Waterford Airport ‘left out once again' as nearly €8m in regional airport funding announced
Transport Minister Darragh O'Brien, announced the allocation of almost €8m in exchequer funding to regional airports under the Regional Airports Programme 2021-2025, on Tuesday, May 20.
The announcement sees a total of €7.823m going to Ireland West, Kerry, and Donegal airports, but none for Waterford Airport, which has seen its runway extension project stalled in recent years.
William Bolster, director and board member of Waterford Airport, told the Irish Independent that they welcome all investment to infrastructural projects to the regions and in particular aviation, but 'unfortunately Waterford falls outside the criteria on the Regional Airports Programme due to the absence of a commercial carrier in place.
'Waterford Airport and the board are working very closely with Minister O'Brien and the Department to achieve the goal to have capital funding committed to allow a Jet Runway for the southeast region, we hope to have speedy conclusion to our discussion in the near future,' said Mr Bolster.
SF Waterford TD Conor McGuinness sharply criticised the Government's latest decision to exclude Waterford Airport from regional airport funding allocations, describing it as a 'calculated and ongoing neglect of Waterford and the south east', and has called on Government Ministers John Cummins and Mary Butler to 'stop covering for this blatant disregard' and 'stand up for their county'.
'This announcement saw nearly €8 million allocated to regional airports in the west and south west, while Waterford was left out once again, despite having planning permission, private investment, and local authority co-funding in place for the long-awaited €12 million runway extension,' said Deputy McGuinness.
'Let's call this what it is - calculated neglect. Waterford Airport is ready to go. The project is costed, planned, and regionally backed. The missing piece is Government commitment.
'Instead, we see millions flowing to other airports while Waterford is passed over again. The runway extension would restore scheduled services and unlock real economic growth across the south east but, the Government continues to block it.'
Deputy McGuinness said the silence from Waterford's Government TDs is no longer tenable. 'Minister Mary Butler and Minister John Cummins need to stop providing political cover for this ongoing snub. It's not enough to issue soft statements after the fact - they're part of the Government making these decisions. If they won't fight for Waterford, who will?'
'David Cullinane and I have been campaigning relentlessly to secure this funding. Last week we jointly raised the issue again in the Dáil. The Minister's excuses have run out. This is not a case of due process – it's a failure of political will, and it's costing Waterford jobs, investment and connectivity.'
ADVERTISEMENT
Learn more
Deputy McGuiness added, 'Government inaction is holding Waterford back. Cummins and Butler must now call a halt to this calculated neglect, and demand that Waterford gets its fair share.'
Speaking before the announcement, former independent TD for Waterford and now social advocate, Matt Shanahan, said the 'bludgeoned' aspirations of 2011 and 2017 Government programme promises to develop Waterford Airport can be 'clearly seen'. The Government 'has no desire to fund aviation activity in the South East region,' said Mr Shanahan.
'Opposition TDs will grandstand in press, social media and in the Dáil, but no way will their party leadership allow them bring a motion to the floor of the house on the issue to actually force serious debate.
'When people in Waterford ask why are we continuously denied any meaningful investment to create regional economic advantage, the answer has been the same for two decades - whichever party reps you follow, government or opposition, their party political interests always come before your economic needs. And their political reps' loyalty is always to the party, not you the people.
'Vested interests elsewhere have no interest in promoting Waterford or south east economies simply because they fear negative impact to their own - their political strength and the blind allegiance of their party reps means nothing changes in our favour.
'Fairness for Waterford was mentioned endlessly in every electoral campaign soundbite and leaflet in 2024 - once the election was done, just like before, both went in the bin.
'The phrase 'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me' has been around since 1651 - it's obvious Waterford needs to pay more attention to history rather than listening to repeated empty political rhetoric.
Mr Shanahan added, 'For the next four plus years while people in Waterford continue to decry our 'Oliver Twist' existence, the political parties will continue to smile in joined understanding of the old maxim - you broke it, you own it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Eamon Ryan backed higher pay and bonuses to attract best CEOs to commercial State bodies
Former Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan wanted Government departments and agencies to have greater freedom to offer more competitive packages, including performance bonuses and increments, when seeking CEOs for commercial State bodies. He also supported more flexibility on the duration of contracts with an option to extend the time in the role. In a letter to a Government-appointed pay-review group last summer, Mr Ryan suggested a two-tier system for determining chief executives' pay. He proposed that there could be one arrangement for agencies that operated in a highly competitive setting and a different approach for those who provided 'more in way of a public service'. 'Given the sector-specific context and diversity in play, a 'one-size-fits-all approach is not working in attracting talent, particularly when international consideration and comparators are taken into account,' he wrote. READ MORE Mr Ryan said 12 commercial agencies came under his remit as Minister for Transport . 'These agencies have, in the past, had difficulties attracting and retaining CEOs,' he said. The Senior Posts Remuneration Committee had been asked by Government to examine CEO pay in commercial State companies. Its chairperson, Maeve Carton, had asked ministers for submissions. Mr Ryan said fixed-term contracts limited the pool of potential candidates as those appointed had to leave after seven years. 'The overall packages would be considered low in comparison to private sector comparable positions and with the lack of job security at the end of the term, limits the position to quite a small candidate pool,' he stated. 'The fixed single-term contract is constrained by the Protection of Employees (Fixed -Term Work) Act 2003 and I recognise that the committee is not in a position to resolve this issue. However, consideration to amend the Act in relation to CEOs would be a very beneficial outcome moving forward.' He said the Department of Public Expenditure did not allow for increments, cost-of-living rises or public service pay awards. Mr Ryan also said there was no mechanism open to Government departments to work through any disputes, nor were there any levers available 'should it be decided it is in the best interest of all for the CEO to exit the contract early'. He added that the objectives and the level of responsibility associated with the role could change during the term of a CEO due to Government policy evolving. He wrote: 'I would like to see a situation where the job could be re-evaluated should substantial changes to the original specification occur during the term of the contract.' Mr Ryan also said that to compete with private industry, a performance-related award (PRA) element would be welcome. He stated that this could allow flexibility over the course of the term of the CEO in relation to targets and performance. [ 'Like living near a helicopter': Residents fed up with takeaway delivery drones buzzing over their homes Opens in new window ] [ EU warns it could accelerate retaliatory tariffs over US duties Opens in new window ] He wrote that the PRA would 'be awarded on the basis of clear guidelines outlining the expected outputs including targets and objectives with the explicit consent of the line department through the remuneration committee process.' Mr Ryan's letter also stated: 'My department has concerns over the current oversight and governance structures which are fixed and slow to move. An example of this is, for instance, no pay rate reviews since 2011. I would like to see a mechanism where there is, of course, central Government oversight but in line with market conditions and changes in the economic environment.' Last month the Government signalled it would update rules to allow a 'market rate' to be paid to chief executives in commercial State companies but ruled out performance-related bonuses.
Irish Independent
4 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Injuries Resolution Board proposes rethink on whether it can sanction the paying of legal fees
The Injuries Resolution Board has called on the Government to consider changing the law to allow it to sanction the paying of legal fees. Such a move would represent a massive U-turn because the board was set up 20 years ago with the express intention of avoiding costly legal fees. Under current legislation, the board can sanction the paying of legal fees only in very limited circumstances. In a submission to the Department of Finance, as part of the public consultation on a new Action Plan For Insurance Reform, the Injuries Resolution Board says that 95pc of claimants using its services are represented by a solicitor. The fact that it does not pay legal fees means people often reject its settlement offers, the submission states. Close to half of the settlement offers made by the board are rejected. However, legal fees often end up being paid by insurers' lawyers after the claim leaves the Injuries Resolution Board, the submission says. 'For a large proportion of claims that leave our system, legal fees are incurred thereafter and paid,' the submission said. The Injuries Resolution Board, formerly known as the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, is the state body allowing people to resolve personal injury claims without having to go to court. It deals with road traffic, public liability and workplace personal injury claims. Most injury claims have to go to it before going to court, and can go to court only if an assessment by the board is rejected by either side. The longer a claim lasted before being resolved, the higher the legal fees, the board said. The submission said that many insurers offered to pay legal fees where the claimant's solicitor agreed to accept the award initially recommended by the Injuries Board after the claim had left the Injuries Board system. This meant that the board should consider paying legal fees. The submission states: 'In the interests of resolving claims at an earlier juncture for all concerned, 20 years after the establishment of the board, the question of legal fees needs to be considered.' ADVERTISEMENT Such a move may undercut lawyers who have a financial interest in getting cases out of the Injuries Board to generate fees for themselves. The Injuries Board calls for consideration for a 'scale of fees' that it would pay. It understood that typical legal fees would be between €1,000 and €2,000, reflecting that fact that Injuries Board assessments are resolved much faster than if they are litigated. A separate submission from the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission says that resolving personal injury claims through the Injuries Resolution Board is faster than litigation and has lower legal costs. Central Bank research has found that settlement costs for claims of less than €150,000 are €23,000 for both cases settled by the Injuries Board and for those involving litigation. For cases taken through the Injuries Board, the legal costs are €1,000. But if they involved litigation, the legal costs rise to €23,000. More than 70pc of claims are settled by litigation, representing 89pc of injury settlement costs, the Central Bank found. And legal costs have risen despite the Personal Injuries Guidelines, used by both the courts and the Injuries Board, having dropped by up to 40pc in the past few years. And judges have controversially recommended that award guideline levels rise by 16.7pc, which the Government has yet to endorse. The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission submission calls for more data on legal costs. Fast-food giant Supermac's, whose owner Pat McDonagh has long campaigned for insurance reform, submitted that there should be insurance pricing transparency legislation. The company wants mandatory disclosure by insurers of the key components contributing to premium calculations. It also wants insurers to be forced to justify 'significant year-on-year premium increases, with oversight by a regulatory body'. The Alliance for Insurance Reform submitted that broker charges account for an increasing proportion of the overall cost of insurance and that brokerage firms are being sold for huge multiples. 'Many brokers now charge a fee based on a percentage of the cost of the policy. This is inherently unfair to consumers as the 'worse' the premium they secure for them, the more money they will make. We believe this needs further examination,' the Alliance stated. Representative group for small businesses, ISME, said there is 'no moral hazard for fraudulent claims'. The Convenience Stores and Newsagents Association (CSNA) called for insurance companies to 'devote more time and resources to investigating claims rather than paying up due to a cost-benefit analysis'. Some 70 submissions were made, but the Law Society, which represents solicitors, and the Bar Council, which represents barristers, do not appear to have made submissions.
Irish Examiner
12 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Home Q&A: All you need to know about Local Property Tax changes
Question What do I need to know about upcoming Local Property Tax changes? Answer When paying your local property tax (LPT) from January 1, 2026, or working out your tax for the first time from November 1 of this year, it's worth noting that as property values have increased by 23% nationwide from November 2021 to December 2024, there are some changes on the way. It's not all bad news. The LPT revaluation is to take place on November 1, 2025, with the next set valuation period commencing in January 2026 for a duration of five years. What you can expect is a nominal increase on your LPT unless you live in a 12-bedroom mansion in South County Dublin. Let's start with the upside. The valuation bands that determine what we pay are set to widen by 20%, ensuring most Irish homeowners (the Government estimates this is 96%) will remain in their existing bands. They will start with Band 1: €0-€240,000, then Band 2: €240,001-€315,000. Band 3 and all subsequent bands increase in increments of €105,000 over €315,001 up to Band 19. The minister for finance, Paschal Donohoe, also announced a new base rate of 0.0906%, which is used to work out the tax on your property based on its market value. This rate was previously .1029% on the value of the home, so that's come down. That said, taxes are increasing, especially for prestige properties. For the lower bands, the fixed charges (set from the mid-point of the Band) for Bands 1 & 2 will be increased: from €90 to €95 for Band 1, and from €225 to €235 for Band 2. If you're wondering why your PLPT might potentially be higher, it's because those fixed charges sop up some of your savings on the percentage weighed to make up your LPT. There is a 5%-6% increase expected in LPT for properties valued under €1.26 million. Properties higher than €1.26 million, or properties that have appreciated significantly in value since 2021, will pay LPT that is 'proportionate to these factors'. Properties valued at €2.1 million or above will be charged on their actual value. Don't panic. If your home is valued at €525,000 or lower on November 1, 2025, the increase to your LPT will likely be no more than €30 extra a year. It's worth noting that from 2026, local authorities will now be able to vary LPT upwards by up to 25% and downwards by 15%. This is termed a 'local adjustment factor' to cover the desirability and struggle of some areas within areas, where houses relatively close in address of the same type can vary in their market value. The Government gives this example: A house in Cork (South-West Region), valued at €370,000 in 2021. The new estimated value could be €470,000 with local variations, an increase of 27%. That house remains in its original Band 4, and its liability for LPT goes up a relatively modest €23 from 2026, an increase from €405 in 2021 to €428 in 2026. That payment will be effectively frozen from 2026 until the next revaluation by the Government in three to five years. Value of your home So, what is your house worth, and how do you come to the right figure to ensure your LPT is correct? This is a self-assessment figure based on 'market values'. You will either be registering for LPT for the first time (with a new build or newly renovated home) or picking up on the LPT attached to the house or apartment you've recently bought. Once your new home has stamp duty paid, it is registered for LPT and has a property ID and an Eircode on those records. You will just update your personal details. If you know your property has increased in value, for example, you've added an extension, from November 1, you should update your valuation using the Property ID. There's a Property Valuation Tool on that can simply tot up the likely value of your home in one of the 18,600 'small areas' of the country, so keeping in mind any unique specifics of your property, start there. Revenue advises: 'When you value your property, you should include the value of lands and other buildings associated with your property. This includes lands or buildings that have domestic or residential purpose, or an amenity such as a yard, garden or patio, driveway or parking space, garage, shed or greenhouse, garden room or home office, and land up to one acre (0.4047 hectares) most suitable for enjoyment with the property, closest to the property, for example, the land that you use as a garden. "You don't have to include sheds used for agricultural purposes.' (I would add here if you have horses, ensure you have a herd number registered with the Department of Agriculture — something that's often overlooked, but it's the law of the land.) Money is tight for most families, and clearly there's a temptation to fudge things downward and slide into the narrowest band possible when settling on a valuation. Keep in mind that a 20% increase in the bands of values may help you out. Deferrals There's also been an adjustment to income thresholds for deferrals of LPT payments (a whopping 30%-40%), which is another encouragement to be honest and straightforward when making your valuation. From 2026, the income threshold for a full deferral for a single person will be increased from €18,000 to €25,000. For a couple, it will be increased from €30,000 to €40,000. The threshold for a partial deferral for a single person will be increased from €30,000 to €40,000. For a couple, it will be increased from €42,000 to €55,000. Payments Citizens Advice offers this useful tip: 'If you paid LPT for 2024 with a repeating payment method, such as a direct debit, the payment will continue in 2025 unless you choose a different way to pay. Repeating methods include LPT deductions from your salary, pension or social protection payment. "Any changes you make to the way you pay (for example, if you want to make a once-off direct payment) can be easily handled online through your own Revenue Property Record. First time out, Revenue assigns a unique Property ID to each residential property for LPT purposes, and you will be assigned a PIN to go with your account. You can use your existing login details for myAccount or Revenue Online Service (ROS).' Got a question for our Home team? Email home@
