Fr McVerry supporting lessons in how to occupy properties

This man has lost all credibility in my eye. Whatever your views on the housing situation, it’s never right to enter someone else’s property illegally. But teaching people how to do so is beyond belief.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-an-emergency-you-take-emergency-action-fr-mcverry-supports-take-back-the-city-workshops-on-occupying-vacant-buildings-37327369.html

DChancer

Deleted User wrote: »

This man has lost all credibility in my eye. Whatever your views on the housing situation, it’s never right to enter someone else’s property illegally. But teaching people how to do so is beyond belief.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-an-emergency-you-take-emergency-action-fr-mcverry-supports-take-back-the-city-workshops-on-occupying-vacant-buildings-37327369.html

Total agree.
I have long believed he is a part of the problem rather than the solution, loves to peddle the idea of the "entitlement" culture.

_Brian

Interesting over in the accommodation forum there is a marked increase in the number of posts from small tome landlords saying that tenants are overstaying and stopping paying their rent.

Private property needs to be respected. The rule of law needs to be respected.

The rental market is terribly skewed at present because so many properties have been taken out of the rental system. Landlords sold out because of the draconian tax implication of rental income.

When landlords can no longer make a profit they will no longer rent property out.

Occupying property and more and more tenants welching on tents will only worsen the problem by driving properties to be sold out of rental and existing rents increasing to cover the costs.

Gimme A Pound

DChancer wrote: »

Total agree.
I have long believed he is a part of the problem rather than the solution, loves to peddle the idea of the "entitlement" culture.

I actually don't. I've huge respect for him - he gave up a comfortable life and actually DID something for people rather than bitch about other people not doing something. He sacrificed so much for decades, and for the genuinely needy. Horrific stories of people being neglected as children and ending up on the streets.

But I agree this is disappointing crap by him.

Your Face

The whole thing is an ego trip driven by those who want to elected on this platform.

Watch the videos of the protests, it's a cynical exercise.

TheCitizen

LOL at the right wingers on here that don't like the occupy stunt. I'm not totally in agreement with all of the tactics of the Take Back the City campaign myself but they're succeeding in highlighting the issue and the lack of action relating to it.

Wheeliebin30

I heard him this morning saying they need to occcupy 50 or a 100 houses because the gards can’t evict all of them at the same time.

Sick of him and his sniggering attitude to anyone who disagrees with him.

Makes people who own a property feel guilty for not handing it to some homeless person.

Not to mention his ceo on a 100k a year.

To be homest I find him a bit of a well I can’t say it here..

Maybe his beloved Catholic Church might take some of the 200 billion they own and house the homeless.

riffmongous

I can think of loads of harmless reasons to 'illegally enter someone's property', to say it's never right is a bit naive. Now if there's someone living there it's a no go obviously but there are plenty of long vacant or extensive properties out there where it's harmless. Did you never kick a ball over the wall as a child? Take a shortcut while out walking? Go camping?

ohnonotgmail

riffmongous wrote: »

I can think of loads of harmless reasons to 'illegally enter someone's property', to say it's never right is a bit naive. Now if there's someone living there it's a no go obviously but there are plenty of long vacant or extensive properties out there where it's harmless. Did you never kick a ball over the wall as a child? Take a shortcut while out walking? Go camping?

I dont remember going over a wall to collect a ball and then refusing to leave until a high court order was issued.

riffmongous

_Brian wrote: »

Interesting over in the accommodation forum there is a marked increase in the number of posts from small tome landlords saying that tenants are overstaying and stopping paying their rent.

Private property needs to be respected. The rule of law needs to be respected.

The rental market is terribly skewed at present because so many properties have been taken out of the rental system. Landlords sold out because of the draconian tax implication of rental income.

When landlords can no longer make a profit they will no longer rent property out.

Occupying property and more and more tenants welching on tents will only worsen the problem by driving properties to be sold out of rental and existing rents increasing to cover the costs.

so landlords can't make any profit, at all? Or is it more that they aren't making enough profit? How big a profit should they be making? I saw a thread there a few months ago where some guy put up theoretical numbers to claim you couldn't make a profit renting out..ignoring the fact that the rent was also paying off the mortgage

riffmongous

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I dont remember going over a wall to collect a ball and then refusing to leave until a high court order was issued.

Cute, but I'm clearly responding to the op

ohnonotgmail

riffmongous wrote: »

Cute, but I'm clearly responding to the op

your post was nothing at all to do with the OP. McVerry is advocating more action like the recent frederick st occupation and also seems happy to waste garda resources in doing to.

markodaly

riffmongous wrote: »

so landlords can't make any profit, at all? Or is it more that they aren't making enough profit? How big a profit should they be making? I saw a thread there a few months ago where some guy put up theoretical numbers to claim you couldn't make a profit renting out..ignoring the fact that the rent was also paying off the mortgage

Enough profit to justify the risk. If the risk profile is too much for a landlord at a given price they will raise their rent accordingly.

Most landlords wants a steady income, that is all. Nevermind that landlords wont see 40c on the euro as take-home income.

riffmongous

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

your post was nothing at all to do with the OP. McVerry is advocating more action like the recent frederick st occupation and also seems happy to waste garda resources in doing to.

Oh really?

Whatever your views on the housing situation, it’s never right to enter someone else’s property illegally.

ohnonotgmail

riffmongous wrote: »

Oh really?

was is illegal about going over a wall to collect a football and then returning?

TheCitizen

riffmongous wrote: »

so landlords can't make any profit, at all? Or is it more that they aren't making enough profit? How big a profit should they be making? I saw a thread there a few months ago where some guy put up theoretical numbers to claim you couldn't make a profit renting out..ignoring the fact that the rent was also paying off the mortgage

The notion that landlords can make profits is ludicrous, they're just greedy for more.

Rent is astronomical in Irish cities, it's scandalously extortionate and yet we have right wing mopes moaning about student protests.

BPKS

Deleted User wrote: »

This man has lost all credibility in my eye. Whatever your views on the housing situation, it’s never right to enter someone else’s property illegally. But teaching people how to do so is beyond belief.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-an-emergency-you-take-emergency-action-fr-mcverry-supports-take-back-the-city-workshops-on-occupying-vacant-buildings-37327369.html

McVerry's employers (the people who paid his salary, gave him free board and transport for decades) have thousands more unoccupied properties around the country than any of these landlords.

NIMAN

He needs to be pulled up on this, the next time he's on the radio or TV, but of course he won't be.

TheBoyConor

The Constitution of this state includes a right to private property.
The government should be enforcing this right.

/occupy

Gunmonkey

Rrrriiiight...and I'm sure the fine folks breaking into houses and assaulting the elderly residents up and down the country are just highlighting the lack of Garda resources and closures of local stations!

McVerry has always been a self-appointed lecturer of the masses. A moralising vested interest who ignores any hard questions about the charity he heads, the church he lives off or the people he demands rights for on the backs of the work of others

He can fcuk off as far as I'm concerned.

NIMAN

I think most people in the country know for several years now that there is a homeless crisis (or a constructed one as some believe), they don't need people illegally occupying properties to tell them.

Breaking the law is breaking the law. Private individuals whose property is being illegally taken over should have the law protect them.

When are Take Back the City going to take over government and church owned vacant properties?

Gimme A Pound

TheCitizen wrote: »

LOL at the right wingers on here that don't like the occupy stunt. I'm not totally in agreement with all of the tactics of the Take Back the City campaign myself but they're succeeding in highlighting the issue and the lack of action relating to it.

Not a rightwinger - and I doubt you're lolling.

Don't agree with private property being broken into or people being held up from going home to family after a long day's work. How it's an unreasonable position is beyond me. And a lot of middle class leftwingers know it, but need to pretend that it's totally fine and they're not bourgeois.

wexie

Who exactly is it they want to take the city back from?

NIMAN

The Man

McMurphy

wexie wrote: »

Who exactly is it they want to take the city back from?

Snow patrol. They started it.

Yer Da sells Avon

wexie wrote: »

Who exactly is it they want to take the city back from?

Property speculators.

Buford T Justice

BPKS wrote: »

McVerry's employers (the people who paid his salary, gave him free board and transport for decades) have thousands more unoccupied properties around the country than any of these landlords.

Yeah, but people only want free houses to live in in Dublin City centre, not in Bally-go-backwards in the Wesht.

Discodog

The reason there's a housing crisis is because the majority have a home & don't give a damn for those who don't. The same applies to health care.

It must be desperately upsetting for those that care, like McVerry, seeing the problem getting worse not better.

NIMAN

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

Property speculators.

... who are doing nothing illegal.

If I buy a property in central Dublin, I can leave it lying empty for 100 years if I want.

Unless the Gov changes laws of course. They are the ones to aim your vitriol at, not the owners of properties.

kneemos

Maybe his church could lead by example by handing over some of the properties they promised to to pay for their abuse?

Yer Da sells Avon

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Yeah, but people only want free houses to live in in Dublin City centre, not in Bally-go-backwards in the Wesht.

Most people don't want 'free houses' - they just want to be able to work and live in Dublin at an affordable cost.

Buford T Justice

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

Most people don't want 'free houses' - they just want to be able to work and live in Dublin at an affordable cost.

Mmhmm.... Sure.....
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057899809

bloodless_coup

What's this 10,000 homeless figure about anyway. You'd be tripping over homeless walking down the street if that was the case.

Yer Da sells Avon

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Mmhmm.... Sure.....
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057899809

That's one person (who incidentally, didn't even want to live in the city centre).

Working people just want to be able to afford to live within reasonable distance of where they work.

mikhail

TheCitizen wrote: »

LOL at the right wingers on here that don't like the occupy stunt. I'm not totally in agreement with all of the tactics of the Take Back the City campaign myself but they're succeeding in highlighting the issue and the lack of action relating to it.

I'm in broad agreement with their aims, but not their tactics. People like you, who associate left wing politics with half assed sit-in protests and disrespect for the rule of law, are why the left can't win a double digit percentage of Dail seats.

TheCitizen

Jensen White Robot wrote: »

Not a rightwinger - and I doubt you're lolling.

Don't agree with private property being broken into or people being held up from going home to family after a long day's work. How it's an unreasonable position is beyond me. And a lot of middle class leftwingers know it, but need to pretend that it's totally fine and they're not bourgeois.

There are two things at issue here from my viewpoint; rent prices are extortionate in cities in this country to a scandalous degree and nothing is being done about it, this occupy student protest is designed to highlight that I presume.

The other point is there are lots of buildings being left vacant in our cities with landlords for various reasons sitting on them. Many of these building fall into disrepair and end up being boarded up. This shouldn't be allowed to continue.

kneemos

doylefe wrote: »

What's this 10,000 homeless figure about anyway. You'd be tripping over homeless walking down the street if that was the case.

Anybody on any kind of assisted accommodation counts as homeless I think,even if they have a flat or a house.

TheCitizen

mikhail wrote: »

I'm in broad agreement with their aims, but not their tactics. People like you, who associate left wing politics with half assed sit-in protests and disrespect for the rule of law, are why the left can't win a double digit percentage of Dail seats.

Didn't I say I wasn't in total agreement with their tactics myself. Amazing how you just glossed over that comment in my brief remark

begbysback

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This man has lost all credibility in my eye. Whatever your views on the housing situation, it’s never right to enter someone else’s property illegally. But teaching people how to do so is beyond belief.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-an-emergency-you-take-emergency-action-fr-mcverry-supports-take-back-the-city-workshops-on-occupying-vacant-buildings-37327369.html

"He said that the occupation of vacant buildings is fine, once there is no violence or damage to the property"

Hes probably the only charity out there where you know your donation will go where intended.

It makes news for homelessness which is his business - why wouldn't he support it?

n!ghtmancometh

People have some nerve criticising Peter McVerry. He does more work to help vulnerable people in one day than any of the whingers here will do in their lifetime. He sees the reality of the housing problem and the hugely negative impact it's having currently, and the damage it is causing young children now which will have severe repercussions in the future, day in and day out. Unbelievably selfish attitude most of ye have. Not surprising though.

JupiterKid

The housing crisis at at such a point that I support these occupations, as long as they are not forcing anyone out or damaging the occupied property.

I have expertise in housing and planning policy so I actually know what I'm talking about. Dublin in particular has a housing emergency. Desperate times call for desperate action.

There should ve a tax on vacant residential properties to put them back into use like in Holland and Denmark. we also need a huge social housing programne. It's pathetic and disingenous of Leo V and Eoghan Murphy deeming houses costing €320k in Dublin as "affordable."

This is a direct insult to the intelligence of an entire generation locked out of securing their long term housing needs. This neo-liberal Thatcherite free market ideology has utterly failed and the consequences are there for all to see.

riffmongous

NIMAN wrote: »

I think most people in the country know for several years now that there is a homeless crisis (or a constructed one as some believe), they don't need people illegally occupying properties to tell them.

Breaking the law is breaking the law. Private individuals whose property is being illegally taken over should have the law protect them.

When are Take Back the City going to take over government and church owned vacant properties?

but doesn't this strike you? That it's been a problem for years and everyone knows it but it's not being confronted? It's why it needs more attention, it needs to be shoved under people's noses constantly instead of just being casually dismissed

mikhail

TheCitizen wrote: »

Didn't I say I wasn't in total agreement with their tactics myself. Amazing how you just glossed over that comment in my brief remark

Yeah, amazing on how I focussed on the remark branding anyone who disagreed with you as a right winger. It's almost like I had no further interest in what you had to say.

kneemos

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

People have some nerve criticising Peter McVerry. He does more work to help vulnerable people in one day than any of the whingers here will do in their lifetime. He sees the reality of the housing problem and the hugely negative impact it's having currently, and the damage it is causing young children now which will have severe repercussions in the future, day in and day out. Unbelievably selfish attitude most of ye have. Not surprising though.

Well he doesn't have a day job.

Trasna1

TheCitizen wrote: »

LOL at the right wingers on here that don't like the occupy stunt. I'm not totally in agreement with all of the tactics of the Take Back the City campaign myself but they're succeeding in highlighting the issue and the lack of action relating to it.

I don't know what more highlighting the issue requires. There is a story on housing every day in the news.

As I said before, protests will not make the thousands of construction workers appear to build social and affordable housing.

TheCitizen

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

People have some nerve criticising Peter McVerry. He does more work to help vulnerable people in one day than any of the whingers here will do in their lifetime. He sees the reality of the housing problem and the hugely negative impact it's having currently, and the damage it is causing young children now which will have severe repercussions in the future, day in and day out. Unbelievably selfish attitude most of ye have. Not surprising though.

It appears those of a selfish mindset are in the majority on here which is sad

ANDREWMUFC

I find Father McVerry a creepy man

Gimme A Pound

TheCitizen wrote: »

There are two things at issue here from my viewpoint; rent prices are extortionate in cities in this country to a scandalous degree and nothing is being done about it, this occupy student protest is designed to highlight that I presume.

The other point is there are lots of buildings being left vacant in our cities with landlords for various reasons sitting on them. Many of these building fall into disrepair and end up being boarded up. This shouldn't be allowed to continue.

I agree fully but I don't agree with people breaking the law to do it, or to sneer "rightwingers" at those with this view.

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

People have some nerve criticising Peter McVerry. He does more work to help vulnerable people in one day than any of the whingers here will do in their lifetime. He sees the reality of the housing problem and the hugely negative impact it's having currently, and the damage it is causing young children now which will have severe repercussions in the future, day in and day out. Unbelievably selfish attitude most of ye have. Not surprising though.

People can have both views - I hugely respect him but I don't agree with him taking this particular approach.

He certainly does do far far far more though than people who whinge about nothing being done (yet don't do anything themselves either).

kneemos

Not a lot the ordinary Joe can do about the housing crisis.

ThunbergsAreGo

begbysback wrote: »

"He said that the occupation of vacant buildings is fine, once there is no violence or damage to the property"

Hes probably the only charity out there where you know your donation will go where intended.

It makes news for homelessness which is his business - why wouldn't he support it?

Exactly it is solid marketing by him