Former Labour Party chairman Colm Keaveney to join Fianna Fáil

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Any more surprising than Colm Keaveney doing so?

You can see the rationale for both:

FF is looking for a high-profile Dublin candidate for the Euro elections and Matthews is looking for a party machine to support a run. FF may have somebody else lined up for that though.

Donnelly is a guy with a young family looking to build a lasting career in politics. According to Paddy Power, his chances of retaining his Dail seat as an Ind are about 50/50. AFAIK Dick Roche is retired, so there is vacant 'safe' FF seat in Wicklow. The noises Donnelly has been making lately suggests he wants to team up with a broader political movement to effect change but is skeptical about the prospects for a new party.

Toibin is the one that intrigues me, does anyone know if there is any substance to that. Would certainly be a big blow to the Shinners if one of their rising stars jumped ship for FF.

FF have clearly looked around and realised their only way back to power is by recruiting from across the political spectrum.

I think they are very confused politically by doing this though. I mean in Europe they align themselves with the liberals ALDE. They are essentially going after political; Conservatives (Matthews), Liberals (Donnelly), Social democrats (Keaveney, Toibin).

It reinforces what I've always thought about FF. They stand for nothing politically apart from populism. If communism were suddenly become popular I think they would recruit some CPI comrades.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

Ok so that means Higgins wont be ahead of Keaveney.

But it is still a HUGE ask for him to win the 2nd FF seat. If I remember correctly, Kitt was one of the highest Fianna Fail pollers in the country at the last election and he seems determined to run again in the next election.

I do remember Higgins did quite well in Galway East in the last election, particularly around Athenry area which should be a focus with the new constituency maps.

People on here seem to be saying Keaveney went to FF because it GUARANTEES him a seat in the next election. That is far from the case.

They're not. We are saying he has engaged in a cynical ploy that will give him the very best chance of retaining his seat. There are no guarantess for anyone.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

Fair enough.

But what move do you think Keaveney should have made?

- Labour were ruled out because he didnt vote with them on the budget, and was widely applauded for it.

- Fine Gael is ruled out because of their coalition with Labour.

- Independent is ruled out because of Keaveney's outspoken views (which were far more vocal than his views on FF) on independents.




Bear in mind, I am NOT a Keaveney fan or supporter, the above is a genuine question.

Independents are not a unified group with a similar past. He could easily have bided his time as an Independent. Plenty of talk of new party formation. Why not drive this and lead it?

Whatever about his views on Independents how can anyone justify his move to FF? Do you believe his motivations or do you see them as an act of cynicism and self preservation?

I believe he had anything about him in terms of principle he would have stayed out as an Independent and fought on those terms and if he was not re-elected he should have considered walking away from politics rather than doing what he did. I really believe that.

But he couldn't because he is on the gravy train now and he is doing absolutely everything to stay on it like the rest.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

Ideally, that would have been the best move. And I would hav loved to see it. In his interview in the Irish Independent on Saturday (conducted before he joined FF), he does mention that it is almost impossible to start a new party in Ireland. No idea how accurate that is.



How can somebody completely ignore his views on independents? And then highlight all the things he said about Fianna Fail? That is also not being fair on him.

I do not know his motivation to be honest. I am not sure it can be seen as an act of self-preservation when I think he probably had equally a good a chance of getting elected as indepedent as he did as a FF candidate. So if it was an act of self-preservation, I am not so sure it was the best move on his part.

I think I voted for Keaveney number 2 in the last election. I didnt agree with him not voting for the budget and decided then not to vote for him next time. His changing to Fianna Fail has not altered my thinking on that.

With respect that is an absolutely ridiculous comparison. FF is a unified body with a core philosophy (populism) that has a shameful record in government when last there. Everyone of the policies that the current government are implementing are a direct consequence of FF actions that Keaveney slated and rightly so.

Independents had no impact on that-they are not a party therefore not all the same and not to be tarnished with the one brush. Saying you don't believe in the power of Independents is well and good but what about the 'power' of FF?? What happens if he ends up in government and realises again that FF are screwing up and implementing harsh cuts, etc?? He'l sit there like a hypocrite and take it because he will have cemented his seat which is all he is worried about.

He would also know well that FF courted Lorraine Higgins and another prominent Independent in Galway East before him yet he still had no problem bedding down with them.

Remember Michael Kitt did not know this decision was coming. The line was that it was Kitt's last term and Keaveney has set himself up to keep his seat - that's the bottom line. Also strictly speaking Kitt would not be in Galway East next time with the boundary reconstruction. Now due to revolt at grassroots and having not been consulted it seems Kitt is going to keep in for another bit. Will make it all the more interesting.

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

With respect that is an absolutely ridiculous comparison. FF is a unified body with a core philosophy (populism) that has a shameful record in government when last there. Everyone of the policies that the current government are implementing are a direct consequence of FF actions that Keaveney slated and rightly so.

Independents had no impact on that-they are not a party therefore not all the same and not to be tarnished with the one brush. Saying you don't believe in the power of Independents is well and good but what about the 'power' of FF?? What happens if he ends up in government and realises again that FF are screwing up and implementing harsh cuts, etc?? He'l sit there like a hypocrite and take it because he will have cemented his seat which is all he is worried about.

He would also know well that FF courted Lorraine Higgins and another prominent Independent in Galway East before him yet he still had no problem bedding down with them.

Remember Michael Kitt did not know this decision was coming. The line was that it was Kitt's last term and Keaveney has set himself up to keep his seat - that's the bottom line. Also strictly speaking Kitt would not be in Galway East next time with the boundary reconstruction. Now due to revolt at grassroots and having not been consulted it seems Kitt is going to keep in for another bit. Will make it all the more interesting.

1) I do not see how it is a ridiculous comparison. If he remained an independent, he could very easily be criticised for doing so. Vincent Browne gave him a very heavy questioning in the run-up to the last election and Keaveney was adamant that independents were a waste of time. How could he be expected to run as an independent in the next election after being so loud about it a couple of years ago? It just wouldn't be logical.

2) Do you have a source for this? I didnt hear anywhere that it was to be Kitts last term.

He's not even a clever opportunist.

I think this could be the truth of it. Maybe he just isnt that bright. There are people calling him opportunistic on here. And I dont agree because it just seems such a bad move for him. Perhaps, he just isnt that clever.

If he wants to remain a TD, the only options open to him were:

1) Join Fianna Fail
2) Start a new party

I would love if he chose option 2 instead of 1.

For Reals wrote: »

Bundling all the Independents to one group, one view point is kind of silly. He could easily have gone that route without affiliating himself to those he had previously commented on.

Fianna Fail are and will be a much bigger player than Labour. They will return to power at some point in the not so distant future. They have a core of mindless traditional supporters who will vote for them. Keaveney knows this. That's why he's opportunistic, but foolish because I don't think the wave of support for Fianna Fail will be enough to carry him too and nobody has any respect for him, which isn't a prerequisite for being a Fianna Fail candidate by any means.

No, he couldnt! That is the point. He made a very detailed explanation in the run-up to the last election that being an independent is a waste of time and that they cannot achieve anything. Anybody who followed his election campaign last time around knows this - so imagine the flack he would have to take from opponents in the run up to the next election. He didnt mention specific independents. His opinion was that independents simply do not work. If he stayed as an independent, he was staying in a position where he has previously stated is a position where he cannot make any meaningful change. There is just way that would have been feasible for Keaveney.

Nobody knows when FF will get back in. I suspect they wont get back in during the next election (Surely Ireland's memory isnt that short?!) and then you are looking well into the future from here.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

Ok so that means Higgins wont be ahead of Keaveney.

But it is still a HUGE ask for him to win the 2nd FF seat. If I remember correctly, Kitt was one of the highest Fianna Fail pollers in the country at the last election and he seems determined to run again in the next election.

I do remember Higgins did quite well in Galway East in the last election, particularly around Athenry area which should be a focus with the new constituency maps.

People on here seem to be saying Keaveney went to FF because it GUARANTEES him a seat in the next election. That is far from the case.

I agree with you,i have no idea how Keaveney will do as an FF candidate.Higgins did ok in the last election,but only ok.Every candidate that lab ran did well.It will be different next time round and i think you will get long odds against lab winning the seat.It will be interesting to see how Higgins does in the European election.She has no chance whatsoever of a seat and the party would appear to be using that election as a launch pad for the general.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

But there isn't a guaranteed seat. That is the point!

There will be one FF seat in Galway East. But it is a long way from guaranteed that Keaveney will get that seat.....

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=571080802963177&set=a.534747629929828.1073741828.171572416247353&type=1&theater

Think this says it all about Colm and his motives....

Sole FF candidate in deal - not an opportunistic, self serving move at all:rolleyes:

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=571080802963177&set=a.534747629929828.1073741828.171572416247353&type=1&theater

Think this says it all about Colm and his motives....

Sole FF candidate in deal - not an opportunistic, self serving move at all:rolleyes:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ffs-kitt-to-confront-martin-over-secret-signing-of-keaveney-29817816.html

An extract from the above link:

And he rejected a report in a local newspaper which claimed that Mr Keaveney had been told he would be sole Fianna Fail candidate in the Galway East constituency.
"That's not true at all," he said, adding that he intends to defend his seat at the next general election.

It simply does not make ANY sense for Fianna Fail to run Keaveney as a sole candidate. That would actually put their 'guaranteed' seat at risk in Galway East.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Looks like the jump is on
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sf-td-hints-at-party-exit-as-anger-with-adams-grows-29823286.html
"I don't believe it's ever correct to say that two police officers were murdered because of their own actions. These men's deaths were not determined by their own actions but the actions of the IRA. The IRA is responsible for the murder of these two men, not the officers themselves,"
Looking very much like the jump is on. "
I can't ever remember an SF TD differing from the party line like this, note particularly the use of the M word in connection with an IRA operation.

Doubt this is primarily motivated by careerist concerns, I'd imagine the 'left' seat in the constituency is in SF's keeping for the foreseeable future. Suspect it may be motivated by pique over his abortion sin-binning but it will be very interesting to see what rationale he offers if indeed he does defect.

This is a makey uppey story in the FF independent newsletter.

Nothing in it is true. All Fianna Fail propaganda.

I am no fan of SF but this rubbish is ridiculous.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Looks like the jump is on
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sf-td-hints-at-party-exit-as-anger-with-adams-grows-29823286.html
"I don't believe it's ever correct to say that two police officers were murdered because of their own actions. These men's deaths were not determined by their own actions but the actions of the IRA. The IRA is responsible for the murder of these two men, not the officers themselves,"
Looking very much like the jump is on. "
I can't ever remember an SF TD differing from the party line like this, note particularly the use of the M word in connection with an IRA operation.

Doubt this is primarily motivated by careerist concerns, I'd imagine the 'left' seat in the constituency is in SF's keeping for the foreseeable future. Suspect it may be motivated by pique over his abortion sin-binning but it will be very interesting to see what rationale he offers if indeed he does defect.

You are quoting the Independent, a Fianna Fáil rag that is dedicated to writing lies and slandering Sinn Féín? lol

Peadar Tóibín: Fianna Fáil approached me, but I want to rejoin Sinn Féin

.....But despite being at odds with the Sinn Féin position on abortion, the Meath West deputy said this morning that reports that he was preparing to quit the party altogether are “inaccurate” and “frustrating and tiresome”.
In a statement released yesterday, he said: “During the last 17 years I have invested my time and energies wholeheartedly into the Sinn Féin project and I hope that the necessary space is created to allow myself and others do so again.”

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

It proves that Keaveney will not be the sole candidate in FF. Its just not going to happen. FF will not turn their back on a candidate like Kitt who polled so highly last time around.

Ok, lets say this is the case. Why would he move to FF? Sierra Oscar has already explained he cannot be guaranteed to be the sole candidate. Surely Keaveney would also be aware of this?
And it is a hell of a stretch to claim that FF are guaranteed a 2nd seat in that constituency. They simply are not - Fine Gael are most likely to get it (Cannon & Connaughton are both strong candidates).

I am not a Keaveney fan. But it simply makes no sense to claim that he joined FF to guarantee a seat in the next election.

Well this is getting less and less believable all the time when you consistently pursue the 'guaranteed' line of argument and misquoting others.

As been pointed out plenty of times - I are not saying he is guaranteeing himself a seat, we are outlining that he is giving himself the very best chance of preserving his political career. In doing so he has sacrificed any principal or credibility he has. That's the crux of the argument. Deflecting attention from this by analysing FF strategy, etc is fooling no one.

Secondly and most definitively Colm Keaveney himself in the link I gave you says the deal he struck with Martin ensures he'l be the sole FF candidate in Galway East. This is his understanding of things. These are the circumstances in which he agreed the deal. This indicates that he is quite clearly giving himself a great chance in his mind owing to what he is being told.

Now do I believe this will go unopposed? No, I don't. But again that's me speculating. You can reply now and tell us we are flawed in our thinking because that they won't abandon Kitt, etc, etc. Again that's a completely separate issue. We were criticising Keaveney for his motives and this information and his understanding of this deal completely supports the majority consensus here that it is self serving, self preserving and opportunistic politician.