[Article] Ray Burke paid €41,492 pension as ex-minister

Victor

Isn't it nice that when they are cutting back on rent allowance, that people are getting €100,000 pensions having spent a few years in office, haven't retired yet **and** still get paid salaries from their current jobs. :rolleyes:

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/2219248?view=Eircomnet

Ray Burke paid €41,492 pension as ex-minister
From:ireland.com
Tuesday, 23rd December, 2003

The former minister for foreign affairs Mr Ray Burke received a ministerial pension last year of €41,492, according to new accounts published by the Government, reports Arthur Beesley, Political Reporter

Mr Burke faces a tax demand for €2 million. He has sought free legal aid after pleading not guilty to criminal proceedings brought against him for making false returns under the 1993 tax amnesty. He also issued legal proceedings earlier this month to prevent anyone being appointed to deal with his €10.5 million legal bill other than Mr Justice Feargus Flood.

Mr Burke is paid a ministerial pension in addition to the pension he receives for his years as a TD. This contributory pension, worth some €38,000 last year, was increased by 2.95 per cent last summer as part of the benchmarking process. It will rise by 5.85 per cent at the start of the new year when the next benchmarking increases are given.

While ministerial pensions are not benchmarked, they rise in line with pay rounds under the social partnership agreements.

The annual Finance accounts for 2002 show that the State's total expenditure on such pensions last year was €2.89 million. The expenditure on judges' pensions, retirement lump sums and death gratuities was €4.94 million.

The accounts show that the President, Mrs McAleese, received personal remuneration last year of €223,667 and an annual allowance of €317,434.

The State also paid €5.7 million in expenses to the leaders of the Government and Opposition last year. The political parties received €4.34 million. Candidates in the general election received €189,170. The State also paid €197,971 in severance payments to politicians demoted from the cabinet or from junior ministries during 2002.

The list of office-holders' and ministerial pensions disclosed yesterday included €79,780 paid to the former taoiseach, Mr Charles Haughey. He also receives a TD's pension.

The family of Mr Haughey, who is suffering from prostate cancer, made a €5 million settlement with Revenue last March for "outstanding tax liabilities". Mr Haughey made a separate settlement of €1.28 million in 2000.

Pensions paid to other former taoisigh included: €78,770 paid to Mr John Bruton; €78,703 to Mr Albert Reynolds; €74,794 to Dr Garrett FitzGerald; and €59,835 to Mr Liam Cosgrave.

Former presidents Mrs Mary Robinson and Dr Paddy Hillary each received pensions last year of €111,164. Dr Hillary also received a ministerial pension of €31,542.

Mrs Rita Childers, widow of the former president Mr Erskine H. Childers, received €55,583.

Pensions to former attorneys general included €51,950 paid to businessman Mr Peter Sutherland. Barristers such as Mr Harry Whelehan received €440,830; Mr Dermot Gleeson received €36,085; Mr John Rogers received €47,319. The EU Commissioner, Mr David Byrne, received €32,314 for his time as attorney general.

Retired Fianna Fáil ministers on the pension list included: Mrs Máire Geoghegan-Quinn €51,378; Mr Gerry Collins €40,485; Mr Padraig Flynn €36,778; Mr David Andrews €33,745; Mr Ray MacSharry €29,797; Mr John O'Connell €19,729; and Mr Seán Doherty €15,509.

Former Fine Gael ministers included: Mr Peter Barry €46,873; Mr Paddy Cooney €40,485; Mr Austin Deasy €26,954; Mr Michael Noonan €32,334; and Ms Nora Owen €16,318.

Former Labour ministers included: Mr Dick Spring €50,382; Mr Ruairí Quinn €30,884; and Dr Conor Cruise O'Brien €27,224.

The sitting Fianna Fáil TD Dr Michael Woods received a €35,723 severance payment when he retired from the cabinet last year. Fianna Fáil TDs who received severance payments when they lost their junior ministries included: Mr Ned O'Keeffe €15,852; Mr Eoin Ryan 15,589; and Mr Dan Wallace €15,589. The PD TD Ms Liz O'Donnell received €16,069 when she returned to the back benches for family reasons.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/2219430?view=Eircomnet

Leaders look good at our expense
From:The Irish Independent
Tuesday, 23rd December, 2003
Senan Molony Political Correspondent

REPORTS that the taxpayer has spent €35,500 on hairstyling and makeup for the Tanaiste in the last six years raised eyebrows at Leinster House yesterday.

But Ms Harney is not the only politician being paid to look good, and nor is she the most costly: Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has spent an average of €18,000 a year on personal grooming in the same period, figures released under the Freedom of Information Act show.

None of Mr Ahern's beautification money went to his former partner, grooming consultant Celia Larkin. Two other businesses were used.

The Labour party took issue with the Tanaiste's spending on beautification, which has reached €15,755 this year. That's €43 a day, but she is still outspent by the Taoiseach, who needs €50 a day to stay looking good.

A Labour spokesman said: "People finding themselves dumped off a community employment scheme can be forgiven for cynicism when they find out the same Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment was able to find over €15,000 to spend on cosmetics this year." Opposition sources jibed that the Comptroller and Auditor General should carry out a value-for-money audit on the spending.

The €300-a-week grooming bills for both the Taoiseach and Ms Harney are paid directly out of taxpayer funds and are set to rise further next year when Ireland's EU presidency will increase the need for leaders to put a good face on things.

Ms Harney's personal beautician, stylist Val Sherlock, has been paid €36,500 in the last six years for attending to her appearance. But a failure to submit bills in time meant Mr Sherlock was paid no funds at all in 2001 for attending to the Tanaiste.

A spokesman for Ms Harney said this year's figure of €15,755 also reflected "some unpaid bills for a previous year."

A spokesman for the Taoiseach said Mr Ahern needed special attention in grooming because of his constant schedule of public appearances, official functions and TV interviews. Mr Ahern's make-up maintenance reached a peak cost of over €20,000 in the year 2000.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/2219442?view=Eircomnet

Politicians' pensions cost taxpayer €9m
From:The Irish Independent
Tuesday, 23rd December, 2003
Gene McKenna Political Editor

FORMER presidents and taoisigh are among the highest beneficiaries from almost €9m paid out in 2002 in State pensions, annuities, retirement lump sums and severance payments.

...

Five former taoisigh figure prominently on the list of more than 100 politicians published annually who got pensions worth €2.89m last year.

...

Not all those on the list get full pensions while they are still in the Dail under rules introduced in recent years.

Some get half of their pension while still serving.

The Department of Finance accounts also cover salaries and allowances to President McAleese and allowances to the leaders of the political parties, as well as salaries, allowances and expenses to members of the judiciary.

The total cost for the judiciary was €14.8m while the combined overall allowances to the political party leaders was €5.77m.

...

The figures are contained in the Finance Accounts, prepared each year by the Department of Finance to show where money from the Central Fund was paid out.

...

Sean Treacy, the former Ceann Comhairle, got €53,980, ex-Tanaiste John Wilson received €55,828 while Dick Spring, the former Labour leader and Tanaiste, got €50,382.

Other ex-ministers whose pensions topped the €40,000 mark include Peter Barry, Gerard Collins, Patrick Cooney, Des O'Malley and Michael O'Kennedy while former Environment Minister Padraig Flynn got €36,778 and former Posts and Telegraphs Minister Dr Conor Cruise O'Brien received €27,224.

Among the former Fine Gael leaders, Michael Noonan got €32,334 and Alan Dukes, €31,485 while former Labour leaders Michael O'Leary and Ruairi Quinn received pensions of €34,394 and €30,884.

therecklessone

I know I shouldn't, but I can't resist...

REPORTS that the taxpayer has spent €35,500 on hairstyling and makeup for the Tanaiste in the last six years raised eyebrows at Leinster House yesterday.

Hairdressers and stylists eh? Not doing a very good job, are they...

Victor

Originally posted by therecklessone
I know I shouldn't, but I can't resist... Hairdressers and stylists eh? Not doing a very good job, are they...

Mary could really do with the dietician and personal trainer though

Cork

Why are ye attacking the Tanaiste on these grounds?

Mary Harney is doing a fine job. She is a pretty decent lady.

As Minister for Trade & Employment - Her record is pretty fine.

If people want TDs expenses or pensions - let them stand for election.

Capt'n Midnight

Cork's being sarcastic again...

Next year it will all be BIK (me hopes)

can you imagine what they'd look like without the grooming.

swiss

Originally posted by Cork:

Why are ye attacking the Tanaiste on these grounds?

Because this is the same Tánaiste that belongs to a government that has decided to cut the community employment scheme, which helped the poor and marginalised in society to earn themselves some kind of a living. Because for every speech about "belt tightening" and "value for money" and "rationalisation" that is made by the goverment now demonstrates perpetual hypocrisy. Value for money in public service must come from the top down, not the other way around. What kind of example does it give to a department that has high overheads when their own leaders are claiming this kind of frivolous expense? In my opinion it gives them the impression that if it isn't their own money, they can do pretty much whatever they want with it.

Mary Harney is doing a fine job.

Ignoring the fact that this point is completely debateable, this is not the issue. If Mary Harney wants to spend €15,000 to cover up her warts and wrinkles, then I certainly won't stop her. However, I take issue with her using taxpayer money to do so. I don't spend nearly that amount of money on beauty products, and I don't have a reservoir or taxpayer money from which I can draw in order to buy these products/services. If I can get by with ordinary toiletaries when it comes to personal appearance, why can't our public representatives?

If people want TDs expenses or pensions - let them stand for election.

What point are you making here? If people want to get rich and look good - then they should stand for election? Forgive me for being naive here, but I would have thought that a person standing for election would have other things on his/her mind, such as perhaps governing the country? Of course a TD is entitled to a respectable salary and some expenses (for example travel, if visiting other countries), but the current expenses scheme is completely open to abuse, and TD's are abusing it. The lack of accountability when it comes to TD's granting themselves these expenses furthur compounds the perception that TD's do not truly earn their keep.

star gazer

originally posted by cork
If people want TDs expenses or pensions - let them stand for election.

Getting elected has to be seen as more than some ego-trip gravy train, granted there is an ostentatious tinge to the current government. They are there to represent us, to do so requires that they don't have to worry about personal financial matters, hence they get a very decent wage and extremely decent expenses. If they want a big image make-over, which €15,000 grand is buying them, they or their party should be footing the bill.

Ray Burke sold a house for two or four million, a tribunal of inquiry found him to be corrupt, people thought there would be justice when we found out the truth, maybe that wasn't such a wise assumption in hindsight.

Capt'n Midnight

Someone who don't spend 15,000 on hair stylists

Cork

Originally posted by swiss
Because this is the same Tánaiste that belongs to a government that has decided to cut the community employment scheme, which helped the poor and marginalised in society to earn themselves some kind of a living.

With falling long term unemployment and issuing of many work visas to non nationals - cutbacks on social employment schemes should not come as a surprise.

. If Mary Harney wants to spend €15,000 to cover up her warts and wrinkles, then I certainly won't stop her. However, I take issue with her using taxpayer money to do so.

This government is spending vast amounts on social welfare. What % do you think 15K represents?

Do you think that US citizens give out about the make up worn by the Dick Chaney?

Mary Harney has done more for employment in this country than many. The goal is to get people back to work. She has preformed this function well.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
With falling long term unemployment and issuing of many work visas to non nationals - cutbacks on social employment schemes should not come as a surprise.

The heaven help us when rates of cancer-related deaths falls, because the government will immediately cut spending on oncology clinics...
:rollyes:

This government is spending vast amounts on social welfare. What % do you think 15K represents?

About 15k's worth too much Cork. This is taxpayers money, not Harney's private funds!

Do you think that US citizens give out about the make up worn by the Dick Chaney?

No, because it comes out of his own pocket, or more accurately, his campaign funding.

Mary Harney has done more for employment in this country than many. The goal is to get people back to work. She has preformed this function well.

Prove it.
I look about and see the industry that started the Celtic Tiger boom finding itself being slowly shut down from all corners.
I see third-level education, the only source of our only natural resource (our highly skilled workforce), being strangled with financial cuts.

I don't see how any of this translates to "promoting employment".

Capt'n Midnight

I know you are trolling - Cork - but that is not 15K total - it's 15K for ONE perk for ONE TD - if it was 15K devided between them all so as they woundn't look like gob****es on foreign TV I woundn't begrudge that.

Look at the total expenses in the Dail and as a rough guide every million spent (cf. Govt Jet) is one euro out every private sector employee pocket or one euro not going into the pocket of everyone that need its - school kids, care-ers (SP) long term unemployable , pensioners etc. etc.

BTW: Many if not most US senators are milllionares - they don't need to be in policits for the wages..

Cork

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight


Look at the total expenses in the Dail and as a rough guide every million spent (cf. Govt Jet) is one euro out every private sector employee pocket or one euro not going into the pocket of everyone that need its - school kids, care-ers (SP) long term unemployable , pensioners etc. etc.

Waste of Public money needs to be avoided. Schemes & Programmes need to be under constant review to make sure that the taxpayer is getting value for money.

But - Most democracys have Jets. Many Film Stars and Rock Stars have them. Yet, are we to begrudge our government a jet at the time we take up the EU presidentcy.

We live on an island. Our government needs a jet for doing business.

Government Information Campaigns cost much more than 15K. There was a recent one to tell people to "Shop Around". School Kids Of 5 know this.

Money could be saved by government departments. But the government jet is an investment which will be used by other Irish Administrations.

Do Labour or FG have a policy of not using government jets?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
But - Most democracys have Jets.

No, they don't. How many times do I have to post the policy document from the UK regarding air travel before you get it through that thick skin over your ears Cork? We Do Not Need A Private Jet. We can't afford it, we shouldn't be wasting the little money we do have and we shouldn't be allowing the government to avoid using the national carrier or other civilian airlines.

We live on an island. Our government needs a jet for doing business.

No, we don't. The UK is also an Island, and one I'll remind you, with a lot more money than us - and they don't need a jet for doing business, they quite happily use BA or other arilines. And the same can be said for Iceland and in fact, every other small nation.

Cut your cloth according to your measure Cork.

Government Information Campaigns cost much more than 15K.

And generally do more good than primping up Mary Harney's hair (BTW mary, stop eating for a few weeks - it'll cost a lot less and you'll look one hell of a lot better than anything a new hairdo will do for you!)

Capt'n Midnight

Not the thread for this but the Govt Jet is not an investment - it's VERY expensive for what it is. The initial cost is only part of the ongoing maintainance costs.

And since Aer Lingus and Ryanair already have daily services to almost every where they are legitimately supposed to go.. (not to mention all of the Aer Lingus "one world" partners) there is no real NEED for it.

PS. Denmark had a much bigger air force than we do but don't need a jet with trans-atlantic range.

PPS. Does the govt jet have to stop in shannon ?

Cork

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight


And since Aer Lingus and Ryanair already have daily services to almost every where they are legitimately supposed to go.. (not to mention all of the Aer Lingus "one world" partners) there is no real NEED for it.

Aer Lingus have cut back on regional services from Cork. This then is said to be our National Carrier?

God Help us - Ministers arranging meetings around timetables.

I think the purchase of the jet was financed thru savings.

Purchase is cheaper than lease or hire.

But if ye want to take about make up & stuff.

How much does our State broadcaster pay on such items?
What politicians use such faculities before appearing on TV?
What does this add to the TV licence?

When Ireland gets the EU presidentcy

A lot of events will be sponsored by companies wanting to be associated with the event.

This will save us (the taxpayer) many €.

Much credit has to go to the government seeing this opportunity.

I have no doubt a tidy some will be saved.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Aer Lingus have cut back on regional services from Cork. This then is said to be our National Carrier?

This then is the national carrier. Or did Fianna Fail put taxpayer's money in the wrong airline for donkey's years?

God Help us - Ministers arranging meetings around timetables.

What, you mean that they might have to do work like the rest of us? God help us if they actually had to sit with the rest of the plebs in first class...

I think the purchase of the jet was financed thru savings.

Does it matter where the money came from? It didn't go to fix a school, or keep another A&E bed open, or pay for another kid's education.

Purchase is cheaper than lease or hire.

No, it isn't. Purchase requires you to take on maintainance and purchase specialised equipment. This is why large companies like Eircom have been selling off fixed assets like buildings and vehicle fleets for the last few years in favour of hired or leased assets. Because it's cheaper.

When Ireland gets the EU presidentcy
A lot of events will be sponsored by companies wanting to be associated with the event.
This will save us (the taxpayer) many €.

Excuse me? It's bad enough that you want to divert funds from hospitals and schools to keep mary harney and bertie happy sitting in a private jet getting a manicure, but now you want to sell the EU presidency in our name???
:mad:

Much credit has to go to the government seeing this opportunity.
I have no doubt a tidy some will be saved.

Bonkey, this has to be a troll.

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks



No, it isn't. Purchase requires you to take on maintainance and purchase specialised equipment. This is why large companies like Eircom have been selling off fixed assets like buildings and vehicle fleets for the last few years in favour of hired or leased assets. Because it's cheaper.


Excuse me? It's bad enough that you want to divert funds from hospitals and schools to keep mary harney and bertie happy sitting in a private jet getting a manicure, but now you want to sell the EU presidency in our name???
:mad:

Companys will pay to get their names associated with given events - thus saving the taxpayer money.


Purchase is cheaper in the long run. Lease/ Hire companies will not hire at break even. Some companies hire expensive equipment for reasons of cash flow.

REPORTS that the taxpayer has spent €35,500 on hairstyling and makeup for the Tanaiste in the last six years raised eyebrows at Leinster House yesterday.

So what?

But the government needs to look at high spending deparrtments to eliminate possibble slack & wastage of public money.

The Colltroller & Auditor General normally does this along with the Dail Public Accounts Commottee - They both seem to be doing a pretty excellent job.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Companys will pay to get their names associated with given events - thus saving the taxpayer money.

In other words, you'd sell the EU presidency. Which would be about the worst thing I can think of doing for our national name shy of calling a german diplomat a kappo....

Purchase is cheaper in the long run. Lease/ Hire companies will not hire at break even. Some companies hire expensive equipment for reasons of cash flow.

No cork, purchase is not cheaper in the long run, that's why Eircom has been selling it's buildings and vehicle fleet off and taking out leases instead - that way they get to do their job (providing a phone service) rather than maintaining buildings and trucks.

So what?

So they spent our money on their haircuts and manicures. Which have nothing to do with their jobs. And frankly, trying to doll up Mary Harney is sort of like trying to put a new coat of paint on a ruined building. It's a waste of money. What could that 15 grand have bought? Could it have fixed a school's dry rot problem or hired a rent-o-kill guy to fix their rat infestation?
But no, it got spent on haircuts.

But the government needs to look at high spending deparrtments to eliminate possibble slack & wastage of public money.
The Colltroller & Auditor General normally does this along with the Dail Public Accounts Commottee - They both seem to be doing a pretty excellent job.

Not good enough if this much is spent on Mary Harney's hair! And we haven't even mentioned Bertie's "Communications Department"...

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks

So they spent our money on their haircuts and manicures. Which have nothing to do with their jobs. And frankly, trying to doll up Mary Harney is sort of like trying to put a new coat of paint on a ruined building. It's a waste of money. What could that 15 grand have bought? Could it have fixed a school's dry rot problem or hired a rent-o-kill guy to fix their rat infestation?
But no, it got spent on haircuts.

If 15k was spared in one department it does not automatically to another one.

Why are tou singling out Mary Harney?

Do Opposition TDs not claim expenses?

Mary Harney is a decent & Hard Working Politician. When, the rainbow government were in power - I surpose they dod not claim for such things?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
If 15k was spared in one department it does not automatically to another one.

Nope. But if you spend it, it's gone.
That's sortof hard to deny, isn't it cork?

Why are tou singling out Mary Harney?

Because the original story was about her expenses.
Do try to keep up....

Mary Harney is a decent & Hard Working Politician. When, the rainbow government were in power - I surpose they dod not claim for such things?

Let me get this straight - you want me to not criticise Harney, who happily lambasted anti-war protestors as anti-american (only to see Bertie jump into bed with the anit-war sentiment in recent weeks), and who's been about as true to her principles as Fr. Fortune - because I'm not criticising politicians who've been out of power for the last six years?

You'll have to come up with something better than that, Cork.

Capt'n Midnight

Eircom is not an example to use - they are asset stripping and by employing sub contractors for much (all?) of the installations they can cut numbers any time they like.

Sparks

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
Eircom is not an example to use - they are asset stripping and by employing sub contractors for much (all?) of the installations they can cut numbers any time they like.

Yes, but the initial decision to move from fixed assets to leased assets was taken before the current situation in eircom took prevalance - at that point in time, the goal was to make eircom competitive rather than the current goal, which appears to be to sell the eircom family silver

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks
because I'm not criticising politicians who've been out of power for the last six years?

Should we stop the tribunerals work into the awarding of the second mobile phone licence by the Labour/FG government?

So they spent our money on their haircuts and manicures. Which have nothing to do with their jobs. And frankly, trying to doll up Mary Harney is sort of like trying to put a new coat of paint on a ruined building. It's a waste of money. What could that 15 grand have bought? Could it have fixed a school's dry rot problem or hired a rent-o-kill guy to fix their rat infestation?

So, are opposition partys currently not claiming expenses?

What political partys are aganist claiming for haircuts and manicures?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Should we stop the tribunerals work into the awarding of the second mobile phone licence by the Labour/FG government?

Why would we? What has this to do with the argument?

So, are opposition partys currently not claiming expenses?
What political partys are aganist claiming for haircuts and manicures?

What, now I must choose sides or I'm not allowed to criticise corrupt practises?
I think Cork, that you need to get your head out of that dark warm place that you've got it located in at the moment.

If nothing else, you're making Bertie walk funny....

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks



What, now I must choose sides or I'm not allowed to criticise corrupt practises?

Give examples and show how they are corrupt?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Give examples and show how they are corrupt?

Where would you like me to begin? Redmond? Lawlor? Ahern?
Well, why not. Let's start with Ahern.

Tell me Cork, what's it called when I fake a resume to get a job, putting two fake degrees in my CV and claiming to be a professional when I've never worked at the profession?

Cork

This thread is about "Ray Burke paid €41,492 pension as ex-minister"

then it went onto Mary Harney's expenses.

These were legitimate expenses.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
This thread is about "Ray Burke paid €41,492 pension as ex-minister"
then it went onto Mary Harney's expenses.

Now you want to stick to the subject?
*lol*
Cork, you have a neck like a jockey's bollocks.
Too bad you got the horses's smarts to go with it

These were legitimate expenses.

No, they weren't - that's the whole point!

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks



No, they weren't - that's the whole point!

Yes they were - otherwise they would not not been claimed for or payment of which sanctioned.

Why don't you think the oppostion are not running with this one?

SF claim expenses from Westminister & don't even take up their seats.

Are these expenses legitimate?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Yes they were - otherwise they would not not been claimed for or payment of which sanctioned.[/quote[
No they were not. Are you saying that the party that gave us Charlie Haughey would never stoop to approving payment of an unethical expense?

Why don't you think the oppostion are not running with this one?

Who can outvote a Dail majority?
But nonetheless, here we are talking about it.
So I suppose that the many opposition parties are actually running with it, as well as the many other issues on which this government must be brought to task.

SF claim expenses from Westminister & don't even take up their seats.Are these expenses legitimate?

I believe you'll find that those expenses apply in another nation's jurisdiction, and not our own...

Cork

Who can outvote a Dail majority?

No, but opposition partys could issue a statement if they were so concerned.

those expenses apply in another nation's jurisdiction, and not our own...

O thats ok then. So, long as it does not occur in our back yard. SF are a political party thatoperate in this country.

They are the same organisation that operates in both the UK and Northern Ireland.

What expenses have they been claiming? Have they been claiming for offices in Westminister? Do they take their MEP salarys without taking their seats? How much money is involved??

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
No, but opposition partys could issue a statement if they were so concerned.

Indeed. And if I did not think them to be as dishonest as the FF/PD coalition, I'd be berating them for not having done so outside the Dail, where they've happily berated the government parties.

O thats ok then. So, long as it does not occur in our back yard. SF are a political party thatoperate in this country.

Indeed they are. But I'm not so arrogant to think that I can dictate the rules for another soverign nation. Are you?

Instead, I'd rather hold my government responsible for their actions, and leave other governments to their peoples.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
How much does RTE pay it's "stars"?
How much do they spend on "make-up" for its presenters?
This is a public service broadcaster partly serviced by the licence payer?

For RTE to spend money on makeup is akin to Eircom spending money on fiber-optic cable, or Aer Lingus spending money on jet fuel. It's the cost of providing the service.
The government does not need to spend money on Mary Harney's makeup to do business.
And please, before you say that it's a needed expense before going on the news - please rememmber that RTE pays for makeup put on Bertie before he appears on TV. Not the government per se.
So we're not talking here about money spent on primping Harney for television appearances - but for day-to-day appearances.

Now I don't know about you Cork, but I pay less than a tenner a month for a decent haircut, and a suit lasts me more than a few years.
So 15,000 on haircuts is a luxurious extravagance.
And with Mary, it really is moving deckchairs on the Titanic....

If we as a nation want to get value for every cent - why don't we reform the whole welfare system - when a person gets a job - they pay back any social welfare benefits obtained?
The same could go for graduates and third level fees.

We do both cork, it's a radical new scheme called income tax.

Well....

Some of us do both.... others join or buy the government....

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
I think the purchase of the jet was financed thru savings.

Yes, they decided to get another few years out of 40 year old SAR helicopters (no radar, no FLIR, no all weather capability).

Cork would you depend on a 40 year old ambulance?

Cork

Now I don't know about you Cork, but I pay less than a tenner a month for a decent haircut, and a suit lasts me more than a few years.

I don't wear suits and I pay €8 per hair cut every 3 months.

All political Partys claim expenses?

Why single out Mary Harney?

She is not the only TD in Dail Eireann claiming expenses or is she the leader of the only party doing so.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
I don't wear suits and I pay €8 per hair cut every 3 months.

So why defend someone who wastes fifteen thousand euro on haircuts?

All political Partys claim expenses?
Why single out Mary Harney?

She wasn't singled out. The initial report lists expenses from several TDs - however Harney's case really does take the cake for two reasons:
1) In her case it really is paint on a crumbling facade;
2) She's the one advising us to "shop around" and tighten our belts.

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
All political Partys claim expenses?

Not for make-up. Many opposition TDs / MEPs (Greens / Socialist come to mind straight away) even donate a substantial part of their salaries to their parties. Each larger party gets a leader's allowance, which is meant to go on the **exceeptional** expenses of being a party leader (personal assistant, reseach staff) and I suppose "how not to look like anorak man in front of the world's press", however cecertain people are taking the p.

Cork

Originally posted by Victor
Many opposition TDs / MEPs (Greens / Socialist come to mind straight away) even donate a substantial part of their salaries to their parties.

TDs are paid a salary but they are also ENTITLED TO expenses.

TDs can donate money to what ever charities or partys they like. That is their business.

How much of Tax Payers money did it cost to keep Joe Hggins in Jail?

She's the one advising us to "shop around" and tighten our belts.

People crib about rip off Ireland & then when when Mary Harney encourages people to be consumer aware - they are criticised.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
TDs are paid a salary but they are also ENTITLED TO expenses.

They are entitled to claim for valid expenses Cork - an important distinction.

How much of Tax Payers money did it cost to keep Joe Hggins in Jail?

Too much. Perhaps the government should have served the people rather than the WTO and thus saved that money...

People crib about rip off Ireland & then when when Mary Harney encourages people to be consumer aware - they are criticised.

And rightly so. Telling people to "shop around" ignores the fact that all the shops are charging over-the-odds prices.
It was a stupid, callous and uninformed comment and she should not have made it. And that she did shows she has no idea of the problems we require her kind to solve.

Originally posted by Sparks

And rightly so. Telling people to "shop around" ignores the fact that all the shops are charging over-the-odds prices.
It was a stupid, callous and uninformed comment and she should not have made it. And that she did shows she has no idea of the problems we require her kind to solve.

Hmmm, dunno whether one should take that attitude, I shopped around for a best price on cavity blocks before christmas.
The first place had them at €1.35 each whereas the exact same block four miles away was 85 cent a block.
On a thousand blocks thats a very significant saving.

Shop around folks-to paraphrase animal farm, some rip off more than others.

Cork

Maybe that campaign made people more consumer aware.

Maybe it was beneficial on the run up to Christmas.

They are entitled to claim for valid expenses Cork - an important distinction

If these expenses were not valid - why were the allowed?

Have more TDs claimed for such expenses?

Do TDS not claim for overnight expenses?

It is not only women TDS who use make up & the like.

Bydad - Men Folk have started as well.

Many TDS & Conucillers have claimed much in expenses.

The Farmers Journal ran a league table during the year for concillers.

It is not party or gender specific.

Capt'n Midnight

Do chance of a link to that leagure table ?
Or the one about the senators expenses ?

Cork

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
Do chance of a link to that leagure table ?
Or the one about the senators expenses ?

Sorry I don't. It was not on their website at the time it came out.

I think their circulation jumped that week.

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Maybe that campaign made people more consumer aware.

No, it'd didn't. People were made consumer aware by a few hundred years of poverty Cork. A single speech by Harney wouldn't do that - it simply shows her lack of understanding of the problems she's supposed to solve.

Maybe it was beneficial on the run up to Christmas.

Nope.

If these expenses were not valid - why were the allowed?

Corruption.

Have more TDs claimed for such expenses?

Yup.

Many TDS & Conucillers have claimed much in expenses.

And what does that mean? That if there's a lot of corruption, it's right?
:rolleyes:

Cork

Is there one TD that is not claiming expenses?

People in many jobs around this country claim expenses.

There is nothing wrong at claiming expenses.

If you take up a job & you are permitted to claim certaim expenses -

How is the claimant wrong in claiming what he is entitled to?

Sparks

Originally posted by Cork
Is there one TD that is not claiming expenses?

And what does that mean? That if there's a lot of corruption, it's right?
:rolleyes:

People in many jobs around this country claim expenses.

Yes, but they're not claiming them off taxpayers.

There is nothing wrong at claiming expenses.

Correct, if and only if those expenses are valid. If they are not, it's called embezzlement.

How is the claimant wrong in claiming what he is entitled to?

Where does it say that Harney is entitled to claim for 15,000 for haircuts?

You'll need a bigger whitewash brush Cork...

Originally posted by Sparks

Yes, but they're not claiming them off taxpayers.

Thats debateable.
while certainly in the last few finance acts the rules governing the taxing of payments in kind to employee's have been tightened, they are still an expense in a companies accounts on which tax relief is claimed.
Therefore every other tax payer is subsidising them to an extent.

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks

You'll need a bigger whitewash brush Cork...

Sparks - Its Christmas, For the season thats in it - Do you begrudge politicians a little make -up?

Value For Money is important be that Building tunnels (Like the Dublin Port one), bridges, roads etc.

Where does it say that Harney is entitled to claim for 15,000 for haircuts?

It She was not entitled to them - Such expenses would not be allowed.

Originally posted by Sparks

Where does it say that Harney is entitled to claim for 15,000 for haircuts?

:eek: :eek: :eek:
How much??
Was that in one year, did she have gold plated highlights in or something??
I don't see how any expense like that could be justified, indeed it would be evidence that she did not shop around