Green Party - "Lets tax everything we can possibly make an excuse for"

MrVostro

I didnt vote green, but i've always been sympathetic to their ideals.
When they had the chance i thought they shoudl either "sh!t or get off the pot" and had much respect for them when they put themselves into a position to make a difference.

Now a while down the line i think they have become the "Increase Tax party".

Instead of being radical and perhaps taxing fuel instead of VRT and roadtax so that the poluter pays, they will be increasing tax all round. So that EVERYONE pays more, but the poluter just pays even more than anyone else.

Along with a few other things that they are doing i think they are on their way to extinction as a political party in Ireland.

On another note.

Some years ago Fingal Co Co justified their bin charges by charging for putting out your bin only. With the mantra "You only pay for what you throw away".

Now, we are obviously not throwing enough away so they want us to pay a yearly charge PLUS for what we throw away.
Where is the logic here. If they need to make more money then increase the charge per lift only (like they've already done) to make up any shortfall. Dont penalise those who try not to create rubbish even more just so you garauntee money.

Stark

Bang on. Nothing much has changed under the Green Party except we pay more for things. I thought that maybe once they got into power that we'd see a change in the status quo and more focus on alternative options to private car transport in contrast to the PD's Thatcheresque attitude to transport. So far we've seen zilch. Now we're going to have to shell out loads in Kyoto emissions penalties, when that money could have been going into improving our infrastructure and thereby our quality of life. But why have people getting on a train, when you could be squeezing them dry through car taxes.

MrVosto wrote:

Instead of being radical and perhaps taxing fuel instead of VRT and roadtax so that the poluter pays, they will be increasing tax all round. So that EVERYONE pays more, but the poluter just pays even more than anyone else.

Yup, by hiking up the flat rate cost on cars, they're just going to encourage people to "try and get the use out of it". Hiking up the tax on fuel would have done more good and make people actually think twice about using their cars to drive the equivalent of a 10 minute walk every time they need to pick up a litre of milk, go to mass, head to the post office etc.

guinnessdrinker

What they could have tried too was to keep vrt but abolish motor tax completely and raise the tax on fuel. In this way, people pay tax in accordance to the milage they clock up.

Might not have worked but at least they could have put more thought into the area of motor tax reform.

AckwelFoley

lol, guys IVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS!!!!!

But like the Sinn Fein They get their votes by harping on about a specific cause..

Greens,, SAVE THE PLANET (but when we get in we're gonna tax everything and run out free enterprise)

Sinn Fein SAVE IRELAND! BRITS OUT! (but when we get in we're going to rule communist style baby!)

spank_inferno

Stark wrote: »

I thought that maybe once they got into power that we'd see a change in the status quo and more focus on alternative options to private car transport in contrast to the PD's Thatcheresque attitude to transport. So far we've seen zilch.

Point... How may PD ministers of transport or environment have there been in the last 4 governments? If your going to blame someone at least get your facts right.

I agree that the Greens havent been as radical as many would have hoped in government. I think not getting the transport ministary has restricted their scope for radical change somewhat.
Its also pretty galling that we the taxpayer will have to pay hundreds of millions in penalties for government policy not of our choosing.

Stark

spank_inferno wrote: »

Point... How may PD ministers of transport or environment have there been in the last 4 governments? If your going to blame someone at least get your facts right.

I mean in terms of overall influence that the smaller party would have on the larger party. You'd expect the PDs to be more economically right-wing: lower taxes, more private spending power so people can purchase better services vs economically left-wing: higher taxes and more Government provided services. Granted, FF are to blame for taking that influence and applying it where it doesn't work as well.

DadaKopf

Goyz, the Greens have sensible 'polluter-pay' taxation policies. They're fully behind a car taxation system which encourages people to leave the car at home when they can by abolishing the flat-rate tax.

But look at the political reality, dudes. You have a small party with good ideas representing a small constituency, and then you have FF and civil servants not wanting to make trouble for themselves. So, good as the Greens' actual proposals were, they never get implemented in a way that is right and fair for the Irish people. That's the realpolitik.

On the subject of bin charges, look: Councils have no other means to raise revenue. We're supposed to have a system of local government in this country, but it's completely dysfunctional. The idea behind local government is for democracy to be closer to people, and for essential public services - schools, transport, health, sanitation etc. - to be more responsive to the needs of communities. But because the system doesn't work well, because most decisions are made by central government and a plethora of unaccountable agencies appointed by Bertie's team, because government funding is inadequate and councils have lost the ability to raise their own revenues to provide what services they can, our country is in the stink.

Instead of saying: 'right, X% of my income goes to Dublin, Y% goes to my council, and I get to decide how that's spent in my area', we've got people being sent to Mountjoy for refusing to pay itty bitty bin charges when the problem really is the lack of civic engagement and genuine democracy in this country.

We have to get real about the problems in this country. One of them is this: we want more services, but we want to pay less for them. How does this make sense?

brianthebard

DadaKopf wrote: »

We have to get real about the problems in this country. One of them is this: we want more services, but we want to pay less for them. How does this make sense?

By making those services more sustainable and less wasteful. Teh government is going all out to make people pay for water. A while ago it was our most plentiful resource, now if you listen to Gormley its massively scarce. Is the answer to make more use of grey water, to "recycle" more water, to start using toilets that use less water? No, obviously the answer is to make schools and farmers and eventually all home owners pay for it. Taxes have already paid for the upgrades to water treatment facilities so why should people be asked to pay for them again? And how can the government expect the people of galway to pay for water that isn't even drinkable? This is the mentality being applied by the green party and co. Why make electricity cleaner when you can just charge more for it? Why improve public transport when you can just charge people more for the pleasure of the only system of transport they can trust, their car? Of course if you were very cynical you might say that all these taxes were to make up a portion of the loss that the fall off in house building will bring. It might not bring in the 1 or 2 bn that the fall off will lose, but its a start I'm sure.

guinnessdrinker

brianthebard wrote: »

Of course if you were very cynical you might say that all these taxes were to make up a portion of the loss that the fall off in house building will bring. It might not bring in the 1 or 2 bn that the fall off will lose, but its a start I'm sure.

Although I am dissapointed with the Greens so far, it really is FF and to lesser extent PD's fault that the Gov. has become so over reliant on the construction industry as a source of tax revenue, (again all eggs in one basket never a good thing, people have said).

It would have been impossible for the construction boom to continue forever. The 2006 census showed that 15% of houses were lying empty. The demand for new houses has decreased. How are the gov. going to get around this, where are they going to make up the shortfall in tax revenue? Increase borrowing or raise taxes or both?

DadaKopf

brianthebard wrote:

By making those services more sustainable and less wasteful. Teh government is going all out to make people pay for water. A while ago it was our most plentiful resource, now if you listen to Gormley its massively scarce. Is the answer to make more use of grey water, to "recycle" more water, to start using toilets that use less water? No, obviously the answer is to make schools and farmers and eventually all home owners pay for it. Taxes have already paid for the upgrades to water treatment facilities so why should people be asked to pay for them again? And how can the government expect the people of galway to pay for water that isn't even drinkable? This is the mentality being applied by the green party and co. Why make electricity cleaner when you can just charge more for it? Why improve public transport when you can just charge people more for the pleasure of the only system of transport they can trust, their car? Of course if you were very cynical you might say that all these taxes were to make up a portion of the loss that the fall off in house building will bring. It might not bring in the 1 or 2 bn that the fall off will lose, but its a start I'm sure.

I didn't say I was in favour of water charges. I'm not - I think water is a universal right which we should only pay for through taxes. But it logically follows that if we are to have local government looking after local water needs, that must be paid for through taxation. But local authorities can't levvy taxes, so they must pay their share of water treatment through water charges. This is not an ideal situation.

Again, the problem is good ideas being scuppered by FF and vested interests.

It's a no-brainer not want less wasteful services and better value for money. But even still, we need a massive expansion of core public services just to bring us in line with the European averages. If we want European-style public services, we'll have to pay for them. Plain and simple.

The_Minister

Stark wrote: »

I mean in terms of overall influence that the smaller party would have on the larger party. You'd expect the PDs to be more economically right-wing: lower taxes, more private spending power so people can purchase better services vs economically left-wing: higher taxes and more Government provided services. Granted, FF are to blame for taking that influence and applying it where it doesn't work as well.

http://www.progressivedemocrats.ie/our_policies/
Here is a link to the last Progressive Democrats manifesto, including transport

Public Transport
In Government, the Progressive Democrats will:
• Prioritise the statutory establishment of the Dublin Transportation Authority, and establish a
national regulatory framework for public transport, which facilitates the optimum provision of
such services by way of a level playing field for all market participants.
• Upgrade public transport services in provincial cities and in the regions, including additional
buses, new bus priority measures and new park and ride sites.
• Mainstream accessibility for persons with disabilities across all modes of public transport,
including fully accessible city buses and enhancing the accessibility of bus and railway stations.
• Promote sustainable and integrated transport solutions, including clean urban public transport
modes, clean vehicle technologies and fuels, and walking and cycling.
(Please see our extensive environment policy chapter).
• Introduce a fully integrated, customer-friendly, smart card ticketing system in the Greater
Dublin Area, facilitating the use of different transport modes (bus, LUAS, DART, Irish Rail etc)
in single journeys.
• Invest € 90 million under the NDP in the Rural Transport Initiative.
• Implement our Access All Stations policy:
• Establish a passengers' charter to guarantee improved access to commuter rail stations
across the country.
• Ensure all commuter railway stations will have affordable and accessible local feeder
services, subsidised as necessary, based on best value for public money.
• Instruct the new Dublin Transport Authority (DTA), to carry out a study of feeder bus
services, car parking and park-and-ride services for all commuter rail stations.
• Ensure the DTA, Íarnród Éireann Rail and Local Authorities have clear areas of
responsibility for linking services and pedestrian access to stations.
• Work to see that in large urban areas commuters will not have to walk for more than
10 minutes to a stop for at least one form of public transport service, be it bus, LUAS,
DART, Metro or suburban rail.
• Develop a network of Park and Ride Facilities outside the M-50 as being critical to
cutting commute times and to fully exploit the existing rail network.
• Evaluate the scheduling and timeliness of bus and rail commuter services to support service
operators deliver adequate and appropriate service.
• Ensure adequate infrastructure so people may commute safely on bicycle and on foot.

Good economy needs good infrastructure, so that people can keep moving.

EDIT: Also, "thatcheresque" does not apply to the Progressive Democrats, there are big differences between them and Thatcher.

casey212

The whole environment thing is a scam from top to bottom. And don't try to pretend that individual people even have a choice in the matter.

Why do people expect the government to work in their favour?

This has never happened and never will.

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

I didn't say I was in favour of water charges. I'm not - I think water is a universal right which we should only pay for through taxes. But it logically follows that if we are to have local government looking after local water needs, that must be paid for through taxation. But local authorities can't levvy taxes, so they must pay their share of water treatment through water charges. This is not an ideal situation.

Again, the problem is good ideas being scuppered by FF and vested interests.

It's a no-brainer not want less wasteful services and better value for money. But even still, we need a massive expansion of core public services just to bring us in line with the European averages. If we want European-style public services, we'll have to pay for them. Plain and simple.

I pay enough taxes already mate. You have no idea where your tax euros go, and yet you are offering to hand over more. Not a bad gravy train to be on, if you can get it.

DadaKopf

The "whole environment" is a scam?

Ha.

edanto

Taxes have been shown to work - the plastic bag tax, the landfill levy. But don't try and pretend it was the Green Party's idea to 'tax everything we can make an excuse for', hell no, that's long-term Fianna Fail policy.

As Dadakopf says, local government is in a complete mess. So, what have the Greens done about that? http://www.environ.ie/en/PressMedia/ There's a story there about the Boundary committees being set up, which may be the first steps in a long reform. Also talk from the GP of directly elected mayors, a la London.

In the IT the other day, there was a big objection to the idea of elected mayor from none other than the 'I've got the job 'cos I was given it' City Manager of Dublin. He had the cheek to call the proposal undemocratic.

And this from a man that signed a deal with JC Decaux to let them put one hundred 5m high illuminated ads on our streets in exchange for a few bikes and then refused to show the elected councillors the contract saying that is was 'commercially sensitive'. Now if that's not a neon sign that things need to be reformed a local government level I don't know what is.

So, hold off on judging the Greens until you see what they do with their time. But if you want to blame some politicians for how expensive it is to live in Ireland and the impact of commuting/taxation on quality of life, then you can just pick any of the major parties that have been the lead coalition partner over the past 10 years or so.

DadaKopf

It's also historically accurate to say that taxation has played a hugely important role in the establishment of modern democracy in Europe. People getting angry about how their taxes are used is the cornerstone of democratic accountability. An active citizenry, united by the value of social solidarity and political participation transforms taxation from a burden to a benefit.

People shouldn't blame a party with little power to the mess Ireland's in. Blame FF and FG.

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

It's also historically accurate to say that taxation has played a hugely important role in the establishment of modern democracy in Europe. People getting angry about how their taxes are used is the cornerstone of democratic accountability. An active citizenry, united by the value of social solidarity and political participation transforms taxation from a burden to a benefit.

People shouldn't blame a party with little power to the mess Ireland's in. Blame FF and FG.

FF and FG are only puppets for the boys in Brussels. The dogs in the street know this.

The government is a business. They are in the business of gathering as much tax as possible, and then handing out this funding to known associates in the private sector.

DadaKopf

I know how things are, and what you say isn't strictly accurate. How things are is also unacceptable.

I'm talking about how things should be.

Small-mindedness is so typical of Ireland. Cop on.

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

I know how things are, and what you say isn't strictly accurate. How things are is also unacceptable.

I'm talking about how things should be.

Small-mindedness is so typical of Ireland. Cop on.

So you are an idealist.

The public voted these people in again and again and again without ever complaining. As someone once said, they don't vote someone in, they vote the last crowd out.

As for the Brussels connection, this is beyond debate. The greens/gormley are only implementing policy as they are told. However he unfortuanetly gets to be the smug idiot riding around on a bike.

These people are supposed to be public servants.

Is it not hypocritical to vote for these people and then complain when you are taxed to death.

Zaphod

The_Minister wrote: »

http://www.progressivedemocrats.ie/our_policies/
Here is a link to the last Progressive Democrats manifesto, including transport
[...]
Good economy needs good infrastructure, so that people can keep moving.

EDIT: Also, "thatcheresque" does not apply to the Progressive Democrats, there are big differences between them and Thatcher.

For some more laughs, check out their 2002 manifesto:

REGIONAL LINES
We will re-introduce passenger rail services on the following lines:
• Limerick-Shannon-Ennis-Galway
• Galway-Claremorris-Sligo
• Limerick-Waterford
Only a skeleton service is provided on the Limerick-Waterford route at present. We will upgrade this and introduce a proper timetable of services on the line.
We will also upgrade and expand the local rail service in Cork and we will introduce commuter rail services in Limerick, Galway and Waterford.

We will ensure fast and frequent commuter services on the following routes into Dublin:
• Dundalk-Drogheda-Connolly
• Arklow-Wicklow-Connolly
• Carlow-Kildare-Heuston
• Tullamore-Portlaoise-Kildare-Heuston
• Mullingar-Maynooth-Connolly
• Dublin-Dunboyne-Navan

LUAS
The Progressive Democrats will extend the network so that three
additional sections are operational by 2006. Using public-private partnerships where appropriate we
will extend:
• Line A from Red Cow to Citywest and Saggart
• Line A from Connolly to Docklands
• Line B from Sandyford to Cherrywood

METRO
On the basis of the progress that has been made to date on the planning of this project we are confident
that the first phase of the metro can be delivered during the term of office of the next government, with
extensions coming on stream quickly thereafter. Our timetable for opening is:
• Sandyford-City Centre-Dublin Airport 2007
• City Centre-Blanchardstown 2007
• Sandyford-Shanganagh extension 2008
• Dublin Airport-Swords extension 2008

The full 90 pages of horse**** is here.

The_Minister

Has any party, ever, in all of Irish history, ever achieved its manifesto? No.

That manifesto reflects the goals of the party, what they would like to achieve, and what they will lobby for, in government.
A coalition government is about co-operation and compromise, it applies to every party that you can name. There was not a PD Minister for Transport in that timeframe, so they would have had to negotiate with FF to try to get their policy implemented (and alot of it has been promised under Transport 21, even if it is late)

casey212

The_Minister wrote: »

Has any party, ever, in all of Irish history, ever achieved its manifesto? No.

That manifesto reflects the goals of the party, what they would like to achieve, and what they will lobby for, in government.
A coalition government is about co-operation and compromise, it applies to every party that you can name. There was not a PD Minister for Transport in that timeframe, so they would have had to negotiate with FF to try to get their policy implemented (and alot of it has been promised under Transport 21, even if it is late)

Maybe you are right, however in my honest opinion, a party manifesto is something used to fool the electorate before an election takes place.

The_Minister

casey212 wrote: »

Maybe you are right, however in my honest opinion, a party manifesto is something used to fool the electorate before an election takes place.

I try to be so cynical. I've found that if you look for an ulterior motive in Irish (or any) politics, then you will always find one, even if that motive is getting support by being seen to have no ulterior motive.
A manifesto should be indicative of the basic approach that a party will take to problems that it will encounter in government, and should show what the party thinks it should and can achieve, under favorable circumstances (ie. not two TDs and one ministry.

Mr.Micro

I for one believe that any manifesto is not worth the paper its printed on. A manifesto IMO is just a slick advert to get votes and is not a contract or legally binding once in office. Now there is a teaser, if a manifesto was legally binding then perhaps we would all be polarized and vote for the right reasons and get what we voted for.:D

casey212

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I for one believe that any manifesto is not worth the paper its printed on. A manifesto IMO is just a slick advert to get votes and is not a contract or legally binding once in office. Now there is a teaser, if a manifesto was legally binding then perhaps we would all be polarized and vote for the right reasons and get what we voted for.:D

Legal matters don't matter if you run the legal system.

Why do people vote anyway, that only gives the impression that "democracy" exists. I can assure you it does not.

DadaKopf

casey212 wrote: »

Why do people vote anyway, that only gives the impression that "democracy" exists. I can assure you it does not.

Assure me. Do you have concrete evidence of this being true?

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

Assure me. Do you have concrete evidence of this being true?

Just look at the amount of scams pulled on the public.

DadaKopf

Like what?

ednwireland

i actually agree (gave greens a preference) but its all stick and no carrot. i beleive its easier to introduce new taxes rather the do something that will help the environment (how about getting rid of vat on green products) its a bit like introducing new laws to solve speeding and drink driving rather than enforcing the existing laws.
govs like to be seen to be doing something if it doesnt work they can blame the people for not doing it.
i would love to put in solar water heating and wind power to power my home but i cant afford it.

djpbarry

ednwireland wrote: »

i would love to put in solar water heating and wind power to power my home but i cant afford it.

I'm pretty sure government grants are available for that sort of thing through SEI.

eoinmadden

ednwireland wrote: »

but its all stick and no carrot.

Are you perhaps forgetting that the new motor tax changes are designed to be revenue neutral for the government?
That car tax will be lowered for new cars with low carbon emissions? That car tax is being scrapped for electric vehicles?

eoinmadden

And by the way,
apart from car tax changes what other new taxes have been introduced since the Greens entered the coalition government?

guinnessdrinker

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm pretty sure government grants are available for that sort of thing through SEI.

It's still very expensive dj, even if you are awarded a grant.

There's some grant figures at the bottom of this article which are not that high considering the cost of the equipment needed.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0903/breaking43.htm

Here is another article from last September, great ideas but very costly to implement.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/green-eco-plan-adds-836415000-to-house-cost-1085476.html

djpbarry

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

There's some grant figures at the bottom of this article which are not that high considering the cost of the equipment needed.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0903/breaking43.htm

Ah, now, those grants are not at all bad. I realise the equipment can be expensive, but if you were buying say, a biomass boiler, the grant would cover about 20 - 50% of the cost, depending on the size of the boiler. There's a few different models here.

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

Here is another article from last September, great ideas but very costly to implement.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/green-eco-plan-adds-836415000-to-house-cost-1085476.html

First of all, the cost of the houses in question is subject to variation, based on the dynamics of the market. Secondly, even if one of these houses was to cost an extra €15,000, this would easily be recouped in energy savings during the house's lifetime.

guinnessdrinker

djpbarry wrote: »

Secondly, even if one of these houses was to cost an extra €15,000, this would easily be recouped in energy savings during the house's lifetime.

True of course, but when building a house every extra cent is an expense. A neighbour of mine currently building a house wanted to put in either geothermal or wood pellets and got various quotes but unfortunatly just could not afford either in the short run. If they got approved with a larger mortgage maybe but not always easy.

Forgot to say, some of the quotes were significantly more that €15,000.

OTK

MrVostro wrote: »

Instead of being radical and perhaps taxing fuel instead of VRT and roadtax so that the poluter pays, they will be increasing tax all round. So that EVERYONE pays more, but the poluter just pays even more than anyone else.

Motor tax for existing cars went up 10% - but this was the first rise in 4 years. Allowing for inflation, there was no rise in motor tax for existing vehicles. For new and imported cars, some people will pay more VRT and motor tax and some will pay less depending on the car they choose. "EVERYONE pays more' is not true.

Changing tax rates so that some activities are encouraged and some discouraged is often effective at changing behaviour but always going to be unpopular. Even in this case where the changes for cars were revenue neutral.

The changes in motor tax to an emissions based system, were proposed initially by the EU, implemented by various countries years before us and even flagged by Brian Cowen in 2006 before the Greens entered government so it wasn't a case of Gormley dreaming up these changes on his own.

Government is now having difficulty maintaining tax revenues as the economy slows and will seek to raise rates and think up new taxes. Naturally, FF will try to blame the Greens and this will be lapped up by the bleating public.

Back to your thread title: what other taxes are the greens proposing?

moe_sizlak

casey212 wrote: »

FF and FG are only puppets for the boys in Brussels. The dogs in the street know this.

The government is a business. They are in the business of gathering as much tax as possible, and then handing out this funding to known associates in the private sector.

really , looks like its been the public sector our taxes have been used to over pay this past few years and regardless of the slowing economy , looks like thats where most of our taxes will go in the future

casey212

moe_sizlak wrote: »

really , looks like its been the public sector our taxes have been used to over pay this past few years and regardless of the slowing economy , looks like thats where most of our taxes will go in the future

A bit of both in fairness. I remember doing a pyschometric test for the civil service 2 years ago. Over 2000 people for 15 jobs, you only have to look at the pay scales/holiday time/sick leave/pensions (i could keep going) to figure out why. It also appears to be very much a closed shop. They should have a space on the application where you could mention relatives, friends or whatever because in the end thats how you get in.

Then you also have to look at the handing out of state contracts which is based on a similar concept. Look at the west link toll bridge. Talk about the biggest scam this country has seen in a while, and there is more to come on that front.

However as I mentioned people should not expect anything from the government.

casey212

From reading most of these posts I get the feeling that people actually enjoy paying taxes. Have you heard of my "save the whales foundation"?

edanto

So now you disagree with the concept of taxes, along with our government? Maybe you should get your own thread.

casey212

edanto wrote: »

So now you disagree with the concept of taxes, along with our government? Maybe you should get your own thread.

I agree with an accountable government with an accountable tax policy. Are you telling me that both are present in this country?

OTK

casey212 wrote: »

I agree with an accountable government with an accountable tax policy. Are you telling me that both are present in this country?

Yes. Every five years the government is accountable to the people in a general election, during which, people can show their approval of government policies by re-electing them, or their disapproval by electing somebody else.

Do you think there should be more direct democracy? Perhaps the budget should be ratified by a referendum. Is this what you're thinking?

fly_agaric

casey212 wrote: »

...civil service pensions...

That seems to be everyones favourite whipping-boy now.

Businesses over the last few years have decided en-masse that having good employee pension schemes was taking far far too much money away from upper-level management bonuses and shareholder profits.

Now the pressure is on for the govt. to trim some fat from these juicy public-sector pensions and hand it over it to, you guessed it, the same people (top earners and businesses), in the form of tax cuts...

After all, everyone should really be boiled up and sold for glue once they've become too old to work any more so count your blessings...

Funny thing is, I remember when the economic garden looked so rosy some years ago the monkey-boys in civil service/public sector jobs were being laughed at because they were stuck on low wages when similarly qualified people in the private sector were raking it in...

casey212

OTK wrote: »

Yes. Every five years the government is accountable to the people in a general election, during which, people can show their approval of government policies by re-electing them, or their disapproval by electing somebody else.

Do you think there should be more direct democracy? Perhaps the budget should be ratified by a referendum. Is this what you're thinking?

I think any government official taking bribes etc. should be shot, and that is no joke. People elect these clowns remember.

I myself do not vote and never have. If I want to see a circus I go and watch one, however I dont waste my time voting for what is a political circus.

Do people not get sick of the promises and then all the rubbish 6 months later about "tightening our belts". It happens time and time again.

casey212

fly_agaric wrote: »

That seems to be everyones favourite whipping-boy now.

Businesses over the last few years have decided en-masse that having good employee pension schemes was taking far far too much money away from upper-level management bonuses and shareholder profits.

Now the pressure is on for the govt. to trim some fat from these juicy public-sector pensions and hand it over it to, you guessed it, the same people (top earners and businesses), in the form of tax cuts...

After all, everyone should really be boiled up and sold for glue once they've become too old to work any more so count your blessings...

Funny thing is, I remember when the economic garden looked so rosy some years ago the monkey-boys in civil service/public sector jobs were being laughed at because they were stuck on low wages when similarly qualified people in the private sector were raking it in...

A job for life was never a bad thing no matter what the economic outlook may be at any given time. Of course life as a fat cat would be better again, but as I said its who you know.

Hotblack Desiato

casey212 wrote: »

I think any government official taking bribes etc. should be shot, and that is no joke. People elect these clowns remember.

Perhaps the people who vote for these clowns should be shot :rolleyes:

Your concept of democracy would go down rather well in 1930s Germany.

I myself do not vote and never have.

Then I can categorically state, without fear of contradiction, that you are an absolute idiot.

oscarBravo

No more personal attacks please, and no more off-topic posting. If you're not clear what the topic is, read the thread title.

casey212, if you try to do the same thing with this forum you tried with Green Issues, you'll get the same outcome. This is your only warning.

Back on topic.

frenchman

DadaKopf wrote: »

Goyz, the Greens have sensible 'polluter-pay' taxation policies. They're fully behind a car taxation system which encourages people to leave the car at home when they can by abolishing the flat-rate tax.

But look at the political reality, dudes. You have a small party with good ideas representing a small constituency, and then you have FF and civil servants not wanting to make trouble for themselves. So, good as the Greens' actual proposals were, they never get implemented in a way that is right and fair for the Irish people. That's the realpolitik.

On the subject of bin charges, look: Councils have no other means to raise revenue. We're supposed to have a system of local government in this country, but it's completely dysfunctional. The idea behind local government is for democracy to be closer to people, and for essential public services - schools, transport, health, sanitation etc. - to be more responsive to the needs of communities. But because the system doesn't work well, because most decisions are made by central government and a plethora of unaccountable agencies appointed by Bertie's team, because government funding is inadequate and councils have lost the ability to raise their own revenues to provide what services they can, our country is in the stink.

Instead of saying: 'right, X% of my income goes to Dublin, Y% goes to my council, and I get to decide how that's spent in my area', we've got people being sent to Mountjoy for refusing to pay itty bitty bin charges when the problem really is the lack of civic engagement and genuine democracy in this country.

We have to get real about the problems in this country. One of them is this: we want more services, but we want to pay less for them. How does this make sense?

Exactly.. the greens habve implemented more of their election manifesto than you would think. they have implemented small changes as well as large ones..

frenchman

ednwireland wrote: »

i actually agree (gave greens a preference) but its all stick and no carrot. i beleive its easier to introduce new taxes rather the do something that will help the environment (how about getting rid of vat on green products) its a bit like introducing new laws to solve speeding and drink driving rather than enforcing the existing laws.
govs like to be seen to be doing something if it doesnt work they can blame the people for not doing it.
i would love to put in solar water heating and wind power to power my home but i cant afford it.

again i think the situation needs to be re- examined. the greens have 6 seats in this government agains a much more powerful and more numerous Fianna fail so i think that the greens can't be expected to be the ruling force in the government. all they can do is make changes proportional to their power and numbers in government.. also the vrt i believe is helping the environment as at present there are far too many SUVs and completely unnecessary vehicles on the streets of our towns and cities. and since the greens have been in government(only since june 2007) public transport expenditure has gone up, as well has the grants and new inclusion of energy companies for Research and Develpment grants.
Eamonn Ryan our energy minister(green party) recently announced ambitious plans to look into the idea that ireland could have almost 50% of it's electricity supply from renewable sources which would reducve our emissions from fossil fuels by 25% as a nation. so big sweeping changes are being made but we just have tol ook away from the anit green media for this and realise that ther ehas been a huge change in political attitudes in our country since the greens took power and maybe now for once we are seeing politicians put action in as well as blow hot air!
as for wanting to install solar panels etc.. grants have gone up and i think if foresight is used it is clear that coupled with the grants the new installation will pay for itself in a matter of years as well as help the environment and possibly save our economy from total collapse in the future if our use of fossil fuels and dependancy on out dated technologies continues... it could be bye bye modern life!

is_that_so

The_Minister wrote: »

Has any party, ever, in all of Irish history, ever achieved its manifesto? No.

That manifesto reflects the goals of the party, what they would like to achieve, and what they will lobby for, in government.
A coalition government is about co-operation and compromise, it applies to every party that you can name. There was not a PD Minister for Transport in that timeframe, so they would have had to negotiate with FF to try to get their policy implemented (and alot of it has been promised under Transport 21, even if it is late)

I think much of the ire with Greens aside from their spin on "look at what we've done" is the fact that politically they have rolled over completely. I know some people who are involved with the Greens and they are delighted with it all.

Many others outside the fold are not. The high risk strategy the Greens seem to be employing will certainly tar them as FF lackeys like the PDs. For me that is a serious consideration at any future election. If voting for Green party candidates means the current version of FF getting back in again my vote will go elsewhere.

Even Labour, in that ill-fated FF 94 coalition, despite their desire to implement their own manifesto, at least had the integrity to tell FF where to go.

As for the Green ministers I don't think they are terribly good. Gormley suffers from a combination of naviety and the urge to tell people how much they've done. I am not sure what it is Eamon Ryan is supposed to be doing. And as for that paragon of virtue Sargent, well you wouldn't trust a word out of his mouth now would you. The attitude of the Greens seem to be bask in the glory now because God knows if we'll ever get the chance again. If so I wish them well but it doesn't strike me as a good long-term policy.

Hobbes

DadaKopf wrote: »

Goyz, the Greens have sensible 'polluter-pay' taxation policies. They're fully behind a car taxation system which encourages people to leave the car at home when they can by abolishing the flat-rate tax.

Yes, sensible if you live close to a bus/train route. If you don't then it is stupid. To take public transport to work one-way takes me 2 and half hours to go 12 miles. In a car 18-20 minutes. Oh yea, and that is if I go before rush hour starts although with the time involved that isn't an option. Bus stop is only 2 minutes walk from my house.

The only reason I think removing VRT is a bad idea is that because the green party will ensure you end up paying more in petrol tax then the VRT cost, which in turn will raise prices of everything.

when the problem really is the lack of civic engagement and genuine democracy in this country.

I can't see how someone complaining that they are already paying taxes are expected to pay for their bins as well as being against democracy.