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.
—
ON FRIDAY, 18 February of this year, Dr David Duffy, the director of Property Industry Ireland sent a letter to Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Peter Burke.
Property Industry Ireland (PII) is an industry group that forms a part of Ibec – the employers’ lobby. Duffy was sending the minister their recently completed policy paper – ‘Proposals to reform the judicial review process in planning matters’.
This contained 15 recommendations for Government in relation to tackling the number of judicial reviews being taken over An Bord Pleanála (ABP) decisions.
Judicial reviews (JRs) are challenges taken to the High Court that question the legality of a public decision. The number of JRs taken in planning cases has shot up in recent years, with so-called fast-track planning laws being one of the main reasons due to being allowed to bypass local planning authorities and go straight to ABP for a decision.
“PII recognises the right to appeal planning decisions. However, the impact of judicial reviews on the supply of new homes is a critical issue that must be addressed,” Duffy said in his letter.
He welcomed the government’s plans to review JR laws, and said the high level of challenges was delaying the delivery of new homes, which added to the overall cost of building – “a cost that is usually borne by the first-time buyer”.
The letter and policy paper were also sent to John Shaw, assistant secretary general in the Department of the Taoiseach, and were released to Noteworthy under the Freedom of Information Act.
They are part of a wider construction industry-led push to change the laws around JRs, with the aim of making it more difficult for the legal challenges to be taken against planning decisions.
Over the past number of months, Noteworthy delved into the industry push for reform of the judicial review process as part of our project - THE CONSTRUCTION NETWORK - on lobbying by the construction industry. We can now reveal:
Back in July – as part of this investigation – we also wrote about how ‘deeply controversial’ last-minute planning law changes could lead to ‘years of litigation’. The full investigation can be read here.
—
Over 70,000 lobbying returns
We examined returns filed on the Register of Lobbying in order to get a picture of how often industry representatives are lobbying government officials, who they are lobbying, and what they are lobbying about.
Since 2015, under the Regulation of Lobbying Act, any person or organisation involved in lobbying has to register as a lobbyist with the Standards in Public Office Commission (Sipo) and file returns – which are publicly accessible – three times a year detailing their activities.
Lobbying is described by Sipo on its lobbying website as “an essential part of the democratic process” enabling “citizens and organisations to make their views on public policy and public services known to politicians and public servants”.
Since September 2015, over 70,800 lobbying returns have been filed by private companies, representative organisations, charities, civil society organisations and individuals across Irish society on a wide variety of subjects.
Ibec – which has a remit across various sectors of the economy – is by far the most frequent lobbyist in the country, with over 3,200 returns filed since 2015. This is followed by the Irish Farmers’ Association, with over 2,200 returns.
Construction industry analysis
For this investigation, Noteworthy focused on lobbying by the construction and property industries, as well as representative groups, public relations (PR) and consultancy firms working on behalf of construction or property companies.
We examined ‘Housing’ and ‘Development and Zoning’ lobbying records and focused solely on lobbying periods that fell within the timespan of the current government.
We also obtained – through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests – a number of documents, correspondence and minutes of meetings, particularly in relation to engagement on planning laws and Judicial Review.
The current government took office in June 2020, so we examined records from the periods ‘May to August 2020′ to ‘May to August 2022′.
In that time, a total of 984 returns were filed in relation to ‘Housing’, and 709 were filed in relation to ‘Development and Zoning’ – a total of almost 1,700 returns.
The most frequent lobbyists are large industry representative groups, housing or homelessness charities and public relations firms.
The Construction Industry Federation (CIF) – the industry representative group – filed the most returns over the past two years. Focus Ireland – the housing and homelessness charity – was next.
Lobbying by the construction industry was conducted by industry representatives, development companies, property investor firms and PR companies, with Q4PR and Pinnacle Public Affairs joining CIF and Ibec at the top of the list.
By far, the Designated Public Official (DPO) most frequently lobbied by these organisations is Housing Minister Darragh O’Brien, who has been lobbied 88 times, with his special adviser Kevin Dillon next highest – being lobbied 40 times.
Sinn Féin’s housing spokesperson Eoin Ó Broin was lobbied 38 times, with Minister of State at the Department of Housing Peter Burke lobbied 28 times and Maria Graham – assistant secretary of the Planning Division at the Department of Housing – lobbied 25 times.
Meetings between industry and councils
Lobbying by the construction industry takes many forms, including expressing industry views on upcoming laws or regulations as well as seeking to influence policy decisions.
But it can also involve engaging with officials at forums, roundtable discussions or just general updates on the sector. Housing provision is one of the principal issues facing the country so national and local government officials regularly seek industry views on the matter.
“The IHBA [Irish Home Builders Association] and the CIF are first and foremost a trade association for the industry,” said Conor O’Connell, director of the Irish Home Builders Association – a division of CIF – in relation to lobbying.
It is vital in any functioning democracy that the views of a wide range of stakeholders are understood at a political and regulatory level. We advocate on behalf of our members to a large range of bodies both public and private so that the business model and how the industry operates is fully understood.
For example, of the 88 returns filed by CIF over the past two years, 12 involve officials from Cork City and County Councils.
According to the minutes of nine meetings between CIF and the councils between 2021 and 2022 – released to Noteworthy via FOI – industry reps and council officials discussed issues including social and affordable housing, infrastructure developments, building costs, apartment viability and derelict sites.
This is just one of the many examples of the engagement between construction industry representatives and local authorities evident in the lobbying returns.
Fast-track housing a priority for lobbyists
Often, however, industry groups lobby for changes to laws and policies that they believe will benefit their members and say will also lead to lower costs and an increase in housing supply which would be of benefit to the consumer.
Both PII and CIF told Noteworthy that the construction and property industries are facing very serious challenges, which are impacting the supply of homes being built.
Speaking on RTÉ’s Prime Time last month, Conor O’Connell of CIF said that there would likely be a decline in the number of homes being built next year.
“The reports we’re getting at the moment from our members – homebuilders right around the country – is that there does seem as if there could be a decline in output,” O’Connell told Prime Time. “We are concerned about next year. There’s no doubt about it.”
Among many of the issues facing the industry, including the disruption from Brexit, Covid-19 and the war in Ukraine – which has reduced available labour and seen the cost of materials rise – CIF, PII and others also have issues with the delays in securing planning permission in Ireland.
Recently, the industry has expressed serious issue with the sharp rise in the number of judicial review cases being taken, and has lobbied strongly for the laws to be changed.
According to industry figures and planning consultants, JRs are delaying large infrastructure projects as well as blocking thousands of homes from being built.
A large number of JRs have to do with Strategic Housing Development (SHD) applications. SHD laws were introduced by the then-Fine Gael led government in 2017, with the aim of speeding up the planning process.
Under the legislation, large developments of over 100 units of accommodation, or over 200 units of student accommodation, could bypass local planning authorities and go straight to An Bord Pleanála (ABP) for a decision.
A 2019 academic study conducted by researchers from UCD and Queen’s University Belfast shows how the introduction of SHD laws were strongly lobbied for by industry figures.
The researchers – Mick Lennon and Richard Waldron – anonymously interviewed 39 different people involved in introducing the laws. The interviewees included high level members of property and real estate companies, developers, planners, planning consultants, civil servants and politicians.
The results of the research outlined the strategies employed by the industry and the intensive industry lobbying of the government to introduce the laws.
Speaking to the researchers, one member of Property Industry Ireland (PII) stated that Minister Simon Coveney contacted a colleague after hearing them speak about the fast-track planning system. He said:
And we met him four times over about six or seven weeks for, amazing actually, from eight o’clock at night until midnight. And he went through what his vision was for the Irish planning property system. And we gave him our recommendations and they took it lock, stock and barrel and stuck it into the new housing bill.
Rise in judicial reviews in recent years
As SHD developments bypassed the planning stage, the general public could not make submissions on the process before it reached An Bord Pleanála and could not appeal the final decision without going to the High Court seeking a judicial review (JR). As a result, more JRs were taken.
“By the time the public got to comment on it, all the decisions had been made and in fact, there was no mechanism for their contribution to be taken on board,” said Orla Hegarty, Assistant Professor at the School of Architecture, Planning and Environmental Policy at UCD.
“It was really just window dressing that people could comment on an SHD because it had all been designed and agreed with An Bord Pleanála at that stage, and there was no mechanism to change it.
“So clearly, excluding people from the process has escalated everything. And that’s why we’ve seen more judicial reviews.”
The figures back up this assessment. At the hearing before the Public Accounts Committee in July, then chairperson of An Bord Pleanála Dave Walsh was asked for the total number of successful JR cases taken against ABP decisions – where ABP lost or conceded.
In 2019, 55 JR cases were taken and 15 were lost or conceded by ABP. In 2020, 83 JR cases were taken and 32 were lost or conceded; in 2021, 95 cases were taken and 40 were lost or conceded.
These figures were included in a report on a review of the functions of ABP undertaken by the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR), published last month. In it, the OPR stated: “It is clear that the number of legal challenges which are successful has increased exponentially in the last three years.”
It also noted that a reason for the increasing number of cases being taken has to do with allegations of ABP not adhering to local area plans or guidelines, and allowing for developments that go against conditions set down in those plans.
The High Court also found in a number of cases that a proper Environmental Impact Assessment had not been carried out, and so quashed ABP’s decision on that basis.
Strategic Housing Developments overturned
The figures above relate to all JRs being taken. When it comes to JRs being specifically in relation to SHD planning permissions, the numbers are more stark.
The same OPR report stated that many of the legal challenges since 2020 related to SHDs – a total of 97 JRs up to the end of June this year.
According to Fred Logue’s latest calculations, JRs that have been decided in relation to SHDs have had a 93% success rate – where ABP lost or conceded.
The government has since declared an end to SHDs, replacing them with Large Residential Development (LRD) laws instead. These laws will see a return to the local authority being the primary decision maker, with a view to reducing the number of successful legal challenges to development.
SHD applications were supposed to end entirely by the end of 2021, however this was extended into this year, and applications were still being lodged up until July.
A spokesperson for the Department of Housing said that as a result of the new laws it was “envisaged that the number of LRD decisions subject to judicial review will be substantially less than those in respect of SHD decisions”.
Environmental challenges
JRs are also taken by environmental organisations and NGOs against proposed developments that they believe breach EU environmental laws and directives.
One high profile case involved the heritage and environment charity An Taisce challenging ABP’s decision to grant permission for a multi-million euro proposed Glanbia cheese factory in Kilkenny.
The High Court challenge failed, and An Taisce ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court, but had its appeal dismissed earlier this year.
For proponents of the use of JRs, the high level of successful cases, or cases in which ABP concedes, show that SHD laws or planning decisions were flawed to begin with.
“The first thought that struck me is that this judicial review frenzy is basically a feature of the SHD system, not a general feature of the planning system,” said Fred Logue, a solicitor, who regularly takes JR cases on behalf of clients.
“And that the explosion of JRs has occurred because of particular features of SHD,” he added.
‘Worrying trends’ – industry response
However, the industry does not see it that way, instead focusing on the fact that permission is being regularly quashed by the courts for large scale developments of hundreds of homes on “minor technical issues”.
“I would find it hard to accept the word ‘success’ as a description of the overturning of thousands of planning permissions for much needed homes by the courts in circumstances where the expert decision makers [planners] have granted permission for homes on lands zoned for homes,” said Conor O’Connell, director of the Irish Home Builders Association, a division of CIF.
O’Connell said that lands zoned for housing have already gone through a lengthy public process and voting by councillors.
“Obviously legal challenges have arisen and the need for reform of the legislation and legal process is needed,” he said.
CIF’s position is echoed by other leading industry groups.
“The SHD process did significantly reduce the time taken for planning decisions. At the time the process was introduced there were long delays in getting planning permission,” David Duffy, Director of PII told Noteworthy.
Then and now there is a need to increase the delivery of new homes into the market – to increase supply. The further delays that have occurred are largely due to planning decisions being challenged, for the most part on legal or technical grounds – not on planning issues.
According to the Office of the Planning Regulator report, planning permission for housing developments has been overturned by the High Court for issues such as: ABP not properly justifying contravening a local area plan; the extent of car parking on a development – which went against SHD guidelines; the drawings submitted for a development being incomplete.
The industry position is that factors such as these should not result in the planning decision being overturned.
However, solicitor Fred Logue wholly rejects the idea that decisions are being overturned on “legal or technical grounds”.
“[Judicial reviews] are used to overturn unlawful decisions. That’s what a judicial review is, that’s what it does, and that’s what people [who take the cases] are doing,” he said, adding that the vast majority of concluded JRs have been successful, with ABP losing or conceding.
That means that those planning applications should never have been granted in the first place… You can’t lay it at the hand of the people who are just exercising their rights to bring a case to overturn an unlawful decision.
Lobbying by industry
Prior to PII’s letter and policy paper last February, the chair of PII, David O’Connor, sent a letter to the Minister Darragh O’Brien on 5 March 2021, emphasising “the urgency of a review of the existing system for Judicial Review (JR) of planning decisions and, in particular, worrying trends in recent months”.
The letter went on to say that it “might be tempting to blame the SHD legislation” on the increase in JRs, but that it had “nothing to do with that legislation”.
“Only one of the 25 successful challenges to an SHD decision relates to a unique feature of that code,” the letter states.
The Noteworthy investigative team obtained this PII policy document through FOI from the Department of Taoiseach but the Department of Housing refused to release it.
This was refused by the Department of Housing along with a number of other records that Noteworthy requested due to “deliberative process”. This reason is given when the records may be informing an upcoming decision like the creation of new laws, for example.
In addition, in one case, a separate letter that was refused by the Department of Housing had been released previously by the same Department under FOI, so Noteworthy requested a re-release of the record and obtained it that way.
In a separate letter in April 2021, Bartra – a large property investment company – wrote to An Taoiseach Micheál Martin concerning its plans to lodge a Strategic Housing Development (SHD) application for hundreds of homes at O’Devaney Gardens.
“I feel that it is absolutely inevitable that, no matter what we do and no matter what effort we put into our planning application, any decision by An Bord Pleanála under the Strategic Housing Development legislation will be judicially reviewed,” the letter states.
In my view, High Court judicial reviews are being used as a de facto way to appeal planning decisions and this cannot be the State’s intention.
Bartra also wrote to Minister Darragh O’Brien in December 2020, expressing frustration with the increasing number of JRs being taken.
The property firm that it “fully supported and endorsed” people’s rights to take cases against decisions which may breach domestic or EU law, or the terms of the Aarhus Convention, which gives people the right to access information about the environment and promotes public participation in decision-making.
“However, they must be balanced with the propensity for applicants to abuse the Judicial Review process and/or to treat the Judicial Review process as a mean of appealing and/or delaying the substance and implementation of planning decisions,” Bartra said.
However, Orla Hegarty said that the JRs were being taken as people had been excluded from the planning process by the SHD legislation, and that the courts were able to decide if there were grounds for the cases and if the law had been followed.
When Noteworthy put allegations of the process being abused to Hegarty, she said that “the courts are well able to throw it out if it’s abuse”.
Clearly, there are grounds if they accept the cases and the majority were found to be justified.
Judicial review ‘industry’
What’s more, the property and construction industries reference a growing “industry” around JRs.
In its letter in 2021, PII said that government plans and laws have as their primary goal the provision of housing, “yet JR challenges have evolved as an effective cottage industry to frustrate that provision”.
This “industry” is also referenced in research by planning consultants Tom Phillips + Associates. In the document, which informs the 15 recommendations from PII, the authors state: “It’s time to readdress the Judicial Review industry!”
CIF also references JRs being taken on grounds of “commercial interest” in a submission to government in October of last year, provided to Noteworthy by CIF.
The group said it supports the review of JR laws being undertaken by government. It laid out a number of recommendations to amend the laws.
The group also stated that there are cases in which “the commercial interests of the applicant are the main reason behind an application” and that laws should be introduced to “debar applicants in circumstances where it reasonable to deduce that the application is made on the grounds of a commercial interest”.
Planning experts and opposition politicians roundly reject the idea of an industry profiting off JR, and say that the high number of cases being taken is as a result of poor planning laws.
Fred Logue strongly refutes any suggestion of an “industry” around judicial review cases being taken, stating again that the vast majority of JR challenges have been successful.
But how can you say there’s an industry taking cases on small points when the vast majority of the cases actually succeed?
He said instead that “the problem is the board [ABP] making decisions that are unlawful” and that these “don’t comply with the requirements of proper planning and environmental protection”.
“An unlawful decision has to be removed,” he added.
Echoing of statements
Recent government statements echo some of the industry positions. Speaking on RTÉ’s News at One last January, Peter Burke announced planned changes to JRs, which would make it harder to take cases.
“We’re making the planning process more robust. We’re trying to tackle an industry that is growing,” he said.
It’s very important that we curb this industry.
Burke announced a number of changes to JRs, including a cap on costs for those taking cases, ensuring that anyone taking a JR had to have a “substantial interest” in the case, and altering the “automatic standing rights” for non-governmental organisations, such as charities or environmental groups, which would make it harder for them to take cases.
The changes are similar to ones contained in the General Scheme of the Housing and Planning and Development Bill 2019, published by the last government, which also sought to reduce the number of JRs being taken, but which was never progressed.
The Bill was met with strong criticism from NGOs and civil society organisations. Legal experts also said that it would likely break EU laws around access to justice. This included the Law Society who expressed their concern in January of this year, when it was asked to submit its views on the Bill:
The Society is concerned that the cumulative effect of the outlined changes will be to severely restrict access to justice, a right which is recognised as a fundamental personal right guaranteed under Article 40.3 of the Constitution as well as Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR [European Convention on Human Rights].
However, Burke’s plans and the proposed laws are in alignment with many industry positions.
In its letter from December 2020, Bartra put forward a number of recommendations, including calling for those taking JRs to have a “sufficient interest” in the case, as well as recommendations over costs, also stating that planning authorities should “rigorously pursue the recovery of costs against the applicant” when a JR is unsuccessful.
PII in its policy report from February puts forward 15 recommendations. Among them, it also calls for “proportionate cost risk” for people taking a case, as well as a call to “raise the entry bar for making a challenge”, and that any applicant “must be able to show some connection to the area”.
Commenting on these recommendations, David Duffy told Noteworthy that the paper “recognises the right to undertake a judicial review of a planning decision”.
“The PII submission has been prepared with input from legal and planning professionals with significant experience in this area and we believe that the proposals put forward are both workable and consistent with EU law,” he said.
The aim of many of the recommendations in the PII paper are to make the planning decision making process more robust and reduce the very high overturn level of planning decisions in the courts, while also reducing the time it takes to go through the JR process.
In its submission, CIF also called for a requirement that JR applicants have a connection with the area, and that they must show how the development directly affects them and that they have made submissions at the earliest stage of the planning process.
Controversy over law amendments
Burke’s statements over a judicial review “industry” and the plans to amend the laws were met with some controversy, and the plans were temporarily shelved.
Our investigative team reported in July on an attempt by government to ram through “deeply controversial” changes to the laws around JRs before the Dáil’s summer recess. These changes sparked outrage from opposition politicians and NGOs.
Following the outrage, the government dropped the most controversial amendment, which would have allowed ABP to amend its decision after the judicial review process had started. However, more changes are coming down the line.
A full review of all of Ireland’s planning laws is currently being undertaken by the Attorney General, and is due to be concluded imminently, with a new consolidated planning bill set to be brought to government by the end of the year.
The bill will represent a massive overhaul of Ireland’s planning system. It will also contain changes to the laws around JRs, though it is unclear at this stage what these changes will be.
Recent government statements point towards changes that will restrict the number of JRs being taken. Speaking in Limerick last month, Minister O’Brien said:
We have a housing crisis that is resolvable and solvable, we need people to stop objecting, frankly.
He also said that he didn’t believe planning decisions should be made in the courts, as it’s “not the right place for them”.
“Planning decisions should be made in our local authorities and in An Bord Pleanála,” he said.
Minister for Public Expenditure Michael McGrath made similar comments in September at an industry conference, stating that the new planning bill would deal with JRs.
“It’s intended to reduce the legal risk of successful judicial reviews, that planning decisions should be made by our planning authorities, not by the courts, and the court should not in so many instances have grounds on which to overturn planning decisions,” he said.
Fred Logue rejected the statements that the courts are deciding planning decisions and said that “we actually have a very good quality court system”.
The courts “don’t decide planning applications”, he explained and said that’s “the one thing they actually don’t do and have never done”. Instead, “their job is to review the legality of the decision, procedural and substantive legality”.
The ‘key issue’
For local advocates and opposition politicians, focusing too much on JRs is a distraction to the main issue with homebuilding in Ireland – developments that have been granted planning permission, but where construction has yet to commence.
A recent analysis of large-scale housing developments by the Dublin Democratic Planning Alliance – an alliance of community groups and associations – found that planning permission for over 50,000 homes was granted, with no moves made as yet to build them.
These figures, first reported in the Business Post, did not include homes that were subject to legal challenges.
According to TD Cian O’Callaghan, housing spokesperson for the Social Democrats, planning permission being granted for developments that were “speculative” and “aren’t aimed at actually delivering homes” is the main issue with planning in Ireland.
This is “the key issue in terms of the planning process and delays in getting a quicker, more efficient planning system,” he told Noteworthy.
David Duffy of PII said that there were many reasons why developments that receive planning permission may not be built – including changing market conditions, certain conditions that need to be met, and a failure to secure funding.
“Homebuilders want to build houses. There is no evidence of significant hoarding of permissions,” he said.
Changes ‘could backfire’
Opposition politicians, planning experts, and NGOs disagree that changes to JRs will speed up the planning process, however. As well as this, some commentators state that government should not listen to industry in relation to any changes to laws.
“In terms of judicial reviews, we need to be very careful in terms of any changes that could backfire, like the previous changes backfired and could lead to more conflict, more delays,” said TD Cian O’Callaghan, housing spokesperson with the Social Democrats.
“And I definitely don’t think [the industry] are the right people to be… proposing further changes, given that the previous proposals they championed were so disastrous in terms of increasing the use of judicial reviews, conflicts, court cases and delays.”
David Duffy said, however, that SHDs “did significantly reduce the time taken for planning decisions” and that amending the laws would have solved any issues with SHDs.
“There were some deficiencies in the SHD legislation. These were capable of being addressed by legislative amendments, and PII did put forward proposals in this respect,” he said.
However, the government decided to replace SHDs with the new Large Scale Residential Developments (LRD) process, which may address some of the issues. This will significantly extend the time scale for decisions.
According to Orla Hegarty, many of the issues raised in JR cases were ones that could have been ironed out in pre-planning consultations and public participation, but as SHDs removed much of this, the issues got taken to the High Court.
“Things that might have been a €20 submission at the beginning and ironed out locally, suddenly turn to €50,000 in a High Court judicial review,” she said.
“So instead of going back to the strength of the previous system, now what they’re trying to do is say – let’s make judicial review even harder, which is just excluding people and oversight even more from the process.”
Hegarty said that this “is not a solution, because we’ll just find things getting kicked off to European courts”.
Fred Logue echoes this assessment, saying that JRs are being taken as a result of serious faults in planning decisions and the “seriously flawed” SHD laws.
“That’s why there [are] so many JRs, and that’s why they’re succeeding,” he said. “The problem isn’t judicial review, the problem is what’s upstream of judicial review, in terms of the planning, legislation and the decision making.
“And they’re the areas that should be fixed, not basically going in and undermining the rule of law by trying to squash judicial review.”
—
FULL SERIES IS OUT NOW
An opinion piece – out this morning – states that politicians blaming judicial review for housing delays are overshadowing planning reform. Our explainer - in July - reported that ‘deeply controversial’ last-minute planning law changes could lead to ‘years of litigation’.
And in our REVOLVING DOOR series – out earlier this week – the extent of lobbying by former senior public officials in Ireland is revealed for the first time.
By Cormac Fitzgerald for Noteworthy
This investigation was proposed and funded by readers of Noteworthy, the crowdfunded investigative journalism platform from The Journal. We also have a number of other projects focused on politics which you can view here.
You can support our work by submitting an idea, helping to fund a project or setting up a monthly contribution to our investigative fund HERE>>
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Taxing high earners at marginal rate of 60% plus is what I have a problem with. I earn nothing near that but no one should lose more than half their oncome at source at any point.
How can a zinger from micheal fiscal spacer noonan make it a bad day from anyone. Noonan is worse at maths than gerry it seems , so there is no credibility in any criticism from him about any one elses numbers.
The other problem with taxing the high earners at that rate is that these are the people who have the option to up sticks and leave. They are generally very well educated and experienced in their field and that will carry them into well paid jobs in places they won’t have 60% taken from them.
Scaremongering at it’s best, exact same thing FG are saying,
Agree Jane. We had tax rates like this in the 80s even though they applied at lower income levels. It was damaging then and it will be damaging in the future in Sinn Fein get their way.
It will never happen because all those in the dail
would be down 60%.
And this pensions lark is so wrong too. People will be less inclined to take up a pension and we’ll be in even more bother with pensions in time to come.
Reg, what happens in other countries seems to be that their wages are lifted even higher to compensate for the tax difference. In essence no-one really loses except for the multinational corporation, because in all honesty, not many other firms are paying this.
But we’re trying to attract people home and high end jobs. Penal tax rates will not do this and some may even leave. Sinn Fein is also planning to increase employers PRSI which all add to the cost of businesses who pay well. Not good for an open economy like Ireland.
And usually the tax is only 60% on earnings over 100000€ so
Imagine kenny doing the nations economic policies,same difference here,the civil servants do that and are written off by the finance minister,who should check them..noonan.Id have Pearse Doherty any day as finance minister rather than the sleeveen we have.
Someone on 100k already pays an effective tax rate of about 40%. You think it’s ok that they pay 60% plus for anything they earn above that? I don’t.
Watersedge SF supporters were here last night complaining about lack of coverage for SF, particularly their policies. Well Adams got plenty time today to discuss his policies and ye are still on here complaining. I made a comment, as did Reg, regarding those policies and all you come back with is that we are scaremongering and of course the obligatory attempt to link us to FG. Well you wanted to discuss the policies so go for it, we are all ears.
You know they will abolish the water charges and the property tax, bring in universal health care, invest in badly needed public services. They will not abolish u.s.c. something that social democrats have also said and seeing as you are a big fan of them, they seem to be inline with SF on a lot of things. Unless you a very high earner yourself Jane and want the u.s.c abolished, you should welcome it seeing as it looks like FG are not going to be able to deliver on that promise anyway. For more info
http://www.sinnfein.ie/budget2016
I don’t like the USC but I believe Stephen Donnelly when he says getting rid of it now is the wrong thing to do.
Do you think it’s fair to take 60% of someones wage in taxes?
Taxes are not nice, no one likes them and this country has become very unequal. The high earners will still get the property tax, water charges abolished, be entitled to universal health care also. MIddle, high earners seem to think that they will be a lot better off with fg but truthfully, will they be able to abolish the u.s.c? Leo was on primetime and got caught out again on their figures. They are being advised by TASC not to abolish it. I personally don’t think they can do it.
People on 100k+ already pay an effective tax rate of 52% so lose a little more than half their earnings
So you totally agree sf polices are all calculated better than all the rest.i personally think they all cook the books..if you weren’t a sf troll I’d expect you to understand that..
So because I am going by reports that FG were in actual fact caught with the figures in the air and because I have seen FF FG and Labour already in government and have not seen SF in government so cannot judge them yet and am willing to give them a try, I am a troll.
I had high hopes for Labour before the last election and Joan Burton particularly sold it for me but she had her chance so you move on to whoever you think will represent you the best whether it be SF, SD, Right to Change, Independents. I realise though that without SF seeing as they are the largest group on the left, this movement away from FF FG Labour will not take off without them. They are needed along with all the others.
Pearce Doherty has called on Noonan if he is so confident, to publish his costings from the dept. of finance for a phased abolition of u.s.c. over 5 years. We he do it, that is the question and then we will all know once and for all.
Waters ignore 3as. He is the troll. He had a go at me earlier also on another thread and had nothing to contribute. You and I may disagree on things but you always put across your points to the best of what you believe.
But here is where I agree with Reg. I don’t earn over 100k either, but if I work harder and do extra hours I might well get there and then SF want to penalise me for that?! I may decide to work 80 hours a week to put my kids through private school one day or to pay for private medical insurance or a nice holiday. Should I be penalised and pay more tax (SF want an extra 7%) and at the other end they want to reward long term social welfare recipients by giving them more dole?
I think what’s needed is a movement away from all these parties..ind. .see how they like that and get the lot of them to actually listen to us for once.
Other thread..what would that be greg
Greg Kelly that’s for you..
Greg the fact that I had to look up where I had a go at you earlier…proves my point I’d forgotten that…and the fact if I question things,and that it upsets you..maybe you need to think a about your own views and not mine. Look a little deeper.
Greg Kelly. .please answer. .but I will rephrase it..run Greg run..you never answered my question earlier..so who’s the troll…I know you won’t get bk to me…coward or sheep….mmm guessing sheep.
Keep the red thumbs for yourself greg..
Hiding behind your keyboard I see..come out and discuss greg…
You accused the guy of being a SF troll. He is a Sinn Fein head and is all about SF this and SF that, but that doesn’t make him a troll. He argues his case each time although i almost always disagree with him. You accused the guy of being a troll which is insulting. I said he wasn’t and that you had little to contribute. Simple as ! What’s there to discuss?
Ciaran Whyte, you’re not quite correct, with the recent budget changes the marginal tax rate is now just less than 50%.
I use to loose more than 60% of my income on (direct and indirect) taxation in this country due to the current goverment.
At it’s worst, someone on 40k lost about 25% (10k) of their income in direct taxes. To lose 60% you would have had to pay another 14k in indirect taxes. You’d want to be a heavy drinker, smoker and drive a lot to pay 60% in total taxes.
For a 60k income you would have lost about 36%. To lose 60%, again you would have had to pay another 14k in indirect taxes. The a lot of booze, petrol and fags!
Car tax, tv license, pso and tax on utilities, vat on electronics, vat on insurance, triple tax on fuel property tax (home and veichele) I drink socially and smoke But purchase neither in Ireland except in pub. Dirt. No return services gained also out of pocket So yes making it out to be over 60% I an not working in Ireland anymore so I am noticing I am actually saving now which I never could do before
Also being single man also cripples me in this country. Not entitled to tax breaks. No return of service like other eu countries provide (I have worked on the Continent) we don’t have a completed motorway network etc etc
It’s still unlikely that you lost 60% of your income in total taxes, however, it all depends on spending habits. For most people they’ll come nowhere close to loosing 60% Michael.
For someone on 40k they would need to pay another 46%, almost half of their take home pay in indirect taxes to lose a total of 60%.
No sure what you mean by not entitled to tax breaks because your single Michael. Since tax individualisation a single person is taxed the same as a couple if they are both working. If you are an employee you are entitled to tax credits worth €3300. Some tax reliefs have been pased out, mortagage interest relief, rent relief etc. Don’t know what they have to do with being single or not though.
Spending habits haha! Food water heat and transport?? Staying alive. And taxed to the hilt. What about SOME welfare payments people getting or as call them political bribery. spending habits are grand when you are a certain member to society. I was paying more than 60% direct and indirect I will make a spread sheet.
I am working let’s say in a more expensive country but walking home with A lot more eg tax, included.
Last time I checked food, water, heat and transport are not taxes. Some of them you will pay some tax on, others you don’t. Most basic food items are tax free. If you eat out it’s 9%.
But they are taxed!! Heavy !!because my local petrol station actually had a total break down of the price of fuel. So did the off licence on alcohol. Compared to our eu counterpart’s. I was on the poverty line but now since I’m not paying all of that any more I’m comfortable now.
That’s good to hear Michael. We are not a low tax country, nor are we a particularly high tax one. Most people think they pay more taxes than they actually do. As I said for someone on 40K would need to pay almost half of their take home pay in indirect taxes to loose a total of 60%. Unlees you’re heavy drinker, smoker and drive a lot that’s almost impossible.
As for petrol prices, we’re just a little above average for Europe: http://www.europenroad.com/fuel/
Well I’ll put up a spread sheet of income / outgoings compared to the living taxes included and return of services. I do not receive return of services in this country. Well I’m telling I am paying more taxes. An I urge all young people to leave this country and experience taxes in other countries.
O’Rourke exposed this fool for the spoofing economic illiterate that he is.
‘spoofing economic illiterate that he is’ – Noonan?
Ah Diarmuid, did you not listen to Enda’s interview yet? Get back to me and tell me what you think.
http://padraigomara.com/2016/02/13/neil-prendeville-interview-with-enda-kenny/
Adams did come across very bad today. Pearse would have been better to send in. Adams hadn’t a clue on some of the basics and he wants to be Taoiseach?
Adams was great on the six one today he’s deffo the right man 4 the job.its time to pump the establishment partys and try something new vote right to change
I luv u diarmuid.
Adams and SF said USC was an unjust tax not so long ago (as did lots on here giving out).
http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2011/PreBudget2012.pdf
Section 3 under taxation
“We would abolish the USC”
Now before the election has even happened they want to keep USC and penalise us all working hard to make a living.
First broken promise of SF before a vote has even been cast. (Oh did they make a it urn on water rates also?)
Adams is a bluffer, when it comes to the detail he hasn’t got a clue. Martin is too busy trying to bash Adams about the past and of course is leader of the treasonous FF. Kenny is well he’s like a caricature of a politician, an embarrassment to the nation. Then there’s Joanie, i can see her rocking on a rocking chair in a corner of a mental institution by the end of the year. The women is crazy. None of that four are fit to lead our people. There’s more substance at the bottom of a bag of tayto than in that lot.
What are you on about Greg, what has 2011 /2012 got to do with it. If they changed their minds on abolishing the u.s.c. that is the sensible thing to do. FG/ Labour HAVE been in government and flip flopped on their promises before the last election and continue to do so. They bumped up their figures by 2 billion, they won’t be able to abolish the u.s.c. and commit to a universal health care system and fix the housing crisis etc it’s not going to happen.
Well said Richard.
The problem I have with SF is that they belive the end justifies the means. They have shown that in their past and their supporters are showing it now!
4 years ago Greg. Policies change from time to time in every party.
Policies change more in some parties than in other. Depends which way the wind is blowing.
I love Tayto
I just thought Sean got a bit aggressive at times.I don’t think he will address the rest of the leader’s in the same manner.
Onrourke grilled them all the same.. He’s a great interviewer. No place to hide for enda, burton, martin or Adams. He beat them all.
I wish RTE would stop asking Gerry hard questions. It’s really mean.
He grilled Enda in exactly the same matter, SF need to lose the persecution complex. Adams’ style, in debates and interviews, is similar to Kenny’s: speak in sound bites and generalities, waffle when your asked for specifics.
Brian that’s his job.
Yesterday we had Adams giving out about RTE not giving him airtime. Today he was given 30 mins one-on-one with no other balance from other politicians and he still gives out.
Sure Noonan cant add neither 2billion is a big mistake.Gerry is grand he will manage just fine I like the thoughts of the health care system they are offering vote sf right to change
Y’know I don’t think anyone gets irony…..
At least Gerry turns up shinnerbot,no sign of the burton or varadkar on the Vincent Browne show tonight.
Wake up, Adams didn’t turn up for VB the night before..coward
Gerry Adams might not be good at maths but my God noonan 3 billion out on fiscal
I’m glad we have a real finance minister, one who knows his maths, his fiscal space is rock solid…..oh wait. Hugh, do you think we’re f***ing stupid? Is that how your glorious party sees the electorate?
Lets call a spade a spade. In government, a Taoiseach doesn’t do any calculations or any major work with figures. That’s the job of the Department of Finance, CSO, advisors etc. Plus, their party has a spokesperson on financial and budgetary matters who is more than capable of discussing at length the figures in their proposals.
Sinn Fein are the guys that got the calculations right for their manifesto. I would rather their leader be a statesman then a maths teacher, and leave the calculations to the experts.
Did you actually listen to your leader this morning, or are you actually that brainwashed to think he is Taoiseach material?!
PS do you mean the same CSO and Department of Finance you call liars for showing 7% economic growth and the lowest unemployment rate in 7 years?
FC Adams was atrocious. The only person on message is always Murphy or Boyd barret.. shame their message would leadI Ireland in to an economic basket case.
Haha..varadkar and burton refusing to go on Vincent Browne again tonight,otherwise busy doing handy debates.
Adams is clueless at economics, he has a terrible memory, he puts family loyalty ahead of the common good, he doesn’t seem to know the true meaning of the word republican or understand the concept of what a republic actually is and how it works and he is a proven liar, maybe even a perjurer. How is this man even an outside shot for Taoiseach?
Look at Trump in america.. Some people only believe what they want.
Dermot – they seem like the exact qualities required to be the leader of any modern nation
SF plan to reduce tax relief to 20% on pension contributions for workers over €40000 is wrong.
Public sector workers have pensions paid by the state and now private sector workers who save for their retirements will have their effords punished.
Sinn Fein targeting the private sector on modest incomes. A private pension gets taxed when you draw it down but Sinn Fein want to hit you twice. Bonkers stuff.
Overdoing the Adams angle a bit there Hugh. Maybe in the interests of balance you could apply the same rigor when examining the economic credentials of our dear leader. Better yet, how about reporting Yanis Varoufakis’ comments regarding Michael Noonan’s spirited fight against debt relief for Greece or maybe even Jim O’Callahan’s family and professional connections to the intrepid irish media. Pathetic journalism
Oh you mean the comments from the Greek Finance Minister who’s married to a billionaire’s daughter? The guy who simply retired after ruining Greece’s immediate future in a game of brinksmanship with their creditors and who retired to his private island in protest?
The left has strange heroes.
Yep thats exactly the guy I’m talking about. And what of it ? Yanis Varoufakis personal life in no way has any bearing on the allegation he makes against Noonan. Stop trying to deflect from the issue. If you do want to get personal, how about we consider Minister Noonan’s own status as a bondholder ? Unlike Varoufakis case, this has a direct impact on his ability to exercise the office of Minister for Finance in the interests of the Irish people, a very clear conflict of interest . Varoufakis’s point only reinforces this position.
Yes that’s the guy who expected Noonan and other EU finance ministers to give Greece a write off so that the Irish and European taxpayers like the Germans could pay for the Greek debt and foot the bill landing us in more debt. Yes that guy! And then he did a runner leaving his country with worse austerity than ever . Did you see the protests last week in Greece ? Of all the things Noonan has done (good or bad) , this is one thing we can all be thankful for not giving into Greece and causing more tax on our people.
@greg..throw around ur accusations about me..but not debate with me..saying I can’t back them up..one thing you can be sure of…I back everything I say and I hope one day you will be adult enough to do the same…
Greg, that`s a bit of a simpleton statement from you to be honest,FF and FG – Noonan in particular, have saddled us, our children, our childrens children with a debt that has nothing to do with us, all to save the half assed, ill conceived, fundamentally flawed project which is the mighty Euro.
Enda Kenny and Noonan lied through their teeth to get elected, saying they would fight for this, that, and the other for us, Reality is, they fought for nothing, absolutely nothing for us.
they cow towed to Merkel, Draghi and the rest of the bully boys, Result = we were left with 42% of the European debt. They have compounded it further thn anyone possibly could, by stripping the most vulnerable in society.even if a person was deliberately trying to sabotage us, they couldn`t have done a better job.
Picture another scenario, One with Gerry Adams in place of Kenny and Doherty in place of Noonan, there is no way on Gods earth they would have been spoken to, nor treated like that.
Say what you will about Adams, and lord knows you all do, but not one of you can deny the fact that, he would have been a stronger leader than the Euro lickspittle spineless gimp we had fighting our corner instead.
Mother you are just a tiny tiny slightly bit wrong. The bank guarantee etc was introduced in 2008. Cowen and Lenihan (RIP) and FF did that, not kenny and noonan. In fairness we were bankrupt and without imf and Europe we were screwed (unless we had left eu).
Noonan reduced the debt and renegotiated the terms as we know over the last few years and started to be able to borrow in the markets again.
Adams can’t do basic maths so he hardly would have been able to do any deal with Europe. We saw what happened to Greece when their “Adams” Tpris went to tell EU to get lost and we saw what happened there didn’t we? The country is on its knees there.
I wouldn’t mind that, it’s Pearce Doherty you look to on that side of things and he has proved to be very effective at getting it right and proving Michael Noonan is wrong. Cheek of Noonan going on about Adam’s and he is the laughing stock of the country. Deflecting from his own shortcomings.
From the Irish Times
“Fine Gael saw its father figure Michael Noonan – revered within the party – mishandle the communication of its economic election package to such an extent that Sinn Féin could give lectures on bad sums and dodgy figures.”
Doherty is good. I have seen him many times in action. Just wish Adams would retire and allow new blood in. Adams had still a whiff of old SF around him and that’s what’s putting a lot of people off.
“Adams is held to no greater a test than any other party leader” Hugh, even by your standards, that’s horseshit. P.s. Remind me who’s party was the only one to correctly calculate the fiscal space? But sure what’s €2bn euro between FF/FG/Lab friends, eh?
Noonan had 5 years to get his sums in order & instead of fiscal space he created dead space! Enda hasn’t a clue as to what’s going on about pretty much everything & their pet monkey is in meltdown ! I’m not a Sinn Fein supporter btw but tempted to throw them a preference – sick of this govt / their radio station & f**ktards like Durrrmud!
Not a supporter either, but like you Setrakian am sick to my teeth of these liars and the YFG sycophants. Will be giving SF a preference
Hugh where’s all the articles on the very serious allegations surrounding the Finance Minister? Any country, other than a dictatorship, would have wall to wall coverage yet in good old Ireland our pathetic “journalists” completely ignore it.
Your bang on there and Adams has a lot to answer for as well.
Difference is, if it was Adam’s it would be all over the news, have you seen it on RTE news, no?
No. I’m not by no means defending Noonan he should be held accountable, but you can’t defend Adams on the other hand..hypocrisy might be the word if you do.
And you won’t see it Watersedge,Rte will do their best to put Sinn Fein down.Goes back a long time.
Dave I think Gerry has done a lot of that himself..if sf got rid of him they would be better off
Like knowing about sex abuse allegations for 20 years and he brushed aside these accusations when they were brought to his attention. He’s now trying to say that the people who came to him with those allegations are lying.
“Gerry has done a lot of that himself..if sf got rid of him they would be better off”
Agreed. Mary lou would be more credible as their leader, and it should put an end to the easy IRA comebacks used by FF and FG.
watersedge. I was unaware of this further revelation – this gets more and more shocking.
Diarmiud grow up all the red thumbs u get you would think you would get the picture no body cares what u think
I care.
All of Diarmuids comments on this topic have more green thumbs than red ones as I write.
It’s amazing that some coherent and logical comments get so many red thumbs around here. Incredible that so many people could actually agree with some of the inane ramblings too.
you have been more than handy at inane ramblings yourself from time to time Old Gordon, TBH it was why i thought you were called Old Gordon, for all the “senior” moments you seem to have around the keyboard.
Lowest unemployment give me a break I would call gateway or job bridge a job FG and labour are using this as jobs for Ireland and fool that votes for this shower should move to the states and hang with the trump supporters theywould believe anything to
2 billion out,hep c scandal and now this cover up,corruption and fg go hand in hand.
“Finance Minister Michael Noonan has admitted that he knew about abuse allegations at a foster home in the southeast area as far back as twenty years ago.
Mr Noonan today confirmed that he received a letter written by the foster father in the controversy directly to himself in 1996″
Michael Noonan though. Minister for health in the mid 90s. Hep c and abuse….. Anyone willing to chase the man up on it? Or are his bully boy tactics affecting the media too?
I’d take his record over the last 40 years than Jorry’s any day.
I don’t know meehawl, seems like the fiscal spacer noonan has more than a few skeletons in his closet. Only reason we don’t see more on it in the media is govt influence .
Myself and my family are going to the r2w protest on Saturday. I.ve invited all my family and friends and seen as this is the big one they are all going . I.d suggest everyone here scroll through their contacts list and invite your friends to march with us on Saturday.
Is your keyboard broken Alan? http://m.grammarbook.com/grammar-quizzes/apostrophes_1.asp Let me know how you get on with that quiz.
Heard the weather isn’t going to be to nice better bring an umbrella and thermals you may need them
There is ALWAYS one R-sole who will try and pull someone up on their grammar in an online forum, Step forward Dara McGann and collect your prize…..
I am sure Sammy Sausages will give Joan a grilling on Ireland AM
It’s the top brass civil servants that run our country not the politicians…they just spout out what they have been told to say
The simple fact is that we can’t have the services that people are crying out for unless we take in more tax. Taxing the poor only means more need so that’s a waste of time. Everybody talks about the squeezed middle and they are right so no more to be had there. That leaves the well off. Yet it seems we can’t contemplate that because they will leave in their droves and take their talents somewhere else. Sean O’ Rourke for example might be headhunted by…….. someone. Along with Tubbs, Ray, Miriam Joe Duffy and the rest of RTE.
Isn’t the truth that a lot of people in Ireland are paid well in excess of what they are worth. Those we need to keep, doctors, we can pay more out of the extra revenue if necessary.
We have a deeply unequal and unjust society. Don’t be afraid to vote for something better.
Alex Ferguson wasn’t much of a footballer, luckily had incredible talent at his disposal…. If you want figures talk to Pearce…. SF have the establishment rattled.
I think we should support Gerry and his unsubstantiated waffle that even he doesn’t fully understand.
I mean, it just might work when they get elected and need to address the detail?
Flip a coin, it might just work out.
Let’s give them a chance. It’s not like they have any crazy atomic plans like a United Ireland that will hand the UK a 20 billion a year get out of jail card that leaves Ireland screwed or anything, is it?
I don’t think Gerry is insane, do you?
How much worse can it get ??? They ff fg lab had their chance and pooped their nappies time for change its as easy as that
No Grey Vote for Fine Gael or Labour or Fianna Fail …. who take LPT from Medical Expenses refunds of pensioners when they cant keep up the tax payments.
Regressive Tax Laws (forced, without consent and no account for inability to pay) unacceptable in any modern fair society.
It’s really funny to see no matter faults “and they all have a lot” ye defend them to the last..anyone seriously think about voting independent’s ye all know they won’t be able to form a government but it has to be worth a try…..ohhh..I can see red.
Jane let them up and leave who cares the irish dont give a shite..I am not worried about somebody earning 100thousand my heart is broken for them get over yer selves instead of buying a Merck buy an Audi dont be moaning think about the people losing their homes and the people on 0hr contracts making 20g a year next time dont be so complicit in bailing out banksters.
What do you expect from Sinn Fein. Their finance spokesman is a two time college drop out (neither finance related) and he has zero experience in any finance field. The vast majority of their candidates don’t even have a third level education.
I mean these are people who could be running a country and nearly all of them would struggle to get a job in an average office, let alone be entrusted to run it.
Zero expertise, zero clue. It’s embarrassing and hilarious in equal measures when Sinn Fein members try to chime in on finance or economic issues.
Unemployment is a third less in the north than the south, probably even better in real terms. Sinn Fein are in government in the north and this is one example of their success.
FG Labour keep saying SF in south will wreck economy etc.
However I think SF should emphasise their success in the north in government a lot more during this election.
have your say