Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Sinn Fein's 10 point plan

  • 03-02-2011 4:45pm
    #1
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    1. A jobs stimulus. Sinn Féin is advocating the transfer of €7billion from the National Pension Reserve Fund (NPRF) for a State-wide investment programme (stimulus). We are calling for a transfer from the fund of €7billion –– for a jobs stimulus package. This money should be administered out of the NPRF over the next 3.5 years, with the Department of Finance signing off on proposals as they are submitted from the departments. All proposals would have to have ‘value for money’ clauses and total number of people that would be employed under the proposal. €2billion would be spent on the employment stimulus in 2011.

    2. Growing the agri-food sector. Deploy funding of €500million to set up and support central production hubs for SMEs involved in the agri-food sector so that they have access to advice, support and, most importantly, infrastructure and equipment perhaps not available to early- stage start-ups. We envisage existing agencies such as Enterprise Ireland and An Bord Bia to come together with Government to drive this project. This would create 5,000 direct jobs and 2,000 indirect jobs.

    Coupled with regional networking, partnerships and branding across the whole country, this measure alone has even greater potential for job creation. Investment in agriculture and the agri-food sector provides high returns for the Irish economy. The multiplier for agriculture on GDP is 1.73 and 1.76 for the food and drink manufacturing industry (if you invest €1million in these sectors, the wider economy sees a return of €1.73 million). Funding required = €500m.

    Creating jobs through the construction of essential infrastructure
    3. Health infrastructure. We would build 100 new primary healthcare centres throughout the State at a cost of €500million. This would alleviate the strain on our main hospitals. It would provide local healthcare for a variety of medical conditions and an excellent resource for communities. The building of these centres would create in the region of 5,000 jobs and 2,000 indirect jobs. Our pre-Budget submission provides for the lifting of the current recruitment embargo, which would allow all these centres to be staffed in the years following their construction. Funding required = €500m.

    4. School buildings and refurbishment. An increased school-building and refurbishment programme for 2011 to take at least 125 schools through the construction stage. A 16-classroom generic repeat design project costs approximately €3million in current market conditions. This would cost €375million in total and create approximately 4,000 jobs directly and 1,600 indirect jobs. A minimum of 150 school-building projects should enter the architectural and planning stage each year so that school projects are ready to proceed as quickly as possible to the construction phases. Funding required = €375m.

    5. Crèches. Build 100 crèches State-wide for state childcare provision at a cost of €200million, creating 2,000 jobs directly and 800 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €200m.
    Assisting businesses and entrepreneurs

    6. Improving communications infrastructure. Augment the current National Broadband Scheme to provide a fibre-optic island-wide network. Fast-track the €435million spend so that it is delivered beginning in 2011 instead of 2013. This will provide in the region of 4,500 jobs directly and 1,700 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €435m.

    7. Assistance for those starting a business. Change the PRSI system to create a safety-net for those who attempt to establish their own business. Provide a one-stop-shop virtual helpdesk for business start-ups with legal, HR, patents, accountancy and funding advice. In addition, create an innovation website where budding entrepreneurs can pitch their business and invention ideas to investors at home and abroad. Funding required = €2 million.

    8. Helping businesses to export. Create a ‘Sales Ireland’ strategy to help Irish firms access export markets outside the US and Britain and to help Irish firms looking to set up manufacturing businesses with the potential to compete with out largest imports, including R&D funding. Currently, almost 90% of exports come from foreign-owned multinationals and foreign-owned firms import over 86% of the materials they use, bypassing Irish firms.

    9. Maximising employment on public projects. Rethink local authority and public sector construction, service and procurement contracts to create a level pitch for small businesses to tender. Breaking tenders into smaller pieces allows contractors with less significant turnover to efficiently tender for work. Make the employment of a set amount of apprentices a condition on which public contracts are awarded to contractors building public infrastructure.

    10. Initiate a ‘Frontline Services Aides Scheme’ where people are employed to take on specific work from overworked frontline workers (e.g. civilianising administrative work that is currently done by Gardaí). Funding required = €250m.

    Bar the obvious typo, bolded by me, this seems to be a pretty good plan. I really like the generic school design and there really should be something done for those who want to start their own business's.
    I work part time atm, for a security company installing hi-end CCTV systems/safes and access systems. I have tried to apply for tenders before for projects, but then I see the small print saying something like, "You must have a turnover of 1.5 million in the previous year to apply". That is ridiculous as some of the projects I worked on were bigger than the tender I was applying for! Although I don't necessarily agree with their, "Make the employment of a set amount of apprentices a condition on which public contracts are awarded to contractors building public infrastructure." as I know a few companies that can't actually afford apprentices right now, but given the work, they could hire them.

    Opinions?

    (MOD NOTE: IF THIS GOES INTO A HISTORY LESSON ABOUT TERRORISTS/MURDERERS/BANK ROBBERS/ETC IT WILL BE CONSIDERED OFF TOPIC AND DELETED. THIS THREAD IS SOLELY TO DISCUSS THE 10 POINT PLAN)


«13

Comments

  • #2
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    It seems like a sound plan and point no.2 would be essential to it as the agri-food business is the only sector of our economy actually doing well and theres a lot of potential for growth.

    Point no.8 is important too as the government should be doing more to help indigenous companies. Attracting multinationals is grand but they will only bring in so many jobs and most of them will be in the export sector, whereas the indigenous companies will be vital to growing the domestic economy again.


  • #3
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    I really like the generic school design

    How is that different from the existing Department of Education generic school design in place now?


  • #4
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    How is that different from the existing Department of Education generic school design in place now?

    I wasn't aware of one. So all schools being built are of the same design? Can you back this up please? Also, how many schools have been built over the last three years

    Thanks in advance


  • #5
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,341 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    10 points of crap really. Sure they need to spend the Pension fund on our €15bn deficit once they tell IMF to piss off. Spending half the pension reverse fund to employ more overpaid public sector workers in a time when we have a €19bn deficit isn't a very good idea imo.


  • #6
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    MOD NOTE: PLEASE REMEMBER CIVILITY IS A RULE ON THIS FORUM, THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE CAN BE QUITE BEAUTIFUL AND THERE IS NO NEED TO RESORT TO SWEARING

    Your friendly neighbourhood mod,

    Papa


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    CortezTheKiller
    Registered Users Posts: 68 ✭✭CortezTheKiller


    Point 1 seems to be saying "We'll take €7 billion from the Pension Fund and we'll try to make up some ideas as we go along in the next 3.5 years"


  • #8
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    CortezTheKiller wrote: »
    Point 1 seems to be saying "We'll take €7 billion from the Pension Fund and we'll try to make up some ideas as we go along in the next 3.5 years"

    If they had put point 1 as point 10 you would be on here saying, "And how are they going to pay for this? Oh, it's at the end, an after thought"!


  • #9
    CortezTheKiller
    Registered Users Posts: 68 ✭✭CortezTheKiller


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    If they had put point 1 as point 10 you would be on here saying, "And how are they going to pay for this? Oh, it's at the end, an after thought"!

    Good point!! :)


  • #10
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    My point was, what about the rest of it?


  • #11
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    If they had put point 1 as point 10 you would be on here saying, "And how are they going to pay for this? Oh, it's at the end, an after thought"!

    However, they have already earmarked the NPRF to pay for the deficit. Since they're also talking about rolling back the cuts Fianna Fáil have made, and rejecting the IMF deal, there isn't anything left over even in year 1 for a 'stimulus package'. The expected annual state deficit is, or would be, larger than the whole of the NPRF, without the banks.

    I like some of the ideas, sure, but the plan is based on an entirely unrealistic approach to funding. The numbers will not add up - you cannot use the NPRF in one part of your policy platform to substitute for IMF or market money, and use it in another part to provide a stimulus package, when the first use absorbs all the money, and then some. It becomes even more hopelessly unrealistic when you enquire about year 2, because the Sinn Fein plan is based on the idea that "free of the bank debt" we'll be able to borrow from the markets at rates lower than we've ever borrowed. Again, that's so utterly, fabulously, unrealistic as not to pass muster anywhere but on the back of a very well-used beermat.

    That leaves me, essentially, with low-cost points 7-9, which are good ones. However, most of point 7 exists in the private sector already, although I will say I really like the idea of a PRSI safety net for business entrepreneurs. Risk is what puts most people off - and the scheme is, in a sense, a grown-up equivalent of the 'Back to Work' welfare scheme. Still, it's not a cost-free item.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    How much is in the NPRF at the moment? And is it not the case that if we don't accept the IMF deal and renege on our debts, the funds from the NPRF won't be used up to pay the debts? Isn't that one of the conditions of the bailout? That we first use up our NPRF? Thus leaving at least 7 billion for a stimulus package

    I honestly don't know, it's an incredibly complicated mess :)


  • #13
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Point number 6 is numerically illiterate rubbish as I explained HERE


  • #14
    Laois_Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,758 ✭✭✭Laois_Man


    Thanks OP for reinforcing my decision to NOT vote for SF

    All of what the've listed there costs €9 billion - money which they must be going to pull out of their backsides.....them and Labour - the biggest blaggards going!!


  • #15
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    Forgive me, but that ndp link goes from page 126 to 129. Pages 127 and 128 are not there.


  • #16
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    Laois_Man wrote: »
    Thanks OP for reinforcing my decision to NOT vote for SF

    All of what the've listed there costs €9 billion - money which they must be going to pull out of their backsides.....them and Labour - the biggest blaggards going!!


    Just for transparency's sakes:
    Point 1: receive 7bn over 3.5 years
    Point 2: 500m
    Point 3: 500m
    Point 4: 375m
    Point 5: 200m
    Point 6: 435m
    Point 7: 2m
    Point 8: No amount given
    Point 9: No amount given
    Point 10: 250m

    Grand total: 2.262bn

    Over 3.5 years: 7.917

    As they said in point 2:
    Coupled with regional networking, partnerships and branding across the whole country, this measure alone has even greater potential for job creation. Investment in agriculture and the agri-food sector provides high returns for the Irish economy. The multiplier for agriculture on GDP is 1.73 and 1.76 for the food and drink manufacturing industry (if you invest €1million in these sectors, the wider economy sees a return of €1.73 million). Funding required = €500m.

    So they would expect to see a return of 865m for the initial investment of 500m.

    That extra 365m spread over 3.5 years (1.277bn) would make up for the .917bn shortfall they are not receiving from the NPRF, no?


  • #17
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    Can you back this up please?

    Here, let me Google that for you.


  • #18
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,415 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    5. Crèches. Build 100 crèches State-wide for state childcare provision at a cost of €200million, creating 2,000 jobs directly and 800 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €200m.
    Assisting businesses and entrepreneurs

    Where does the figure of 2 million a creche come from, our local public creche cost a multiple of that.

    Where is the figure for funding 2,000 creche workers, 20 per creche? They are nice round figures but its hard to believe. By there reasoning 2000 people could be employed for 10k each a year, thats even below the reduced minimum wage never mind the cost of construction.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #19
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    However, they have already earmarked the NPRF to pay for the deficit. Since they're also talking about rolling back the cuts Fianna Fáil have made, and rejecting the IMF deal, there isn't anything left over even in year 1 for a 'stimulus package'. The expected annual state deficit is, or would be, larger than the whole of the NPRF, without the banks.

    I like some of the ideas, sure, but the plan is based on an entirely unrealistic approach to funding. The numbers will not add up - you cannot use the NPRF in one part of your policy platform to substitute for IMF or market money, and use it in another part to provide a stimulus package, when the first use absorbs all the money, and then some. It becomes even more hopelessly unrealistic when you enquire about year 2, because the Sinn Fein plan is based on the idea that "free of the bank debt" we'll be able to borrow from the markets at rates lower than we've ever borrowed. Again, that's so utterly, fabulously, unrealistic as not to pass muster anywhere but on the back of a very well-used beermat.

    That leaves me, essentially, with low-cost points 7-9, which are good ones. However, most of point 7 exists in the private sector already, although I will say I really like the idea of a PRSI safety net for business entrepreneurs. Risk is what puts most people off - and the scheme is, in a sense, a grown-up equivalent of the 'Back to Work' welfare scheme. Still, it's not a cost-free item.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Sorry to go slightly off-topic here but this suggestion that if you burn the bondholers and use on NPRF money instead, that you won't be able to borrow from the markets has consistently been thrown out there by both Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil and its complete fiction.

    The whole reason the markets were looking for such high interest rates was because of the banking debt, which was because of the guarantee. If you separate the banking debt from the sovereign debt then you don't have that instability thats worrying the markets.

    Just take yesterday as an example when Standard & Poor downgraded Ireland's credit rating yet again, despite the fact we've been bailed out by the IMF and ECB. And the interest rate being sought by the markets is still above 9%. Why? Because the markets aren't thick and they know we can't pay the money back.

    Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael will have you believe that because we refuse to bailout the bondholders who took a risk by lending money to Irish banks and lost, that we wouldn't be able to seek money on the markets again. This is complete nonsense. Markets lend money solely on the ability to pay, and if we can show that we are tackling our sovereign debt and will be able to pay any borrowed money back, they won't care that we didn't bailout the bondholders in Germany, Britain and France. Going by that logic, the USA would have had the door shut in its face because they didn't bail out Lehman's Bros.

    So anyone who thinks that accepting this bailout will lead to Ireland being able to borrow off the markets again is living in cuckooland. All it will mean is Ireland being saddled with €200 billion or so worth of debt that we can't pay back, and only delaying the inevitable which will be Ireland defaulting.


  • #20
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    I like their investment in agri-food. I think that is something Ireland needs to prepare for because we already have a great reputation for agriculture.

    I have major problems with their other job-creation ideas because they're all public sector.
    Creating jobs through the construction of essential infrastructure
    3. Health infrastructure. We would build 100 new primary healthcare centres throughout the State at a cost of €500million. This would alleviate the strain on our main hospitals. It would provide local healthcare for a variety of medical conditions and an excellent resource for communities. The building of these centres would create in the region of 5,000 jobs and 2,000 indirect jobs. Our pre-Budget submission provides for the lifting of the current recruitment embargo, which would allow all these centres to be staffed in the years following their construction. Funding required = €500m.

    Ok I think this is a great idea but surely that 500m doesn't cover doctor and nurse and admin wages?
    4. School buildings and refurbishment. An increased school-building and refurbishment programme for 2011 to take at least 125 schools through the construction stage. A 16-classroom generic repeat design project costs approximately €3million in current market conditions. This would cost €375million in total and create approximately 4,000 jobs directly and 1,600 indirect jobs. A minimum of 150 school-building projects should enter the architectural and planning stage each year so that school projects are ready to proceed as quickly as possible to the construction phases. Funding required = €375m

    5. Crèches. Build 100 crèches State-wide for state childcare provision at a cost of €200million, creating 2,000 jobs directly and 800 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €200m.
    Assisting businesses and entrepreneurs.


    6. Improving communications infrastructure. Augment the current National Broadband Scheme to provide a fibre-optic island-wide network. Fast-track the €435million spend so that it is delivered beginning in 2011 instead of 2013. This will provide in the region of 4,500 jobs directly and 1,700 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €435m.

    These are again great ideas but they're not actually creating jobs they're just buying jobs
    Assistance for those starting a business. Change the PRSI system to create a safety-net for those who attempt to establish their own business. Provide a one-stop-shop virtual helpdesk for business start-ups with legal, HR, patents, accountancy and funding advice. In addition, create an innovation website where budding entrepreneurs can pitch their business and invention ideas to investors at home and abroad. Funding required = €2 million.

    8. Helping businesses to export. Create a ‘Sales Ireland’ strategy to help Irish firms access export markets outside the US and Britain and to help Irish firms looking to set up manufacturing businesses with the potential to compete with out largest imports, including R&D funding. Currently, almost 90% of exports come from foreign-owned multinationals and foreign-owned firms import over 86% of the materials they use, bypassing Irish firms.

    I do like these. having a safety net for entrpreneurs is sensible and morally right.


  • #21
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Here, let me Google that for you.


    Hi, we have a charter here on the politics forum. Here it is. Part of that charter states quite explicity:
    charter wrote:
    When offering fact, please offer relevant linkage, or at least source. Simply saying "a quick search on google...." is often, but not always, enough. If you do not do this upon posting, then please be willing to do so on request.

    So thank you for your assistance on teaching me what google is, but that link does not state that the DOE has generic school designs. It just says:
    DOE wrote:
    There are over 160 major projects at various stages of architectural planning

    However,
    it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the delivery of each project at this time.

    So would you like to back up your statement that the DOE has generic school designs in place?


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    By defaulting, would we not be telling the EU to fcuk off with their banks, then we'd be forced out of the euro and take on a new currency, which would be worthless. Could help with tourism and exports though. We'd be cheap again. But it will be awful for us because imports would be very expensive. By defaulting and taking on a new currency would we even have a deficit. A default and a new currency would probably mean working for a pound a day though.


  • #23
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    By defaulting, would we not be telling the EU to fcuk off with their banks, then we'd be forced out of the euro and take on a new currency, which would be worthless. Could help with tourism and exports though. We'd be cheap again. But it will be awful for us because imports would be very expensive. By defaulting and taking on a new currency would we even have a deficit. A default and a new currency would probably mean working for a pound a day though.

    We can't be 'kicked out' of the euro. If we choose to default instead of taking the bailout, that will inevitably lead to a banking crisis in the big countries like Germany, Britain and France. After all the whole reason Ireland was forced into a bailout was to save the banks in these countries. So at the very least, we would have huge bargaining power if we threatened to default.

    But David McWilliams is argueing that we should default, and leave the euro altogether and either go back to the punt or form a new common currency with the other PIGS.

    And if you want an idea of what would happen if we defaulted, just look at Iceland who are now in a better position than us.


  • #24
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    How much is in the NPRF at the moment? And is it not the case that if we don't accept the IMF deal and renege on our debts, the funds from the NPRF won't be used up to pay the debts? Isn't that one of the conditions of the bailout? That we first use up our NPRF? Thus leaving at least 7 billion for a stimulus package

    I honestly don't know, it's an incredibly complicated mess :)

    The amount in the NPRF and NTMA was somewhere around €24.4bn on December 31st 2010. Under the agreed Fianna Fáil-IMF-EU 4-year bailout programme, we're providing €17.5bn. €10bn of that is marked 'bank bailouts - immediate', and as far as I can see the other €7.5bn is marked 'bank bailouts - contingent'. €10bn is definitely coming from the NPRF.

    There's then another €17.5bn of the external assistance marked 'bank bailouts - contingent', and €50bn marked 'government deficit spending'. Theoretically, the latter could be used to provide a stimulus package, but the agreed programme does not, as far as I can see, have room for such a thing, except in a sectoral sense, where money saved in one sector is provided to another sector as a sectoral stimulus.

    The problem with the Sinn Fein proposals is that the government deficit for 2011 is projected to be €17.7bn with the €6bn austerity package in place. Without it, obviously, you're looking at more like €22.5bn (I know, they're not directly related), which eats the NPRF. Sure, it looks like there's money left over, but part of the NPRF's holdings are in the banks that Sinn Fein propose winding up.

    With a stimulus package instead of the austerity cuts, the Sinn Fein year 1 budget eats all the available money. In year 2, we....what?

    The answer is that apparently the markets, enormously impressed by our willingness to impose 100% losses on debt holders, come flocking to our bond auctions to fund further unsustainable Sinn Fein borrowing at low low rates. When asked why the bond markets would do such a thing when we've unilaterally burned a whole previous set of creditors, they answer that that's "bank debt" and no-one will attach the slightest risk to the fact that it was the Irish government that decided to do it when it come to buying Irish government debt. Pressed further, they point to the fact that Iceland may be able to re-enter the markets this year, only two and a half years after defaulted on bank debt - and that therefore we would definitely be able to do so, and at incredibly low rates too.

    We could also export unicorns, of course. There's a heck of a market for them. Still, as you can see from some of the other posts, there's people who are quite willing to believe.
    If you separate the banking debt from the sovereign debt then you don't have that instability thats worrying the markets.

    Um, yes. The reason instability "worries the markets" is because they worry they will not get their money back. Removing the instability by making it clear they won't get their money back if we don't want them to is a case of treating the illness by shooting the patient - yes, the patient no longer has a life-threatening illness, and all question marks over his surviving the illness have been removed, but no, people won't be queuing at the clinic doors.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #25
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    Jim236
    I wouldnt listen to a thing david mcwilliams says.


  • #26
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Papa Smut wrote: »
    Forgive me, but that ndp link goes from page 126 to 129. Pages 127 and 128 are not there.

    The already mostly spent €435m in Point 6 is mentioned about 8-10 times in that 2007 document had you searched the PDF for €435m or simply 435 , including on page 128 of 265 like I said.

    Point 6 is utter fiction, it refers to a spending target between 2007 and 2013 and more than half was ALREADY spent or committed when the government cut back capital spending around 3 times from end 2009 onwards


  • #27
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    Jim236
    I wouldnt listen to a thing david mcwilliams says.

    To be fair its not a bad suggestion.


  • #28
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    TBH the last thing we need are more Public Sector funded jobs. All I see here is spend spend spend. What is needed is the atmosphere for the SME sector to start to grow again, that is where we will get the real jobs growth and where we will see real inroads into the unemployment figures. To do that costs for business needs to fall, especially Government related costs and this plan does absolutely nothing to address that.


  • #29
    Alani Crashing Munchies
    Posts: 0 ✭ Alani Crashing Munchies


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    The already mostly spent €435m in Point 6 is mentioned about 8-10 times in that 2007 document had you searched the PDF for €435m or simply 435 , including on page 128 of 265 like I said.

    Point 6 is utter fiction, it refers to a spending target between 2007 and 2013 and more than half was ALREADY spent or committed when the government cut back capital spending around 3 times from end 2009 onwards


    Ok, You may have missed my point, that page 128 is not there and I honestly didn't think to search for 435.


  • #30
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    gandalf wrote: »
    TBH the last thing we need are more Public Sector funded jobs. All I see here is spend spend spend. What is needed is the atmosphere for the SME sector to start to grow again, that is where we will get the real jobs growth and where we will see real inroads into the unemployment figures. To do that costs for business needs to fall, especially Government related costs and this plan does absolutely nothing to address that.

    Indeed, and the last time we were in a hole this deep (c. 1990, when debt interest took up somewhat over 20% of tax revenue), we got out of it by stopping digging. Government spending as a proportion of GDP was progressively cut from 24% to about 20% - not increased.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Tordelback
    Registered Users Posts: 677 ✭✭✭Tordelback


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    5. Crèches. Build 100 crèches State-wide for state childcare provision at a cost of €200million, creating 2,000 jobs directly and 800 jobs indirectly. Funding required = €200m.
    Assisting businesses and entrepreneurs

    Where does the figure of 2 million a creche come from, our local public creche cost a multiple of that.

    Where is the figure for funding 2,000 creche workers, 20 per creche? They are nice round figures but its hard to believe. By there reasoning 2000 people could be employed for 10k each a year, thats even below the reduced minimum wage never mind the cost of construction.

    Further, it seems inevitable that state-funded creches would have an effect on the viability of existing creches, with resulting unemployment and/or transfer of employees from failed businesses from private sector to public sector. While I'd be very much in favour of state-funded childcare, the total costs to the state here seem greatly underestimated, and the provision itself a drop in the ocean.


Advertisement