Newly built social homes sitting idle for over 8 months in Wexford

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739831#Comment_118739831

Good to know that we've established that equality doesn't mean treating everyone equally.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739827#Comment_118739827

Nope. Antisocial behaviour policies do exist alright, but it’s not as easy as immediate eviction and removal from ever being accommodated by the council again.

This is Wexford Co. Co. policy as an example (no idea where the other posters are referring to, but seeing as the OP refers to circumstances in Wexford…), but all local authority policies will be similarly worded as they’re all based upon the same legislation -

Excluding Orders

Wexford County Council will apply Section 3 of the 1997 Act, as amended (Excluding Order) if practicable, in order to allow for a more targeted approach in dealing with persons engaged in Anti-Social Behaviour and in order to avoid if possible the eviction of an entire household.

Except in exceptional circumstances, applications for Excluding Orders in relation to adults will be for three years and will be in respect of the dwelling and the estate in which the dwelling, from which the Anti-Social Behaviour is emanating, is situate and any other relevant estate. In accordance with legislation, the Council will not seek an Excluding Order against a juvenile who is under 12 years of age. Where the juvenile is over 12 (and under eighteen) years, and the case is serious and significant, the application will refer to a specified property, place or area other than the juvenile’s family home.

https://www.wexfordcoco.ie/sites/default/files/content/Housing/Wexford-Anti-Social-Policy-2018-as-adopted-by-WCC-12.03.18.pdf

Dempo1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739827#Comment_118739827

They absolutely would but of course , not it would seem a particularly cultural Cohort 😉

I've seen with my own eyes the shocking vandalism in one particular location that has happened repeatedly over a number of years.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739927#Comment_118739927

"Let them eat cake. " he says.

Try getting finance approval for a PCP when you're on minimum wage zero hour contacts, or worse, in bogus self employment.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739921#Comment_118739921

Don't lecture me on part M. I've owned an Apartment constructed in this century to the standard and no wheelchair user would have been getting access to the apartment for all the level paths and space in the bathroom or low level light switches and raised power points as it was not a ground floor apartment.

A resident who found themselves confined to a wheelchair would have had to install a stairlift.

The objective of the regulations with regard to residences is to make them accessible in so much as is practical not to make them turnkey residential space for those with limited mobility.

Read part M again. These are the guiding principles from the publication itself:

"Buildings should be designed so that they are easy for people to use and to reflect the fact that all people experience changes in their abilities as they progress through the different stages of life. It is important for designers to take all of the users of buildings into account throughout the design process in order to avoid the creation of a built environment that excludes certain groups from participating in normal everyday activities."

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739955#Comment_118739955

I take it you are conceding this point in that you implicitly acknowledge that those on lower incomes (outside of your edge cases) can realistically afford to get access to EVs.

Your claim was that only the wealthy were able to derive benefit from this Government Incentive.

_Kaiser_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739173#Comment_118739173

Really?? let's see...

3 lads standing beside a rickety fence at the edge of the field peeking over it (or complaining they can't see anything) while the rest of the (paying) fans sit in the dedicated stands.

If you're going to try and support your argument, best not to do it with graphics that completely undermine it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740174#Comment_118740174

That picture is a bit unfair and not a good analogy.

A better analogy would be to have the freeloaders inside on half the premium seats. Only half though - because they burned the other ones at the last game.

The ones looking from the outside would be the ones funding the games and the premium seats

_Kaiser_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740211#Comment_118740211

You do have a point!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740174#Comment_118740174

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740211#Comment_118740211

Jaysis lads between the pair of ye, yer deliberate attempts to misinterpret the point of the picture are comical 😁 I’m not sure this picture will help, but sure feck it, it even comes with explanations for the deliberately stupid -

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740291#Comment_118740291

Speaking of deliberately stupid, you appear to be ignoring the massive assistance, financial and otherwise, that certain "perennially disadvantaged" people get. Houses which literally cost millions, only to be trashed and destroyed and replaced again.

Those "disadvantaged" people with get orders of magnitude more from the State than you or I will. And it isn't a hand up - 99% of their children will be the same.

The State has to help them, but there is no need to deny the massive amounts they do get.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740303#Comment_118740303

You appear to have missed my earlier post in the thread just this morning Donald?

I don’t think you ignored it, but you definitely missed it if you’re accusing me of ignoring the assistance, financial and otherwise that councils are entitled to receive in public funding to provide accommodation specifically for travellers (as distinct from funding received by councils to provide for social housing from the Dept. of Housing) -

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118739382#Comment_118739382

That massive assistance, financial and otherwise doesn’t appear to be benefiting the perennially disadvantaged, which is why they continue to be perennially disadvantaged. Addressing criminal damage and antisocial behaviour is also the councils responsibility, but councillors don’t appear to be taking that obligation seriously either.

What you’re doing is the not just the equivalent of blaming a whole group in society for the behaviour of a minority of that group, which would be like depriving you of whatever you’re entitled to claim from the State, as a consequence of something I’ve done, and I face no consequences whatsoever, but you’re holding the wrong people responsible for the wrong thing - the perennially disadvantaged aren’t the people who are responsible for deciding where public funds are spent, nor are the perennially disadvantaged responsible for the criminal or antisocial behaviour of other people. To assume they are, and punish them accordingly, would amount to discrimination based upon prejudice, and would probably be regarded as unlawful, putting advocates of that sort of thing in a fairly awkward position - rather than treating people fairly, they’re arguing that people should be treated unfairly on the basis of their own prejudices against other people.

Can’t say I’d be particularly in favour of that style of Government Donald, but thankfully because we live in a democracy where political representation is not contingent on how much anyone pays in income tax, I don’t have to worry about posters here arguing that the perennially disadvantaged should remain perennially disadvantaged.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740400#Comment_118740400

It's called reality dude. If people decide to engineer themselves into a perpetual cycle of "helplessness" then there isn't much anyone can do. It's either indulge it or don't.

It's like if you have a junkie. And you decide to help him. But it's not that you decide to help wean them off their addiction and get them back on their feet. You instead say - "Ah ya poor divil, here, look, we'll give ya free smack and also a free house in a nice area and we'll also make sure it has a nice big garden so that we can build you a nice "manshed" out the back with massive widescreen TV with surround sound so that you can bring your junkie pals around......but only for as long as you are on the smack....Once ya get off it, you'll be back in a council flat"

Some may prefer that those people exist because they themselves are on the take from the State but one level down. And they are grateful that that higher level exists as it takes the focus off them. Whatever your own motivations for wanting that status quo to exist is your own business.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740430#Comment_118740430

What you’re describing Donald is just far-fetched nonsense, well removed from reality, much like how you would propose to address the issues you’re exaggerating to make your point. I get it, not even gonna quibble with your example which bears no resemblance to reality whatsoever.

I’m not suggesting anyone indulge criminal or antisocial behaviour, but what I am suggesting is that you’re overlooking the fact I pointed out in my previous post - the perennially disadvantaged don’t get to decide, declare or determine however public funds are spent, any more than you or I do. That’s the responsibility of public servants who determine legislation and social policies and so on.

I’m well aware of what can only be described as the sheer incompetence of the number of stakeholders involved in distributing funding they receive from the Oireachtas to provide services to the State, and I’m acutely aware of local councillors incompetence which is overlooked because they are about as far removed from reality as you are. It’s not like you’re in any way unique in that regard - as long whoever is shafting you looks daycent, seems you’re happy to allow them to continue to do so, and blame the perennially disadvantaged for your sore hole (because don’t you just know it but the local council also didn’t apply for funding already allocated to them for lube 😒).

Whatever your motivations are for encouraging and maintaining that status quo are entirely your own business too. I don’t want to know, same as I said to the other poster earlier who wanted the State to pay for their accommodation - off they go, and if there’s anything I can do to help let me know, but their own personal circumstances aren’t anyone else’s business.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740561#Comment_118740561

Why should a person who identifies as being part of a particular grouping be entitled to far more from the State than someone else? Yet people will still make allowances for them and call them disadvantaged.

Can you tell me why a person with a particular surname or belonging to a particular family should be entitled to a house that costs the guts of a million to build because of their surname or their claimed hobbies, while another person might have to do with a small house in a housing estate?

The mad thing is that the former probably claim to need space because they have mobile housing - their preferred form of housing when it suits them to claim so - that they want to park in the driveway.

Are you that deluded and innocent to think that "ah sure if we give this person the fancy house then it will break the cycle and sure their kids will grow up to be engineers and surgeons"?

Why not spend that money instead on a few people who will take it and build on it and then contribute back to society? Higher insurance premiums and then old people using insurance payouts to buy new goods after they have been beaten and battered and had their possessions stolen might give a minor indirect stimulus to that local economy but I'd posit that it isn't really a benefit to society overall.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740174#Comment_118740174

You’ve never seen fences or walls inside stadiums? Have you ever sat with a wheelchair user in one of the designated spots in the stands their and seen how the lose their view of the action every time the action hots up and the crowd rises?

Put your brain into gear and see if you can get your head around an important principle rather than obsessing about obviously irrelevant details.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740634#Comment_118740634

Genuine question for you Andrew. Why are you going on about wheelchairs? It doesn't mention wheelchairs in the article. It actually states that:

Cllr George Lawlor said he was being contacted by families who are in dire need of housing and they can’t understand why these properties have been left empty. “As of yet, we don’t know why the families refused them and what they are looking for.

Do you have inside knowledge that these people are refusing to take up the houses because the families involved all need wheelchair access? Surely statistically unlikely?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740694#Comment_118740694

I’m going on about wheelchairs to help people to get their heads around the important principle that achieving equality does not involve treating everyone equally.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740593#Comment_118740593

Well the answer to your first question should be obvious - because they are regarded as being disadvantaged in some way is the reason why they might meet whatever eligibility criteria have been determined by public servants who have the power and authority to make these decisions.

Your second question - nobody is entitled to a million euro house, and further to that - nobody is entitled to a house, full stop. I do know there is talk alright about holding a referendum on a right to housing, but I can’t imagine politicians would want to touch that one with yours, it’s not exactly a vote winner with only 64% in favour of the idea according to one poll -

https://www.thejournal.ie/it-has-huge-expressive-value-but-would-a-right-to-housing-in-our-constitution-force-governments-to-act-5453992-Jun2021/?amp=1

And that brings us to your third question - I don’t know why the money isn’t being spent on a few people who will take it and build on it and contribute back to society, which is why I question the vast majority of funding being spent on administering the funding, like it’s some sort of pyramid scheme, because it sure as hell isn’t being spent on the perennially disadvantaged in order to enable their equal participation in Irish society.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740742#Comment_118740742

Dude these "perennially disadvantaged" are only so because of choice. If someone is disabled or has an actual reason, that is different. Beyond that, there is no logical reason why a person would remain disadvantaged because of their last name when their grandparents and parents had literally millions of Euros directly spent on helping them.

Let's suppose a hypothetical scenario. There are two houses in that estate and two newly married men are granted them. One is Michael Joyce and the other is Patrick Joyce. They aren't related. One is the son of a farmer from Galway and the other is a self-defined traveller. Which of their future kids will be more disadvantaged - Michael's or Patrick's?

(And yes I haven't told you which one is which .... but I gather that you would be happy to accept that one of them will have "perennially disadvantaged" children)

If you decide to take your children out of school at 15 and marry them off at 16 or 17, that's not the State's doing.

Multipass

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118737472#Comment_118737472

Same story in Galway

https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-life/drone-footage-of-fana-glas-area-in-ballybane/

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740706#Comment_118740706

Why does one person need a 850k house when the average price of a house in the county might be a quarter of that?

There was a recent case in the Supreme Court I think about a travelling family in Co. Clare. The family in question had been part of a housing settlement with 6 houses that was specially built for travellers. Unfortunately for them, the State made their family get involved in a feud with other travellers (ya know the way the craft State buggers always do that). The result was that the houses were attacked by arson and then, funnily enough, later stripped of all fixtures and fittings when the occupants moved out.

Anyway, ignoring the many court cases in High Court and Supreme Court (well paid lawyers getting funded with tax payer money) it came out in one of the cases that there was no figures for the first houses that were built, but the last two were built in 2006 at a cost of 1.7 million. That does not include land cost as the Co. Council had owned the land since 1990. The reason for all the court cases was that they fecked off for a few years and were given other accommodation, but then later decided they might be able to get a few quid by coming back and trespassing on Council land and squatting on it. (Of course, there is no suggestion that they had anything to do with the stripping of the original houses of fixtures and fittings and pipes etc).

Average house price in Co. Clare jumped 17.5% in 2021 to just under 220k.

So tell me Andrew, what do you think it would do for those people to have spent 850k on the build costs of a house in 2006? (Don't give us any "Celtic Tiger" guff - average house build prices were never remotely near that figure). What would it have done for them that a 200k house would not have done? And if you think it was a good investment, can you tell us how you think it worked in terms of return on that investment for the State.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740780#Comment_118740780

They’re perennially disadvantaged because that’s how you’ve chosen to classify them, they didn’t choose that classification for themselves, and that’s without me enclosing perennially disadvantaged in inverted commas, I don’t see the need when who we’re talking about are travellers, recognised by the State as a distinct ethnic minority which is why they receive support from the State.

I hate hypothetical scenarios because they’re never grounded in reality and could literally be used to argue anything either way, especially given the little amount of detail you’ve provided. In reality the State requires far more detail before determining whether anyone is eligible for support from the State. Even applying the broadest context to your example - I don’t know if you’ve noticed but farming in this country isn’t the profitable enterprise it once was, with many farming families reliant on EU grants and State subsidies for their income as opposed to the value of goods they produce. In reality there’s simply no way of determining the possible outcomes of their offspring based upon such little information, and I don’t imagine any more would be forthcoming without further engineering a scenario which suits your argument.

It’s not the States doing if parents take their children out of education at 16 or 17, but it is the States responsibility to ensure that those children have a minimum standard of education, so that whether they’re farmers, travellers or councillors, they all have equal opportunities to sustain themselves as independently of the State as possible. It provides better value for Irish society’s long term prospects when it invests in its own future for the common good of everyone in society, as opposed to just appealing to the tiny minority who would begrudge anyone support based upon nothing more their own prejudices against other groups in Irish society.

Dempo1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740832#Comment_118740832

My My , as I presumed, the cynic in me (and I am with it comes to this absurd nonsense) is this is a coordinated campaign, led by we all know who, to press home the importance of the now recognised right to self entitlement for the chosen few, different rules etc etc

Of course we also know what the rest of the population on the housing list would face if they refused the offer of a home, they be immediately kicked down the waiting list with absolutely no mediation or so much as a second thought .

I'd also like to know how much all this mediation is costing and more importantly why one rule for some "The Cultural Cohort" and a Rule for the rest of us 🤔 and not when it just comes to this Disgraceful debacle.

Make me sick to my stomach , this nonsense 😡

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740902#Comment_118740902

Not sure what you are ranting on about farmers and EU subsidies which are designed to ensure cheap food for yourself, the consumer. Come back to me in 6 months if this Ukraine thing holds up and we'll see whether you are happy about paying an amount for your food that has been increased to something closer to the cost of production. You may or may not be appreciative of the subsidies which the EU gave out for ultimately your benefit. Money for agriculture comes from the EU. Which Ireland pays into but given we produced proportionially far more agricultural produce than most countries, we benefit from disproportionately. Most state subsidies and grants go to industry. The next time that you go out to your local retail park, just have a think about how much that new road cost to bring customers to that business.

Anyway, from your post you appear to think that I have personally designated people are disadvantaged, ergo they are disadvantaged and need more expensive houses. I hadn't been aware that posts on boards.ie had that much authority. Other than that, you are contradicting yourself by saying, on one hand, that membership of a group confers disadvantage on a group, but on the other hand saying that you can't tell whether their children will be disadvantaged.

But anyway, to the question I asked above. A build cost of 850k on a house in 2006. How much better off are we as a society for spending that on those people as opposed to spending 150k or whatever would have been average at that time? Do you think we got a good return on the differential? The extra 700k

The problem with rewarding certain types of behaviour is that you prolong it. If the parents take their children out of school, and the children end up with more than others who aren't taken out, not by hard work but by having it gifted to them, then there is no incentive to see the value of that education.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118740855#Comment_118740855

Are you mistaking me for a quantity surveyor? I got involved in the discussion to correct a poster’s error on an equality principle and now you think I’m an expert on construction costs?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118741009#Comment_118741009

Hardly a rant now in fairness? It was one line referring to the fact that both farmers and travellers receive support from the State, and without knowing more details about each individuals circumstances you gave as examples, it’s impossible for anyone to be able to predict which is the more disadvantaged and therefore in greater need of support from the State, or greater supports or different supports from the State depending upon their individual needs.

The reason I thought of it was because of a recent thread in the farming forum where a poster showed their income and expenditure, and what they had left over after expenses wouldn’t even cover juniors first semester in third level education, meaning that junior would have to apply for support from the State if they chose to attend further education, which would increase their future prospects in a positive direction (it’s one of the reasons why we have free primary and secondary education provided for by the State - one less thing for parents to worry about funding from their own incomes).

I don’t imagine that you personally have designated anyone as disadvantaged. The term you personally used was perennially disadvantaged to refer to travellers. It’s the State recognises travellers as an ethnic minority which is why they receive supports from the State on THAT basis, because nobody receives funding from the State based solely upon their surname. You already knew that though, but still threw it in there for whatever your own reasons are.

Your question is like asking how long is a piece of string, there’s simply no way to quantify the benefit to society in tangible terms of the States investment either in property or in individuals like you’re attempting to do. The State provides €10Bn annually to provide for education in this country and our education system still manages to turn out some woeful gobshìtes. It’s not sufficient justification to argue we shouldn’t at least try to educate gobshìtes!

The State isn’t rewarding anyone for taking their children out of school, travellers or otherwise. In fact it appears you didn’t just miss my earlier post, you missed @AndrewJRenko’s post too about the disproportionate number of children who are already disadvantaged being put on reduced hours in spite of the fact that their parents who do see the value of education are already at a considerable disadvantage in trying to argue their case -

https://www.noteworthy.ie/tough-start-pt-3-traveller-children-education-5574141-Oct2021/

I don’t see what point you’re making in suggesting that some children have more than other children, other than teaching children to covet their neighbours goods. I don’t think that’s a good value to be instilling in children as they grow up to become adults with a victim complex - always eyeballing what everyone else has and wishing that person didn’t have it, even though it makes no difference whatsoever to them. They just don’t want someone else to have something, and they see themselves as hard done by if anyone else gets something and they don’t.

I’d be suggesting that such an adult should grow the fcuk up tbh, rather than lecturing anyone else about reality.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118741266#Comment_118741266

You are showing your utter ignorance and trying to create a false equivalence for some unknowable reason. Utter ignorance.

The only conclusion is that your perspective is one where it is fine, and perhaps a badge of honour, to rip off the State and taxpayers

You still avoid the question as to what a 850k build-cost house would have provided that a 200k full cost one would not have. Because whatever it was, it didn't seem to work ......... the same people are back in the Supreme Court trying to crush an injunction preventing them from squatting on the same site in their caravans

Anyway, point of the thread is that there are lovely newly built houses in Wexford. There is a massive waiting list yet nobody can move into them because the ungrateful pricks who are holding it up are happier making sh1te of somewhere else at the minute, safe in the knowlefge that do-gooder gimps will push for them to be given more salubrious surroundings to trash.

Take the houses and give them to Ukrainians. Lets the others stay in their caravans but restrict them to the same laws as everyone else - on their own land with planning permission. If they break the law, then put them in jail.

If they want a free house, back of the queue for rejecting these ones and then give them the same options as everyone else when they get to the front on the queue again

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118741363#Comment_118741363

Bit rich Donald suggesting I’m showing my ignorance when your own is like a dirty knickers flapping on a washing line - out in the open for all to see. You missed the details in my post earlier, the same one I provided for you personally earlier on, not something I do for just anyone, but you’re special.

You missed the part where I detailed that the local authorities can draw down funding allocated to provide accommodation for travellers specifically, and that this funding is separate from other funding that is provided for social housing. I did address your question, and explained to you exactly why it was like asking how long is a piece of string.

I’ve also explained already that nobody gets a free house, not travellers, not Ukrainians, not farmers, not councillors, nobody. Arguing that anyone does, is just going back to square one, and quite frankly I neither have the time nor the inclination to entertain your nonsense any more than I have done already as it doesn’t actually achieve anything positive.