Eoin Murphy no confidence vote

reg114

is_that_so wrote: »

2011-2014 don't count as we were under the rule of the Troika. There were on average about 4000 commencements for each of those years. The first commitment for housing came in Budget 2015 with at least €800m a year allocated since, in recent years that has been well over €1bn.

Quoting figures is fairly pointless when the gov throws money at projects carried out by private developers without any due diligence or cost benefit analysis.. see the national childrens hospital as a prime example. I dont accept the ' we were under the troika' argument. In 2013 for example the Dept of the environment allocated 326 million to be spent on Water infrastructure, if your argument holds true this expenditure would have been prohibited as it would equate to almost half the 800 million allocated for housing per year since 2015.

McMurphy

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Only new account I can’t leave links yet.

Yes you can, you just break the link up.

Jinglejangle69

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Yes you can, you just break the link up.

Oh right can you explain?

James Brown

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Your call.

Are you willing to give more money to the welfare state?

That's what SF would do for their base.

We see the result of FG pandering to their base. We need welfare to function. That's the result of FG.

IF SF's base were all on welfare it wouldn't be half as high in the polls also traditionally the poor don't come out to vote. So that doesn't fly.

If you can show one policy from any party that speaks to more welfare for people who choose not to work, I'd be interested to read it.

McMurphy

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Oh right can you explain?

This is a link.

www.woodies.ie

This is a broken link.

www. Woodies .ie

Kermit.de.frog

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If you can show one policy from any party that speaks to more welfare for people who choose not to work,

Not the point. Implicitly at the moment more welfare extends to "lifers" like Margaret Cash.

I'd like a policy that targets those who won't work while helping those who do.

I think that is fair.

The system now is not fair especially for low paid workers.

Billcarson

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Peter McVerry wrote a letter to the Irish Times today saying it is ok to be a thief if you are homeless (or poor presumably).

Not the first time he has made this point.

What we have at the moment is a homeless industry that needs to be challenged now.

Challenge it so

blanch152

reg114 wrote: »

Considering this Fine Gael government has been in power since 2011 I would argue their record on housing and pretty much everything else has been utterly deplorable. I would give them an F. Eoin Murphy and his big brother Leo have been staggeringly inept and woefully wanting when it comes to the provision of the basic human right of having a roof over your head. We have 10,000 people classified as homeless, the worst since records began. The vast majority of these people are living in bnbs and hotels. Meanwhile you cant budge in Dublin for the construction of yet more hotels and office blocks, where is all the accommodation being built? Nama claimed possession of several thousand properties why werent these sold back on to the market immediately instead of being drip fed into the existing stock to maintain high prices ?

The irony is that Ireland's economy has mirrored the global economy in that both have been on an upward curve since june 2011. This 8 year bull market where stocks have consistently risen and gold is at a record high, will end sooner rather than later. When it does a homeless figure of 10,000 will seem small. The government should have given the two fingers to developers that the tax payer bailed out and started a campaign of mass building homes across the country. Leaving house building policy to private developers and vulture capitalists has destroyed the market and only benefited the wealthy. But i dont expect Murphy or Leo to appreciate any of that given their gilded lives leave them so very desperately out of touch. Meanwhile we have a minister for health who is overseeing the building of the most expensive hospital in the world, a childrens hospital more costly than the worlds tallest building, The Burj khalifa in Dubai.

Can I also remind people that the government continue to fight the EU's awarding of 13 billion euro over the Apple tax fiasco...

and they say the mafia in Italy are gangsters....

If the economy crashes, the numbers of homeless will actually go down, as there will be housing freed up by the emigration that will take place. Not only will many of the recent immigrants leave for pastures new, but many young Irish will join them. Rents will crash, as seen in 2008-09, and house prices will come down. Availability will increase as well.

It is actually very difficult to maintain a housing market that matches the economy.

The Burj Khalifa was built on the back of slave labour with workers brought in from the likes of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan and paid in yearly rates equivalent to hourly rates in Ireland. I don't think we want that kind of economy.

As for Apple, yawn, yawn, yawn, the Commission made a ruling, the Courts are testing it. Happens all the time with landmark rulings.

is_that_so

reg114 wrote: »

Quoting figures is fairly pointless when the gov throws money at projects carried out by private developers without any due diligence or cost benefit analysis.. see the national childrens hospital as a prime example. I dont accept the ' we were under the troika' argument. In 2013 for example the Dept of the environment allocated 326 million to be spent on Water infrastructure, if your argument holds true this expenditure would have been prohibited as it would equate to almost half the 800 million allocated for housing per year since 2015.

Well, you are entitled to your other universe theory for 2009-2014. Payment for water was and is considered good practice. The money came from LPT and other sources which we had and did not need to borrow for. Outside of that we had little control over anything other than day to day spending without strict approval. It's not "my argument", it's public record what they allocated. Not sure what the NCH has to do with housing funding given its flaws are in the management of the project but I guess it's building!

Jinglejangle69

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

This is a link.

www.woodies.ie

This is a broken link.

www. Woodies .ie

Thanks.

James Brown

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Not the point. Implicitly at the moment more welfare extends to "lifers" like Margaret Cash.

I'd like a policy that targets those who won't work while helping those who do.

I think that is fair.

The system now is not fair especially for low paid workers.

And who was in government when Mags got her house?

Yes, we need ensure chancers are routed out but that's a minuscule side issue when compared to the FG/LA policy of giving away public land for a percentage of housing, some of which we'll lease back or buy back, but makes for great distraction.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

If the economy crashes, the numbers of homeless will actually go down, as there will be housing freed up by the emigration that will take place. Not only will many of the recent immigrants leave for pastures new, but many young Irish will join them. Rents will crash, as seen in 2008-09, and house prices will come down. Availability will increase as well.

It is actually very difficult to maintain a housing market that matches the economy.

The Burj Khalifa was built on the back of slave labour with workers brought in from the likes of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan and paid in yearly rates equivalent to hourly rates in Ireland. I don't think we want that kind of economy.

As for Apple, yawn, yawn, yawn, the Commission made a ruling, the Courts are testing it. Happens all the time with landmark rulings.

So the tax payer may win if FG lose their hold on their economy? Might be the most mistakenly honest post I've ever read from you.

You know our housing crises and economy are practically going in opposite directions right?

13bn would buy a lot of leases from vulture funds. Noonan would be annoyed with you

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We see the result of FG pandering to their base. We need welfare to function. That's the result of FG.

IF SF's base were all on welfare it wouldn't be half as high in the polls also traditionally the poor don't come out to vote. So that doesn't fly.

If you can show one policy from any party that speaks to more welfare for people who choose not to work, I'd be interested to read it.

This type of factless argument really irritates.

http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Annual-Reports_holder.aspx

There were 1.3 million social welfare recipients in Ireland in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Irish_general_election

Sinn Fein got 295,319 votes in the 206 Irish general election.

It is nonsense to suggest that a party that targets the social welfare recipient with its jingoistic style of protest politics isn't getting its votes from that section of the population given the numbers involved.

The turnout was 65.1% of the electorate in 2016, if social welfare recipients had a turnout of 50%, a much lower figure, that would mean 650,000 of them. Sinn Fein would only have needed to get around 40% of those to get 260,000 votes, with the other 35,319 coming from die-hard republicans. Given the numbers, it is a certainly a reasonable argument that Sinn Fein largely depend on voters on social welfare for their share of the vote in a general election.


P.S. Do you have a link to any Irish study that shows turnout is lower in poorer areas?

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So the tax payer may win if FG lose their hold on their economy? Might be the most mistakenly honest post I've ever read from you.

You know our housing crises and economy are practically going in opposite directions right?

13bn would buy a lot of leases from vulture funds. Noonan would be annoyed with you

Where did I say that the taxpayer might win if FG lose their hold on the economy? It is complete nonsense to suggest I argued that.

171170

"Newly-elected Green TD Joe O'Brien has said his time in the Dáil could be as little as 24 hours but said: "I can’t think of a better reason to force a general election than the 3-4,000 homeless children.""

Depressing to see that the newly elected Green TD for Fingal appears to have the IQ of a maggot.

He appears to believe that by voting no confidence in Eoin Murphy tonight and thereby causing a GE, those 4,000 homeless kids will magically be housed before Christmas. What a cretin! Hopefully, when his hangover wears off and his wife talks some sense into him it will dawn on him that causing an election can only extend the period of homelessness for the kids he professes to care about, as the negotiations to form the next government may well go on for months early in the new year and there will be a policy inertia until a new government is formed.

Hopefully, Fingal voters will remember his witless posturing when the next General Election does come around!

James Brown

171170 wrote: »

"Newly-elected Green TD Joe O'Brien has said his time in the Dáil could be as little as 24 hours but said: "I can’t think of a better reason to force a general election than the 3-4,000 homeless children.""

Depressing to see that the newly elected Green TD for Fingal appears to have the IQ of a maggot.

He appears to believe that by voting no confidence in Eoin Murphy tonight and thereby causing a GE, those 4,000 homeless kids will magically be housed before Christmas. What a cretin! Hopefully, when his hangover wears off and his wife talks some sense into him it will dawn on him that causing an election can only extend the period of homelessness for the kids he professes to care about, as the negotiations to form the next government may well go on for months early in the new year and there will be a policy inertia until a new government is formed.

Hopefully, Fingal voters will remember his witless posturing when the next General Election does come around!

That's very disingenuous of you.

He's 100% correct IMO.
We need things to change and as FG/Murphy are happy with things as is, they need to go or dramatically change tack.

Blanch, thoughts?

Sheepdish1

171170 wrote: »

"Newly-elected Green TD Joe O'Brien has said his time in the Dáil could be as little as 24 hours but said: "I can’t think of a better reason to force a general election than the 3-4,000 homeless children.""

Depressing to see that the newly elected Green TD for Fingal appears to have the IQ of a maggot.

He appears to believe that by voting no confidence in Eoin Murphy tonight and thereby causing a GE, those 4,000 homeless kids will magically be housed before Christmas. What a cretin! Hopefully, when his hangover wears off and his wife talks some sense into him it will dawn on him that causing an election can only extend the period of homelessness for the kids he professes to care about, as the negotiations to form the next government may well go on for months early in the new year and there will be a policy inertia until a new government is formed.

Hopefully, Fingal voters will remember his witless posturing when the next General Election does come around!

I don’t think that is what he meant, he would know as much as you or I that the 4,000 homeless children won’t be housed over Christmas. I feel he meant the 4,000 children currently homeless is a good reason to motion a vote of no confidence. It’s one of many reasons that the housing crisis is worsening, look at the prices of rent and then wealthy businesses are buying up stock and renting them out for extortionate prices.

If a general election was triggered it may delay sorting the issue but it is currently going so long with no signs of improvement, it could be better for someone else to completely take over it.

Jinglejangle69

Glad Murphy fought back to shorthall that her and her party have objected to social housing and apartments in her area.

Sick of these hypocrite politicians.

Ivan Yeates pitting it up to her now.

James Brown

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Glad Murphy fought back to shorthall that her and her party have objected to social housing and apartments in her area.

Sick of these hypocrite politicians.

Ivan Yeates pitting it up to her now.

Glad the waster got a dig in? Will keep rough sleepers warm at night
Yeah....

The Taoiseach has defended his objection to a new housing development planned for his own constituency.
https://www.newstalk.com/news/taoiseach-rejects-nimbyism-accusations-over-castleknock-planning-objection-523684

Ministers said the Government is willing to call Ms Byrne’s bluff over her local concerns, calling it out as “complete nimbyism”.

Fine Gael is prepared to line up Ms Byrne’s replacement, with sources last night pointing to city councillors who could run in Dublin South Central in the event of an election.

Ms Byrne refused to respond to media queries yesterday, but in a tweet last night, she maintained the proposed development is not right for the site.https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/leo-varadkar-may-sack-catherine-byrneif-she-doesnt-back-murphy-871246.html

171170

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's very disingenuous of you.

He's 100% correct IMO.
We need things to change and as FG/Murphy are happy with things as is, they need to go or dramatically change tack.

If causing the government to fall would change anything, then I'd be inclined to agree with you, Matthew. However, as most intelligent followers of current affairs are well aware, it won't!

Even the two Soc Dem idiots who tabled tonight's motion (as a vote-winning stunt that failed completely) have admitted that they don't want an election - but Fingal's greenest (in more ways than one) TD is so thick that he appears to believe that gesture politics solves problems.

Jinglejangle69

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yeah....

Exactly.

Every party are guilty of it yet one party gets blamed.

James Brown

171170 wrote: »

If causing the government to fall would change anything, then I'd be inclined to agree with you, Matthew. However, as most intelligent followers of current affairs are well aware, it won't!

Even the two Soc Dem idiots who tabled tonight's motion (as a vote-winning stunt that failed completely) have admitted that they don't want an election - but Fingal's greenest (in more ways than one) TD is so thick that he appears to believe that gesture politics solves problems.

As any handsome fellow knows, (see I'm at it now) it will. Why won't it? Unless the replacement carry on FG policies it'll change.

Yep, can't defend Murphy so go after the motives of pointing out his ineptness.
Changing government is only a gesture when it's FF to FG/FF or to FF/FG.

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Exactly.

Every party are guilty of it yet one party gets blamed.

That would be the one in government. Odd that :rolleyes:

The Blueshirts are out in force today

Why is there a “housing crisis”? Is it because more people are willing to suffer short term pain in order for the state to supply them with a home?
Once in their “foreva” home, do they treat said home like a home should be treated or do some turn it into a tip and expect a new home in its place?
There are 3 different types in need of social housing.
1. Those unable to provide for themselves through ill health.
2. Those working in low paying jobs who cannot afford to pay for their needs within a reasonable distance from their job.
3. Those unwilling to look after their and their families needs.
Numbers 1 and 2 should have priority. Number 3 should be made accept what’s left, even if it’s the other side of the country from their preferred area.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is there a “housing crisis”? Is it because more people are willing to suffer short term pain in order for the state to supply them with a home?
Once in their “foreva” home, do they treat said home like a home should be treated or do some turn it into a tip and expect a new home in its place?
There are 3 different types in need of social housing.
1. Those unable to provide for themselves through ill health.
2. Those working in low paying jobs who cannot afford to pay for their needs within a reasonable distance from their job.
3. Those unwilling to look after their and their families needs.
Numbers 1 and 2 should have priority. Number 3 should be made accept what’s left, even if it’s the other side of the country from their preferred area.

You're not credible Maryanne. None of this is genuine. It's slurry to distract. It's been covered and responded to, discussed at length. All you are looking to do here is keep the eye off Fine Gael.

2015:

Deleted User wrote:

Properly built pre fabs will be just fine. However, unless they are in an area the homeless person wants to live, they will be rejected.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97255995&postcount=45

2016:

Deleted User wrote:

I think that a lot of the housing crisis is due to people who live in social houses not moving on to owning their own houses, as used happen. Those houses would have been freed up for the next tenants. There is also the habit of some in need of housing not accepting one in an area that is not their first choice.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=98678733&postcount=14

2017:

Maryanne4 wrote:

The housing crisis cannot be solved overnight. There's the little matter of buying/building houses which takes time for every citizen let alone a Government!
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103017040&postcount=4171

My favorite, a variation of todays post:

2018:

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it time to call shenanigans on the homeless industry? How are these figures collated? Are my adult children who live with me included? People who have a hotel roof over their heads at night are not homeless.
I googled “homeless in Ireland” and the top three results were Focus Ireland, Peter MacVerry Trust and Simon community. How much do they get on grants ever year from the public purse? How much of that money goes in actually housing people versus how much in wages, offices and associated costs?
People, too have to take responsibility for their plight. Are we rearing a generation of people unable to look after themselves? Shur, someone else will give me a house(not apartment) In the Uk roughly 50% of people live within 70 miles of their childhood homes. The requirement for living near family or school shouldn’t be acceptable. What’s wrong in moving to where housing, schools and jobs are available?
Those living rough are the homeless that our Government should be focusing on. Their needs stretch beyond having a roof over their heads.

In short you raise these points as questions. They get discussed, then some time later you try raise them again like you just thought of it. As I said not credible.
You are merely posting to fudge the discussion IMO.
I respect you seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet but playing it like it's all a revelation and 'asking' questions isn't being genuine.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is there a “housing crisis”? Is it because more people are willing to suffer short term pain in order for the state to supply them with a home?
Once in their “foreva” home, do they treat said home like a home should be treated or do some turn it into a tip and expect a new home in its place?
There are 3 different types in need of social housing.
1. Those unable to provide for themselves through ill health.
2. Those working in low paying jobs who cannot afford to pay for their needs within a reasonable distance from their job.
3. Those unwilling to look after their and their families needs.
Numbers 1 and 2 should have priority. Number 3 should be made accept what’s left, even if it’s the other side of the country from their preferred area.

The initial problem was down to no builds between about 2010 and 2014 on the private side and very few if any on the social front and very low stock anyway. Private housing seems to have recovered with the exception of rentals. Social is long on plans but still short on delivery for now.

Matt Barrett

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You're not credible Maryanne. None of this is genuine. It's slurry to distract. It's been covered and responded to, discussed at length. All you are looking to do here is keep the eye off Fine Gael.

2015:

2016:

2017:

My favorite, a variation of todays post:

2018:

In short you raise these points as questions. They get discussed, then some time later you try raise them again like you just thought of it. As I said not credible.
You are merely posting to fudge the discussion IMO.
I respect you seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet but playing it like it's all a revelation and 'asking' questions isn't being genuine.

So, I’m not allowed a query related to the topic?

I will again query how real the housing crisis is. I know that it gets a bit annoying, but what about personal responsibility?

is_that_so

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's very disingenuous of you.

He's 100% correct IMO.
We need things to change and as FG/Murphy are happy with things as is, they need to go or dramatically change tack.

It's a very dumb comment and would just rile up voters if they were forced to face a campaign over the Christmas period, in other words it's not going to happen. He'd also lose his shiny new seat! TBH I really don't get what your hurry is for an election. The main two have said no and as has been stated repeatedly it's only a few months away.

Beta Ray Bill

Food for thought:

There are approx 253,000 council houses/flat in Ireland, with the vast majority in Dublin. They represent approx 15% of all dwellings in Ireland.
Last year local authorities got approx €350M in rent for these, meaning on average people in these units paid approx €115.28 per month
This data is skewed a little however as the total arrears last year countrywide for council housing was €73.6M
To add to this, there are approx 86,000 waiting for social housing.

In addition to this, there are another 60,000 units being rented which is supplemented via HAP. In these circumstances tenants pay approx €50 per week themselves and the rest is paid by the council. Again the vast majority of these are in Dublin.

So to summarise, 18.5% (nearly 1 in 5) of all house holds in the country are paying on average less than €38 a week for rent, with the bulk on tenants living in Dublin.

And we wonder why we have a housing crisis....

I'm sympathetic to those people that have come out of a relationship with a kid in tow and have difficulty working because child care is so damn expensive.

But the reality is that they more social house/HAP we give out, the worse this problem is going to get.
we cant have a situation where nearly a fifth of the people are paying around €165 a month for rent and the other four fifths are paying nearly €2,000.

And if it is the case that people absolutely have no choice for social housing then it should be offered to them somewhere well outside of built up areas.

This problem is about 30 years in the making. It's not going to be solved overnight. It is however solvable
First off Social housing should be available to anyone over the age of 25, regardless of income.
Your rent will be a percentage of your income. There is no skipping the queue regardless of your situation.
This would alleviate a huge part of the problem, it's no secret that people bang out kids to move up the list. (The only exception to this is people who work in front line services, Garda and Nurses, etc)

We then need to decide what we're going to do, are we going the social model or are we going the private model.
Irish people place value on owning something more so than renting something, so it will probably be private.
If this is the case we need to wind down the amount of social housing we're providing (In certain areas), as it creates excessive demand on the market.

In terms of the Minister himself, I don't think he really has a clue what he's doing.
Bare in mind, near 20% of all houses are social housing, that's a hell of a lot of votes, most of which will end up going to Far left or Far right, instead if centre left/right parties. (This can already be seen as Sinn Fein have a majority on nearly every council in the greater Dublin area)
This again makes the situation worse.
So it doesn't matter whether he stay's or goes, as not one of our elected TDs has the intelligence or the bottle to fix this issue.

This huge boulder has started rolling down hill, and it going to take a monumental effort to stop it.

Idbatterim

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Oh yeah when the IMF we’re here and we hadn’t a pot to piss in and too many houses??

Yeah that was the time to start building more.

it was the time to hold onto property in dublin etc, that was given away for a pittance, probably well below build cost. The same type of property the idiots will pay a fortune for now!

riemann

I think most people have lost any interest in the "homeless of Ireland, particularly Dublin".

When you have a significant proportion of people living in hotels (I know, imagine saying that 30 years ago), as a way to get moving up the housing ladder, combined with an unrepresentative % of applications from non-Irish persons.

Combined with child benefit incentivising single mothers having even more kids they can't afford, again moving them up the housing ladder.

The whole thing is a loop of greed, laziness and short sightedness.

I know there are loads of genuine cases, but I just don't care anymore.