Another General Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sophrosyne raised a delicate subject amongst our politicians "Are they just delaying an inevitable second general election?" - The likes of the TD's who lost their seats because of change of boundaries in their respective constituencies last time want another election. Having lost their seats they received more publicity than they could buy. I would say close on 100% of the elected TD's need another general election like Georgia needs another Josef Stalin.

Remember over seven weeks ago our airwaves were filled with TD's screaming for a government to be formed (especially the easy option Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael). Then we had Enda and Micheál talking and then not talking and then talking again. Now they are agreeing to differ.

You see, despite the moaning of the likes of Michael O'Leary who is just interested in his share price and race-horses (and who would blame him?) appealing to people who are much poorer than him that next time out to forget about the Independents. Kenny and Martin would want the same. When you read between the lines and watch their squirming body language of most main party politicians you know the last thing they want is another general election.

Michael Healy-Rae is being scoffed at in certain quarters. Some other Independents are receiving but not as much scoffing too. Healy-Rae (Michael, at least) is a subtle politician with an agenda that has made him a very rich man. Next week Michael Healy-Rae will still be rich and the scoffers will still be poor. The Independents are here and will be here for quite some time. This is mainly due to Fianna Fáil, Labour, Fine Gael, Sinn Féin politicians and their lack of decent representation over the years and one of the mentioned parties nearly broke the country and the others failed to stop them.

So now the whole country is wondering how the Healy-Raes, Halligan etc got elected. The people are not stupid, you know. I reckon it will be several years before we have another general election.
 
Time will tell, of course, but the first big test will be agreeing a budget.

I don’t agree that all elected TDs fear a general election.

I think Fianna Fáil fancies its chances, perhaps also Sinn Fein.

Certainly, the Healy-Raes would have have nothing to worry about.
 
I see that IW is headed for the State sector. That is one jolly good thing and thanks to FF for it. Besides putting a curb on the obscene packages that captains of industry (and agriculture) in the private sector think they are worth, it ensures that any borrowings are on the national balance sheet. I always thought getting IW debts off the NBS was a dangerous piece of sorcery.:mad:
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
I see that IW is headed for the State sector. That is one jolly good thing and thanks to FF for it. Besides putting a curb on the obscene packages that captains of industry (and agriculture) in the private sector think they are worth...
Click to expand...

The CEO of Irish Water is John Tierney.
Previous occupation: City Manager of Dublin City Council
 

I would be of the other opinion that the "obscene packages" will remain if not get more "obscene" but now we will pay for it through direct taxation with a government that wont be able to control its spending and costing us more in both the short and long term.
 
Wasn't it on the State balance sheet anyways ever since it failed the eurostat test?

I presume the Duke was being sarcastic in his post above re. curbs on obscene packages!
 
Delboy said:
Wasn't it on the State balance sheet anyways ever since it failed the eurostat test?

I presume the Duke was being sarcastic in his post above re. curbs on obscene packages!
Click to expand...
Well no. IW have a monoploy; left to their own devices the top 500 execs would be on 7 figure packages on the basis of the huge demand from China for their magical skills. We might baulk at senior civil servants on safe pensionable salaries getting 6 figure packages but it is in the tuppence hal'penny place compared to the private sector.
 
I really don't think that to be the case. ESB is a semi-state but was still paying 750k+ to it's CEO back in 2009.
Coillte also pays top dollar for a very ordinary company in monopoly position

Anyways there are now caps in place for semi-state CEO's pay so they cannot be left to their own devices
 
Delboy said:
I really don't think that to be the case. ESB is a semi-state but was still paying 750k+ to it's CEO back in 2009.
Click to expand...
That is not a 7 figure sum. The head of Paddy Power got €3.75m last year and that was by no means an exception. It is debatable whether the service that a bookie provides to folk is 5 times more important that the electricity supply to the whole community
 

Some societies have tried to have that debate. And it didn't end well for anyone except party apparatchiks. I'm sure they could put together a pretty good argument explaining why the workers in Irish Waters should earn more than the CEO, after all, they're the ones doing the work so surely their service is more important to the community than the guy who sits behind a desk?

In a free society people are free to assign the importance they want to the products they purchase. I think some people spend money on all sorts of ridiculous things - fashion fads, concert tickets, sport fads.
And doubtless people may say the same about me, spending money on books, and bottles of wine that cost more than the price of my dinner.

The pertinent question is the effect that a CEO can have on the profitability and survivability of the organisation. Paddy Power operates in a highly competitive environment that has been going through an IT revolution.
The cleaning lady could be promoted to the head of ESB and does anyone think that the company's bottom line would take a hit?
 
Almost certain there would be a hit, not guaranteed though. Anyway, what exactly is your point? Is it that only certain people are qualified, or educated, or what? Like, the retired CEO of the ESB was put in charge of Irish Water, what exactly did he know about IW? Then again maybe he knew someone who knew someone else and ?????
 

It doesn't make commercial sense either to pay over the odds for a CEO - if you can get someone to do the job just as well for 100k or a million less. Irish Water and ESB are in this zone because of their limited commercial decision making.
All the major Irish Water decisions, including pricing, are being made by the government. Irish Water is not in control of its own destiny. It's a government mandated monopoly, a political creation. It will live and die at government whim.
The salaries of its CEOs should be assessed versus civil service department heads etc. They are making administratively important but not commercially important decisions.

But also it's a false economy to try to save 100k or a million on a CEO's renumeration package, who makes the wrong commercial decisions and costs the company tens or hundreds of millions. Paddy Power are in this zone because their are in a dynamic, competitive sector with high scope for commercial decisions to affect the company bottom line.
Paddy Power, commercially, is in control of its own destiny. It will falter or and propser based on its commercial acumen and decisions.

That's the basis for judgement on whether a CEO salary is too high or too low.

Not some impossible to quantify or define or assess 'value' of the 'importance' of the services to the 'community'. One could just as easily argue why should we expect people to value functional things higher than those discretionary items where they can give full flight to their own decision-making? We could be here until kingdom come going down that particular rabbit hole.
 
Last edited:
odyssey06 said:
It doesn't make commercial sense either to pay over the odds for a CEO - if you can get someone to do the job just as well for 100k or a million less.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. But please don't tell me that the CEO of Paddy Power needs £3.75M to do his job. The fact is that governance of executive pay in the private sector has got completely out of control.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Couldn't agree more. But please don't tell me that the CEO of Paddy Power needs £3.75M to do his job. The fact is that governance of executive pay in the private sector has got completely out of control.
Click to expand...

In the specific Paddy Power instance I actually don't know... In general, I do think that executives full stop (not just when it comes to pay) seem to be out of control of the nominal owners of the companies i.e. the shareholders.

But, after that sidebar, returning to the main topic, I think we now seem to be heading into another general election. Last week I thought FF and FG were going to do a deal for a FG minority government and finagle some sort of deal on Irish Water that would pacify (if not satisfy) their parties.
The sticking point is coming down to FF's insistence on a suspension of charges for X years. The other aspects - waivers, free allowance, state ownership are not red lines.
 
odyssey06 said:
The sticking point is coming down to FF's insistence on a suspension of charges for X years. The other aspects - waivers, free allowance, state ownership are not red lines.
Click to expand...
The relevance of IW to the future of this country is both astonishing and alarming. There are 3 issues that the anti pay bodies have raised:
  1. Water is human right and should be free - Probably largely resolvable in that the basic necessary level required per household can be supplied free with any excess use paid for through metering. No reasonable party should oppose this.
  2. There is an agenda to sell off IW at a future date and we will all be hit with massive bills. Should be easily resolvable by ensuring IW does not own the infrastructure and has now right to be a monopoly supplier.
  3. IW as a company has been so undermined that it will never be seen as acceptable to a significant coterie of the populace. Again simply resolved by implementing some minor structural changes in the organization including a change of name. If I was a business owner I would definitely be making these changes in order to rid my business of the negativities.
FG/FF appear to have hoisted themselves on their own petards over this issue and it has now become the single biggest issue preventing the formation of a stable government. Why is this??? Clearly SF and other so called anti water parties have taken the high moral ground on the issue and FF would view any dilution of their election manifesto on IW as being left open to vulnerability to attack by a Mary Lou uppercut in the Dail. We would end up with farcical Dail debates on the issue and no real work would be done. SF will never accept any resolution to IW as it can only generate additional votes for them.

I am in total despair over this gerrymandering and the potential for it to go on and on until any Government collapses. Politicians have taken entrenched positions and are prepared to ignore the major crisis's of Homelessness and Health as politically these have now assumed a minor importance.

We voted in the lunatics and have only ourselves to blame when they take over the asylum!!!
 
Leo said:
The only people who can say whether that is good value or not are Paddy Power shareholders.
Click to expand...

All well and good but the vast majority of shareholders are all large institutional holders who have no desire to raise issues about executive pay when they don't want attention drawn to themselves. Also, look at the number of companies that have non-binding votes on executive pay. Anyone who thinks there isn't an issue with executive pay just needs to look at recent events in BP.
 

An agreement could be reached but this is more about political manoeuvring rather than water charges.

FF is just going through the motions. It has no intention of supporting a FG minority government. It wants another election despite its pronouncements to the contrary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register