Labour Councillor's harsh words for Bin Tax Non Payers

by durutti Fri Sep 05, 2003 13:12

what would you expect from someone who is a lawyer by proffession. Joanna probably doesn't want her glittering legal career harmed in any way by pesky protesters.

I would be interested in Labour's position on non collection. I know they dont support non payment, so the next logical step is that they don't support those that are victimised by the council.

by The Real Durutti (a slight return) Fri Sep 05, 2003 13:31

There are plenty of scheming careerist Labourite hacks but there are also rank & file members who are involved in the campaign. I dont think Tuffy is the sharpest knife in the drawer but I'm surorised if she would come out with this crap.

by Andrew Fri Sep 05, 2003 13:39

I'm quite willing to believe a LP member might have said all this but it would be a little bit more convincing if we were told WHO is posting this, WHO these remarks were made to, WHEN they were said and WHERE they were said.

by Flood Watcher Fri Sep 05, 2003 13:48

the above post is not the first time that andrew flood has leaped to the defence of the Labour Party. Maybe it shows something about the petty bourgeois nature of anarchy

by trot watcher Fri Sep 05, 2003 13:51

Why do the SP believe that its ok to make up stories about their opponents? Answer that Finghin.

by Andrew Fri Sep 05, 2003 14:16

If I want people to know my full name here I'll publish it myself. It's not up to you to do the job for the cops or my employer. Nor is this the first time you have done this, your something of an occasional stalker over the last couple of years. And the stalker does appear to be (yet another) anonymous SP member from the politics of what they post.

Besides that perhaps you should re-read what I actually posted? My comment is based on the knowledge that if I want to convince any Labour Party supporter that what was claimed was indeed said I need something beyond 'an anonymous contributor to indymedia claims she said it persons unknown, at a unknown time and place'.

by SpySpotter Fri Sep 05, 2003 14:21

On the SY Board they out and identify people who disagree with them. They did this to AOC but they may have got the name wrong.

by Chekov - WSM Fri Sep 05, 2003 14:30

Asking for sources for the information in an article is now apparently to be interpreted as 'leaping to the defence of the labour party'. Surely, asking for sources is an elementary part of any type of research / journalism. Or are you just supposed to agree with everything blindly that seems to fit your agenda?

To get back to the point of the thread, while door to door canvassing in Stoneybatter a few months back for the bin charges campaign, I came across one pensioner who had recently received a threatening letter from the council. Not knowing what to do, he went to one of Joe Costello's clinics to seek advice. Joe told him that the council were really getting serious this time (which was of course bullshit) and advised him to pay or he'd be in trouble. Joe didn't inform him of the existance of the local bin charges campaign (which he knows of well), nor did he mention the high levels of non-payment. The said pensioner therefore paid his bills. He was absolutely gutted when we came around to his house and told him about the campaign and the non-payment levels, the case was obviously very important to him. I have an independent witness to all this by the way (I was canvassing with a partner)

If this is the behaviour of one of the Labour lefties, I would fully believe that she may have said the above quotes, but I'd be surprised if she did so in public, as it is hardly a good opening gambit for the local election campaign next year. If there is no verifiable source for the quote, it is a terrible idea to advance it. Better to argue to people that Labour's actions show them to be pro-charges than to present accusations that they can refute.

by Agent of Chaos Fri Sep 05, 2003 14:37

The SY have deleted my last 2 comments from the thread mentioned. I think they got upset when I pointed out how many people visit Indymedia compared to their board. They certainly do the Gardas work by naming people.

by Anonymous Fri Sep 05, 2003 15:00

In all fairness "not the 1st time" - get the message.

Regards.

by iosaf Fri Sep 05, 2003 15:30

hurtful, disturbing and has poisoned many users of this site's impressions and knowledge of each other.
So: fuck off "Anarcho-watcher"/"SP-watcher"/"fascist-watcher"/"name-watcher"/"SF-watcher"/"green-watcher"
ah, but therein the great mystery, there never has been a "SF-watcher" nor a "green-watcher".

here beginnith the lesson.

Suggestion to next commentators:

WHO is posting this article , WHO were these remarks made to, WHEN were they said and WHERE were they said?

Taken @ first reading they are typical utterances of a lawyer in paranthesis and bear no relation to the Bin tax debate. I'd call that trolling.

by Watcher Watcher Fri Sep 05, 2003 15:48

I think there was a SFwatcher or it might have been SFhater or could it have been a Justinwatcher?

by Anti Bin Tax Activist Fri Sep 05, 2003 16:10

Again another few jokers try to ruin a news piece.

I put up the original news item. Like Andrew I don't want my employers to get after me for using the work computer. It doesn't mean that I'm a shitstirrer, I want to remain anonymous.

I think that Labour should clarify where they stand on non collection. We know that they advocate payment, what will they do with non collection?

by Curious Fri Sep 05, 2003 16:29

Of course the SP would never wreck a piece, just look at the Laffoy article.

You still havent provided any evidence.

by Andrew Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:03

I'm not aware of any Labour TD or councillor advocating non-payment at any stage of the campaign. There are examples of them advising people against it. I'm not even aware of a Labour Party member advocating non-payment (although I know a couple who probably would if asked)!

'Bin Tax Activist' its quite possible for you to remain anonymous but still provide the other information that would make your quotes more usable. ie who they were said to, when and where. My original request was genuine in this regard as if sourced in some way they would be useful.

by not on your life! - sp Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:36

yes everything is the fault of the SP. even labours position on Bin Charges. At the end of the day we will see who supports actions and who doesn't. Labour activists have been very vocal against us lately but in the end people will decide for themselves. Half the Socialist party would have been labour supporters once until the party saved Fine Gael or Finnia Fail one too many times. labour have only themselves to answer for this, not us we didn't make your positions.

by Stalins airbrush Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:36

Shane.Kenna
Moderators

Please note that in an effort to provide a better forum for all users, from September 5th "Guests" in this forum are not permitted to post or reply to topics. Guest users may register for free on this forum if they wish to post or reply to any topic

by gman Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:40

When an example of the traitorous role that the LP are playing in the bin tax on the eve of non collection is posted on indymedia what are the replies?

surprise surprise it descends into slagging off the SP. The SP by all accounts have a very very good record in the bin tax campaign the Labour Party do not. The Labour Party are opposed to mass non payment. Yet who do people slag off?

This site is pathetic.

by Derek Hatton Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:42

"Labour activists have been very vocal against us lately but in the end people will decide for themselves. Half the Socialist party would have been labour supporters once until the party saved Fine Gael or Finnia Fail one too many times. labour have only themselves to answer for this, not us we didn't make your positions."

More distortions - they left when it looked like they might be fucked out. Very principled!

by Andrew Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:48

The anonymous SP member who decided it was 'smart' to have a go at me for requesting more details on what was said where etc.

This is the core of the problem. The SP have a record of starting (anonymous) slagfests here and then bleating like sheep when these methods turn around to bite them in the ass.

Personally I think 90%+ of the attacks on the SP are stupid but they'd be in a much stronger position to complain about these if they were not so obviously fond of indulging in the same behaviour.

Back to the issue. Anyone, anywhere ever heard a LP TD/counciller advocate non payment? I've presumed that their silence on this was obvious but seeing as some people see a need to 'expose' them perhaps this is not so.

by not on your life - sp Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:54

I wasn't alking about older members who were in Labour. I mean younger members like myself who was never in Militant. I would definitely have supported the labour party if labour didn't support FF and FG. Remeber the reason Labour aren't in the present coalition is because FF chose not to go with you, not the other way around.

by gman Fri Sep 05, 2003 17:55

Nearly all SP members have simply stopped visiting this site. I think that a vast vast majority of 'SPmembers' posting abuse are the products of trolls. I think that includes the post having a go at you.

As for the Labour Party, they are supposedly agaisnt the bin tax but have voted for it up and down the country and their councillors have done deals to get it passed. Their official party line on non payment and direct action to blockade bin trucks is that they are against it as it would be breaking the law. So it does not surprise me in the least if the initial post is true.

by badman Fri Sep 05, 2003 18:00

If there are no SP members on the site, how come every fucking thread turns into a slagfest SP vs. Labour / SP vs. SF / SP vs. anarchos / SP vs ex-SP / SP vs Greens and so fucking on. Then the SP blame indymedia??? Your mental universe is funny indeed.

by Agent of Chaos Fri Sep 05, 2003 18:02

Shane Kenna deleting comments when hes losing an argument, altering his own comments , naming people,banning guests from commenting.

by john - community activist D15 Fri Sep 05, 2003 18:03

So it was unprincipled to leave the labour party after they were kicked out? Now this logic is the best yet on indymedia, what were they supposed to do? As far as I remeber Joe higgins was expelled. After he was expelled was he supposed to just sit back retire from politics and leave LABOUR to itself. Or was he to go on with the struggle organising against attacks on people through water and bin charges.

its really unfair that joe wasn't't polite enough to take his expulsion seriously. But I suppose they have principle unlike the party queing up to share power with FF and FG, you know what the worst part is before the election you won't even tell us whether it will be FF or FG just whichever way the numbers go.

It makes me very angry you can attack someone like joe this way very angry. I'll never vote for you again.

NOW MY FRIEND THATS PRINCIPLE!

by Badman Fri Sep 05, 2003 18:09

This comment seemed to come from a Labour Party person. Would people cop the fuck on and realise that these opinions that are represented on indymedia exist in the heads of people in the real world, all indymedia does is allow everyone to see them. I know that ye all like to think that the whole thing must be a big conspiracy and that such 'bad' opinions could not possibly exist in the real world. Bad news: they do. Deal with it.

Derek was not saying that Joe et al should have taken their expulsion sitting down, he was saying that if you get kicked out, you can't really later say that you left on a point of principle. Stop; think for a minute; try to understand the point that's being made. Don't just attack your mental windmills straight away.

by ray - labour Fri Sep 05, 2003 20:16

the same basic problem persists,the original piece isn't backed up by information.if it's true then fair enough but prove it.statements without evidence just lead to these shit throwing competitions.so i call on the original writer to name his/her source or pack up aand leave your credibility behind.

by sp member (personal capacity) Fri Sep 05, 2003 22:40

Rather than go in circles about this could someone throw a little light on the subject.

What is OFFICAL LP policy on bin charges?
What is OFFICAL LP policy on non payment, for or against?
What is OFFICAL LP policy on non collection of bins?

by Anonymous Sat Sep 06, 2003 12:44

http://www.labour.ie/

Very little / hardly anything said on this on their website.

But if you persist and do a search under "bin" in their policy section, there is a press release by Eamon Gilmore, Labour Spokesperson on Environment and Local Government, Issued on Thursday 30 January, 2003.

http://www.labour.ie/press/detail.tmpl?sku=20030130135015&BOLD=bin

At the end of this release he states:-

"The Labour Party will oppose this new compulsory bin tax. We are opposed to back door taxation."

by libertarian socialist Sat Sep 06, 2003 13:56

What is OFFICAL LP policy on non payment, for or against?
What is OFFICAL LP policy on non collection of bins?

by Dumper Sat Sep 06, 2003 15:08

All this bickering between LP & SP means nothing to me, its over 30 years since I was in a political party. Its about the same length of time since I gave any kind of a preference vote to Labour, though I put on a diplomatic front when I meet any of them.

The point I want to make is that it is our own individual efforts which will undermine and help to defeat this double taxation, If the Corpo, or "Dublin City Council", as they have so grandiously renamed themselves, refuse to collect my rubbish, I will find another way to dispose of it. I will do my best to ensure that this causes as much inconvenience as possible to the Corpo and the commercial sector, and I would urge others to do the same.

by The Navvy Soviet Sun Sep 07, 2003 20:33

I'm not sure if the above comments are true or not but if anyone agrees with what is written, Then let me tell you why you shouldn't pay!

Apart from the charges being well above an affordable amount for the average worker and should these charges be accepted by the rest of the country, your delightful little county council will hand over the refuse service to a private company who will indeed raise the amount by what ever percentage they like.

I don't mean they'll add another 100 euro, I'm talking about anyting between 50% and 300%, which if you live in the Dun laoghaire - rathdown county, who currently are charging about €620 per annum, would be €930 at the low end and €1,860 at the high end!

Another concern would be that workers that currently work for the council woundn't necessarily keep their jobs or even their union reconition! For instance have a look at the most likly candidate for the refuse contract in Dun laoghaire - Rathdown, Greenstar.

These are mere basic worries that surround the bin charges. For info on your local campaign see the link.

by King Mob Mon Sep 08, 2003 14:15

Typical SWP/SP trick/tactic to attack a party which is many times more popular than their tiny little outfits and which will always be thank God namely the Labour Party

by sp member (personal capacity) Mon Sep 08, 2003 21:02

I some how doubt that the LP will be pleased to have got King Mobs support. He appears to be moving through the newswire attempting to provoke a row any place he can get one but bigger issues are at stake so he can be left to sort himself out as best he can.

On the bin tax issue the news that Fingal council intends to provoke residents on Wednesday makes the situation all the more urgent everyone who opposes the bin tax should make their voice heard, fight this latest move by the council and come fully behind the Fingal anti bin tax activists.

by Puzzled Tue Sep 09, 2003 15:07

What's wrong with the idea of paying tax to have your bins emptied? The money has to come from somewhere. There seems to be a notion abroad that we can all insist on first class public services - but that somebody else should pay. I don't see why.

Moreover, paying tax is a statement of social inclusivity. We do it and take care of both our own needs and those of others. It is the right wing who always moan about taxes and insist on less of them. It is the opposite of the individualism that I thought the left would abhor. So I would suggest that the bin tax is a form of therapy, good for progressive politics, and that we should smile, pay it - and move on. And taxes in general should be increased a good bit.

by tax payer #11 Tue Sep 09, 2003 17:22

this is a DOUBLE TAX!

by Puzzled Tue Sep 09, 2003 17:36

But my point is that the overall amount of tax raised isn't enough for what everyone wants from it. Ok then, lets oppose the bin tax - but would you say increase other taxes to make up the shortfall?????? If not, maybe you need a calculator.

by simple answer Tue Sep 09, 2003 18:17

something like 97% of all waste is non-domestic waste.

tax the real polluters.

by Terry Tue Sep 09, 2003 18:57

This Bin Tax is a double tax. Besides that the plan is to hand the whole thing over to the private sector who have no interest in reducing waste volumes as this would reduce turnover in the business and potential for profit.

Reducing waste would also wreak the governments plans for the multiple incinerators planned for this country, a number of which have been approved already, but with the biggest, which will handle 500,000 tonnes per year planned for Ringsend in Dublin yet to be approved.

Incinerators burn stuff (paper, cardboard, wood and plastic) which can be recycled! The BIGGEST plastic recycling plant in Europe is actually called Wellman International and their factory is up in Co Meath, near the Cavan border. They can and do recycle plastic PET bottles which includes all those bulky soft drinks bottles and shampoo type bottles. Absolutely nothing has been done by the government to take advantage of this and help the recycling of plastic. Recycling infrastructure is completely underfunded in this country so that it is set-up to fail. This is why the waste crisis is always presented in the media as Landfill vs Incinerator with the sentence thrown in, 'ah sure, recycling is well and good, but it doesn't work' -This is simply lies. It is a well orchestrated to mislead the public by manipulating the debate and discussion, events around waste, and of course the recent legislative changes to take decisions regarding waste and recycling away from councils, although in the current form they are not very democratic anyhow.

The Green Party has been suckered into supporting this unjust tax, because they have swallowed their simplistic argument: Polluter pays, we pay -> therefore it's good and GP support. They clearly haven't thought about this at all. Any analysis they have done must be very shallow indeed. I would say non-existant. I suspect they are afraid of an attack by the media which would result in a 'sound bite' level of debate, which they know they cannot win, because they know a proper analysis would never be permitted by the corporate media. My guess is that many at the grassroots in the Green Party are against this, but are not allowed go against the party line. [I can say one thing the Green Party are certainly not going to save the Earth and environment if they back down on this issue. They must face the fact that at some point they have to face the corporate media head on.]

Anyway, the government strategy is simple, as witnessed by it's actions so far. Do not reduce waste. Create a new monopoly market for their friends in the private sector. Produce more toxic waste by building incinerators, which will be run and operated by their friends in the private sector, while at the same time poisoning the people and the land and ultimately upping the health costs and destroying our green image of healthy food abroad.

This double Tax has absolutely nothing to do with solving the waste crisis.

There was a previous discussion here on Indymedia over payment of the Bin Tax, even though the discussion started out as a call for direct action.

See http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=60592

by Jonathan - Labour Youth Wed Sep 10, 2003 19:08

Below is what Joanna Tuffy actually said on the bin charges taken from a speech on the Protection on the Environment Bill in the Seanad on the 5th February 2003, not just hearsay from an anonymous anti-bin tax campaigner.

Direct quote on the non-collection by local authorities of rubbish

"The provision in the Bill which allows local authorities to refuse to collect waste from households which have not paid the charge contravenes the Supreme Court judgement of 2001 and is certain to be challenged. If a citizen fails to pay income tax his child is not prevented from going to school. The same logic can be applied to the payment of water and waste charges. It is one thing to pursue the collection of a debt but quite another to deny a family a basic service which is essential to health and safety simply because the head of the household has failed to pay a local authority charge, perhaps on principled grounds."


Full Text of speech
Waste and other service charges are an unfair form of taxation. They are not income related and waivers do not address this aspect. Often, those on low incomes must pay. For example, in South Dublin County Council, of which I am a member, people are entitled to waivers if their sole income is from social welfare or if they are entitled to family income supplement. This means that those on small occupational pensions or who have a supplementary income to their social welfare income are excluded from the waiver provisions. This form of taxation is unfair to those on lower and middle incomes, particularly those in the PAYE sector. By contrast, service charges are small change for top income earners who manage to pay very little tax.
These charges are a combination of new charges and increases in present charges. They have nothing to do with the environment and are being introduced because of the income tax cuts introduced by the Government, which have most benefited the better off. As a form of non-income related taxation, they are unfair, yet they are to become the means by which local government must make up the shortfall in Government investment.
The proposal to make charges an executive function is undemocratic. It removes any semblance of local democracy. The practice of councillors in this area has been subject to much myth making. They are making decisions and imposing charges. Differences of opinion or dissent does not mean there is a problem, rather it indicates that democracy is at work. The Government wishes to remove dissent on this issue, which is a bad move.
These taxes have nothing to do with the polluter pays principle, about which many more myths have arisen. For example, the many people in my county who take the trouble to bring their empty bottles to collection centres and separate their cardboard and aluminium waste from other waste are not polluters. They are good citizens and we should not penalise them for what we want them to do, that is, recycle and segregate their waste.
Genuine green taxes would impose penalties on those who do not engage in environmentally sound practices. The plastic bag levy is an example as it means that people can use alternatives without having to pay the levy. These are the types of charges that should be considered. Fines should be imposed on those who, given the opportunity, refuse to recycle or overuse water.
The Government and management of councils are considering introducing pay by weight charges but it will be a long time before this happens. At present, flat charges apply. When I was a member of the Forum for Europe, it was addressed by a representative of the European Commissioner on the Environment. The issue of environmental charges was raised and he said flat charges were the least environmentally sound.

The provision in the Bill which allows local authorities to refuse to collect waste from households which have not paid the charge contravenes the Supreme Court judgment of 2001 and is certain to be challenged. If a citizen fails to pay income tax his child is not prevented from going to school. The same logic can be applied to the payment of water and waste charges. It is one thing to pursue the collection of a debt but quite another to deny a family a basic service which is essential to health and safety simply because the head of the household has failed to pay a local authority charge, perhaps on principled grounds. I believe the courts will rule against this measure in due course.

The Government is strangling local government. This is happening partly because of the Government's policy of reducing the income tax base. Through this lack of funding it is forcing unfair tax policies on local authorities while people are seeing a reduced level of local services. By reducing the powers of local authority members the Government is showing that it does not care about local government. With the abolition of the dual mandate the Government is casting local government adrift to irrelevance. At the same time it is getting rid of directly elected mayors and reducing the powers of councillors. The abolition of the dual mandate will mean that things will continue in this direction because the only true social democrats left in Fianna Fáil are those Oireachtas Members who are also county councillors. They, at least, are in touch with the issues on the ground.
The threat to abolish county councils which do not adopt an Estimate within the allotted time has been referred to. The Minister says this is the law but this law is profoundly unconstitutional. One of the few positive measures taken by this Government in relation to local government was the insertion of a provision referring to local government in the Constitution. This provision says there shall be directly elected local authorities. An unelected commissioner cannot be consistent with this constitutional provision. This constitutional amendment may be the saviour of local government in the end.
Senator Henry mentioned education for county councillors on the law. If we educate county councillors enough in the legal background to the Government's provisions they may be the ones to challenge the Government's actions.

by clarification and fine tuning. Mon Sep 22, 2003 14:13

there is a press release by Eamon Gilmore, Labour Spokesperson on Environment and Local Government, Issued on Thursday 30 January, 2003.

http://www.labour.ie/press/detail.tmpl?sku=20030130135015&BOLD=bin

At the end of this release he states:-

"The Labour Party will oppose this new compulsory bin tax. We are opposed to back door taxation."

What is BACK DOOR taxation?