Is it not time EVERYONE considers not voting for FF or FG in the upcoming election

Lux23

I think Paris has most of their social housing in the suburbs, but this causes huge social problems, a bit like Ballymun!

Bannasidhe

BarryD2 wrote: »

Agree but try recovering that rent from wages, welfare payments and/ or evicting these tenants and you'll be dumped on by O'Broinn, Rich Boy and all the rest of the parties complaining about lack of public housing.

Do you disagree there is a lack of public housing?

Have you a shred of evidence to support your claim that any of the people you mentioned above have spoken out against claiming rent arrears from LA tenants?

Bannasidhe

Lux23 wrote: »

I think Paris has most of their social housing in the suburbs, but this causes huge social problems, a bit like Ballymun!

Paris is broken up into administrative units (arrondissement) each of which has been responsible for local housing policy - the Champs de Elysee is in the 8th arrondissement, a traditionally wealthy area particularly after Napoleon III had the slums cleared between 1850/70 to facilitate the 'rebuilding' of Paris.
However :

Paris city officials on Tuesday inaugurated three new mixed-income buildings in the first and eighth arrondissements – two of the French capital’s most affluent neighbourhoods.

https://www.france24.com/en/20150602-france-paris-affordable-housing-affluent-neighbourhoods-mixed-low-income

So yeah - there is social housing near the Champs de Elysee.

efanton

efanton wrote: »

Except that many of those parties, SF included, are also implementing rent freezes, and will then legislate so that any rent rises are index linked to cost of living or inflation

i am very aware of where i am in the list of priorities in a sinn fein govt, the overall effect of their policies would be disastrous far beyond a rent freeze

eagle eye

Bannasidhe wrote:

So yeah - there is social housing near the Champs de Elysee.

So don't visit Paris then as you have lowlifes and criminals everywhere by the looks of things.

Idbatterim

Fann Linn wrote: »

Any stats to back that up considering unemployment rate is only approx 4%.

do I have any stats to back up the tens , if not hundreds of thousands in social housing, all paying virtually nothing? no I dont need them. Likewise with HAP, some dublin landlords receiving 3k a month in hap!

Idbatterim

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you disagree there is a lack of public housing?

Have you a shred of evidence to support your claim that any of the people you mentioned above have spoken out against claiming rent arrears from LA tenants?

there is a lack of public housing! you know what would help provide more, people in it actually paying their rent and then actually paying a reasonable amount! To help more people get social or affordable housing, but let me guess, that wouldnt be "fair"?

James Brown

Talking about rent arrears is pointless as regards building over leasing/buying/renting. Same people being housed, it's which is a better deal for the tax payer.

Bannasidhe

Idbatterim wrote: »

do I have any stats to back up the tens , if not hundreds of thousands in social housing, all paying virtually nothing? no I dont need them. Likewise with HAP, some dublin landlords receiving 3k a month in hap!

Idbatterim wrote: »

there is a lack of public housing! you know what would help provide more, people in it actually paying their rent and then actually paying a reasonable amount! To help more people get social or affordable housing, but let me guess, that wouldnt be "fair"?

So - according to you ( you have not provided any evidence nor apparently do you need it) there are hundreds of thousands in social housing all paying virtually (not sure what that translates to in actual percentages) nothing while at the same time there is a lack of public housing and some private landlords are getting up to €3k a month of taxpayers money...
would any of this have anything at all to do with the people who write the legislation?

Anything thing at all at all???

Oh if only there was some system where someone could bring in laws to allow for the swift and efficient removal of tenants who don't pay their rent, or someone who could introduce a methodology where how much LA tenants pay is regulated - or even *gasp* enable the construction of LA housing so less money would need to be paid to Dublin (or any other) private landlords.

We could call this system a 'government'.

Idbatterim

"So - according to you ( you have not provided any evidence nor apparently do you need it) there are hundreds of thousands in social housing all paying virtually (not sure what that translates to in actual percentages) nothing while at the same time there is a lack of public housing and some private landlords are getting up to €3k a month of taxpayers money...
would any of this have anything at all to do with the people who write the legislation?

Anything thing at all at all???

Oh if only there was some system where someone could bring in laws to allow for the swift and efficient removal of tenants who don't pay their rent, or someone who could introduce a methodology where how much LA tenants pay is regulated - or even *gasp* enable the construction of LA housing so less money would need to be paid to Dublin (or any other) private landlords.

We could call this system a 'government'.

this country is first and foremost a banana republic, when you grasp that, it actually makes sense, why nothing gets done here and why the system is so ****! I will try to dig out figures later , to see how many social houses are being let and roughly what rents are paid. This has been covered on this forum before and a quick google, will no doubt yield news articles on this!

If you dont see the correlation, between expensive new housing being given away, and why that limits how much of it we can provide...

Bannasidhe

Idbatterim wrote: »

So - according to you ( you have not provided any evidence nor apparently do you need it) there are hundreds of thousands in social housing all paying virtually (not sure what that translates to in actual percentages) nothing while at the same time there is a lack of public housing and some private landlords are getting up to €3k a month of taxpayers money...
would any of this have anything at all to do with the people who write the legislation?

Anything thing at all at all???

Oh if only there was some system where someone could bring in laws to allow for the swift and efficient removal of tenants who don't pay their rent, or someone who could introduce a methodology where how much LA tenants pay is regulated - or even *gasp* enable the construction of LA housing so less money would need to be paid to Dublin (or any other) private landlords.

We could call this system a 'government'.

this country is first and foremost and banana republic, when you grasp that, it actually makes sense, why nothing gets done here and why the system is so ****! I will try to dig out figures later , to see how many social houses are being let and roughly what rents are paid. This has been covered on this forum before and a quick google, will no doubt yield news articles on this!

If you dont see the correlation, between expensive new housing being given away, and why that limits how much of it we can provide...

I see a correlation between the sale of LA housing and the failure to replace them leading to low income household being forced into the private market which pushes up rental costs due to increased demand coupled with government subsidies to that same private market also pushing up rental costs.

I see millions of taxpayer's money being handed to B&B/hotel owners and private landlords when what we need is affordable, secure, LA housing but apparently we can't 'afford' that - but we can 'afford' to give private developers grand deals on publicly owned land.

If it's a banana republic then perhaps it's time we stopped electing either of the 2 parties who have been in power since the formation of the state?
If it is a banana republic it was made one by FF and FG - with the occasional aid of the LP, PDs and that one time the GP.

Idbatterim

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I see a correlation between the sale of LA housing and the failure to replace them leading to low income household being forced into the private market which pushes up rental costs due to increased demand coupled with government subsidies to that same private market also pushing up rental costs.

I see millions of taxpayer's money being handed to B&B/hotel owners and private landlords when what we need is affordable, secure, LA housing but apparently we can't 'afford' that - but we can 'afford' to give private developers grand deals on publicly owned land.

If it's a banana republic then perhaps it's time we stopped electing either of the 2 parties who have been in power since the formation of the state?
If it is a banana republic it was made one by FF and FG - with the occasional aid of the LP, PDs and that one time the GP.

I agree with what you are saying. But the councils wont build or wont build near enough! Near me in Dundrum, there is lots of council owned zoned residential land. Now instead of building housing on it years ago, its still idle! MEANWHILE they rent luxury apartments beside dundrum town centre on a twenty five year lease at astronomical sums? WHY? well they are morons first of all, thats why the situation has arisen. But the next why, why rent at appalling value for everyone involved? optics! they are providing 90 housing units there, but is is sheer INSANITY!

There needs to be a national housing agency, you couldnt let the councils near this! Running an ice cream van, would be well beyond their competency. Get whoever is running revenue here to run it, the only well run facet of the state! That or get private operator in to manage it on behalf of state. Might be the best option... All you will get from government departments is excuses, delays and incompetence!

Bannasidhe

Idbatterim wrote: »

I agree with what you are saying. But the councils wont build or wont build near enough! Near me in Dundrum, there is lots of council owned zoned residential land. Now instead of building housing on it years ago, its still idle! MEANWHILE they rent luxury apartments beside dundrum town centre on a twenty five year lease at astronomical sums? WHY? well they are morons first of all, thats why the situation has arisen. But the next why, why rent at appalling value for everyone involved? optics! they are providing 90 housing units there, but is is sheer INSANITY!

There needs to be a national housing agency, you couldnt let the councils near this! Running an ice cream van, would be well beyond their competency. Get whoever is running revenue here to run it, the only well run facet of the state!

I agree - it's insane.

But I think the fault lies with government - they have the power to create the conditions where (for Dublin for example) there could be the likes of the old London County Council that was responsible for the building of a huge amount of public housing in the 1930s - whole suburbs were built using the underground network as the link to central London.
It's also a fact that we are a very centralised country and in many ways the local councils are ham-stringed by central government - this is not to say that local authorities aren't quite often models of inefficiency and poor management.


Interesting article here on the history of State interference in public housing in Ireland: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/a-century-of-housing-how-the-state-built-ireland-s-homes-1.3785939

eagle eye

Fann Linn wrote:

Any stats to back that up considering unemployment rate is only approx 4%.

No, they hide things everywhere like the unemployment rate. The amount of people on courses which takes them off the live register, and they attend two days a week and then get after school care paid for the week, is not available as they have them paid under different course names and by different departments.

James Brown

eagle eye wrote: »

No, they hide things everywhere like the unemployment rate. The amount of people on courses which takes them off the live register, and they attend two days a week and then get after school care paid for the week, is not available as they have them paid under different course names and by different departments.

Same with the homeless figures. It's just something government does to make the numbers look good. You know FG/FF are the government right?

Edgware

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you disagree there is a lack of public housing?

Have you a shred of evidence to support your claim that any of the people you mentioned above have spoken out against claiming rent arrears from LA tenants?

He hasn't but wait until there is efforts to do so and the those named will be first to criticise the council and defend the scroungers

Bannasidhe

Edgware wrote: »

He hasn't but wait until there is efforts to do so and the those named will be first to criticise the council and defend the scroungers

The court cases began last November so the efforts are well under way.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/first-dublin-city-council-social-housing-tenant-to-be-evicted-for-rent-arrears-1.4085923

Apparently the reason for the delays was

However, until recently the council was unable to evict tenants who refused to pay. “Due to the absence of relevant court rules no applications for repossession could be made until June 2017,” the council said.

I did a bit of a google to see who is responsible for the Court Rules and lo and behold it's the Minister of Justice.
So it appears that DCC could not bring eviction cases to court against tenants in arrears as the legal mechanism was not in place because the relevant government ministers had not put them in place.


Seems to me the reason for no evictions has been successive FF/FG Ministers of Justice.

Now - where is the outrage from those named?

I Am The Law

This a reminder of the last governments cosy arrangement. Not very democratic IMO.

[URL="chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://www.lawsociety.ie/globalassets/documents/policy-and-law-reform/public-affairs/ff-fg-agreement-may-3-3pm.pdf"]FG/FF Confidence and Supply Arrangement[/URL]

For example,

Fianna Fáil agrees to:
•abstain in the election of Taoiseach, nomination of Ministers and also the reshuffling of Ministers;
•facilitate Budgets consistent with the agreed policy principles attached to this document;
•vote against or abstain on any motions of no confidence in the Government, Ministers and financial measures (eg money bills)recognised as confidence measures; and
•pairing arrangements for EU Council meetings, North South meetings and other Government business as agreed.

Ludo

I Am The Law wrote: »

This a reminder of the last governments cosy arrangement. Not very democratic IMO.

[URL="chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://www.lawsociety.ie/globalassets/documents/policy-and-law-reform/public-affairs/ff-fg-agreement-may-3-3pm.pdf"]FG/FF Confidence and Supply Arrangement[/URL]

For example,

Fianna Fáil agrees to:
•abstain in the election of Taoiseach, nomination of Ministers and also the reshuffling of Ministers;
•facilitate Budgets consistent with the agreed policy principles attached to this document;
•vote against or abstain on any motions of no confidence in the Government, Ministers and financial measures (eg money bills)recognised as confidence measures; and
•pairing arrangements for EU Council meetings, North South meetings and other Government business as agreed.

I have never and will never vote for FF.
BUT...I dont find that undemocratic at all to be honest and to my mind at least they do deserve some credit for it. FG were the largest party. FF second so they negotiated and agreed to support party more people voted for in return soe some concessions.
Yet they could have taken down the government at any moment if they felt things were going to hell. Not the worst way to run a government to be honest.
Compromise and all that.
Still won't give them a vote though :-)

Wanderer78

I Am The Law wrote:

This a reminder of the last governments cosy arrangement. Not very democratic IMO.

Be some laugh if they done another confidence and supply after this one!

is_that_so

I Am The Law wrote: »

This a reminder of the last governments cosy arrangement. Not very democratic IMO.

[URL="chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://www.lawsociety.ie/globalassets/documents/policy-and-law-reform/public-affairs/ff-fg-agreement-may-3-3pm.pdf"]FG/FF Confidence and Supply Arrangement[/URL]

For example,

Fianna Fáil agrees to:
•abstain in the election of Taoiseach, nomination of Ministers and also the reshuffling of Ministers;
•facilitate Budgets consistent with the agreed policy principles attached to this document;
•vote against or abstain on any motions of no confidence in the Government, Ministers and financial measures (eg money bills)recognised as confidence measures; and
•pairing arrangements for EU Council meetings, North South meetings and other Government business as agreed.

This is a fairly common arrangement in democracies when voters do not provide parties with enough seats to form a government. It also avoids countries going back to the polls multiple times. Just because there are 160 of them or that there are some similarities between FF & FG doesn't mean there is a government to be found.
Pairing agreements are not new, it's been around for a very long time. Its aim has always been to make sure that a government doesn't lose a vote because TDs or ministers are unavoidably absent.

is_that_so

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Be some laugh if they done another confidence and supply after this one!

They will although probably have to change the seats around.

Wanderer78

is_that_so wrote:

They will although probably have to change the seats.

Yea I am expecting this outcome myself, I'm bored of this campaign already

Geuze

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So yeah - there is social housing near the Champs de Elysee.

Fair enough, ok.

Though there seems to be a lot within the canals, especially on the northside?

Geuze

eagle eye wrote: »

No, they hide things everywhere like the unemployment rate. The amount of people on courses which takes them off the live register, and they attend two days a week and then get after school care paid for the week, is not available as they have them paid under different course names and by different departments.

Yes, the majority of inactive adults are not on JSA.

They are also on DA, OPFP, CA, etc.

Bannasidhe

Geuze wrote: »

Fair enough, ok.

Though there seems to be a lot within the canals, especially on the northside?

In Paris?

Bannasidhe

Geuze wrote: »

Yes, the majority of inactive adults are not on JSA.

They are also on DA, OPFP, CA, etc.

I agree the true number of unemployed is massaged through various schemes, and has been for decades tbh, but I disagree with your use of the term 'inactive adults' for DA, OPFP etc as people on these can and do work and this income is taxable etc.
How many hours they can work and how this affects their benefits/allowances is decided by the government.

I'm not sure what CA is - but if it's Community Employment then that it'self is work (albeit paid for by the State) which helps keep many a charity/community organisation open - and people doing C.E can also work part-time elsewhere. It's also time limited contracts.

It's a labyrinthine mishmash of allowances, schemes, benefits where it is near impossible to get an accurate picture of how many people are completely reliant on the State for their income so are technically 'unemployed' - much like as another poster said how it's impossible to get an accurate picture of how many people are homeless (as in do not have secure accommodation of their own) as government would like to 'count' only those literally sleeping on the streets.

Field east

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Be some laugh if they done another confidence and supply after this one!

Well , would it?. We will just have to wait and see the seat fallout between all the parties and independents.
It is only then that the various possible options will become ‘clear’. and , for argument sake, if it turns out exactly the same as the last time then the confidence and supply principal is back on the table. Unless SF leads a left leaning gov with a C and S arrangement with FF or ,dare I say ,with FG

I Am The Law

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Be some laugh if they done another confidence and supply after this one!

Which will be decided on how people vote, that's the thread subject.

Vote for FF is a vote for FG.

Vote for FG is a vote for FF.

Geuze

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I agree the true number of unemployed is massaged through various schemes, and has been for decades tbh, but I disagree with your use of the term 'inactive adults' for DA, OPFP etc as people on these can and do work and this income is taxable etc.
How many hours they can work and how this affects their benefits/allowances is decided by the government.

Yes, people on DA and OPFP can work, yes. CA = carers allowance

Yet we lead Europe in non-working.

The lecture given recently by Barra Roantree of the ESRI (ex-IFS in the UK) is a good summary:

https://www.esri.ie/sites/default/files/media/file-uploads/2020-01/Slides_1.pdf

Some key points:


"Where we really stand out is % of working-age adults with no market income"

We lead Europe in lone-parenthood. Does anybody know why this is? This contributes to higher poverty rates and income inequality.

While 19% of working-age adults living alone say permanently disabled/unfit for work - again the highest in Europe.

Why have we some many people who are disabled?