Sinn Fein misuse expenses

Laminations · 03-07-2012 2:56pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Why wouldn't SF implement wage cuts for all dáil members? They already take way less than other TDs so its no skin off their nose.

For us, actions speak louder than words. Reform must start with the Dáil. That means cutting TD’s wages and expenses

So while in a position to act on expenses, they draw the second highest amount and misuse expenses and rack up huge printing costs to promote themselves...

And then Doherty says there should be reform

Yes, actions speak louder than words.

And currently, a SF TD doesn't cost the state any less in wages than any other TD - they just divert anything above the AIW to the party machine

fasttalkerchat · 03-07-2012 2:58pm

Laminations wrote: »

And then Doherty says there should be reform

And he's right. Strange that the other parties (who use less expenses) don't agree.

Laminations · 03-07-2012 3:04pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

And he's right. Strange that the other parties (who use less expenses) don't agree.

You are missing the point. ACTIONS speak louder than words.

Happyman42 · 03-07-2012 3:05pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

And he's right. Strange that the other parties (who use less expenses) don't agree.

Which is the point, the 'system' is designed to not be transperant. It is obviously so confusing that anybody can adopt whatever stance they wish, e.g. Joe Higgins can rationalise his use of 'expenses' and RBB can legitimise his actions in another way.
I support those who want a fully vouched system and who will stand up and call for it.....what is your stance on that Lamintations, whose call do you support in your non-partisan way?

Laminations · 03-07-2012 3:18pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

Which is the point, the 'system' is designed to not be transperant. It is obviously so confusing that anybody can adopt whatever stance they wish, e.g. Joe Higgins can rationalise his use of 'expenses' and RBB can legitimise his actions in another way.

It is not so confusing that one might ever reasonably assume that TAA (travel and accommodation) could be used to hire staff. They may be able to rationalise their actions with regard to the system but shouldn't be so easily able to rationalise them with the electorate. We shouldn't stand for 'Oh I though I was allowed print millions of copies?', or 'Oh I used my TAA expenses to hire staff, is that not what its for?', or 'I was obliged to do xyz, so I paid for it out of travel expenses without bothering to check when it should have come from the party account'.

I support those who want a fully vouched system and who will stand up and call for it.....what is your stance on that Lamintations, whose call do you support in your non-partisan way?

No you condemn the system but not those abusing it.

I doubt the sincerity of Dohertys call, seeing as he had the chance to not abuse the imperfect system and he chose to abuse it. But yes, I support a fully vouched system of expenses and support the scrapping of many expenses and perks that politicians get. I also support the reform of the code of conduct to make it clear and concise with meaningful consequences for those who break what should be far more stringent ruies. SIPO need more teeth and there should be a mechanism for removing a TD from the Dail and stopping pensions.

Happyman42 · 03-07-2012 3:28pm

Laminations wrote: »

No you condemn the system but not those abusing it.

I don't condemm, we have had this already. I seek change by supporting those who say they also want change and who do something about it.
If they welch on that then I will find somebody else to support.

Einhard · 03-07-2012 3:41pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

No it didn't. What my post suggested was that those who set up this thread as a SF bashing thread (see thread title) might want to wait until this expenses thing plays out. It is already engulfing other parties and members of Dail Eireann, so the thread title is no longer relevant or accurate. It should be a thread about the 'system' in general.

I think this is a very strange attitude to take. I believe that where wrongdoing is perceived in an elected representative, then that is open for comment at that time, and doesn't need to depend on further enquiries to estabish whether anyone else was doing it. Since when has cu;pabilty become a group thing?

I imagine, for example, that at the height of the Ivor Callely scandal a couple of years ago, you weren't on here calling for everyone to keep their powder dry until there had been a full investigation.

I didn't start this thread, but from what I understand, when the allegations re Doherty surfaced, they weren't accompandied by allegations against anyone else. To suggest that people should refrain from commenting until such a time as such allegations do arise is fankly nonsensical. We'd never be able to discuss political wrongdoing if that were the case, because we'd always have someone popping up with your strange line of argument.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Which is the point, the 'system' is designed to not be transperant. It is obviously so confusing that anybody can adopt whatever stance they wish, e.g. Joe Higgins can rationalise his use of 'expenses' and RBB can legitimise his actions in another way.
I support those who want a fully vouched system and who will stand up and call for it.....what is your stance on that Lamintations, whose call do you support in your non-partisan way?

Is the system so opaque? Richard Boyd Barrett seemed well able to get to grips with it. Or is the supposed complexity of the system being used as a cover by politicians and their supporters?

Again, I seriously doubt that, were this to involve a FF TD, you'd be discussing the lack of transparency in the system.

Don't get my wrong- I'm not condemning or criticising Doherty. That's not the point of my posts. Rather, I'm criticising the way that party political partisanship works in this country, and the lack of any real independence or objectivity shown by party supporters, includng those who post in support of Sinn Fein on these boards.

Laminations · 03-07-2012 3:49pm

Einhard wrote: »

Is the system so opaque? Richard Boyd Barrett seemed well able to get to grips with it. Or is the supposed complexity of the system being used as a cover by politicians and their supporters?

Again, I seriously doubt that, were this to involve a FF TD, you'd be discussing the lack of transparency in the system.

Ah now to be fair, remember when John O'Donoghue was getting grilled in the media, remember all those SFers coming to his defense saying

'its the system, he just got confused and overwhelmed by the opaque system'

....no I don't remember that either.

They are two separate points, yes the system is too lax and open to abuse. Yes we should highlight all those abusing the system as the misuses of funds are uncovered. I'm not an investigative journalist so I rely on the media to break these stories, they broke one on Doherty, this thread resulted from that. BUT his behaviour is especially interesting in light of SFs statements on 'higher standards' and 'lower expenses' etc.

Happyman42 · 03-07-2012 4:11pm

Einhard wrote: »

I think this is a very strange attitude to take. I believe that where wrongdoing is perceived in an elected representative, then that is open for comment at that time, and doesn't need to depend on further enquiries to estabish whether anyone else was doing it. Since when has cu;pabilty become a group thing?

I imagine, for example, that at the height of the Ivor Callely scandal a couple of years ago, you weren't on here calling for everyone to keep their powder dry until there had been a full investigation.

I didn't start this thread, but from what I understand, when the allegations re Doherty surfaced, they weren't accompandied by allegations against anyone else. To suggest that people should refrain from commenting until such a time as such allegations do arise is fankly nonsensical. We'd never be able to discuss political wrongdoing if that were the case, because we'd always have someone popping up with your strange line of argument.

You won't find me on any Ivor Callelly thread or the plethora of similar threads. Because they are pointless and time wasting. I prefer to take part inthreads about system change and that discuss who is attempting 'real' change. I came on this thread when I saw it was a blatant attempt to bash SF when the full facts where not known. A thread set up by somebody with an irrational hate/fear of SF as it turned out.

Is the system so opaque? Richard Boyd Barrett seemed well able to get to grips with it. Or is the supposed complexity of the system being used as a cover by politicians and their supporters?

Again, I seriously doubt that, were this to involve a FF TD, you'd be discussing the lack of transparency in the system.

Don't get my wrong- I'm not condemning or criticising Doherty. That's not the point of my posts. Rather, I'm criticising the way that party political partisanship works in this country, and the lack of any real independence or objectivity shown by party supporters, includng those who post in support of Sinn Fein on these boards.

I'm not familiar enough to comment knowledgebly on the opacity of the legislation. But I did raise concerns based on not understanding why he would blatantly break the rules like this. He did after publically issue his accounts which revealed this. That's what make him different to a Calelly or a O'Donoghue imo.

Laminations · 03-07-2012 4:20pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

You won't find me on any Ivor Callelly thread or the plethora of similar threads. Because they are pointless and time wasting. I prefer to take part inthreads about system change and that discuss who is attempting 'real' change. I came on this thread when I saw it was a blatant attempt to bash SF when the full facts where not known.

What actions suggest to you that SF is attempting 'real' change? The actions of O'Snodaigh, of O'Doherty, of the politicians in the north who claim constituency expenses from Westminster for seats they refuse to take, the fact that SF have the second highest expenses here??

If the only action you applaud is that they make their accounts available (transparency) it is a little odd that you then criticise someone for questioning those accounts and the use of TAA expenses. Transparency is meaningless without accountability. Accountability will never happen when people like you refuse to accept that the misuse of funds is wrong.

A thread set up by somebody with an irrational hate/fear of SF as it turned out.

And less of this please

Happyman42 · 03-07-2012 4:46pm

Laminations wrote: »

What actions suggest to you that SF is attempting 'real' change? The actions of O'Snodaigh, of O'Doherty, of the politicians in the north who claim constituency expenses from Westminster for seats they refuse to take, the fact that SF have the second highest expenses here??

If the only action you applaud is that they make their accounts available (transparency) it is a little odd that you then criticise someone for questioning those accounts and the use of TAA expenses. Transparency is meaningless without accountability. Accountability will never happen when people like you refuse to accept that the misuse of funds is wrong.

And less of this please

I see what they do at a local level, what constituents are important to them, they don't just pay lipsevice to the idea of equality and fairness. They seem to actually fight for that. That is where they are reaping the rewards, at a local level.
In the Dail I see a party who will stand up and say and call for they see needs to be done. Rightly or wrongly. I am not a supporter of their economic policies but that doesn't take away from my belief that they are being honest.
I can also see that their leaders (and this is important) dont lead lives that are much different in terms of wealth than those of their constituents.

And pleassssssssssse don't lets go there with your hoary old Westminister nonsense. Not taking their seats because of political ideology and the small matter of an oath of allegiance does not mean that they aren't working hard for their constitiuents, for which they are entitled to be paid.

jonniebgood1 · 03-07-2012 5:05pm

In relation to the Socialist parties use of Dail expenses to travel the country promoting non payment of household tax, what do people who have commented on SF think?

I think they should fund such an exercise themselves. Not doing so damages a campaign that I have followed with interest. Whether they have broke Oireachtais 'rules' is up for question but the moral implications are relevant in a similar way to Doherty's slighthandedness.

Laminations · 03-07-2012 6:00pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

I see what they do at a local level, what constituents are important to them, they don't just pay lipsevice to the idea of equality and fairness. They seem to actually fight for that.

unless of course you are Conotr Murphy and the DRD.

That is where they are reaping the rewards, at a local level.

The proper separation of local and national issues is a reform I'd value more than the expenses. What exactly do SF do at a local level? And what about it makes you think they can run a country?

In the Dail I see a party who will stand up and say and call for they see needs to be done. Rightly or wrongly. I am not a supporter of their economic policies but that doesn't take away from my belief that they are being honest.

You value someone syanding up and honestly saying spmething that is wrong?How do you square off their honesty (which is debatable) with their flawed economic approach?

I can also see that their leaders (and this is important) dont lead lives that are much different in terms of wealth than those of their constituents.

That bit has to be a joke.

And pleassssssssssse don't lets go there with your hoary old Westminister nonsense. Not taking their seats because of political ideology and the small matter of an oath of allegiance does not mean that they aren't working hard for their constitiuents, for which they are entitled to be paid.

It's been reported that they are 'milking' Westminster.

gerryo777 · 03-07-2012 6:31pm

Laminations wrote: »

It's been reported that they are 'milking' Westminster.

Source?

The Waltzing Consumer · 03-07-2012 7:21pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Source?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2164092/Who-picks-restaurant-bills-Martin.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gerry-adams-claimed-1m-as-mp-but-never-took-seat-2956145.html

one million in expenses and he never sat a day there

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/sinn-fein-under-fire-over-westminster-expense-claims-16175256.html

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/22155

SF even admit it here :rolleyes:

You want any more sources?

gerryo777 · 03-07-2012 7:36pm

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2164092/Who-picks-restaurant-bills-Martin.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gerry-adams-claimed-1m-as-mp-but-never-took-seat-2956145.html

one million in expenses and he never sat a day there

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/sinn-fein-under-fire-over-westminster-expense-claims-16175256.html

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/22155

SF even admit it here :rolleyes:

You want any more sources?

Just asked for a source, don't be a smartarse about it.
Well done though, saved me googling.

BTW, the system is there to be milked.
Every politician from every party does it.
If your so worried about the expenses gravy train why don't you elect a party that will change the system?

Happyman42 · 03-07-2012 8:54pm

Laminations wrote: »

unless of course you are Conotr Murphy and the DRD.

Brilliant! I can see clearly how this debate will proceed. :rolleyes:

The proper separation of local and national issues is a reform I'd value more than the expenses. What exactly do SF do at a local level? And what about it makes you think they can run a country?

Go out and have a look, you might suprise yourself.

You value someone syanding up and honestly saying spmething that is wrong?How do you square off their honesty (which is debatable) with their flawed economic approach?

I debate it with them, honestly.

That bit has to be a joke.

If you know different, enlighten us.

It's been reported that they are 'milking' Westminster.

Have they been charged with claiming illegal funds? If so please point it out.

K-9 · 03-07-2012 11:16pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Just asked for a source, don't be a smartarse about it.
Well done though, saved me googling.

BTW, the system is there to be milked.
Every politician from every party does it.
If your so worried about the expenses gravy train why don't you elect a party that will change the system?

On that note the thread is just going to go round in circles, plus Doherty wasn't found of wrong doing.

Sinn Fein misuse expenses

Comments