Grassroots FF and the renewal of the party

Opening post moved from Irish Economy and existing thread merged.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

There are legal implications in discussing Mahon and making judgements on an individuals character before the tribunal has issued its report.

Sounds pathetic, I know - but its true nonetheless.

It does sound pathetic, but it isn't true. There was plenty of evidence before the 2007 election that Ahern had been engaging in all kinds of financial irregularities. If they had wanted to, the parliamentary party had a wide variety of ways that they could have got rid of him without affecting the Mahon tribunal. They either didn't care or chose to ignore all this and stand by him.

If what you are saying was true they wouldn't have been able to pressure him to leave in 2008.

raymon wrote: »

We hear a lot about the FF renewal and grassroots.

I would like to know what FF grassroots stands for .

If a recent Mayo cumann meeting is any indication grassroots stand behind Pee Flynn.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/05/01/meanwhile-in-mayo-7/

We saw the grassroots fall over themselves applauding Brian Cowen at the recent ard fheis.

O Cuiv claims he is the voice of grassroots. He says that FFs natural ally is SF . Also he is definitely anti Yes on the forthcoming treaty.

In the absence of any other message , FF grassroots looks like an organisation without clear direction.

Does anyone know what FF stands for , or Grassroots FF stands for?

Maybe I am wrong , maybe there is a set of core values that are clearly defined.

First of all to the best of my knowledge the Castlebar Cumann of FF is the only branch in Mayo that supported Flynn, every other branch voted either unanimously or overwhelmingly in support of the expulsion of Flynn and Ahern.

FF Grassroots still believe in the ideals of supporting business while also ensuring that the more needy in society are looked after where possible. Sadly the top moved away from this ideal for quite some time back and completely ignored warnings coming from their supporters.

FF Grassroots are still mainly form the working class/middle class, small farmer background. There would be simply no way they would support FG as they are seen, and nothing they have done so far in government would change any FF supporters mind of the fact, as the party of the large farmer and the wealthier in this country.

With regard to a No vote on the treaty the party stance is causing some disquiet as a large number of party supporters would be in the No camp. The treaty is being seen as permanently signing away economic sovereignty to Europe, mainly to Germany and France who seem to have taken over the running of Europe, forgetting that it is a Union of equal members. The people who were unhappy at the Troika being brought in by FF, including myself, now cannot comprehend the rush to permanently sign away that sovereignty when FF were criticised for a temporary signing away of that sovereignty.

The Grassroots are where they have always been, the problem has been trying to keep the party in that place. The contempt shown by Ahern to the grassroots over the years was clear to everyone within the party, there was constant fighting within the Grassroots over it. The fight to get them back to where the Grassroots are is still going on, but as poll figures show many of the Grassroots have walked away and given up, and they can't be blamed for that.

golfball37 wrote: »

I was FF to the core until 2007 really. If they came back to their Republican roots I would certainly consider rejoining the party. I know a lot of lower down members like myself who agree with O'Cuiv on this.

You're right, many former members would come back but they think there is no real change in the party and the O'Cuiv issue is proving them right because they agree with him.

raymon wrote: »

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

First of all to the best of my knowledge the Castlebar Cumann of FF is the only branch in Mayo that supported Flynn, every other branch voted either unanimously or overwhelmingly in support of the expulsion of Flynn and Ahern.

FF Grassroots still believe in the ideals of supporting business while also ensuring that the more needy in society are looked after where possible. Sadly the top moved away from this ideal for quite some time back and completely ignored warnings coming from their supporters.

FF Grassroots are still mainly form the working class/middle class, small farmer background. There would be simply no way they would support FG as they are seen, and nothing they have done so far in government would change any FF supporters mind of the fact, as the party of the large farmer and the wealthier in this country.

With regard to a No vote on the treaty the party stance is causing some disquiet as a large number of party supporters would be in the No camp. The treaty is being seen as permanently signing away economic sovereignty to Europe, mainly to Germany and France who seem to have taken over the running of Europe, forgetting that it is a Union of equal members. The people who were unhappy at the Troika being brought in by FF, including myself, now cannot comprehend the rush to permanently sign away that sovereignty when FF were criticised for a temporary signing away of that sovereignty.

The Grassroots are where they have always been, the problem has been trying to keep the party in that place. The contempt shown by Ahern to the grassroots over the years was clear to everyone within the party, there was constant fighting within the Grassroots over it. The fight to get them back to where the Grassroots are is still going on, but as poll figures show many of the Grassroots have walked away and given up, and they can't be blamed for that.

You make a few good points , however I must disagree on a couple of points.

You refer to the fact that FFs actions were but a temporary signing away of our sovereignty. I find the statement shocking. We are stuck with Anglo's debt forever. Remember this was supposed to be the cheapest bailout in history.

Also you never mentioned Brian Cowen , please explain how the grassroots gave him a standing ovation at the ard fheis. He was one of the top architects of our destruction as minister for finance and later as taoiseach.

Regarding the Flynnasty , surely if the grassroots wanted to they could put forward a motion looking for the return of the FF money used to buy the farm.

Sovereignty with regard to being told what we can and cannot do with our budgets. Owing a debt is one thing, being told what we can and cannot do as regards our budget by Germany and France forever is another thing. That's what the treaty provides. The bail out gave us our economic say back after 2015.

With regard to Cowen, he got a standing ovation, probably ill advised, but within FF there is a certain amount of sympathy. As Minister for Finance he was under the boot of Ahern. FF was a dictatorship at the time. If you doubt that see what happened McCreevy when he stopped singing from the Bertie hymn sheet. When he became Taoiseach the cards had been dealt. He made some dreadful decisions and as a FF supporter I felt like I was watching a car crash in slow motion at times. The ovation was for his public service, be it disastrous or not ( for the record I was not in attendance ).

Any sort of motion by FF is pointless and toothless and would achieve nothing. Do you think Flynn would produce €50000 just because a FF Cumann passed a motion?

kbannon wrote: »

Nonsense.
Cowen did not have to sign his name on anything. He is a smart man and if he disagreed with anything could have made a stand and taken the punishment or alternatively walked away based on his principles. The Irish people were never shown anything that looked like him taking a stand in favour of the people.
Also, the FF fans also had the choice to stand and applaud or to sit and boo. As for the standing ovation being "probably ill advised" - who advised them to give a standing ovation?
In terms of McCreevey, he didn't do too badly now, did he?

Looks like we will never know!
However, the money was for FF. Martin claims that he doesn't want the money as its tainted (just like the party). Why doesn't he look for the money and then return it to Gilmartin? This would give the perception that FF are starting to root out corruption and would make for a few nice soundbites. Seems strange that FF don't want to avail of the opportunity of some positive spin!

"Ill advised" is a form of speech, as I am sure you are more than aware. The nature of people not walking away on principle in politics is enshrined in every political party in this and any other country, which is a sad reflection of political life. It is not limited to FF or Brian Cowen. It is also very easy to look at the current crisis in hindsight, much easier than it possibly was while stuck in the middle of the whole thing, particularly as it is not an Irish phenonomen but has affected most of Europe. I am sure there were decisions made that seemd like the right thing at the time but now can be seen to have been wrong.

With regard to McCreevy, he may not have done too bad, but everyone knows he didn't want to go and that the only reson he was made go was that he had questioned the spending by the government and wanted to rein it in.. Are you saying that would not have made a difference?? Or is your hatred for FF so irrational that no good could come from any decision made by a member?

What would looking for the money achieve now?? FF is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't. They would be criticised for trying to create positive spin. They were criticised for not doing something about the corrupt members of the party, when they satated they would expell tem they were criticised for doing so too late. I would personally rather that corruption actually be rooted out instead of "the perception that FF are starting to root out corruption" It would be pointless tilting at windmills because any decision on the money is Flynns and the party of which he is no longer a member certainly won't be able to influence that decision.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Meh, whatever. That's your interpretation of things. You asked for some of the core aspects of the party and those are they.

OK I'll take a stab at it then (for transparency, I've no loyalty to any party. I'll vote for whoever I believe will actually get the job done - not line their own pockets or who performs to what I like to call the "ah shure it'll be grand" approach that is so prevalent throughout any and all branches of Irish government and state generally). Perhaps you'll have a more "detailed" response than above?

You gave us the "core beliefs" of FF as they stand today. You also mention that these are under review so maybe now is in fact an ideal time for us to address some of these...


(i) The whole United Ireland/800 years angle needs to go. Never mind that we have enough problems of our own without trying to take on responsibility for another state, where's the evidence (from both sides of the border) that says this is what the people actually want?

The facts are that when Ireland was split in two, it was a reflection of how statecraft was conducted in those times - where occupation and conquering other nations was viewed as an acceptable means of expansion. That isn't to say it was "right" or diminishes the suffering and loss (on both sides to be fair), it's merely acknowledging that that's how it was back then.

We (as a race) have now evolved beyond this - at least those of us in the so-called developed world think we have, and the successful visit of the Queen, the ending of the Troubles, establishment of the Assembly and so on is proof that we have learned other ways to resolve our problems. Yes I know that sounds a bit clichéd, but my point is that FF need to move on from the past in this regard too.


(ii) The Irish language is technically dead and has been for many years, kept alive only through state subsidy (that we can now ill afford) and a Celtic Tiger era "fad" for the language that has now also died out.

I'm not saying kill it off, but it needs to be removed as a mandatory subject from our schools (as does the teaching of the Catholic religion in our increasingly secular/multi-faith country - in addition to the well documented reasons why that faith deserves NO official sponsorship after the damage it's done to countless lives).

Again, I'm not suggesting it should be banned or something but it belongs in the home (like the teaching of Irish). If you want your children to be raised as Irish speaking Catholics then by all means do so.. but do it yourself with support from your Church and your community (as a side note it wouldn't hurt many Irish parents to take a more active role in their children's education anyway) and replace both subjects with increased focus on literacy (for example), and European languages.

I spent a few years in Holland as a child and while the kids I started school with here were being forced to learn a language most of them can't string a sentence together in, my classmates in Amsterdam had fluency in Dutch, English and usually 2/3 other languages as well. No wonder then that the Google's and Microsoft's have to go abroad to get these skills while our own people sit on the shelf.


(iv) Shell to Sea (as but one example) anyone? How does this fit with the idea of "To develop the resources and wealth of Ireland to their full potential, while making them subservient to the needs and welfare of all the people of Ireland"


(v) I think this one is equally obvious - massive rezoning of land for over development / planning tribunals etc. Need I go on?


(vii) I think our "obligations" to Europe (as we're so often reminded were the doing of FF), and the resultant enforced austerity, the German parliament getting first look at OUR national Budget and so on prove "Irish Sovereignty" has long been sold off.


When FF can come back to the Irish People with a realistic, achievable plan as to how these objectives can be met, with defined targets and metrics for judging the success of same, and equally clear penalties or consequences for failure, THEN I think we can talk about the party having achieved a "Grass Roots" reform - I'd add to this a zero-tolerance policy on corruption, parish-pump governance and general gombeenism.

Until then it's just more spin and propaganda and we are getting more than enough of that from Enda and his merry men at the moment thanks very much.

raymon wrote: »

.


FG and Labour stand for one thing right now ...... getting us out of the mess .

That's the core value I will judge them on.

As I said before I have mixed views on their success.
For example property tax on properties dropping in value is not good economics.
However I feel that Noonan will get the Anglo debt sorted.
I also said it is too early to judge and I do believe we have had a narrow escape from the cliff ledge that FF put us on .

So let's get back on track here : on the subject of FF core values can anyone name one that FF have demonstrated. A real one this time.??

As they are basically implementing a plan agreed by Fianna Fail, could it not be said that is the aim of FF as well?FF always wanted the less well off in society looked after, hence 4 times as many SNA's now as in 1997 despite the cutbacks

raymon wrote: »

The thread for me has been very informative

The consensus with FF members is that the party stand for the following



1. Fianna Fáil is a National Movement. Its aims are:-


(i) To secure in peace and agreement the unity of Ireland and its people.


(ii) To develop a distinctive national life in accordance with the diverse traditions and ideals of the Irish people as part of a broader European culture, and to restore and promote the Irish language as a living language of the people.


(iii) To guarantee religious and civil liberty, and equal rights, equal treatment and equal opportunities for all the people of Ireland.


(iv) To develop the resources and wealth of Ireland to their full potential, while making them subservient to the needs and welfare of all the people of Ireland, so as to provide the maximum sustainable employment, based on fostering a spirit of enterprise and self-reliance and on social partnership.


(v) To protect the natural environment and heritage of Ireland and to ensure a balance between town and country and between the regions, and to maintain as many families as practicable on the land.


(vi) To promote the family, and a wider sense of social responsibility, and to uphold the rule of law in the interest of the welfare and safety of the public.


(vii) To maintain the status of Ireland as a sovereign State, as a full member of the European Union and the United Nations, contributing to peace, disarmament and development on the basis of Ireland’s independent foreign policy tradition.


(viii) To reform the laws and institutions of State, to make them efficient, humane, caring and responsive to the needs of the citizen.

I don't believe that any of these are valid in the FF of today.

Like I said, you don't agree and that is your prerogative but you had made that conclusion before you started this thread !

Does your thread have any other purpose ?