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

Rabble rabble time - Government ministers are exempt from the household charge

Options
  • 19-03-2012 2:09pm
    #1
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,322 ✭✭✭✭


    http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/03/13/00247.asp

    "The Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 provides for a number of exemptions and waivers from payment of the household charge. The exemptions from payment of the household charge are -

    · Residential properties that are part of the trading stock of a business and have not been sold or been the source of any income since construction,

    · Residential property owned by a Minister of the Government, a housing authority or the Health Service Executive,"

    The Sinners, ULA and the rest are going to have an absolute field day over this. It's astounding that someone thought it'd be a good idea to put this clause in, how can they try tell people to pay it when they won't be paying it themselves?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    They make it so easy for us *laughs evilly*


  • Options
    #3
    msg11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭msg11


    It's not like they don't have the money, all the ministers are ****ing loaded at this stage. In fact it's getting to the stage it's like the premier league the wages some of them are on.


  • Options
    #4
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    super_furry wrote: »
    http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/03/13/00247.asp

    "The Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 provides for a number of exemptions and waivers from payment of the household charge. The exemptions from payment of the household charge are -

    · Residential properties that are part of the trading stock of a business and have not been sold or been the source of any income since construction,

    · Residential property owned by a Minister of the Government, a housing authority or the Health Service Executive,"

    The Sinners, ULA and the rest are going to have an absolute field day over this. It's astounding that someone thought it'd be a good idea to put this clause in, how can they try tell people to pay it when they won't be paying it themselves?
    Proof N.o 220076 that this country is sh1te, always was and always will be


  • Options
    #5
    stupidusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭stupidusername


    What difference does it make,€100 is nothing to them anyway. Or is it the principle?


  • Options
    #6
    ANXIOUS
    Registered Users Posts: 3,095 ✭✭✭ANXIOUS


    I couldn be wrong but i think that you are missing reading the law.

    My take on it, is that for example the army have houses in the curragh that are owned by the minister of defense. Same with the minister of justice in templemore. These are exempt.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,966 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Proof N.o 220076 that this country is sh1te, always was and always will be

    I disagree wholeheartedly.


  • Options
    #8
    Thoie
    Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    Even if they paid it, they'd probably claim it back on expenses anyway - maybe they were trying to cut down administration?:mad:


  • Options
    #9
    youtube!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,265 ✭✭✭youtube!


    This has to be a wind up surely?


  • Options
    #10
    Degag
    Registered Users Posts: 9,955 ✭✭✭Degag


    Bunch of idiots if true. Did they really think there wouldn't be uproar when it was found out?


  • Options
    #11
    Padraig Mor
    Registered Users Posts: 9,544 ✭✭✭Padraig Mor


    That doesn't mean what you think it does OP.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Thoie
    Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    ANXIOUS wrote: »
    I couldn be wrong but i think that you are missing reading the law.

    My take on it, is that for example the army have houses in the curragh that are owned by the minister of defense. Same with the minister of justice in templemore. These are exempt.


    Why wouldn't they phrase it as "Residential property owned by the government" or something like that. I presume the Minister of Defense doesn't personally own the houses in the Curragh - they're government property managed by his department.


  • Options
    #13
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Are we sure that means what we think it means?

    Read the sentence

    "· Residential property owned by a Minister of the Government, a housing authority or the Health Service Executive,"[/I]

    That would seem to imply property held in their official capacity.

    Are we sure this applies to their personal capacity as well?


  • Options
    #14
    mattjack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭mattjack


    I knew our government was fun.


    Oireachtas Games

    Learn about the Oireachtas and the world of parliamentary politics in a fun way with our three online games.

    System requirements: You will need Adobe Flash Player Version 8 or higher installed on your computer for each game to function properly. A broadband Internet connection is also required.

    Beat the Bell
    Answer each question before your time runs out - if you hear the Ceann Comhairle's bell you've been too slow. Play the Game
    Parliament Pairs
    Find pairs of images of famous politicians before the time runs out. If you are quick enough you may get on the leader board. Play the Game
    Word Scramble
    Unscramble as many words as you can, and try to get on the high score table. Play the Game


  • Options
    #15
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    Padraig Mor wrote: »
    That doesn't mean what you think it does OP.

    Seems to say what I think it does. May include other properties that a minister doesn't live in but I cannot see how that statement doesn't apply to their own house?


  • Options
    #16
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    ANXIOUS wrote: »
    I couldn be wrong but i think that you are missing reading the law.

    My take on it, is that for example the army have houses in the curragh that are owned by the minister of defense. Same with the minister of justice in templemore. These are exempt.

    Spot on, I'm pretty certain this is what the wording means.


  • Options
    #17
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    stupidusername wrote: »
    What difference does it make,€100 is nothing to them anyway. Or is it the principle?

    What bizzarre logic:confused:
    The less one can afford a tax the more one is obliged to pay it?

    YES ITS THE BLOODY PRINCIPAL!!!!!!!!


  • Options
    #18
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,322 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    ANXIOUS wrote: »
    I couldn be wrong but i think that you are missing reading the law.

    My take on it, is that for example the army have houses in the curragh that are owned by the minister of defense. Same with the minister of justice in templemore. These are exempt.

    I'm actually hoping that's it. While the language used is nowhere near clear enough, the fact that those "Minister of the Government" properties are followed by "a housing authority or the Health Service Executive", suggest you might be right.

    The alternative is just insane.


  • Options
    #19
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    Gee Bag wrote: »
    Spot on, I'm pretty certain this is what the wording means.

    Why not say "owned by a government ministry" then? I think that's the spirit of it alright but I think we can use this as a stick to beat the corrupt twats anyway.


  • Options
    #20
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    Thoie wrote: »
    Why wouldn't they phrase it as "Residential property owned by the government" or something like that. I presume the Minister of Defense doesn't personally own the houses in the Curragh - they're government property managed by his department.

    Wording like that would mean including every residential property in NAMA.


  • Options
    #21
    mawk
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭mawk


    I too would screw the system.
    but until I'm given the chance, I'm furious at other assholes who do it!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Heh. Even if it's intended for residential buildings owned in an official capacity, it doesn't explicitly state that, and is put in such a broad enough way that it clearly can be interpreted as covering private property.

    There's no way to tell as far as I can see, if (functionally, in law) it would equate to that, unless a judge rules on it in a court case (and in the meantime, I would say ministers could successfully use it to exempt themselves until challenged).


  • Options
    #23
    ANXIOUS
    Registered Users Posts: 3,095 ✭✭✭ANXIOUS


    Thoie wrote: »
    Why wouldn't they phrase it as "Residential property owned by the government" or something like that. I presume the Minister of Defense doesn't personally own the houses in the Curragh - they're government property managed by his department.

    In his capacity as minister of defense he owns them, that's why when people are suing they always include the minister also.


  • Options
    #24
    Joko
    Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭Joko


    This is a non story. It is referring to property owned by the Dept of Social Protection and other local authority schemes.


  • Options
    #25
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    ANXIOUS wrote: »
    I couldn be wrong but i think that you are missing reading the law.

    My take on it, is that for example the army have houses in the curragh that are owned by the minister of defense. Same with the minister of justice in templemore. These are exempt.

    In the same way that the minister of Finance owns the ESB? That makes sense, as long as they don't use it to wriggle out of the property they own in a private capacity.


  • Options
    #26
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Heh. Even if it's intended for residential buildings owned in an official capacity, it doesn't explicitly state that, and is put in such a broad enough way that it clearly can be interpreted as covering private property.

    There's no way to tell as far as I can see, if (functionally, in law) it would equate to that, unless a judge rules on it in a court case (and in the meantime, I would say ministers could successfully use it to exempt themselves until challenged).

    I agree with this. The wording of this makes it unclear as to what the intended purpose of this clause is for and it could be used by a minister of the government to avoid paying the household tax for his/her private residential property. We need clarification.


  • Options
    #27
    goose2005
    Registered Users Posts: 4,798 ✭✭✭goose2005


    Thoie wrote: »
    Why wouldn't they phrase it as "Residential property owned by the government" or something like that. I presume the Minister of Defense doesn't personally own the houses in the Curragh - they're government property managed by his department.

    He does own them, but as part of his job, not as his personal property. All Age cards technically belong to the Minister of Justice/Defence.


  • Options
    #28
    Thirdfox
    Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Thirdfox


    super_furry wrote: »
    http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/03/13/00247.asp

    "The Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 provides for a number of exemptions and waivers from payment of the household charge. The exemptions from payment of the household charge are -

    · Residential properties that are part of the trading stock of a business and have not been sold or been the source of any income since construction,

    · Residential property owned by a Minister of the Government, a housing authority or the Health Service Executive,"

    The Sinners, ULA and the rest are going to have an absolute field day over this. It's astounding that someone thought it'd be a good idea to put this clause in, how can they try tell people to pay it when they won't be paying it themselves?

    This has already been debunked on boards.ie - check the Politics forum:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056581256

    The statement made is not the legal text, always refer to original legislation when discussing the law:
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/act/pub/0036/sec0002.html
    (b) a building vested in a Minister of the Government, a housing authority (within the meaning of the Act of 1992) or the Health Service Executive;

    Vested, not owned. Meaning in an official capacity and not his/her private accommodation.

    Hopefully a mod can change the thread title to reflect that this has been debunked. There may be legitimate grievances against the government but this isn't one.


  • Options
    #29
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Thirdfox wrote: »
    This has already been debunked on boards.ie - check the Politics forum:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056581256

    The statement made is not the legal text, always refer to original legislation when discussing the law:
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/act/pub/0036/sec0002.html



    Vested, not owned. Meaning in an official capacity and not his/her private accommodation.

    Hopefully a mod can change the thread title to reflect that this has been debunked. There may be legitimate grievances against the government but this isn't one.


    What he said.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement