# bertie and gangs pay rise



## pc7 (25 Oct 2007)

Just heard that bertie and the gang are to get significant payrises between now and 2009, is it just me that thinks this stinks!


----------



## Sn@kebite (25 Oct 2007)

pc7 said:


> Just heard that bertie and the gang are to get significant payrises between now and 2009, is it just me that thinks this stinks!


You could always get into politics yourself


----------



## pc7 (25 Oct 2007)

i wouldn't get out of bed for that much!


----------



## redstar (25 Oct 2007)

Economic downturn - what downturn ?, sure there must be lots of dosh to pass round .... 

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1025/politics.html

I'd like to hear Brian Cowen justify a (forecast) tough budget in light of these pay rises !!


----------



## Sn@kebite (25 Oct 2007)

redstar said:


> I'd like to hear Brian Cowen justify a (forecast) tough budget in light of these pay rises !!


That'll be the day!


----------



## Purple (25 Oct 2007)

I think they get about the right amount at the moment and would not like to see increases above the average private sector rates.


----------



## triplex (25 Oct 2007)

As a civil servant myself, i actually think 'High level' civil and public servants get too much as it is.. 

cowen needn't bother raising taxes to pay for these increases either!

shame on them!


----------



## Purple (25 Oct 2007)

triplex said:


> As a civil servant myself, i actually think 'High level' civil and public servants get too much as it is..
> 
> cowen needn't bother raising taxes to pay for these increases either!
> 
> shame on them!


I agree but I wouldn't put politicians into that category; I'm not aware of any civil or public servants who have to seek re-election every 5 years.


----------



## Ceist Beag (25 Oct 2007)

I think they have gone too far this time. These rises are way above the rate of inflation and it would be interesting to see how the salaries have risen in the last 10 years. It's a ridiculous notion that they can just grant themselves pay rises like this - quite disgusting really when you consider their performances recently.


----------



## Sn@kebite (25 Oct 2007)

Yorky said:


> They get far too much ( in excess of the US president and secretary of state if I'm not mistaken which is beyond belief) and there are far too amny of them.


You'd think our beloved politicians were finding it easy to pay their bills and taxes or something, thus the payrises.


----------



## micamaca (25 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> I'm not aware of any civil or public servants who have to seek re-election every 5 years.



That's merely part of the job spec.  If they don't want the hassle, they don't have to choose this line of work...


----------



## RainyDay (25 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> I'm not aware of any civil or public servants who have to seek re-election every 5 years.


Secretary-Generals, County Managers and many public sector Chief Executives are on fixed-term contracts of 5-7 years duration. Some of these contracts bar extensions, hence the 'musical chairs' effect of County Managers shifting to a new county as their contract ends.


----------



## roland (26 Oct 2007)

Yorky said:


> They get far too much


 
Forget benchmarking against what George Bush gets - he doesn't even notice his salary.  

Our leaders get far too little in my mind.  The head of a modern successful country being paid a couple of hundred thousand is an embarrassment.  Many of us are shareholders in companies where the heads are paid €10m+ and we don't blink.  In fact we claim they are well worth it.  If a country has come from nothing to become the celtic tiger, how did we reward the head of that country?  €200k per annum?  Pathetic.  How can we vote in a head of our country and just pay them a few hundred thousand.  They should be paid about €5m if there was any sense here.  Why not pay them €10m or €20m if we want a good job done.  We have a performance rating system - if they are not doing a good job we vote them out.


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2007)

RainyDay said:


> Secretary-Generals, County Managers and many public sector Chief Executives are on fixed-term contracts of 5-7 years duration. Some of these contracts bar extensions, hence the 'musical chairs' effect of County Managers shifting to a new county as their contract ends.


 I was not aware of that, thanks. BTW, since we are not being pedantic any more I won’t point out that it’s Secretaries General, not Secretary Generals.


----------



## LDFerguson (26 Oct 2007)

If I was in the political PR game, I'd employ an "independent" panel to review salaries with the instruction that they should recommend salary increases well in excess of what I was hoping for.  I'd let the public uproar get going for a few days.  Then I'd announce that due to belt-tightening, setting an example etc., we were all refusing to accept the recommendations of the salary review panel and were choosing to take a lower rise instead, i.e. the rise I expected all along.  Soften everyone up for a harsh budget.


----------



## Green (26 Oct 2007)

I believe we should pay top public and civil servants the going rates to get and hold good people. In regard to politicians I think we should do something similar except we have far too many of them. These increases are abhorrent in the context that every disaffected TD has been placated since the election with some non job with the sole point of increasing their salary. This week's Dail and Seanad Committee nominations being a case in point, also why do we need 20 junior minister's?


----------



## Sunny (26 Oct 2007)

YOBR said:


> I believe we should pay top public and civil servants the going rates to get and hold good people. In regard to politicians I think we should do something similar except we have far too many of them. These increases are abhorrent in the context that every disaffected TD has been placated since the election with some non job with the sole point of increasing their salary. This week's Dail and Seanad Committee nominations being a case in point, also why do we need 20 junior minister's?


 
I agree with you that politicians and civil servants deserve to be well paid. Its a difficult job. I always hear this argument though about the public sector keeping hold of its people against private sector competition. Has anyone seen a report where is states how many top civil servants have resigned in the past ten 10 years to take up employment in the private sector. I would imagine turnover at the lower end of the civil service is quiet high but at the better paid higher end, I would be amazed if there was evidence of mass leaving. Why would you when there is no accountability. Last senior civil servant to be sacked anyone??

I agree with you about the Dail and Seanad committees. Biggest joke ever and all the parties are guilty of it.


----------



## redstar (26 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> I think they get about the right amount at the moment and would not like to see increases above the average private sector rates.



About right compared to who ? The Taoiseach  will earn more than the German Chancellor, British PM and the US President !!  Surely elected representatives should be compared to their peers in equivalent jobs, and not to the (unelected) private sector who are not paid out of our taxes. 

Maybe its so much harder to govern our little country compared to the US, Britain or Germany  ?


----------



## Green (26 Oct 2007)

Sunny said:


> Last senior civil servant to be sacked anyone??


 Matt Russell AG'S Office although I gather he kept his pension.


----------



## Sunny (26 Oct 2007)

YOBR said:


> Matt Russell AG'S Office although I gather he kept his pension.


 
That must be 10/15 years ago and he pays the price for delaying extradiction of Brendan Smyth by getting early retirement on full pension...Tough life!!


----------



## shnaek (26 Oct 2007)

The government, like the best and most honourable rulers, are leading from the front on this. So roll on my 14% pay increase! I just have to head in to the boss this morning and run it by him...


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2007)

redstar said:


> About right compared to who ? The Taoiseach  will earn more than the German Chancellor, British PM and the US President !!  Surely elected representatives should be compared to their peers in equivalent jobs, and not to the (unelected) private sector who are not paid out of our taxes.
> 
> Maybe its so much harder to govern our little country compared to the US, Britain or Germany  ?


Does that mean that the rest of the workforce should be benchmarked against other economies?
Our PR system means that we get weak government and loads of elections so the job security is not good. The problem with the economy is not the few million we spend on our politicians, it's the billions they spend badly and the ten odd billion we pay to our health service staff.
It may well be hypocritical and/or politically stupid for them to take big (or any) pay increases but from an economic perspective it is totally irrelevant.


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2007)

shnaek said:


> The government, like the best and most honourable rulers, are leading from the front on this. So roll on my 14% pay increase! I just have to head in to the boss this morning and run it by him...


 I can't wait to tell my customers in the USA, Germany and the Far East that they have to pay more for their goods because I have decided to pay everyone the Benchmarking increases that the public and protected sectors get with the next round of benchmarking (the last one cost the economy over a billion every year).


----------



## z103 (26 Oct 2007)

> €200k per annum? Pathetic. How can we vote in a head of our country and just pay them a few hundred thousand. They should be paid about €5m if there was any sense here. Why not pay them €10m or €20m if we want a good job done.



Lol 

I also heard that some boss in Enterprise Ireland is also getting a whooping huge pay increase. This money could be used instead to help or set up indigenous Irish enterprise.

It really is disgusting.


----------



## Caveat (26 Oct 2007)

The argument supporting these salaries is often: "You pay peanuts, you get monkeys"

But what if you pay _*coconuts* _and you still get monkeys?

Well you vote the monkeys out of course - but this can't happen before the current coconuts have been enjoyed for quite some time.


----------



## shnaek (26 Oct 2007)

roland said:


> How can we vote in a head of our country and just pay them a few hundred thousand.  They should be paid about €5m if there was any sense here.  Why not pay them €10m or €20m if we want a good job done.



Sold. Give me the 20mil, and a full five year term (that's 100mil total) and I'll have the place sorted. 
And if I make a balls of it ye can just get someone else in to give it an auld go.


----------



## Bedlam (26 Oct 2007)

Bertie will need every cent of the increase and plenty more when the Mahon Tribunal finds against him for costs.

I have no difficulty in the concept of  paying for qualified people who are set targets and have to deliver results in a PLC environment. (Steve Staunton as an example) who gets the boot when he fails to deliver on those results/targets. Our Politicans have no such accountabilty because the country's MD does not manage his team as they should be managed


----------



## room305 (26 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> Our PR system means that we get weak government and loads of elections so the job security is not good. The problem with the economy is not the few million we spend on our politicians, it's the billions they spend badly and the ten odd billion we pay to our health service staff.



Here, here.


----------



## A.Partridge (26 Oct 2007)

Bedlam said:


> I have no difficulty in the concept of paying for *qualified people* who are set targets and have to deliver results in a PLC environment. (Steve Staunton as an example) who gets the boot when he fails to deliver on those results/targets....


 
and Steve  Staunton's qualifications are?...


----------



## Megan (26 Oct 2007)

I heard Bertie on the news on one trying to justify why he is paid more then Mr. Bush or Mr. Brown. He said he doesnt have NO.10 or the White House to live in. Doesn't he have Mr. Wall's house - no I forgot he paid cash for that.


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Oct 2007)

A.Partridge said:


> and Steve  Staunton's qualifications are?...


Work experience!


----------



## roland (26 Oct 2007)

Bedlam said:


> Our Politicans have no such accountabilty because the country's MD does not manage his team as they should be managed


 
How can you say in a democratic system that our politicians have no such accountability?  Do they not get booted out at the next election if we think they haven't done a good job, in the same way as any CEO or Steve Staunton?


----------



## Perplexed (26 Oct 2007)

You can always post your comments here [broken link removed]


----------



## Sn@kebite (26 Oct 2007)

Perplexed said:


> You can always post your comments here [broken link removed]


If all people say is "Shame on them!", then it's just pointless signing a petition. - He has never listened to us, why will he now?


----------



## rabbit (26 Oct 2007)

Yorky said:


> They get far too much ( in excess of the US president and secretary of state if I'm not mistaken which is beyond belief) and there are far too amny of them.
> 
> If Ireland had the same representation per capita as the UK we would have about 36 TD's, alot less waffle and alot more tax revenue to spend on needy projects.


 
Well said.   Most Irish politicians are a waste of taxpayers money.


----------



## roland (27 Oct 2007)

rabbit said:


> Most Irish politicians are a waste of taxpayers money.


 
We have supported a democratic system whereby we vote in the people we want to govern our country. And yet we get people saying 'most' irish politicians are a waste of our money. 

What is your alternative proposal to the system we have for electing who we want to decide how our money is spent?


----------



## rmelly (27 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> Our PR system means that we get weak government and loads of elections so the job security is not good


 
By my count we have had 4 general elections since 1990, with the senior partner in Government in power for 10 consecutive years and counting - hardly 'loads of elections'.

The first lesson in politics is that the electorate are 'fickle', so while job security may not be great, it's not something the candidates aren't aware of.

As compensation for the possibility of the electorate rejecting a sitting TD (for whatever reason e.g. incompetence, criminal activity etc), TD's have generous pensions and any TD that was a civil servant (e.g. teacher) has his/her position kept open for him/her if required to return to it at a later date, and it I know anything about the civil service, absence from the job (while TD) won't prejudice pension, promotion, seniority, entitlement to increments, benchmarking etc.

One other perk I became aware of recently is that former TD's have the use of Leinster House parking (for free) indefinitely - another few grand a year saved...


----------



## Bedlam (27 Oct 2007)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Bedlam* http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=512201#post512201 
_I have no difficulty in the concept of paying for *qualified people* who are set targets and have to deliver results in a PLC environment. (Steve Staunton as an example) who gets the boot when he fails to deliver on those results/targets.... _


and Steve Staunton's qualifications are?...

I rest my case


----------



## rabbit (28 Oct 2007)

roland said:


> What is your alternative proposal to the system we have for electing who we want to decide how our money is spent?


 
The point is, in this little country, the same population as a decent size city in many other countries, we have too many politicians  ( Dail, Seanad, Presidency etc ) , and they are paid too much.  The German ambassador who gave that speech about a month ago had a good eye on what was going on.    Its laughable to think that de teeshock who speeks like dat and who enjoys a few cash kickbacks for de auld house from de lads in manchester, could be paid more dan de president of de united states or the PM of the UK.


----------



## Sunny (28 Oct 2007)

Whatever about the rights and wrongs about the pay rises, I think their attitude in handling it has shown that these guys think the public are just a bunch of moaners who should consider themselves lucky to have them. Marin Cullen and Noel Dempsey to name but two do not deserve to be ministers considering their performances but nothing will ever happen because no matter how useless they are, they are still being benchmarked against successful people in the private sector who have probably acheived targets to reach the level they got to. What has Martin Cullen achieved since becoming a minister???


----------



## RainyDay (29 Oct 2007)

rabbit said:


> Its laughable to think that de teeshock who speeks like dat


Far be it from me to defend Bertie, but I don't quite see what his accent has got to do with it? Are all politicians supposed to have D4 accents to meet your high standards?



rmelly said:


> As compensation for the possibility of the electorate rejecting a sitting TD (for whatever reason e.g. incompetence, criminal activity etc), TD's have generous pensions and any TD that was a civil servant (e.g. teacher) has his/her position kept open for him/her if required to return to it at a later date, and it I know anything about the civil service, absence from the job (while TD) won't prejudice pension, promotion, seniority, entitlement to increments, benchmarking etc.


I'm reasonably sure that this privilege of keep a position open only applies to teachers for some strange reason. I do find it grating that former teachers like Tom Kitt keep their teaching post, when we all know there isn't a snowballs chance in hell of him ever getting back in the classroom. This means that his replacement teacher is left without a permanent contract.


----------



## rabbit (29 Oct 2007)

RainyDay said:


> Far be it from me to defend Bertie, but I don't quite see what his accent has got to do with it? Are all politicians supposed to have D4 accents to meet your high standards?


 
Maybe, just maybe, this politician who now thinks his salary should be more than the salaries of the president / prime ministers of much larger industrial nations like the USA, UK, France etc should have got a bit of help from de lads in Manchester - every fella down on his luck should have a few property developers dig in their pockets to give him a digout towards a few auld elocution lessons, and a few pints of de bass while his having dem, to steady de nerves like.

No wonder the German ambassador finds it so easy to get his audience to laugh at us.


----------



## ashambles (29 Oct 2007)

There's no such thing as proper pronuciation, most Irish people don't pronounce "th" in "Received Pronounciation" style. Bertie speaks clearly enough. 

The problem is what he says not how he says it - a few weeks ago he was whining that consultants had the cheek to earn twice his salary - now he's under the illusion that because Gordon Brown gets to use Chequers and No. 10 he deserves compensation as he doesn't have an official residence.

The comparisons made between senior government jobs and high level private sector are just invalid. If there was a danger of say Ryanair or Air Lingus making a move to recruit Minister Dempsey or one of his colleagues or even those superb senior civil servants who sat cluelessly on the Shannon story as their next CEO then it would make some sense to pay salaries to prevent this from happening. 

But the danger of that happening is tiny, yes they could become board members as their contacts are always useful but that's not quite the CEO type level to which they reckon they correspond.


----------



## RainyDay (29 Oct 2007)

rabbit said:


> every fella down on his luck should have a few property developers dig in their pockets to give him a digout towards a few auld elocution lessons, and a few pints of de bass while his having dem, to steady de nerves like.





Yorky said:


> What's a _Dublin 4 _accent? He should be able to speak plain English with proper diction, pronunciation and grammar.
> 
> If that's a _Dublin 4_ accent then yes, he should.



This is just snobbery. There are so many easy targets when criticising Bertie without having to pick on his accent, which (like all of us) is just an accident of birth.


----------



## daithi (29 Oct 2007)

Accent debate aside, if the present lot were to find themselves in the private sector, they would have been fired a long time ago, with the possible exceptions of Brian Lenihan, and maybe Bertie..btw wouldnt it be nice if all the teachers in the Dail including Enda Kenny (funny how nobody seems to object to him being called "Inda")would follow Finian McGrath's lead and resign his teaching post?

daithi


----------



## rabbit (29 Oct 2007)

RainyDay said:


> This is just snobbery. There are so many easy targets when criticising Bertie without having to pick on his accent


 
With all that money - he thinks us taxpayers should pay him more than the President of the USA or France are paid by their taxpayers - he may at least spend a few bob at long last on a few elocution lessons.


----------



## Purple (30 Oct 2007)

ashambles said:


> There's no such thing as proper pronuciation, most Irish people don't pronounce "th" in "Received Pronounciation" style. Bertie speaks clearly enough.
> 
> The problem is what he says not how he says it - a few weeks ago he was whining that consultants had the cheek to earn twice his salary - now he's under the illusion that because Gordon Brown gets to use Chequers and No. 10 he deserves compensation as he doesn't have an official residence.
> 
> ...



I'm not disagreeing with the substance of your comment but there have been some very notable exceptions; Peter Sutherland, Ray McSharry, Ivan Yates, and Albert Rynolds spring to mind. Peter Sutherland is quite possibly the most successful Irish businessman of all time.
I’m sure there are others.


----------



## rmelly (30 Oct 2007)

does anyone else take issue with him justifying his salary because he doesn't have an official residence, given the circumstances in which he acquired his house?


----------



## Purple (30 Oct 2007)

rmelly said:


> does anyone else take issue with him justifying his salary because he doesn't have an official residence, given the circumstances in which he acquired his house?



No, they are different issues. I think that the office merits a public residence. The American ambassador should be kicked out of the park and Bertie should be installed (thought just while he is in office).


----------



## elefantfresh (30 Oct 2007)

> does anyone else take issue with him justifying his salary because he doesn't have an official residence, given the circumstances in which he acquired his house?



Yes of course - but what can you do? We all knew the situation and then voted him back in again.


----------



## Green (30 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> No, they are different issues. I think that the office merits a public residence. The American ambassador should be kicked out of the park and Bertie should be installed (thought just while he is in office).


 
Why does the office merit a public residence?


----------



## Sunny (30 Oct 2007)

rmelly said:


> does anyone else take issue with him justifying his salary because he doesn't have an official residence, given the circumstances in which he acquired his house?


 

But he does have an official residence. He just chooses not to live there. Too far from Fagans I suspect.


----------



## Green (30 Oct 2007)

Sunny said:


> But he does have an official residence. He just chooses not to live there. Too far from Fagans I suspect.


 
Really where is it?


----------



## ashambles (30 Oct 2007)

According to wiki 

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_residence#.C2.A0Ireland


Áras an Uachtaráin (President)
Steward's House at Farmleigh (Taoiseach)


----------



## Green (30 Oct 2007)

ashambles said:


> According to wiki
> 
> -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_residence#.C2.A0Ireland
> 
> ...


 
Actually, it says that "In 2006 it was announced by the OPW that the Steward's House which is located in the grounds of Farmleigh has been renovated. It is believed that the house will become the official residence of the Taoiseach (although a spokesperson has said Bertie Ahern has no intention of using it), and any official engagements will be carried out in Farmleigh or Government Buildings.[1]".


----------



## Purple (30 Oct 2007)

YOBR said:


> Why does the office merit a public residence?



Out of respect for the office, if not the office holder.


----------



## rabbit (30 Oct 2007)

Seeing as everyone may have to tighten their belts a bit in the future, and seeing as world energy prices are rising, could not Bertie and Mary share the overheads of public office + share the same residence in the Phoenix Park ?   It would help the environment.   Our small country of 1.5 million taxpayers or so should not be asked to pay a Prime Minister - Bertie - more than the leader of the mighty big USA, France or UK gets - as well as a President - Mary McAleese.


----------



## z103 (30 Oct 2007)

> This is just snobbery. There are so many easy targets when criticising Bertie without having to pick on his accent, which (like all of us) is just an accident of birth.


Elocution lessons. Many great leaders have had them.

However, his marketing machine have probably decided that he'll get more votes if he sounds like dat.


----------



## Sn@kebite (30 Oct 2007)

rabbit said:


> ...Our small country of 1.5 million taxpayers or so...


Must be more than that? 2.2 million I though and that was a while ago. Unless you mean PAYE only?





rabbit said:


> ...should not be asked to pay a Prime Minister - Bertie - more than the leader of the mighty big USA, France or UK gets - as well as a President - Mary McAleese.


Alot of the USA's money is all going on military funding and other "ventures" which Ireland doesn't (yet) have I would think.


----------



## Purple (31 Oct 2007)

rabbit said:


> Seeing as everyone may have to tighten their belts a bit in the future, and seeing as world energy prices are rising, could not Bertie and Mary share the overheads of public office + share the same residence in the Phoenix Park ?   It would help the environment.   Our small country of 1.5 million taxpayers or so should not be asked to pay a Prime Minister - Bertie - more than the leader of the mighty big USA, France or UK gets - as well as a President - Mary McAleese.


 
So how we are perceived by visiting politicians/ senior civil servants/ business people and a sense of respect for the highest executive office in our country is less important than penny pinching? What is it in our national mind-set that resents those in high office for the resources that have access to? It's not that long ago that many people thought that the government should not have any aeroplanes.


----------



## Green (31 Oct 2007)

Purple said:


> So how we are perceived by visiting politicians/ senior civil servants/ business people and a sense of respect for the highest executive office in our country is less important than penny pinching?
> 
> _*I have an idea here that would impress the visiting dignataries.. First why not have a world class airport in Dublin. Then a high speed rail link to the capital with seemless connections to all the other modes of transport in the city. Then high speed motorways to all other other major cities in the country. Now wouldn't that impress them (and us the taxpayer) far more than them having the ability to say "nice Georgian mansion Bertie"*_
> 
> What is it in our national mind-set that resents those in high office for the resources that have access to? _*I resent them for having access to resources because of the way they use or abuse them, plain and simple. I remember once in the dark old 80's signning on in Cumberland Street a few days late (due to sickness) after I have been made redundant but I could only claim from the date I signed on not like the deal given to an ex Minister on his pension this week. The more resources politicians in Ireland are given the more they abuse them for political purposes. The widespread corruption in the planning process in Dublin and in other areas is a case in point if further proof was needed. Other examples include the recent action in bumping up the numbers of Minister of State to 20 and giving nearly every TD a second invome from some non entity of a Committee job. Its time irish people woke up and smelt the coffee!!*_


----------



## Sue Ellen (31 Oct 2007)

Yorky said:


> And so they shouldn't - let them get a cheap flight as the mere mortals do. And as for state cars and drivers, they should have their own car and fund it out of a public sector mileage allowance, which is extremely generous,  and let them pay for a driver out of that if they see fit.



Let them sit in the heavy traffic also and they'd sort it a lot quicker than they are doing so now.

They could also try the squash on the Luas lines at peak times.  They'd replace the smaller trams a lot quicker also than they are presently doing.  Pickpockets have a field day.

Bet ya they'd also insist on trams running between Heuston and town at peak times on the red line which would help a lot.  This was mentioned in the early days of set-up but has never happened.


----------



## Perplexed (31 Oct 2007)

We all complain but is there any way to actually do anything about these pay rises ? It makes me sick to see these guys getting so much, when they've done little or nothing about healthcare & infrastructure etc during the biggest boom this country has ever seen.

Can there be a public vote of no confidence in our government ?


----------



## Gordanus (31 Oct 2007)

Fintan O'Toole made a good point in the irish times a few days ago.  He says the independent board that recommended the pay hikes did so on the grounds of the 'unique accountability' that Ministers have.  However, having watched Mary Harney blame Susie Long's death on 'the system', Bertie did the same; Hanfin also blamed the 'education system' for shortcomings, you'd wonder where the accountability comes in.  Only at the end of 4 years..........but even then the public nor even the rank-and-file membership of the party has any influence over the appointments of Taoiseach or Ministers.  
If they claim a 'unique accountability' to justify these pay raises, let them take the bullet for the 'system's failings' and not hive it off.


----------



## Purple (1 Nov 2007)

Perplexed said:


> Can there be a public vote of no confidence in our government ?


Yes, it's called an election.


Gordanus said:


> Fintan O'Toole made a good point in the irish times a few days ago.  He says the independent board that recommended the pay hikes did so on the grounds of the 'unique accountability' that Ministers have.  However, having watched Mary Harney blame Susie Long's death on 'the system', Bertie did the same; Hanfin also blamed the 'education system' for shortcomings, you'd wonder where the accountability comes in.  Only at the end of 4 years..........but even then the public nor even the rank-and-file membership of the party has any influence over the appointments of Taoiseach or Ministers.
> If they claim a 'unique accountability' to justify these pay raises, let them take the bullet for the 'system's failings' and not hive it off.


 I agree with them that it's the system. I just wish any politicain had enough power to change the system, but they don't.


----------



## Sunny (1 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> I just wish any politicain had enough power to change the system, but they don't.


 
So why are we paying them such high salaries? I loved Berties defence of Noel Dempsey. He won't sack him because "He is doing the job to the best of his abilities and should be allowed get on with it"...I could pay someone €50,000 to do the job to the best of his abilities. For the salary that Noel Dempsey is on I expect someone with the ability to do the actual job. 

But again there is no form of performance appraisal for these guys. People mention elections but our system means the politics is about local issues. You could be the worst minister in the world at a national level but build a few schools in your local area, and you will be elected again and then you just have to hope your party gets into power and you are probably minister again. Why not have these same consultants who gave the pay rise do annual performance appraisals on ministers performance based on clear measurable objectives and goals. At least that way we might feel like we are getting value for money. What penalty does Noel Demspey get if he fails to deliver a fall in waiting times for driving tests by nest June? Sorry for picking on Noel Dempsey. Same argument could be used for all them. Speaking of incompetence, where is Martin Cullen these days?


----------



## rabbit (1 Nov 2007)

Perplexed said:


> We all complain but is there any way to actually do anything about these pay rises ?


 
not pay  taxes where possible ? not spending money in Ireland where possible ?  ....its our taxes paying for these guys + their fat pensions + perks


----------



## RainyDay (1 Nov 2007)

Sunny said:


> People mention elections but our system means the politics is about local issues. You could be the worst minister in the world at a national level but build a few schools in your local area, and you will be elected again and then you just have to hope your party gets into power and you are probably minister again.


Who do you blame for this focus on local issues - the politicians or the voters?


----------



## Purple (1 Nov 2007)

rabbit said:


> not pay  taxes where possible ? not spending money in Ireland where possible ?  ....its our taxes paying for these guys + their fat pensions + perks


... yes, that's a great idea!


----------



## Green (1 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> ... yes, that's a great idea!


 
Yeah, nearly as good as the one about giving Bertie an official residence


----------



## Purple (1 Nov 2007)

YOBR said:


> Yeah, nearly as good as the one about giving Bertie an official residence


Why, because it would bankrupt the country as well?


----------



## Sn@kebite (1 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> Why, because it would bankrupt the country as well?


Maybe it's because he has more than enough money to buy his own residence like the rest of us!


----------



## Green (1 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> Why, because it would bankrupt the country as well?


 
Think I've given my view on this issue already...


----------



## cole (1 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> I agree with them that it's the system. I just wish any politicain had enough power to change the system, but they don't.


 
  If they can't change the system then what the hell are they doing there in the first place. System schmistim... it's always somebody (or something) elses fault. They _do_ have the power to change the system.... that's their job. Whether they choose to exercise that power is another matter.


----------



## Sn@kebite (1 Nov 2007)

cole said:


> If they can't change the system then what the hell are they doing there in the first place. System schmistim... it's always somebody (or something) elses fault. They _do_ have the power to change the system.... that's their job. Whether they choose to exercise that power is another matter.


Exactly! - It's not "the system" it's the people running "the system". But we are to blame too because we need to make them listen to us by putting pressure on them to clean up imo. Not complaining about it on forums...


----------



## Purple (1 Nov 2007)

So you would vote for a party that wants to close your local hospital because it's in the national interest? Yea, right. They tried that and it didn't work. 
Our PR system leads to weak government so all actions have to be populist and that never solves anything. If we change it we will have FF and I for one don’t want that! So what’s the solution? I don’t know but blaming the titular head of a government department for shortcomings that are institutional and have been the norm for generations is juvenile. Politicians are part of the problem and have to be part of the solution but they are only part of it.


----------



## Gordanus (1 Nov 2007)

not got the power to change the system????

How about the rise and rise of private hospitals?   Doesn't this just fit in with PD thinking? And who's the Minister for Health?  Not a PD by any chance????


----------



## cole (2 Nov 2007)

Purple said:


> So what’s the solution? I don’t know but blaming the titular head of a government department for shortcomings that are institutional and have been the norm for generations is juvenile. Politicians are part of the problem and have to be part of the solution but they are only part of it.


 
The buck stops with the head of the relevant government department, nobody else. It is their responsibility and theirs alone. They are the leaders and decision makers. By all accounts that's why they award themselves exhorbitant salaries. This isn't a juvenile argument, it's a fact. Whether they choose to exercise the power entrusted to them is their responsibility and ultimately ours come the next election. Being defeatist and shrugging our shoulders certainly won't change things. If they want to change institutional shortcomings they have the power to do it. Have they the will though?


----------



## Green (2 Nov 2007)

cole said:


> The buck stops with the head of the relevant government department, nobody else. It is their responsibility and theirs alone. They are the leaders and decision makers. By all accounts that's why they award themselves exhorbitant salaries. This isn't a juvenile argument, it's a fact. Whether they choose to exercise the power entrusted to them is their responsibility and ultimately ours come the next election. Being defeatist and shrugging our shoulders certainly won't change things. If they want to change institutional shortcomings they have the power to do it. Have they the will though?


 
Incorrect, strictly speaking they are not in charge of policy, that is the responsibility of the political head, the Minister. They have an input into policy and are in charge of operational issues. Interestingly, while some of the opposition stated that the increase of the Taoiseach was "disgusting", none of them actually said they would reverse it if in power. In some ways it suits the opposition as they know they can blame the Government but will pick up this easy money if/when they are in power.


----------



## cole (2 Nov 2007)

Should have made myself clearer... by "head of government dept" I meant the Minister.


----------



## Gordanus (4 Nov 2007)

Well, if they won't accept their accountability (which was the reason the cttee  gave to justify the increase), how the hell do they justify their increase?
(Where's Joe Higgins when we need him?  O yeah, didn't get voted in....)


----------



## z103 (4 Nov 2007)

> Yeah, nearly as good as the one about giving Bertie an official residence



Let him have an empty apartment in Lucan or Tallaght or somewhere. There are loads of those.

His salary increase is quite simply theft.


----------

