Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATS have proposed to invest €1.5 billion in public services as well as abolish water charges, cut local property tax and reduce USC.
The party’s three leaders, Stephen Donnelly, Róisín Shortall and Catherine Murphy, have launched their pre-budget submission this morning ahead of tomorrow’s main Budget 2016 announcement in the Dáil.
Proposals include the abolition of water charges, which the SocDems claim would cost only €13 million, and to halt the installation of water meters.
Donnelly explained that abolishing charges would cost €136 million.
But he said that by scrapping the water conservation grant, the administration of it and not having the “significant cost of billing people” – which he estimated at €44 million – there would be an overall cost of €13 million.
What we’re saying is the cost of charging people for water more or less covers the cost of charging them for water.
However, Donnelly said these assumptions are “very, very conservative” and said it would “arguably save money” to abolish charges. The Wicklow TD said that Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin’s estimations of the cost of scrapping charges had not factored in the savings made from not billing people.
The party is proposing to retain Irish Water as an entity and have it continuing to upgrade water infrastructure. It would be paid for through via general taxation, but Donnelly did not rule out charges being introduced in the future, saying:
We’re very open to a conversation with the Irish people that says: ‘Look you’re currently paying for it through central taxation, it could be paid for through a charge in the future.’ But what we will absolutely not to do is charge people twice.
Murphy said that charging was something “hypothetical, off into the future”.
Elsewhere, the party wants to reduce local property tax for mortgage holders by considering the amount of stamp duty paid and the net value of the property.
A tax on junk food would raise €225 million, the party claims. This would involve a higher VAT rate on foods which are high in sugar content and saturated fats.
The junk food tax also includes a 20 cent levy on a packet of cigarettes, an additional 10 cent on beer, cider and spirits and a ban on below cost-selling of alcohol.
There is also proposal to reduce Universal Social Charge by 0.5%.
This would involve a half a per cent cut to each of the 1.5%, 3.5% and 7% rates and would be targeted at those earning under €70,000.
Under this measure, somebody earning €35,000 would benefit by €175 annually while someone on €70,000 would be €525 better off.
Shortall said that people’s overall cost of living would be reduced by investing in services.
“It’s not just about putting an extra fiver in people’s pockets while at the same time they have to pay for all their services. What we’re talking about is investing in services so that the cost of living is reduced.
The party’s childcare proposals include the introduction of a second free pre-school year, extending paid parental leave to 36 weeks (and 52 weeks by 2018), introduce two weeks of paid paternity leave, and the roll-out of a second free pre-school year from September next year.
The SocDems also want to recruit 3,000 more teachers at primary and secondary level, introduce 100MB broadband in all primary schools, and restore school guidance counsellors.
The party is also proposing to create 900 new positions for primary healthcare workers, allocate €75 million to fund the construction of new primary care centres and reduce the prescription charge from €2.50 to €2.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The biggest crime with Irish water is they spent €600 million installing water meters. This money should have been used to repair leaks in the system.
Second hand, reconditioned meters at that Bob, all of which will have to be replaced in in a few years. No prizes for guessing who has the contract for that.
The social democrats might eventually introduce charges? Did anybody else pick up on that?
Also more taxes on food that’s bad for you, cigarettes and beer seems like a reintroduction of the nanny state that we all hated under FF/PD/Greens!
Please tell me somebody else picked up on these points!
I think Stephen Donnelly’s rational behind water charges are perfectly acceptable. Cut the fat out of iw, upgrade the infrastructure , and approach the people with a charge. Now, enshrine the ownership of our water in the Constitution and he has my vote
Yes and I also picked up on the phone fact that they will not charge for water TWICE. My reading of that is in the event if implementing a specific water charge there will be tax reductions elsewhere. And food, beer and cigarettes are likely to be hit in future regardless of who is in government. So…… why not bury the old party system that collectively have ruined this country and just once. … vote for REAL change.
YEAH… SPEND THE MONEY FIXING WATER LEAKS!
Good thing some sort of device that measures and reports flow rate or loss of pressure isn’t required to find leaks in the water infrastructure in the first place…
agree; they can’t find the leaks until they meter the network
Lot less than that….the cost of a pen
Where did you get that they are using reconditioned second hand meters William?
TruebloodÉire – Another new Nazi aligned Twitter Account , from a familiar Fascist / Racist Grouping !
Just as soon as one is blocked – another one pops up – such a shame that Journal.ie doesn’t look out for them ?
@jane its common knowledge. People got suspicious because a number of them went on fire. Apparently the ones being installed are the meters the germans rejected because they were inaccurate. Close examination of some meters reveals shop soiled or second hand item Allegedly….:-)
That’s interesting Bren I hadn’t heard that.
Eddie Barrett, can you show any comments that said anything of hate toward any other race. There has been nothing but facts backed up by sources which are irrefutable. Yet you want censorship because someones presents facts that disagree with you – whose the tyrant now?
Shortall was streets ahead of FF and FG on Vincent Brown last week. While they were shouting each other down Shortall was a breathe of fresh air- calm, clear and concise and no spin
This is something I really don’t understand. Róisín Shortall supported the Traitor Party’s election campaign of lies in 2011, she also implemented the governments austerity policies for a year and a half. I am by no means a supporter of Lucinda Creighton but as far as I can tell there is not much difference between them in this regard, yet people support Shortall and are against Creighton.
Breath of fresh air? Once we get through with punitive taxation of food and drink we’ll look at a tax on breaths of fresh air.
Forward with the Nordic Model……but let’s not mention the taxes that will have to be levied somewhere to pay for it all.
We already pay mental taxes in Ireland, we just get nothing for it.
we already have Nordic levels of tax, we just don’t have the services to go along with it.
I dont eat junk foods as I have gone vegetarian recently.Too many hormones and antibiotics in animal protein.
As for Irish Water” if they add a referendum to ensure that we will never sell the right to provide water to a multi national entity-they have my number one.!
http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/book-reviews/book-review-the-dublin-doctor-who-is-beating-cancer-30796329.html
Wait for the backlash of spin and lies from the other hoodlums when they read a carefully thought out plan which trumps all the other shite we are going to be promised from now until election day.
A hundred odd people disagreed with me (not that I care about the thumbs system) not one of them could point out where I’m wrong? The Irish electorate have very short memories and this goes someway to explaining why some people still support Fianna Fail.
It’s a f*cking popularity contest, no wonder the country is f*cked.
Fair play to Lucinda for leaving FG – this was a generally positive move for both her and Róisín imo
Beyond that though, the similarities seem to end – Lucinda’s stated reasons for leaving was being anti-abortion, Róisín’s was being anti-corruption. Similarly, their post-party-exit stances and policies have been pretty much the opposite of each other.
Or what similarities were you referring to exactly?
This is only a guess, but I think people feel Shorthall was screwed over by her party just as much as we were. Whereas Creighton knew her partys position on abortion, but took their money to get herself elected and then jumped ship. Plus, people don’t want another right wing party with a Christian leaning. We have enough of those.
Shorthall agreed to the program for government when Labour went into the government with FG, water charges etc. Shorthall implemented and supported those policies of austerity right up until the time of the issue with O’Reilly which was a year and a half into the governments term. Shorthall had no problem with the direction Labour was going in up until the time, she’d even been on TV defending their record in government up to that point.
I don’t trust Shorthall, she has given me no reason to trust her since Labour went into government. I see no difference between her and the rest of the Labour party, traitors one and all.
Les maybe she thought she could make changes from within. I remember hearing her on the radio shortly after she left and she came across very well. I also think a year and half isn’t very long considering the snails pace things move at in the Dail.
“Les maybe she thought she could make changes from within”
Ha ha that is the poorest political excuse there is but thanks for the laugh :-)
Labour’s whole election campaign of 2011 was based on falsehoods, a campaign Shorthall was a part of. By agreeing to go into government with FG as a member of her party, she supported the water charges, which FG set out in their manifesto. Now as a member of the SD’s she against them? I stand by what I said, she can’t be trusted.
I’m not surprised you feel that way Les. It’s called compromise, I might not get everything I want right now but I’ll stick with it a while and see how it goes. When she saw that things were not going as she’d hoped and were in fact getting worse she left.
That’s why the left are so fractured. There is no ability or desire to compromise. It’s the ‘I want it my way or I’m not playing anymore’ attitude. Lacks maturity.
SD’S are looking good for me. Sure they are worth a shot and I do like they way Shorthall and Murphy asked a lot of pertinent questions of the Govt this time around. Sure they can’t be any worse than FG LAB
Sure FG are taking in 20,000 so what’s the difference.? FG also handed out over 80,000 citizenship during their tenure. I have o problem with any nationality so ling as they respect our values and contribute via working and paying taxes. We have enough free loaders of our own
ceannaire – you could say the same about SF or any main party. socdems are the only party worth a vote IMO.
They will only have a chance if a lot more than the usual 50% of the electorate get out and vote.!
Pity they aren’t running more candidates. I’d probably vote for them if they had a candidate in my constituency
Agreed. Would love to see them standing candidates in a few more constituencies – if there was one in Fingal, they’d certainly get my No. 1.
Sugar and junk food taxes will actually hit the poorest hardest as their diets are shocking.
Ironic that they are the ones with the time to cook seeming they don’t work
Extremely patronising to assume just because someone isn’t well off that they eat poorly
Promises promises promises. How about we as citizens after voting in a government have the power of removing that party if pledges are not met in a reasonable timeframe. That would cut out the populist bs promises.
Swiss Canton style.?
No hope.
Gavin, you do know there’s a difference between promises and pledges.
All i’ll say is that everything thats costing the current gov (ie: setting up IW, burtons 6 million IW grant administration cost) is about 10 or 20 times as much as what it should rightly cost. That probably goes as well for politicial expense claims and pensions. True money wasters!
That useless brute kelly said the other day that it would cost 1.5 billion to get rid of IW, and IWs initial set up cost estimate in Jan 2014 was 180 million. Now its costing 1.5 billion each year. If he was working for a private company, he’d be fired long ago. Why can’t we do the same with useless politicians like him.
The SD’s are not proposing to scrap IW, it says so in the article.
The £13m cost is only the cost of stopping the water charges.
The scrap IW and bring it back under the control of the councils, the cost would be a lot more.
This is indicative of the waste of money used to set the quango up in the first place.
I personally want IW abolished, dismantled, wiped out of existence, nothing less then that promise / guarantee gets my vote,
A new political party led by 3 of the best TDs in the Dail, whats not to like?
They’re running a good candidate in my constituency, and I’m happy to give them my 3rd preference.
False promises, tbh. All political parties say one thing and make a complete uturn when elected into power. I honestly don’t know who to vote for, and most parties are just in the running to get on the gravy train.
Speaking of gravy, what are the constraints on the definition of junk food. Are my shares in bisto ltd looking a bit risky?
The man has my vote!
Anyone but FG/LAB….
We on the left believe in bodily autonomy and the fundamental right to choose… except the right to choose what food and drink you consume, then some of your choices should be punished by the state.
Are you really comparing the criminalisation of abortion with the taxation of food and drink?
I’m talking about bodily autonomy and our right of choice, brother.
Yes, you can choose to drink, smoke and eat what you want. But as long as the state has to take care of your medical needs, they get to decide whether to discourage unhealthy behaviours…
Keep up the good work Libtard, I’m sure some people will start to come around to your satire eventually.
Property tax based on the net value of a house is a ridiculous idea.
You will have people in cottages paying more property tax than people living in McMansions if you adjust the value for mortgages.
On the other hand, levying a property tax on people in modest homes who, through no fault of their own, are in negative equity is also ridiculous.
replace property tax with a wealth tax which taxes in levels of income and expenditure along with assets and cost of living. its progressive and doesn’t get charged to anyone struggling in society.
In most countries property taxes are levied on the square footage.
This would not suit the ruling elite.
Even people who bought two bedroom apartments in Dublin have higher service charges built into their deeds than those who bought larger properties in the same complex.!
Property tax is a wealth tax.
Watcher, someone living in a big house in a desirable neighbourhood derives greater utility from that house than they would from a small cottage in the middle of nowhere thus it is reasonable that property tax be based on the gross value of the house, not the net value.
property tax is part of a wealth tax. also worth noting that a wealth tax can fail if implemented or structured wrong. fine Gaels property tax revenue goes on water meter installation not to mention those at the bottom are uncesessarily getting hit by it. those in negative equity also. We need a fair wealth tax not an unfair property tax.
There should be no property tax on the family home but if you have more than one property than that second property and any more should be taxed.
It’s actually very simple. If you have a ‘little cottage’ in Dublin 4, you own an asset worth hundreds of thousands of euro. The property tax exists to tax from actual assets. The suggestion to base the tax on square footage is as silly as basing it on the number of windows. The fairest measure would be to base the tax on site value – therefor valuable, underused land would be incentivised for more intensive development. This is better for society.
If you are a Dublin 4 cottage owner, and you are jealous of the McMansions in rurual Ireland, then I’ve got a suggestion. Why don’t you sell your hugely valuable cottage and buy a McMansion? In fact you could probably afford two of them.
Would love to endorse Soc dems but until they rule out a Fine Gael/Fianna Fail majority they could just as well end up as Labour.
Have to disagree. The party heads have, IMO, shown themselves to be smarter than the average politician and actually seem to have integrity. They’re like the unicorns of Leinster house.
We don’t deny they are smart however they must show principle that they will not support a fine gael and/or fianna fail led government? its surely critical if they want to implement their budget proposals
Why would they rule it out categorically? Surely any party with a mandate would go into government if the other party were willing to implement their proposals?
Fair enough to say “if FF/FG are unwilling to do this, this and this, then we won’t go into government with them”, but saying that you won’t categorically do it would be very silly and would lead to people not voting for them on the basis that they won’t get to implement their philosophy anyway.
In any case, that’s really more of a matter for the election campaign than for a pre-budget submission.
You think fine Gael will go along with increased taxes and public spending? I mean I get your point with labour and slightly possible fianna fail would agree but fine gael? I mean their ideology is small government and low taxes. Soc Dems is big gov and more taxes. It would be like renua not ruling out aaa-pbp “just incase”. Soc Dems have sinn fein, aaa-pbp and many independents all looking for more spending on services and a fairer taxation system. 60% haven’t felt the recovery and up to 70% claim they won’t vote fine gael. If anything soc dems are loosing votes by not ruling them out as people see fine gael as toxic
Fair point, and I would expect that, when we come to an election campaign, the SDs will come down hard on certain things as being “red lines” that will need to be included in any governmental agreements if they are to go into coalition. That can be read be you or me or anyone else as ruling out coalitions with different parties, but it’s a much more reasonable approach than ruling out parties in all circumstances.
Of course, if SDs say that – for example – abolition of IW is a red line, and FG say that retention of IW is a red line, then that will clearly rule out a coalition unless one of them goes back on their promises.
But the right way to go if you are a party with a particular social/economic philosophy is to make that philosophy the red line rather than ruling out one party or another.
I like that the Social Democrats want to transition to the Nordic model. The problem is all of the pandering in their party platform. Not only do Nordic states have metered water charges, they have some of the most expensive in Europe. They also have higher taxes on average workers.
You can’t have a Nordic utopia without paying for it. It’s so depressing. Why can’t we have a party with balls who are willing to actually implement the unpopular policies in order to get us the services we truly want?
What party has the cojones to rein in the power of the big public service unions.??
Only a dictatorship could even think about it.
That’s certainly a part of it. Nordic socialism works because everybody pitches in. The wages are much higher, but you don’t have insane top heavy government bodies like the HSE. The problem is that if we want to transition to a Nordic model, it’s going to be extremely painful for a few years and a lot of people don’t want that.
Well, Seán, the way I see it, we’re getting the pain now, and no sign of any transition to any thing other than more of the same…
You have not been listening to Brendan Howlin’s promises then.?
Some are already in place.
Even your two hours off every week to lodge a pay cheque which no longer exists, is still intact.!
True but the system at present only favours the very rich. Being on top level tax at 30k a year is bs. Government is just interested in thieving as much of the wages as they can.
There seems to be only spending on this report of the proposals, no revenue raising apart from a fat tax.
Surely that have revenue raising measures to pay for all these spending increases?
The state already raises plenty of revenue. SocDems position is that this revenue could be better managed and allocated according to policy driven initiatives rather than short term vote buying and vanity projects.
Do they propose to let people go in the public sector to make these savings?
I’m only asking because the article does not cover the SD’s revenue raising.
Ill look it over myself when I get home.
A tax on junk food and sugar. I thought this party was offering something new. Tax this tax that tax the other thing is just the same lazy response to any problem the establishment parties come up with. taxation is just a money making racket nothing else.
But they get to go “Boo to Irish Water and USC” and sure we all know junk food is bad for us, 50c on a Happy Meal won’t stop us buying it.
Well, yes, taxation is a money-making “racket”. What else would it be? It is how the government gets the money to pay for healthcare, welfare, security, infrastructure, emergency services, administration of the state and a hundred other things we all take for granted. What do you think taxation SHOULD be for?
Juggling around with populist promises. Rubbish!
costed promises are not populist they are costed. populist promises are things like “we will deliver a democratic revolution” or “it is unjust to tax a family home” or “it will end the scandal of patients on trollies”. All populist muck from Enda by the way
€13m. Would be money well spent.
Will they commit to a referendum on the 8th? I would like the women and girls of Ireland to have autonomy of their own bodies.
I have to say, I like the cut of their jib so far. They’ll have my thumbs-up.
How did they come up with that figure?
Cool. Get it done – NOW.
“Non-capital investment” is a contradiction in terms.
Martin j. The point is that they pretend its concern for peoples health and well-being BS its a revenue raising racket nothing else, stop lying. As pointed out previously 50 cent on a happy meal will not stop people buying them. Stop fn lying is my point. Call a spade a spade and a tax a tax not an attempt to assist you live longer.
Where exactly is the money for Irish Waters new headquarters coming from?
What a joke! No way will Irish water be stopped and anyone who thinks they will stop Irish water must be on some sort of hallucinating substance… These social democrats are nothing more than populists who only seek to spread lies to be in power..
The current government are realists..these clowns may aswell debate on comedy central cause its a laugh that the social democrats will change or do anything productive for Ireland.
@The Journal TD – what lies would those be?
don’t care how much it costs, get rid of it and fg labour, they betrayed this country.
Who would they go into coalition with?? No large enough to go it alone and and useful policies will be diluted
This kind of fantasy economics would be right at home in a Sinn Feinn pre-budget submission
I take it that you have read SF submission? After Pearse Doherty questioned End a in the banking enquiry I think it was quite clear who had the better understanding
Wow, two weeks of paternity leave? is that supposed to be socially progressive?
have your say