When will austerity end in Ireland?

micosoft

True. The whataboutery argument that "my money is wasted on HSE management" or "bankers debts" or the classic "I'll pay for it WHEN the service is perfect but not before".

Which then leads to the "I will only engage in this conversation when the state does not waste a penny and is debt free (i.e. never)".

The more direct taxes on consumption the better as it is the only serious engagemen most of the electorate have on what our money gets spent on. If you don't pay who does?

micosoft

Idbatterim wrote: »

Once the absolute core services are up to scratch that is...

Can you explain what the absolute core services are and then explain how you will sell that to an electorate which has manifestly not voted for a libertarian view point?

noodler

Villa05 wrote: »

From €6,000,000,000 last year to over €8,000,000,000 this year

Our interest costs are increasing on debt already borrowed but that is because we are borrowing more and more, even a small budget deficit has to be borrowed.

Thankfully, when the troika bailout ends we will be able to borrow at around 4% by the looks of things.



Ireland has met its budget targets fairly consistently over the last 5 years. I have no reason to believe that we won't be where we need to be by the end of 2015.

So I expect Budget 2016 to be fairly neutral.

We will hope, of course, that domestic demand and thus GDP has grown by then.


We are signed up to the Fiscal Compact permanently but every analysis I have read argues that we will be fufilling the terms of this (i.e. reudcing our debt to the 60% GDP range) by accomplishing fairly minor GDP growth so the argument (put forward by SF at he time of the referendum) that we would be undertaking austerity forever until debt reaches 60% GDP seems like scaremongering to me.

Tigerandahalf

And what if there is no growth? Will there be austerity then?

ardmacha

the fact is we all know the value of what we get for what we pay is appalling, if its worse services or more tax, I know which I'm choosing. Once the absolute core services are up to scratch that is..

Some things are appalling value for money, some not. But there is no concern for value for money, the government doesn't feel any need to reform things because the public don't ask them to.

micosoft

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

And what if there is no growth? Will there be austerity then?

In the long run we'll all be dead anyway.

View

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

And what if there is no growth? Will there be austerity then?

Yes because we can't go around with high debt levels as the slightest economic downturn will wipe us out (we'd be like Greece was at the start of this crisis - with our nose barely above water and a tsunami coming at us).

Idbatterim

Some things are appalling value for money, some not. But there is no concern for value for money, the government doesn't feel any need to reform things because the public don't ask them to.

FG 2011 Election Manifesto

1. help protect and create jobs
2. keep taxes low while fixing the deficit
3. deliver smaller better government
4. create a completely new, fairer, more efficient health system and
5. overhaul the way our political system works to stamp out cronyism and low standards...

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0215/finegaelmanifesto.pdf

I think there was and is a large appetite for change. I was maybe naive, but thought after years in the wilderness, that FG would have some fight to get things done, at least at the start of their term. They clearly dont really, Labour being in there doesnt help, thank god theyll be consigned to the opposition benches before long...

Idbatterim

health, education, policing, army, local government etc I would deem as core services. Bar a few departments like revenue, they are just useless at pretty much everything they do. As has been pointed out, money was ust thrown at every problem to buy votes and it wasnt the answer to the problem...

johnnyskeleton

JP 1800 wrote: »

Austerity will not end as long as people do not have any confidence in the domestic economy, more and more individuals are putting money away as there is a large uncertainty of what the next budgets will bring. We need to encourage spending by measures such as reducing the VAT rate, easing off on taxing those who are still working and creating more demand for our products and services thus creating employment. The biggest problem I can see is the cost of doing business in this country which stems from excessive taxes and charges, be it energy prices or rental costs along with the aforementioned taxes.
It also appears to me that the youth of this country are being sacrificed for the benefit of the older generation which as we know is a ticking time bomb, so much wealth and potential wealth has been transferred to the over 50s which will stifle the future growth of this country, one case in point is the disparity of the remuneration packages for teachers from the older generation to those just starting their careers as well as those in the public service.
If we as a country do not combat this issue we will have lost an entire generation to mass emigration which will have a dire social cost.

While I don't necessarily believe that more spending is a cure all for economic woes, I'm glad you recognise that in order to increase spending we should reduce consumption taxes rather than increase savings taxes. Mind you, DIRT is already stupidly high.

micosoft

Idbatterim wrote: »

health, education, policing, army, local government etc I would deem as core services. Bar a few departments like revenue, they are just useless at pretty much everything they do. As has been pointed out, money was ust thrown at every problem to buy votes and it wasnt the answer to the problem...

Yeh - Yada yada received wisdom which is simply not true.

Health - 19th in the World. 25th in expenditure. So not useless (and as a recent recipient of that Health Service I can only compliment the efficiency of a service where I received world class treatment from three consultants in a week on the public system.) And obviously efficient - that evergreen model for us called Sweden is the 7th highest spender yet is 23rd on the WHO ranking for performance. Wealthy Switzerland is the 2nd highest spender yet is one after us at 20th.
* I accept this is a 2000 report which is the last time the WHO created this report but nonetheless is debunks the "we have a third world health care system argument". We still spend a heck of a lot more on Health now then in 2000.

I'm not claiming there are not significant concerns about some of our public services but by every objective measurement we are OK to Out performing our peer group (the wealthiest countries in the world) on pretty much every service. I've lived in a lot of countries and I can say that you hear the same complaints (waiting lists in Canada, incompetent police in Stockholm) as here. Perspective please.

The only service you've left out is social welfare. Are you suggesting we eliminate social welfare? Utterly abhorrent view for 98% of the electorate I would suspect. If not then you've really not discovered any pot of gold to reduce public expenditure other then slowly unwinding public pay rates using pay freezes, redundancies, t&c changes where possible as the Government is doing. Increments are the only one that needs to be addressed.

We are going to have a balanced budget by 2014 according to Michael Noonan.

Idbatterim

Health - 19th in the World. 25th in expenditure. So not useless (and as a recent recipient of that Health Service I can only compliment the efficiency of a service where I received world class treatment from three consultants in a week on the public system.) And obviously efficient - that evergreen model for us called Sweden is the 7th highest spender yet is 23rd on the WHO ranking for performance. Wealthy Switzerland is the 2nd highest spender yet is one after us at 20th.
* I accept this is a 2000 report which is the last time the WHO created this report but nonetheless is debunks the "we have a third world health care system argument". We still spend a heck of a lot more on Health now then in 2000.

Im not saying we have a third world heath system! Im saying the value we get given what goes into it is poor. In relation to the social welfare, of course Im not advocating we do away with it. Im saying it needs a total overhaul, I doubt anyone will agree with me there. The way I doubt anyone will disagree with me that the waste and salaries here particularly in the PS and at higher levels are OTT... Also of course you hear complaints in every country, in countries with expectations of very high standards, if they arent met, of course they will complain, I think the bar is set lower in Ireland though, so its all relative...

murphaph

Idbatterim wrote: »

health, education, policing, army, local government etc I would deem as core services. Bar a few departments like revenue, they are just useless at pretty much everything they do. As has been pointed out, money was ust thrown at every problem to buy votes and it wasnt the answer to the problem...

Revenue are no great shakes either IME. Don't know where the myth came from that they are the bees knees. They tried to claim that I (as a non-resident) was liable for PRSI on rental income and sent me an assessment for it! (non-residents are exempt from PRSI on such income for the record). This should have been quick to clear up but the person I was talking to was adamant and it was a real struggle to get her to go check with someone higher up.

I have had other similar problems with revenue since becoming non-resident. They often just don't know the tax code well enough.

Idbatterim

Revenue are no great shakes either IME. Don't know where the myth came from that they are the bees knees. They tried to claim that I (as a non-resident) was liable for PRSI on rental income and sent me an assessment for it! (non-residents are exempt from PRSI on such income for the record). This should have been quick to clear up but the person I was talking to was adamant and it was a real struggle to get her to go check with someone higher up.

I have had other similar problems with revenue since becoming non-resident. They often just don't know the tax code well enough.

I agree Murpaph, im not saying they are great, just compared to the other departments they have a reputation for being efficient, its coming from a pretty low benchmark to be fair. Pitty they arent as eagle eyed with spending money as they are with collecting it here...

spank_inferno

Ireland is serviced pretty well by its public service by international standards.

In turn they are renumerated well by international standards.

Though not perfect.... The above is how I want it to be.

The "3rd world standard" is just pub-talk, and belongs on a barstool.

BuilderPlumber

mariaalice wrote: »

We are going to have a balanced budget by 2014 according to Michael Noonan.

That is the very problem. We all think things like balanced budgets and budgets in general are a good thing. Budgets have two main problems.

1. We'll say 1000000000 is allocated to whatever and only 60% was needed during the year and kept the service going and we had full employment in the sector. What happens? The other 40% then is squandered on something silly instead of rolling it over for next year. There is a desire to use the full 100% even if not needed!

2. We have only 70% of our needed funds. We need to cut 30% off to balance the budgets. Let's cut the bottom part.

Of course, if scenario 1 wasn't done, there would be money to make up that 30% deficit in scenario 2.

Godge

murphaph wrote: »

Revenue are no great shakes either IME. Don't know where the myth came from that they are the bees knees. They tried to claim that I (as a non-resident) was liable for PRSI on rental income and sent me an assessment for it! (non-residents are exempt from PRSI on such income for the record). This should have been quick to clear up but the person I was talking to was adamant and it was a real struggle to get her to go check with someone higher up.

I have had other similar problems with revenue since becoming non-resident. They often just don't know the tax code well enough.

You might view it that way but another view of your experience is that Revenue are tough and hard and verify carefully any claims by non-residents to be exempt from Irish taxes.

BuilderPlumber

Godge wrote: »

You might view it that way but another view of your experience is that Revenue are tough and hard and verify carefully any claims by non-residents to be exempt from Irish taxes.

There are still too many tax exemptions for the rich in Ireland. The whole horsey set for example. A whole lot of these tax exemptions for the horsey set was brought in by Charlie Haughey for personal reasons: his daughter was one of the horsey set.

micosoft

The tax benefits are for horse racing... not the "horsey set". The contribution of the Horse Racing business last year was in excess of €708 Million with exports in excess of €150 and we are widely regarded as world leaders in the business. Aside from that you have the huge tourism benefits of the RDS Dublin show etc etc.
A contribution to this country that I suspect is far in excess of the sector indicated by your username ever made.

spank_inferno

micosoft wrote: »

The tax benefits are for horse racing... not the "horsey set". The contribution of the Horse Racing business last year was in excess of €708 Million with exports in excess of €150 and we are widely regarded as world leaders in the business. Aside from that you have the huge tourism benefits of the RDS Dublin show etc etc.
A contribution to this country that I suspect is far in excess of the sector indicated by your username ever made.

You mean that horse show attended by fewer than attend 3 leinster games?

Cmon.... The dogs on the street know the power of the horse & gambling lobby.

Why take a small tax from milionaires & their gee-gees when you can heap more misery on the coping class instead.

Ash.J.Williams

according to the nice Indian chap from the troika that got us into this austerity lark we will NEVER EVER get out of recession until we stop austerity and that he was wrong to ever put us in this situation...

spank_inferno

Austerity will end when the government is within its deficit limits.

This will happen in 1-2 years.

With luck they will continue to cut current expenditure allowing for a tax reduction.

(of course that will not happen though!)

View

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

according to the nice Indian chap from the troika that got us into this austerity lark we will NEVER EVER get out of recession until we stop austerity and that he was wrong to ever put us in this situation...

And according to the CSO we are ALREADY out of the recession.

BuilderPlumber

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

according to the nice Indian chap from the troika that got us into this austerity lark we will NEVER EVER get out of recession until we stop austerity and that he was wrong to ever put us in this situation...

That is it exactly. The IMF have time and time again said that austerity alone does not work and austerity does not work in many circumstance. It actually only works when it is applied to the fat cats at the top and then the money saved there spent to support the true economy (the people's livelihoods).

Cutting people's jobs at the lower end of the public sector, banks not supporting small businesses, no government support given to local initiatives. That is NOT what the IMF want (the IMF want a functioning economy that thrives and gives them back return on investment - what they don't want is a self serving regime cornering all the money to pay themselves).

The government likes to shift the blame for THEIR own dictatorial decisions to the IMF and EU. And it is also very true that the current government are much worse than the Brian Cowen one for implementing horrid dictatorship and then washing their hands of it saying it is the IMF/EU. People need to realise that the disgusting dictatorial decisions to weaken the people here come 100% from our own so-called government.

Idbatterim

It actually only works when it is applied to the fat cats at the top and then the money saved there spent to support the true economy (the people's livelihoods).

The people we refer to as "fat cats" would make up less than 1% of the population and while of course they should have their pay cut or pay more tax (if they arent shouldering a "fair share" (define fair share). But you cant exempt pretty much the entire population from cuts given the scale of the current crisis and the insane amounts of money involved...

dlouth15

spank_inferno wrote: »

Austerity will end when the government is within its deficit limits.

This will happen in 1-2 years.

With luck they will continue to cut current expenditure allowing for a tax reduction.

(of course that will not happen though!)

It will be tough for a long time after that. Public finances will be in order but remember that the private sector economy will be further weakened at that stage. This will make raising taxes difficult and necessitate further cuts.

Geuze

spank_inferno wrote: »

Austerity will end when the government is within its deficit limits.

This will happen in 1-2 years.

With luck they will continue to cut current expenditure allowing for a tax reduction.

(of course that will not happen though!)

A 3% deficit is planned by 2015.

But, AFAIK, under an EU Stability Treaty, don't we then have to gradually reduce our borrowing towards 0.5% of GDP?

Geuze

View wrote: »

And according to the CSO we are ALREADY out of the recession.

Note that growth is still very low.

View

Geuze wrote: »

Note that growth is still very low.

So?

It still means we are out of recession.

And in Ireland's case, since we rely hugely on exports, the single biggest factor that will effect our growth is how the economies of our major trade partners are doing.

BuilderPlumber

Idbatterim wrote: »

The people we refer to as "fat cats" would make up less than 1% of the population and while of course they should have their pay cut or pay more tax (if they arent shouldering a "fair share" (define fair share). But you cant exempt pretty much the entire population from cuts given the scale of the current crisis and the insane amounts of money involved...

Money and its problems are VERY much a man made thing. Unlike a nuclear disaster for example, where chemicals leave a lasting, irreversible pollution. Governments can revalue or print more money, change currencies, change the rules. This so-called financial crisis started off due to manmade greed by the likes of GW Bush, Blair, Bertie, banks and many many others.

Decisions that lead to it such as the Iraq war, subprime lending, negativity in the media, a hedge fund/risk culture, bailing out banks, increasing tax/cutbacks, etc. ALL either made the rich rich or protected the rich from their mistakes. I don't buy the whole freemasons world government thing but would agree that governments and the powerful control a manmade thing called money that they can value any way they see fit to protect their needs. The people are pawns and just statistics and their uncaring attitude and frightening budgets shows their utter contempt and aloofness.

Also, you notice how a whole media thing grew up around it. The likes of George Lee in the early days and David McWilliams suddenly were everywhere. Also, all those Frontline type programmes. Pat Kenny even gave up the Late Late Show to cash in on it.

Bearing in mind that this recession goes on for so long means that it is intended. This is a new warfare against the people, a new type of dictatorship to keep the people weak and poor, confused and depressed and in their place for a greedy, autocratic regime. The aims of governments who want to take more power traditionally come from war. With no wars in Europe, the recession and make it appear bad is the new war: the government/media/top brass can then say 'times are bad' (yet you never see them themselves drop their lavish lifestyles!) and then the government can increase tax, cut back services, implement emergency laws and so on. I'm never fooled by any crises to do with money as money is green/coloured paper with value agreed on by man who can change the value of it when needed. If a financial crisis was against the interests of governments, it would have been resolved long ago.

spank_inferno

Geuze wrote: »

A 3% deficit is planned by 2015.

But, AFAIK, under an EU Stability Treaty, don't we then have to gradually reduce our borrowing towards 0.5% of GDP?

Thats true.

Again hopefully it will incentivise more agressive spending cuts... Chance would be a fine thing.
Too many snouts with agendas feeding from the tax payer.

BuilderPlumber

spank_inferno wrote: »

Thats true.

Again hopefully it will incentivise more agressive spending cuts... Chance would be a fine thing.
Too many snouts with agendas feeding from the tax payer.

I can't understand this logic: spending cuts (you notice it is always the poor and lower middle class and their jobs being taken??) = job losses = unemployment = businesses going out of business = continuing this misery. EXCACTLY what governments want.

Agreed: WASTE should be cut, Agreed: surplus budgets rolled over, Agreed: there are too many unjust giveaways not means tested like free travel for the retired rich and junkets for top guys. Agreed: we should reduce our borrowing.

The tax payer, true, does not deserve to be funding waste. But enough cutbacks to job-creating incentives (and don't give me this public replaced by private thing as both need to be healthy for one another to thrive), there is going to be no tax to begin with.

Bertie Ahern-style give-away-but-meaningless-budgets are not what we need. We need stimuli where money is invested into the creation of good stable employment, exports, etc. and a good, reliable tax base too.

spank_inferno

Confiscate less of the peoples money.
Let us decide how we spend our earnings.

Then watch demand sky-rocket.... And the jobs that come with it.

Just needs agressive tax cuts..... & government spending is still way too high.

Tigerandahalf

Everyone says gov spending is too high but where do you make the cuts. A cut in wages in the public service (and let's face it to save an amount you would have to cut the average public servant as they are the majority) will simply mean less mortgages being paid and less money spent in the economy.
I can see us going back into recession next year as the full property tax and water tax kick in. The gov has committed to not touching income taxes but that is all PR as their workaround way of increasing taxes is to lower tax bands and tax credits. It will all mean less money in the economy and more businesses failing. Jobbridge is being expanded to massage the jobs figures.
With the general election in early 2016 you would expect that the budget in Oct 2015 would be gentler, otherwise FG/Labour are in trouble. It will be interesting to see what Merkel offers up as the current policy cannot succeed.

spank_inferno

you do know that if a government decides to spend less money that unspent money does not disappear.

It remains in the economy.

(unless it is borrowed.... Which no one would prefer)

ardmacha

Confiscate less of the peoples money.
Let us decide how we spend our earnings.

Which services do you wish to do without, to facilitate this. Or do you simply wish others to do without?

spank_inferno

ardmacha wrote: »

Which services do you wish to do without, to facilitate this. Or do you simply wish others to do without?

Services.... Stay the same... For me & you.

Though I think we could do without 1 or 2 of the half dozen quangos in the area of fisheries / the sea.
(to give one example).

I know your a big government kind of guy.... Most Irish are.

I'd just like a little bit less government & a little more money in my pocket.... It wont happen though, I know that.

Uriel.

spank_inferno wrote: »

Services.... Stay the same... For me & you.

Though I think we could do without 1 or 2 of the half dozen quangos in the area of fisheries / the sea.
(to give one example).

I know your a big government kind of guy.... Most Irish are.

I'd just like a little bit less government & a little more money in my pocket.... It wont happen though, I know that.

You cite fisheries/sea quangos. Can you identify specific quangos, why they should be disbanded and why their work is not required?

spank_inferno

Uriel. wrote: »

You cite fisheries/sea quangos. Can you identify specific quangos, why they should be disbanded and why their work is not required?

no because Im not your researcher....

Google for a list of Irelands 900+ quangos and take your time.

I'm just the contrary opinion remember.
If you are happy with such a large expensive government then thats fine.

murphaph

Godge wrote: »

You might view it that way but another view of your experience is that Revenue are tough and hard and verify carefully any claims by non-residents to be exempt from Irish taxes.

What are you talking about? They accept fully that I'm non resident (you lose almost all reliefs when you are so they are on the whole able to get more income tax out of a non resident) but assessed me for a tax for which non residents are exempt. It's just plain old incompetence.

Uriel.

spank_inferno wrote: »

no because Im not your researcher....

Google for a list of Irelands 900+ quangos and take your time.

I'm just the contrary opinion remember.
If you are happy with such a large expensive government then thats fine.

If you have nothing to back it up then why be so specific about the area. You didn't say we should reduce Government/Public Service/No. of Quangos. You made specific reference to a certain "sector" of quangos.

So what you are saying is that you just threw out a specific area of government that could be disposed of, but it was just a random top of the head assessment, yes?

I love people like you... "x, y, z should be cut/ceased, why? eh, I dunno, I just think it should, yo er you know save money... I don't know what they do but I am sure they won't be missed..."

Count Dooku

Uriel. wrote: »

You cite fisheries/sea quangos. Can you identify specific quangos, why they should be disbanded and why their work is not required?

http://www.ifco.ie/website/ifco/ifcoweb.nsf/web/home?OpenDocument ( one clerk can copy ratings from British censor)
http://foi.gov.ie/Censorship-of-Films-Appeal-Board same
http://www.nesc.ie/en/home/ - Taoiseach already have plenty advisers
http://www.lgcsb.ie/en - can be transferred to Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government

hmmm

Uriel. wrote: »

You cite fisheries/sea quangos. Can you identify specific quangos, why they should be disbanded and why their work is not required?

Not the OP, but the problem I see with the Quangos is that each comes with a layer of bureaucracy. Each has a highly paid "CEO", a receptionist, marketing people, legal advisors, new offices, new stationery, an expensive logo etc. Most of their functions are worthwhile, but the Department should be consolidating them rather than allowing expensive little fiefdoms to develop.

Uriel.

Count Dooku wrote: »

http://www.ifco.ie/website/ifco/ifcoweb.nsf/web/home?OpenDocument ( one clerk can copy ratings from British censor)
http://foi.gov.ie/Censorship-of-Films-Appeal-Board same
http://www.nesc.ie/en/home/ - Taoiseach already have plenty advisers
http://www.lgcsb.ie/en - can be transferred to Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government

So you are moving away from the Fisheries? So you admit that you just threw them out as an example?

Re the ones you mention above - you provide absolutely no case to support any rationale for closing these.

IFCO - your arguement for this is non-sensical. While we are closely aligned to Britain in many respects, we do still have a different society here, and I personally don't think it is appropriate to just copy British certs. We have slightly different ideals etc.. rightly or wrongly. Also, I would say there are legal issues with just "copying" the British certs.

What might make more sense, is merge IFCO with Department of Arts, as one possible cost saving mechanism. But one would have to ask the level of cost savings associated with such a merger.

NESC - what advisors for the Taoiseach to you speak about. Nesc is a broad societal, industry and sectoral "think tank" that produces long-term strategic advice for the Taoiseach, which incorporates significant input and buy-in from a cross sectoral viewpoint. It is also independent of line Department policy barriers, making it an extremely useful resource. I don't know of any other advisors to the Taoiseach that offers such a dynamic

LGMA - would not be a good fit to subsume into the DECLG as it is responsible for the application of strategy and programmes amongst local Government (hence the County Manager(s) involvement). This needs to be separate from a Government line Department for independent reasons and to reduce central policy influences and constraints - the whole point of a local Government system. If anything, Ireland should look to move to more autonomy in Local Government.

Are there Quangos that could be abolished? - Maybe. Are there some that might be more efficiently and cost effectively managed ? Probably. Are there some that could be subsumed into line Departments - perhaps. But throwing out cheap soundbites of "abolish x,y,z" "jail the bankers" sound great and and all, the reality is somewhat different. Measured research and strategic thinking are the only grounds on which to proceed to reshuffle or shake up the Agency "sector"

Uriel.

hmmm wrote: »

Not the OP, but the problem I see with the Quangos is that each comes with a layer of bureaucracy. Each has a highly paid "CEO", a receptionist, marketing people, legal advisors, new offices, new stationery, an expensive logo etc. Most of their functions are worthwhile, but the Department should be consolidating them rather than allowing expensive little fiefdoms to develop.

I don't disagree with you, but Agencies, such as the EPA for example are autonomous and free from central line Departments for very good reasons.

Good loser

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

That is it exactly. The IMF have time and time again said that austerity alone does not work and austerity does not work in many circumstance. It actually only works when it is applied to the fat cats at the top and then the money saved there spent to support the true economy (the people's livelihoods).

Cutting people's jobs at the lower end of the public sector, banks not supporting small businesses, no government support given to local initiatives. That is NOT what the IMF want (the IMF want a functioning economy that thrives and gives them back return on investment - what they don't want is a self serving regime cornering all the money to pay themselves).

The government likes to shift the blame for THEIR own dictatorial decisions to the IMF and EU. And it is also very true that the current government are much worse than the Brian Cowen one for implementing horrid dictatorship and then washing their hands of it saying it is the IMF/EU. People need to realise that the disgusting dictatorial decisions to weaken the people here come 100% from our own so-called government.

Would disagree with practically all that. The basic trouble with FF is that, afraid of the electorate, they tried to please all the people all the time. Any idiot should know this is impossible.

The louder the complaints the more they coughed up. Their increases to social welfare and to public servants were reckless in the extreme. Plus their deliberate refusal to rein in the property splurge.

Re continuing austerity we have no choice. At the end of 2104 we will have the second highest primary deficit in the euro area - assuming we meet the budget targets (€3.1 bn in 2013). As C Gurdgiev said in Sunday Times 'easing austerity or mounting a fiscal stimulus is like accelerating in reverse on a one-way street.'

Count Dooku

Uriel. wrote: »

IFCO - your arguement for this is non-sensical. While we are closely aligned to Britain in many respects, we do still have a different society here, and I personally don't think it is appropriate to just copy British certs. We have slightly different ideals etc.. rightly or wrongly. Also, I would say there are legal issues with just "copying" the British certs.

Even if IFCO will decide to ban something "Life of Brian-2", people will still will be able to watch in North or buy DVD/BR through internet. Kids can download it from internet and watch on their smartphones. Whole idea of national regulation is pointless now, if you don't have language barriers.
BTW, ratings are not copyright protected

Uriel. wrote: »

NESC - what advisors for the Taoiseach to you speak about. Nesc is a broad societal, industry and sectoral "think tank" that produces long-term strategic advice for the Taoiseach, which incorporates significant input and buy-in from a cross sectoral viewpoint. It is also independent of line Department policy barriers, making it an extremely useful resource. I don't know of any other advisors to the Taoiseach that offers such a dynamic

Do you have any examples of real work from this "think tank"?
Taoiseach has Dail as think tank.

Uriel. wrote: »

LGMA - would not be a good fit to subsume into the DECLG as it is responsible for the application of strategy and programmes amongst local Government (hence the County Manager(s) involvement). This needs to be separate from a Government line Department for independent reasons and to reduce central policy influences and constraints - the whole point of a local Government system. If anything, Ireland should look to move to more autonomy in Local Government.

More autonomy without income taxes stayed in local government is pointless.
If you want local Governments be more independent, then introduce "federal" and local taxes.

RobbieTheRobber

Count Dooku wrote: »

http://www.ifco.ie/website/ifco/ifcoweb.nsf/web/home?OpenDocument ( one clerk can copy ratings from British censor)
http://foi.gov.ie/Censorship-of-Films-Appeal-Board same
http://www.nesc.ie/en/home/ - Taoiseach already have plenty advisers
http://www.lgcsb.ie/en - can be transferred to Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government

Thos first two links you said do the same job well that would be because they are the same organisation.
If you had bothered to read the FOI.gov.ie site and the link you provided from it you would have seen that it simply provides a link back to the first site. www.IFCO.ie

:rolleyes:

Red Nissan

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

The government have said another 2/3 budgets and that around 2015 we will

reelect a Fianna Fail government and they'll start the big spending all over again. It's happened three times in my lifetime already.