TD's on the average industrial wage

dsmythy

So a number of them have made this commitment to take home half their pay or commonly to only take home the average industrial wage. I was just wondering if they are allowed to refused a portion of their wage? I have this idea in the back of my head from somewhere that they are not allowed for some reason.

Also of those who are taking voluntary cuts, if they are allowed to do so, what have each of the individuals/parties taking part said they are planning on doing with the surplus money?

dlofnep

All Sinn Féin politicians earn the average industrial wage, while the rest goes back into the party to help fund elections.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

All Sinn Féin politicians earn the average industrial wage, while the rest goes back into the party to help fund elections.

So they earn the full TD salary, and just happen to spend most of it on political donations.

I've nothing against any TD who wishes to work for less than they are entitled to, but this trend of claiming to be doing so, whilst in reality one is receiving the full amount and directing some of it to personal causes, is a tad mendacious to say the least. And SF are far from the only ones doing it.

The Volt

I have no qualms about our TDs receiving a good wage as long as they're fit for purpose. However, if we pay peanuts then we most definitely will get monkeys.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Liam Byrne

Voltwad wrote: »

I have no qualms about our TDs receiving a good wage as long as they're fit for purpose. However, if we pay peanuts then we most definitely will get monkeys.

That's the argument trotted out up to now, and yet it hasn't stopped the monkeys.

niallers1

We got a right shower of monkeys for 14 years and paid them ridiculously high salary's and bonuses expenses..

Einhard

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's the argument trotted out up to now, and yet it hasn't stopped the monkeys.

Yeah, but whilst high wages hasn't stopped the monkeys, lower wages would confine the Dail almost exclusively to monkeys.

Anyway, it's really up to the electorate to end monkey participation in the Dail, and it's something we've conspicuously failed to do. Monkeys voting for monkeys perhaps?








i promise i'll stop with the animal metaphors now!

matrim

One thing I've wondered about this is do they take home the average wage before or after tax?

The average wage is about 35k gross. After tax this is approx 30k. But for a net \ take home of 35k it would work out as having a gross salary of approx 42k, so if they are taking home 35k they are misleading people about only getting the average wage.

Tragedy

Sinn Fein TDs get to keep 100% of expenses. That would be why they all have uncommonly high expenses claims(including Mr Doherty).

"We only take home the average industrial wage...and €40k in expenses"

Victor

dlofnep wrote: »

All Sinn Féin politicians earn the average industrial wage, while the rest goes back into the party to help fund elections.

Is this permitted? How does one person give €40,000+ in donations to a political party?

matrim wrote: »

One thing I've wondered about this is do they take home the average wage before or after tax?

Note that "average industrial wage" and "average wage" are very different things as it includes all income levels from minimum wage to senior management. Average industrial wage is generally considered to be higher.

Pherekydes

Einhard wrote: »

Yeah, but whilst high wages hasn't stopped the monkeys, lower wages would confine the Dail almost exclusively to monkeys.

Nope! With higher salaries all you get is greedier monkeys.

Gloomtastic!

Heard during the week on Ivan Yates radio show that the independents get an additional €40k allowance for being 'party leaders' of their own party. However all Party TDs get €80k paid directly to their party to cover party expenses.
Is this true? Is there no bottom to the trough that these people feed off?

Tragedy

Victor wrote: »

Is this permitted? How does one person give €40,000+ in donations to a political party?

They can't and don't. They give the maximum allowed(€5,000 I think?) and apparently the rest gets sunk into the local constituency office, which no doubt helps their re-election chances quite a bit.

Liam Byrne

Einhard wrote: »

Yeah, but whilst high wages hasn't stopped the monkeys, lower wages would confine the Dail almost exclusively to monkeys.

Don't agree. €100,000 is massive money, and we might actually get people who are interested in fixing things rather than people interested in money.

Anyway, it's really up to the electorate to end monkey participation in the Dail, and it's something we've conspicuously failed to do. Monkeys voting for monkeys perhaps?

Probably more to do with the ****e standard of candidates on offer to begin with.

dlofnep

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They earn the average industrial wage, and the rest is donated back to the party. They are very clear about this and have never suggested otherwise.

So whatever way you wish to spin it - a Sinn Féin TD takes home the average industrial wage. To me, it shows that they are not engaged in politics for the financial side of it.

ninty9er

dlofnep wrote: »

They earn the average industrial wage, and the rest is donated back to the party. They are very clear about this and have never suggested otherwise.

So whatever way you wish to spin it - a Sinn Féin TD takes home the average industrial wage. To me, it shows that they are not engaged in politics for the financial side of it.

anybody who gets into politics for the money is deluded. For the commitment required and abuse they get they'd be better off sticking with the day job. There's on point trying to paint SF TDs as martyrs to the cause Ar there are plenty of other TDs who pay constituency costs from their own pocket.

dlofnep

ninty9er wrote: »

There's on point trying to paint SF TDs as martyrs to the cause Ar there are plenty of other TDs who pay constituency costs from their own pocket.

I haven't stated anyone is a martyr. The OP asked which politicians are earning an average industrial wage - I replied with a factually accurate statement. What's the problem?

imme

The Greens used to donate some of their wages to the Party as well.

Why don't these people make donations to charity instead of donating to their parties.

As regards SF, it goes toward positive spin as to their socialist position, their credentials, men of the people and all that.

The choice to give some of their salaries to their party does not affect overall bill of paying TD's. Their portrayal of it gives the suggestion that they are earning less than other TD's. They cost the exact same as every other TD, just that they give some of their salary to their party is all.

delta720

SF only take home the average industrial wage, but they don't tell us how much of their living expenses are covered. Gerry Adams has a house up the North, one in Donegal, and now a very big house in Ravensdale. Did he rent/buy this new house using his industrial wage or do the party cover it? If the party cover it then it's a bit of a joke claiming to only get an average industrial wage if that wage is essentially disposable income.

Bohser

ninty9er wrote: »

anybody who gets into politics for the money is deluded. For the commitment required and abuse they get they'd be better off sticking with the day job.

Then what are politicians involved in politics for? The love of politics? The desire to help the people?

ninty9er wrote: »

There's on point trying to paint SF TDs as martyrs to the cause Ar there are plenty of other TDs who pay constituency costs from their own pocket.

Mate, this is just a suggestion but, you might want to look up the word martyr in a dictionary.

Bohser

delta720 wrote: »

SF Gerry Adams has a house up the North, one in Donegal, and now a very big house in Ravensdale.

Several politicians have more than one property. Some of them got the money from private business practices (e.g. doctors practices, farming) or inheritance whilst others like Michael Lowry get money from business men like Ben Dunne.

delta720 wrote: »

Did he rent/buy this new house using his industrial wage or do the party cover it?

I think that Gerry Adams has at least one book published. Fair play to him. I doubt that most of his fellow TDs have come anywhere close to that kind of success privately.

Bohser

Einhard wrote: »

So they earn the full TD salary, and just happen to spend most of it on political donations.

So what?

Einhard wrote: »

I've nothing against any TD who wishes to work for less than they are entitled to

Thank God for that.
I take it then that you or the party you vote for would not consider doing it?

Einhard wrote: »

, but this trend of claiming to be doing so

Who claimed what now?

Einhard wrote: »

whilst in reality one is receiving the full amount and directing some of it to personal causes

They obviously think that their cause will benefit the country. A personal cause for Michael Lowry was a IR£395,000 extension to his home.

Einhard wrote: »

is a tad mendacious to say the least.

Jaysus "mendacious", that's some fancy word there. It almost sounds like you know what you're talking about.

Einhard wrote: »

And SF are far from the only ones doing it.

Who else are doing it and so what if they are? Personally I'd vote for any of them before the guys that are taking their full salary.

Bohser

dsmythy wrote: »

So a number of them have made this commitment to take home half their pay or commonly to only take home the average industrial wage. I was just wondering if they are allowed to refused a portion of their wage? I have this idea in the back of my head from somewhere that they are not allowed for some reason.

Also of those who are taking voluntary cuts, if they are allowed to do so, what have each of the individuals/parties taking part said they are planning on doing with the surplus money?

There are a few other independents doing it I think? I heard some of them on Newstalk during the week saying that they would donate the money to personal causes such as local healthcare.

Sorry, I can't remember the names.

delta720

feistyfawn wrote: »

Several politicians have more than one property. Some of them got the money from private business practices (e.g. doctors practices, farming) or inheritance whilst others like Michael Lowry get money from the private business men like Ben Dunne.

While others get it from robbing banks. Your right, I was naive to think that his average industrial wage as a politician was his only source of income. Thanks for clearing that up.

I think that Gerry Adams has at least one book published. Fair play to him. I doubt that most of his fellow TDs have come anywhere close to that success privately.

Really?

Bohser

delta720 wrote: »

While others get it from robbing banks.

So you think that SF TDs profited directly from the bank robberies?

That's some crazy speculating you're doing there - you'd really need to be sure of what you're saying before you make accusations.

delta720 wrote: »

Really?

Yeah really.

Fr Tod Umptious

Ming is giving half his salary to help pay for local recreational projects.
He says he would do that rather than allow it just go straight back into the public coffers and get swallowed up in a bank bailout.
A far more 'honest' approach than those who put it back into their party if you ask me

Bohser

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Ming is giving half his salary to help pay for local recreational projects.
He says he would do that rather than allow it just go straight back into the public coffers and get swallowed up in a bank bailout.
A far more 'honest' approach than those who put it back to if you ask metheir party.

Maybe more admirable, but not necessarily more sensible.

Possibly not if SF believe in what they're trying to achieve and want to compete with the other parties spending prowess (in part due to corporate donations). In order to get in government and implement their policies (which I believe includes stopping corporate donations to political parties) - it might be a sensible approach to take.

Anyway, maybe that wasn't they're intention when they initiated the policy some years ago. Maybe they are trying to help demonstrate that they're not just interested in monetary gain.

spurious

When I started work as a teacher in 1984, TDs were paid the first point on the teacher's common basic salary scale.

Today that would be €30,904, but TDs now start on over three times that.

A Dub in Glasgo

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Ming is giving half his salary to help pay for local recreational projects.
He says he would do that rather than allow it just go straight back into the public coffers and get swallowed up in a bank bailout.
A far more 'honest' approach than those who put it back into their party if you ask me

Presumably he is doing this to charities that are eligible for tax relief

BlaasForRafa

feistyfawn wrote: »

So you think that SF TDs profited directly from the bank robberies?

That's some crazy speculating you're doing there - you'd really need to be sure of what you're saying before you make accusations.

Its a pretty rational assumption to make.

Anyway what are you going to do about it if he does say that. Sue him? Sue the site? Threats like that could get you a site ban.

dlofnep

delta720 wrote: »

Gerry Adams has a house up the North, one in Donegal, and now a very big house in Ravensdale. Did he rent/buy this new house using his industrial wage or do the party cover it? If the party cover it then it's a bit of a joke claiming to only get an average industrial wage if that wage is essentially disposable income.

Gerry Adams has written a number of books. He earns the same as every other SF politician. What he earns on the side through published works, and speaking engagements is none of your business.

dlofnep

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its a pretty rational assumption to make.

No it isn't a rational assumption to make. It's an asinine assumption to make.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Anyway what are you going to do about it if he does say that. Sue him? Sue the site? Threats like that could get you a site ban.

I'm pretty sure boards.ie has a clear-cut policy with regards to making false accusations against people.

A Dub in Glasgo

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its a pretty rational assumption to make.

.

It is obvious you missed the ir at the start of rational

Fr Tod Umptious

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Presumably he is doing this to charities that are eligible for tax relief

Are you suggesting that he is doing this to reduce his own personal tax bill, to feather his own nest as it were. ?

The next time he is on TV or Radio someone shouls ask him.

Persobnally I think Ming Flannigan has far more integrity in his small toe than all the people in SF have put together.

Bohser

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its a pretty rational assumption to make.

It's a very far from rational assumption to make. It's a dangerous assumption to make because in my opinion it is disinformation.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Sue him? Sue the site? Threats like that could get you a site ban.

Sue? Threats? Where are you getting this from? The only person implying any threat is you.
I meant you should be sure when you make accusations in general. Personally, from what I have read, I very much doubt that any SF TDs benefited directly from the robberies.

A Dub in Glasgo

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Are you suggesting that he is doing this to reduce his own personal tax bill, to feather his own nest as it were. ?
.

No, maybe you should look at what you wrote earlier

'He says he would do that rather than allow it just go straight back into the public coffers and get swallowed up in a bank bailout'

If he is not doing this in a tax efficient way then he will pay the local recreational projects out of his net pay which means he hasn't prevented his tax to get swallowed up in a bank bailout. There are tax efficient ways of doing this and benefits the charity even more. Over here it is called 'Gift Aid'. Looking at the revenue site, it is called the CHY2 scheme.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/chy2.pdf

Look before you jump in eh?

leeroybrown

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Presumably he is doing this to charities that are eligible for tax relief

The standard PAYE tax reliefs on donations by a private individual are reclaimable by the charity for their use rather than by donating individual. The only personal benefit the individual derives is having to donate less net pay to give the same amount.

dlofnep wrote: »

Gerry Adams has written a number of books. He earns the same as every other SF politician. What he earns on the side through published works, and speaking engagements is none of your business.

I disagree with this. As a publicly elected official he now responsible to provide a certain level of transparency and accountability regarding his earnings. I'm not saying that he needs to publicly disclose all of this information, but the electorate are sick of our public representatives picking up tens of thousands of euro from unaccounted for sources.

A Dub in Glasgo

leeroybrown wrote: »

The standard PAYE tax reliefs on donations by a private individual are reclaimable by the charity for their use rather than by donating individual. The only personal benefit the individual derives is having to donate less net pay to give the same amount.

See post above yours

leeroybrown

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

See post above yours

This is what happens when you get coffee in between starting a post and clicking submit. :-)

BTW - your link has two www's in it and is broken.

A Dub in Glasgo

Fixed the link now

Fr Tod Umptious

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

No, maybe you should look at what you wrote earlier

'He says he would do that rather than allow it just go straight back into the public coffers and get swallowed up in a bank bailout'

If he is not doing this in a tax efficient way then he will pay the local recreational projects out of his net pay which means he hasn't prevented his tax to get swallowed up in a bank bailout. There are tax efficient ways of doing this and benefits the charity even more. Over here it is called 'Gift Aid'. Looking at the revenue site, it is called the CHY2 scheme.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/chy2.pdf

Look before you jump in eh?

Interesting, thanks for that.

Still does not change my opinion of SF though

delta720

dlofnep wrote: »

Gerry Adams has written a number of books. He earns the same as every other SF politician. What he earns on the side through published works, and speaking engagements is none of your business.

I'm not asking about what he earns on the side, I'm asking is SF money used to house him in his move to Louth, and if it was I think it's ridiculous that he continually claims the moral high ground over only receiving the average industrial wage.

Einhard

feistyfawn wrote: »

So what?

I've nothing against it as I said. I do however object to someone claiming they take only the average industrial wage, when in fact they take the full amount. That's dishonest.

Thank God for that.
I take it then that you or the party you vote for would not consider doing it?

Can't speak for the party I voted for, but I wouldn't expect them too. I'm far more interested in someone's ability to do a good job than in the amount they earn.

Who claimed what now?

Several TDs have claimed that they only earn the average industrial wage, when in fact they claim a full TD's salary, but just happen to further some of it to political/charitable causes.

They obviously think that their cause will benefit the country. A personal cause for Michael Lowry was a IR£395,000 extension to his home.

Michael Lowry is a crook. Not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand.

Jaysus "mendacious", that's some fancy word there. It almost sounds like you know what you're talking about.

It's not a fancy word at all. Pretty commonplace actually. I'd say the fact that you attempt to ridicule its use says more about your general comprehension than mine.

Here, maybe this might come in handy with the multiple syllable words: http://dictionary.reference.com/

Who else are doing it and so what if they are? Personally I'd vote for any of them before the guys that are taking their full salary.

Ming Flanagan is doing so. So, AFAIK, are the ULA members of the house. Vote for them if you want- I'd rather vote on ability than on political stunts, but that's just me I s'pose.

Hmmm, I've just your post under your reply to me, in which you answer your final question to me. If you knew various independents were doing so, why did you ask me?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

delta720 wrote: »

I'm not asking about what he earns on the side, I'm asking is SF money used to house him in his move to Louth, and if it was I think it's ridiculous that he continually claims the moral high ground over only receiving the average industrial wage.

He's renting in Louth, and pays for it himself out of his own wages. What's the problem?

dlofnep

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You obviously didn't read my first response to this question. I never stated that they save the tax-payer money. They earn the average industrial wage and give the majority of their earnings back to the party. Their disposable income is far less than the majority of careerist politicians. That's the reality of the matter, regardless of the whatever spin you'd like to put on it.

You're missing the point of it's intent. It's quite clear that Sinn Féin politicians are not in it for the money when they give the majority of their wage back to the party. It indicates to me that they are in it, because they are genuinely interested in being in the field of politics and want to create change.

I don't see any Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour politicians giving over half of their paycheck back to their party.

Chucky the tree

dlofnep wrote: »

You obviously didn't read my first response to this question. I never stated that they save the tax-payer money. They earn the average industrial wage and give the majority of their earnings back to the party. Their disposable income is far less than the majority of careerist politicians. That's the reality of the matter, regardless of the whatever spin you'd like to put on it.

You're missing the point of it's intent. It's quite clear that Sinn Féin politicians are not in it for the money when they give the majority of their wage back to the party. It indicates to me that they are in it, because they are genuinely interested in being in the field of politics and want to create change.

I don't see any Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour politicians giving over half of their paycheck back to their party.

How is that clear? Do they give their expenses back to the party? I'm sure the average industrial wage + perks from Sinn Fein they make decent money. I'd say Ferris is making more now then as a fisherman(or gun runner). Pearse probably didn't make much more as a Civil Engineer or Civil Engineering technician.

Tragedy

dlofnep wrote: »

You obviously didn't read my first response to this question. I never stated that they save the tax-payer money. They earn the average industrial wage and give the majority of their earnings back to the party. Their disposable income is far less than the majority of careerist politicians. That's the reality of the matter, regardless of the whatever spin you'd like to put on it.

You're missing the point of it's intent. It's quite clear that Sinn Féin politicians are not in it for the money when they give the majority of their wage back to the party. It indicates to me that they are in it, because they are genuinely interested in being in the field of politics and want to create change.

I don't see any Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour politicians giving over half of their paycheck back to their party.

Normal politicians have to pump money into their constituency office and spend their own money on local electioneering between elections too - the difference is they don't claim to be "taking home the average industrial wage".

You're also still ignoring the fact that SF TD's are ripping off the tax payers with their extremely high expense claims. Expenses that go directly to them on top of their 'average industrial wage'.

SkepticOne

The phrase "you pay peanuts, you get monkeys" is true for the professions, but the role of TD should not be regarded as a profession. It should be something you do because you want to make a difference rather than advance your own career.

The problem with the role in Ireland is that it has become professionalised. The "job" consists of attending funerals, assisting with planning applications, sorting passports, fixing potholes and so forth. You also vote according to the party whip as required on national issues but you don't worry too much about that. The less conviction you have for anything the better as that only gets in the way. You get better money than you got when you were a teacher so you put up with the various hardships. How else are you going to make that sort of money when you don't have much in the way of skills or imagination?

Bring the money down to about 40K and very strict allowances and expenses. Right now there's compensation for you if you live a certain distance away from Dublin, which is fine. But there's also compensation for not getting the living away allowance if you live near Dublin! The whole thing has become about money.

Now the usual argument against this is as follows: if you don't pay these clowns a lot of money they are just going to extract it in the form of bribes and thievery of one sort or another.

I disagree with this. By paying what amounts to a good professional salary you attract money oriented individuals. It is a certain proportion of these that will then go on to want more money and some of these will use dodgy methods to get it.

There's nothing wrong with being money oriented. If you are an accountant or a solicitor or barrister or some other professional then the reward of money might be what spurs you on to work harder. But the job of TD is not like that. You are supposed to be there for the good of the country, not the good of yourself. A more modest salary would encourage that. If you are willing to do the job on 40K then it is probably because you want to change things in the country. You are not going to be bothered with sorting out constituents petty problems (for whom there are already people paid to do that) because you are not paid enough to bother with all that.

Bringing the salary down is not enough on its own. I would also ban all political donations, get rid of multi-seat constituencies and introduce a list system, but it would be a start.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.