Berties Monies

P

pinkyBear

Registered User
Messages
1,065
Hi All,
I am confused, Bertie is in the news again about money.. I know there is an election comming up and this is overshadowing the election, the thing is while I don't condone what he did I cannot throw the first stone. As I have taken cash for little jobs (small websites and stuff) that I did and not paid tax. In the past and was broke...

The thing is Enda Kenny only retired as a teacher this year after 30 years leave of service, which I think is far worse - he was holding up a permanent post, paying a sub and pocketing the rest (plus full entitlements to a pension) ....

What do people think???
 
If he would come clean about it maybe the fuss would die down.

But explaining the 30k payment as a 'stamp duty issue' raised more questions, as I don't think anyone has the slightest clue what he is talking about.
 
Can he say anything publicly - could this have implications in the tribunal?? Any legal buffs out there know?

I agree he should come clean - but can he??
 
You could be right-but he would have been better off saying nothing to begin with.
 
pinkyBear said:
Hi All,
The thing is Enda Kenny only retired as a teacher this year after 30 years leave of service, which I think is far worse - he was holding up a permanent post, paying a sub and pocketing the rest (plus full entitlements to a pension) ....
What do people think??
Click to expand...

I am completely confused. Are you saying that Enda K was getting paid for the past 30 years for NOT working as a teacher. He then paid someone else less money to do the job for him and he pocketed the rest?

Is that true? Surely the dept of education do not pay teachers that are not working for 30 years.

I would have assumed that leave of service means you dont get paid but the job is there for you if you want to return. However 30 years leave of service is generous in the extreme.
 
Last edited:
homeowner said:
I am completely confused. Are you saying that Enda K was getting paid for the past 30 years for NOT working as a teacher. He then paid someone else less money to do the job for him and he pocketed the rest?

Is that true? Surely the dept of education do not pay teachers that are not working for 30 years.

I would have assumed that leave of service means you dont get paid but the job is there for you if you want to return. However 30 years leave of service is generous in the extreme.
Click to expand...
He should have resigned long ago, but you are correct in your interpretation of leave of service, it does however entitle him to a full pension (i think), but only because he was a dail member.

As for Bertie, there is no restriction on him talking about whatever he wants, it certainly didn't stop him last October. The reality is that he should never have opened his mouth, but once you start airing your business in public, you can't stop just because the story no longer makes sense. And to mention stamp duty in the week that's in it, ffs!!
 
I don't see a whole lot wrong with politicians being entitled to return to teaching or other civil service posts if they lose their seats. I would not criticise the likes of Enda Kenny or Mary Hanafin for exercising this entitlement if/as it is legally open to them. They would be foolish not to do so. Kenny only held on to his seat by the skin of his teeth in the last election. If he had lost his seat, I don't think it would have been fair to deny him the opportunity to return to his teaching post, after devoting many years to public service as a TD. Similarly Mary Hanafin was widowed in tragic circumstances a few years ago and it would have been a scandal had she ended up on the dole queue if her family committments as a single parent had forced her to step down as a TD.

The notion that the practice of TDs holding onto teaching posts is somehow comparable to those taking bungs from private businesses is preposterous. Which is more serious, Padraig Flynn's retention of his teaching post for 30+ years or his alleged acceptance of €50,000 from Tom Gilmartin?
 
politicians being entitled to return to teaching or other civil service posts if they lose their seats.
Click to expand...

Thats all well and good, if after 5 -10 years but 30 years and if they lost their seats I would seriously doubt they would be looking for a teaching post, they would be looking at a higher post, given their experience... So why hold onto the post for 30 years...

As for Paidraig, believe me I think what went on was discusting and Bev was no better.. There have alway been rumors about Bertie (unsubstantiated), maybey he is the last of the breed that did take money... I don't know .. and this is what confuses me.

When I look at FF, I can personally vouch for the man who represents my area, I have had personal dealings with him.

The fine geal candidate I know personally from where I used to work and to be honest he is a complete sleaze bucket.. so he is definatly out for me.
The labour candidate to be honest I never hear/see from her - except in the last 2 weeks when I got a note in the door...

In respect to the government, mabey a change is good, but locally I would hate to see the locall FF candidate go as he is really good, and this payment thing with bertie is holding his own party back.. Maybey he should gracefully resign ....
 
pinkyBear said:
Hi All,
....I don't condone what he did I cannot throw the first stone. As I have taken cash for little jobs (small websites and stuff) that I did and not paid tax. In the past and was broke...
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% honest but I still wouldn't leave a crook in charge of my financial affairs.Bertie is the leader of a government that spends over Eur50 BILLION of our money per year.Does it matter whether he, or his colleagues, are honest?You bet it does.
 
he won't resign, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

I know - cause if he does it looks as though he has done something wrong.... But he should really at this stage... He has already said that if her does get elected - he wont be in for the full term....
 
I wonder would it help if Bertie were to sign a pre - nup oh sorry a pre election document saying that if he is re elected and then if the tribunal does find that he has done something wrong that he would then resign. something like what Enda Kenny is saying that if he is in goverment and that if he doest deliver on his promises that he won't stand again.
Anyone putting themselves forward for any job should have to answer any questions they are asked regarding how they are going to do that job.
I think that is the problem Bertie doesnt seem to think that he should give us the answers.
 
Quote: I don't see a whole lot wrong with politicians being entitled to return to teaching or other civil service posts if they lose their seats Unquote.

to clarify: Public servants and every other irish citizen can be elected to Dail/Seanad.

Civil servants can not.
 
Well it looks like Bertie has answered the questions at last. The 30k was not given to him but to Ms Larkin, it was given for the renovations of the house, he also put his money into the house, end of!!! now we might get on with the election hopefully,
As a landlady myself hope my tenants are not expecting 30k to do up their houses how they like.
 
I googled this interesting article http://www.indiana.edu/~csrc/millar3.html

With regard to the interdependencies between the political and administrative systems, whilst the Minister of the department officially employs his departments civil servants, they do so on the recommendation and nomination of individuals by the Civil Service Commission, political affiliation or support is extraneous to the procedure.

Any successful candidate appointed to the civil or public service, if a member of a political party is required to relinquish membership on appointment. Furthermore, civil servants who declares himself a candidate for a local, national or European election must retire from the service regardless of the election outcome.

Since the 1960's the civil service associations battled against this tradition. In 1974, the government introduced a modification to this rule, regarding political activity, by permitting clerical staff, analogous grades in the technical area and industrial workers to engage in politics. The statement did however, expressly forbid civil servants form standing for election regardless of their grade.

Civil servants involved in the framing of policy documents and proposals remain completely barred from political activities, this includes those servants found in the administrative, middle and higher management grades in the general service.

The government of the day introduced this modifying measure by attempting to balance two tantamount arguments; that in a democratic society it is desirable that as many citizens as possible should play an active part in the public affairs of the community, balanced by the notion that the public interest demands that confidence be maintained in the political impartiality of civil servants.
Click to expand...
 
homeowner said:
I am completely confused. Are you saying that Enda K was getting paid for the past 30 years for NOT working as a teacher. He then paid someone else less money to do the job for him and he pocketed the rest?

Is that true? Surely the dept of education do not pay teachers that are not working for 30 years.

I would have assumed that leave of service means you dont get paid but the job is there for you if you want to return. However 30 years leave of service is generous in the extreme.
Click to expand...

Is it true that Bertie is on extended leave from his job as accounts clerk at the Mater hospital?
 
Marcecie said:
Well it looks like Bertie has answered the questions at last. The 30k was not given to him but to Ms Larkin, it was given for the renovations of the house, he also put his money into the house, end of!!!
Click to expand...

It's only just begun. Sunday papers will be interesting........ ;)
 
ubiquitous said:
I don't see a whole lot wrong with politicians being entitled to return to teaching or other civil service posts if they lose their seats. I would not criticise the likes of Enda Kenny or Mary Hanafin for exercising this entitlement if/as it is legally open to them.
Click to expand...
When a teacher becomes a TD their replacement cannot be made permanent so in Enda’s case someone has been teaching his classes for 30 years on a temporary basis. That temp teacher does not get paid for holidays and does not get a proper pension (the major financial attraction of becoming a teacher). Enda gets paid the difference between what the temp teacher gets and what he would get if he was still there full time. He also gets a teachers pension. I accept that it could be a good idea for their job to be left open for one term or the Dail but not beyond that.

ubiquitous said:
They would be foolish not to do so.
Click to expand...
They would be honourable if they did not do so.

ubiquitous said:
The notion that the practice of TDs holding onto teaching posts is somehow comparable to those taking bungs from private businesses is preposterous. Which is more serious, Padraig Flynn's retention of his teaching post for 30+ years or his alleged acceptance of €50,000 from Tom Gilmartin?
Click to expand...
I agree that in general it’s more serious to take bribes (from anyone) but in the case sited by the OP Enda Kenny has gained a lot more by exploiting a temp teacher for 30 years than Bertie ever got from dinner buddies or plasterers. It is, in my opinion, no right to keep a job open for yourself if doing so seriously disadvantages the person who replaces you.
 
Are people not a little tired listening to Bertie fobbing us off by saying that it's a campaign to ruin his party's chances at re-election.

Everytime something is released to the media, he says it's sabotage. Fair enough, but can we also focus on the issue itself a bit more. Why was a businessman giving 30,000 to Celia Larkin...she can't pull any strings for him. Would it be fair to presume her relationship with Bertie was a factor in this 30,000 being handed over. If Bertie was already putting money into the house, perhaps that was 30,000 less he had to put in. Is this a wild conclusion? I think not.

It's getting ridiculous at this stage...Bertie has no credibility left in my mind. If there weren't so many hidden agendas with Bertie, there would be nothing to be released to the media and nothing to hide. How many more will come out of the woodwork...
 
micamaca said:
Everytime something is released to the media, he says it's sabotage. Fair enough, but can we also focus on the issue itself a bit more. Why was a businessman giving 30,000 to Celia Larkin...she can't pull any strings for him. Would it be fair to presume her relationship with Bertie was a factor in this 30,000 being handed over. If Bertie was already putting money into the house, perhaps that was 30,000 less he had to put in. Is this a wild conclusion? I think not.
Click to expand...

£30,000GPB and some £50,000IRP of renovations ear-marked for a house that was four years old and worth maybe £140,000IRP at the time. Not exactly a coat paint a new set of curtains, sounds like there must have been massive structural damage.

So why did the renovations never go ahead? Why did Bertie buy the house (for whichever of the two sums he says he did) and still not carry out any repairs? How is the place still standing if it needed work equivalent to more than half its cost (actually probably more than the cost of knocking it down and rebuilding it at the time) over a decade ago?

What the hell was the "stamp duty" comment about? I was under the mistaken impression people paid stamp duty to the revenue rather than the partner of a potential tenant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top