Will the Dail career of Mick Wallace be truncated?

[disability student]

Joe Higgins did not 'misuse' any expenses - he claimed expenses for travelling to do his work and - despite what d. student claims above - produces detailed accounts for all the money he receives from the Dail. To demonstrate the point - the Dail committee responsible for the expenses issued a ruling claiming that legal advice determined that Joe Higgins mis-claimed the expenses. However, it later turned out that the Dail committee never actually met, no legal advice was sought or received by the same Dail committee and the statement was issued by a bureaucrat who apparently was 'ordered' to do it by 'someone somewhere'.

Would Higgins provide his expenses online when on receipt from the Dail just for the record to stop the unfounded rumours?

Has Higgins spoken to the Dail committee re bureaucrat?

There is one TD who refused to claim expenses on record as his salary would be enough to provide it. Lot of TD's are up to their necks re property bought during the boom and find themselves in trouble to pay back in negative equity.

[Sam Lord]

As late as last night on VB Clare Daly as a ULA rep was again defending Wallace on national TV.

I watched it earlier today and did not get that impression. She said that he was wrong to pocket the VAT. I think she even used the word "condemn" when pushed by VB. She then gave a personal opinion on some Dail committee that Wallace supposedly did not cooperate with, saying that she would not have co-operated with it either and that it was a matter for the Revenue. If that is her opinion it is her opinion. She is allowed it without it being a defence of Wallace. You may as well say that the SP defended Wallace by refusing to call for his resignation from the Dail.

[Baron von Biffo]

I didn't say he had. I said he had been accused of misusing his expenses. It happens I think it was nit picking pedantry. You can claim expenses for this bus but not that one; ridiculous. Socialists need to lose the hair shirt 'find' some toner and **** a deaf un.

There's no doubt about it, Higgins admits he used his constituency expenses for national campaigning and that's against the rules.

It's not nit picking pedantry to expose TDs who don't obey the rules in relation to their expenses.

There was talk of Higgins having legal advice which supported his argument and that he was considering a judicial review but all of that seems to have been quietly forgotten. Now why would that be do you think?

[DCon]

Would Higgins provide his expenses online when on receipt from the Dail just for the record to stop the unfounded rumours?

Has Higgins spoken to the Dail committee re bureaucrat?

There is one TD who refused to claim expenses on record as his salary would be enough to provide it. Lot of TD's are up to their necks re property bought during the boom and find themselves in trouble to pay back in negative equity.

Leo does this. http://www.leovaradkar.ie/?page_id=167

I think all TD's should do this. And no, they should not receive a "preparing my expenses for publication" allowance.

If they can claim them, which they have no problem with, they can publish them

[bernadette]

There's no doubt about it, Higgins admits he used his constituency expenses for national campaigning and that's against the rules.

It's not nit picking pedantry to expose TDs who don't obey the rules in relation to their expenses.

There was talk of Higgins having legal advice which supported his argument and that he was considering a judicial review but all of that seems to have been quietly forgotten. Now why would that be do you think?

It is nit picking pedantry when the money has verifiably been used for travel regarding his job. The big complaint was that he had used his travel expenses to travel outside his area to campaign for something the government was introducing which he disagreed with.

I think that its his job when he disagrees with government actions to say so loudly and travel using his travel expenses if need be to those places he need to go to be heard.

FG/LAB/FF/SF are in no position to condemn someone who may have strayed out of a pin point on a map.

I would hope he has dropped the judicial review because the worthless spendthrift government have seen sense.

[Baron von Biffo]

It is nit picking pedantry when the money has verifiably been used for travel regarding his job. The big complaint was that he had used his travel expenses to travel outside his area to campaign for something the government was introducing which he disagreed with.

I think that its his job when he disagrees with government actions to say so loudly and travel using his travel expenses if need be to those places he need to go to be heard.

FG/LAB/FF/SF are in no position to condemn someone who may have strayed out of a pin point on a map.

I would hope he has dropped the judicial review because the worthless spendthrift government have seen sense.

Sorry Bernadette but that's just the old discredited Irish way of doing things - If you don't like the rules just ignore them.

Higgins is a party leader so he has a party leaders allowance for any national campaigning he wants to do. Constituency expenses are intended to cover constituency work. If Higgins doesn't agree with the rules he should have sought to change.

[bernadette]

Sorry Bernadette but that's just the old discredited Irish way of doing things - If you don't like the rules just ignore them.

Higgins is a party leader so he has a party leaders allowance for any national campaigning he wants to do. Constituency expenses are intended to cover constituency work. If Higgins doesn't agree with the rules he should have sought to change.

But it is nit picking! How can it not be? He was working, campaigning, not for election which would be different but against something he and the majority of people in this country are against.

It was an attempt to embarrass him and frankly if that, in this country, is the best they could do the mans a saint!

[Jolly Red Giant]

Higgins is a party leader so he has a party leaders allowance for any national campaigning he wants to do. Constituency expenses are intended to cover constituency work. If Higgins doesn't agree with the rules he should have sought to change.

1. Joe Higgins is not a 'party leader' - the Socialist Party has a collective leadership.

2. The 'party leaders allowance' cannot be used for 'national campaigning' - there are very strict rules about the things it can be used for and that is not one of them.

[Baron von Biffo]

But it is nit picking! How can it not be?

Because he was breaking the rules on constituency expenses. If he thinks those rules are unnecessarily onerous then he should seek to have them amended. Nothing will ever change in this country until we change our attitude to obeying our laws.

He was working, campaigning, not for election which would be different but against something he and the majority of people in this country are against.

It was an attempt to embarrass him and frankly if that, in this country, is the best they could do the mans a saint!

It really doesn't matter what he was doing, if he was outside his constituency he wasn't entitled to use constituency expenses to do it. That said, I suggest that the whole anti-HC campaign by the SP and other parties is an opportunist electoral strategy.

[Baron von Biffo]

1. Joe Higgins is not a 'party leader' - the Socialist Party has a collective leadership.

Which member of the SP is the Parliamentary Leader for the purposes of the act?

2. The 'party leaders allowance' cannot be used for 'national campaigning' - there are very strict rules about the things it can be used for and that is not one of them.

The leaders allowance can be used for,

"the provision for, or recoupment of, transport and personal expenditure incurred by a parliamentary leader, officers or a parliamentary party spokesperson as a result of their parliamentary party function,"

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/GeneralPub...me,5502,en.htm

[bernadette]

Because he was breaking the rules on constituency expenses. If he thinks those rules are unnecessarily onerous then he should seek to have them amended. Nothing will ever change in this country until we change our attitude to obeying our laws.



It really doesn't matter what he was doing, if he was outside his constituency he wasn't entitled to use constituency expenses to do it. That said, I suggest that the whole anti-HC campaign by the SP and other parties is an opportunist electoral strategy.

And I strongly suspect that every other TD does the same and worse. It was an attempt to discredit him and take peoples eye off the unpopular household charge which is nothing more than robbery.

[Baron von Biffo]

And I strongly suspect that every other TD does the same and worse. It was an attempt to discredit him and take peoples eye of the unpopular household charge which is nothing more than robbery.

I keep trying to get this point across - It doesn't matter what he was campaigning for or against. Constituency expenses are for constituency work.

He broke the rules so any embarrassment or political damage he suffered is of his own making.

[bernadette]

I keep trying to get this point across - It doesn't matter what he was campaigning for or against. Constituency expenses are for constituency work.

He broke the rules so any embarrassment or political damage he suffered is of his own making.

Yes! Technically he broke the rules but he did not leg it with a couple of tons of toner which by the way was in the rules...... Higgins used his expenses on national not constituency business, lets all hang him.

[Baron von Biffo]

Yes! Technically he broke the rules but he did not leg it with a couple of tons of toner which by the way was in the rules...... Higgins used his expenses on national not constituency business, lets all hang him.

No-one is calling for a hanging. A refund and an apology would be appropriate but Higgins refuses to admit that what he did was wrong so the matter remains open.

[bernadette]

No-one is calling for a hanging. A refund and an apology would be appropriate but Higgins refuses to admit that what he did was wrong so the matter remains open.

Why should he, its a minor technicality, no one is suggesting he 'disappeared' a couple of tons of toner or declared his main home was hundreds of miles from his constituency and the Dail and those two are the tip of the iceberg. Those people who are hounding Higgins need to put their own house in order.