Anti Bin Tax Demo, City Hall, Dame Street, Monday, 6.30 pm

by Activist - Anti-bin tax campaign Fri Oct 03, 2003 16:51

There is an all city activist meeting after the council picket downstairs in Brogans on Dame street. Presumably it'll start at 7.30 or 8.

by Niall ÓB - Greens Fri Oct 03, 2003 17:05

You Wrote...
"Contact the following councillors who support the Bin Tax and the imprisonment of protesters:"

Leaving aside the argument about support for the bin tax, the claim that these councillors support the imprisonment of protesters is groundless.

It is hard to see what the purpose of such provocation is, other than to score cheap political points.

Are you perhaps a member of the PD's in Grouch's clothing?

by Oscar de Grouch Fri Oct 03, 2003 17:54

You are the one who is a PD in Enviornmentalists clothing. The Green Party has not condemned the imprisonment of Joe Higgins and Clare Daly; they have merely criticised the length of the sentences imposed.

The Green Party on Dublin City Council supported the imposition of the Bin Charges. They knew that resistance would continue, and things would eventually come to a head. By continuing to support bin charges they share responsibility for the action being taken against campaigners.

by Ryan Meade - Green Party Fri Oct 03, 2003 17:55

And we've made this clear on a number of occasions. I supported a motion from Ger Dorgan (Independent) at last month's meeting of City Council calling on the City Manager not to implement non-collection of bins. This motion was defeated by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael votes.

I don't mind being lobbied on any issue, and I'll be happy to discuss Green Party policy with anybody who contacts me. However I don't appreciate misinformation and I must question the motives of somebody who singles out the Greens above the Fianna Fail councillors. I acknowledge that our position on bin charges is not in line with that of the anti-bin-tax campaign, but Fianna Fáil are the people leading the push for privatisation and flat-rate charges.

Fianna Fáil want the householder to cover the entire cost of waste disposal through charges - this is not part of the Greens' policy. You may not agree with our policies, but I don't see any justification for singling us out above the government parties.

by Pat C Fri Oct 03, 2003 18:03

If you dont oppose the bin tax itself then you do share the blame for the action being taken against the blockaders. The Greens supported the these taxes when they were proposed. You were not a councillor at the time but you do share the blame for bringing in an anti working class tax unless you now oppose it.

Even the Greens call for a refuse tax based on weight will still be unfair. No matter what your wages, be you a High Court Judge or a Binworker, you will pay the sdame amount per kilo.

As long as the bin charges are there, then the council will try to implement them. This will inevitably lead to clashs and activists being injuncted.

by Environmentalist Fri Oct 03, 2003 18:04

During the last general election campaign in Dublin North, Trevor Sargent claimed repeatedly that Clare Daly and the Socialist Party would be responsible for the privatisation of the bin collection service in Fingal.

That was disgusting behaviour.

Sargent, the leader of the Green Party, knows well that the bin charge is the first step towards privatisation. If the charge is accepted then there will be a secure income stream to entice the private operators in.

No secure income equals no profits equals no privatisation.

The implementation of "user fees" for services previously paid for out of general taxation cannot be seperated from the privatisation agenda. They are part and parcel of the same thing.

Sargent however tried to blame the inevitable result of his own policy on opponents of the tax and of privatisation.

Why does the Green Party attract hostility on this issue? Take a long look at yourselves.

by Anonymous cut and paster - People that post other people's articles Sat Oct 04, 2003 14:54

[ note, this article is cut and pasted from the I.T. ] Whatever else this is, it is far from the republican socialism of James Connolly, Peadar O'Donnell or Michael O'Riordan.
Irish Times, O4 2003

Joe Higgins is widely respected as a sharp, witty and effective parliamentarian, although his astringent probes rarely draw blood from the Taoiseach. No such positive epithets characterise the anti-bin-charge campaign, which has detained the deputy from his legislative duties.

Nonetheless, the appearance that a conscientious objector is more harshly treated than Government deputies who have committed serious offences is neither good politics nor good for confidence in the equity of the law. It is only appearance, as the shaming of a public figure is on average far worse punishment for them.

Rarely has political martyrdom or political prisoner status been won so cheaply over as dubious a cause.

It would be hard to find the nobility of campaigns for civil rights, anti-apartheid or nuclear disarmament, which might justify civil disobedience, in the "right" not to pay directly for your rubbish and to interfere with delivery by workmen of an essential public service, collection of household waste.

Twenty years ago, the introduction by the minister for the environment, Dick Spring, of a power by local authorities to raise service charges to compensate for cutbacks in local authority funding might plausibly have been attacked as double taxation, after the transfer to general taxation of local government funding following the abolition of household rates. Taxation in the 1980s was exceptionally onerous.

Yet even then local government and the services it provides had to be carried on and paid for. Today we have moved to a low tax economy; far too low, the rigorous socialist would argue in any other context. With the reduction of the standard rate of income tax from 35 per cent to 20 per cent and VAT from 35 per cent to 21 per cent in 2003 compared to 1983, it is more the halving of taxation, not its doubling, that the Socialist Party should be complaining about.

Clare Daly has argued that corporation tax (set by Ruairí Quinn in 1997 at 12.5 per cent) must be raised. But legislation is made in the Dáil not in the streets.

Do people care about the thousands of jobs that would be lost if that happened, or would that just be more grist to the political mill?

The charge is in any case not a tax, but payment for a service ranging from €4 to €8 a week, higher in the country. With waivers for the poor, and against the background of a tax system that treats low-income earners favourably, most people are glad to have their rubbish collected at a nominal weekly cost.

And no, most people do not want their taxes raised or other services curtailed as the alternative to charges, nor are they impressed with the claim that "the rich" will pay for everyone else's rubbish collection.

The environmental arguments for encouraging individual responsibility on the polluter-pays principle, and the need for more refined systems of waste separation and minimisation, do not need to be rehearsed here.

I have no particular desire to see local authority services privatised.

Apart from the loss of employment, there is potentially less control of prices, though sometimes prices are boosted by local authorities charging more for use of dumps.

Still, private firms provide very efficient rubbish disposal services in the country. Profit is dirt, yet the anti-bin-charge campaign will deprive local authorities of the revenue necessary for them to provide the service. Private firms would never for one moment collect bins that are not paid for, nor would they be held to ransom by any street campaign. Tax evasion is practised by people who arrogate to themselves the decision on how much they will pay. Likewise, people who demand public services but refuse to pay for them except as they choose are behaving in a similar fashion.

A jail sentence is a costly and not particularly progressive punishment that should mainly be used where there is a danger of repeated offences against people or property. It is far better otherwise to collect money through fines, which is what stopped the IFA protest referred to by Vincent Browne last Wednesday, than spend money on prison terms.

One would be almost tempted to join the calls for instant release, if one were not confronted at every turn by posters, demanding that whole swathes of the "establishment" be jailed. Where is the evidence that socialist monopoly power has provided any protection against corruption?

At one level only does the anti-bin-charge campaign make sense, as an instrument of political mobilisation in advance of local elections, particularly where the authorities can be provoked into over-reaction.

In the normal way in a stable democracy, few bother their heads about the ideological fantasy world of splinter groups, whose main public visibility consists of catchy slogans and posters on lamp-posts advertising public meetings, where pocket Lenins and Rosa Luxemburgs can preach Marxism and the lost revolution to fellow activists, since the population at large are little interested.

Some support comes from the class-war element in the trade union movement that yearns to overturn social partnership, full EU membership, and some of whose best-known figures seem to regard "president-for-life" Arthur Scargill as the model to follow.

There is practically none from the mainstream trade union movement, which exercises a positive influence with Bertie Ahern's government far in excess of what its counterpart in Britain enjoys with Tony Blair.

Militant socialism has its roots in Britain, not in Moscow. Tony Blair and Dick Spring established credibility by expelling that element from the Labour Party in both countries. The British Labour government is, of course, in the militant view "a right-wing Government". The basis for a permanent solution to sectarian conflict, according to Joe Higgins's submission to the Forum, is "a voluntary, free and socialist federation of Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales".

Logically, Ireland would lose its hard-won sovereignty, and economic policy, foreign and defence policy would be decided by the far left in London. Whatever else this is, it is far from the republican socialism of James Connolly, Peadar O'Donnell or Michael O'Riordan.

by Shay Chuveragh Sat Oct 04, 2003 15:01

Well said, the Socialist Party's British Unity Policy would send Connolly (not to mention marx) into spasms with rage.

by hibernian oxonian recognition service (free) Sat Oct 04, 2003 15:08

There are as we know loads of Martins in Irish History and Political development. And the one who has written above knows more about most of them than the average reader here.

_conscientious objection_ = jolly well put Martin.

Whatever is happening it is indeed very difficult to understand using the paradigms developed in the last century by fine minds such as the Irish Martins, though needless to say they just don't go away, and we can expect to read their thoughts and more to be influenced by their analysis for many years to come. Being as we all are "a far cry from Connolly" is really quite a good thing. It has allowed the paradigms alluded to above to lose some of their truly _most objectionable_ parameters. But some of the Irish Martins are still finding it difficult to recognise the paradigm of the socialist tradition which informed early 20th century Marxism and Connolly, that of libertarianism and yawn yawn anarchism.
We in the 5º look forward to more words from the Irish Martins as last week's offerings from the little rascals were really "below par".

by Rob Sat Oct 04, 2003 15:10

Seriously, if anybody wants to read this Government propaganda they can buy today's Irish Times where it's published. Delete for focks sake.

by Irish Times Readers Book Club Special Offer Sat Oct 04, 2003 15:37

Joe and Clare should take pride in this hatchet job.

When one of the governments chief advisers and main public "intellectual" is wheeled out to spit abuse at them in the pages of the Irish Times, they know they have the bastards rattled. "Fantasists", "unionists", get a new record Martin dear.

I don't know what James Connolly would make of Joe or Clare. I suspect he would approve. I am certain, though, that he would be outraged at the use of his name by a government propagandist to attack two socialists who are in prison for standing up for working class people.

by Gandhi Sat Oct 04, 2003 16:13

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win.
Mohandas Gandhi

by bored Sat Oct 04, 2003 17:54

Yeah right.

by pat c Sat Oct 04, 2003 18:54

its shows how much mansergh & ff fear the campaign that they have to introduce this red herring.

mansergh should be reminded that if connolly & o'donnell hadnt been prepared to break the law then he wouldnt be sitting in the seanad.

he might well have found a comfortable home in the british house of lords though.

i am sure i will disagree with the sp once more on some future occasion on the federation question; but now defeating the bin tax is the main issue.

by red - sp Sat Oct 04, 2003 20:36

united we'll win

by sp member (personal capacity) Sun Oct 05, 2003 00:23

Shay
expected you to make an appearence a long time ago.

It is of couurse nothing new for the press to use the tactics of devision to attempt to devide working class movements.
If memory serves JConnolly suffered from this a few times himself, the point was fequently made that he was british and that the evils of socialism where a british import in to ireland.

For my part I have more in common with a worker from London than a boss from Dublin.

In the bin tax campaign I hope to see a victory by the workers of Dublin over the bosses of Dublin.

by Rational Normal Person Sun Oct 05, 2003 02:40

The "ideological fantasy world of splinter groups"....

It's so true. If you people could see yourselves! It's like Monty Python wothout the humour.

by bert de hernia Sun Oct 05, 2003 15:36

"Joe Higgins is widely respected as a sharp, witty and effective parliamentarian, although his astringent probes rarely draw blood from the Taoiseach."

Nice to see Mansergh fawning over his Taoiseach like a good faithful party hack .... didn't Charlie's little arse-lickers do the same back in the good old glory days of FF ...

But the what would any normal rational person expect .... shure isn't it too much to be expecting anyone to draw blood from an amorphous blob of spineless jelly ...

And nice to see how Mansergh can equate the bin tax protestors with the Ansbacher gang:
"Tax evasion is practised by people who arrogate to themselves the decision on how much they will pay. Likewise, people who demand public services but refuse to pay for them except as they choose are behaving in a similar fashion."

With twats like that in Government no wonder the plebs are taking to the streets .....

by the ghost of christmas past Sun Oct 05, 2003 15:42

Lest we forget - Mansergh was a faithful lackey of Haughey:

"Service in Dublin as a third secretary preceded a move to the embassy in Bonn. His stint there completed, Mansergh returned to Dublin where he soon came to the notice of Charles Haughey. Senior diplomats at the time recall their amazement at watching this relative rookie stroll past them to seat himself beside the Taoiseach. In 1980, Haughey seconded him to the Department of the Taoiseach. The die was cast; when Haughey departed from government, Mansergh followed him to work for Fianna Fail. He stood squarely with Haughey in those years; Garret FitzGerald writes about him with a clear distaste in his autobiography. Mansergh later edited a collection of his speeches, entitled Spirit of the Nation.

Mansergh does not now disavow Haughey. "I visited him about two weeks ago," he said last week. "I see him a few times a year. Of course, like everyone I was disappointed by certain things, but I'd draw a distinction between his reputation and his achievements. Whatever is on the debit side, there are some extremely positive achievements.""

by googlegallian Sun Oct 05, 2003 18:57

Fucking cheek of Mansergh, he has always been a lackey to Haughey and the Ansbacher men in FF. He was not even elected at the last election.The best thing to do is just ignore him and his ilk and take sati8sfaction that we are obviously getting under his skin.

by Mankind Sun Oct 05, 2003 19:15

If I wanted to read this sort of windbaggery I'd have bought the Irish Times, which I never do due to the fact that within the first couple of articles I invariably find myself either feeling very drowsy or in need of an orgasm.
However I suspect the jackass may have a point about there being no evidence that "socialist monopoly power has provided any protection against corruption." He's also correct when he says that "legislation is made in the Dáil, not in the streets", which is a pity. Legislation should be made in the streets and even the dogs that are out there already know that. New technology facilitates the increased involvment of the common pleb in the everyday running of his or her country and taking the power from corrupt the criminal mentalities of the vested interests. This interesting new approach could be called 'Democracy'.
But sure when you think about it everyone would just have to go to all the bother of taking part in political discourse and keeping up with the issues and that would just take from all the time we like spend thinking about celebrities and all that really interesting stuff. Yeah, best to leave the decision making to whoever promised us planning permission for a new extension on the house or whatever. Sure that democracy stuff is all just an "ideological fantasy world". If you don't like the government you've got you can always vote them out (once every five long years).

by Humanity Dick Sun Oct 05, 2003 20:09

Well Mankind, I suppose that the jolly old Oxbridge prat may well have a point .... monopoly socialist power did not indeed provide too many safeguards against corruption .....

But then again the quasi-monopoly non-socialist power wielded by the FF gombeens and their paymasters during the heyday of the Haughty Charlatan and his crew didn't exactly help to curtail low standards in high places either did it now ?

But dear old Dr. Mansergh sits blissfully in his glass house and throws stones at those beastly (non-monopoly-power-wielding) socialist cads like Higgins and Co. agitating in a most unparliamentary and non-Oxonian manner for the abolition of the bin tax.

Such bounders are (according to Dr. Martin's astute analysis) every bit as bad as the naughty tax evading boys and girls of the Ansbacher era ....(none of whom ever saw the inside of the Joy ..... but then again the Joy was never built for people of Dr. Martin's social class or their patrons in the "business community" ....)

Well God be with those who can follow his logic ... there are probably enough of them in Ireland ... and it might explain why we get the goverments that we do ....

by internationalist Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:31

The following is taken from James Connolly's 1909 pamphlet "Socialism Made Easy"

"SOCIALISM IS A FOREIGN IMPORTATION!

I know it because I read it in the papers. I also know it to be the case because in every country I have graced with my presence up to the present time, or have heard from, the possessing classes through their organs in the press, and their spokesmen upon the platform have been vociferous and insistent in declaring the foreign origin of Socialism.

In Ireland Socialism is an English importation, in England they are convinced it was made in Germany, in Germany it is a scheme of traitors in alliance with the French to disrupt the Empire, in France it is an accursed conspiracy to discredit the army which is destined to reconquer Alsace and Lorraine, in Russia it is an English plot to prevent Russian extension towards Asia, in Asia it is known to have been set on foot by American enemies of Chinese and Japanese industrial progress, and in America it is one of the baneful fruits of unrestricted pauper and criminal immigration."