. Is Limerick now also not a city? That's her opinion, not a fact.

Let's deal with facts, such as the 72 page Report of the Waterford Local Government Committee which has recommended a merger instead the other options. The committee is made up of local, successful and highly respected business people who surely have Waterford's best interests at heart. People who have done more for the city than all those councillors put together ever will.

This whole issue has completely lost the run of itself judging by some of the hysterical comments I've seen online and in the media. For example, the comparisons of Hogan to Cromwell trying to "take" the city, such bull.

One thing I will say is though, why can't the new Waterford council be called "Waterford City & County Council"? Maybe it will! Might shut up all this city status nonsense.

Limerick being the 3rd biggest city in Ireland and having Shannon Airport on its doorstop will always have a decent level of prosperity. That in combination with 4 3rd level colleges - UL, Mary I, LIT and LSAD mean that it is fairly shielded, city council or not. Us on the other hand are the forgotten souls and we need help. This is just another little dig at Waterford in removing our rights and our status, like ffs people barely realise we are a city now, whats its gonna be like when we are merged. We'll lose the city council now, then in 5 years we'll lose this "Metropolitan Area" designation then we'll have no clout for a university or jobs and will be thankful that we are getting 20 IDA jobs every 2 years, its absolute rubbish lads and no one should buy into it.

BBM77

O Riain wrote: »

... its absolute rubbish lads and no one should buy into it.

The best comment I read about the merger. It is complete rubbish and has nothing to do with its stated goal. If the government is left away with this the next thing will be parts of WIT will be moved to Kilkenny and Wexford, mark my words.

O Riain

BBM77 wrote: »

The best comment I read about the merger. It is complete rubbish and has nothing to do with its stated goal. If the government is left away with this the next thing will be parts of WIT will be moved to Kilkenny and Wexford, mark my words.

According to Phil Hogans recent newsletter its already on the cards. Did the South East action plan not specify that without a defined hub that the south east will continue to suffer. So what do they do? Move the VEC, spread WIT all over the region and remove the city council of the Gateway city to the South East. You could not make it up.

Sully

I haven't had a chance to read the report because I am not on my full health and don't have the energy to read it. But from what I gather, there isn't much we didn't already know.

- City & County councils are being merged in Waterford & Limerick only. There will be no longer separate bodies to manage both areas. Instead, it appears, we will be electing people for Waterford as a whole - City and County. Some people in the City are alarmed at the though of not having one body to represent them and are unhappy with being lumped in with the County. Additional fears that its another hit on Waterford, job losses or potential jobs gone out the window as a result.

- Reduction in Cllrs across the board, not just in Waterford.

- Abolishment of Town Councils, across the board and not just Waterford.

- Still nothing to say that we are no longer a City. Latest is that Big Phil is giving us a City status but we wont be a City in reality. Some saying its what Kilkenny have others saying it cant be a City as it wont have its own independent council which is a must for a city. Plus, its a different type of City when others have two independent councils.

So, really, nothing new. True, a lot more questions now than we had originally but I assume that's down to lack of legislation and wondering how its all going to work, where its going to work and so on.

My thoughts, initially without seeing the report and just going on the back of reports. We never needed two independent councils to be a success and tbh I think its a bit insulting to suggest otherwise. There is a serious City County divide being created by some, which is disappointing. We should be able to work together for the betterment of Waterford and as the capital for the South East and not bitching at each other, taking strips of each other and demanding we stay away from the City or County.

Its all well and good have councils representing our areas, getting things done and so on. But do we need so many to get effective representation and change locally and representation on a national level? Town Councils were powerless committees that were talk shops and for many, the first step to political life. Effectively glorified committees with nice pay cheques and fancy titles. So what if they get abolished. Replace them with voluntary committees and you will be able to get the same representation.

I would be worried a bit with there being the same cities but in terms of local administration they are done different. In theory, how they are governed should not make the slightest difference to government funding. The IDA and others should not double back and go "Wait. They don't have a City council in Waterford. Bad for us and bad for businesses, lets get out of here". We should be treated the same as we always have been and there should be absolutely no difference. We were a City, we are a City and we will be a City - end of story.

But. Its up to Waterford Council now to come together and work together for the betterment of Waterford and our region as one whole unit. They should make this work to their advantage - one single strong united voice lobbying TDs and Government Ministers for 'Fair Play' towards Waterford. Working together for the betterment of our City and County. We should not stand aside, slump and say 'We are ****ed'.

Stand up, be counted and be sure we are represented.

Silverado

Psychedelic wrote: »

Was Waterford a city when it did not have a city council? i.e. for most of its 1,100 year history. Didn't they used to be called Waterford Corporation up until the 90's? Was it a city then?

Waterford has been a city since it received its Charter from King John in 1215. This Charter is there to be seen today. From that time the city had its own Corporation/Council to conduct its affairs until now apparently. For those who don't seem to understand what's going on (and its carefully left out of the report) there is to be a rationalisation of all the elected councillors in Waterford city and county and there will only be a single body of 32 representing us all across the city and county. This is where Big Phil is getting his saving - he will not have to pay 33 councillors since we currently have 65 in total.

The cessation of the office of Mayor of Waterford is a very serious move on the part of Big Phil. Are we to accept that he will interfere with our heritage which goes back to the Royal Charter of King John? Is this what we will tell our tourists? I think that they would be shocked if we accepted it.

The booklet says very little about this type of detail and one gets the impression that Big Phil is trying to bully us into accepting a very woolly proposal.

Perhaps the only way forward is an extensive and detailed statement from the Minister as to how he intends to deal with the situation in Waterford. I'm sure that the people of Limerick would like the same since they are also being dealt with in a similar manner. Then, and only then, can we decide how to deal with his proposals.

Psychedelic

Silverado wrote: »

Waterford has been a city since it received its Charter from King John in 1215. This Charter is there to be seen today. From that time the city had its own Corporation/Council to conduct its affairs until now apparently.

Silverado wrote: »

The cessation of the office of Mayor of Waterford is a very serious move on the part of Big Phil. Are we to accept that he will interfere with our heritage which goes back to the Royal Charter of King John? Is this what we will tell our tourists? I think that they would be shocked if we accepted it.

But I don't see how the Royal Charter is affected by the merger if Waterford City is to retain a mayor as proposed. We can still hang on to the historical trappings of the mayoralty. The Charter is not being ripped up, history cannot be re-written, whatever happened, happened. We will still have the charter and the history that affirms our city status.

On another note, what power does the current mayor have anyway? The current mayor is not even directly elected, instead we get a pact of councillors who rotate the mayoralty between each other for each year of the 5-year term of the council.

Silverado wrote: »

Perhaps the only way forward is an extensive and detailed statement from the Minister as to how he intends to deal with the situation in Waterford. I'm sure that the people of Limerick would like the same since they are also being dealt with in a similar manner. Then, and only then, can we decide how to deal with his proposals.

I couldn't agree more.

7upfree

Aquos76 wrote: »

@7upfree

I've read all of your posts in this thread and you make some valid points in some of them alright but your seriously your in danger of getting yourself a ban from here, everyone likes a good lively debate but your FG bashing is starting to override all the good points your making and it's not to far from been described as trolling.

We get your not a fan of FG, nor am I btw, lay off of the FG bashing and atleast engage it valid discussions.

Lay off the FG bashing? I fail to understand where you are coming from on this one - really. The reality is that if a political party offends people they must accept criticism. If it were FF or anyone else at it I would do the very same.

Ban away if you must, but it would strike me as more censorship than moderation. I will continue to criticise any party which puts this City of our at risk or in the firing line. I presume all others who have criticised Phil Hogan and FG on this thread are also in line for a warning or ban?

7upfree

Dicky Pride wrote: »

I agree with Sully. I think people are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. In the greater scheme of things, what's really changing?

I believe the responsibility still lies with the people of Waterford and its representatives to carry on doing things like winterval etc to promote our city.

Hmmm. Winterval or the undermining of an 1100 year-old City? Not a hard choice really.:rolleyes:

Dicky Pride

7upfree wrote: »

Hmmm. Winterval or the undermining of an 1100 year-old City? Not a hard choice really.:rolleyes:

Not to someone as obsessive as yourself. Is a 1100 year old legacy going to put food on people's tables?

I've been reading these forums for a long time, and Miss, you just seem to be an antagonist who gets offended by anyone who has the audacity to have an opinion that's different to your own. You also seem to be quite verbally militant which, if harnessed in the right way could actually be useful to some cause somewhere or some time. Unfortunately you seem to be a little too much in love with yourself so I doubt you'd ever find the time to do something that involves tearing yourself away from your beloved keyboard.

Also, those roll eyes smilies that you love so much? They just tell me you're a little bit too smug for you're own good.

Sully

7upfree wrote: »

Hmmm. Winterval or the undermining of an 1100 year-old City? Not a hard choice really.:rolleyes:

I doubt we had two councils 1100 years ago... I assume they survived with the one body/group representing the whole of Waterford over the years.

fuzzy dunlop

Sully wrote: »

I doubt we had two councils 1100 years ago... I assume they survived with the one body/group representing the whole of Waterford over the years.

No but we administered South Kilkenny up until just over 100 years ago which is what should be included in any so called radical reform but it isn't I wonder why? Instead Phil Hogan gets to throw 1 million of taxpayers money to breathe life into a development in Ferrybank that should never have been allowed in the first place. But anything to maintain the pretence that Ferrybank is a seperate Kilkenny Town instead of the reality that it is part of Waterford City.

And the angst towards Phil Hogan has nothing whatsoever to do with the household charge. He is well known to be part of the FG gombeen set that were to be predicted to most likely continue the same antics as FF which has transpired to be true. Ring,Hogan,Reilly and Cannon supporters of Enda Kenny who instead of providing regional efficiencies based on economy of scale exist solely to ensure the fat gets trimmed somewhere else such as WRH. Instead of getting the change we voted for and a government ensuring services on a regional level we get pilfering of VEC's,Strokes with Primary Care facilities and making sure Kilkenny gets part of the WIT pie. This is why we suspect his bona fide as well as his form for criticizing the IDA for focusing on Waterford rather than Kilkenny. Which has been mentioned here numerous times which you conveniently forget.

DeiseforLiam

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

I know it said town councils are being abolished and mergers in Waterford, Limerick and Tipp. Does the plan say that borough and county councils are merging too? There's no mention of them that I can see

I think that they will also be municipal areas of their respective counties.

7upfree

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

No but we administered South Kilkenny up until just over 100 years ago which is what should be included in any so called radical reform but it isn't I wonder why? Instead Phil Hogan gets to throw 1 million of taxpayers money to breathe life into a development in Ferrybank that should never have been allowed in the first place. But anything to maintain the pretence that Ferrybank is a seperate Kilkenny Town instead of the reality that it is part of Waterford City.

And the angst towards Phil Hogan has nothing whatsoever to do with the household charge. He is well known to be part of the FG gombeen set that were to be predicted to most likely continue the same antics as FF which has transpired to be true. Ring,Hogan,Reilly and Cannon supporters of Enda Kenny who instead of providing regional efficiencies based on economy of scale exist solely to ensure the fat gets trimmed somewhere else such as WRH. Instead of getting the change we voted for and a government ensuring services on a regional level we get pilfering of VEC's,Strokes with Primary Care facilities and making sure Kilkenny gets part of the WIT pie. This is why we suspect his bona fide as well as his form for criticizing the IDA for focusing on Waterford rather than Kilkenny. Which has been mentioned here numerous times which you conveniently forget.

Couldn't have put it better. One million into a dead development which is, for all intents and purposes, in the Waterford City - and when one of the top libraries in the country is a bus ride away from Ferrybank in Lady Lane.

This puts it better than anyone can:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=197244597076716&set=a.193720477429128.47437.192944300840079&type=1&theater