Sinn Fein misuse expenses

Laminations · 28-06-2012 8:50pm

dlofnep wrote: »

Pearse was completely cleared of any wrong-doing.

http://www.thejournal.ie/pearse-doherty-expenses-no-breach-leinster-house-travel-503075-Jun2012/

In fact, it turned out that not only did Pearse not abuse his expense allowance, he only drew down half of the expenses he was entitled to.

Now - Who wants to be the first person to apologise? Let's see how quick people are to post.

I don't care if he drove his car up every botharin in Ireland. He misused funds. He claimed so much in travel expenses and used the rest to employ staff. Just because he is now producing evidence of mileage that would have eaten up all his expenses doesn't mean he was right in what he did. He should have used his travel and accommodation expenses to claim for that mileage.

It's like a person claiming 1000e for the bike to work scheme, using that money for some other purpose and then when caught out saying 'oh well I bought a bike with my own money and it was more than the allowance'

It's misuse of expenses and just because it's not against any rules doesn't mean it is right.

No.Apologies.Here

Happyman42 · 28-06-2012 8:54pm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mileage-controversy-councillor-set-to-be-mayor-after-fg-pact-3134112.html <<<Media conspiracy suspicions solved I think Oireachtas rules should be next?

As a point of rederence Did the lad who used all the ink toners break any Oireachtas rules?

I think that article is quite, quite different to the one posted by the OP. Read it again....is it mere reportage, like the one you posted or is it a platform for a sustained attack on a TD, when judgement had not been made? I still haven't seen a credible reason for the nonsense tacked on to the end of it, except that it was for the edification of the more hysterical and afraid members of the public.

dlofnep · 28-06-2012 8:57pm

Laminations wrote: »

I don't care if he drove his car up every botharin in Ireland. He misused funds.

No, he didn't misuse funds. Did you actually read the report?

Laminations wrote: »

He claimed so much in travel expenses and used the rest to employ staff.

No, he didn't. He only claimed half in what he was entitled to.

Laminations wrote: »

Just because he is now producing evidence of mileage that would have eaten up all his expenses doesn't mean he was right in what he did.

The Oireachtas report found no wrong-doing whatsoever. So how about you offer an apology instead?

Laminations wrote: »

It's misuse of expenses and just because it's not against any rules doesn't mean it is right.

No, it's not misuse of expenses and the report supports that.

Laminations wrote: »

No.Apologies.Here

So basically, you're happy to smear someone's character and not apologise even when proven wrong afterwards?

dlofnep · 28-06-2012 9:03pm

The confirmation that his travel and accommodation costs outstripped the actual amounts Doherty received means that the money he uses to hire extra staff is considered to be part of his Oireachtas salary – which Doherty is entitled to use however he sees fit.

And as such - he did nothing wrong. Discussion over - outstanding apologies still awaiting.

jonniebgood1 · 28-06-2012 9:10pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

I think that article is quite, quite different to the one posted by the OP. Read it again....is it mere reportage, like the one you posted or is it a platform for a sustained attack on a TD, when judgement had not been made? I still haven't seen a credible reason for the nonsense tacked on to the end of it, except that it was for the edification of the more hysterical and afraid members of the public.

I point out that I did not say the article was same as that in OP.

I have no argument against the media being nonsense in most cases. I have highlighted undue mesia bias in the past and it is always wrong.

jonniebgood1 · 28-06-2012 9:14pm

dlofnep wrote: »

No, he didn't misuse funds. Did you actually read the report?

......

The Oireachtas report found no wrong-doing whatsoever. So how about you offer an apology instead?

No, it's not misuse of expenses and the report supports that.

So basically, you're happy to smear someone's character and not apologise even when proven wrong afterwards?

You have alot of respect for the Oireachtas and its givings. That is unusual amongst people in the current political climate.

Laminations · 28-06-2012 9:14pm

dlofnep wrote: »

So basically, you're happy to smear someone's character and not apologise even when proven wrong afterwards?

Nothing in the oireactas statement changes this

The party’s finance spokesman spent €24,000 of the €33,000 he received for travel and accommodation expenses last year. He repaid €845.05 to the Oireachtas commission, leaving a surplus of €8,000.

Last week, Mr Doherty admitted he had used this to hire part-time constituency workers. He said he did not know this was in breach of the rules and if it was, he would pay it back.

If he had travelled so many miles (which I don't dispute he did) he should have claimed for them from the 33,000e. He 'admitted' using 8,000e of these expenses on hiring activists. He is now retrospectively it seems claiming for the other mileage

'I have provided all of this information to the Oireachtas officials and they have confirmed to me in writing today that I haven’t breached any regulations and have stated to me that ‘the regulations have been complied with'

I don't care if the oireactas gives him the all clear, it also gave that FG Kennedy fella the all clear but what he did was still clearly wrong.

A comment on the Journal.ie article sums it up

Honestly nearly lost for words here. So he didn’t use his expenses for travelling he used them to staff his office. They are travel expenses not staffing expenses. ARRRGGGHHHH!!!!!

Nice to know your moral compass is set by what the politicians and the oireactas deem acceptable.

Laminations · 28-06-2012 9:22pm

dlofnep wrote: »

[Quote:
The confirmation that his travel and accommodation costs outstripped the actual amounts Doherty received claimed for means that the money he uses to hire extra staff is considered to be part of his Oireachtas salary – which Doherty is entitled to use however he sees fit.]

And as such - he did nothing wrong. Discussion over - outstanding apologies still awaiting.

It's a subtle difference but I'm sure you'll ignore it for as long as possible. He also signed a declaration that all the expenses were used on travel and accommodation.

He 'admitted' that he used 8000e to pay staff. What part of that do you dispute?

Laminations · 28-06-2012 9:42pm

dlofnep wrote: »

And as such - he did nothing wrong. Discussion over - outstanding apologies still awaiting.

Excellent post on p.ie

It does appear that the T & S regulations S.I. No. 84/2010 are so ambiguous that they can be interpreted very broadly. Rather unsurprisingly, they were signed into effect by that renowned straight talker, the late Bozo.

And Brennie Howlin's amendment S.I. No. 37/2012 appears to have added yet more obfuscation and ambiguity to the mess. Given such a balls-up, when you've some cunning stuntmen like the SF TDs with their unrivalled mastery of doublethink and doubletalk, the regulations become an Aladdin's cave of goodies, all funded by the wretched taxpayer.

Happyman42 · 28-06-2012 10:05pm

As is so pathetically the case in this country, the politics of condemmnation will and has, never achieved anything. It's why I don't often indulge in it.
I'm a realist, and things like this happen, what is important is that the system is tightened (because you can never guard against mistakes, greed or abuse) and very clear and that it is effective in doing something about it. We can all run around shouting hysterically that they are all the same, but what actual good will that do?.
What seems to have happened here is that the system was neither tight enough and clear enough. It's good to see Doherty use the judgement to call for vouched expenses.
If I had to chose a party who were actually standing up and being counted and shouting for something to be done about misuse of taxpayers money though, I know which one it would be.

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 1:09am

Happyman42 wrote: »

As is so pathetically the case in this country, the politics of condemmnation will and has, never achieved anything. It's why I don't often indulge in it.
I'm a realist, and things like this happen, what is important is that the system is tightened (because you can never guard against mistakes, greed or abuse) and very clear and that it is effective in doing something about it. We can all run around shouting hysterically that they are all the same, but what actual good will that do?.
What seems to have happened here is that the system was neither tight enough and clear enough. It's good to see Doherty use the judgement to call for vouched expenses.
If I had to chose a party who were actually standing up and being counted and shouting for something to be done about misuse of taxpayers money though, I know which one it would be.

The party who have a member who spent €50k on printer cartridges?

jonniebgood1 · 29-06-2012 8:15am

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The party who have a member who spent €50k on printer cartridges?

I don't think that broke any Oireachtas rules either :mad: :mad: :mad:

Diarmaid Ferriter said on Vincent Browne the other night that the inevitable is happening to Sinn Fein. As they get closer to power they mould into the same as what they will replace. It is a repeating cycle.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 8:29am

Laminations wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/sinn-feins-cheap-little-power-game-with-queen-3147562.html

Brain Hayes lays into SF for their PR stunt which is a reactive step to gain votes

This lauded SF act of basic civility comes at a time when they have been found to be taking excess expenses and travel monies and misusing it for party aims.

So let's no let their abuse slip under the radar

http://www.thejournal.ie/i-use-it-to-take-someone-off-the-dole-doherty-on-hiring-extra-staff-using-unused-expenses-493651-Jun2012/

http://www.thejournal.ie/oireachtas-seeks-clarification-over-pearse-dohertys-use-of-e8k-expenses-500244-Jun2012/

Have a look at some of the other returns of unused expenses.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=fg%20td's%20return%20unused%20expenses&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CFAQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thejournal.ie%2Fone-third-of-tds-return-e210k-in-unused-expenses-for-2011-477434-Jun2012%2F&ei=clftT-3nKMTS0QWC_53PDQ&usg=AFQjCNF2NmAcUYLzFkWLqlTpDznHNy9cKA

Some really dodgy looking numbers here.

Phil Hogan €11.90
John Perry €12.17
Jimmy Deenihen €12.85
Danny McGinley €13.39
Simon Coveney €37.74

Do these not sound a bit suspect to anyone?

A bit of creative bookwork going on here methinks.

Don't let it stop the anti-SF rants though.

Happyman42 · 29-06-2012 8:35am

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I don't think that broke any Oireachtas rules either :mad: :mad: :mad:

Diarmaid Ferriter said on Vincent Browne the other night that the inevitable is happening to Sinn Fein. As they get closer to power they mould into the same as what they will replace. It is a repeating cycle.

Which only underlines my point, the system has to change and be tightened because those using it patently won't.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 8:37am

Happyman42 wrote: »

Which only underlines my point, the system has to change and be tightened because those using it patently won't.

Isn't that why Doherty has asked for the rules to be changed to all expenses being vouched for.

Brian Hayes's little rant might come back to haunt him and his buddies in power.

Happyman42 · 29-06-2012 9:12am

gerryo777 wrote: »

Isn't that why Doherty has asked for the rules to be changed to all expenses being vouched for.

It's those who resist this that condemnation should be reserved for....at the polls, where condemnation is useful.:rolleyes:

dlofnep · 29-06-2012 9:41am

Laminations wrote: »

It's a subtle difference but I'm sure you'll ignore it for as long as possible. He also signed a declaration that all the expenses were used on travel and accommodation.

He 'admitted' that he used 8000e to pay staff. What part of that do you dispute?

The part where the Oireachtas report stated that he paid the 8000 euro with his own salary, and was entitled to do so - ergo, not in breach of any policies. Oh wait, I don't dispute that - because that's what happened.

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 10:30am

gerryo777 wrote: »

Isn't that why Doherty has asked for the rules to be changed to all expenses being vouched for.

No, he's done that for populist vote grabbing. If SF were serious about vouched expenses they'd already have it implemented within their party. Instead they feel it's better having the second highest expense claim in the Dail.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 11:33am

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No, he's done that for populist vote grabbing. If SF were serious about vouched expenses they'd already have it implemented within their party. Instead they feel it's better having the second highest expense claim in the Dail.

That's right chucky, everything SF do is for populist vote grabbing.:rolleyes:

Do you not find it a bit suspect that Big phil and the likes only return €10 or €15 as unused expenses?

It's another gravy train that we pay for.

Do you get paid to travel to work?

I know I don't.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 11:35am

Laminations wrote: »

I don't care if he drove his car up every botharin in Ireland. He misused funds. He claimed so much in travel expenses and used the rest to employ staff. Just because he is now producing evidence of mileage that would have eaten up all his expenses doesn't mean he was right in what he did. He should have used his travel and accommodation expenses to claim for that mileage.

It's like a person claiming 1000e for the bike to work scheme, using that money for some other purpose and then when caught out saying 'oh well I bought a bike with my own money and it was more than the allowance'

It's misuse of expenses and just because it's not against any rules doesn't mean it is right.

No.Apologies.Here

Good chap, never let the truth get in the way of a good SF rant!

Happyman42 · 29-06-2012 11:49am

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No, he's done that for populist vote grabbing. If SF were serious about vouched expenses they'd already have it implemented within their party. Instead they feel it's better having the second highest expense claim in the Dail.

Just before you twist the knife, can you show us where Doherty tried to hide this? Or that the intention was to personally gain? As far as I can see his accounts where available for anyone to see. No scam or attempt to obscure there.

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 12:05pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

That's right chucky, everything SF do is for populist vote grabbing.:rolleyes:

Do you not find it a bit suspect that Big phil and the likes only return €10 or €15 as unused expenses?

It's another gravy train that we pay for.

Do you get paid to travel to work?

I know I don't.

What I find suspect is the party claiming they will bring in vouched expenses are the same party who have the second largest expense claims in the Dail and also have strongly defended a member for claiming €50k worth of ink cartridges.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Just before you twist the knife, can you show us where Doherty tried to hide this? Or that the intention was to personally gain? As far as I can see his accounts where available for anyone to see. No scam or attempt to obscure there.

Where did I say he tried to hide this?

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 1:26pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

What I find suspect is the party claiming they will bring in vouched expenses are the same party who have the second largest expense claims in the Dail and also have strongly defended a member for claiming €50k worth of ink cartridges.

Where did I say he tried to hide this?

That's not answering my question.

What do you think about big phil and his ministerial buddies, as I've listed in a previous post, returning sums of €10 or €15 as unused expenses?

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 3:15pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

That's not answering my question.

What do you think about big phil and his ministerial buddies, as I've listed in a previous post, returning sums of €10 or €15 as unused expenses?

This thread is about Sinn Feinn. Open up a Phil Hogan and Fine Gael one if you want to talk about that.

Laminations · 29-06-2012 3:59pm

dlofnep wrote: »

The part where the Oireachtas report stated that he paid the 8000 euro with his own salary, and was entitled to do so - ergo, not in breach of any policies. Oh wait, I don't dispute that - because that's what happened.

So when he admitted spending the 8000e out of the TAA expenses, Doherty was mistaken, even though he hadn't returned these expenses or at the time claimed for the full 33,000e. Are you saying that his recollection was incorrect as well as the accounts showing he only claimed 24,000e??

He admitted to spending the surplus on staff.

Doherty had been accused of breaching the Oireachtas’s rules regarding the use of his personal allowances last year – after the Donegal South-West TD said he used about €8,000 of his allowances to hire staff at his office.
But authorities have Leinster House have told him that he is not in breach of any rules,

Whether he breached ridiculously lax rules is neither here nor there.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 4:21pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

This thread is about Sinn Feinn. Open up a Phil Hogan and Fine Gael one if you want to talk about that.

Hey chuck, who made you a moderator?

You don't want to answer my point do you?

Have another rant, good chap.

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 4:33pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Hey chuck, who made you a moderator?

You don't want to answer my point do you?

Have another rant, good chap.

No one did. I won't be answering your off-topic questions though.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 4:34pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No one did. I won't be answering your off-topic questions though.

Ha, didn't think you would.
Truth hurts.

Chucky the tree · 29-06-2012 4:40pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Ha, didn't think you would.
Truth hurts.

Don't blame me because you are to lazy to start a thread on it.

Laminations · 29-06-2012 4:42pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Ha, didn't think you would.
Truth hurts.

So you are casting aspersions about other politicians saying they may have been misusing funds as their expenses returned were small amounts (I don't see the evidence there but hey) in defence of a politician who has admitted misusing his TAA expenses to hire staff.

Baffling line of defence.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 5:04pm

Laminations wrote: »

So you are casting aspersions about other politicians saying they may have been misusing funds as their expenses returned were small amounts (I don't see the evidence there but hey) in defence of a politician who has admitted misusing his TAA expenses to hire staff.

Baffling line of defence.

You don't think it's a but suspect then?

Whats the max allowance €33k? And these guys can budget their expenses to within €10 of that amount per year.

Do you seriously think that's plausible from a government who's every prediction about growth, every prediction about the course this country is taking has been wrong?

Give me a break, their all milking the gravy train but some people just like to focus on SF.
Suppose it's because they see them as the biggest threat to their positions into the future.

Work away so, enjoy yourself!

southsiderosie · 29-06-2012 5:09pm

MOD NOTE:

OK, everyone, the sniping needs to stop NOW.

Chucky, if you think a thread is going off-topic, report it, rather than engaging on thread.

gerryo777, rolley eyes do not count for discussion in this forum. And cut the 'old chap' crap - it is hard to see that as anything but trolling.

dlofnep · 29-06-2012 5:33pm

Laminations wrote: »

Whether he breached ridiculously lax rules is neither here nor there.

No, it's not here nor there. He didn't breach any rules, and as such has not done anything wrong. No matter way you spin it, these are the facts.

Laminations · 29-06-2012 5:49pm

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it's not here nor there. He didn't breach any rules, and as such has not done anything wrong. No matter way you spin it, these are the facts.

Oireactas rules are not an adequate definition of right and wrong. Using that logic, Callely did nothing wrong, O'Snodaigh did nothing wrong, taking advantage of a very lax system to divert tax payers money to personally benefit is wrong, morally wrong.

dlofnep · 29-06-2012 6:01pm

Laminations wrote: »

Oireactas rules are not an adequate definition of right and wrong. Using that logic, Callely did nothing wrong, O'Snodaigh did nothing wrong, taking advantage of a very lax system to divert tax payers money to personally benefit is wrong, morally wrong.

He did nothing wrong, deal with it.

The Waltzing Consumer · 29-06-2012 6:20pm

dlofnep wrote: »

He did nothing wrong, deal with it.

He did.

Anyone here defending SF and him from this would be throwing hissy fits if this was FG or LAB. It's all bull to be honest, how many times do we see the same defending, the same excuses

Tippearary defends Lowry
Wexford defends Wallace
Kerry defends Healy Rae
Drumcondra defends Bertie
SF defend, em, SF

The only truth in all of this is that there is one set of standards if it is a party or politician you don't support and there is whole other set of standards to those you do support.

SF have now failed miserably at really standing up and setting a new standard and use the same Bertie/Callely/Cooper Flynn tactics and defense.

LostinKildare · 29-06-2012 7:19pm

Oh come on, it's not that hard to understand, except, apparently, for people blinded by their hatred of SF

He underclaimed for his travel expenses -- apparently he thought he was entitled to diesel and tolls only, when actually there was a higher mileage allowance that takes in motor tax, car depreciation, etc.

He claimed only 11,000, when he was entitled to claim 22,000 for the distance he had traveled.

When paying tolls and filling your car with diesel, you pay with the money in your wallet (i.e., your own money) and then you recoup that money via an expense claim.

So, apparently, when he received that 11,000 reimbursement (having mistakenly shortchanged himself by a significant amount), INSTEAD OF USING IT TO PAY HIMSELF BACK FOR HIS OUTLAY, he used (most of) the lump sum to create a few jobs for people.

Far from ripping off the "taxpayer," he's benefitted the "taxpayer" by several thousand --- first by underclaiming (by 11,000), second by presumably taking a few people off the dole. At his own expense.

But he's SF so he must be baaaaaaaaad.

The Waltzing Consumer · 29-06-2012 7:50pm

LostinKildare wrote: »

Oh come on, it's not that hard to understand, except, apparently, for people blinded by their hatred of SF

He underclaimed for his travel expenses -- apparently he thought he was entitled to diesel and tolls only, when actually there was a higher mileage allowance that takes in motor tax, car depreciation, etc.

He claimed only 11,000, when he was entitled to claim 22,000 for the distance he had traveled.

When paying tolls and filling your car with diesel, you pay with the money in your wallet (i.e., your own money) and then you recoup that money via an expense claim.

So, apparently, when he received that 11,000 reimbursement (having mistakenly shortchanged himself by a significant amount), INSTEAD OF USING IT TO PAY HIMSELF BACK FOR HIS OUTLAY, he used (most of) the lump sum to create a few jobs for people.

Far from ripping off the "taxpayer," he's benefitted the "taxpayer" by several thousand --- first by underclaiming (by 11,000), second by presumably taking a few people off the dole. At his own expense.

But he's SF so he must be baaaaaaaaad.

Yep cause if this was a FF TD, you would be just as understanding and not slinging out "jobs for the boys" line

He has no right to do what he did, just like if he was a member of FG, Lab, FF, SWP, ULA.

End of /

poeticseraphim · 29-06-2012 7:56pm

LostinKildare wrote: »

Oh come on, it's not that hard to understand, except, apparently, for people blinded by their hatred of SF

He underclaimed for his travel expenses -- apparently he thought he was entitled to diesel and tolls only, when actually there was a higher mileage allowance that takes in motor tax, car depreciation, etc.

He claimed only 11,000, when he was entitled to claim 22,000 for the distance he had traveled.

When paying tolls and filling your car with diesel, you pay with the money in your wallet (i.e., your own money) and then you recoup that money via an expense claim.

So, apparently, when he received that 11,000 reimbursement (having mistakenly shortchanged himself by a significant amount), INSTEAD OF USING IT TO PAY HIMSELF BACK FOR HIS OUTLAY, he used (most of) the lump sum to create a few jobs for people.

Far from ripping off the "taxpayer," he's benefitted the "taxpayer" by several thousand --- first by underclaiming (by 11,000), second by presumably taking a few people off the dole. At his own expense.

But he's SF so he must be baaaaaaaaad.

This pretty much represents a huge problem with Sinn Féin.

THE ACTION IS WRONG...whether or not being a member of Sinn Féin is wrong is another matter.

But using the pretense exquisite victimhood in a fallacy of infallability is always what SF do.

WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HOLD YOU TO ACCOUNT WE ARE THE ELECTORATE.

That goes for any party.

Also on another point it has been put here that to question the integral morality of Sinn Féin and any guilt by association is unacceptable. It is not. Perhaps those who associate with SF SHOULD be viewed with suspicion considering some of it's members criminal history. SF does not want to accept the perfectly reasonable position that some are horrified by some of the actions of their members and brushing it aside and joking about it is just delusional. Yes i believe there is a moral lacing in SF that is MUCH darker than misusing funds.

But as for this instance. That was taxpayers money. Some voted for FG some voted for FF and some for SF. But the majority of voters voted for FG . The electorate is diverse THAT is why you cannot use taxpayers money to fund your activists to grow your party. Using taxpayers money to promote Sinn Féin or any party is wrong..it is undemocratic and immoral.Most of those people do not support SF or want their money to go to drumming up more support for SF. It is like using taxpayers money to support your own campaign ..it is immoral.

It also shows SF would be useless in this current cliate when when need accounting regualarity and adherance to rules..

By the way it is NOT socialism to put taxpayers money into your cronies pockets...it is helping out a friend FF territory. SF activists ARE NOT public servants ..they are not ad should not be on the pay role . Nor should any party activists that money is not to promote your party or your campaigns.

SF are on a different planet.

gerryo777 · 29-06-2012 8:44pm

poeticseraphim wrote: »

This pretty much represents a huge problem with Sinn Féin.

THE ACTION IS WRONG...whether or not being a member of Sinn Féin is wrong is another matter.

But using the pretense exquisite victimhood in a fallacy of infallability is always what SF do.

WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HOLD YOU TO ACCOUNT WE ARE THE ELECTORATE.

That goes for any party.

Also on another point it has been put here that to question the integral morality of Sinn Féin and any guilt by association is unacceptable. It is not. Perhaps those who associate with SF SHOULD be viewed with suspicion considering some of it's members criminal history. SF does not want to accept the perfectly reasonable position that some are horrified by some of the actions of their members and brushing it aside and joking about it is just delusional. Yes i believe there is a moral lacing in SF that is MUCH darker than misusing funds.

But as for this instance. That was taxpayers money. Some voted for FG some voted for FF and some for SF. But the majority of voters voted for FG . The electorate is diverse THAT is why you cannot use taxpayers money to fund your activists to grow your party. Using taxpayers money to promote Sinn Féin or any party is wrong..it is undemocratic and immoral.Most of those people do not support SF or want their money to go to drumming up more support for SF. It is like using taxpayers money to support your own campaign ..it is immoral.

It also shows SF would be useless in this current cliate when when need accounting regualarity and adherance to rules..

By the way it is NOT socialism to put taxpayers money into your cronies pockets...it is helping out a friend FF territory. SF activists ARE NOT public servants ..they are not ad should not be on the pay role . Nor should any party activists that money is not to promote your party or your campaigns.

SF are on a different planet.

Should I mention the 9 years in the 1990's when FG were paying party activists in cash 'under the table' payments?
Or does that not matter.

LostinKildare · 29-06-2012 9:34pm

poeticseraphim wrote: »

But as for this instance. That was taxpayers money. Some voted for FG some voted for FF and some for SF. But the majority of voters voted for FG . The electorate is diverse THAT is why you cannot use taxpayers money to fund your activists to grow your party. Using taxpayers money to promote Sinn Féin or any party is wrong..it is undemocratic and immoral.Most of those people do not support SF or want their money to go to drumming up more support for SF. It is like using taxpayers money to support your own campaign ..it is immoral.

It also shows SF would be useless in this current cliate when when need accounting regualarity and adherance to rules..

By the way it is NOT socialism to put taxpayers money into your cronies pockets...it is helping out a friend FF territory. SF activists ARE NOT public servants ..they are not ad should not be on the pay role . Nor should any party activists that money is not to promote your party or your campaigns.

As I understand it, it was his own money, not "taxpayers'" money.

That is, he had already paid 11,000 out of his own pocket for diesel and tolls. He was reimbursed the 11,000.

As a reimbursment of his outlay, the money was his to spend as he wished. If he wanted to use it to hire people to work for him, well so what?

A non-story.

Doherty's statement: http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/23695

astrofool · 29-06-2012 9:46pm

LostinKildare wrote: »

Oh come on, it's not that hard to understand, except, apparently, for people blinded by their hatred of SF

He underclaimed for his travel expenses -- apparently he thought he was entitled to diesel and tolls only, when actually there was a higher mileage allowance that takes in motor tax, car depreciation, etc.

He claimed only 11,000, when he was entitled to claim 22,000 for the distance he had traveled.

When paying tolls and filling your car with diesel, you pay with the money in your wallet (i.e., your own money) and then you recoup that money via an expense claim.

So, apparently, when he received that 11,000 reimbursement (having mistakenly shortchanged himself by a significant amount), INSTEAD OF USING IT TO PAY HIMSELF BACK FOR HIS OUTLAY, he used (most of) the lump sum to create a few jobs for people.

Far from ripping off the "taxpayer," he's benefitted the "taxpayer" by several thousand --- first by underclaiming (by 11,000), second by presumably taking a few people off the dole. At his own expense.

But he's SF so he must be baaaaaaaaad.

So, he used the unspent milage money to hire workers for himself, then when found out, miraculously came up (on his second go) with some unvouched expenses which filled the gap perfectly.

And now is paying the workers out of his own pocket, despite apparantly living on the "average industrial wage".

I have some magic beans for sale, interested?

poeticseraphim · 29-06-2012 11:22pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Should I mention the 9 years in the 1990's when FG were paying party activists in cash 'under the table' payments?
Or does that not matter.

YES ..IT MATTERS GREATLY..why do you assume i could ever accept that??

It's insulting.

I find infuriating and disgusting.

Don't just mention it shout it condemn it and stamp it out of all parties.

As for it being his own money and him re-imbersing...

It was not his to 'borrow' anyway

And he used partitioned money to hire staff then when he realized he paid it back out of other public money ?

You just don't hire staff in five mins you have to do paper work prsi numbers etc i mean i assume he hired them legally?

Of course he knew what he was doing.

Shows they don't care about workers too as when actions like this take place there is no job security.
And public money from a diverse electorate is not meant to aid the promotion of one political view.

It's wrong...

It definitely needs looking into and he does not convince me.

It is true through we need to stamp this out in ALL parties totally.

murphaph · 30-06-2012 11:47am

gerryo777 wrote: »

Should I mention the 9 years in the 1990's when FG were paying party activists in cash 'under the table' payments?
Or does that not matter.

Of course it matters (if true, I don't know the story myself but wouldn't be at all surprised). NO PARTY should be paying its activists from taxpayers' money, regardless of the source. Why do you think wrongdoing in SF is somehow neutralised by wrongdoing in FG?

When people attack SF for doing wrong, it doesn't mean they automatically and blindly support some other party and forgive their transgressions. If SF want to play the game, then be prepared to be scrutinised like any other party as is right and proper in any democracy.

If anything we need a lot more scrutiny in politics.

thecommietommy · 30-06-2012 11:48am

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mileage-controversy-councillor-set-to-be-mayor-after-fg-pact-3134112.html <<<Media conspiracy suspicions solved I think Oireachtas rules should be next?

As a point of rederence Did the lad who used all the ink toners break any Oireachtas rules?

Firstly off topic. But since you asked, O'Snodaigh didn't actually break any rules or guidelines as ridiculous the amount he used was.

nuac · 30-06-2012 12:19pm

thecommietommy wrote: »

Firstly off topic. But since you asked, O'Snodaigh didn't actually break any rules or guidelines as ridiculous the amount he used was.

Aren't Gardai investigating Ó'Snodaígh's "use" of printer cartridges?

fasttalkerchat · 30-06-2012 12:27pm

He paid for the people to do the job for him out of his personal money.
Later he listed the things paid for in that period from his money and that was on of them. It wasn't like he bought himself a yacht and then claimed it on expenses.

thecommietommy · 30-06-2012 12:44pm

nuac wrote: »

Aren't Gardai investigating Ó'Snodaígh's "use" of printer cartridges?

Not aware of it whatsoever, but if you can provide a reliable link to what appears to be a rumour.

( BTW, the coppers would have more than their hands full if they investigated every Gombeen politican in the Dail :rolleyes: Thy'd have to double in size )

gerryo777 · 30-06-2012 12:47pm

murphaph wrote: »

Of course it matters (if true, I don't know the story myself but wouldn't be at all surprised). NO PARTY should be paying its activists from taxpayers' money, regardless of the source. Why do you think wrongdoing in SF is somehow neutralised by wrongdoing in FG?

When people attack SF for doing wrong, it doesn't mean they automatically and blindly support some other party and forgive their transgressions. If SF want to play the game, then be prepared to be scrutinised like any other party as is right and proper in any democracy.

If anything we need a lot more scrutiny in politics.

And isn't that why Doherty is calling for all expenses to be vouched.

It won't happen though, too many snouts in the trough and as they say 'turkeys don't vote for christmas'.

gerryo777 · 30-06-2012 12:49pm

nuac wrote: »

Aren't Gardai investigating Ó'Snodaígh's "use" of printer cartridges?

Why don't the Gardai investigate the extra payments, above what was agreed, that FG/Lab are paying their 'special advisors'?

Sinn Fein misuse expenses

Comments