manshimajin Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 A summary of the irish Budget. Some very tough and interesting measures including significant cuts in Publc Servants pay (5-10%) and parliamentarians pay cut in line with that, increased retirement age for new public servants, a carbon tax, a €200,000 p.a. levy on Irish domiciled people earning over €1 million pa, a scrappage scheme etc etc... Still reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 ithought this bit was vary clever off them Excise duty on alcohol to be cut by 12 cent on pint of beer/cider; 14 cent per half glass of spirits; 60c on bottle of wine. Reduction must be passed on to consumer well to make up for all the extra cost there going to have to pay least thay be able to go out and get pissed to stop worring about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Manx Govt take note. Some bold and difficult decisions taken here wrt public sector and politicians pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Never thought I'd see this one, reference the Irish Budget Taoiseach (Prime Minister) to take pay cut of 20 per cent, ministers to reduce pay by 15 per cent Irish Budget Link Got to say Manshimajin, there's some eye openers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jehovah Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 A way to cut MHK pay would be to stop paying up to 60% extra just because they run a department or are helping a minister. They're already paid handsomely to run the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 A way to cut MHK pay would be to stop paying up to 60% extra just because they run a department or are helping a minister. They're already paid handsomely to run the island. I could never understand how ministers are involved in running a department, as what's the point of paying people a substantial amount of money as *Managing Director (*whatever title) who should know what and how their business is operating. Surely, if the minister wanted to know something from whichever department, they simply had to phone/email and leave a message with whoever's secretary, thereby saving time and expense? By actually being present at these various meetings, sort of implies that the Directors' etc are not up to the task, or is it simply a power thing, that they must have control? I genuinely don't know, but the old adage of 'minutes are taken and hours are lost' springs to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Yes, a lot to digest and to understand. But it does sound to be a case of 'leading from the front'. Bear in mind also that in a previous budget the TDs' (MHKs) and the public servants' pension schemes became contributory (except if I recall for judges who were asked to 'volunteer'....few did). One issue that I have not picked up is whether they are getting rid of the anomoly whereby sitting former ministers can claim their pensions in addition to their TD's salaries. A few gave them up whilst still being TDs but as this was also volutary most, from all parties, held on. There is an argument that Ireland has had no alternative but it does mean that it is pain oday for potential benefits tomorrow. Hopefully it will also reign in the very high cost of the Public Service (an example for here). Imagine Ms Moffatt having to deal with substantial salary cuts to bring her members back into line... I do give credit to the FF/Green Coalition Government for no longer sitting on their hands but doing something - it may not be perfect but it is action. I wonder despite his speechifying whether Allan Bell has the intestinal fortitude to do something across the board and strong enought to address the VAT shortfall? PS: Rumour has it that Gordon Brown had a 90 minute unsuccessful telephone call to the Taoiseach begging him not to set an example by cutting his own salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 A way to cut MHK pay would be to stop paying up to 60% extra just because they run a department or are helping a minister. They're already paid handsomely to run the island. It always amazes that we bleat about MHK's pay and at the same time bleat aboout the calibre of those we attract as whilst I agree an MHK salary may be handsome if you are in the manual sector, or in a clerical or administrative job a decent qualified proffesional or senior manager would probably not see it as such. Whilst it may well be that some of those currently elected are over paid for their abilities and the current salary may attract postman, shop keepers etc to apply do you really think that they at a level that would attractsome of the sharpest and best to stand especially when by standing they could find themselves un elected five years later and unable to get back into their profession at which they left. I am not an MHK, nor do I have one as a relative or as a friend. However I would actually be in favour in doubling current salaries if it meant we could attract a few more heavyweights to stand and get elected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asgard 1 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I am not an MHK, nor do I have one as a relative or as a friend. However I would actually be in favour in doubling current salaries if it meant we could attract a few more heavyweights to stand and get elected I don't know what your definition of "heavyweight" would be, but I doubt it would make any difference to most voters We had a candidate last time who had a lifetime's experience in business and who's last job was managing director of the Sefton Group. He was a good public speaker, likeable and with some good policies but the electorate stuck to the devil they knew. As is mostly the case in Manx elections Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I agree LL. The other added bonus is that perhaps the electorate will think a bit more carefully about who they vote in if the rewards are greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I am not an MHK, nor do I have one as a relative or as a friend. However I would actually be in favour in doubling current salaries if it meant we could attract a few more heavyweights to stand and get elected I don't know what your definition of "heavyweight" would be, but I doubt it would make any difference to most voters We had a candidate last time who had a lifetime's experience in business and who's last job was managing director of the Sefton Group. He was a good public speaker, likeable and with some good policies but the electorate stuck to the devil they knew. As is mostly the case in Manx elections He obviously didn't arrange taxis for all the old dears to go vote for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaipyr Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 A summary of the irish Budget. Some very tough and interesting measures including significant cuts in Publc Servants pay (5-10%) and parliamentarians pay cut in line with that, increased retirement age for new public servants, a carbon tax, a €200,000 p.a. levy on Irish domiciled people earning over €1 million pa, a scrappage scheme etc etc... Still reading it. Can't understand why they've cut child benefit rather than taxing it - they said it was too difficult to do, but the IOM manages it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share Posted December 10, 2009 I am not an MHK, nor do I have one as a relative or as a friend. However I would actually be in favour in doubling current salaries if it meant we could attract a few more heavyweights to stand and get elected It seems as if most MHKs are doing it as a second pensionable job. The electorate have been happy to vote these people in. What would change if we doubled the salaries? What would you do if we still did not get 'heavyweights'? Would you pay 'lightweights' less? In any case I would not want to see additional money being spent on this without the overall numbers in Tynwald being reduced (get rid of the LegCo for starters) - and maybe a rationalisation of 'local' and 'not quite so local' government for the 84,000 of us. A benign and well-versed dictator for 2 years might just do the trick. In the meantime I give full marks to the Irish Minister of Finance for biting even harder on the bullet and doing something that will make it that bit easier to haul in on the soaring costs of the public sector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 It always amazes that we bleat about MHK's pay and at the same time bleat aboout the calibre of those we attract as whilst I agree an MHK salary may be handsome if you are in the manual sector, or in a clerical or administrative job a decent qualified proffesional or senior manager would probably not see it as such. Whilst it may well be that some of those currently elected are over paid for their abilities and the current salary may attract postman, shop keepers etc to apply do you really think that they at a level that would attractsome of the sharpest and best to stand especially when by standing they could find themselves un elected five years later and unable to get back into their profession at which they left. I've never really been convinced by this idea. An argument could also be made that increasing the salary would also attract a fair amount of the greedy and the craven, and since they're exactly the kind of person who would most readily exploit populism to their own ends they'd stand a pretty fair chance of getting in as well. Secondly, looking at the example set by Westminster over the years, it's pretty clear that the professionals or those who may boast the most qualifications are not necessarily going to be the best people for the job, or even the 'sharpest'. All such expectations do are differentiate between amateur career politicians, and professional ones. I'm sure we'd get an influx of people who are much better at playing the political game, but I have reservations regarding the idea that we'd get better people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 A benign and well-versed dictator for 2 years might just do the trick. Go on then, I'm not very busy for the next two years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.