Is Hosuing minister Murphy at the end of the line?

GGTrek · 25-09-2018 10:45am #1

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/i-hope-byrne-isnt-pulled-into-sinn-fin-stunt-housing-minister-on-tds-decision-ahead-of-no-confidence-vote-37352036.html
Tonight at 8pm a motion of no confidence in Murphy is scheduled to be discussed and voted in the Dail: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/dail-schedule/?selecteddate=2018-09-25
if FF abstains and just one of the FG TDs abstains Murphy will fall since all the hard left and SF will vote to support the motion (very similar situation to the infamous Anti Eviction bill that was presented in Jan 17) and this will cause a big shock wave in the govvie and even more instability in the housing situation in Ireland (which is already very unstable). Maybe they will do a last minute deal. The TD in question Catherine Byrne is just a Nimby supporter in her constituency and does not want affordable and social houses built.

power pants · 25-09-2018 10:57am

He needs to go immediately. He didn’t magic enough free houses in the right areas from his ass hole to the likes of Margaret cash

Shame, shame on you

I’m entitled!!!!!!

Saints#33 · 25-09-2018 11:05am

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

Hitman3000 · 25-09-2018 11:09am

GGTrek wrote:

if FF abstains and just one of the FG TDs abstains Murphy will fall since all the hard left and SF will vote to support the motion (very similar situation to the infamous Anti Eviction bill that was presented in Jan 17) and this will cause a big shock wave in the govvie and even more instability in the housing situation in Ireland (which is already very unstable). Maybe they will do a last minute deal. The TD in question Catherine Byrne is just a Nimby supporter in her constituency and does not want affordable and social houses built.

Byrne has an eye to the impending GE. Supporting Murphy won't guarantee her a seat. Blocking social housing on behalf of her constitutents will.

bluelamp · 25-09-2018 11:35am

Only 30 of the units were to be social housing. Over 400 were to be cost rental.

It makes me sick that she has opposed this based on a lack if infrastructure in inchicore.

Two luas stops within a 5 minute walk, at least 5 Dublin bus routes, cycling distance of town, a Dublin bike station around the corner in kilmainham, 5 minutes to the m50 and m7, probably under a mile from heuston station, there's a Tesco, eurospar and Londis. Walking distance to the war memorial gardens and the Phoenix park. Primary schools, secondary schools, and a college of further education.

Nearly 500 apartments with affordable rent would have been the best thing to happen to the Dublin housing market in years.

It's not exactly an upper class area either, I don't know what she's protecting here.

I hope this ends her career.

power pants · 25-09-2018 11:36am

Saints#33 wrote: »

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

I spoke to him personally 2 weeks before he took up this position and I discussed a housing matter and he told me

I have no real knowledge of the housing sector, I’m minister of financial services

Utter cretin

KaneToad · 25-09-2018 11:58am

Saints#33 wrote: »

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

Definitely needs to go. I called his office about a loose slate on the roof of my house. Got a similar brush off. Outrageous.

Wanderer78 · 25-09-2018 12:00pm

Doesn't matter who goes in, as this is currently unresolveable

power pants · 25-09-2018 12:05pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Doesn't matter who goes in, as this is currently unresolveable

That’s true, it’s a poison chalice from years of ignoring

Wanderer78 · 25-09-2018 12:08pm

power pants wrote:

Thatâ€™s true, itâ€™s a poison chalice from years of ignoring

It's a mess, an extremely complicated mess, and it doesn't look good for the immediate future, not just for tenants, but for homeowners to.

power pants · 25-09-2018 12:09pm

Actually Erica Fleming (gone very quiet now she got what she wanted, yet always made out her protests were for the people)

Margaret cash (forever home)

I believe these 2 should be in charge

zell12 · 25-09-2018 12:09pm

KaneToad wrote: »

Definitely needs to go. I called his office about a loose slate on the roof of my house. Got a similar brush off. Outrageous.

Indeed. You should've gone to a Labour member for a solution

Assetbacked · 25-09-2018 12:24pm

The nonsense spouted by populist spoofers on the "homeless crisis" is not what working people are concerned about. The fact that large chunks of tax-payers income is hoovered up by rent (while all other general expenses like insurance, utilities etc. remain high) is the bigger crisis; it impacts a far larger number of people and is most definitely a greater threat to social and political stability than the "10,000 homeless" who need a free house.

Catherine Byrne not supporting Murphy because of her view on his performance as housing minister, while at the same time campaigning against social housing in her constituency, is a perfect example of a populist spoofer. She is caught blind in the headlights and has once again been shown up for the hypocrite she is.

dudara · 25-09-2018 12:31pm

Saints#33 wrote: »

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

Contact the Property Services Regulatory Authority

http://www.psr.ie

Back on topic - Murphy is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. It’s a poisoned chalice, and I’m not sure what having a no-confidence vote is trying to achieve, other than destabilise the government.

Polar wizard adventure · 25-09-2018 12:34pm

Definitely needs to go. I called his office about a annoying buzzing my fridge is making. Got a similar brush off. SF are the only ones who can solve this crisis.

Turnipman · 25-09-2018 12:59pm

dudara wrote: »

It’s a poisoned chalice, and I’m not sure what having a no-confidence vote is trying to achieve, other than destabilise the government.

But what else can Sinn Fein do with their private members' time other than making a fuss about something populist? It's not as if they have anything constructive to offer, so it's all about making as much noise as possible while simultaneously trying to embarrass FF.

The next cab off the "private members time" rank is PbP's Richard Boyd-Barrett who was on Sean O'Rourke's show earlier this morning to inform us excitedly that the leftish collective of privately educated TDs of which he is a prominent member will be (ab)using their private members time slot next week to bring a motion about homelessness. Never one to miss an opportunity to help impoverished members of An Garda Siochána to earn some badly-needed overtime, RB-B is also encouraging tens of thousands of students, "activists" and miscellaneous skangers to participate in a street protest outside Dáil Eireann while the motion is being discussed. I can hardly wait

optogirl · 25-09-2018 1:04pm

power pants wrote: »

He needs to go immediately. He didn’t magic enough free houses in the right areas from his ass hole to the likes of Margaret cash

Shame, shame on you

I’m entitled!!!!!!

The amount of people who truly believe that a large cohort of people are demanding a 'free house' is really saddening. If you can honestly say you don't think that there is a housing crisis, that rents are unsustainable & that market prices are out of the reach of most working people then you must be living in some delightful cloud of ignorance.

The Specialist · 25-09-2018 1:15pm

optogirl wrote: »

The amount of people who truly believe that a large cohort of people are demanding a 'free house' is really saddening. If you can honestly say you don't think that there is a housing crisis, that rents are unsustainable & that market prices are out of the reach of most working people then you must be living in some delightful cloud of ignorance.

That's the optics being given by the left and the media, particularly when you have the likes of Erica "Foreva Home" Fleming and Mags "Gimme Gimme" Cash being paraded as the poster children of the "homeless" crisis.

The fact is that we don't have 10000 people living on the streets, you know - genuine homeless. If this whole issue was simply down to the price of houses and the ridiculous rent rates then it would have a lot more taxpayer support than it does. People are not stupid - the left & the media can beat the "homeless" drum all they want but this issue is transparent to anyone with half a brain. Do you honestly expect any of us to believe these "10000" people don't have a single relative or friend who could offer them somewhere to stay? That they can't afford even rents some distance away from where they want to live? No that's asking the hard questions and it's not palatable - all these poor people in hotels and hubs need to be given houses damn it.

All we are hearing from the bleeding hearts is "build more social housing". Great idea, but who's going to pay for it? I sure as hell don't want my taxes being diverted to give some waster a free house while I break my balls working and paying rent and trying to save a deposit for a house I will be 20+ years paying off. And once we magically house these 10000 "homeless" - what happens when the next 10000 put their hands up and the 10000 after that and the 10000 after that...?

power pants · 25-09-2018 1:19pm

optogirl wrote: »

The amount of people who truly believe that a large cohort of people are demanding a 'free house' is really saddening. If you can honestly say you don't think that there is a housing crisis, that rents are unsustainable & that market prices are out of the reach of most working people then you must be living in some delightful cloud of ignorance.

Firstly, Yes I truly believe that they are a large cohort of people demanding a free house. I’m from the inner city and know personally many people who are doing just this. They see living in a hostel as a grind to get their “forever home” (their words)

They have never worked a day in their lives as they are lazy

I know only to well about the rent situation. I’m a single parent, work full time and earning a very average salary. I don’t get hap and have no family here to help.

This rent situation has been going on for years and didn’t just happen since Murphy took over

People need to take account of their own actions too.

DubCount · 25-09-2018 1:48pm

If SF were genuinely interested in solving the crisis, why are they not trying to have their policies implemented in stead of trying to destabilize a minority government? This is just a political stunt that is more about helping SF popularity than helping the homeless crisis.

I'm no fan of the minister or FG policy, but I think he is being asked to do an impossible job. The things that need to be done to actually help the situation are unpopular and/or expensive.

Its just like all this reclaim the city activists. "Down with this sort of thing" is easy, real solutions are difficult.

We need higher density housing in inner-city areas, but that means taking from the value of existing properties. Easy to say unless you live there or are a politician representing people who live there.

We need local authorities to build/buy social housing. Great if you are a recipient of social housing, not so great if your taxes are increasing to pay for this, or you have a €600,000 mortgage with negative equity and next door is becoming one of those additional social houses.

We need to stop the outflow of Landlords from the market, but I doubt any politician will suggest pro-landlord policies.

Forget Minister Murphy, show me the policies and have the spine to be unpopular, and have a plan of where to get the money from. Everything else is just hurling from the ditch.

amcalester · 25-09-2018 1:51pm

DubCount wrote: »

If SF were genuinely interested in solving the crisis, why are they not trying to have their policies implemented in stead of trying to destabilize a minority government? This is just a political stunt that is more about helping SF popularity than helping the homeless crisis.

And why are they voting to reduce the LPT by 15% every year?

FileNotFound · 25-09-2018 1:53pm

Saints#33 wrote: »

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

They aren't, additionally there are essentially no laws governing them. Has been this way for a long time, never understood how regulations were not introduced.
Faced some bad ones on our house hunt, in the UK massive fines, prison and disbarring from the profession make it much more respectable.
Stealing thousands from honest decent people.

John Hutton · 25-09-2018 2:01pm

power pants wrote: »

Actually Erica Fleming (gone very quiet now she got what she wanted, yet always made out her protests were for the people)

Margaret cash (forever home)

I believe these 2 should be in charge

It seems people can't win.

Erica is now a single mother studying hard in university with the aim of getting a good job and will ultimately not need social welfare support.

Contrast this with her previous position, homeless and scraping by on part time work.

The outcome here is positive.

Would you rather she be on social welfare for life?

If someone campaigns you knock them. If someone knuckles down and works at educating themselves to have a brighter future with higher earning potential, and as a result cannot campaign as much, you still knock them.

Hopefully this is the end of posh boy.

Sleepy · 25-09-2018 2:03pm

But she will be on social welfare for life via her state-subsidised accomodation. Even if she were earning a million a year, she wouldn't be paying market rent for her housing.

Turnipman · 25-09-2018 2:40pm

John Hutton wrote: »

Hopefully this is the end of posh boy.

So, anything-but-smart boy, when you refer to "posh boy" are you referring to the one who went to the exclusive private Gonzaga College or to the one who went to the even more exclusive Blackrock College where the fees are far higher?

lawred2 · 25-09-2018 2:41pm

Saints#33 wrote: »

He 100% needs to go.

I emailed his office 2 weeks ago about a shady estate agency and was told "estate agents are not his remit".

Have you ever heard such nonsense.

?

I can see their point

Colonel Claptrap · 25-09-2018 2:49pm

John Hutton wrote: »

It seems people can't win.

Erica is now a single mother studying hard in university with the aim of getting a good job and will ultimately not need social welfare support.

Contrast this with her previous position, homeless and scraping by on part time work.

The outcome here is positive.

Would you rather she be on social welfare for life?

If someone campaigns you knock them. If someone knuckles down and works at educating themselves to have a brighter future with higher earning potential, and as a result cannot campaign as much, you still knock them.

Salient and fair points. But then you come out with this absolute clanger which ruins any chance of somebody taking you seriously.

John Hutton wrote: »

Hopefully this is the end of posh boy.

If the minister was previously homeless, worked and studied part time, and grew up in a council house - would that make him less or more effective at his job?

What has his background got to do with anything?

You're just as bad as the people knocking Erica because of her background. If not worse.

BBFAN · 25-09-2018 2:51pm

My thinking on the Minister for Housing or Health is that it should be a position for life regardless who's in government.

The problem with making it dependent upon election is that whoever is in these two crucial positions is only ever thinking about the next election and not the long term future of the country.

Hitman3000 · 25-09-2018 2:55pm

BBFAN wrote:

My thinking on the Minister for Housing or Health is that it should be a position for life regardless who's in government.

So if they are in the position for life where is the incentive to do a proper job if losing the gig after an election is no longer a concern?

BBFAN · 25-09-2018 3:19pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So if they are in the position for life where is the incentive to do a proper job if losing the gig after an election is no longer a concern?

The incentives are the same as every person who goes to work:

1. Most people want to do a good job, that is if the right person is recruited.
2. If they don't they can be fired.

Hitman3000 · 25-09-2018 3:20pm

BBFAN wrote:

1. Most people want to do a good job, that is if the right person is recruited. 2. If they don't they can be fired.

You said in the job for life, the threat of being fired is not part of a job for life.

Is Hosuing minister Murphy at the end of the line?

Comments