Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Local Election 2014: People Before Profit Alliance - Martin Grehan [MOD Note Post 6]

Options
«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    Thanks Niamh :)

    Hi everyone, firstly, just to mention that I'm running in the Maynooth local electoral area which encompasses the following towns and more: Maynooth, Kilcock, Clane, Straffan, Rathcoffey, Prosperous, Derrinturn, Carbury, and Donadea. I live in Maynooth and our branch is based in that area too.

    I'm available to take questions and queries between now and the election. I'll endeavour to get back to all posts within a day or so, I'm not a smartphone user though so there may be occasions when I'm out of touch for 24 hours or more.

    For an introduction to myself and information on what People Before Profit have done in the area and our positions going into the election please see our final leaflet/manifesto here.
    Also links to our blog, facebook and twitter if you're interested in keeping track. Our national website, which includes a list of candidates (though there are no other PBP candidates running in Kildare), can be found here.


  • Options
    #3
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    Hi OSI,

    On the pandering suggestion, I've campaigned tirelessly on those issues for a number of years, the ambulance cuts, property/water taxes, so voters can decide for themselves if it's populism or actual activism in action.

    We view the council as merely a talking shop, councillors have very little legislative power. People Before Profit councillors, in addition to council work, inside and out of the chamber, utilise their positions as platforms on broader, structural issues. For example, yes, the council has no legislative control of the ambulance service, but no one is working on getting that ambulance back bar ourselves and some others. If I'm elected it gives the campaign a publicly elected voice, and hence makes reversing the cuts more achievable.

    Issues like Water Charges and the Property Tax directly relate to council work, for example the councils will vote in September to lower or higher the LPT, if elected I would vote to lower the LPT for example.

    The wage for a councillor is less than the average industrial wage. If I am elected and I am also holding down other employment my take home pay would never exceed the average industrial wage. There are different metrics for what that is, normally we would employ one that excludes high earners. All wages in excess of that figure would be donated to local campaigns, for example, the ambulance cuts campaign, or whatever issues it is our group decides funds should be diverted to.


  • Options
    #4
    banquo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    I will show terrific restraint, and let this be my only post here.


  • Options
    #5
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Nice to see you back on boards martin, your previous accounts <snip> and <snip> obviously didn't serve you as well as this one.

    I wish you luck in your campaign and this is where I leave this alone.

    **NOTE: Speculating as to the identity of an anonymous account is against the Terms of Use. This is the ONLY thread warning, any more instances will result in warnings being given.**


  • Options
    #6
    richiek83
    Registered Users Posts: 171 ✭✭richiek83


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Hi OSI,

    On the pandering suggestion, I've campaigned tirelessly on those issues for a number of years, the ambulance cuts, property/water taxes, so voters can decide for themselves if it's populism or actual activism in action.

    We view the council as merely a talking shop, councillors have very little legislative power. People Before Profit councillors, in addition to council work, inside and out of the chamber, utilise their positions as platforms on broader, structural issues. For example, yes, the council has no legislative control of the ambulance service, but no one is working on getting that ambulance back bar ourselves and some others. If I'm elected it gives the campaign a publicly elected voice, and hence makes reversing the cuts more achievable.

    Issues like Water Charges and the Property Tax directly relate to council work, for example the councils will vote in September to lower or higher the LPT, if elected I would vote to lower the LPT for example.

    The wage for a councillor is less than the average industrial wage. If I am elected and I am also holding down other employment my take home pay would never exceed the average industrial wage. There are different metrics for what that is, normally we would employ one that excludes high earners. All wages in excess of that figure would be donated to local campaigns, for example, the ambulance cuts campaign, or whatever issues it is our group decides funds should be diverted to.

    Hi Martin,

    Just a number of points I wish to raise. In the interests of transparency, I wish to state that I did consider running as an Independent in the Kildare/ Newbridge Municipal District Council/ Area.

    Firstly, you are correct in you assertion that Councillors have very little power and is more akin to a talking shop. The Irish State is highly centralised with many public services provided by Central Government or its Agencies. Irish Water being the most recent example of such. I admire your stance with regards to the Ambulance services but ultimately the HSE will make decisions in that regard. If enough political pressure is made, then you might succeed.

    Water charges do not relate to Council work. The charges are set nationally and there is a service level agreement between Irish Water and the Councils to essentially provide the service for a number of years. The charges go in to a national pot, aka Irish Water who will then makes decisions as to which capital project can/ will proceed.

    Councillors will be able to vote on the rate of LPT for 2015 and onwards. The rate can be varied by +/- 15%. I thinks it is misguided for candidates to state that they will vote for a redcution or rise if they do not know the impact that the decision will have on council services. I would be advocating no change for 2015 pending an analysis of the impact a reduction/ rise will have on Council services. If a drop in the rate of LPT led to a reduction of services locally, lets say street cleaning, maintanance of parks, library services, would you be willing to stand over that?

    Regards
    Richard Kelly


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    richiek83 wrote: »
    Hi Martin,

    Just a number of points I wish to raise. In the interests of transparency, I wish to state that I did consider running as an Independent in the Kildare/ Newbridge Municipal District Council/ Area.

    Firstly, you are correct in you assertion that Councillors have very little power and is more akin to a talking shop. The Irish State is highly centralised with many public services provided by Central Government or its Agencies. Irish Water being the most recent example of such. I admire your stance with regards to the Ambulance services but ultimately the HSE will make decisions in that regard. If enough political pressure is made, then you might succeed.

    Water charges do not relate to Council work. The charges are set nationally and there is a service level agreement between Irish Water and the Councils to essentially provide the service for a number of years. The charges go in to a national pot, aka Irish Water who will then makes decisions as to which capital project can/ will proceed.

    Councillors will be able to vote on the rate of LPT for 2015 and onwards. The rate can be varied by +/- 15%. I thinks it is misguided for candidates to state that they will vote for a redcution or rise if they do not know the impact that the decision will have on council services. I would be advocating no change for 2015 pending an analysis of the impact a reduction/ rise will have on Council services. If a drop in the rate of LPT led to a reduction of services locally, lets say street cleaning, maintanance of parks, library services, would you be willing to stand over that?

    Regards
    Richard Kelly

    Hi Richard,

    re the ambulance issue, we've already generated significant momentum on that front in the last few months due to the increased interest in election season. I hope to win a seat but no matter what happens, getting the ambulance service restored is the key, and as you said, building political pressure is what it's all about.

    In relation to Water Charges, I was in a rush earlier and should have expanded. Water infrastructure, water charges and the property tax are all co-mingled, KCC looking after infrastructure, Irish Water receiving a subvention from the local government fund, etc, etc,.

    As for the vote on raising or lowering the Property tax, I signed a pledge to vote against cuts to services or increase in non-progressive taxes. We view the Property Tax as regressive and hence I will be voting to lower it no matter what the situation re funding is.

    We simply believe that no matter what, increase or no increase in LPT, that local services will not be catered for. The tax will increase and no increase in services will occur. We will oppose all cuts to local services in addition to that.

    I am not putting myself forward to prioritise one cut over another. We're about winning people over to the principle that every cut is unjustified and immoral.

    Anyway, think I've covered general points of your post there, if you want to get more specific just ask :)


  • Options
    #8
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    As for the vote on raising or lowering the Property tax, I signed a pledge to vote against cuts to services or increase in non-progressive taxes. We view the Property Tax as regressive and hence I will be voting to lower it no matter what the situation re funding is.

    Can you please attempt to close the gap between these two wildly conflicting statements?

    You've stated you'll vote against service cuts
    You've stated you'll vote to cut funding (as cutting LPT will be)

    These are diametrically opposed to each other.

    If you can't see there's a massive contradiction here you're lying to yourself as well as potential constituents.


  • Options
    #9
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    MYOB wrote: »
    Can you please attempt to close the gap between these two wildly conflicting statements?

    You've stated you'll vote against service cuts
    You've stated you'll vote to cut funding (as cutting LPT will be)

    These are diametrically opposed to each other.

    If you can't see there's a massive contradiction here you're lying to yourself as well as potential constituents.

    First will come the vote to lower/raise LPT. What are the outcomes?

    Raise in LPT. Is that money going to go into local services? €400m subvention to set up Irish Water from local government fund for example would suggest that raise=more local services argument is dubious. We believe that cuts will take place regardless as that is the ideological line from central government.

    Lowered LPT, this aids the income of low and middle income earners. Then subseqent to that an argument will doubtlessly be made that we must cut local services. Cutting LPT only means cuts to local services if cllrs subsequently vote through cuts, it is not automatic. In the budget, cuts to services will probably be included (again, we feel this is inevitable no matter raise/lower) and we will oppose those cuts. We will attempt to build resistance at a council level to a cuts budget, as well as outside the council.

    In essence, we feel that whole argument is a false dichotomy. We're not trying to mislead anyone.


  • Options
    #10
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Raise in LPT. Is that money going to go into local services? €400m subvention to set up Irish Water from local government fund for example would suggest that raise=more local services argument is dubious. We believe that cuts will take place regardless as that is the ideological line from central government.

    This really sounds like you don't quite understand the impact of a council altering its LPT rate. If increased rates did not go directly to the council, do you think the option would even exist?
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Lowered LPT, this aids the income of low and middle income earners. Then subseqent to that an argument will doubtlessly be made that we must cut local services. Cutting LPT only means cuts to local services if cllrs subsequently vote through cuts, it is not automatic. In the budget, cuts to services will probably be included (again, we feel this is inevitable no matter raise/lower) and we will oppose those cuts. We will attempt to build resistance at a council level to a cuts budget, as well as outside the council.

    If LPT is lowered and no services are cut, exactly where then is the money going to come from that has been cut from the LPT? You need to account for where you're going to fund tax cuts and service increases, rather than just saying that they'll happen.

    Councils have a very limited set of income sources, remember that.
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    In essence, we feel that whole argument is a false dichotomy. We're not trying to mislead anyone.

    You appear to be misleading people already by suggesting that there is no option other than "raise" or "lower" to begin with, Martin.


  • Options
    #11
    richiek83
    Registered Users Posts: 171 ✭✭richiek83


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Hi Richard,

    re the ambulance issue, we've already generated significant momentum on that front in the last few months due to the increased interest in election season. I hope to win a seat but no matter what happens, getting the ambulance service restored is the key, and as you said, building political pressure is what it's all about.

    In relation to Water Charges, I was in a rush earlier and should have expanded. Water infrastructure, water charges and the property tax are all co-mingled, KCC looking after infrastructure, Irish Water receiving a subvention from the local government fund, etc, etc,.

    As for the vote on raising or lowering the Property tax, I signed a pledge to vote against cuts to services or increase in non-progressive taxes. We view the Property Tax as regressive and hence I will be voting to lower it no matter what the situation re funding is.

    We simply believe that no matter what, increase or no increase in LPT, that local services will not be catered for. The tax will increase and no increase in services will occur. We will oppose all cuts to local services in addition to that.

    I am not putting myself forward to prioritise one cut over another. We're about winning people over to the principle that every cut is unjustified and immoral.

    Anyway, think I've covered general points of your post there, if you want to get more specific just ask :)

    Thanks for the prompt response Martin.

    Water Services, infrastructure and charges will in time become the sole responsibility of Irish Water. The first ten years or so of water charges is to pay for the investment that is required in our water infrastructure including the Waste Water Treatment plants. Funds are being diverted at present from the Local Govt Fund and LPT this year to pay for the installation of the water meters. As soon as Irish Water becomes fully operational and starts taking in revenue, the Council at this point will cede control of decisions related to investment in its water services. It already has lost this control but by 2015 it will lose it entirely.

    Water Charges and the LPT are two separate issues. One is intended to fund a certain amount of local services along with commercial rates and other charges and so on. The other as I said previously will go into a central pot and will in time be used as general taxation to, well, cover the cost of providing water services.

    You signed a pledge to vote against cuts to services. In this case, a reduction in LPT to which you advocate will from 2015 likely lead to a reduction in some council services. This is contradictory. The LPT is in theory not a bad tax, the timing is. The LPT, if used correctly by the Councils can act as their own fiscal policy instrument to control the demand for property in the area. If citizens want a new link road or improved playgrounds or orther services that can't be met by existing Council funding or Government grants, then an increase in the property tax provides the Council with a way of funding same if the citizens are willing to pay for it. The LPT from 2015 will become a significant source of funding for Councils as approximately 80% of the tax (still to be decided by the way) will go back to the Council.

    Do you not see that the Councillors will vote on the LPT. If your constituents want more playgrounds, longer opening hours of libraries or Leisure Centres, then they have to be willing to pay for it. If the County Manager recommends an increase in the rate of the tax, then it will be the elected officials that will have to scrutinise the proposals and ask what they are getting for it.

    The nature of society is that there is not a limitless supply of money that can provide all the services that society needs. It is therefore incumbent that the political system reaches a compromise that protects those that are in most need. Not all cuts are unjustified and immoral, some actually make sense. For example, the Council cutting expenditure in relation to its tendering for supplies and materials or on administrative costs makes perfect sense.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Boards.ie: Niamh
    Boards.ie Employee Posts: 12,597 ✭✭✭✭✭Boards.ie: Niamh
    Boards.ie Community Manager


    Please see Mod Note here, thanks.

    How can I? User's guide to some features on the new site



  • Options
    #13
    banquo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    Genuine Q: Can we link to his past accounts if it actually is the candidate?

    Argument for: If - as the candidate has himself said on so many occasions - you're seeking office and believe in total political transparency, a fair latitude must be permitted.

    Boards.ie is a public forum, and if he's seeking votes through boards.ie than his public boards.ie record should be made available. I think it's completely fair.


  • Options
    #14
    banquo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    [Mod's decision obviously final!]


  • Options
    #15
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    banquo wrote: »
    Genuine Q: Can we link to his past accounts if it actually is the candidate?

    Argument for: If - as the candidate has himself said on so many occasions - you're seeking office and believe in total political transparency, a fair latitude must be permitted.

    Boards.ie is a public forum, and if he's seeking votes through boards.ie than his public boards.ie record should be made available. I think it's completely fair.
    See my question and reply from Dav here regarding this. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=89565013


  • Options
    #16
    Boards.ie: Niamh
    Boards.ie Employee Posts: 12,597 ✭✭✭✭✭Boards.ie: Niamh
    Boards.ie Community Manager


    banquo wrote: »
    Genuine Q: Can we link to his past accounts if it actually is the candidate?

    Argument for: If - as the candidate has himself said on so many occasions - you're seeking office and believe in total political transparency, a fair latitude must be permitted.

    Boards.ie is a public forum, and if he's seeking votes through boards.ie than his public boards.ie record should be made available. I think it's completely fair.
    The short answer is no.
    Dav already covered this a month ago when we first started talking about these Verified Rep Accounts for candidates; nothing has changed in the interim nor is it likely to.

    Back on topic now, if you wish to discuss it further, please post in the thread linked to above.

    How can I? User's guide to some features on the new site



  • Options
    #17
    Rosahane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭Rosahane


    Hi Martin,
    Perhaps you might give us some background information on yourself, such as work, education and community organisations (other than political) in which you have been involved.
    Rosahane


  • Options
    #18
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    MYOB wrote: »


    You appear to be misleading people already by suggesting that there is no option other than "raise" or "lower" to begin with, Martin.

    Of course there are options. You see options as following a pre-defined set of rules that are laid out by FG/Labour. I see it differently.

    I will fight to defend all public services against cuts, inside and outside of the chamber. I'll leave it at that.


  • Options
    #19
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Of course there are options. You see options as following a pre-defined set of rules that are laid out by FG/Labour. I see it differently.

    With respect, this is missing the point wildly or deliberately.

    You acted as if the only options were raising or lowering the tax when there is an obvious third option - leave it the same. The relevance to the topic of your unprompted grandstanding against other parties is lost on me also.
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    I will fight to defend all public services against cuts, inside and outside of the chamber. I'll leave it at that.

    You haven't stated how you're going to fund them after you've voted to cut funding, though. Promises are great but you're not showing any substance behind them Martin.


  • Options
    #20
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    richiek83 wrote: »
    Thanks for the prompt response Martin.

    Water Services, infrastructure and charges will in time become the sole responsibility of Irish Water. The first ten years or so of water charges is to pay for the investment that is required in our water infrastructure including the Waste Water Treatment plants. Funds are being diverted at present from the Local Govt Fund and LPT this year to pay for the installation of the water meters. As soon as Irish Water becomes fully operational and starts taking in revenue, the Council at this point will cede control of decisions related to investment in its water services. It already has lost this control but by 2015 it will lose it entirely.

    Water Charges and the LPT are two separate issues. One is intended to fund a certain amount of local services along with commercial rates and other charges and so on. The other as I said previously will go into a central pot and will in time be used as general taxation to, well, cover the cost of providing water services.

    You signed a pledge to vote against cuts to services. In this case, a reduction in LPT to which you advocate will from 2015 likely lead to a reduction in some council services. This is contradictory. The LPT is in theory not a bad tax, the timing is. The LPT, if used correctly by the Councils can act as their own fiscal policy instrument to control the demand for property in the area. If citizens want a new link road or improved playgrounds or orther services that can't be met by existing Council funding or Government grants, then an increase in the property tax provides the Council with a way of funding same if the citizens are willing to pay for it. The LPT from 2015 will become a significant source of funding for Councils as approximately 80% of the tax (still to be decided by the way) will go back to the Council.

    Do you not see that the Councillors will vote on the LPT. If your constituents want more playgrounds, longer opening hours of libraries or Leisure Centres, then they have to be willing to pay for it. If the County Manager recommends an increase in the rate of the tax, then it will be the elected officials that will have to scrutinise the proposals and ask what they are getting for it.

    The nature of society is that there is not a limitless supply of money that can provide all the services that society needs. It is therefore incumbent that the political system reaches a compromise that protects those that are in most need. Not all cuts are unjustified and immoral, some actually make sense. For example, the Council cutting expenditure in relation to its tendering for supplies and materials or on administrative costs makes perfect sense.

    This is just a world view thing Richard. We, People Before Profit, simply do not believe that the choices you're presenting there are valid ones. Cut to service here means more services somewhere else, ambulance cuts because "we don't have the money". We just believe those choices are never valid.

    In relation to specifics on LPT, covered that in my reply to previous poster.


  • Options
    #21
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    Rosahane wrote: »
    Hi Martin,
    Perhaps you might give us some background information on yourself, such as work, education and community organisations (other than political) in which you have been involved.
    Rosahane

    Hi Rosahane,

    I completed a degree in NUI Maynooth in Maths Studies in 2005. A Masters in Applied Maths in DCU in 2008 and I also have a research masters in Maths from NUIM from 2012. I have a certificate in Race and Ethnicity from Trinity College, completed last month as well.

    I was employed in the university in a variety of roles, but mostly as an occasional teaching staff member of the Maths Dept, from 2005 until 2013.
    I have decided to pursue a career as a community worker and as such I decided to end my employment in the maths line of things to allow me time to concentrate on pursuing those sort of job opportunities.

    My community work and volunteering is split between Maynooth and Dublin. In Maynooth I'm currently involved in trying to start up a youth club in association with Foroige. I'm involved in Kildare Intercultural Action Group which meets once a month in the community space at Tesco. I've also just begun to attempt to start bringing all the groups that use that space together to try and start a campaign for a permanent community centre in Maynooth. That's separate to the election stuff. I also started a project last September called "The Rent is Too Damn High Maynooth" which aims to highlight our specific housing crisis and help people highlight specific issues they may have with landlords, etc,.

    I also volunteer for the Caring and Sharing Association, doing social events for young adults and adults who have various forms of disabilities, that's in Clane every month.

    In Dublin I have volunteered with Show Racism the Red Card, have done few things with them, including volunteering on camps they run and doing an event in conjunction with the FAI around FARE (Football Against Racism in Europe) week. I sit on the committee, as community officer, of the 1895 Trust, a co-operative of Shelbourne FC fans.

    I think that's about everything, thanks for enquiring!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    MYOB wrote: »
    With respect, this is missing the point wildly or deliberately.

    You acted as if the only options were raising or lowering the tax when there is an obvious third option - leave it the same. The relevance to the topic of your unprompted grandstanding against other parties is lost on me also.



    You haven't stated how you're going to fund them after you've voted to cut funding, though. Promises are great but you're not showing any substance behind them Martin.

    Hold on a second, you're twisting my words, of course it could be left the same. But is that likely? I was presenting an analysis of what I found likely to occur in the council, that it will either be lowered or raised. But of course, it could be left the same.

    And I'm sorry, but what you call "unprompted grandstanding", I call criticism of parties who are ideological confined to 1) cutting local services, 2) not taxing those who can afford to pay, 3) privitisation and 4) no will to speak out against the status quo.

    And we specifically do not promise anything bar promising to fight to protect local service. What promises are you referring to?

    I cannot speak about what I will do without criticising what they do. I'm not running for election to be a service provider, I'm doing it partly to criticise the centre-right parties and offer a left alternative. I can tell from tone of your posts that you clearly disagree, which is your right, and let's agree to disagree :)

    I must head off now, and I have a wedding tomorrow so any reply will be over the weekend, apologies for the delay.


  • Options
    #23
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Hold on a second, you're twisting my words, of course it could be left the same. But is that likely? I was presenting an analysis of what I found likely to occur in the council, that it will either be lowered or raised. But of course, it could be left the same.

    You presented an either-or option when there's a third and, to be honest, most likely option.
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    And I'm sorry, but what you call "unprompted grandstanding", I call criticism of parties who are ideological confined to 1) cutting local services, 2) not taxing those who can afford to pay, 3) privitisation and 4) no will to speak out against the status quo.

    Not relevant to the discussion - I fail to see how it can be considered to be anything other than unprompted grandstanding. There was nothing said or implied in relation to Fine Gael or Labour until you brought it up.
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    And we specifically do not promise anything bar promising to fight to protect local service. What promises are you referring to?

    Your promise to vote to cut the council's funding while not reducing services - a mathematical impossibility.
    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    I cannot speak about what I will do without criticising what they do. I'm not running for election to be a service provider, I'm doing it partly to criticise the centre-right parties and offer a left alternative. I can tell from tone of your posts that you clearly disagree, which is your right, and let's agree to disagree :)

    You've not given one indication of how you intend to fund services after having cut funding so there is nothing to 'agree to disagree' about.

    Are you suggesting that people who actually understand the purpose of a local authority have no reason to even consider voting for you? Local authorities exist to provide services, not provide a talking shop.


  • Options
    #24
    Agent Smith
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 21,502 Mod ✭✭✭✭Agent Smith


    Martin Grehan wrote: »

    The wage for a councillor is less than the average industrial wage. If I am elected and I am also holding down other employment my take home pay would never exceed the average industrial wage. There are different metrics for what that is, normally we would employ one that excludes high earners. All wages in excess of that figure would be donated to local campaigns, for example, the ambulance cuts campaign, or whatever issues it is our group decides funds should be diverted to.


    Hi Martin
    Welcome back to boards!

    Just on this point. You say your only going to take home the average Industrial wage.

    But you are still going to taking the excess and donating it to "Causes".

    Wheres the value for money? Why make the claim?


  • Options
    #25
    Rosahane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭Rosahane


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    Hi Rosahane,

    I completed a degree in NUI Maynooth in Maths Studies in 2005. A Masters in Applied Maths in DCU in 2008 and I also have a research masters in Maths from NUIM from 2012. I have a certificate in Race and Ethnicity from Trinity College, completed last month as well.

    I was employed in the university in a variety of roles, but mostly as an occasional teaching staff member of the Maths Dept, from 2005 until 2013.
    I have decided to pursue a career as a community worker and as such I decided to end my employment in the maths line of things to allow me time to concentrate on pursuing those sort of job opportunities.

    My community work and volunteering is split between Maynooth and Dublin. In Maynooth I'm currently involved in trying to start up a youth club in association with Foroige. I'm involved in Kildare Intercultural Action Group which meets once a month in the community space at Tesco. I've also just begun to attempt to start bringing all the groups that use that space together to try and start a campaign for a permanent community centre in Maynooth. That's separate to the election stuff. I also started a project last September called "The Rent is Too Damn High Maynooth" which aims to highlight our specific housing crisis and help people highlight specific issues they may have with landlords, etc,.

    I also volunteer for the Caring and Sharing Association, doing social events for young adults and adults who have various forms of disabilities, that's in Clane every month.

    In Dublin I have volunteered with Show Racism the Red Card, have done few things with them, including volunteering on camps they run and doing an event in conjunction with the FAI around FARE (Football Against Racism in Europe) week. I sit on the committee, as community officer, of the 1895 Trust, a co-operative of Shelbourne FC fans.

    I think that's about everything, thanks for enquiring!

    Thanks Martin that's great.

    I believe youth and disability work volunteering is especially important. I'm involved in that myself.

    I trust that you have been involved with these initiatiatives for years, not just in the last few months?


  • Options
    #26
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    Rosahane wrote: »
    Thanks Martin that's great.

    I believe youth and disability work volunteering is especially important. I'm involved in that myself.

    I trust that you have been involved with these initiatiatives for years, not just in the last few months?


    I've been involved with Show Racism the Red Card since spring 0f 2013, the 1895 Trust since its inception in August of 2012. I've volunteered for CASA for over a year. Kildare Intercultural Action group I only recently got involved in the last few months.

    But before those I was involved in other campaigns, volunteering, youth work,etc,. I worked for CTYI in DCU over two consecutive summers 09/10 and worked on a youth camp in Maynooth the summer before that. Was invovled in a nationwide campaign to provide representation for domestic football supporters in 2012.

    Locally as well I was one of the founding members of the Stop the North Kildare Ambulance Cuts campaign in August 2012 as well, obviously that has political dimension to it as well.

    What organisations do you work with?


  • Options
    #27
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    Agent Smith wrote: »
    Hi Martin
    Welcome back to boards!

    Just on this point. You say your only going to take home the average Industrial wage.

    But you are still going to taking the excess and donating it to "Causes".

    Wheres the value for money? Why make the claim?

    The take home wage for the work is €16k per annum, which can rise to c. €22k per annum depending on committee work.

    If my total wages including that €16k - €22k plus any wages/monies earned from part or full time employment elsewhere exceed the average industrial wage all monies in excess of that figure will be distributed, as per the wishes of the local People Before Profit Alliance group, to local campaigns, community groups or charities. The latter two groupings would have to demonstrate a progressive stance on economic and social issues to receive funds.

    I am not making a "claim" as you put it. All People Before Profit Alliance representative must live on the average industrial wage, you cannot be a candidate without agreeing to that. If I were to go back on that promise I would be in breach of that pledge.


  • Options
    #28
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    MYOB wrote: »
    You presented an either-or option when there's a third and, to be honest, most likely option.



    Not relevant to the discussion - I fail to see how it can be considered to be anything other than unprompted grandstanding. There was nothing said or implied in relation to Fine Gael or Labour until you brought it up.



    Your promise to vote to cut the council's funding while not reducing services - a mathematical impossibility.



    You've not given one indication of how you intend to fund services after having cut funding so there is nothing to 'agree to disagree' about.

    Are you suggesting that people who actually understand the purpose of a local authority have no reason to even consider voting for you? Local authorities exist to provide services, not provide a talking shop.

    When you define the parameters of a conversation as narrowly as you do I think I'll always be prone to your criticism. You have not engaged on the ideology, you're trying to come across as an objective arbiter when it's clear that you see the purpose of elected representatives completely differently than the left do.

    I'll be asking people to vote for me because I fight on issues and cuts that are important to people in the locality. Not one other "politician" in this area is doing that. I'm not for playing by the narrow parameters you set.


  • Options
    #29
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    When you define the parameters of a conversation as narrowly as you do I think I'll always be prone to your criticism. You have not engaged on the ideology, you're trying to come across as an objective arbiter when it's clear that you see the purpose of elected representatives completely differently than the left do.

    I'll be asking people to vote for me because I fight on issues and cuts that are important to people in the locality. Not one other "politician" in this area is doing that. I'm not for playing by the narrow parameters you set.

    OK, there's nothing further to get on that topic; I think your position is now clear to everyone on here.

    Can you at least explain how you intend to bridge the funding gap that your stated positions will create?


  • Options
    #30
    Martin Grehan
    Company Representative Posts: 22 Verified rep ✭Martin Grehan


    MYOB wrote: »
    OK, there's nothing further to get on that topic; I think your position is now clear to everyone on here.

    Can you at least explain how you intend to bridge the funding gap that your stated positions will create?

    Post weekend I'll be happy to indulge you, remind me if I forget to come back to you with other replies. Have a good weekend :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Agent Smith
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 21,502 Mod ✭✭✭✭Agent Smith


    Martin Grehan wrote: »
    The take home wage for the work is €16k per annum, which can rise to c. €22k per annum depending on committee work.

    If my total wages including that €16k - €22k plus any wages/monies earned from part or full time employment elsewhere exceed the average industrial wage all monies in excess of that figure will be distributed, as per the wishes of the local People Before Profit Alliance group, to local campaigns, community groups or charities. The latter two groupings would have to demonstrate a progressive stance on economic and social issues to receive funds.

    I am not making a "claim" as you put it. All People Before Profit Alliance representative must live on the average industrial wage, you cannot be a candidate without agreeing to that. If I were to go back on that promise I would be in breach of that pledge.


    But your missing the point, PBP candidates say they live on the Average Industrial wage. Which is great! fair play to them! However they may only live on the Average industrial wage, But still Cost the same as any other Candidate. The money that a candidate would get isnt any less. You Just take the money and donate it to PBP causes.

    If you only took the amount that brought you up to the average industrial wage, then I believe you could honestly make that claim.



    Edit: This isnt a pop at you directly Martin. Its something i've seen other PBP and left wing Candidates say. It kinda defeats the saving money argument.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement