# What gives Brendan the right to speak on behalf of The Irish Taxpayer?



## Dan Murray (10 Sep 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> So I have taken it upon myself to make a submission on behalf of the Irish taxpayer.



Brendan,

May I make 3 factual points please:

1. I am an Irish taxpayer;
2. You have no mandate to speak on my behalf; and
3. Your submission does not represent my views.


----------



## Early Riser (10 Sep 2017)

Dan Murray said:


> Brendan,
> 
> May I make 3 factual points please:
> 
> ...



Without making any comment on the content of the submission, I suggest that framing it as being "on behalf of the Irish Taxpayer" points directly to the question of its credibility at the outset. Why?


----------



## PaddyBloggit (10 Sep 2017)

Why not frame it 'as a concerned Irish Taxpayer'?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Sep 2017)

Because no one at all is speaking on behalf of the taxpayer.

All of the submissions have come from groups calling for more expenditure.

One little voice must be raised on behalf of the person funding all the expenditure. 

Brendan


----------



## Dan Murray (10 Sep 2017)

Early Riser said:


> Without making any comment on the content of the submission, I suggest that framing it as being "on behalf of the Irish Taxpayer" points directly to the question of its credibility at the outset. Why?



Curiouser and curiouser.

My best guess is that this is being produced for publicity purposes - akin to the Joe Brolly, Eamonn Dunphy, George Hook, Michael O'Leary approach - as in just say something, anything.........so long as it's controversial - get people talking and arguing.

So, having fallen for the trap myself, I am just going to say:

1. I think the submission is of poor quality;

2. Brendan does not represent my views and it is extremely silly, irritating and arrogant to pretend that he does; and

3. The pejorative tone of the submission is offensive - particularly so when Brendan was rightly admonished for similar insensitivity just a few days ago.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (10 Sep 2017)

Thank God we live in a democracy ... at least Brendan has the opportunity to express his thoughts on the matter. Were he in North Korea he'd have long disappeared from AAM!



Dan Murray said:


> My best guess is that this is being produced for publicity purposes



Don't be too quick to jump to conclusions Dan - Brendan has shown himself to be a positive advocate for the consumer over the years. We could do with more like him.

Why not present an alternative proposal?

Personally, I think every submission made should be viewed positively - why? Because somebody or some group took the time to put one together.

The more views that are given, the better the chance that informed choices will be made.


----------



## TheBigShort (10 Sep 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Because no one at all is speaking on behalf of the taxpayer.
> 
> All of the submissions have come from groups calling for more expenditure.
> 
> ...



Brendan

First of all I commend you on sticking your neck out there with your proposals. It's a lot harder to do what you do than what I do, that is, to criticize behind the anonymity of my username.
So while I may lay it on thick and heavy from time to time, please be assured that it is not personal (certainly not intended to be).
Having said that, if viewpoints and proposals are put into the public domain and those proposals are, from my perspective, ill-judged at best or reprehensible at worst, then as another poster alluded to, in a democracy, it is healthy for those proposals to be tackled.
It is the mindset that supports the proposals that I wish to engage with not the personal individual (albeit the lines get blurred from time to time).
That said, I'm not immune from learning or opening my mind to alternatives, and certainly there are a select few contributors on AAM that have made me think.
After all that, I look forward to reading your detailed proposal...but alas, I don't expect to be hitting the 'like' button anytime soon.

TBS


----------



## Early Riser (10 Sep 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Godwin's Law once again...






PaddyBloggit said:


> Thank God we live in a democracy ... at least Brendan has the opportunity to express his thoughts on the matter. Were he in North Korea he'd have long disappeared from AAM!



So now we have the inverse expression of Godwin's Law.



PaddyBloggit said:


> Why not frame it 'as a concerned Irish Taxpayer'?



Why not indeed? That is the question. As the submission couldn't even claim to be on behalf of the contributors to this thread, never being on behalf of the Irish taxpayer, why the grandiose assertion? Does it serve to add to, or to undermine, its credibility?



PaddyBloggit said:


> Personally, I think every submission made should be viewed positively - why? Because somebody or some group took the time to put one together.
> 
> The more views that are given, the better the chance that informed choices will be made.



The more the merrier - in a manner of speaking. (But would we need to employ more Public Servants to read them all? And what if each and every contradictory one of them claimed to be on behalf of "the Irish taxpayer"?)
.


----------



## Purple (11 Sep 2017)

Unions claim to speak on behalf of "workers" and yet most workers aren't in unions and a sizable portion of them, perhaps a majority, strongly disagree with the agenda of the Trade Unions. 

IBEC claims to speak for businesses and yet most businesses aren't in IBEC.

Brendan is making a submission which looks to highlight the counter view to the establishment narrative which is to continue to make the government bigger and bigger without looking at what value we get and what impact it will have on the economy which finances our society.


----------



## TheBigShort (11 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> Unions claim to speak on behalf of "workers" and yet most workers aren't in unions and a sizable portion of them, perhaps a majority, strongly disagree with the agenda of the Trade Unions.
> 
> IBEC claims to speak for businesses and yet most businesses aren't in IBEC.
> 
> Brendan is making a submission which looks to highlight the counter view to the establishment narrative which is to continue to make the government bigger and bigger without looking at what value we get and what impact it will have on the economy which finances our society.



Unions claim to speak on behalf of their members, who happen to be workers. Ditto IBEC, whose members happen to be business owners.
Subtle difference. Brendan is claiming to speak on behalf of taxpayers. As a taxpayer he is entitled to his view, but his claim that no-one at all is speaking on behalf of taxpayers is simply not credible.


----------



## Purple (11 Sep 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> Unions claim to speak on behalf of their members, who happen to be workers. Ditto IBEC, whose members happen to be business owners.


Unions claim to speak on behalf of "workers" but they don't; they speak on behalf of their members. I am a worker and Unions and their agenda damage me and others like me. 
IBEC is no better. 
Brendan is an individual looking to highlight a perspective which, to a great extent, is ignored. There is an element of theater in the title but so what. He did it once, the Unions have been doing it for decades and they are the establishment insiders.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (11 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> He did it once,



Hi Purple 

I have done it before. 

I have spoken on behalf of consumers many times. 

I have spoken on behalf of mortgage holders paying the highest mortgage rates in the euro area.

I have spoken on behalf of borrowers in arrears. 

Based on what people are saying here, the Labour Party should change its name to... (suggestions please.) 

Brendan


----------



## TheBigShort (11 Sep 2017)

Purple said:


> There is an element of theater in the title but so what.



Fair enough, lets not get hung up on it so.


----------



## qwerty5 (11 Sep 2017)

Maybe he should change it to "On behalf of some Irish Taxpayers".

I would have thought it pretty obvious that he's not going to speak for 100% of Irish taxpayers. I'm sure there are large groups of taxpayers that his proposals won't help or actually cause problems for.

But that's the same for every single person that speaks for any group. When the President of Ireland speaks on behalf of Irish people there are people that he doesn't speak for. We understand what he means when he says it and don't really need to pick him apart.

Similarly for other speakers. Whenever somebody says they represent a group I understand that they may only represent 50%, 60% or whatever.


----------



## Firefly (11 Sep 2017)

Well I tell you something, Brendan's views are pretty much in line with my own (a few differences but not much) and if someone was to run for election with this as their only mandate they would get my (and a lot of others I would imagine) vote.


----------



## MrEarl (11 Sep 2017)

Hello,

For anyone that is not happy with the proposed submissions, mind me asking why you don't submit something yourselves ?


----------



## rob oyle (11 Sep 2017)

'On behalf of Irish taxpayers' perhaps?


----------



## Early Riser (11 Sep 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Based on what people are saying here, the Labour Party should change its name to... (suggestions please.)



Rubbish. The Labour Party (or any other party) can claim to speak only for its membership and/or the people who vote for it. A party can shout about things with the aim of attracting more support but without votes  it doesn't speak for anyone. I hadn't realized that there is a party, or organization, called "The Irish Taxpayer", never mind who it can credibly claim to represent. Maybe  such an organization exists in someone's fantasy.



MrEarl said:


> For anyone that is not happy with the proposed submissions, mind me asking why you don't submit something yourselves ?



I can't speak for anyone else, but I couldn't give a hoot about what is in a submission which is devoid of credibility from the outset.



Firefly said:


> Well I tell you something, Brendan's views are pretty much in line with my own (a few differences but not much) and if someone was to run for election with this as their only mandate they would get my (and a lot of others I would imagine) vote.



There is likely to be an opportunity in the not too distant future. Are you proposing anyone?


----------



## Dauhee (27 Sep 2017)

oh good lord Dan, bless you. You must not be able to sleep at night for all the prayers forcibly said in your name . .  . Father: "May almighty god have mercy on us all, er except Dan . . . . ."

All together now, NOT MY ARTICLE


----------



## MrEarl (29 Sep 2017)

This is getting more and more stupid by the day....

People can go and prepare their own submission, if they not happy with Brendan's.  As for what each person or party calls their submission, who cares as long as it's clear that it's a proposal in relation to the budget etc. 

The regular splits, divisions and silly bickering that goes on between groups of people in Irish, is one of the key reasons that we all achieve so little.  United we stand, divided we fall etc.

Put the effort into trying to achieve something positive here, rather than just trying to undermine each other is my view.


----------



## Leper (29 Sep 2017)

The basic rule is that anybody contributing here is entitled to contribute. You don't have to agree or disagree with everything somebody says; you just have to make your own mind up and reply or don't reply if you wish.


----------

