Eamonn Maloney TD Well done

bamboozle

we're not going to get out of the mess we're in with td's not claiming expenses but we're at the stage where every penny counts, hats off to Deputy Maloney.


Labour TD Eamonn Maloney is the only TD in the Dáil who claimed no expenses at all in 2011. Despite many TDs claiming more than €50,000 in expenses in less than a year, the Dublin South West TD didn’t claim a single euro on travel, accommodation or costs according to new figures released by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

MagicMarker

OMG how has he survived!!? Presumably with all his 'expenses' he has no spare money for bread and milk and all those necessities?

Ellis Dee

Maith an fear! But he won't last. Someone who was on the dole until elected to a job with a salary of about €7,000 a month counting his lucky stars and not seeking to dig his snout even deeper into the trough must be an example that many of his Oireachtas colleagues will find unsettling, indeed alarming.:rolleyes:

I bet that, as we speak, some of them are doing their best to find some dirt on him.

From now on, I hope our media publish as many details as they can of the expenses that all of our elected representatives claim.:)

ednwireland

shame our man doesnt think as much of taking our money

Independent TD Thomas Pringle says he won’t pay back his Leader’s Allowance of over €41,000 until government spending is reformed.

http://www.donegalnow.com/sp/article_manager/detail/pringle_wont_pay_leaders_allowance_back_until_spending_reformed

nuac

In fairness he does live in central Dublin - TDs outside Dublin are entitled to travel expenses within reason.

Not convinced about the other expenses

MagicMarker

nuac wrote: »

In fairness he does live in central Dublin - TDs outside Dublin are entitled to travel expenses within reason.

Not convinced about the other expenses

Why are they entitled to them? Thousands upon thousands of people who live outside Dublin but work in Dublin are not entitled to them.

bamboozle

nuac wrote: »

In fairness he does live in central Dublin - TDs outside Dublin are entitled to travel expenses within reason.

Not convinced about the other expenses

he's tallaght based so there's a small bit of travel involved.

contrast this guy Maloney to Ivor Callely who as TD & Senator regularly cycled the 3km's from clontarf into Dail Eireann...then claimed he was cork based and hit the taxpayer with his crazy expenses.

bmaxi

Fair play to Eamon Maloney, this is the kind of example politicians should be setting.
I get pissed off hearing about the cuts politicians and senior Public/Civil servants are supposed to have taken and attempts to equate them with cuts taken by the lower paid. The cuts, if they have been made at all, do not impose hardship on those at the top like they do those at the bottom. I would love to see just how much of their annual salary TDs and top earners actually spend and how much of their lifestyle is supported by expenses and other "fringe benefits".
It's easy for the likes of Noonan to keep lashing out increases in VAT, Excise and carbon tax when he never has to put his own hand in his pocket, just as it was easy for him to hound a sick woman to her grave using the full resources of the state.

raymon

Well done Eamonn Maloney, we need more of this .

I'm fed up with my taxes going to unvouched spongers

later12

MagicMarker wrote: »

OMG how has he survived!!?

You're arguing against a point that nobody is making.

The suggestion is not that this man is on the breadline, but that he appears to have taken a principled stand against increasing his effective income by €20,000 or €30,000 as he could quite easily have done.

Politicians' expenses, and moreso TDs' expenses, are open to an awful lot of abuse in light of their relative opacity. Although I think politicians ought to be reimbursed for their occupational costs, I have a lot of respect for Eamonn Maloney for possessing the acumen to disagree with that position and for - quite literally, perhaps - putting his money where his mouth is.

MagicMarker

later10 wrote: »

The suggestion is not that this man is on the breadline, but that he appears to have taken a principled stand against increasing his effective income by €20,000 or €30,000 as he could quite easily have done.

jimmycrackcorm

So who pays for this guys constituency office?

raymon

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

So who pays for this guys constituency office?

Should the question not be - do all the other tds have legitimate and bona fidae constituency office expenses ?????

The unvouched system should be stopped

dx22

I dont like it! A politician should claim some expenses, its just a labour politician trying to achieve some smug higher ground.

Go back and renegotiate the Croke Park agreement with your union buddies instead i will respect you then!

raymon

dx22 wrote: »

I dont like it! A politician should claim some expenses, its just a labour politician trying to achieve some smug higher ground.

Go back and renegotiate the Croke Park agreement with your union buddies instead i will respect you then!

I hate unions too, and you are right Croke Park is one of FFs worst decisions.
Also I am no fan of Labour.

But for a politician to claim no expenses is a step in the right direction.

Or maybe you wish we had more Callelys and Ned o keeffes.

lugha

raymon wrote: »

But for a politician to claim no expenses is a step in the right direction.

I see nothing wrong in principle with any worker being reimbursed for expenses incurred in the course of their duties. The problem with expenses for public officials is abuse (and to a lesser extend, that they are unduly generous). The answer surely is careful scrutiny of the details of expenses claimed and not the populist appeal for TDs to claim no expenses at all.

raymon

lugha wrote: »

I see nothing wrong in principle with any worker being reimbursed for expenses incurred in the course of their duties. The problem with expenses for public officials is abuse (and to a lesser extend, that they are unduly generous). The answer surely is careful scrutiny of the details of expenses claimed and not the populist appeal for TDs to claim no expenses at all.

I agree with some of what you say here

We should ask why one TD can claim 50,000 and another can claim 0 .

What is interesting here is how the TD who claimed 0 , is treated with suspicion while the TD who claims 50,000 is considered normal.Seems bizarre to me that anyone could criticize a man for not fleecing the taxpayer as populist.

lugha

raymon wrote: »

I agree with some of what you say here

We should ask why one TD can claim 50,000 and another can claim 0 .

What is interesting here is how the TD who claimed 0 , is treated with suspicion while the TD who claims 50,000 is considered normal.Seems bizarre to me that anyone could criticize a man for not fleecing the taxpayer as populist.

But if the allowance procedures are working properly and there is no fiddling going on then it is not "fleecing the taxpayer", it is simply the proper reimbursement of an individual. This notion that "expenses" is a buzzword on a par with backhander or the like is unhelpful.

MagicMarker

You simply have to be taking the piss if you think claiming 50k in expenses is anything other than fleecing the tax payer.

raymon

lugha wrote: »

But if the allowance procedures are working properly and there is no fiddling going on then it is not "fleecing the taxpayer", it is simply the proper reimbursement of an individual. This notion that "expenses" is a buzzword on a par with backhander or the like is unhelpful.

Politicians are fleecing the taxpayer, the gravy train of unvouched payments is a disgrace.

Our country is bankrupt and can't afford these expenses

Sierra Oscar

All unvouched expenses should be eliminated immediately - its a disgrace that they still exist.

nice_guy80

I have to drive to work everyday to work on behalf of the state but I cannot claim mileage expenses

Pity, with the price of diesel so high (though I'd still make a profit on it with the official mileage allowance TDs get)

Good loser

dx22 wrote: »

I dont like it! A politician should claim some expenses, its just a labour politician trying to achieve some smug higher ground.

Go back and renegotiate the Croke Park agreement with your union buddies instead i will respect you then!

I, too, am not impressed.

Far too much time and chatter is devoted to this matter of Dáil expenses.

If he was in my constituency it would not make the slightest difference to my vote in an election.

It's only another form of auction politics.

Any citizen can put him/herself up for election on a 'no expenses' ticket.

Think what a crowd of clowns we would then end up with in the Dáil (if many were elected).

thebman

Good loser wrote: »

I, too, am not impressed.

Far too much time and chatter is devoted to this matter of Dáil expenses.

If he was in my constituency it would not make the slightest difference to my vote in an election.

It's only another form of auction politics.

Any citizen can put him/herself up for election on a 'no expenses' ticket.

Think what a crowd of clowns we would then end up with in the Dáil (if many were elected).

I don't think it gets too much time. It is a form of legal corruption, no unvouched expenses should be accepted.

raymon

Good loser wrote: »

I, too, am not impressed.

Far too much time and chatter is devoted to this matter of Dáil expenses.

This is the mentality that allowed Callely , o Donohue and o Keeffe to get away with it .

Legitimate expenses with ( non forged ) receipts should be paid. Forged or unvouched expenses should be not allowed

I do not get an allowance for going to work .I would get fired if I didn't go to work

ColeTrain

Beats reading stories like this.

earlyevening

..but there were always TDs with zero or close to zero expenses. Just looking at 2008 as a random example and (I've only looked at the first page), I see Noel Ahern and Pat CArey on 0. (And they both lost their seats for their troubles.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21141420/Deputies-Salary-and-Allow-2008

Equally, some modest enough claims in 2005

http://www.mulley.net/2006/08/22/td-expenses-for-2005/

Good loser

thebman wrote: »

I don't think it gets too much time. It is a form of legal corruption, no unvouched expenses should be accepted.

All those on €50,000 ASAIK are on vouched expenses - if so no corruption.

I hear endless discussions on the matter. Vast majority of non politicians think the matter is scandalous.

I don't agree. Pay and expenses are now about right. Politicians work incredibly hard for long hours and have to put up with continuous abuse. Pensions were definitely over generous before reforms.

Bannasidhe

Good loser wrote: »

All those on €50,000 ASAIK are on vouched expenses - if so no corruption.

I hear endless discussions on the matter. Vast majority of non politicians think the matter is scandalous.

I don't agree. Pay and expenses are now about right. Politicians work incredibly hard for long hours and have to put up with continuous abuse. Pensions were definitely over generous before reforms.

Not technically corruption but way too generous. Am I seriously expected to believe that Cork South/North Central TDs need over 50 k a year in expenses? Neither are exactly geographically large regions - Cork is a very small city. It's also not exactly located that far from Dublin - not that the Dail sits that many days anyway.

TDs not only volunteered for the job - they went around and asked people to give it to them, and now they can make a profit from things like travelling expenses due to the generous allowance they voted in for themselves. It sticks in my craw and not one of those 50k expense claimers will get a vote from me come the next election. I have had enough of hearing about 'tough choices' and 'need for austerity' from people who claim enough in expenses alone to buy a fecking house outright in their constituency.

Cork South Central house for less then 50k:
http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?id=634332

Cork North Central house for less then 50k:
http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?id=633559

bmaxi

[QUOTE I see Noel Ahern and Pat CArey on 0. (And they both lost their seats for their troubles.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that was the reason :rolleyes:

jmayo

bamboozle wrote: »

we're not going to get out of the mess we're in with td's not claiming expenses but we're at the stage where every penny counts, hats off to Deputy Maloney.


Labour TD Eamonn Maloney is the only TD in the Dáil who claimed no expenses at all in 2011. Despite many TDs claiming more than €50,000 in expenses in less than a year, the Dublin South West TD didn’t claim a single euro on travel, accommodation or costs according to new figures released by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Wippe a TD who happens to live in his own home and represents a constituency which is only a few miles from the Dáil claims no expenses.

I have no problem with expenses if within reason and fully vouched.

In other words no expenses for chauffeured transport, no expenses for constituency sidekicks, no double expenses for sharing accommodation or travel (jackie healy rae and olywn enright), no laundry bills, no private party postage allowances, etc.

But one has to allow for expenses of some sort.

I think everyone would claim legitimate expenses incurred in their normal course of work.
Added to that I would allow a living and travel allowance for TDs who do not live at home, i.e. further than 50 miles from the capital.
AFAIk they can claim it if they live in Meath FFS.

Would people like Kenny, Gilmore, etc to fork out for their travel to Brussels for instance ?

lugha wrote: »

But if the allowance procedures are working properly and there is no fiddling going on then it is not "fleecing the taxpayer", it is simply the proper reimbursement of an individual. This notion that "expenses" is a buzzword on a par with backhander or the like is unhelpful.

This is the problem because the expenses gravy train for so long was allowed run amuck.

Oh and it doesn't just stop with TDs.
Anyone remember the Fás or HSE junkets where managers, hell even some connected union plebs got to fleece the system ?

walshb

bamboozle wrote: »

we're not going to get out of the mess we're in with td's not claiming expenses but we're at the stage where every penny counts, hats off to Deputy Maloney.


Labour TD Eamonn Maloney is the only TD in the Dáil who claimed no expenses at all in 2011. Despite many TDs claiming more than €50,000 in expenses in less than a year, the Dublin South West TD didn’t claim a single euro on travel, accommodation or costs according to new figures released by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Well, he's an idiot then, because you can be sure the money he is not claiming is probably being pissed away anyway.

Bannasidhe

walshb wrote: »

Well, he's an idiot then, because you can be sure the money he is not claiming is probably being pissed away anyway.

Ah - the Celtic Tiger still roars 'Let's milk the system for all its worth lads, sure t'would only be pissed away anyway!!!' :rolleyes:

walshb

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah - the Celtic Tiger still roars 'Let's milk the system for all its worth lads, sure t'would only be pissed away anyway!!!' :rolleyes:

Absolutely.

No good deed goes unpunished!

walshb

I used to be a big supporter of class, honesty, integrity and decency, but it just doesn't seem to work in todays society. Can't beat em, join em!

Bannasidhe

walshb wrote: »

I used to be a big supporter of class, honesty, integrity and decency, but it just doesn't seem to work in todays society. Can't beat em, join em!

http://www.fiannafail.ie/page/s/jointheparty

Good loser

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah - the Celtic Tiger still roars 'Let's milk the system for all its worth lads, sure t'would only be pissed away anyway!!!' :rolleyes:

Claiming or not claiming expenses does not a good TD make.

Live in the real world.

Not giving enough (or some more) limits the choices available to an electorate.

I bet Denis O Brien would waive his expenses AND his salary.

Bannasidhe

Good loser wrote: »

Claiming or not claiming expenses does not a good TD make.

Live in the real world.

Not giving enough (or some more) limits the choices available to an electorate.

I bet Denis O Brien would waive his expenses AND his salary.

No but preaching austerity while claiming every single cent you can under a generous expenses system does make one a hypocrite.

Since Denis O Brien is not a TD or paid out of public funds what he may or may not do is immaterial.

Son Of A Vidic

Amazing how the expense issue was quickly brushed under the carpet over here. A pity it wasn't dealt with in a more robust fashion, the way it was in the U.K. But I suppose if it was, the DPP would probably be inundated with files.

Good loser

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No but preaching austerity while claiming every single cent you can under a generous expenses system does make one a hypocrite.

No it does not. There is no connection between the two. Your argument is flawed.

Austerity is good or bad on its merits.

The obvious point to make is that austerity is the chosen policy because it is good for us - hardly to fund TDs' expenses.

If we had had austerity ten years ago there would be no need for it now.

You post a lot - beware of ad hominem arguments. This country is bedevilled with them.

Bannasidhe

Good loser wrote: »

No it does not. There is no connection between the two. Your argument is flawed.

Austerity is good or bad on its merits.

The obvious point to make is that austerity is the chosen policy because it is good for us - hardly to fund TDs' expenses.

If we had had austerity ten years ago there would be no need for it now.

You post a lot - beware of ad hominem arguments. This country is bedevilled with them.

Thanks but I neither need or appreciate your backseat modding.

Yes - for an elected public representative to use the national interest and need for shared austerity to justify voting for measures which result in drastic cutbacks, increased taxation and charges levied on the general public while simultaneously claiming over the average industrial wage in personal expenses is not only hypocrisy of the highest order, it is a slap in the face to the hard pressed taxpayer and a demonstration that the spirit of Haughey still reigns in Dail Éireann.

expectationlost

i'd be more interesting to see details of his spending

Good loser

Good loser wrote: »

You post a lot - beware of ad hominem arguments. This country is bedevilled with them.

leave out the backseat modding please

thebman

Good loser wrote: »

All those on €50,000 ASAIK are on vouched expenses - if so no corruption.

I hear endless discussions on the matter. Vast majority of non politicians think the matter is scandalous.

I don't agree. Pay and expenses are now about right. Politicians work incredibly hard for long hours and have to put up with continuous abuse. Pensions were definitely over generous before reforms.

Not really corruption, just sickening abuse of power. Is that corruption, probably not.

Anyone claiming that TD's should be allowed 50,000 Eur expenses (which is significantly more than the average wage in the country for expenses!!) really needs to go have a rethink about how they'd like our politics to work IMO.

How politicians can expect anyone in the country to respect politics or politicians when they behave in that way is ridiculous. Few other professions get expenses for driving to work and few other professions say they need email filters to reduce the number of requests they get from customers.

Good loser

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Thanks but I neither need or appreciate your backseat modding.

Yes - for an elected public representative to use the national interest and need for shared austerity to justify voting for measures which result in drastic cutbacks, increased taxation and charges levied on the general public while simultaneously claiming over the average industrial wage in personal expenses is not only hypocrisy of the highest order, it is a slap in the face to the hard pressed taxpayer and a demonstration that the spirit of Haughey still reigns in Dail Éireann.

I repeat it is not hypocrisy.

Pearse Doherty draws about the maximum in expenses and opposes the 'austerity' (so called) in all its manifestations. Is he a non hypocrite?

What matters is the facts of the cutbacks - are there choices other than the ones made and why should these be substituted?

A few cents to TDs in expenses is neither here nor there; as I said ad hominem arguments are flawed arguments.

Havermeyer

Ellis Dee wrote: »

From now on, I hope our media publish as many details as they can of the expenses that all of our elected representatives claim.:)

As far as I know, that can be done for about €10 (last I heard) and a trip to the Office of the Information Commissioner.

Bannasidhe

Good loser wrote: »

I repeat it is not hypocrisy.

Pearse Doherty draws about the maximum in expenses and opposes the 'austerity' (so called) in all its manifestations. Is he a non hypocrite?

What matters is the facts of the cutbacks - are there choices other than the ones made and why should these be substituted?

A few cents to TDs in expenses is neither here nor there; as I said ad hominem arguments are flawed arguments.

There have been far too many 'a few cents here and there doesn't matter' arguments made by defenders of the outrageous salaries paid out by a bankrupt state to elected representatives, their extra special advisor and top tier public servants. It all counts.

No - Doherty is not a non-hypocrite.


hyp·o·crite noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\

Definition of HYPOCRITE

1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

raymon

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There have been far too many 'a few cents here and there doesn't matter' arguments made by defenders of the outrageous salaries paid out by a bankrupt state to elected representatives, their extra special advisor and top tier public servants. It all counts.

No - Doherty is not a non-hypocrite.


hyp·o·crite noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\

Definition of HYPOCRITE

1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Doherty is a hypocrite

Please see his blogs at http://pearsedoherty.blogspot.com/2009/09/my-expenses.html where in 2009 he said "TDs , Senators, junior Ministers are overpaid and thir expenses are inflated "

He proudly displayed a breakdown of his 2009 expenses and allowances and named and shamed those who claimed higher expenses.

Didn't take you long Pearse..... didn't take you long at all

kingtubby

raymon wrote: »

Doherty is a hypocrite

Please see his blogs at http://pearsedoherty.blogspot.com/2009/09/my-expenses.html where in 2009 he said "TDs , Senators, junior Ministers are overpaid and thir expenses are inflated "

He proudly displayed a breakdown of his 2009 expenses and allowances and named and shamed those who claimed higher expenses.

Didn't take you long Pearse..... didn't take you long at all

Any TD drawing over €50K expenses a year annoys me.But after hearing all of sinn fein's pius rhetoric for years and now Doherty and other sinn fein TDs at it well that just takes it to a new level.

CiaranC

A response from Eamonn maloney on Sherlocks legislation

Dear Ciaran

Many thanks for your recent email in relation to the signing of a statutory instrument by Minister Sean Sherlock regarding copyright law.

This issue has been raised with concerns, by a number of my constituents and I have contacted Minister Sherlock urging that he carefully re-examine his proposals.

I will be in contact with you again as soon as I have a reply to hand.

Yours sincerely

Eamonn Maloney T.D.

Good loser

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There have been far too many 'a few cents here and there doesn't matter' arguments made by defenders of the outrageous salaries paid out by a bankrupt state to elected representatives, their extra special advisor and top tier public servants. It all counts.

No - Doherty is not a non-hypocrite.


hyp·o·crite noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\

Definition of HYPOCRITE

1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

If a doctor is a smoker and advises/compels his patient to give up smoking is that doctor a hypocrite?

There is no connection between the doctor's professional advice to his patient and his own behaviour as an individual.

Your ad hominem argument is flawed.