Deputy Gogarty and the Green Party's support for the current government.

DeVore

I suppose I kicked this whole debate off by asking why, if you were so angry about the current government, you and your party continue to support them in Dail votes. You're answer was "patriotism". I'd like to hear you expound on that if you would?


DeV.

PaulGogartyTD

DeVore wrote: »

I suppose I kicked this whole debate off by asking why, if you were so angry about the current government, you and your party continue to support them in Dail votes. You're answer was "patriotism". I'd like to hear you expound on that if you would?
DeV.

Believe it or not I actually replied to this already at 8:25am but it seems to have disappeared. It took ages to write also, so I will do again, but be brief.

PaulGogartyTD

Just tried again, this time it said service unavailable. But I cut and pasted my reply and will try once more...

PaulGogartyTD

PaulGogartyTD I and others would like to know why you and other supposedly angry TD's dont resign and trigger a G.E. http://bit.ly/bCf1rm "

My reply was "Patriotism".

A bit glib perhaps, but succinct I felt given the elaborative limitations of Twitter.

In a nutshell, we have limited economic sovereignty remaining. If we go to the markets in January for more loans to pay for wages, social welfare and service without having put a credible four year plan in place, along with another tough budget, then any chance of being able to get loans at a more preferential rate will have disappeared. Therefore it is one's patriotic duty to do the right thing by the country, rather than seek an issue to go to the country on and salvage some of your electoral support.

There is only so long you can go on borrowing at over 6.5%. At some stage, and exactly when is the subject of many different opinions, the Government would have to get a bailout from the EU fund, or perhaps the IMF directly. At that stage, any choice in what proportion of capital, current or taxation to play around with in budgetary deliberations would go out the window.

Some analysts believe that the IMF would only seek cuts in and around the region of what is currently being proposed. But certainly there would be no choice as to where to cut. Some politically unpalatable decisions might actually be the right thing to do, but some wouldn't and the loss of control would damage us economically as well as damage our national psyche.

I actually tend to believe that the IMF, in addition to telling us where to cut, would also be interested in front loading the cuts to €6 or €7 billion. That is just personal, unskilled opinion. But the risks are too high to play silly buggers for political positioning.

An election now, if the Green Party felt it was time to go, would not be in the best interests of our future economic prosperity. So the inclination is to push for a tough, but fair as possible budget and a credible four year plan.

The other considerations regarding staying in Government relate to implementing Green policies agreed in the Programme for Government such as those on climate change and corporate donations. I might see these as patriotic duty and indeed duty to the planet, but others mightn't, so I am not going to include them in defining what I tweeted to you last week.

deelite

Hi Paul, Dee here - exactly what green policies have your party put in place?

gandalf

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

In a nutshell, we have limited economic sovereignty remaining. If we go to the markets in January for more loans to pay for wages, social welfare and service without having put a credible four year plan in place, along with another tough budget, then any chance of being able to get loans at a more preferential rate will have disappeared. Therefore it is one's patriotic duty to do the right thing by the country, rather than seek an issue to go to the country on and salvage some of your electoral support.

I think when we have the vista of the leader of your party leader crawling to the opposition nearly begging them to get involved that it is plainly obvious that the parties that make up the Government are devoid of ideas to solve this situation and the only logical thing to do is to face the electorate and allow the people democratically decide the make up of the Dail to help get us out of this mess that was created by the excesses of the previous Government and the mis-judged decisions of this Government.

[/There is only so long you can go on borrowing at over 6.5%. At some stage, and exactly when is the subject of many different opinions, the Government would have to get a bailout from the EU fund, or perhaps the IMF directly. At that stage, any choice in what proportion of capital, current or taxation to play around with in budgetary deliberations would go out the window.

Some analysts believe that the IMF would only seek cuts in and around the region of what is currently being proposed. But certainly there would be no choice as to where to cut. Some politically unpalatable decisions might actually be the right thing to do, but some wouldn't and the loss of control would damage us economically as well as damage our national psyche.

I actually tend to believe that the IMF, in addition to telling us where to cut, would also be interested in front loading the cuts to €6 or €7 billion. That is just personal, unskilled opinion. But the risks are too high to play silly buggers for political positioning.

I actually believe you are right. If the IMF get involved they will not pussy foot around they will cut to the bone but part of me says that maybe this is what we need. We certainly need to drag the Public Service up to the standards of the 21st Century as they are still languishing in the 19th century.

An election now, if the Green Party felt it was time to go, would not be in the best interests of our future economic prosperity. So the inclination is to push for a tough, but fair as possible budget and a credible four year plan.

The question is will this budget address the situations at hand. The massive waste and overspend in the Public Services, the fact that a lot of people enjoy the benefits of being citizens of Ireland without paying any real tax burden at all. Or will the budget be the usual fudge targeting the middle classes with a whole raft of taxation based abuse?

The other considerations regarding staying in Government relate to implementing Green policies agreed in the Programme for Government such as those on climate change and corporate donations. I might see these as patriotic duty and indeed duty to the planet, but others mightn't, so I am not going to include them in defining what I tweeted to you last week.

So basically you are saying that now you are in Government that Green Policies don't really matter any more because you are now concentrating on being "patriotic"?

southsiderosie

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

In a nutshell, we have limited economic sovereignty remaining. If we go to the markets in January for more loans to pay for wages, social welfare and service without having put a credible four year plan in place, along with another tough budget, then any chance of being able to get loans at a more preferential rate will have disappeared. Therefore it is one's patriotic duty to do the right thing by the country, rather than seek an issue to go to the country on and salvage some of your electoral support.

One could argue that any four year government plan would be more credible if elections were held before the budget was put through. This way, whoever came into power would have a clear mandate from the public to implement the four year plan.

In addition, on the issue of credibility, outside of Ireland the credibility of the government, and particularly Brian Lenihan, has been repeatedly called into question; the Guardian recently all but called him a liar.

Taken together, it seems that Ireland's credibility to both foreign investors and the ECB could be enhanced rather than diminished by calling elections - immediately. Although markets would likely churn in the run-up to election day, the stability from having a five-year government mandate to cover a four-year economic plan would in all likelihood lead to lower interest rates and a subsequent improvement in the government's finances. At the end of the day, investors like stability and continuity, and harmonizing the government timeline and the budget timeline is one way to achieve this.

In a nutshell, I'm not convinced that an election would hurt the medium and long-term economic interests of the country.

gandalf

This question/comment is from the member Laminations to this topic.

Hi Paul, I do believe your patriotism response to be sincere but unfortunately you don't have a mandate for that type of patriotism. Neither the government nor the opposition have a mandate to decide anything for this country on a 4 year time scale (at most it's 1-2), so if a 4 year budget is needed you have to go to the people with your plans. I do agree that an election cannot happen before this budget so if you want to be patriotic make sure the budget is merciless in it's cuts with no golden cows, then if you want cross party agreement have all parties promise not to campaign based on reversing these cuts - the public need a firm hand. Yes this tack of a harsh budget followed by an election will probably decimate your party and Damage FF hugely but that's true patriotism, putting the country first.

If we need a 4 year plan, which it looks like we do, they we need an election sooner rather than later.

gandalf

This is a comment from user Black Briar

paulgogartytd wrote:

An election now, if the Green Party felt it was time to go, would not be in the best interests of our future economic prosperity. So the inclination is to push for a tough, but fair as possible budget and a credible four year plan.

Rubbish...
A government which is so low in the polls and that has at max 2 years to run has no business dictating a 4 year plan without going to the people first in the context of the fact that such an election would throw them very far out of office and probably anihialate the greens.
Why the pretense mr Gogarty.
We aren't fools.
It's as obvious as night and day that ye are hanging in for as long as possible as ye know ye are gone if theres an election.
Ergo this patriotism claim by you is false,so false it's insulting frankly

My comment: I am going to hold off adding any more questions for the moment to allow responses to these ones.

johnnyskeleton

Firstly, in relation to Bertie Ahearn, the Green Party went into power when he was Taoiseach, despite concerns about his personal finances and other issues before the Mahon Tribunal. Michael McDowell TD was criticised for his continued support of Mr. Ahearn during this time when the PDs manifesto was to put manners on FF. When the Green party went into government with FF they said they would not be lackeys to FF but then when they got into power they did just that.

In particular, Minister Gormley made a rousing speech that things were very different on "planet bertie", but no sooner were the Greens in power then Minister Gormley was defending Mr. Ahearn (reported IT 4th Feb, 2008 link requires subscription).

How can the Green party justify that complete volte face on the issue of Deputy Ahearn's finances and will Deputy Gogarty, as an outspoken voice in the Green party now come out and condemn Deputy Ahearn on this issue?

bijapos

Lost in Blanch post 48

My question for Gogarty, even though I'm not expecting anything like an honest answer.

If the Greens had voted not to go into government to prop up FF in 2007, would you have:

1. Stood behind Bertie applauding him as your party leader did in that infamous picture on his retirement?
2. Voted in favour of protecting Willie O'Dea in his vote of no confidence?
3. Voted for NAMA?
4. Supported the fact that those who stand to benefit financially from NAMA are deliberately being kept secret from FF?
5. Supported the fact that all bondholders in Anglo are deliberately kept secret by FF?

bijapos

Laminations post 66

Was it right to let Roddy Molloy go from FAS and Patrick Neary go as financial regulator? Why?

Do you think they were incompetent and mismanaged their responsibilities?

Should they have been given full pensions plus golden handshake? And why hasn't the state taken a civil case against them for mismanagement and incompetence? Do you think it's right and fair they get rewarded for their failures?

So now can you apply the same reasoning to the current government? Why should you all remain in the job to finish out your contract? For gods sake the current Taoiseach was the minister for finance that fuelled the bubble! Do you think Cowen did a good job as minister for finance? Do you think it's right he's getting rewarded for it? Job promotion and pay rise, state car and driver for life?

Do you have any concept of accountability?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

johnnyskeleton

Following the question re: Ahern, Laminations asks (amended):

Paul, if Mahon (which is long overdue) finds Deputy Ahern's behaviour to have been unbecoming of a TD or even simply questionable, what will the consequences for Deputy Ahern be?

Do you think Ahern is a disgrace to politics?

AND

Currently do you feel that Deputy Ahern and his triple jobbing is pulling his weight in the Dail or is the taxpayer paying him simply to be chaffeured around for private speaking engagements and book signings?

More generally, what is your view on politicians having outside interests and professions which they maintain while in the Dail? Do you agree that when a person is elected to the dail they should be required (like a member of An Garda Siochana) to cease any other part time or other employments while they are serving?

johnnyskeleton

It is my view that one of the major problems in Irish politics is that Ireland being a small country means that TDs have a very strong local focus.

That means that instead of focussing entirely on the running of the country, they very often spend as much if not more time in local clinics and doing favours for constituents.

Two notable examples:

1) Deputy Enda Kenny missed the vote on NAMA (what I and many others consider to be the most important vote in the current dail) because he was doing constituency work in Mayo and couldn't make it to Dublin.

2) Minister for Science Conor Lenihan agreed to launch a book that denied evolution on the basis of some psudeo scientific belief that there is no evidence of human life prior to 6000 years ago.

I pose the question that if we are to have a functioning government, we need TDs to be fully dedicated to the running of the country only, and TDs should eschew the local clinics, favours and clientism that exists in most of the country - do you agree?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

PaulGogartyTD

deelite wrote: »

Hi Paul, Dee here - exactly what green policies have your party put in place?

To save space, here is the link on the party website:

http://www.greenparty.ie/government/achievements_in_government/rolling_list_of_achievements

That's a long list. Some are minor, some are less so. But in the past year, the top achievement from my perspective was protecting education at a difficult time and reversing some of the previous year's cuts. This action was welcomed by the teaching unions and other education partners and I have to say was widely acknowledged as the single biggest reason why the Green Party membership reached the two thirds quota for adopting the Renewed Programme for Government.

Funnily enough it isn't in the Green Party official list of achievements below which, ahem, must have been an error.

But anyhow, the other ten of the past year are worth pointing out (sorry I can't personalise due to time constraints. Today has turned into a distracting day with loads of meetings and pointless time-draining stuff):

1 Reforming planning to suit Ireland in 2010

Aimed at ensuring the end of crony capitalism and making ghost estates a thing of the past, the Planning Bill is one of the Green Party’s most important achievements in 2010. It makes community-focused, sustainable planning a legal requirement. The bill, enacted in July 2010 will ensure transparency, openness and democratic involvement in the planning process to avoid the rezoning disasters of the past.
2 Civil Partnerships Legislation

The Civil Partnership Bill passed all stages in Oireachtas Éireann on 8 July 2010. The will be of real importance to gay and lesbian citizens and give protection to tens of thousands of cohabiting couples, gay or straight. The new laws allow same-sex couples to register their civil partnership. It contains provision for succession rights, protection of a home that couples share, plus maintenance rights in the event of a separation.
3 Help for mortgage holders

At the Green Party’s insistence, an expert group was established in February 2010 to look at how State-supported banks could help the tens of thousands of people facing difficulties in paying their mortgages. The Group recommended that: no penalty interest or arrears charges should apply; you should not lose your tracker mortgage if you agree a deal (longer maturity, interest only, payment holiday, etc) with your bank; and that all lenders develop a specialist unit to deal with those in arrears. The Government said it would implement immediately the recommendations.
4 Cervical cancer vaccinations

In May 2010 the previously stalled HSE programme to vaccinate teenage girls against cervical cancer got underway. This was one of the important measures sought by the Green Party in negotiations for the renewed Programme for Government in October 2009. Approximately 30,000 secondary level students will receive the human papilloma virus vaccination in the first year of the programme.
5 Ongoing record investment in water services

The Water Services Investment Programme for 2010-2012 provides for crucial water infrastructure in the next three years, which will sustain public health; protect the environment and support economic development. It includes several hundred in-progress and planned water conservation projects with a value of nearly €3bn. 4,000 jobs will be supported through infrastructure repair and upgrade. €93m was also allocated to rural water schemes.
6 Action to tackle homelessness prioritised

Funding for programmes tackling homelessness has continued to be ringfenced despite great pressure on all government spending. The budget for homeless accommodation and related services was increased by 5% in 2009 to €62m. This funding was maintained in 2010.
7 Improving animal welfare standards

Two new pieces of legislation have improved standards for Irish deer and dogs. The Wildlife (Amendment) Legislation 2010 and the Dog Breeding Establishment Legislation 2010 are significant steps forward in the campaign for better animal welfare standards.
8 Ireland now second in Europe for renewable energy

We have doubled the amount of wind energy on the national grid since 2007. Our targets for 2010 have already been surpassed, with over 15% of electricity from renewable sources – making us second in Europe for wind power, and pushing to be first. We are also on course to exceed our targets for 2020. The Carbon Revenue Levy Bill, enacted in June 2010, will recover from power generators a substantial portion of the unearned carbon windfall gains they currently receive.
9 Inquiry into banking collapse

The Green Party in January insisted that the Government establish an independent, thorough and cost-effective inquiry into the collapse of the banking sector. Having already demanded the appointment of outside regulators, the Party was pleased that reports by Klaus Regling and Max Watson, and Professor Patrick Honohan got to the heart of the collapse. They Party will insist that an open and public inquiry must now follow.
10 Clampdown on premium rate ripoffs

Under a new law introduced in March 2010, broadcasters will be responsible for any premium rate services they advertise. To avoid scams and ripoffs, TV stations and service providers will have to apply for a licence to broadcast competitions or phone-in contests. The new law also regulates premium rate phone lines selling ring tones, sports results, traffic reports and psychic services. Failure to comply will result in fines, or broadcasters having their licences cancelled.

PaulGogartyTD

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If I had a choice at this stage I would suggest Brian Lenihan or Micheal Martin. But that said the office of Taoiseach can work its magic on incumbants so I would say both Mr Kenny and Mr Gilmore have the skills to be Taoiseach, it's just a) whether they would live up to their talents and b), just like Fianna Fail, whose interests they serve. As long as corporate donations loom, politics is tainted by the obligation, real or imagined, to serve vested interests, be they banks, developers, business interests or trade unions.

PaulGogartyTD

gandalf wrote: »

I think when we have the vista of the leader of your party leader crawling to the opposition nearly begging them to get involved that it is plainly obvious that the parties that make up the Government are devoid of ideas to solve this situation and the only logical thing to do is to face the electorate and allow the people democratically decide the make up of the Dail to help get us out of this mess that was created by the excesses of the previous Government and the mis-judged decisions of this Government.

I actually believe you are right. If the IMF get involved they will not pussy foot around they will cut to the bone but part of me says that maybe this is what we need. We certainly need to drag the Public Service up to the standards of the 21st Century as they are still languishing in the 19th century.

The question is will this budget address the situations at hand. The massive waste and overspend in the Public Services, the fact that a lot of people enjoy the benefits of being citizens of Ireland without paying any real tax burden at all. Or will the budget be the usual fudge targeting the middle classes with a whole raft of taxation based abuse?

So basically you are saying that now you are in Government that Green Policies don't really matter any more because you are now concentrating on being "patriotic"?

Green policies DO matter, but so does ensuring that the right decisions are made in this budget. If we are not achieving in Government there is nothing to keep us in but patriotic duty. But I am not saying that we are failing to achieve, simply that this budget is bigger than politics.

Trying to achieve a consensus among all parties is a worthwhile undertaking. I know that those engaged in the process in my party are genuine because I disagree with what they are doing. My suspicion is that the opposition parties will try and find a way out for political reasons and that FF will play both sides so as to give some credence but not go all the way.

I hope I am wrong. My personal instinct would be to make the decisions as the elected Government and then suffer the electoral consequences. But, because it is a four year outline plan that is being decided to give clarity to the EC, the ECB and the markets, the opposition have a right to contribute in the interests of the country. If they don't that is another story.

As for an election, a mandate is given by Dail Eireann and another election is only going to be held when that mandate expires after five years or when Dail Eireann chooses; whichever happens sooner.

The argument that we don't have a mandate because of a four year plan does not wash. Governments have been tied into plans that go beyond terms in the past and there will be flexibility for any new incumbants to change the manner of measures, but not the actual amount.

PaulGogartyTD

gandalf wrote: »

The question is will this budget address the situations at hand. The massive waste and overspend in the Public Services, the fact that a lot of people enjoy the benefits of being citizens of Ireland without paying any real tax burden at all. Or will the budget be the usual fudge targeting the middle classes with a whole raft of taxation based abuse?

It won't in itself. The Croke Park Agreement has to be implemented as a start. If it isn't then next year will see a renewed look at spending and wastage in the public sector.

The tax burden will have to be spread in this budget and Mr Lenihan has indicated as much. We want to see the higher earners pay a higher share if others on lower incomes are brought into the tax net. We already pointed to the PRSI ceiling last year and there would be an expectation that this will be looked at also.

oppenheimer1

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

It won't in itself. The Croke Park Agreement has to be implemented as a start. If it isn't then next year will see a renewed look at spending and wastage in the public sector.

The tax burden will have to be spread in this budget and Mr Lenihan has indicated as much. We want to see the higher earners pay a higher share if others on lower incomes are brought into the tax net. We already pointed to the PRSI ceiling last year and there would be an expectation that this will be looked at also.

The top 4% of earners pay nearly half of all income tax collected. Is it really feasible and fair to ask them to pay even more? T

PaulGogartyTD

southsiderosie wrote: »

One could argue that any four year government plan would be more credible if elections were held before the budget was put through. This way, whoever came into power would have a clear mandate from the public to implement the four year plan.

In addition, on the issue of credibility, outside of Ireland the credibility of the government, and particularly Brian Lenihan, has been repeatedly called into question; the Guardian recently all but called him a liar.

Taken together, it seems that Ireland's credibility to both foreign investors and the ECB could be enhanced rather than diminished by calling elections - immediately. Although markets would likely churn in the run-up to election day, the stability from having a five-year government mandate to cover a four-year economic plan would in all likelihood lead to lower interest rates and a subsequent improvement in the government's finances. At the end of the day, investors like stability and continuity, and harmonizing the government timeline and the budget timeline is one way to achieve this.

In a nutshell, I'm not convinced that an election would hurt the medium and long-term economic interests of the country.

I take your point and acknowledge you could be right. I for one would love a real and proper debate on the economic issues for the Mr Gilmore in particular to come out and say what he would do and who he will hurt.

The markets don't care about elections, but at this stage, so close to the budget, an election would mean that we wouldn't have a budget before we go cap in hand looking for more loans.

That would be to assume that patriotic duty is the only thing keeping us in. We are still intent on implementing policies to make us more competitive long term (climate change) and ensure that the links between vested interests and political organisations are thwarted (corporate donations). There are other things we want to achieve while we are in Government because in many ways, the FG/Lab alternative would not be much different to FF on their own. That's just my opinion and you are entitled to yours and could even be right. But at the moment, separate to the Green policy achievement demands, I think we are 55-45% better off not having an election and trying to achieve a consensus or firm Government-only decision. Decisiveness is what is needed.

PaulGogartyTD

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The top 4% of earners pay nearly half of all income tax collected. Is it really feasible and fair to ask them to pay even more? T

Damn, another time out after posting a long response..... Will have to redo in a while

PaulGogartyTD

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The top 4% of earners pay nearly half of all income tax collected. Is it really feasible and fair to ask them to pay even more? T

If the Minister has to go and start taxing the 50% who are not in the income tax net, then there has to be a proportionate increase for those who are already in the tax net.

Those who can afford to pay more should pay more, because the alternative is to place more burden on those who cannot afford to pay more.

I would say that the top 25% of earners could pay more. I would love to see (personally speaking of course, not politically) a 60% income tax on earnings above the €120,000 mark and the removal of the PRSI ceiling at 70k.

If we are going to crucify the lower paid to raise income, then the higher paid should be seen to take a hit, politicians take note. It won't make the budget seem any fairer, but it will be fairer and perhaps we can live with ourselves more.

gandalf

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

Green policies DO matter, but so does ensuring that the right decisions are made in this budget. If we are not achieving in Government there is nothing to keep us in but patriotic duty. But I am not saying that we are failing to achieve, simply that this budget is bigger than politics.

I would say that you should be worried than when people mention the Green Party these days an awful lot of them rightly or wrongly consider the party a burden on their wallet without any tangible payback.

Trying to achieve a consensus among all parties is a worthwhile undertaking. I know that those engaged in the process in my party are genuine because I disagree with what they are doing. My suspicion is that the opposition parties will try and find a way out for political reasons and that FF will play both sides so as to give some credence but not go all the way.

Hang on are you saying that you disagree with John Gormleys overtures to the opposition parties?

I hope I am wrong. My personal instinct would be to make the decisions as the elected Government and then suffer the electoral consequences. But, because it is a four year outline plan that is being decided to give clarity to the EC, the ECB and the markets, the opposition have a right to contribute in the interests of the country. If they don't that is another story.

But as has been suggested already surely it makes more sense for a new Government to be elected to see out those 4 hairshirt budgets?

As for an election, a mandate is given by Dail Eireann and another election is only going to be held when that mandate expires after five years or when Dail Eireann chooses; whichever happens sooner.

Basically when you say Dail Eireann chooses you mean that yourselves or the "Independents" finally decide to bring the charade down.

When I voted a 2nd preference for the Green party at the last election I did not give them a preference to go into Government with Fianna Fail. In fact based on the promises of the then leader of the Greens I never expected it to happen. Instead he stepped aside like a snake oil salesman and my vote and those of a lot of other citizens was twisted into support for the very party we were trying to keep out of power.

And I believe that party with the collaboration of the Green Party has done even more damage to the economy of this country based on their frozen in the headlights approach to the bank guarantee scheme and their inaction on ensuring credit flowed to SME's (as we were told it would) since the last Election.

oppenheimer1

PaulGogartyTD wrote: »

If the Minister has to go and start taxing the 50% who are not in the income tax net, then there has to be a proportionate increase for those who are already in the tax net.

Those who can afford to pay more should pay more, because the alternative is to place more burden on those who cannot afford to pay more.

I would say that the top 25% of earners could pay more. I would love to see (personally speaking of course, not politically) a 60% income tax on earnings above the €120,000 mark and the removal of the PRSI ceiling at 70k.

If we are going to crucify the lower paid to raise income, then the higher paid should be seen to take a hit, politicians take note. It won't make the budget seem any fairer, but it will be fairer and perhaps we can live with ourselves more.

First of all, increasing the rates of tax on higher earners will not necessarily result in a higher return for the exchequer. Too high of a rise and people will stop doing the overtime that pushes them into that bracket because the net return isn't worth it.

Ten years ago 82% of those on lower incomes contributed 33% of income tax returns, this has dropped to 18%. People who earn over €1m per year will pay on average €700k income tax, and there are only about 1000 people in the country who earn this kind of money. The system we have at the moment is most definitely top loaded, its a system that those that pay least get most.

Bringing the lower paid into the tax net doesn't have to crucify them. The rate they should be asked to pay should be relative to what they earn naturally. A low tax on lower incomes will have a higher net return than a high tax on high incomes, and would go a long way to addressing the imbalances in the system.

(Numbers from the Sunday Business Post http://www.sbpost.ie/news/ireland/high-earners-pay-nearly-half-of-all-income-tax-45532.html )

Scofflaw

gandalf wrote: »

I would say that you should be worried than when people mention the Green Party these days an awful lot of them rightly or wrongly consider the party a burden on their wallet without any tangible payback.



Hang on are you saying that you disagree with John Gormleys overtures to the opposition parties?



But as has been suggested already surely it makes more sense for a new Government to be elected to see out those 4 hairshirt budgets?



Basically when you say Dail Eireann chooses you mean that yourselves or the "Independents" finally decide to bring the charade down.

When I voted a 2nd preference for the Green party at the last election I did not give them a preference to go into Government with Fianna Fail. In fact based on the promises of the then leader of the Greens I never expected it to happen. Instead he stepped aside like a snake oil salesman and my vote and those of a lot of other citizens was twisted into support for the very party we were trying to keep out of power.

We two, and Liam, have been over that issue several times on boards. I've pointed out the many occasions on which the Green Party said publicly that they had not ruled out any coalition arrangement in advance of the election. It's not really possible to claim anything there other than that you personally misunderstood what was being said, and did not appreciate that you were voting for a party in which such a matter would be settled by a majority vote of the membership.

I would have preferred personally to have seen the Greens in government with some other party than Fianna Fáil (although the environmental credentials of other Irish parties are not all that much better) but it is not realistic for any minor party to rule out coalition with Fianna Fáil, particularly given the fact that Fine Gael haven't won an election for 25 years - the 2007 election was supposed to be a Fine Gael landslide, but it wasn't.

cordially,
Scofflaw

gandalf

Scofflaw that is your slant as a Green Party supporter. Before the last election I would have counted myself as a Green Party sympathiser and I and a lot of others read Trevor Sargents proclamations in the same manner. I would like to hear Paul's opinion on this and what has been said to him by people who voted for him about the union with Fianna Fail.

PaulGogartyTD

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

First of all, increasing the rates of tax on higher earners will not necessarily result in a higher return for the exchequer. Too high of a rise and people will stop doing the overtime that pushes them into that bracket because the net return isn't worth it.

Ten years ago 82% of those on lower incomes contributed 33% of income tax returns, this has dropped to 18%. People who earn over €1m per year will pay on average €700k income tax, and there are only about 1000 people in the country who earn this kind of money. The system we have at the moment is most definitely top loaded, its a system that those that pay least get most.

Bringing the lower paid into the tax net doesn't have to crucify them. The rate they should be asked to pay should be relative to what they earn naturally. A low tax on lower incomes will have a higher net return than a high tax on high incomes, and would go a long way to addressing the imbalances in the system.

(Numbers from the Sunday Business Post http://www.sbpost.ie/news/ireland/high-earners-pay-nearly-half-of-all-income-tax-45532.html )

Agreed. But it's the symbolism that's important, all other things equalising.

PaulGogartyTD

gandalf wrote: »

I would say that you should be worried than when people mention the Green Party these days an awful lot of them rightly or wrongly consider the party a burden on their wallet without any tangible payback.



Hang on are you saying that you disagree with John Gormleys overtures to the opposition parties?



But as has been suggested already surely it makes more sense for a new Government to be elected to see out those 4 hairshirt budgets?



Basically when you say Dail Eireann chooses you mean that yourselves or the "Independents" finally decide to bring the charade down.

When I voted a 2nd preference for the Green party at the last election I did not give them a preference to go into Government with Fianna Fail. In fact based on the promises of the then leader of the Greens I never expected it to happen. Instead he stepped aside like a snake oil salesman and my vote and those of a lot of other citizens was twisted into support for the very party we were trying to keep out of power.

And I believe that party with the collaboration of the Green Party has done even more damage to the economy of this country based on their frozen in the headlights approach to the bank guarantee scheme and their inaction on ensuring credit flowed to SME's (as we were told it would) since the last Election.

Trevor said he wouldn't lead the Green Party, but clearly stated policy was that we were not ruling anyone in or out. This was on the public record. If people didn't want FF then how come so many voted for them. And what is your response to the fact that an alternative was not attempted due to Enda Kenny's unwillingness to deal with Sinn Fein?

I am sceptical of the outcome of John's overtures is all.

An election right now would not be a good idea with us seeking loans in January. A budget would not be in place by then. And that would assume that the Greens want to leave because our policies aren't being implemented. Logically the current Government would be setting out two of four years of a plan, a reasonable assumption under the current mandate and therefore the responsibility lies with it first and foremost.

PaulGogartyTD

gandalf wrote: »

Scofflaw that is your slant as a Green Party supporter. Before the last election I would have counted myself as a Green Party sympathiser and I and a lot of others read Trevor Sargents proclamations in the same manner. I would like to hear Paul's opinion on this and what has been said to him by people who voted for him about the union with Fianna Fail.

Have replied above and in more details vis a vis Fine Gael and Sinn Fein in other threads.