I always say TDs should get around 30 grand a year; then we’ll see who’s interested in public service.

You’ll get committed people alright, but anyone who could earn above that in the private sector won’t be taking the risk to enter politics. That’s not to say those who do enter are only in it for the money, but people make natual choices based on income that you just can’t ignore. Also reducing the salary to that level means politicians will look to make money elsewhere on the side. You create an instant incentive for corruption.

So you want the only Councillors to be people with trust funds and income they do not work for.

How will that be an improvement ? How will it not concentrate all the problems of local Govt. in to an even more woeful form.

Give local Govt. more power, like most of Europe, make they accountable, give the real responsibility and a way of an impact rather than gombeen parish politics cause that is all they are allowed do.

That rots is learnt at the local level but carried all the way up.

Thanks to David and Ronan for providing some light for Stephen’s darkness… Funny how the popular one liners so common on these posts rarely stand up to scrutiny..

Yes, but I live in the real world. We have too many councils, councillors and all they do is pass budgets and bye-laws once a year. One council per county, at the most and If you had people from groups and organisations doing the job on a voluntary basis with expenses. You’d get rid of career politicians and party control of local government, pay them expenses incurred and tell us Donnacha? Are you a politician, involved with councils or member of a party?

He’s good for the biscuits.
But he hates cream crackers…..

Well done Damien, classic

Well why don’t you wait and actually read the reforms.

@Ryan Allen That is fair and reasonable. However, for how much longer must we suffer his arrogance and his vulgar disregard for people.

Waiting for an EU comission job,none vacant at the moment.

Well usually they are approved by the Cabinet (in line with collective Cabinet responsibility) and then published, so some time this week I’d expect. Have a little patience.

He can’t fine them though. Only the courts can, on foot of a case brought by SIPO.

Davy, I think you live in Meath as your estate is inside the Meath boundary as you say yourself. So you want the county boundaries revised too.

I think you have a fair point Davy. For a number of different reasons, not all to do with services. There is a similar situation in Ferrybank in South Kilkenny in Waterford city suburbs. Kilkenny CC do nothing in the south of the county, while spending almost all its budget in the north around kilkenny city. Planning in ferrybank is a complete shambles, while Waterford city seems to do a good job for its people and businesses. Its simply not fair that the city boundary cant be expanded into what is geographically part of the city.

No fan of Phil but he is doing good work in regards to local Govt. This, the amalgamation of Councils and the reduction of TD’s are all important and changes over due for decades.

Pity he fupped it up by being a boor.

He might look like a superman in the cabinet but not to the ordinary citizens who are going to suffer.
I am all for cost savings and removal of duplication but if this was truly the case why only merge Waterford and limerick city councils (the two cities who have suffered so much in recent years and who appear to be getting no jobs unlike cork dublin and Galway.) why not merge all 5 city and county councils.
Or even better yet why not cut the number of TD’s. there is one TD for every 27000 citizens in Ireland. In the uk there is one TD for every 132000 citizens if this was applied in Ireland we would only need at most 40-50 TD’s. however those charged with change are those who will suffer the most hence there will not be a significant reduction in the number of TD’s there will not be an overhaul if the rediculous pensions that they get and all the perks and the outlandish unvoiced expenses they are entitled to claim.

How are ordinary citizens going to ‘suffer’ from badly needed reform of local government? There is no evidence to suggest Limerick or Waterford will suffer considerably in terms of jobs and the local economy as part of a reform programme. The issues with lack of IDA visits is already there, the issue of lack of jobs is already there – and yet we have two tier councils for these cities? I don’t see how any future employer will give two hoots about council arrangement and it will come down to other factors such distance from major airport, skills in the area, road network and so on.

The government appears to want to cut the smaller cities and leave three big cities – Dublin, Cork and Galway – as part of their reforms. I’m not sure what the purpose of ignoring said cities are. I’d like to see more of a focus on large regions – is there an area there for reform perhaps? Delighted that Town Councils are being scrapped, now maybe they will be replaced with voluntary positions instead.

We have already cut the number of TDs (an independent report advised the government on the way forward here) and are looking to abolish the Seanad (something I would not agree with). Local government reform is coming and I hope it brings big changes that will benefit City & County while ensuring a nice saving for the state coffers.

What I would prefer is more political reform which is going at a very slow pace / weak effort. That’s for another day.

Well in Waterford for one the people will suffer if the proposal of basing the HQ in dungarvan goes ahead. Also the fact that the county council is one of the most corrupt in the country and they have a very heavy dent burden at the minute will have a knock on affect on rates etc for already struggling business as once the councils are merged everyone will have to carry that debt burden. Also if the HQ is based almost 50kms from the city centre anyone having to carry out business that involves going to the council offices will have a hell of a round trip for themselves.
I know your feeling on the HQ and it being as you put it a “silly rumour” but I wouldn’t trust minister hogan as far as I could throw him.
I am all for reform like I said but I do believe that reform should be across the board not just in those cities that have already suffered so much.
I do agre that business coming in wont care about the council structure but at the end of the day if our city status is affected by this merger and it comes down to whether a business wants to set up in a town or city there in lies the problem.
We are already being overlooked at every opportunity for jobs as all
Job announcements in recent months have been in dublin cork and Galway and without a city council to fight for Waterford and show exactly what it has to offer then our chances of getting jobs are reduced even further.
This is my opinion which I am entitled to. I already know you disagree with that opinion, but frankly I and many others in Waterford feel that minister hogan has an late riot motive in this move of merging the city and county councils. Frankly I hope I am proven wrong but to be honest I doubt I will.

Kevin, you must be a bit red faced today that the fg mayor has given his backing to the #waterfordgivesashirt campaign

Karen; I agree with pretty much all you said – but just like the story with Galway, I wanted to wait until it was confirmed. I’d kinda put more faith in the Indo than Breaking News, so I suspect Galway wont be reformed. I’m not in favour, as you should know, of the HQ being in the county. That’s on public record, but you probably prefer to pretend I didn’t say it just for the sake of complaining about me. :)

As for the jobs – a lot have been expansions rather than new companies just setting up. Plus, some gave very good reasons Waterford couldn’t match as to why that area was chosen. But I do agree that more needs to be done but I don’t believe our City Council are the ones to do it alone – and with a merger on the cards, it should not be a huge difference to how both City and County are run.

Alan; Why would I? I support most of what the campaign is doing. If anything it just goes to show that FG supporters can have different viewpoints than their party, which many insist they don’t.

Kevin I never said you were for the HQ being based in dungarvan I just said that this is what the people have an issue with.

I am all for reform but unfortunately city and county councils have different priorities and I do think there is going to have to be a lot of trial and error with a merger like this and this is where I feel we will suffer.
Walsh park was meant to be upgraded a few years back the money was there and all but the count board wanted forager field to be upgraded and be the main gas pitch and the city board wanted Walsh park to be upgraded as it is used far more. The result was neither got upgraded and the money went somewhere else. I fear similar situations in the early stages of this merger as you will have city representatives fighting for what they want and county representatives fighting for what they want and this is what has the country in the state that it is in. But unfortunately this will always be an issue.

I am a fair person and I have given you credit where credit was due for wanting to protect our City and that the HQ should be based in Waterford. I won’t disagree with someone just for the sake of it. Which you seem to think is the case but did you after stop to think that you don’t agree with me and you have your viewpoint and that’s what you put across that is simply all I am doing. It’s called a democracy you can’t agree with everyone all if the time life would be very boring all if the time.

I knew Galway was simply a smoke screen to try and defer Waterford people from taking any action against this merger. We would have no issue if it was across the board.

Frankly I think Waterford city looking after the city and south Kilkenny would make far more sense in terms if cost savings and distance etc. even if you take that we were to administer to mulinivat glen more etc its no more then 20 km from the city centre. Dungarvan on the other hand is almost 50 from the city centre. I think these types if alternative options should be looked at across the board and may create a more unified country but that’s never going to happen.

Stephen
I have said this before , It would make a lot of sense .

The merger happening in limerick is also happening in Waterford. This article seems to have left that bit out.
Minister hogan is claiming savings but is the reasoning behind it but I for one would not trust the man as far as I could throw him. If this was truly about cost saving measures it would be across the board and not just picking on the two cities that have suffered the most in recent years.
For this to happen new legislation will have to be brought in to ensure that Waterford and limerick remain city’s even though they will not have a city council, therefore minister hogan will then be able to apply for city status (yet again) for his beloved Kilkenny under the new legislation. Ultimately his aim is to have Kilkenny become the city for the southeast.
If these measures were truly about cost savings why not have councils for the immediate areas I.e. regardless of the county boundary as if this was the case you wouldn’t have shopping centres popping up within a mile of each other because they fall into tow different councils or have hundreds of houses where there is no need for them.
A phil hogan is interested in is getting what he can for his own town. He doesn’t care about who he screws over to do that.

Well said Karen

It seems ridiculous to abolish Waterford city, and enlarge the corrupt dept ridden one of the county! I have heard rumours that the headquarters would not even be in Waterford City! The oldest city in Ireland, without any local government! I think Phil Hogan should be fair and abolish Galway and Cork or leave Waterford alone. If anything he should be expanding the city boundary instead of abolishing the city, Imagine if Balbriggan or Dun Laoighre were the head of a Dublin County Council, It would never be allowed.

There seems to be a lot of NIMBYism of this thread i.e. he should reform everywhere else, but he’d better not dare reform my area.

I think you’ll find what we are saying is have reform across the board. I.e. I’d your doing it for one do it for all or don’t do it at all.

I have no problem what so ever with reform the country needs it but why only in certain areas and not others. Why not bring on a whole new system for everyone.

If they really want cost savings why not start at the top and cut the fat out of Dáil Éireann we don’t need half the amount of TD’s that we have.

Rabble rabble rabble…

Guess what Mark, local government has not been a runaway success in Ireland – instead it has been a disaster in many areas if you look back at the past 20 years. So improving it can’t be a bad thing?

Although changing anything at all seems to be a bad thing for you!

So you are prepared to have only 50 TDs and concentrate decision making on a national level in their hands… Why not just elect 1 person, we’d save even more money. We could resurrect Charlie Haughey with the money we save.

No need, Donncha. He’s still costing us money from the grave.
Not least because of the aristocratic pretensions he roused in a populace blinded by his ‘republican’ posturing.

Eamonn, this idea that there should be a Minister for [insert county/city name] is bloody ridiculous.

Geographic considerations should not decide who gets a ministerial role, talent and ability should. However the old clientelism again rears its head in Irish politics it seems.

As for the MASSIVE savings, they would be in the region of €75m or so based on the cost of running the Oireachtas last year. So I think reforming the public sector properly or cutting wasteful spending would result in far more MASSIVE savings. However your figures are incorrect as there are 650 British MPs, so you might want to recalculate.