NEWSFLASH - Council Passes Estimates

by Stephen Lewis - Irish Socialist Network (Personal Capacity) Tue Nov 30, 2004 00:10

Pat Rabbittes come a long way.He is now part of the problem and so is the Labour Party.

The Labour Party are made up of a bunch of pathetic careerists.They too are happy to screw the working class.

The Labour Party should hang their heads in shame.

Let us defend our class on the streets and in our communities.

by labour watch Tue Nov 30, 2004 00:12

yet another labour party sell out. tax amnesties, passports for sale, water tax, social partnership, nice treaty, ... and now the bin tax.

what are the odds on them being the forefront of implementing non-collection? what are the odds of them supporting privatisation of the bin collection service?

by paul murray Tue Nov 30, 2004 00:13

This vote further shows that the Labour Party are just like anyother capitalist party. They are not a party for the working class. They will always represent big business before workers.

by ......... Tue Nov 30, 2004 01:48

I wasn't at the meeting but was told that a roll call vote was defeated by Labour. They knew what they were doing was wrong and so tried to hide what they did. I understand that only Eric Byrne for sure voted against, but the person I spoke to (a councillor) told me they weren't sure about Paddy Bourke.

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:32

"Labour group leader Cllr Kevin Humphreys said the Labour party remained opposed to the waste charges but that this was not an issue that the councillors had powers to decide on anymore.

"This vote is not about bin charges. That was already signed off on a week ago," he said."

Some way to show your opposition. Didn't even make a stand for democracy.
Ah well, Rabitte should keep Fine Gael happy.

by joe costello Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:35

Don't be despondent, it doesn't matter whether the vote went against us after one meeting or 50 meetings, the outcome was always going to be the same. The play acting of the past years didn't make a difference in the end. This battle was always going to be won or lost on the streets. The council vote and the legal cases were just tactical, we never expected either to win but they did expose the legal system, the police and the labour party for what they are. Remember over 28,000 households in Dublin haven't paid a penny. The battle continues..........

by ....... Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:01

The offical vote was 30-15 but I thinkk this is mistaken those who defintely voted no were.

10 SF
3 independents
Eric Byrne (Lab)
Bill Tormley (FG)

but according to the IT so did Emer Costello.

So who did vote what way. Perhaps Joan Collins has the list if so can she post it.

by Indy Council Corr Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:25

Paddy Bourke definetly voted for it. I saw him vote myself.

There isn't and won't be a list of who voted for what because there was no roll-call vote. There was a great deal of confusion about this at the end.

Basically, you need five councilors to stand to request a roll-call vote. Joan Collins and the two other Independents stood and called for a roll-call while the question to be put to the Council was being read out. Under Council Standing Orders you request a roll-call by standing after the question has been read out but before the vote commences. Since they stood at the wrong time they were told this and sat back down.

After the question was read out they didn’t stand up again and the vote commenced.

Half way through the voting (When people opposed to the Estimates were asked to raise their hands) Joan asked the Mayor when she should stand to indicate a roll-call and was told her time had passed.

A bit of yelling ensued but basically, when the time came to call for a roll-call no-one stood to ask one, neither Joan who clearly wanted one, nor the Shinners who remained seated throughout.

As someone who has a lot of time for Joan as an activist I would suggest the woman get a copy of the Council’s rules and regulations, not just on the point above, but the two amendments she proposed to the Estimates included one that was actually illegal and another that was incomplete and frankly it was a wee bit embarassing. And curiously she introduced herself as speaking on behalf of the Labour Party. A connection she no doubt disavows this morning.

by Mike Roe Sopht Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:48

For gods sake!!!! Joan was elected as an anti-bin tax candidate an we haven't even got a list of who voted for the charges as she hasn't organised herself properly. This is rank amateurism.

I am very frustrated.

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:06

So Joan an indy councillor for a few months - isn't up to date with the minutiae of skullduggery. (Perhaps she could have asked legal eagle Oisin Quinn for advice).

A question for Indy Council Corr, as you are so quick to have a pop at her and seem to know all that happened last night, perhaps you can enlighten us.
15 voted against - 10 Sinn Fein, 3 independents and 2 A.N. Others.
Most seem to be pointing to Eric Byrne so that only leaves one other. Enlighten us - know all. Who was it?

Whatever way you do the sums it means in Finglas that either Tormey and/or Murphy are liars and voted for it. It also means that more than likely Ferguson, Costello and Bourke are liars too and voted for it. So which is it?

by A Yes Voter Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:12

Well done to those Councillors who voted Yes - what a pathetic charade from the anti campaigners.

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:35

Joan Collins on Morning Ireland this morning.

by hard neck Tue Nov 30, 2004 13:36

yiz have some neck slaggin Joan and her stuck on the council with no support from the other councillors. How come the shinners didn't call for a roll call?

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 14:05

Well know-it-all.
How about answering that question?
10 SF, 3 Indy's, Eric Byrne and who else.

You claim to know it all. So go ahead name and shame!!

by Indy Council Corr Tue Nov 30, 2004 16:08

Ahh, Joan's overly sensitive supporters swing into action.

As I said in my first post explaining why there was no roll call I have a lot of time for Joan as an activist and was, and am, genuinely delighted to see her elected.

I also pointed out that Joan did want a roll-call, even if she didn't know how to call for one, and that the Shinners didn't stand even though they knew how to call for a roll-call.

As to why the Shinners didn't call for a roll-call themselves, I have no idea. Sinn Fein people have commented on Bin Charges threads so ask them. I for one would be very interested.

In short I gave an accurate report of what took place last night. Saying Joan doesn't know the Standing Orders of the Council is not having a pop at her. It's a fact. She doesn't and she should.

Saying that the rules and the regulations of the Council amount to the minuate of skullduggery is nonsense. All Councillors have a copy of Standing Orders and it's not a particularly complex document. Joan has been in the Council Chamber to see roll call votes called before.

Saying her two amendment motions on the Estimates consisted of one that was illegal and one that was incomplete is also not having a pop at her. The motion was illegal and the other was incomplete. If Joan can't phrase a motion and I report it, the fault for Joan not being able to phrase a motion is not mine.

As for knowing it all, I never made any such claim, and I don't know who the FG voter was who voted against. Tormey, Byrne, Martin and Fitzgerald were all sitting together at the back. A hand went up from there but from my point of view it was difficult to see who it was. All four spoke during the meeting and expressed varying degrees of criticism but none of them specifically stated they would be voting against, nor said they would be voting for.

Byrne, Cosgrave and Martin both raised the issue of hardship cases and Byrne and Martin said that Chairs of SPCs should either vote for the Charges or resign but they gave no indication in what they said as to whether they'd vote for or against.

Tormey was much more conciliatory than he had been in the media and went so far as to say that information had come to light since he arrived last night that he hadn't had before. But again, didn't say anything as to how he'd vote.

As for Mary Murphy, she definetly didn't vote for it but I have no idea whether she voted against or abstained. John Gallagher and Emer Costello also didn't vote in favour but again, no idea if they abstained or voted against. Humphries, Lacey, Freehill and Quinn backed the Charges.

In FG, Creighton, Donohoe, Flangan, Gillen, Breen, O Muiri all backed the Charges.

The PD and the Green backed it.

In FF Maurice Ahern, Brabazon, Donnolly all backed it.

When 52 people vote for, against or don't raise their hands in less than two minutes it's difficult to get everyone's name down. A roll-call vote would have made everything much clearer.

I'm not here to have a pop at anyone or to push any party line. I'm here to give an honest account of what took place last night. If you don't like the fact that Joan Collins didn't know how to do her job the person to be annoyed with is not the messenger.

by tucker Tue Nov 30, 2004 17:11

Did one of the FG group of Tormey, Byrne, Martin and Fitzgerald definitely vote against the estimates? If so, that means that only one Labour voted against.
Out of interest, this is not Joan Collins job, she already works full time. She is good enough to do another almost full time job voluntarily.

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 17:19

... if the maths are right.

There are 52 councillors.
32 voted for the huge increase.
15 voted against (10 SF, 3 Indy's, 1 Lab - Byrne?, 1FG - Tormey?)
That comes to 47 votes
The Lord Mayor doesn't vote unless it is a tie.
(Conaghan didn't get to be this years Lacey)

So 4 councillors abstained. Any ideas folks. Or is this going to be a I was in the GPO in 1916 moment?

by aaaa Tue Nov 30, 2004 17:20

Joan like all the other councillors gets paid more than €20,000 to do this job, i would have imagined that would be enough for her to organise her one night a year reason for being in the council a lot better.

This is a joke, we get a genuine anti-bin taxer in the council and we have less information on who backed the charges than previous years!!!

Collins should have done her prepatory work properly.

by someone in the know - none Tue Nov 30, 2004 17:30

the vote on the council was another case of amnesia politics. The parties are working on the basis that we will have forgotten the decision when the next election comes around.
Sinn Fein have 4 very experienced councillors well versed in when and how to call a roll call vote.
It suited them not to do so. they can parade as the only major party to vote en bloc against the charges. By not doing a name and shame they did not dirty their bib with their prospective coalition partners.
Because no roll call vote was taken Councillors from all the parties can claim to have abstained- safe in the knowledge that no record will exist. This is what still passes for politics.
For people to criticise Joan Collins is neither here nor there.You can be sure that the council leaders of all the paties knew exactly who was going to do what.

by Tucker Tue Nov 30, 2004 17:42

Concentrate on the important issue, how did the Labour councillors vote?
According to Indy Council Corr, Joan Collins couldn't have called a roll call without the support of 4 other councillors and that wasn't going to happen. Red herring issue for some ex-comrades???

by A YES Voting Leftie Tue Nov 30, 2004 18:25

Most of the comments about who voted for, against or abstained are wrong. Oh the joys of seeing you lot making a bags of it agin is a pleasure. watching the splits and counter splits is great fun. Joan could not get her act together, Sf would not support her , and the two ther Independents like those previously on the Council depended on others to protect their seats. The issue is over lads go one campaign for something decent and relevant

by ABTA Tue Nov 30, 2004 18:35

Nothing Leftie about you at all. Your Botanic Gardens Socialism doesn't wash here.

"Most of the comments about who voted for, against or abstained are wrong."

Enlighten us know it all.

by If only we could.. Tue Nov 30, 2004 18:36

Once again Irelands shittiest centre-right party have disgraced their name and sided with the privatizers. The deliberate confusion sown to cowardly cover their tracks cannot obscure the fact that it was "Labour" who could have stopped this rip-off but are dedicated to proving themselves FGs best cabin-boy.

by SP Tue Nov 30, 2004 20:07

to those who fought the fight (good on you Joan), now on to round two.

by Stephen Lewis - Irish Socialist Network (Personal Capacity Tue Nov 30, 2004 20:37

Below is a comment made by the President of SIPTU in October of 2003 at the time the jailing of anti bin tax protesters began:

SIPTU General President, Jack O’Connor, said “The bin tax is unjustifiable on the grounds of equity – not only because the levy varies from one local authority area to another and it disregards the principle of ability to pay but also because these charges are being imposed to make up for cuts in Government grants to local authorities while the same Government gives massive tax breaks and allowances to the wealthy”.

“As the recent report of the Comptroller and Auditor General makes clear, the country’s richest 400 people received over €70 million in tax breaks last year. At the same time our distorted planning laws have allowed a tiny handful of land speculators to make obscene levels of profit at the expense of house-buyers who must pay grossly inflated prices as a result,” he continued.

He went on to say “The bin tax is also unjustifiable on grounds of public health. Access to proper drinking water, sanitation and refuse collection services is a human right. These are essential public services that should be paid for out of general taxation,” he added.

At the recent Dublin Regional Conference of SIPTU delegates again reaffirmed their total opposition to the bin tax in whatever form it is presented as.To put it simply it is a stealth tax that the Labour Party is so fond of highlighting when it comes to highlighting the record of this current government's record in office.

How can SIPTU continue to support a party that claims to represent the working class ie the Labour Party? This party voted to introduce a stealth tax on the citizens of this city last night on Dublin City Council .This should be a major concern to all SIPTU members.

This tax has seen a three fold increase in the last three years.

It is time SIPTU reviewed its relationship and ties with a party that is clearly disregarding policies of SIPTU, which supports the Labour Party through its political funds.

I ,as a member of SIPTU, will be actively encouraging ,where possible, for the immediate end to the finiancial support which SIPTU gives to a party that clearly acts against the interests of SIPTU members.

by A Yes Voting Leftie Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:30

Oh my I have just found how you can send messages to this site having been reading it for years. Thanks so much to all of you from the SWM, SWP, SF, ISN, SP and all the other irrelevant little "isms" for giving me so much enjoyment over that time. Thankfully the chances of most of you having any real influence - with the exception of SF- who probably do and will have some - the real left can get on with the real task of representing working class people on the issues that matter and not just those forged in the idealogical heads of zealots who wouldove to keep working class people in the place that others choose is their rightful place. Roll on Social Democracy.

by Ray Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:34

It took you this long to find the Add your comments link? Or the big Publish link? I can see we're all in for some scintillating posts...

by ..... Wed Dec 01, 2004 15:17

We know of 14 that defintely voted against (10 SF, 3 Indies and Eric Byrne). But over the past 24 hours the following councillors have claimed they also voted against;

Bill Tormley - FG
Emer Costello - Lab
Tom Brabazon - FF
John Gallagher - Lab


Now we know it was only one of these four. can anyone clarify?

by ABTA Wed Dec 01, 2004 15:21

So the real story is....
by ABTA Tuesday, Nov 30 2004, 4:19pm
Or is this going to be a I was in the GPO in 1916 moment?

by pat c Wed Dec 01, 2004 15:39

At the Crossbarry battle, Barry had a total of 104 volunteers. Later in pension applications more than 3,000 claimed to have been present!

by SIPTU member Wed Dec 01, 2004 15:53

I've talked to many people about this, it looks like some SF councillors may have voted for the estimates or abstained. This would explain why they did not call a roll-call vote.

I think Stephen from the ISN raised a very important issue about the Labour Party. The Labour Party now support the bin tax, the unions are opposed as are the vast majority of working class people. this raises the question why the Labour Party continues to recieve financial support and the affiliation of the trade unions. If Labour go into government, the bin tax will just be the tip of the iceberg. If in government Labour will implement the dictates of big business and will support privatisation, cutbacks and even support for imperialist adventures. This is what happened across Europe when parties liek labour came to power, look at Blair and Schroeder. Activists in the unions need to start breaking the link with the Labour Party, pass motions to stop funding them and start setting up a new genuine working class party.

by Troll Watch Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:04

"I've talked to many people about this, it looks like some SF councillors may have voted for the estimates or abstained. This would explain why they did not call a roll-call vote."

You've talked to no one about this other than other SWP members. You are an SWP Troll who is trying to stir up shite and divide the campaign. Go away and get new orders from Bríd and dont forget to wear your Hijab.

by SIPTU member Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:10

I think you're the troll. I am not a member of the SWP, I would never join such an undemocratic and oppurtunistic organisation. I was talking to people who were in the council chamber and were at the demo and they have a suspicion that not all SF members voted against the estimates. This would explain why 4 councillors are claiming to be the '15th no voter' and why SF did not call a roll call vote. It may not be true but SF on Dublin City Council have manoevered with the other parties in the past and they have in other cities voted for the bin tax.

by Justin Moran - SF (Personal Capacity) Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:13

1. All ten SF councillors voted against the Charges.

2. Joan Collins requested a roll-call on a motion to amend the Estimates that slightly increased rates and put money into flood relief. She did not get fiive councillors to back her adn frankly I'm not sure why she wanted a roll-call on it.

3. When the opportunity for a roll-call vote to be called arose, Joan Collins did not request one. You can ask her why she did so.

4. Further details in tomorrow's An Phoblacht available at all good newsstands.

by SF watch Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:15

Justin, why did SF not call a roll call vote? SF have more then 5 councillors and could have done it.

It's looking more and more like that some SFers didn't vote against the bin tax.

by observer Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:17

I'd say Joan misses this level of political debate !

by Adams Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:18

"4. Further details in tomorrow's An Phoblacht available at all good newsstands."

Justin can you not look at the evidence yourself and make a decision yourself witout waiting for Gerry to tell you what happened in City Hall?

by Ray Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:19

...then who did?
There were 15 votes against. 3 of those were the independents, which are presumably not being questioned. That leaves 12. The report above seems clear that only 1 FG councillor voted against the estimates. For every SF councillor that didn't vote against the charges, you have to find another councillor, presumably from Labour, that did. Who?

by Trotwatch Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:21

"It's looking more and more like that some SFers didn't vote against the bin tax."

This isnt believed even by the trolls who are posting on this thread. The only people who might believe it are naive newly recruitred Trots.

by A Gobsmacked Liam Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:22

"She did not get fiive councillors to back her adn frankly I'm not sure why she wanted a roll-call on it."

Jaysus and there was me thinking SF knew a bit about basic politics.
How wrong can you be.

by observer Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:25

You would imagine that they would be better employed this gloomy afternoon pondering the reason why they have no fucking seats in DCC rather than spreading infantile lies as they did in the election campaign against SF and Collins.

It is typical of them that they are now making a big issue over the roll call which is absolutely and totally irrelevant in all of this other than to provide another flimsy basis for their posion.

by Trotwatch Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:28

Observor, SWP trolls are definitly hard at work here as well.

by Paul McGee Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:35

I think SF trolls are at work trying to point the finger at SP/SWP trolls in an attempt to deflect attention from SF.

The question as to how there are 19 councillors claiming to to be the 15 that voted against the estimates need to be answered. It could well be a possibility that one or two SFers voted for the estimates or may have abstained. It is also a possibility that Tormey and the Labour cllrs are lying. I would say the latter is more likely but this does not mean we can't look into the possibility of one or two Sfers not voting against. Even the most loyal SFers have to ask why they did not call for a roll call.

by McGeeWatch Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:41

If anyone has evidence then produce it. Why have none of the Bourgeois media suggested this? The Indo had reporters in there, so had the IT, Star etc. Wouldnt they be putting this on the front page if SF had abstained? Who are the SF councillors who abstained? I reckon this is just bile dreamed up by Trot Trolls who dont care if they split the campaign.

by Tucker Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:46

The reason a roll call was so important was to see who actually voted against the estimates. Because there was no roll call at least 4 councillors are claiming to be the final vote against. SF have no reason not to vote against and either have the Independents. So that leaves 2 others. We know Eric Byrne voted against but what about Tormley, Costello and Gallagher?
Of course, this still doesn't answer why SF didn't call for a roll call on the estimates vote.

by observer Wed Dec 01, 2004 16:49

There are as far as I know only two people who have posted here who were at the meeting. Both have said that all the SF members voted against the estimates. The freaks claiming that some did not are basing this on " their friend met someone's granny on the way home from bingo who was sitting beside a woman whose cousin told her ..." school of jurisprudence.

All young trots willl be familiar with Saint Leon's "The Stalin School of Falsification" ( as if!!!). Now we have "The Diaper Trotskyist School of Falsification".

by Joe Wed Dec 01, 2004 17:01

With most investigations you'd need to start off with showing a motive and I can't see what the SF motive would be for abstaining or voting for the charges in these circumstances. SF tend to bea pretty disciplined bunch so its hard to imagine it happening accidentally either. In particular after they go to the bother of getting a good turn out to the protest from party activists.

On the other hand Justin protests a little too much on the issue of the roll call vote. This would have revealed just who in Labour and FF had voted for the charges and as SF will be running against these same people in the next locals you'd wonder why they didn't go for a roll call independent of Joan or anyone else doing so. Of course the anonymous trot troll has effectively let them off the hook on this pretty minor question** with his pushing of a fairly senseless conspiracy theory/mud slinging campaign. As usual the trots their own worst enemy.

Overall the whole debate is a useful reminder that 'If voting changed anything they'd abolish it"*. You have to love the squeals of Labour supporters here along those lines. The party that refused to support non payment and the blockades because they were too radical but which then has to admit that voting for them on that issue was an exercise in futility anyway because they never intended to do anything. This could have been scripted almost word for word two years back.

I'd have thought this result was a bit of a problem for those labour lefts who see the LP as a way of winning reforms. Not it appears in this case.

---

* This is actually Ken Livingstons version of the older '.. they'd make it illlegal' anarchist slogan which he used as the title to his history of the GLC.

by observer Wed Dec 01, 2004 17:12

From Olivia Kelly's report on Monday's meetin in Tuesday's Irish Times:

"The 10 Sinn Féin members opposed passing the budget, as did the Independent councillors Mick Rafferty, Joan Collins, and Vincent Jackson. Labour councillors Eric Byrne and Emer Costello also opposed it."

Of course she probably made it all up and will be tortured to death when the SP takes power and relives the glory that were the killing fields of Russia when the bloodthirsty scum Trotsky was practising his rich little boy's fantasy of War Communism.

by A Yes Voting Leftie Wed Dec 01, 2004 18:37

Surely you know there is a difference between saying you are against and voting against. The significanct point surely was when SF did not support the call for a Roll Call vote when it was called for - and I was there -. Could it be that SF did not want the Council to fall and played a small part in achieving that. It could and it probably is. Or could it be that most sensible people realise that the issue is of no relevance and is just used by Middle Class lets pretend "Lefties" as they meander through their Third Level Education at the expense of working class people who do not go.

by Trollwatch Wed Dec 01, 2004 19:59

"Are people calling Seamus Healy a liar? "

Yes. Healy wasnt present in the Council Chamber when the vote took place. He didnt even bother to turn up at the demo in solidarity.

by Anxious Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:01

How would Shay Healy know. He is no better informed than any of the Trolls here.

by Sf watch Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:03

I take the word of Seamus Healy who has a fine record of fighting for the working class of clonmel and tipperary over the bleatings of some anonomous SF party hack on indymedia. Healy is an honest man he would not have publically said that SF conived in doubling bin tax if he did not have some evidence of it happening.

by ....... Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:23

This is pretty desperate stuff on here, really quite despressing. Joan Collins fucked up and got her call on the roll call messed up, she was elected on a single issue and messed it up. She get paid €22,000 a year and this was her one night a year to get it right. She did not prepare and fucked it up. yet another part-time councillor overworked and stretched and the result is less info this year on who voted for the charges than previous years. pure amateurism.

by ABTA Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:21

Not sure why my contribution yesterday was pulled but here goes again.

"Or could it be that most sensible people realise that the issue is of no relevance and is just used by Middle Class lets pretend "Lefties" as they meander through their Third Level Education at the expense of working class people who do not go."

Are you calling the thousands of people in working class areas like Finglas, Cabra, the Inner City, Crumlin, the Liberties, Crumlin, Ballyfermot, etc, etc, where the campaigns are really strong and who haven't paid the charges insensible or do you believe that they have been hynotised by "Middle Class lets pretend "Lefties" as they meander through their Third Level Education at the expense of working class people who do not go."
If you do you really are a (insert your own expletive).*
*Due to being unclear what words not to use and in fear of being censored.

by Justin Moran - SF (Personal Capacity) Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:10

I am curious first of all why so few of the people commenting on this were there on the night in question. The public gallery was less than half full and councilors are generally happy to sign people in. I know for a fact that Brid Smith was offered a pass to the gallery by a SF councillor and turned it down because the conversation took place in front of me.

Why did most of you not even try to attend? Or why was there no reporters from the Voice, or Socialist Worker?

As for Yes Voting Leftie (Dermot Lacey btw for the curious) and his comments on working class people, Dermot's awareness of the working class is limited to pockets in Pembroke and what he reads in the Irish Times.

In that regard according to a Combat Poverty Agency report published in November 2003 “Waste collection charges, based purely on the polluter pays principle are inevitably regressive and impose a greater burden on low-income households, especially those with children and other dependents.”

Between 1997 and 2003 waste collection charges grew by 223% over six years (State wide). Far in excess of the rate of inflation.

For instance, those in low-income
households may have little left over ollowing ‘back to school’ shopping and therefore are unable to purchase a bag or tag.

The Money Advice and Budgeting Service (MABS) has recently identified refuse collection charges as a primary concern for its clients.

by someone in the know - none Thu Dec 02, 2004 14:30

The standard of some contributions to this has been both juvenile and asinine. with the various left groups trying to score petty points off each other. Grow up and start talking to people outside of your own cabals.
The bottom line is that the parties have again gone against the wishes of a large section of their voters. The "who voted what way" debate could go on forever.
The fact is that had they wished to then Sinn Fein had the numbers to call a roll call vote.
By doing so they would have flushed out councillors in both Labour and Fine Gael who have been verbalisers on the issue.
By not doing so they have left a lot of Councillors off the hook.
Sinn Fein are not stupid.It suited them to have the estimates passed.
It is working class people who will have to pay this tax..We have been let down again by cute hoorism by all of the parties.
We can now expect that we will be facing into water charges and more indirect charges in the next few years.

PS. People are now going to use the green bin for all waste to save money .

by SF watch Thu Dec 02, 2004 14:49

In the official Dáil record Seamus Healy's contribution is reported as follows:

"To cap it all, tax concessions to PAYE workers are now being clawed back through stealth taxes of all kinds, such as bin charges, utility charges and the failure to index income tax bands. It calls to mind the decision made this week by Dublin City Council, supported by all the political parties, to introduce and connive at the introduction of a €340 bin tax, almost double the current figure. "

However, as is often the case with the Dail record, this is not entirely accurate. I was watching the Budget debate live on RTE2 and Seamus Healy clearly named all the parties that he was refering to which included Sinn Féin. Anyone else who saw the budget debate will be able to confirm this.

by observer Thu Dec 02, 2004 14:55

Healy did NOT refer to Sinn Féin by name. The Dáil record is the verbatim report of what was said as recorded at the time. You really are a piece of work !!

By the way, I also note that you completely ignore the facts which are that the only people on this thread who were at the meeting state that all the 10 SF cllrs voted against, as does the Times report.

by Still a yes voting leftie Thu Dec 02, 2004 15:25

Ah shucks I am outed - now all those trendy lefties will know that I support Local Government Service Charges - what a revelation. The electorate knew my position and thankfully supported me.

As for not being working class I am and am proud to be - though I am not the whingeing type so represented by many on this site. I grew up in a Corpo house, still live in a Corpo built house in a Corporation etstate. I have been active throughout Dublin South East on a range of Housing, Hospital and Drugs issues as well as a huge amount of other local and social issues. Represented the South East Inner City for six years on the Council and continue to support a variety of causes in that ward. Of course unlike a lot of those trendy middle class lefties I did not get to go to University so have'nt developed a taste for Idealogical thought control. I was unemployed for three years in the 80's and experienced most of the usual difficulties faced by working people. Of course that is not enough for the trendies - So tough. I will leave judgement to the people I represent and the values of Social Democracy that I stand for.

by ....... Thu Dec 02, 2004 16:32

This is geting funnier. It appears that the three independenst may have inadvertenly voted for the estimates. They believed that they were voting for an amendment that was to review the implementation of the system when they were actually voting for the estimates. Hilarious!!!!

by ABTA Thu Dec 02, 2004 17:06

Are you calling the thousands of people in working class areas like Finglas, Cabra, the Inner City, Crumlin, the Liberties, Crumlin, Ballyfermot, etc, etc, where the campaigns are really strong and who haven't paid the charges insensible?

by Mistigo Thu Dec 02, 2004 17:31

Ah ha, about time this ridiculous accusation was thrown in to further muddy the waters. Anti bin tax campaigners vote for bin tax!!!
Only 2 important questions - who was the 2nd Labour councillor who voted against and why didn't SF call for a roll call?

by ...... Thu Dec 02, 2004 17:56

Well considering the incompent performance on the night by Collins, it really wouldn't surprise me to learn she backed the charges by mistake. The numbers actually stack up if the three indys backed the wrong side.

by Jonah Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:30

I'm curious Dermot whether you think everyone opposed to the Bin Charges are middle-class college lefties, or perhaps they're working class people 'conned' by those disreputable middle class types.

While the SWP and the SP as parties certainly might fit the description, I think it is a bit much to say that people opposed to double taxation are by definition, 'trendies'.

I also find the reports that you blamed the Campaign Against the Bin Tax for the Government's decision to remove powers to vote on the Charges from the Council very telling. Blame not the Government, but those people who sought to exert political pressure in a manner other than electoralism.

I also don't think it's ideological thought control for people to disagree with your politics, your voting record, or with social democracy. Just as you have a commitment to social democracy (About as vague an ideology as possible) others have commitments to socialism, republicanism, anarchism and so on and I dare to suggest might have given the issues a lot more thought than you in many cases.

by Andre Nin Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:08

Fair dues to Dermot for openly stating his views in a forthright manner. Neither have I a problem with him pointing out his mandate and his own working class background, though these kind of 'Im more working class then you' pissing competitions are agenerally a very immature substitute for real debate.

Where the problem does arise is his portrayal of the ABTC as consisting of, or at least being led by 'middle class student lefties'. Now this is either monumental ignorance or just plain old lying on Dermots part. I suspect he knows darn well that the campaigns strongholds, where thousands of people are involved, are: Cabra, Crumlin, Finglas etc. hardly what one might call 'middle class' areas. If he does not believe me ask Eric Byrne why he voted against the Estimates: becuse he faces a mass campaign which can mobilise hundreds at the drop of a hat. As to who's leading the campaigns in these strongholds: he might not like them but the 'lefties' involved in these areas are by and large local working class activists. Lefties of varying hues they may be but you can hardly call Joan Collins, Dessies Ellis, Brid Smith, Ciaran Perry, Joe Mooney, John O Neill etc middle class.

What Dermot may be touching on is the unfortunate habit of the SWP (alone of all the left groups) to sometimes import middle class or student activists into campaigns. He should also know that they have failed miserably to do this in the ABTC and were laughed out of it when they tried. While he was being so observant inside the chamber on Monday, his knowledge of the protest outside is questionable: Out of around 300 people there: I saw only two SWPers that fit his description. I exclude the campaign Brid Smith has built in Ballyfermot which is a genuine one based on mass support.

One final point: so what if Joan does'nt know all the proceedures after a four months on the council, she damn well shows up her critics when it comes to organising on the ground. But theres the core of the difference between Dermots social democracy and Joans socialism: Politics as an exercise in playing the game in the corridors of city hall versus politics as the involvement of the mass of working people in activities that advance their own interests.

Do I also detect a bit of 'working class woman getting above her station' snobbery in some of the other posts criticising Joan for her actions in what was obviously a deliberately fostered confusion on Monday night?

by gypsy Fri Dec 03, 2004 14:44

Flashback to Dec 2003 - How come Dermot wasn't so responsible last year?

Dublin City Council accept budget by 1 vote

Dublin City Council last night voted to accept its budget for 2004 by a margin of just one vote.

Some 25 councillors voted to accept the Council's estimates for the year ahead and 24 councillors voted against. The vote came at the end of a heated three-hour meeting at city hall where Fine Gael, Labour, the Green Party, Sinn Féin and Independents expressed reservations about the amount of funding which they had been given.

Labour councillor Mr Kevin Humphreys condemned the budget and said the proposal to increase bin charges by 23 per cent from January was totally unacceptable. The Green Party warned it would vote against the budget unless serious deficiencies in the city's waste management service were addressed.

After the meeting was briefly adjourned, however, the Green Party agreed to vote, along with Fianna Fáil, for the budget. It includes a package of new waste charges, with charges for a 240-litre bin increasing to €195 and for a 140 litre bin to €110 a year.

by Still a yes voting leftie Fri Dec 03, 2004 19:12

1)
I have answered the question before about why I voted differently last year. it was as straigtforward protest at the law change, in many ways caused by activities of many who are opposed to local taxation, by the minsiter for the Environment who transferred the power to the Manager.

2) There are of course very many wonderful working class campaigners for Social Justice and Social Democracy there are also far too many trendy opportunists trying to use real problems to advance obscure political creeds that in my view advance the cause of working people not one whit.

by trendy person with a computer Fri Dec 03, 2004 19:30

Why are you calling people trendy? Is it because they use the internet to communicate? And yes you are left - a little left of hard right. It's getting very crowded on the 'left' of hard right these days isn't it. I predict labour go down the tubes in Dublin in the next election.

by Forever a Positive Leftie Sat Dec 04, 2004 15:09

Have been reading some of my comments and other contributions again and accept that I have been unusually personal and some might say abusive in my comments. That has never ben my style and I regret that I diverged on this occasion.

As readers will probably appreciate the contentious issue of Waste Charges and Local Government financing has played a dominant role in my political discourse over the last few years. Because of that I perhaps have been less inclined to be tolerant of other viewpoints than would normally be my position.

So to those of you who I have inadvertently offended I apologise. I profoundly disagree with you and passionately believe that the interests of working people are best served by a reformed, restructured and remapped system of Local Government that has the power and the will to raise finance independent of Central Government and deliver services independent of central Government.

I believe that the actions I took as Lord Mayor and always as a Councillor have been based on the central committment. many of you I know disagree with me on the Waste Charges but perhaps there is an Alliance to be built on Local Government reform.

by Still a Yes Voting Leftie Mon Dec 06, 2004 16:07

Thanks for those parts of your comments that I agree with and I have no wish to get involved in others. Looking forward to supporting the democratically elected Leader of the Party in Tralee as I always have done. I also look forward to real delivery of Local Government reform by a Labour Party committed to seeking and exercising power.That is the Left I believe in. Theory i leave, quite happily, to others.

by Curious from Coolock Mon Dec 06, 2004 18:54

Is it certain that the only FG nay sayer was Tormey?

I read in the Phoenix this week that Corgrave and Bryne voted no too. Also, Flanagan was all over The Northside People voicing his opposition before the vote.

by Emer Costello Tue Feb 15, 2005 01:18

I just want to put on the record here that I voted against the Estimates.

Unlike a number of other Councillors who claimed to be confused about the vote, I can assure readers I was very clear about how I was voting and what I was voting on.

I voted against the Fianna Fail Amendment as it proposed to adopt the Estimates as amended - that meant accepting the bin charges and I was not prepared to do that.

Eric Byrne was sitting in front of me and he too voted against the charges. I understood Bill Tormey supported the charges in the end so I am surprised that you say that he voted against. I know that as both Eric and I voted against, Bill Tormey couldn't have as well.

I was sitting right beside the press gallery so Olivia Kelly, the Irish Times Journalist got it right in her account on 30 November.

by Finglas Flyer Tue Feb 15, 2005 10:09

So thats clear enough then: All the Labour councillors, bar two, voted FOR the estimates, ie in favour of the Bin Tax.

by observer Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:47

Interesting that Emer is responding to this two months after the vote was taken. I can only assume that this is due to "certain people" putting about that she voted in favour. The same people who were claiming that some of the SF councillors either abstained or voted against. As Emer says, Olivia Kelly's report in the Times of the following day contained an accurate breakdown of the vote: Ten SF, Collins, Rafferty, Jackson, Costello and Byrne voted against the Estimates.

by Me Tue Feb 15, 2005 13:11

It has been brought to my attention that leaflets are circulating in the constituency containing false information about how I voted at the recent Dublin City Budget Estimates meeting.

I had stated my position publicly before the Estimates meeting that I would not support any Estimate that contained the Environmental Waste Charge or “Bin Tax”. I wish to confirm that I honoured that commitment and I voted against the City Manager’s Estimates for Dublin City Council which included the waste management charge. This was reported in the Irish Times on Tuesday, 30 November. I was sitting next to the press gallery at the meeting. It was clear to the members of the press who voted for and against the Estimates.

Residents of the North Inner City have experienced a number of problems since the new system has been introduced in January.
Problems I have identified to date have been:

·Delays/non-arrival of tags to people entitled to a waiver
·Continued confusion about who is entitled to a waiver
·Lack of information regarding the outlets selling the tags for black bags
·The insistence of Dublin City Council to compel residents to use bins in areas that are totally unsuitable for the wheelie bins
·The sale of tags in envelopes of three rather than individually meaning that each purchase of tags costs €7.50 rather than €2.50.
·Illegal dumping of bags in residential areas
·The theft of tags from bags leading to litter fines for those who did actually purchase a tag

I have been particularly critical at City Council, Area Committee and the Environment and Engineering Strategic Policy Committee of the current management of this new system. I am concerned that the current policy of non-collection will cause environmental health problems throughout the city and I will continue to lobby Dublin City Council for the collection of all rubbish on environmental health grounds.

I am also concerned that there may be an attempt to privatise the waste management service provided by Dublin City Council and will oppose any attempts to privatise waste collection.

I would also like to point out that Joe Costello TD, also consistently opposed the bin tax while he served on Dublin City Council and always voted against them.

I hope this clarifies my position on the waste charges.

Emer Costello

by Martika Tue Feb 15, 2005 13:45

It's been a month and a half since the implementation of non-collection in Dublin City and other than this report by Emer Costello there has been no update on the nature and strenght of the campaign.
Is it dead and buried? Have all the 'toy soldiers' ran away?

by Flanker Tue Feb 15, 2005 13:52

Public meeting of Stoneybatter ABTC tonight in Prussia St. Community Centre, all welcome, even Dermo "proud to be pro Bin-Tax" Lacey.

by Martika Wed Feb 16, 2005 14:04

How did the meeting go?
Many revolutionaries at it, saying how they won the water war?

Step by step
Heart to heart
Left, right, left
We all fall down
Like toy soldiers
Bit by bit
Torn apart
We never win
But the battle wages on
For Toy soldiers

by Flanker Wed Feb 16, 2005 14:21

Why are you so interested then you sidelined non-entity?

Care to get up off your arse and do anything yerself pet hmmm? -Hate to burst any bubbles here but regurgitating infantile doggrel is of little material help.

by Emer Costello Mon Mar 07, 2005 18:28

I was contacted by Cllr Bill Tormey following my posting of 15 Feb. Cllr Tormey is adamant that he voted against the Estimates in November. He does not dispute that I also voted against the Estimates that night, but wanted the record put straight for him. An FG colleague of his on the City Council verified that he voted against the Estimates and I accept Cllr Tormey’s bone fides in this regard.