A chara, – While I’m happy to read that the Government has announced further cuts in top- level public service pensions to hit those on so-called “super pensions”, I find it hard to accept that – according to department officials – the touted €100,000 threshold would apply only to an individual pension and not to cumulative pensions. This would mean that the proposed pension cut would not affect most former politicians, as their Dáil and Ministerial pensions are treated separately.
At a time when we’re all getting hit with austerity measures, I find it nauseating that there are individuals out there with multiple incomes from public sources. I suggest a punitive levy on individuals with multiple incomes of which at least one is from public finances, to apply to the portion paid from the public finances. This would either claw back some of the excessive payments they receive or encourage them to relinquish one or more positions and free these up for others looking for work. Win-win scenario I reckon; generate tax income or generate jobs. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Michael Gibney says that the data on sugar intake and obesity is “unclear, inconsistent, unimpressive and a thousand miles from the strength of evidence to support a tax” (November 26th). I don’t have to walk a thousand yards to see overweight and obese children and adults. When two out of three are either overweight or obese the talk of evidence must stop and immediate action must be taken. People can’t wait for scientists to come to a conclusion – for people do not eat science.
However, they do consume vast amounts of sugar and fats. Also, since research always tends to be controversial with research being carried out by a diverse range of institutions, including some paid for by the food industry, I would prefer actions rather than more, and more, words. Thank God for having a physician as Minister of Health who does act and acts decisively. I hope that he taxes all sugary products and does not stop with sugar-added drinks. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The proposed household charge would, if enacted, be the most despicable of all the crimes committed by this treacherous Government. It is universally accepted now that the absence of a property tax in this State, as well as being morally indefensible, has contributed directly to the property bubble whose rupture has destroyed our banks. It fuelled the property casino and ensured that those who won big time were required to repay absolutely nothing from their winnings to the State that had subsidised their gambling. As Talleyrand said, “It’s worse than a crime, it’s a mistake.”
Now, the Coalition proposes to introduce a property tax in the form of a universal household charge which is precisely and deliberately the opposite! The Labour Party is conniving with Fine Gael in order to protect private property, literally at all costs. A universal household charge is nothing more than the hated Thatcherite poll tax. It demands nothing from all those whose homes and, in many cases, collections of homes, are still worth millions, while putting the onus of payment on everyone else, excluding only those living in cardboard boxes. Presumably they will in due course be required to pay a sleeping bag tax.
The household charge is a dirty trick and anyone with an ounce of decency or common sense must oppose it. So, obviously that rules out the current Cabinet. But is there no one on the backbenches ready to point out that the emperor is a naked thief? – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I have an idea that would raise revenue for Michael Noonan’s department as well as providing a feeling of moral justice for the majority of the people in the country. Mr Noonan could attach a new special pension levy to any State pension being currently paid to anyone under the age of 65 (they would still be doing better than most who have to wait until 65 to have any form of non-private pension).
Anyone over the age of 65 drawing a State pension would not have to pay any levy on the first €100,000; anything over this would have a high levy attached, as surely anyone over this age would have paid off any mortgage and probably raised any children by then (these two probably constitute the bulk of most people’s monthly outgoings). – Yours, etc,