fianna fail & mismanagement of economy

miju

before taking into account mis-spending / management of public projects , no i'm not trolling

i wanna hear peoples opinions on hearing fianna fail somewhat gloat about nearlly €1 billion extra in the coffers from tax this year does it not strike anyone that they are actually so bad at managing the economy that they're estimates are out by over €1 billion

civdef

If you're going to be out in your estimates, it's better be out this way than having less money than you expected. Predicting how the economy will develop isn't an exact science, and I'm sure conservative estimates are chosen as the ones to budget off.

miju

true , but a conservative estimate IMO should be out by about 100-300 million but definitely not out by €1 billion that to me smells of mismanagement and while fair enough it's hard to predict the free market the figure that they are out by is quite simply dumbfounding

Sleepy

I'd be more interested in where they plan to spend it tbh. More tax breaks for the construction industry? Fanning the bubble's flames further? The healthcare money-pit?

Or might they actually be sensible and invest that billion into our education system?

bk

:rolleyes: This is just an indication of how conservative FF have been in the management of the economy. This is actually a very good thing.

gilroyb

Estimates are prepared by the Department of Finance. Both the Department themselves, and the Minister in charge, gain from having conservative estimates as it helps to keep expectations in check.

Sleepy

Sleepy wrote:

I'd be more interested in where they plan to spend it tbh. More tax breaks for the construction industry? Fanning the bubble's flames further? The healthcare money-pit?

Or might they actually be sensible and invest that billion into our education system?

Pay off last of debts or SSIAs maybe?

Education sector could probably do with some (well planned, sensible) investment too

Bards

That €1Bn actually belongs to the people. I.E We over paid tax by €1Bn. Remember the Govt does not generate Wealth it spends the wealth that was created by every worker/business in this country.

More than likely it will go towards the next round of benchmarking

banaman

I think its a deliberate ploy. After all if they were to report that their estimates were wrong and in deficit they'd be slagged as incompetent so if they decide to be ultra cautious(cynical) in their estimates they get a pat on the back. Its like the manager of a sporting team saying " sure we've no chance, we'll be happy with a draw".
The other point is what are they going to do with the money? For exmple there is a longstanding acceptance of the need for education and a committment to provide a quality service and yet when ALL education people state that smaller class sizes would really make a difference Mary Harney says "it ain't gonna happen". Hypocrisy. the money will go for short term political gain, TD's wages and expenses and breaks for their mates, while the rest of the country becomes more unequal and divided.

LostinBlanch

Well I heard on the radio this morning that Cowen wanted to borrow €3 billion to balance the books this year. So that would be a place to start.

But he's only going to borrow that to throw everything at those gullible enough to be bribed to vote for FF / PDs. If we're not careful it could be 1977 all over again :mad:

ISAW

miju wrote:

before taking into account mis-spending / management of public projects , no i'm not trolling

i wanna hear peoples opinions on hearing fianna fail somewhat gloat about nearlly €1 billion extra in the coffers from tax this year does it not strike anyone that they are actually so bad at managing the economy that they're estimates are out by over €1 billion

It ISNT a FF extimate is it? Surely the Deptartment of finance or the Central bank put out such figures?

ISAW

miju wrote:

true , but a conservative estimate IMO should be out by about 100-300 million but definitely not out by €1 billion that to me smells of mismanagement and while fair enough it's hard to predict the free market the figure that they are out by is quite simply dumbfounding

You CANT have it both ways. You cant claim FF are responsible for putting out an estimate do to their job creation policy and also that they are not responsible for the job creation.

Either they are responsible for the jobs and the policy created so many jobs that tax revenue was up or they are not responsible for creating the exonomic conditions which resulted in the increased tax take. If they are not responsible for the policy then they are not responsible for the increased tax take.

So which is it? did FF create all those jobs or alternayively are then not responsible for the estimate being low.

ISAW

banaman wrote:

I think its a deliberate ploy. After all if they were to report that their estimates were wrong and in deficit they'd be slagged as incompetent so if they decide to be ultra cautious(cynical) in their estimates they get a pat on the back. Its like the manager of a sporting team saying " sure we've no chance, we'll be happy with a draw".
The other point is what are they going to do with the money? For exmple there is a longstanding acceptance of the need for education and a committment to provide a quality service and yet when ALL education people state that smaller class sizes would really make a difference Mary Harney says "it ain't gonna happen". Hypocrisy. the money will go for short term political gain, TD's wages and expenses and breaks for their mates, while the rest of the country becomes more unequal and divided.

Please explain to me haow one can spend E1000,000,000 on expenses. AFAIK the Dail costs about 17 million a year - thats over fifty years spending or a fifty times increase o spend such a surplus.

miju

ISAW wrote:

You CANT have it both ways. You cant claim FF are responsible for putting out an estimate do to their job creation policy and also that they are not responsible for the job creation.

Either they are responsible for the jobs and the policy created so many jobs that tax revenue was up or they are not responsible for creating the exonomic conditions which resulted in the increased tax take. If they are not responsible for the policy then they are not responsible for the increased tax take.

So which is it? did FF create all those jobs or alternayively are then not responsible for the estimate being low.

no sorry i dont buy the line of fianna fail created all the jobs in this country despite what they like to claim and if they're responsible for policy then they are ovbivously responsible for the extra cash but also when they were coming up with this policy you'd think that maybe that would have been able to get they're estimates a bit more accurate

it's not the first time either they've been out in their estimates by quite a large amount

gilroyb

banaman wrote:

The other point is what are they going to do with the money? For exmple there is a longstanding acceptance of the need for education and a committment to provide a quality service and yet when ALL education people state that smaller class sizes would really make a difference Mary Harney says "it ain't gonna happen".

Can you show evidence of this? I believe you have confused it with when she said that larger wage increases for nurses "ain't gonna happen". I think the PDs have firmly committed themselves to smaller class sizes.

miju

miju wrote:

does it not strike anyone that they are actually so bad at managing the economy that they're estimates are out by over €1 billion

Clearly they underestimated how good they would be. Remember when we used to talk about national debts of billions and shortfalls in budgets? To think people believe FG/Labour is a viable alternative

Isn't life under FF GREAT...

gurramok

Deleted User wrote:

Clearly they underestimated how good they would be. Remember when we used to talk about national debts of billions and shortfalls in budgets? To think people believe FG/Labour is a viable alternative

Isn't life under FF GREAT...

Will you be saying that when the windfall taxes from property fall significantly?

Income tax is less than last year, most of surplus in taxes is from buying and selling of property, i'd wish they'd manage the rest of the economy properly than relying on property to balance the books.

gurramok

gurramok wrote:

Will you be saying that when the windfall taxes from property fall significantly?

The guy who bought Jurys in Ballsbridge back a few months ago doesn't think the sky will fall in.

Is there something you know that he, with his €400 million investment, doesn't? Share it...

gurramok

Its not if the property tax returns falls, its when.

So you think the property windfall will continue indefinitely, that is a very narrow viewpoint of economics.

The property boom will end or lets all hope level off sometime and these big tax surpluses will defintely end at some point in the future, how will the govt cope to balance the books?
The stats released about tax surplus do not point to where the extra money will come from as the vital areas of income tax(which is less) and vat returns which will fall as its the 4th straight month of falling consumer confidence.

Glenbhoy

Is there something you know that he, with his €400 million investment, doesn't? Share it...

Alternatively, is there something that Mr Dunne, the taoiseach's good friend knows about the possibility of getting planning permission for 32 storey high apartment blocks (apparently that's the height needed to make his project financially viable) that we don't??

Glenbhoy

Can you show evidence of this? I believe you have confused it with when she said that larger wage increases for nurses "ain't gonna happen". I think the PDs have firmly committed themselves to smaller class sizes.

They can committ all they want, the target was to have all class sizes reduced by 2005, unfortunately the number of children in classes with 30 or more children has increased in the interim - why? There is no excuse for that, they've had 10 years to sort that, it's relatively easy, but they haven't - why??
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/0615/1105114227HM1CLASSES.html

John_C

Glenbhoy wrote:

They can committ all they want, the target was to have all class sizes reduced by 2005, unfortunately the number of children in classes with 30 or more children has increased in the interim - why? There is no excuse for that, they've had 10 years to sort that, it's relatively easy, but they haven't - why??
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/0615/1105114227HM1CLASSES.html

This is wildly off topic but didn't they change their mind and decided instead to concentrate the new teachers in schools for disabled or disadvantaged children? That's a policy I'm in favour of.

Glenbhoy

This is wildly off topic but didn't they change their mind and decided instead to concentrate the new teachers in schools for disabled or disadvantaged children? That's a policy I'm in favour of.

I know that schools in disadvantaged areas do indeed have class sizes of 24 or under, that however is not an achievement, that is a partial achievement of their initial goal, one which is apparently still being pursued. In fairness to the department, it is at least a good example of prioritisation, which is something we see too little of from government departments.

ISAW

miju wrote:

no sorry i dont buy the line of fianna fail created all the jobs in this country despite what they like to claim and if they're responsible for policy then they are ovbivously responsible for the extra cash but also when they were coming up with this policy you'd think that maybe that would have been able to get they're estimates a bit more accurate

it's not the first time either they've been out in their estimates by quite a large amount

As i explained the estimates are made by the Department of Finance and NOT Fianna Fæil! But you again are trying to have it both ways. You are stating FF are not responsible for achieving job targets that others are the ones who drove this policy. At the same time you are saying that FF ARE responsible for underestamating the tax take based on the tax taken from the underestamated job creation.

How can they be responsible for underestamating the target for tax taken on jobs and at the same time NOT be responsible for underestamitaing the Target of those jobs???
the "extra cash" as you call it is actually extra tax based on extra jobs extra busibness and extra squeesing of tax cheats. so if they got the extra tax target wrong it is because the extra regulation extra business done and extra jobs were underestamated. But it seems you cant admit that by FF being wrong in their tax take target it means they overachieved in their target of stopping fraud, creating jobs and stimulating business.

You clearly show a bias in you opinion.

And note I didnt say FF are responsible for anything! clearly the government are only one part of social partnership and there are TWO parties in government! But you cant claim when A causes B that ONLY B is FF's responsibility but the cause of B i.e. an overachievement in A is NOT FF's responsibility! It is a contradiction to make such a claim.

But in any case, in spite of contradicting yourself, where did FF actually make these claims? You said that FF voerestimated the tax take. where did they do that? I thought the civil service are responsible for that are they not?

ISAW

Bards wrote:

That €1Bn actually belongs to the people. I.E We over paid tax by €1Bn. Remember the Govt does not generate Wealth it spends the wealth that was created by every worker/business in this country.

More than likely it will go towards the next round of benchmarking

The people havent OVERPAID tax! the tax was at the cortrect rate. If not it would have to be given back. the increased number of workers and business coupled with the drop in tax shelters and cheats meant that the tax take was more than expected. and the money does belong to the State. And the State will spend it. I also hope not on making fat civil servants even fatter.

Glenbhoy

Glenbhoy wrote:

Alternatively, is there something that Mr Dunne, the taoiseach's good friend knows about the possibility of getting planning permission for 32 storey high apartment blocks (apparently that's the height needed to make his project financially viable) that we don't??

Well, maybe there's some huge fraud going on with Bertie that only you know about.

Or maybe he employs engineers and architects who have a fair idea whether you'll get planning for a dog kennel or a skyscraper in a certain area. After all, they are paid millions to know this stuff.

Now what do you think it is? You still plumping for the dark conspiracy going all the way to the leader of FF and the country, or the realistic rational explanation?

Glenbhoy

Now what do you think it is? You still plumping for the dark conspiracy going all the way to the leader of FF and the country, or the realistic rational explanation?

So who decides on planning issues anyway? Is it the architects, planning consultants and the planners in collaboration, or may it be totally irrelevant what these professionals say, since it may just come down to a few local councillors anyway - presumably they vote with their consciences now and don't operate a whip system as previously.

Glenbhoy

Glenbhoy wrote:

So who decides on planning issues anyway?

Usually, planning officials in County Councils. They are, of course, not elected. Nor are they all friends of Bertie Ahern.

But if you are specifically saying that Bertie Ahern has a hand in this planning, why don't you do so instead of making vague and completely unsubstantiated allegations that are plucked out of thin air?

Glenbhoy

But if you are specifically saying that Bertie Ahern has a hand in this planning, why don't you do so instead of making vague and completely unsubstantiated allegations that are plucked out of thin air?

Conor, at no point did anyone make any allegations, perhaps if you went back and read my previous comments you would see that. In fact, this statement contradicts itself, on the one hand, you tell me to make specific allegations, on the other, you say, i've already made such!

So who decides on planning issues anyway?


Usually, planning officials in County Councils.

What? Perhaps enquiring as to the workings of local government and local government powers would be of some use to you.

ISAW

Glenbhoy wrote:

Conor, at no point did anyone make any allegations, perhaps if you went back and read my previous comments you would see that. In fact, this statement contradicts itself, on the one hand, you tell me to make specific allegations, on the other, you say, i've already made such!

What? Perhaps enquiring as to the workings of local government and local government powers would be of some use to you.

Here is what you stated:

... is there something that Mr Dunne, the taoiseach's good friend knows about the possibility of getting planning permission for 32 storey high apartment blocks (apparently that's the height needed to make his project financially viable) that we don't??

Now perhaps you will explain what that means? what do you mean by your suggestion that Dunne somehow knows that he will get planning permission for a 32 story building. what is the significance of stating that we don't know something about the process that Dunne does know? And what is the significance of stating he is a personal friend of the Taoiseach?

IWe mat well hear the thud as you climb down from your horse on the high ground and now assert that you were not claiming anything about corruption.

Glenbhoy

what do you mean by your suggestion that Dunne somehow knows that he will get planning permission for a 32 story building.

That was not suggested by me at all - however the size of his investment would indicate that he's either quietly confident or an idiot (his record thus far would indicate he's not).

what is the significance of stating that we don't know something about the process that Dunne does know?

That was a retort to Conor's earlier comment to gurramok:

Is there something you know that he, with his €400 million investment, doesn't? Share it...

It's was an attempt at humour, obviously not found amusing by many of you.

And what is the significance of stating he is a personal friend of the Taoiseach?

A good tabloid journo would never leave that out!!

IWe mat well hear the thud as you climb down from your horse on the high ground and now assert that you were not claiming anything about corruption.

Honestly lads, read my posts - where did i allege or claim anything about corruption - if that's what you took from it that's your perogative, but there is no allegation. Sure we all know that our leader is a man of the people, who does'nt like the fancy things in life. A pint of bass and seeing the Dubs take an All Ireland and Man Utd win the league are all he wants from life (lack of both in recent years may explain his recent bout of irritableness with poor Deputy Higgins et.al.).

banaman

ISAW wrote:

Please explain to me haow one can spend E1000,000,000 on expenses. AFAIK the Dail costs about 17 million a year - thats over fifty years spending or a fifty times increase o spend such a surplus.

Obviously I was not implying that all the surplus would be spent on Td's salaries and expenses. the point I was attempting to make was that in a country that regularly comes at or near the bottom of the OECD tables for equality and EU tables on Health Services is it acceptable for our political representatives to spend our money in the way that they do? From my post you can take it that I do not think it acceptable.
For some of my reasons see the link below:-
http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=opinion-qqqm=opinion-qqqa=general-qqqid=7782-qqqx=1.asp

banaman

Can you show evidence of this? I believe you have confused it with when she said that larger wage increases for nurses "ain't gonna happen". I think the PDs have firmly committed themselves to smaller class sizes.
You may be right. My apologies. I may have got the wrong Mary H the qoute may be from Mary Hanafin. However the point remains despite much publicised claims of committment and government concern. There has been no delivery.
See link below:-
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2005/05/03/story645158260.asp

I believe the same is true in the case of the schools building programme, A&E conditions, infrastructure, etc. The politicians talk the talk but nothing much changes. Perhaps the old graffitti saying "if voting changed anything it would be illegal" may contain some truth?

Lemming

With regards Dunne's recent property purchase, the general consensus from the building industry would appear to be that he was insane to pay the price he did (or so the media would have us believe by recent article quotations)

So ... either he has a loop-hole tucked away somewhere that few people know about or else he's lost the plot. Or has somebody's ear (and given that this is Ireland .. probably somebody's account number too *)



* Note: this is called "humour" in case any builders, speculators, or politician-@rse-lickers get their panties in a twist]

ISAW

Glenbhoy wrote:

That was not suggested by me at all -

here is what yu stated again

... is there something that Mr Dunne, the taoiseach's good friend knows about the possibility of getting planning permission for 32 storey high apartment blocks (apparently that's the height needed to make his project financially viable) that we don't??

Now what did you mean by the above comment?

It's was an attempt at humour, obviously not found amusing by many of you.

Funny or not what did you mean by it?

A good tabloid journo would never leave that out!!

and you are a tabloid journalist are you? And what makes a "good" tabliod journalist?

Honestly lads, read my posts - where did i allege or claim anything about corruption - if that's what you took from it that's your perogative, but there is no allegation.

what did you mean by the above comment that dunne somehow knows he is getting planning permission and linking that with Dunne being a personal friend of the Taoiseach? How is that a joke? How is it funny?

ISAW

banaman wrote:

Obviously I was not implying that all the surplus would be spent on Td's salaries and expenses. the point I was attempting to make was that in a country that regularly comes at or near the bottom of the OECD tables for equality and EU tables on Health Services

Really? I suppose you will support that comment and now give me a reference to the last three in a series and show where Ireland is at or near the bottom? I note you didnt refer to OECD tables on education, Gdp per Capita, Purchasing Power Parity, economic growth, Rate of construction, inflation, Unemployment, and the other usual ways of rating a countries economic performance.

Is it acceptable for our political representatives to spend our money in the way that they do?

Our political representatives dont do that! Soenm political repreasetatives i.e. the cabinet have an ability to spend minor amounts of State money. the vast majority is handled by the civil and public service. of the one or two per cent of the money that cabinet can play with almost all of it is controlled by the Minister of Finance (also advised by more civil servants) . It is unusual for a Minister (like charlie Haughey for example when he defied T K Whittaker and introduced free travel) to move against the officials.

I accept that things like the particular electronic voting system adopted are a waste of 40 odd million. But even this waste isnt anywhere near the planning of the economy!

From my post you can take it that I do not think it acceptable.
For some of my reasons see the link below:-
http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=opinion-qqqm=opinion-qqqa=general-qqqid=7782-qqqx=1.asp[/QUOTE]

the reasons that TDs get the pay they do is because they are linked to civil service pay grades I have gone over this before I just started at A and looked up Agriculture. forestry inspectors, economists, principla officers etc. etc. there is one Minister and two junior ministers and say maybe their secretaries. As opposed to dozens of civil servants on the same money!

Now they do not have to be in the Dail all thge time that is true. But civil servants clock off at five. TD are on call at all times. Of course they can neglect to do their job - and then they will lose their seat! Take a typical party TD . Say Fianna Fail. They have about twenty something cummans per constituency in Dublin (maybe a hundred in some rural areas). They also have the constituency body and a national body and several "working groups" and a youth section. Now the TD may not be on all of them but is likely to be on some of them. But he certainly will have to get to the constituency stuff. Say he gets around to a third of the cumann and to the constituency meeting. thats eight week nights a month taken up.

Ther are also the residents associations "emergency halting site is being set up" or "anti drugs" type meetings. Or it could be a local disaster e.g. flooding or a big factory closing or a fire. There a re community fora, neighbourhoosd watch, sports centres and clubs, old peoples groups, local bodies like colleges, schools, co operatives , etc.

TDs get invited to all of these. Say they concentrate on the "essential party stuff" eight meetings. Add in another twenty odd nights of party fundraisers dinners, quiz nights, race nights etc. about two more a month. Now you are up to half the weeknights in the month (okay the dinners are usually on weekends buty oubs give you free rooms to have things mid week also). also all this is done outside of summer so the ten nights a month seems okay.

At this point i have only covered party stuff and not all the crises, and other organisation and not the national party ( there are also the likes of 1916 commemerations, ) hAnd there are oth3r organisations the TD might be a member of say Amnesty International for example have a march or a talk with some international speaker. The TD has to go to that!

then there are the Clinics. Most TD usually hold thies on non Dail days a monday for example and probably also on a weekend . Usually say from morning to lunchtime. theres at least one of the "two days off a week" taken up! Now aks yourself whether the civil servants who get paid the same as that TD but clock off at five on Friday and you dont see them till monday put in the same time? Also the civil servant is there for life.

Maybe public representatives are overpaid. I would be quite happy to suggest that they take a pay cut - as long as all the relatd civil service grades ALSO take that cut.

Glenbhoy

ISAW, I firstly apologise for having offended you, if i'd known ff'ers were so sensitive I probably would'nt have made the comments in the first place. I know that things are'nt going well for ye at the moment, but really you should'nt take it out on a poor prospective voter.
If you perhaps read your last post, which attempted to dissect an earlier post of mine (now, i mean, actually read it this time), then you could quite easily answer every question you posed. The key is in semantics, don't be trying to read things into posts that aren't there, just follow the actual language.
Anyway, I have no wish to engage any further on this matter, save to reitterate, i am staggered by your sensitivity (to the extent that i'm starting to think you are actually one of the named parties).
You really should work on that blind loyalty though, that can get people into trouble (and i'm not going to quote the various historical references of such).
Finally, you can read whatever you like into a bit of harmless banter on a not very popular bulletin board, I don't care and refuse to respond on that topic again. If you'd like to engage on the dangers your beloveds have imposed on this economy through their inaction on the housing crisis, I'll happily respond.

ISAW

Glenbhoy wrote:

ISAW, I firstly apologise for having offended you, if i'd known ff'ers were so sensitive I probably would'nt have made the comments in the first place. I know that things are'nt going well for ye at the moment, but really you should'nt take it out on a poor prospective voter.

I am not offended nor have I been. No act of contrition is necessary.

You really should work on that blind loyalty though, that can get people into trouble (and i'm not going to quote the various historical references of such).

what blind loyalty? I was not making a party point nor supporting any party. i was only making that point for all public represeatatives no matter what the party as referred to in the Examiner article reference you supplied.

[edit - banaman supplied. sorry ]

Ireland actually is in my opinion well served by its public reps. Take another example. the MEP. Media constantly criticise them as fat cats but Irish MEPs fare far far better than their British Counterparts and are highly regarded Europe. Pat Cox for example is an independent from a countrywith 13 Euro seats in a parliament of 732. Yet he became President of the parliament! A non party guy!

Finally, you can read whatever you like into a bit of harmless banter on a not very popular bulletin board, I don't care and refuse to respond on that topic again. If you'd like to engage on the dangers your beloveds have imposed on this economy through their inaction on the housing crisis, I'll happily respond.

Again you cant attack one particular policy of the government you dont like and then apply this to all representatives in all parties (and independents for that matter).
As regards housing.
Ireland is building more houses than Britian for God's sake! Okay Ill admit demand is greater than supply but both the demand and the prices are as a result of economic success! construction is currently booming!

And I dont say I love all public reps but I do respect what they put into the job. the tired old "90 days holidays" could be applied to public servants also. Do you really believe that public reps go off abroad for the whole Summer and forget about their voters when the House isnt sitting?

Glenbhoy

Glenbhoy wrote:

ff'ers were so sensitive
you should'nt take it out on a poor prospective voter
i am staggered by your sensitivity
blind loyalty
your beloveds

Gotta be the most transparent climb down here!!

Anyway, so you chanced it on about linking Bertie to planning corruption, when pulled up on it you initially went on about semantics, then kinda diluted that whole line by suggesting that anyone who questioned you on your information must be straight outta FF HQ, or that you were doing it becasue that's what the tabloids do...

What you are clearly saying is 'you know that link I made between Bertie Ahern and a specific planning application, well I want to do a u-turn please'.

I can see why you want to drop to topic though. Watching you try to backtrack and explain it away, while changing tack and attack at the same time, is kinda enjoyable.