There was a Sunday Business Post poll at the weekend showing a collapse in support for Fianna Fáil. The poll also asked people if they felt that the Government misled them over the economy in the run up to polling day - a significant majority agreed or strongly agreed. Of course, the same happened in 2002 after that election, and with the next general election a long way off, the poll is somewhat academic.

It did get me thinking about the old phrase “fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me”. Perhaps we need to encourage people to think a bit more before they cast their vote, so that they don’t get hoodwinked a third time.

My plan is simple: everyone who votes to return the Government (and I’ll be generous enough to say Government - not FF so that the plan is future proof), must wear a red hat for 6 months after polling day. That way, when support collapses for the freshly returned administration we can point at the people who had the opportunity to give them a P45, but didn’t.

Responsible voting - gets my number 1.

Now that the 2007 general election is slipping into the foggy memories of Irish political anoraks, our thoughts start to move on to the 2009 local elections. These will be an interesting foretaste of the next Dáil election, and for Fine Gael types like myself, a real opportunity to overhaul Fianna Fáil’s 10 seat lead at council level.

But, in addition to the elections themselves, another interesting process has to happen first: the review of local electoral boundaries. I’ll spare you the long history lesson , you can read that here; the main thing to bear in mind is that the system of town and county councils that is in place dates from the 1898 Local Government Act, and very much reflects how population was distributed at the end of the nineteenth century. I’ve previously published some analysis of county council make-ups, and so this time I want to think about the towns.

The 19th century bias means that some of the fastest growing towns have no representation, while the likes of Ballybay County Monaghan (pop. 401 according to the 2006 census) have councils providing residents with some local control.

Kildare Town has a population of 7538. At the moment 75 towns have councils, and if Kildare was added it would sit at 26th place by population between the former Urban District Councils of Longford and Nenagh. At the current rate of growth it should be well over the 10,000 mark by the 2014. The 2001 Local Government Act says that towns of over 7,500 should be considered, and that 100 signatures are needed to initiate the process. I think I see a petition in my not-too-distant future.

There is also a strong argument in favour of giving Newbridge additional powers for its council. As a former Town Commission they have significantly fewer powers than the former Urban District Councils, indeed Newbridge is the largest former TC and the7th largest town in Ireland.

Here’s a town-by-town breakdown of the various councils and their populations.

It might be two years since I left Trinity, but it took until yesterday for me to graduate. I definitely think I could get used to the doctoral robes!

I’m generally in favour of liberalised trade and an end to protectionism. History has taught us that protected markets reduce efficiency and raise the prices consumers have to pay. However, liberal trade (or even fair trade for that matter) must be based on a level playing field, even if the levelling process is a function of the market.

The EU food market, particularly in the beef industry, is not level. It penalises European farmers by raising their costs through a complex system of food safety mechanisms including bans on certain practices as well enforcing considerable inspection and traceability requirements.

On the surface, such checks are a good thing as they mean we as consumers can be confident that our beef is safe. However, the inevitable result is a significant additional cost borne by the producers that then gets passed on to the shopper. The same shopper also has access to imported beef from locations like Brazil and Argentina. These countries do not have anywhere near the level of food safety checks that apply here in Europe. Animals may be feed cocktails of growth promoters and antibiotics to increase the volume of meat produced. The farms, cold stores and abattoirs are not subjected to the scrutiny we see in the EU. And the net result is that their beef is considerably cheaper than we can produce, while lacking the checks and balances applied here.

At the moment the EU is coming under increasing pressure to regulate or ban imports of Brazilian beef. Why is this the case? Well the EU has a strong record of promoting safe food. Unfortunately this has made the safest food too expensive, thus forcing consumers to source their meat elsewhere. As a result they have produced the contradictory result that high safety standards price our product out of the market, thus driving consumers to buy less safe meat.

Is a ban the answer? Well protectionism means higher prices, so a ban will hit consumers. Personally, I think some form of regulated import market would be better as it would meet the dual needs of safe food and affordability. However, I also think there is a case to be made for a review of the EU food safety apparatus. There can always be ‘too much of a bad thing’ , and I think that the EU may be falling into this category. Safe food that isn’t affordable is little better than no regulation at all. Perhaps a balance between overhead and safety might be the best for everyone.

(This is a release I’ve sent to the local press in Kildare in my capacity as a Fine Gael activist)

Tánaiste and Minister for Finance Brian Cowan has refused to consider a Fine Gael proposal that tax saver status should be extended to any proposed parking charges at railway stations. The move was put to the Mr Cowan by Fine Gael’s Brian Hayes TD at the request of local Fine Gael activist and rail campaigner Tony O’Donnell.

Responding to the Minister’s decision, Dr O’Donnell had the following to say:

“Transport Minister Noel Dempsey recently gave the green light for parking charges at commuter stations including those here in Kildare. These parking charges could represent an additional cost of over €500 to regular travellers, which means a significant increase to the cost of commuting by rail. While all of the local rail users’ groups have been resisting any such charges, the Government seem to be completely unwilling to support our cause.

“In light of this, I have been working with Fine Gael transport spokesperson Senator Paschal Donohoe to identify ways in which the burden can be reduced. One obvious mechanism at the Government’s disposal is an extension of the Tax Saver scheme to cover pay parking.

“The Tax Saver scheme allows commuters to purchase their annual tickets from their gross salary. This means a significant saving on tax and PRSI. If extended to parking charges it could offset nearly half of the cost.

“Unfortunately Brian Cowan has refused to consider such a move, citing two grounds. The first concerns the potential loss of tax revenue, which at an annual cost of around €250 per occupied space would hardly make a dent in the cabinet’s pay rises.

“His second grounds for refusal is that he doesn’t believe it would help to reduce congestion. This simply doesn’t make sense. Pay parking will make rail travel less attractive, and so he is encouraging people back on to the roads.

“We will continue to lobby the Minister on this between now and next month’s budget, however it is disappointing that he seems unwilling to recognise the needs of commuters.”

Notes:

Question to Brian Cowan on Tax Saver Status

DÁIL QUESTION

NO 149

To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if, in view of the Government’s encouragement and support to passengers who choose public transport, with the imposition of a car parking charge at railway stations which could lead to a potential 25% increase in commuting costs, he has considered introducing an annual parking ticket that could be brought into the tax saver system affording commuters the same tax breaks that they get for their tickets themselves; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Brian Hayes.

* For WRITTEN answer on Tuesday, 23rd October, 2007.
Ref No: 25162/07

REPLY

Tánaiste and Minister for Finance ( Mr Cowen ) :

The policy objective underlying the existing arrangements covering bus and rail passes is to encourage taxpayers to use public transport when travelling to and from work and, thus, contribute to the easing of traffic congestion and to the improvement of the environment. The extension of the scheme to include car parking costs would involve additional loss of tax revenue and it is not clear that it would contribute significantly to a reduction in traffic congestion.

—

Question to Noel Dempsey on Pay Parking

Róisín Shortall T.D.

No: 494

*To ask the Minister for Transport and the Marine if the memorandum of understanding between his Department and Iarnród Éireann contains requirements of Iarnród Éireann in relation to the minimisation of parking charges at stations; his Department’s policy in relation to the imposition of such charges on commuters and the consequent discouragement of the use of public transport; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Róisín Shortall.

* For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 26th September, 2007.

Ref No: 20393/07

Answered by Minister for Transport

(Noel Dempsey T.D)

REPLY

The Memorandum of Understanding between my Department and Iarnród Éireann contains no provision in relation to parking charges for the use of car parks at railway stations. The provision and management of car parks at railway stations is a matter for Iarnród Éireann, taking account of the guiding principles for the implementation of rail-based park and ride adopted by the Dublin Transportation Office in their strategy for park and ride in the Greater Dublin Area. These were approved by my Department in 2005. These principles are:

• Park and ride should improve rail accessibility without disimproving road congestion,
• Rail users only should use park and ride spaces, and may have to pay to use them,
• Complementary parking controls in the areas around stations may be required,
• Those who benefit from park and ride should contribute to the cost of it by way of a separate charge; the cost should not be absorbed into rail fares generally,
• Rail services must be able to serve the demand generated by Park and Ride provision.

Park and ride facilities can and do have a positive impact on public transport use and have an important role to play in encouraging people to transfer from private cars to public transport. In considering whether to impose charges for the use of park and ride facilities, providers are expected to take into account a variety of factors and these would include consideration of the likely impact of charges on use of the facility and, by extension, on public transport use.

As an FG supporter, today’s poll results are frustrating. Many new governments enjoy a ‘honeymoon’ period after an election, which is reflected in the polls. This has not been the case in Ireland in the wake of the last two general elections. Today’s poll results are a mirror image of the drop in FF support that occurred after the 2002 vote. In the run up to that election, and the one this summer, Fianna Fáil smeared the opposition and bribed the voters with their own money. Once elected, they abandoned their promises and returned to the arrogant disregard that they display for the first 4 years of every electoral cycle (they tend to dial that down in the fifth year and people fall for it every time).

My frustration lies in the fact that in five years time, people may very well have forgotten that this happens every time, and might once again opt to return FF for a fourth term. But maybe there’s a chink of light in all of this. Unlike previous similar polls, Fine Gael are starting from a much higher base and are now within the margin of error of Fianna Fáil’s rating. Add to this the fact that Bertie Ahern’s popularity is finally starting to wane and a number of new variables enter the system.

At the present levels of support, there is no reason to believe that Fine Gael will not overhaul the handful of seats that separate them from FF at council level. FF must realise that, and such a scenario would set Fine Gael well on track for further Dáil gains next time out. There is also the curious situation that Ahern’s anointed successor is now more popular than his leader. Perhaps the jitters might start to hit the grey men on FF’s backbenches, and might cause Bertie’s departure before the 2009 locals.

And finally - what of the Progressive Democrats? Their leader’s rating didn’t even feature in the television reports last night. As a distinct party. they’ve only hit the media once in recent weeks, thanks to Fiona O’Malley’s comments on the ministerial pay rises. And even when there are reports of internal government discussions on issues like civil unions (a subject that was a core PD aim in a previous life), the focus is entirely on the Greens and FF. It seems that their slide to oblivion is continuing in a slow, quiet and inevitable way, and perhaps their 2% showing might be their last post.