Children penalised for the actions of parents

Ironé

Biggins wrote: »

Even the ones not now paying the €100 charge, have been contributing daily, hourly to the state.
Every time they pay a bill and/or purchase an item.
The same state which is handing down the money for the education grants.
The councils are ONLY their middle men in this process to gain the STATE collected money.


Yes, and and included in all the above listed, is education grants - well until now - when someone has come up with the notion, lets punish offspring because their separate legal parents have not done something themselves, involving one new localised charge!

So you are saying that the state gives money for grants and the council collect money for the state. Good on them!

Also what is separate legal parent?

Ghandee

Ironé wrote: »

Agree - civil disobedience is a valid form of protest - but you have to live with the consequences of it and this is one of those.

Best protest you can do is use your vote in the next election.

Didn't a lot of voters think they were doing that at the last elections?


Not another red cent, labours way, not frankfurts way etc?


The time to protest is now, we've been fooled for too long on this island!:mad:

JRant

Ironé wrote: »

Biggins wrote: »

...And what about all of us that (other than one new charge) have been up to now, paying the vast bulk of their taxes/charges/vat on goods, they still should gain something back for it too which directly effect their particular lives!

om .. roads, hospitals, gardaí, teachers, schools, social welfare ...

Just to name but a few things you get for paying tax. This is the problem with this country people think they get nothing for paying tax - you get all of the above and a whole lot more. And if everyone paid all their taxes not just "the vast bulk" then we'd be a lot better off.

No, we would not be a lot better off. It doesn't matter how much tax is taken in, 'WE' as a country will never be able to pay off all this debt.
The amount of money that has already left the country, our money i might add, is stagering.

ilovesleep

Galways FG's Fildelma Healy Rayes (spelling?) didn't pay her car tax.
Was her salary refused to be paid to her?

Biggins

Ironé wrote: »

So you are saying that the state gives money for grants and the council collect money for the state. Good on them!

Also what is separate legal parent?

The state collects money for use as they see fit - that includes education grants.

A local council supposedly collects local charges for use on amenities in the local area.

I thought that was obvious.

what is a separate legal parent?

A person which is legally responsibly for their own actions/words/liabilities under state Tort and daily judicial law.
The punishment of one where applicable, being separate from those not involved/party to another's own actions/words/liabilities.

Ironé

JRant wrote: »

No, we would not be a lot better off. It doesn't matter how much tax is taken in, 'WE' as a country will never be able to pay off all this debt.
The amount of money that has already left the country, our money i might add, is stagering.

How much money came into the country from Europe during the boom times?

I get what you are saying but I think that every little bit of money helps. And 100 euro a year is only a little bit of money. The property tax will be a whole lot more.

Gmol

Biggins wrote: »

The point being that you clearly missed (1) the sins of the father being handed down to the sons! and (2) why NOW? Surley from the date of the state first being founded (ot sometime soon after) this process should have applied!

No, this is now ONLY being used as a stick to beat parents up, over to extract money from them.
To extract money from them so that their offspring can access money coming from originally collected elsewhere at higher state level, already contributed to by everyone (by paying every other tax/charge/VAT/levy under the sun).

The stick is now being swung and offspring are getting hit - not the people who might separately legally defied a LOCAL council.

I'll answer your 2nd point first
True the timing of it is lousy but do you not think a more stable tax base will provide more certainty in the future, the previous government spent a fortune based on an unsustainable boom and you have got to start somewhere.
The bank debt is a disaster for Ireland but the public spending debt is the one that needs to be addressed in order to get the country up and running and long term is the real problem. The Bank Debt problem is unsustainable so the EU will address this eventually

The grant is based on the parents income and yes the child is being punished but the child may benefit from the housecharge money being withheld. Why should a family benefit from not paying their taxes and then expect to get money in return?

mikom

ilovesleep wrote: »

Galways FG's Fildelma Healy Rayes (spelling?) didn't pay her car tax.
Was her salary refused to be paid to her?

No.
How else was her plumber to be paid in cash otherwise......

Mr Eames paid cash to the plumber Mr Allen originally hired to complete the project. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0726/1224320828358.html

Biggins

lucylu wrote: »

Parents are getting childrens allowance...x 18 years...

Just for clarity:

Child Benefit (previously known as Children's Allowance) is payable to the parents or guardians of children under 16 years of age, or under 18 years of age if the child is in full-time education, FÁS Youthreach training or has a disability. Child Benefit is not paid on behalf of 18-year olds.

The present shower is now considering lowering the age limit - possibly at the next fun-filled budget (thank you Merkel).

Gmol

Gmol wrote: »

True the timing of it is lousy but do you not think a more stable tax base will provide more certainty in the future

Absolutely not, they'll just fritter it away again

, the previous government spent a fortune based on an unsustainable boom and you have got to start somewhere.

Cut public spending including all their stupid advisors and cronies

Skuxx

Biggins wrote: »

Not penalise offspring because someone ELSE has not paid a bill on a house!

What if they don't pay the ESB or Gas bills etc, should we leave it connected because we shouldn't be penalising the the offspring in the household for the parents non payment of a bill??
I full agree with Clare Co Co, people were given enough warning that local services would be removed, now it's happening!

Gmol

bluewolf wrote: »

Absolutely not, they'll just fritter it away again

Cut public spending including all their stupid advisors and cronies

Definitely they should cut public spending but like it or not it is getting to the stage that there is little to cut bar wages and I'm guessing that won't go down well.

Raise taxes or cut Public spending, there's the choices

Biggins

Gmol wrote: »

...The grant is based on the parents income and yes the child is being punished...

Thank you - THAT is my point!

do you not think a more stable tax base will provide more certainty in the future, the previous government spent a fortune based on an unsustainable boom and you have got to start somewhere.

Absolutely - I'm not against a stable tax base - not have I ver spoke out against anyone seeking one.

To do so, one must be fair - but punishing one for the actions of others is despicable.

...There again, we are all being punished and money stripped for the actions of failed corrupt politicians and bankers who are taking bailouts (while they still get their massive wages of course).

...the child may benefit from the housecharge money being withheld.

Say what?

Why should a family benefit from not paying their taxes and then expect to get money in return?

Paying ONE new tax - but have contributed for decades (if not more) in eventual massive accumulative amounts you mean!

Yes, lets forget about all that and throw that all away in order to strong arm a €100 (this year!) charge!

JRant

Ironé wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

I'm all for change but lets get real here. Your asking the turkeys to vote on christmas.
Dissent, protest and witholding unjust payments are all real means to get the powers that be to sit up and take notice. Sure it's far from ideal but when you have vested interests so far removed from everyday life one can't just sit back and hope it all comes good.
Make no mistake we are in this mess for the long haul and if we allow them encroach in this matter where will it end?

Agree - civil disobedience is a valid form of protest - but you have to live with the consequences of it and this is one of those.

Best protest you can do is use your vote in the next election.

Those consequences are for the courts to decide though. Local CoCo's have no business muddling two seperate issues and acting as a Judge Dreed type entity.
Where is the seperation of powers?

Gmol

Biggins wrote: »

Thank you - THAT is my point!


Absolutely - I'm not against a stable tax base - not have I ver spoke out against anyone seeking one.

To do so, one must be fair - but punishing one for the actions of others is despicable.

...There again, we are all being punished and money stripped for the actions of failed corrupt politicians and bankers who are taking bailouts (while they still get their massive wages of course).


Say what?



Paying ONE new tax - but have contributed for decades (if not more) in eventual massive accumulative amounts you mean!

Yes, lets forget about all that and throw that all away in order to strong arm a €100 (this year!) charge!

Say what?
The child may benefit from the money saved by non payment current or future housecharge money
Paying ONE new tax - but have contributed for decades (if not more) in eventual massive accumulative amounts you mean!
Services provided before so irrelevant point

...There again, we are all being punished and money stripped for the actions of failed corrupt politicians and bankers who are taking bailouts (while they still get their massive wages of course).

Yes we are getting slaughtered but as I mentioned in a previous post, they are going to either raise tax or cut the public sector (or both).

delw

westendgirlie wrote: »

But if a parent chose not to pay the application processing fee, wouldn't the children still be the one being penalised?

What if the parent did pay the application processing fee & the HHC,are they effectively not paying for the same service twice?
This new move by our government is emotional blackmail to get the HHC paid IMO

Biggins

Gmol wrote: »

The child may benefit from the money saved by non payment current or future housecharge money

You still have not explained that.

JRant

Ironé wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

No, we would not be a lot better off. It doesn't matter how much tax is taken in, 'WE' as a country will never be able to pay off all this debt.
The amount of money that has already left the country, our money i might add, is stagering.

How much money came into the country from Europe during the boom times?

I get what you are saying but I think that every little bit of money helps. And 100 euro a year is only a little bit of money. The property tax will be a whole lot more.

You seem to be confusing EU development grants that we received with the wholesale pilfering of an entire country.
Is the money we are paying going into infrastructure projects on the mainland?
Nope, it's all going to private individuals and companies. Europe as a whole will see no benefit from these monies.

This €100 is a mere drop in the ocean, like the ridiculous salaries paid to CoCo'ers, so what's the point? It will make no difference at all to our communities.

eyescreamcone

If the household charge has not been paid the county council should award the HE Grant minus €100.

Nulty

Biggins wrote: »

What next?

Don't pay your TV licence?
Your kids are penalised!

Don't pay your car tax?
Your kids are penalised!

Don't pay a fine?
Your kids are penalised!

The above might be only an extreme - but the government has now opened that door!

There's a very convenient word in the English language for this:

Extortion

666irishguy

eyescreamcone wrote: »

If the household charge has not been paid the county council should award the HE Grant minus €100.

I heard the same thing on the Hook show. It's the most logical idea, but once again the logical approach eludes Clare County Council. I should know I am from Clare.

Gmol

Biggins wrote: »

You still have not explained that.

Parents don't pay HHC so extra money available to Household, Household may spend extra money on child.

Galwayguy35

The grant isn't being denied to anyone, the people who paid up the HHC are being processed first which seems fair to me.

Fenian Army

Things are looking positive now -

Sinn Féin’s spokesperson on the Environment, Community & Local Government Brian Stanley TD, has today claimed that the actions of Clare County Council “are punitive, discriminatory and illegal.”

Speaking in the Dáil during this afternoon’s Question Time, Deputy Stanley demanded that the Minister for Environment Phil Hogan, “reverse the cuts in the Local Government Fund and restore adequate funding for local democracy and the provision of Council services to our citizens and communities.

“It is outrageous for a minister to slash the funding for local government in mid-year, significantly reducing the allocation signalled at the start of the year. It typifies the slash and burn approach of this Government.

“The minister introduced the doomed Household Charge and then followed this by cutting local government funding, forcing local authority officials to demand proof from college grant applicants that their families paid the Household Charge.

“We received legal advice this morning. We are confident that the actions of Clare County Council are not only punitive but are illegal. The grant applicant is not responsible for payment of the household charge therefore cannot be punished for its non-payment. The information sought is an irrelevant consideration. We are confident that the action of Clare County Council’s would be deemed unlawful by the High Court.

“Minister Hogan should stop condoning this bully boy behaviour and instruct local authorities to desist.”

In conclusion Deputy Stanley said, “I have written to the Ceann Comhairle seeking a full debate on the matter tomorrow.”

ENDS

JRant

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

The grant isn't being denied to anyone, the people who paid up the HHC are being processed first which seems fair to me.

Where did you get that little caveat from?
From what I have read it is a flat out refusal to process the grant forms.

Also Who are they to judge whats fair and who should be processed first. They are paid to do their job, end of.

MintyDoris

Ironé wrote: »

Absolutely.

What I don't understand is this: we are up to our eyeballs in debt; how do people expect to get out of this mess without making sacrifices?

This is the type of line I hear being trotted out by a lot of people who won't think for themselves. Many people who have said this to me think it sounds educated and smart and makes people think they know what they are talking about and have taken time to educate themselves and read and research the facts of what is actually happening in this country on a daily basis. All it actually does is show that they really have no idea what the fcuk is going on ... but I am sure you aren't like that. Care to elaborate on your comment with some meaningful addition to this?

We have all made sacrifices through our already slashed services and increased taxes! The USC being a perfect example. We are living in country that is cutting the legs from under it's citizens and its sad, really sad.

This is about the government actively encouraging the likes of the Mick Wallace incident to happen and then have the bloody cheek to tell me that I am unpatriotic because I won't pay a makey uppy tax to cover their cushy pay packets which I dont feel they deserve a tiny bit of. They stand by and say he is entitled to claim this but wont look at the moral and decent implications of this!

The CoCo decide they wont process an application from a young person who is trying to better themselves in a country in which the government has screwed them and continues to screw them up the ass! On a grant that they are entitled to have! Because the government/Coco have just decided overnight that its up to them to bully and guilt people into paying a tax that is unfair and unjust in the first place.

And who will suffer in the end ... the kids of the parents who used their brains and their morals and decided not to pay the tax so as not to be bullied and made of fool of by this current government! The kids of the parents who I hope are trying to teach the next generation that its not OK to go with the herd just because someone tells you to. The kids of the parents who are arming their children with a mind of their own and a willingness to speak up for themselves and for the future of this country

Biggins

666irishguy wrote: »

I heard the same thing on the Hook show. It's the most logical idea, but once again the logical approach eludes Clare County Council. I should know I am from Clare.

The fact is that there is a really simple answer.

A council can charge a separate fee for the process of applications if they are that really worried about processing fees!

(By the way, I would have thought that part of their wages was for doing this type of stuff anyway? Silly me!)

That way, the unfairness of offspring being (possibly illegally) punished, can be done away with clearly!

ilovesleep

Isn't there a developer somewhere who fcuked, has loads of debt, owes loads but his kids are allowed to remain on in private education? Costing some amount of money to him no doubt. But public education would be much cheaper, the rest of the country and ordinary folk makes do with it. The money saved for that developer going from private to public would go towards paying down on some debt? In fact, wouldn't this developer even be with NAMA?

So he fcuked up. But his kids are rewarded with private education.

Someone makes a stand against the household tax, or maybe even doesn't even have to money to pay and his/child young adult child is refused a grant to better him/herself.

humbert

There was no warning and it only targets a small section of the population for a tax that affects every home owner. These are also among the poorest.

It reflects very badly on the public officials involved and I do think the people responsible should be held accountable.


However, if it was stipulated clearly and in advance I'd have no problem with it.

The grant is essentially helping families who can't afford to pay for their children's education. If that family has chosen not to pay a tax then it's quite reasonable to deny them government grants.

The suggestion that it is punishing children for the sins of their parents is utterly stupid. The grant is given based on the parents finances. Sometimes that's not fair but it's the way it is and I don't think there's a better alternative.

666irishguy

Biggins wrote: »

The fact is that there is a really simple answer.

A council can charge a separate fee for the process of applications if they are that really worried about processing fees!

(By the way, I would have thought that part of their wages was for doing this type of stuff anyway? Silly me!)

That way, the unfairness of offspring being (possibly illegally) punished, can be done away with clearly!

Like I said, logic is a concept alien to them. I wonder what the legal issues regarding an 18 year old (an adult by law) being penalised for the actions of another adult are?

Biggins

humbert wrote: »

...The grant is given based on the parents finances. Sometimes that's not fair but it's the way it is and I don't think there's a better alternative.

Les be actually accurate here:

The grant is given/assessed on their INCOMING finances and their inability to afford...

kflynn

Anyone wrote: »

You're not seeing the arguement, not at all, in fact like others, you are making one up. Clare county council are removing a local service from those who didnt pay they local service charge. That local service is the processing of grant applications. Tough shít that its actually a really really valuable service, but people were warned that services would be removed and now its happening.

The local service is processing....so give the grant minus the processing charge. If a student has the initiative and work ethic to go to college and doesn't have a great relationship with their parents what are they meant to do??

On the levy itself...we wouldn't need it if the other revenue was managed properly!!!We have a much bigger serious problem here!

They can target the parents if they like.....but like debt collecting laws in most countries you can not assume one person in a household has a good and open relationship with the debtor, and can not disclose information to a 3rd party.

I understand the grant is based on a 3rd parties income but that is one agreement. The household charge is another. If a husband has a mortgage with his wife and he goes bankrupt....they obviously discussed the mortgage but may not have discussed the bankruptcy and you can not assume so!

MaxSteele

So because people refuse to pay for another sly tax which replaced the local government exchequer fund of 164 million euro, tens of thousands of young people should spend the rest of they're lives in menial, dead end, low income jobs ?

Good luck with that.

humbert

Biggins wrote: »

Les be actually accurate here:

The grant is given/assessed on their INCOMING finances and their inability to afford...

That has no bearing on my point. The students-to-be get the grant on the basis of their parents finances (incoming or otherwise) so they can, quite reasonably, be denied it based on their parents finances (i.e. non-payment of taxes).

Before someone reads this post out of context, I don't think their current approach is in any way acceptable.

nachocheese

As a taxpayer, I don't particularly like the thought of handing out thousands of euro in support grants to the children of tax dodgers.

They're assessed on their parents declared income. If they're willing to dodge a €100 tax, simply because payment seemed optional, then who knows what other taxes they are or are not dodging and what their true income is.

Biggins

666irishguy wrote: »

...I wonder what the legal issues regarding an 18 year old (an adult by law) being penalised for the actions of another adult are?

Indirect discrimination for a start?

Indirect discrimination occurs when practices or policies that do not appear to discriminate against one group more than another actually have a discriminatory impact. It can also happen where a requirement that may appear non-discriminatory adversely affects a particular group or class of persons.

http://www.barkeeper.ie/page.asp?menu=0&page=518

As the actions of the council do NOT discriminate between the person not paying the €100 charge and a separate person (offspring) who is getting punished due to the action of another!

kirving

Should students also be denied the grant if thier parents are in prison? Owe money to revenue(not the council)? If they have any upaid speeding fines?

If the cost of processing the application is actually €100, why not just take that out of the grant and tell students that they must pay the first €100 of the registration fee themselves?

Biggins

nachocheese wrote: »

...If they're willing to dodge a €100 tax, simply because payment seemed optional, then who knows what other taxes they are or are not dodging and what their true income is.

Yes, because they have not paid one charge, they automatic thus have not paid of course, every other charge since they first started earning!
Guilty before found innocent?

I dislike the following - but in this case i have to use it!


:rolleyes:

kflynn

nachocheese wrote: »

As a taxpayer, I don't particularly like the thought of handing out thousands of euro in support grants to the children of tax dodgers.

They're assessed on their parents declared income. If they're willing to dodge a €100 tax, simply because payment seemed optional, then who knows what other taxes they are or are not dodging and what their true income is.

Or maybe after the USC, PRSI etc etc etc they didn't have one single cent left to pay the €100!
In any case it does not matter, there will always be tax dodgers and people in genuine trouble....You can't make a blanket rule using education as a bargaining tool. Stop something relatively less significant like the petrol allowance they would probably be getting! That won't affect their kids prospects in life! Just using that as an example....I actually don't think they should do that just pointing out that it could have been better thought out, with less bullying tactics.

666irishguy

Biggins wrote: »

Indirect discrimination for a start?


http://www.barkeeper.ie/page.asp?menu=0&page=518

As the actions of the council do NOT discriminate between the person not paying the €100 charge and a separate person (offspring) who is getting punished due to the action of another!

I thought hostage taking died out with the High Kings and the Chieftains! Only they could think of something like this. A while ago they wanted to ban loyalty cards issued by Tesco and the like on the grounds it would save the samal shop. Totally detached from reality.

steddyeddy

Biggins wrote: »

Irish children penalised for the actions of parents...

Is this what our state has come to?


http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/latest-news/fury-as-council-blocks-student-grants-over-household-charge-3233555.html

I'm NOT here to argue for/against the household charge - there's a thread for that HERE.
...Have our present government become so low and fcuking bitter that they are hitting out at offspring for what is clearly the separate decisions of others?

Feel free to disagree with me but I think its fcuking disgusting!

Thats simply not good enough. A pattern of childlike tactics seem to be the mainstay of this coalition. Creating fear and using bullying tactics isnt what I would want out of a first world government. Its amzing Enda claims to be bullied by the press every now and again yet his govenment dont seem to have a problem using bullying to get at parents through their children. He doesnt seem to have the testicular fortitude to negotiate a debt reduction so instead he takes it out on children. Big man.

nachocheese

Biggins wrote: »

Yes, because they have not paid one charge, they automatic thus have not paid of course, every other charge since they first started earning!
Guilty before found innocent?

I dislike the following - but in this case i have to use it!


:rolleyes:

kflynn wrote: »

Or maybe after the USC, PRSI etc etc etc they didn't have one single cent left to pay the €100!
In any case it does not matter, there will always be tax dodgers and people in genuine trouble....You can't make a blanket rule using education as a bargaining tool. Stop something relatively less significant like the petrol allowance they would probably be getting! That won't affect their kids prospects in life! Just using that as an example....I actually don't think they should do that just pointing out that it could have been better thought out, with less bullying tactics.

Lads, remember, we are just talking about grant receivers here. This measure won't stop those who genuinely want to go to college. I've worked my way through college without a grant, completely independent, and while it was tough I did it with the end goal in mind.

What this will do is deter those who aren't really pushed about going, didn't have anything else in mind so thought they'd go and drink through a grant every year.

I've a bigger problem with the capitation fee these days and how it, as it keeps increasing, restricts access to third level education than the kids of a few tax dodgers not getting a maintenance grant.

Biggins

666irishguy wrote: »

I thought hostage taking died out with the High Kings and the Chieftains! Only they could think of something like this. A while ago they wanted to ban loyalty cards issued by Tesco and the like on the grounds it would save the samal shop. Totally detached from reality.

It really is a bizarre situation.

kflynn

nachocheese wrote: »

Lads, remember, we are just talking about grant receivers here. This measure won't stop those who genuinely want to go to college. I've worked my way through college without a grant, completely independent, and while it was tough I did it with the end goal in mind.

But I'm sure you knew you needed to save a long time before you started and therefore had time to work and save.

I worked all throughout college too!

homeless student

its only 100 euro,who doesnt have 100 euro? not like its 10,000 euro

I am a student but in fairness how can a family refuse to pay a miserly 100 euro then expect the cc to give them thousands in grants??

666irishguy

It's more about the fact that one individual will in effect be punished for the actions of another individual.

Biggins

homeless student wrote: »

its only 100 euro,who doesnt have 100 euro? not like its 10,000 euro

I am a student but in fairness how can a family refuse to pay a miserly 100 euro then expect the cc to give them thousands in grants??

You have a VERY valid point.
There are some - and I know of small cases near to me - where they simply don't have the €100 to spare - but I admit they are the rarity (at least I think they are).

There is also the aspect of when it goes up, when the newer assessment method comes in.

kflynn

homeless student wrote: »

its only 100 euro,who doesnt have 100 euro? not like its 10,000 euro

I am a student but in fairness how can a family refuse to pay a miserly 100 euro then expect the cc to give them thousands in grants??

Yikes! Ok even if it was 'only' €100 it is not the point. You can not bargain with education and as I mentioned cannot assume relationships in households.

If the parents and child didn't speak they could refuse!

MintyDoris

homeless student wrote: »

its only 100 euro,who doesnt have 100 euro? not like its 10,000 euro

I am a student but in fairness how can a family refuse to pay a miserly 100 euro then expect the cc to give them thousands in grants??

On moral principal

homeless student

MintyDoris wrote: »

On moral principal

morals wont pay the cost of going to college