Sinn Fein could lose expenses

Winty · 28-06-2010 12:46pm

dlofnep wrote: »

Neither does Sinn Féin. What's your point?

OK i take it back Sinn Fein members have never Killed, Maimed or did anything bad

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 12:46pm

Winty wrote: »

Why do they not refuse the money and just use funds collected in bars and from business they intimidate

I suppose you have evidence for these allegations?

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 12:48pm

Winty wrote: »

OK i take it back Sinn Fein members have never Killed, Maimed or did anything bad

I never stated either way. You claimed that Sinn Féin needs to kill for people to listen. This is simply untrue. They are dedicated to the peace process and more people are listening to them than ever before? The SDLP however is rapidly losing support. Go figure.

Winty · 28-06-2010 12:49pm

dlofnep wrote: »

I suppose you have evidence for these allegations?

I said I take it back.

Martin McGuinness was never in the IRA as as for Martin Ferris he has tried for years to get the truth published on the murder of Garda McCabe.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 12:52pm

Winty wrote: »

I said I take it back.

Martin McGuinness was never in the IRA as as for Martin Ferris he has tried for years to get the truth published on the murder of Garda McCabe.

You're going slightly off-topic at this point. Martin McGuinness was certainly in the IRA. That however does not prove your accusation that Sinn Féín go around intimidating people. Sceptre has already posted on off-topic posts. I'm not trying to avoid discussing any issues with you - but the thread will be closed if it goes off topic again.

Winty · 28-06-2010 12:53pm

dlofnep wrote: »

I suppose you have evidence for these allegations?

OK fair point, why dont Sinn Fein self finance without the support of Westminster

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 12:59pm

Winty wrote: »

OK fair point, why dont Sinn Fein self finance without the support of Westminster

It doesn't have the resources to do so. The myth of Sinn Féin being financially comfortable is untrue. Our local office here had to close down due to lack of funds.

It's not Sinn Féin's fault that British rule currently exists in the north. It's not their fault that there is no alternative oath's to take to cater for those who do not wish to swear allegiance to a Queen.

In either case - Sinn Féin represents it's constituents, and played a much more pivotal role in devolving powers to Stormont than the SDLP - so it would be false to say that they have not represented them. Whether you like it or not, Sinn Féin are currently the largest party in the north - and as such, has a mandate to represent their constituents. This requires that costs are covered by the current Governing body.

This could be resolved very easily by having an oath of allegiance to constituents, rather than a Queen.

Winty · 28-06-2010 1:15pm

dlofnep wrote: »

It's not Sinn Féin's fault that British rule currently exists in the north. It's not their fault that there is no alternative oath's to take to cater for those who do not wish to swear allegiance to a Queen.

That all stinks of Hypocrisy

Sinn Fein want the British to leave but still want to be paid with the Queens Pound.

You love to remind me that SDLP has no support and SF are the only nationalist in the north.
So SF being so popular and with Friends of Sinn Fein in North America they should be able to support themselves.

"Brits Out Sterling In"

FTA69 · 28-06-2010 1:19pm

Tis fairly hypocritical to be honest. Personally I agree 100% with abstentionism from a British parliament, that having been said Stormont is as much a British creation as Westminister, it is simply a devolved British assembly within a UK framework.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 1:24pm

Winty wrote: »

That all stinks of Hypocrisy

Sinn Fein want the British to leave but still want to be paid with the Queens Pound.

It doesn't stink of hypocrisy. Sinn Féin, much like the SDLP does not want British rule to be a permanent role in the North. However, until that question is resolved - they are entitled to be covered like any other political party for their constituency costs. It's nothing to do with "accepting the Queen's pound". Sinn Féin would much prefer to have a single island Government, where they would not have to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.

Winty wrote: »

You love to remind me that SDLP has no support and SF are the only nationalist in the north.

I never once stated that the SDLP has no support. I was responding to your accusation that people only listened to Sinn Féín because of violence. I offered a rebuttal showing that Sinn Féin has gained much ground since the peace process, so it's obviously something more than violence that has turned them into the largest party in the North, and has took an enormous amount of support from the SDLP. My point was not made to belittle the SDLP's role in the North - it was to dismantle any argument that you were attempting to make about Sinn Féin receiving support only through violence.

Winty wrote: »

So SF being so popular and with Friends of Sinn Fein in North America they should be able to support themselves.

You see - you continue to demonstrate ignorance. It's obviously not enough to be able to support themselves. If it were, my local constituency office would have had enough costs to stay open, would it not? Sinn Féín's politicians have a mandate, and as such - while British rule is adminsitered in the North - SF politicians should be paid for working on behalf of their constituents, which they do well and hard.

This ad-hominem, red-herring driven argument against Sinn Féin does you really no justice whatsoever. I've entertained such discussions a 100 times before you, and I'll do so 100 times after you. You are not making any new statements, nor are you bringing anything noteworthy to light.

Winty · 28-06-2010 1:47pm

dlofnep wrote: »

It doesn't stink of hypocrisy. Sinn Féin, much like the SDLP does not want British rule to be a permanent role in the North. However, until that question is resolved - they are entitled to be covered like any other political party for their constituency costs. It's nothing to do with "accepting the Queen's pound". Sinn Féin would much prefer to have a single island Government, where they would not have to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen..

You dont see its as Hypocrisy?
Sinn Fein sit in the assembly, a devolved institution within the United Kingdom. In that assembly they pass legislation which is ratified by the Queen. Its even got the queens standard on the wall.
What is the difference?.

dlofnep wrote: »

You see - you continue to demonstrate ignorance. ..

Is it ignorance to question the actions of a political party in a Democracy

dlofnep wrote: »

I've entertained such discussions a 100 times before you, and I'll do so 100 times after you...

So I am not alone in my questioning of SF, why is that dlofnep? why do so many people dislike SF?

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 2:00pm

Winty wrote: »

You dont see its as Hypocrisy?
Sinn Fein sit in the assembly, a devolved institution within the United Kingdom. In that assembly they pass legislation which is ratified by the Queen. Its even got the queens standard on the wall.
What is the difference?.

No I don't see it as hypocrisy. I see a huge difference between having an allegiance to your constituents, and swearing an oath of allegiance to a monarch that has bestowed honours to her soldiers for murdering Irish civilians. Stormont exists as a means of ensuring a more local voice is heard. It requires no oath of allegience to the Queen to sit in.

Winty wrote: »

Is it ignorance to question the actions of a political party in a Democracy.

No it isn't, but that's not what you were doing. You were making ignorant assumptions about the finances of Sinn Féín as a party. I explained that despite your ill-intentioned comments, that even my local SF party cannot keep a small, one roomed office open because of lack of funds - which is obviously blowing in the face of your assumptions.

Winty wrote: »

So I am not alone in my questioning of SF, why is that dlofnep? why do so many people dislike SF?

If people dislike Sinn Féin, that's an entirely different question and not one that we were discussing. You seem to be jumping from question to question when I offer rebuttals for your ignorant assumptions. Stay on one topic, and we will exhaust it.

And as for so many people disliking Sinn Féin - It has a larger mandate than your party has. The same could be said about the SDLP in the nationalist community. But it's moot.

Winty · 28-06-2010 2:16pm

dlofnep wrote: »

You seem to be jumping from question to question when I offer rebuttals for your ignorant assumptions. Stay on one topic, and we will exhaust it.

OK lets finish the question.

I say SF is hypocritical for taking the queens pound, you say not because as a political party they need the funds to do the work they do.
You think I am ingnorant because I dont agree, SF could support themselves IMO.

I can see how far SF has come in the past 10 years, I just think it makes the whole region look backward on the international stage when we fight over little things like a oath to a German and a racist Greek.

Here endeth the lesson

sceptre · 28-06-2010 2:25pm

Eh, knock the "ignorant/ignorance" thing on the head. It's pretty rude. Be less rude. There's an underlying hum to it that doesn't go down well. Do not assume that I will be swayed by the "I was attacking the post, guv" defence as it's an incorrect assumption. You don't have to like the other guy's opinion or that he has one but mutual respect is reasonable and reasonably expected.

/mod

astrofool · 28-06-2010 2:51pm

It sounds pretty simple. If they want to claim expenses for being mp's, then they should turn up for work. If they are philosophically against the job, then they shouldn't get paid.

The uk would be more than happy to get rid of the black hole in the budget that is northern Ireland these days.

djpbarry · 28-06-2010 2:54pm

dlofnep wrote: »

...Sinn Féin has gained much ground since the peace process, so it's obviously something more than violence that has turned them into the largest party in the North...

You've said that at least twice now and I'm wondering by what measure are Sinn Féin the largest party in Northern Ireland? They have fewer seats than the DUP in both the Northern Assembly and the House of Commons?

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 3:05pm

Winty wrote: »

I say SF is hypocritical for taking the queens pound, you say not because as a political party they need the funds to do the work they do.
You think I am ingnorant because I dont agree, SF could support themselves IMO.

I didn't say it because you disagree with me. You are completely wrong when you say that.

I said it because you have not demonstrated anything that would substantiate your claims that Sinn Féín is able to operate without financial support for day to day constituency work. No party could. I'll refrain from calling your posts ignorant from here on here, with respect to a moderator's request.

I pointed out the financial troubles that forced the local constituency office here to close down - but you yet you feel that Sinn Féín can cater to their constituent's needs without financial support. It's not Sinn Féin's fault that a backwards, and outdated oath to an unelected monarch is the only means for entering parliament. But in saying that - Westminister's importance is greatly exaggerated by the SDLP in either case.

The are engaged within the GFA framework, are the largest political party in the north and work as hard on behalf of their constituents as any other party. Why shouldn't they be paid like other politicians? Because they refuse to swear allegiance to a monarch, despite working on behalf of their constituents anyway?

You see, you view taking a seat in Westminster, where you hold 4 out of 600 seats as working on behalf of your constituents where you rarely ever get the chance to influence voting. But working on behalf of your constituents goes far beyond that. I would argue that transferring policing & justice powers to Stormont, or day to day constituency work is much more relevant to people than being a proverbial needle in the haystack of a Government house that does not, and will never have your interests safeguarded.

Winty wrote: »

I can see how far SF has come in the past 10 years, I just think it makes the whole region look backward on the international stage when we fight over little things like a oath to a German and a racist Greek.

It is not backwards to refuse pledging allegiance to a the Queen. Being progressive does not mean that you must pay homage to someone who bestowed an honour upon once of her generals for the murder of Irish civilians. I think one can be perfectly progressive, and refuse to pledge an oath of allegiance to the Queen. Even English politicians for years have requested that a separate oath be made to accommodate everyone.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 3:08pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You've said that at least twice now and I'm wondering by what measure are Sinn Féin the largest party in Northern Ireland? They have fewer seats than the DUP in both the Northern Assembly and the House of Commons?

They received more votes than any other party, and as such - have the largest mandate.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 3:08pm

astrofool wrote: »

It sounds pretty simple. If they want to claim expenses for being mp's, then they should turn up for work. If they are philosophically against the job, then they shouldn't get paid.

They do work.

Winty · 28-06-2010 3:17pm

dlofnep wrote: »

I'll refrain from calling your posts ignorant from here on here, with respect to a moderator's request..

Dont be rude, thats a very backhanded statment.
You just cant see any other way, its Sinn Fein or nothing

dlofnep wrote: »

Westminister's importance is greatly exaggerated by the SDLP in either case.

What ?

Sinn Fein take the Queens pound and now its the SDLP's fault

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 3:21pm

Winty wrote: »

Dont be rude, thats a very backhanded statment.

My intentions were not to be rude. Your original statements were made without any understanding of Sinn Féin's financials. That's why I claimed your post was ignorant. I wasn't attacking you as a person. Since the moderator requested that I not make anymore statements like that, I have accepted it and pointed out that I will not do so in future.

I'd rather not going around in circles on a non-issue.

Winty wrote: »

You just can see any other way, its Sinn Fein or nothing

This is the second time you have said this. It has nothing to do with Sinn Féin or nothing. I offered a rebuttal to your claims the first time. If you weren't willing to read them then, there I feel there is no onus to repeat myself again.

Winty wrote: »

What ?

What part of the statement did you misinterpret?

getz · 28-06-2010 3:24pm

when a MP is elected he or she has to represent all his/her constituency voters,not just the ones who voted for him/her,by not taking his/her seat in parliament,it may well be said you dont get paid,if the MP took it to the EU court of justice he/she would loose

Armin_Tamzarian · 28-06-2010 3:28pm

dlofnep wrote: »

But suppose they took their seats, what exactly is it they would accomplish? They hold 5 seats out of 600. The combined nationalist seat is 9. Nationalist interests can never be served or protected under such imbalanced conditions. They would rarely have the power to swing votes, and if they did it may not be over anything on importance.

Going by your logic there's not much point in SF being in the Dail either.
What do the have there, less than 3% of the seats?
Not much point in me voting either is there? What would it accomplish?

Nodin · 28-06-2010 3:33pm

Winty wrote: »

Dont be rude, thats a very backhanded statment.
You just cant see any other way, its Sinn Fein or nothing

Is the alternative be a seemingly endless stream of 'Sinn Fein are thugs' posts and threads?

Winty wrote: »

You know the SDLP dont you? the party that does not need to kill for people to listen

Yet they don't seem to be listening in that many numbers anymore. Perhaps if their members made their focus supporting their views and policies rather than slagging off others, it would do better. Its never a good thing to define oneself by opposition after all.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 3:33pm

Armin_Tamzarian wrote: »

Going by your logic there's not much point in SF being in the Dail either.
What do the have there, less than 3% of the seats?
Not much point in me voting either is there? What would it accomplish?

The difference is, Westminster doesn't serve the interests of the Nationalist community in the north. In the south, no such interests need to be protected. Nor does the Dáil require an oath of allegiance to a Monarch that honoured a general for the murder of Irish civilians.

Apples and oranges to be honest.

Winty · 28-06-2010 3:41pm

dlofnep wrote: »

The difference is, Westminster doesn't serve the interests of the Nationalist community in the north. In the south, no such interests need to be protected. Nor does the Dáil require an oath of allegiance to a Monarch that honoured a general for the murder of Irish civilians.

Apples and oranges to be honest.

No No thats not the point Armin was making

You said

dlofnep wrote: »

where you hold 4 out of 600 seats as working on behalf of your constituents where you rarely ever get the chance to influence voting. But working on behalf of your constituents goes far beyond that. I would argue that transferring policing & justice powers to Stormont, or day to day constituency work is much more relevant to people than being a proverbial needle in the haystack of a Government house that does not, and will never have your interests safeguarded. .

So by your logic SF in the Dail is as much use as the SDLP in Westminster

Armin_Tamzarian · 28-06-2010 3:44pm

dlofnep wrote: »

The difference is, Westminster doesn't serve the interests of the Nationalist community in the north. In the south, no such interests need to be protected. Nor does the Dáil require an oath of allegiance to a Monarch that honoured a general for the murder of Irish civilians.

Apples and oranges to be honest.

Your argument was that there was no point in them being there as they held such a small percentage of seats.
Following that logic there's not really any point in voting for smaller parties such as SF and we'd be better off with a two party system.

RE the Queen and the General.
I'd consider myself somewhat Republican but going on about such things is ridiculous in fairness.
All sides are guilty of killing civilians and all sides have plenty who could be charged with war crimes.
At this stage it's just silly posturing.
When the day comes that SF decide that their interests would be best served by taking their seats then the Queen and the General will be conveniently forgotten about.
Just like 1986, what was bad becomes good, contradictions get glazed over and life goes on.

Winty · 28-06-2010 3:45pm

Nodin wrote: »

Yet they don't seem to be listening in that many numbers anymore. Perhaps if their members made their focus supporting their views and policies rather than slagging off others, it would do better. Its never a good thing to define oneself by opposition after all.

Join the debate Nodin

Nodin · 28-06-2010 3:45pm

Winty wrote: »

So by your logic SF in the Dail is as much use as the SDLP in Westminster

Not at all. Its quite possible for SF to grow as a party in the South. Its even possible for SF to grow in the North. However, for SF to grow influence in Westminister it would have to gain seats in England, Scotland and Wales. Thats stretching credibility, to put it mildly.

Winty · 28-06-2010 3:50pm

Nodin wrote: »

For SF to grow influence in Westminister it would have to gain seats in England, Scotland and Wales. Thats stretching credibility, to put it mildly.

So the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru should give up?
They could work with SF ?

Armin_Tamzarian · 28-06-2010 3:54pm

Nodin wrote: »

Not at all. Its quite possible for SF to grow as a party in the South. Its even possible for SF to grow in the North. However, for SF to grow influence in Westminister it would have to gain seats in England, Scotland and Wales. Thats stretching credibility, to put it mildly.

Well they are experts at it. :cool:

Nodin · 28-06-2010 3:56pm

Winty wrote: »

So the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru should give up?
They could work with SF ?

They do the same as SF, focussing on their local parliaments, with the difference they take their seats. Of course that raises the 'West Lothian' question, showing that you can't please everyone..........

Winty · 28-06-2010 3:59pm

dlofnep wrote: »

Westminster doesn't serve the interests of the Nationalist community in the north.

What do you mean a United Ireland?

Westmister does serve the Nationalsit Community, just like everyone else we have schools and healthcare ect ect.
Everyday Westminster / Stormount helps people from both sides to live their lives

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 4:00pm

Armin_Tamzarian wrote: »

Your argument was that there was no point in them being there as they held such a small percentage of seats.

I'm not sure what's in the water today, but I'm growing weary of having to repeat myself. I explained why having few seats in Westminster equates to nationalist's interests not being advanced. It is not a case of not just having enough seats - It's a case of the complex situation that exists in the North, where Unionist's interests are protected by default - and where nationalists have to scrape the bottom of the barrel for anything.

So no - it is not comparable to discuss taking a seat in the Dáil, and taking a seat in Westminster. One governs with Unionist interests, the other doesn't - and doesn't need to.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 4:03pm

Winty wrote: »

What do you mean a United Ireland?

Where did I mention a United Ireland?

Winty wrote: »

Westmister does serve the Nationalsit Community, just like everyone else we have schools and healthcare ect ect.

In part yes, in full, no. If that were the case, then why would the SDLP advocate Irish unification if all your interests were served from Westminster?

Winty · 28-06-2010 4:10pm

dlofnep wrote: »

Where did I mention a United Ireland

You didn't, thats why i asked

dlofnep wrote: »

In part yes, in full, no. If that were the case, then why would the SDLP advocate Irish unification if all your interests were served from Westminster?

Fair enought answer

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 4:27pm

Winty wrote: »

Fair enought answer

There was a question in it too. I'd be interested to hear your answer.

Winty · 28-06-2010 4:39pm

dlofnep wrote: »

There was a question in it too. I'd be interested to hear your answer.

Its hard to judge a persons tone when not face to face. Dont know what you want me to say, Yes I agree?
Your correct a United Ireland is the hope of all nationalist as Westminster will always be England.

Armin_Tamzarian · 28-06-2010 4:46pm

@dlofnep

Simple question, do you think it's only right that SF should lose their expenses.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 4:55pm

Winty wrote: »

Your correct a United Ireland is the hope of all nationalist as Westminster will always be England.

But you have already stated that Westminster caters to nationalists, in response to my statement - that not all nationalist's interests were being could be served through Westminster.

So why would you be in favour of Irish Unity, if your interests are apparently already served? Genuine question. I'd like you to expand beyond the "hope" rhetoric. It doesn't really answer my question.

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 4:57pm

Armin_Tamzarian wrote: »

@dlofnep

Simple question, do you think it's only right that SF should lose their expenses.

Sorry, were you asking me a question or making a statement?

No, I don't believe that Sinn Féin should lose expenses. They have the largest mandate in the North, and should receive expenses like any other party for constituency work. Why on earth should they lose them?

OhNoYouDidn't · 28-06-2010 5:23pm

Is this actually being looked at or did the OP just say it should? Its not clear

imme · 28-06-2010 5:39pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Is this actually being looked at or did the OP just say it should? Its not clear

Cameron said he`d look at it, but it appears not to be in his gift to change the status quo. It would appear to be under the baileywick of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.

I`m sure Sinn Fein will be sore if their millions are cut.

Fratton Fred · 28-06-2010 6:45pm

When the whole MPs expenses scandal was released by the Telegraph, they also included a bit about Sinn Fein and how they are claiming that they are paying three times more rent than they need to on three properties owned by someone with an address in Ireland.

We've discussed this before and the SF response is that "they are entitled to claim these amounts and they are doing nothing wrong".

If this was a FF TD or senator claiming it, there would be uproar, but as it is SF claiming it off the British tax payer it is ok for some reason.

Hypocritical? Yes, very much so. Will SF voters care? Not a chance, they always believe whatever spiel SF feed them.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 28-06-2010 7:39pm

If they are doing legitimate work on behalf of constituents there is nothing hypocritical about taking expenses even if they are abstentionist

The rental paid in London did seem a bit fishy though. I find it outrageous that they would pay that much for a property in London. And that's not an anti-Sinn Fein thing I would say the same about any MP. The idea that they could get mortgage interest relief is unbelievable.

What I think the British Government should do is build/buy 600 or so offices with accommodation in London. When you get elected as an MP anywhere you get a key to one of these offices. So no loopholes to exploit and no rent/mortgages to be paid for by the taxpayer ever again.

Grumpypants · 28-06-2010 7:50pm

Its simple do the work or don't get paid if you are taking a moral stand then don't take the money.

Our man in Havana · 28-06-2010 7:54pm

Does Cameron have the power to remove these expenses?

Winty · 28-06-2010 7:56pm

dlofnep wrote: »

So why would you be in favour of Irish Unity, if your interests are apparently already served? Genuine question.

What is Irish Unity? Geographical or Sociological Genuine Question

Is Ireland united when we watch the Irish united Rugby team hammer the English?

dlofnep · 28-06-2010 7:59pm

Winty wrote: »

What is Irish Unity? Geographical or Sociological Genuine Question

Is Ireland united when we watch the Irish united Rugby team hammer the English?

I was obviously referring to political unification. Isn't that what your party aspires for? You tell me, I'm not the SDLP voter.

Winty · 28-06-2010 8:09pm

dlofnep wrote: »

I was obviously referring to political unification. Isn't that what your party aspires for? You tell me, I'm not the SDLP voter.

What is the difference between a Sinn Fein and an SDLP supporter?

IMO An SDLP voter if given the choice of never to see another bomb in towns like Omagh or Enniskillen would be happy to live as we do today in a shared land.

I cant comment on a Sinn Fein voter maybe you can

Thats only what I think, I dont speak for the party

Sinn Fein could lose expenses

Comments