President's salary and expenses 2010

S

STEINER

Registered User
Messages
1,161
I read in today's Sunday Independent that the Dept of Finance confirmed the 2010 President's salary as 325k and expenses paid to her in 2010 as 317k. Was she paying for aviation fuel or what!
 
It's disgusting the amount of money that is paid out especially when one looks at the state of some of our national hospitals.
 
Was that money going to the president personally, or for the cost of her office and other things such as the visit of the Queen?
 
State can't cut her salary for the same reason as judges, however, in fairness to her, she did voluntarily take a €60k-€70k paycut last year. The expenses are not money into her pocket, but her to fund travel and entertainement etc. Like it or not, if we want someone to travel around opening things and representing the country in a positive light, it costs money to do so

New president's salary is set at €249k
 
Complainer said:
That's your problem, right there.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the Irish Independent is not on the Labour Party’s approved reading list. You, Steiner, are a subversive and when the revolution comes you’ll get your comeuppance , you and all those people who think they are capable of forming their own opinions.
 
the cost of running that office is a waste. In my opinion this is a position that warrants only the appointment by the taoiseach as he would a senator. Or rotate it amongst senators. A glorified home based amabassador. Why are we voting for some one who has the power to do nothing, no mandate to effect change.
I do not understand the coverage by the media!!!!

As for Norris or McGuiness, whether your for or against them, why have a question mark over the president which could be detrimental to the country.
They all have pasts, but stick out sore thumb pasts. its bad enough they have no power but the possibilty of doing harm by some other foreign heads perception???


And who's that in the Mary Davis posters.

The whole process so far is embarrassing and costly.
 
dockingtrade said:
the cost of running that office is a waste. In my opinion this is a position that warrants only the appointment by the taoiseach as he would a senator.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. The President actually has the most important job in the country in that once legislation is passed by the Dail, only they can refer it to the Supreme Court. If you put a "yes man" in the Aras, you remove the last check on the Govt's powers. You'd be dependent on someone running the risk of financial ruin to challenge legisaltion in the courts.

Also think back to when Haughey and go were ringing the Aras, if one of his cronies had been in power back then.........
 

The presidents blocks legislation?? the president checks the Govt powers?? you're adding to the circus
 
dockingtrade said:
the cost of running that office is a waste.
Click to expand...

I pick on this comment in this thread to say "you're confusing cost with value".

Countries have a Head of State. Part of our history is a desire to be a country in our own right and to have the structures and conventions that being a country involves.

We could apply to become part of the Commonwealth again and look to the Queen as Head of State, but I doubt there's much appetite for that.

The cost of the Office of President is a given. What should happen is for the Office to be run in a way that provides benefit for the country.
 
dockingtrade said:
The presidents blocks legislation?? the president checks the Govt powers?? you're adding to the circus
Click to expand...

n 1982 Paddy Hillary refused to buckle under pressure from Haughey when he sought not to have the Dail dissolved, if he had given in, we could have had another 3 years or so of an FF govt.

As for referring legislation to the Supreme Court, both of the Mary's and Paddy Hilary have referred legislation which the Supreme Court have confirmed would have broken the Constition had they been implemented. That legislation therefore was not signed into law. Those are the facts.
 

So Mary McAlleese is culpible for what happened in this country over the the last 14 years???
 
dockingtrade said:
So Mary McAlleese is culpible for what happened in this country over the the last 14 years???
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you managed to draw that conclusion.

The point of the check is that if the Dail tries to enact legislation that is potentially in breech of the constituiton, the President has the ability to stop that.
 
ye have taken what i replied there completely out of context. MSPOX was building up the role and i said that tongue on cheek.
Maybe thats my fault.
Ye dont have to be so pompus about it in ye're replies.

"harsh but true" fair enough (as i say i've been taken out of context)
 

I'll put my toys back in the pram if you will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register