FF might ditch the PD's

aodh_rua

Apparently some Fianna Fail backbenchers are calling for the party to ditch the PD's and form a minority government. On paper it looks like a possibility as Fianna Fail aren't far off an overall majority and the independents on whom they would then depend are more palatable to old FF-lefties than Mary Harney and co.

While it's an outside possibility, I can see it maybe coming more into focus if the two sides keep bickering. What does everyone else think? Would it be good for Fianna Fail? Would it be good for the country?

mike65

Typical FF, when the going gets tough blame someone else (it used to be Britiain!). The PDs have two ministers at the table the rest are FF. They should just admit the problem lies with thier own not the minority partner who have been damaged themselves by association with FF I'd say (many PD votes going to FG). As for FF nearing a
majority in the Dail well that was true two years ago it wont be in two years time.

Mike.

sceptre

Some FF backbenchers have been calling for this for over a year (at least that's what I was informed by a few of them about a year ago). Since then I've heard a few making reference to the PDs "fighting above their weight", I've made reference to that here before. However, some want them to stay as they'll be a possible scapegoat at the next election should they need one and they're not taking all that many committees from the faithful.

The "fighting above their weight" excuse doesn't wash with me to be honest (if they actually are fighting above their weight, whose fault might that be?) and neither would using them as a scapegoat in the next election and blaming them for any ills.

You could make the case that dumping the PDs would get a few votes back to FF - the PDs made hay last election on the watchdog promise - and dumping out of government would ensure that they couldn't fulfil that promise (not that they've done it anyway) and those voters might return to FF. Fact of the matter is that the most dangerous party in the next election from the point of view of the effeffers is likely to be Sinn Fein. They'll have to try and buy off the poor people with a few fake baubles and heck, maybe even a few real ones. The Pds may or may not want to go along with this but assuming that, like FF, a lot of their existence is dedicated to staying in power, they may well swallow their spittle and build a few community centres, actually deliver on some of the promised police (preferably if they think they're heading out of power as they can whinge about the cost then as the new recruits spend the entire lifetime of the next government drilling in Templemore) and a few of the other things that normal folk might like.

Part of the trouble with dumping the PDs is that Fianna Fail's current economic, er, direction is so close to the position the PDs adopted after about 1992 that you can't tell the difference between them any more. Apart from electoral gain, the PD's junior partners in government haven't anything to gain from dumping Harney and McDowell apart from votes that may or may not even come - the PDs didn't lose that many votes in the locals, especially compared to FF (12% in Waterford lads, well done to Martin Turncoat). the fact that the economic philosophy of the PDs hasn't borne up to serious scrutiny even among the nutty since the late 80s (before they adopted it, after even Thatcher and Reagan dropped it rather quietly) is neither here nor there - it's a Fianna Fail position now and they pretend it was their idea all along (I suppose McCreevy's old friendship with Harney probably didn't hurt there).

One thing is certainly true - the FF backbenchers will try to take steps to ensure they hold on to their seats where possible (and don't lose them due to a shock election if FF get whipped in a minority). They've just got to make up their minds on which is the correct action to take. And they really don't know.

kahlua

In fairness get rid of McCreevy first.

leeroybrown

Hopefully this doesn't happen. If theres one possibility worse than the current FF-PD alliance, it's FF on their own bartering the countries finances for votes with FF Independents.

Much as I dislike some elements of whip politics, doing background deals with independents can be worse.

seamus

Any think we'll see a collapse of Government and a new General Election before Christmas?

Unlikely, but we can always hope

Sleepy

Personally I'd like to see it. Manifesto-wise I'd be behind the PD's: sensible economics with a social conscience. However, Harney seems to me at least to have completely sold out on many key PD beliefs due to her involvement with FF. SO, basically, if a falling out with her new buddys lead to her demise as party leader (and even as a TD) I'd like to see the split happen.

arcadegame2004

The PD's are a convenient scapegoat by FF is the real author of its problems.

I think the failure to advance the PD's economic-liberal agenda of privatisation and competition is one of the indirect causes of the current difficulties for the Government in popularity terms.

For example: people complain about rip-off Ireland. But if people had the right to choose a cheaper electricity company than ESB then prices would come down due to competition.

Also, the 12 billion Euro spent on public-sector pay makes it clear that privatising the public-sector would raise collossal amounts of extra cash for the Health-Service, road-building, and tax-cuts.

So it is actually the refusal of FF to go further down the PD-economic agenda since 2002 that has partly caused FF's problems.

Other reasons are broken promises including promises of money for schools via letters before the 2002 General Election, and the promise of an end to waiting-lists within 2 years.

Also, I don't feel comfortable at all with FF running the show on their own, for obvious reasons.

Victor

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Also, the 12 billion Euro spent on public-sector pay makes it clear that privatising the public-sector would raise collossal amounts of extra cash for the Health-Service, road-building, and tax-cuts.

"Quick, lets sell the house so we can live in a hotel!". I'm sorry, it would be a false economy. Are you saying a privately employed street sweeper is inherently cheaper thatn a state or council employed one?

mike65

Originally posted by Victor
Are you saying a privately employed street sweeper is inherently cheaper than a state or council employed one?

At least the former one is sackable!

Mike.

cyclopath2001

Hmm, yes, the cleaner would probably be replaced by 'guest workers' imported from non-Eu countries and sent home before they could gain any rights?

We're ripped off by the private sector as it is.

Privitising essential services just exchanges a private monopoly for a public one.

What kind of hospital would RyanAir run?

How about AIB running the Gardai?

TV3 or MTV running the schools?

jmcc

Originally posted by sceptre
Apart from electoral gain, the PD's junior partners in government haven't anything to gain from dumping Harney and McDowell apart from votes that may or may not even come - the PDs didn't lose that many votes in the locals, especially compared to FF (12% in Waterford lads, well done to Martin Turncoat).

Haven't much of a clue about Waterford then? Not surprising if you rely on the news from that little Dublin station RTE. Don't confuse what may be a protest vote in a local election with a general election vote.

The demolition of the FF/PD vote in Waterford, especially in the city, is probably attributable to the Radiotherapy issue in the South East. The No Radiotherapy Facility - No Vote seems to have been effective. There is only one FF member of the Waterford city council now.

The people around here do not blame Martin Cullen. They blame the Dublin government who will not give the SE the Radiotherapy facility. Cancer sufferers have to travel to Cork or Dublin for treatment. I listened to the pious platitudes of FF and PD politicians of how they were going to change the world for the people of the South East. I heard their empty promises. Then I remembered my late father having to travel by ambulance to Dublin for radiotherapy last year.

The PDs have been a bit of a disaster - a Frankenstein's Monster of FG flotsam and of FF jetsam with a caculator for a soul. Cullen's move to FF was widely respected and widely applauded in Waterford.

I think that at the time, the Harney/McDowell Dublin Junta had taken over the PDs in a plot with O'Malley. Not only did the PD's Dublin kitchen Junta lose Cullen, it lost Cox as well. Even Dessie O'Malley could not get elected to the European parliament. The people voted for Cox. Not exactly a shining record for a party of political refugees? I wonder if any of them will be seeking political asylum soon.

The PDs may have some good people in its local branches and some support outside the Pale. However the increasingly Harney/McDowell/Neo-Unionist emphasis has reduced the voter base and probably driven away a lot of voters. The introduction of Parlon and a weird attempt at adding a ready made country and western wing to the PDs has failed. Sinn Fein has become a bigger party than the PDs. If the IRA arms issue and the GFA issues are resolved by the next general election, there is an outside possibility of FF doing a deal with SF rather than the PDs.

By the time of the next election, there is a very real chance that Harney will have been replaced as leader of the PDs. If she has been replaced by McDowell, I think that the PDs will be little more than a Dublin party with a TD or three.

One thing is certainly true - the FF backbenchers will try to take steps to ensure they hold on to their seats where possible (and don't lose them due to a shock election if FF get whipped in a minority). They've just got to make up their minds on which is the correct action to take. And they really don't know.

Yes but I think that the PDs are even more worried about losing power now and may be more eager that a shock election does not occur. FF may be faced with the possibility of doing a deal with independents and or the Greens or SF to stay in power. The PDs may be doomed to oblivion.

The best move that the PDs could make would be to dump Harney and McDowell as party leaders. This is a media age and neither are camera friendly. But the PDs will have to ask themselves whether their "power at any price" strategy is worth it. The upshot of this strategy is that they have become a scapegoat for FF. Around here, they are just another Dublin party and local elections in Dublin is where they belong.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
I think the failure to advance the PD's economic-liberal agenda of privatisation and competition is one of the indirect causes of the current difficulties for the Government in popularity terms.

One world arcadegame2004, just one word: EIRCOM.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Originally posted by seamus
Any think we'll see a collapse of Government and a new General Election before Christmas?

Unlikely, but we can always hope

Before October 15th I'd say. Just a mad phase of the moon prediction but you have to remember that the TDs have a very long Summer holiday. Let's hope that after the election, that holiday becomes permanent for a lot of those freeloading politicians. :>

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Originally posted by Sleepy
SO, basically, if a falling out with her new buddys lead to her demise as party leader (and even as a TD) I'd like to see the split happen.

Wouldn't that be ironic. The Provisional PDs versus the Official PDs.

Regards...jmcc

sceptre

Originally posted by jmcc
Haven't much of a clue about Waterford then? Not surprising if you rely on the news from that little Dublin station RTE. Don't confuse what may be a protest vote in a local election with a general election vote.

I was really mentioning Waterford as the most extreme example - the FF vote managed to collapse rather dramatically in all the cities (Limerick had 16% and we haven't a large single issue as locally (or regionally) important as the radiotherapy facility to focus the minds of people living here). I've stressed that a local election result has nothing to do with a potential general election result once or twice since the results came in here, though it's funny to see the fear and triumphalism out there.

Nevertheless John, I know shag-all about Waterford to put it bluntly.

Sleepy

Originally posted by jmcc
One world arcadegame2004, just one word: EIRCOM.

Regards...jmcc

So you think telecoms should be state run?:rolleyes: The problem with Eircom is that it was left a lot of it's monopolistic powers and it still has it's state body work ethic (i.e. none to speak of). Virtually any service outside of the key areas of health, law enforcement and education should be left to private enterprise to run. Yes, services need to be monitored by government but they shouldn't be run by them as the civil service in this (and I'd wager virtually any other country) is about as efficient as trying to power your house with a hamster wheel. I can understand an argument for the likes of Bus Eireann to stay centrally controlled (otherwise the regions would suffer desperately). However, Ryanair have quite brilliantly shown why things like airlines should be left to private enterprise to run. Think about it: why should someone poor subsidise a richer person's flight? That's the situation you have when the likes of Aer Arran are bolstered by government grants. Ironically, it's the same situation as the lazy farmers of Europe relying on CAP to provide for them instead of becoming efficient at their jobs.

jmcc

Originally posted by sceptre
I've stressed that a local election result has nothing to do with a potential general election result once or twice since the results came in here, though it's funny to see the fear and triumphalism out there.

That's the wierd thing about it all sceptre. Politics runs on the perception of power rather than on the reality of power. If FG/LAB/etc can build on this they may convince the people that they are a government in waiting.

The FF/PD canvassers around here were absolutely petrified of what was going to happen in the election and I think that FF were happy just getting a few candidates back. The PDs were wiped out completely.

Nevertheless John, I know shag-all about Waterford to put it bluntly.

Sorry if my post sounded a bit extremish sceptre, but Waterford has always had this attitude that the government doesn't give a damn about what happens here. The whole fiasco over the radiotherapy facility seems to reinforce that. And the radiotherapy facility is a very emotive subject for a lot of people.

RTE's coverage of the election in the real world, i.e more than a few metres outside of RTE's gates was dire. All it gave were the voting statistics. It never gave the names of the candidates, or more importantly the names of those who had been elected. And it failed to do any decent analysis.

Perhaps the biggest reason for the collapse of the FF/PD/other vote in the local elections was the removal of the double-jobber TD/councillors. These people had a traditionally higher profile and a more convincing reason to work harder. With those people out of the race, it became dependent on more locally orientated candidates. This lack of the same old suspects may also have contributed a lot of new candidates which altered the local power structures for the immediate future. But at the next elections, the same old voting blocs will probably remerge. The FF collapse in Limerick and Waterford may not appear to be that bad in the long term because it would give FF a bit of motivation. The expulsion of the PDs from government may happen before the expected date for the next general election but I think that FF may be worried about moving too hastily on this. It may choose to rebuild its voter base first. Anything else at this stage would be political suicide.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Originally posted by Sleepy
So you think telecoms should be state run?:rolleyes:

No. I don't think that a national asset should be sold off and then be allowed to fall into the hands of a bunch of vultures for a firesale price either.

The problem with Eircom is that it was left a lot of it's monopolistic powers and it still has it's state body work ethic (i.e. none to speak of).

Yes and no. It is culling a lot of these people and trying to become more market orientated. It has come a long way since it was privatised. It has not gone far enough but it is still the market player in Ireland. Its grip on the Irish market is failing daily. Its core business, is under attack and it seems to be coming around to the fact that data may be its saviour. The telecoms business is changing drastically and there is a shift from fixed line to mobile. The morons on the pre-Valentia board managed to sell off the most valuable Eircom asset at the bottom of the market.

Virtually any service outside of the key areas of health, law enforcement and education should be left to private enterprise to run.

Communications is a critical aspect of infrastructure. Private enterprise without proper government oversight and control is encouraging exploitation. ComReg has been a useless bunch when dealing with Eircom in the past.

Yes, services need to be monitored by government but they shouldn't be run by them

Agreed. And the government needs competent regulators and powerful sanctions.

Regards...jmcc

arcadegame2004

Privitising essential services just exchanges a private monopoly for a public one.

Not if it's done properly.

I fail to see any case for allowing state-owned monopolies such as the ESB to be the ONLY electricity company that you or me can choose to get electricity from. Why shouldn't we be allowed to choose a different one if we feel the ESB's prices are too high? At least if the ESB and many other semi-states were in the private-sector, their employees salaries would not have to be paid out of the rest of the taxpaying public's taxes.

Also, in the private-sector, the board of directors can be sacked by the shareholders, thereby ensuring its members are appointed on the basis of merit (i.e. who will make the company more profitable and thererby return higher dividends), rather than on the basis of party-political patronage, e.g. the current Chairman of Aer Rianta.

Before someone yaps on about Aer Rianta being "profitable" I simply point out that that isn't very difficult when you're a monopoly.

The primary issue for me is competititon and choice. I want to CHOOSE what company I get electricity from. I want there to be lots and lots of electrivity companies in Ireland for me to compare prices and chose the cheapest option. I am not alone in this ambition. The Left would prefer to impose state-owned monopolies on the public so that the trade-unions can continue to hold this country to ransom, even though you or I had no role in electing them. They are as much against people having the right to choose in their commercial lives as were the religious-right against people having the right to choose in their private-lives back in the De Valera days. Choice is an essential part of living in a democracy.

Someone mentioned Eircom. Actually if you exclude the line-rental, charges per minute have actually fallen. The planned introduction of competition in line-rental will eventually bring that down too.

When a private-sector company knows that it is losing customers to a rival firm, it will try to get them back via lower prices or better service.

Suppose for a moment that you introduced competition by the private-sector against a semi-state like the ESB. In that situation yes, there is also the possibility that ESB will cut prices or improve services to retain market-share. However there is also a strong possibility that instead they will run to the Govt Oliver Twist-style and demand a huge cash-injection of your taxes to bail them out. Only when there is competititon can you truly tell the calibre of the management of a company, as making a profit is easy for a monopoly - and that is no credit to the monopoly.

Trebor

Originally posted by arcadegame2004

Also, in the private-sector, the board of directors can be sacked by the shareholders, thereby ensuring its members are appointed on the basis of merit (i.e. who will make the company more profitable and thererby return higher dividends), rather than on the basis of party-political patronage, e.g. the current Chairman of Aer Rianta.

The primary issue for me is competititon and choice. I want to CHOOSE what company I get electricity from. I want there to be lots and lots of electrivity companies in Ireland for me to compare prices and chose the cheapest option. I am not alone in this ambition. The Left would prefer to impose state-owned monopolies on the public so that the trade-unions can continue to hold this country to ransom, even though you or I had no role in electing them. They are as much against people having the right to choose in their commercial lives as were the religious-right against people having the right to choose in their private-lives back in the De Valera days. Choice is an essential part of living in a democracy.

Someone mentioned Eircom. Actually if you exclude the line-rental, charges per minute have actually fallen. The planned introduction of competition in line-rental will eventually bring that down too.

When a private-sector company knows that it is losing customers to a rival firm, it will try to get them back via lower prices or better service.

Suppose for a moment that you introduced competition by the private-sector against a semi-state like the ESB. In that situation yes, there is also the possibility that ESB will cut prices or improve services to retain market-share. However there is also a strong possibility that instead they will run to the Govt Oliver Twist-style and demand a huge cash-injection of your taxes to bail them out. Only when there is competititon can you truly tell the calibre of the management of a company, as making a profit is easy for a monopoly - and that is no credit to the monopoly.

you fail to understand that electricity is needed by everyone in ireland. you said it yourself private companies aim is to return dividends to it's investors whats the best way to do this? cut the loss making part of your grid and focus all you attention on the most profitable areas.

if we have lots of little firms providing electricity to the country then none of them will be able to gain from economies of scale meaning that although you will have competition and can chose the cheapest you will end up paying more as each of the smaller companies will have higher cost's and less customers to average the costs thus leading to increased prices for all the smaller companies.

we can not afford to let that happen to an industry that the country depends on to function.

arcadegame2004

I disagree with you Trebor.

http://www.psiru.org/reports/2002-08-E-UKImpactPriv.doc

I direct you to this website, which shows that in 2002, there had been a 25% drop in UK electricity-prices since privatisation there.


Your "economies of scale" argument also lacks credibility. ESB has already reached economies of scale such that it could cut prices if it really wanted to. It needs some competitors to start a price-war with in order to get them to actually do it though. These competitors, by eroding ESB's market share via lower prices, would force ESB to similarly cut prices.

if we have lots of little firms providing electricity to the country then none of them will be able to gain from economies of scale meaning that although you will have competition and can chose the cheapest you will end up paying more as each of the smaller companies will have higher cost's and less customers to average the costs thus leading to increased prices for all the smaller companies.

ESB has already reached economies of scale and so too have many of the likely foreign electricity companies e.g. Viridian that might want to enter the Irish electricity market.

Admit it Trebor. Admit that the real reason you oppose competititon in the consumer market for electricity is that it weakens the power of the unions to hold the country to ransom. You know it!

Trebor

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
I disagree with you Trebor.

http://www.psiru.org/reports/2002-08-E-UKImpactPriv.doc

I direct you to this website, which shows that in 2002, there had been a 25% drop in UK electricity-prices since privatisation there.

Your "economies of scale" argument also lacks credibility. ESB has already reached economies of scale such that it could cut prices if it really wanted to. It needs some competitors to start a price-war with in order to get them to actually do it though. These competitors, by eroding ESB's market share via lower prices, would force ESB to similarly cut prices.

ESB has already reached economies of scale and so too have many of the likely foreign electricity companies e.g. Viridian that might want to enter the Irish electricity market.

Admit it Trebor. Admit that the real reason you oppose competititon in the consumer market for electricity is that it weakens the power of the unions to hold the country to ransom. You know it!

you cannot compare the irish market to the uk their population is ten times bigger than ours. even their smaller companies have as many customers as the ESB.

how would a competitor hope to match ESB prices? they would have to be willing to be in debt and selling below cost in order to under cut ESB in any hope of getting any market share. unless of course it's a different type of electricity production like the wind farms which would have a different cost structure.

regarding the unions i believe they result in increased costs due to work stoppages. if a company is not being fair to its employees then they should take the company to the labour courts. i do not believe in striking in any way helps and agree with you that they have to much power. yuck that left a bad taste in my mouth

ZENER

The problem with Eircom is that it was left a lot of it's monopolistic powers and it still has it's state body work ethic (i.e. none to speak of).

Can I ask what you base that statement on? Make up your mind and decide what it is you want exactly ! Would you rather see Eircom back in state hands or as the private enterprise it now is. Consider this if you will, if Eircom had been kept is state ownership it would be putting money back into the Governments pockets to pay for the health service etc.

Currently Aer Rianta is in the process of being broken up and sold off - a company that takes no money from the government or the tax payer but instead contributes to our economy.

However, Ryanair have quite brilliantly shown why things like airlines should be left to private enterprise to run. Think about it: why should someone poor subsidise a richer person's flight?

You're absolutely right RyanAir are a shining example of what Irish private industries are all about - they could care less about their customers and their own employees and want ONLY to fill their own coffers forsaking those little things we seem to have forgotten like:

Customer service
Respect for the customer
Befief that the customer is King !

Perhaps you need to listen to other media sources than those Ryanair have in their back pockets. Please tell me you don't actually believe everything you hear from that idiot O'Leary.

Don't think I'm an Aer Lingus supporter or anything - I too believe they are a top heavy - jobs for the lads entity that has done well clearing out the closets recently. However lately it has turned around its operation and begun to show a profit not bad in a climate that has seen some major carriers bite the dust.

Before someone yaps on about Aer Rianta being "profitable" I simply point out that that isn't very difficult when you're a monopoly.

Aer Rianta manages 3 out of the 9 - yes 9 - airports in Ireland, someone else manages the other 6 so how can Aer Rianta be a monopoly ?? Also there is nothing stopping another Airport opening in Dublin outside the control of Aer Rianta. The problem is they don't want to invest in runways and would rather if Aer Rianta just looked the other way while they used theirs, a bit like Ryan Air not minding if British Midland borrowed one of their planes for an hour or two nod nod wink wink. The truth is Airports cost money, a lot of money to build and run.

The primary issue for me is competititon and choice. I want to CHOOSE what company I get electricity from. I want there to be lots and lots of electrivity companies in Ireland for me to compare prices and chose the cheapest option. I am not alone in this ambition.

Actually the opportunity and structure is there for other companies to supply the domestic electricity Airtricity is one such company availing of this. Others will follow in time. http://www.oasis.gov.ie/public_utilities/electricity_services/electricity_services_in_ireland.html for more info.

When a private-sector company knows that it is losing customers to a rival firm, it will try to get them back via lower prices or better service.

They can do that yes but there is only so far they can go before upping sticks and heading for the hills or do what state companies do and go cap in hand to the government for a bail out like Ryanair did.

I direct you to this website, which shows that in 2002, there had been a 25% drop in UK electricity-prices since privatisation there.

On page three . . .

There are two important points to note. First, these price reductions were paid for by taxpayers because assets owned by taxpayers were sold for only a small fraction of their real value. Second, the price reductions will probably only be temporary as prices will have to rise as old assets are replaced by new assets paid for at the full market price. This trend is becoming apparent in the transmission sector and for the period 2001-05, prices will fall by little more than 1 per cent per year.

ZEN

arcadegame2004

There are two important points to note. First, these price reductions were paid for by taxpayers because assets owned by taxpayers were sold for only a small fraction of their real value. Second, the price reductions will probably only be temporary as prices will have to rise as old assets are replaced by new assets paid for at the full market price. This trend is becoming apparent in the transmission sector and for the period 2001-05, prices will fall by little more than 1 per cent per year.

Yes but the second point is only a "probably", and also, the first point is not really relevant if we sell the ESB for a good market-price for the taxpayer, like we did with Eircom, the proceeds of whose sale went straight into the National Pension Reserve Fund - a fact the pensioners of tomorrow will one day be thankful for.

pete

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
a good market-price for the taxpayer, like we did with Eircom, the proceeds of whose sale went straight into the National Pension Reserve Fund - a fact the pensioners of tomorrow will one day be thankful for.

It was the taxpayer that paid for eircom's infrastructure and it was the taxpayer that got screwed over buying overpriced shares.

Great example of how to do things.

star gazer

originally posted bySleepy
Personally I'd like to see it. Manifesto-wise I'd be behind the PD's: sensible economics with a social conscience. However, Harney seems to me at least to have completely sold out on many key PD beliefs due to her involvement with FF. SO, basically, if a falling out with her new buddys lead to her demise as party leader (and even as a TD) I'd like to see the split happen.

She may not wish to be seen giving in to a more social democratic operating government being driven by Fianna Fail, but like was said above, she may feel it safer to stay in power rather than risk a general election by leaving government.

originally posted by jmcc
Don't confuse what may be a protest vote in a local election with a general election vote.

(quote in relation to waterford local election result and the probabilty that the lack of a radiotherapy unit in waterford had a huge baring on the local elections not necessarily transferable to the next general election)
Trends in the local election can be reflected in a general election also, there have been single issue candidates in general elections before especially around health. If there is still no radiotherapy unit in Waterford by the next general election there may well be a protest vote continuing on.

originally posted by jmcc
The FF collapse in Limerick and Waterford may not appear to be that bad in the long term because it would give FF a bit of motivation. The expulsion of the PDs from government may happen before the expected date for the next general election but I think that FF may be worried about moving too hastily on this. It may choose to rebuild its voter base first. Anything else at this stage would be political suicide.

Rebuilding it's voter base from the same position it held when it received a damaging electoral hit may not prove practical. Certainly the party will be motivated by self-preservation but the party already knew it was about to take a hit so self-protection was already on people's minds. It may be riskier than doing nothing at this stage but a change of emphasis now would give the party a chance at a fresh image and a renewed sense of purpose. It would be riskier though and would have the danger of heaping more political damage onto the party if big changes were made from it's current position swiftly. Still, nothing ventured, nothing gained...

arcadegame2004

It was the taxpayer that paid for eircom's infrastructure and it was the taxpayer that got screwed over buying overpriced shares.

Only the taxpayers who bought the shares and were foolish enough not to sell them when the price was good.

Anyone who invests in shares does so in the full knowledge that share-prices go up and down.

DublinWriter

Just remember ol' Enda kicking around the idea of refunding Eircom shareholders.

In terms of FG-madness, this one even bet Garrett Fitzgeralds idea of privatising Bewleys in the early 80's!

I think it's time we cleared out the big boys (FF/FG) in this country.

Victor

Originally posted by DublinWriter
In terms of FG-madness, this one even bet Garrett Fitzgeralds idea of privatising Bewleys in the early 80's!

Was Bewley's state owned? :dunno:

DublinWriter

Nope, but Bewleys nearly went bankrupt in 1982 and Garrett Fitzgerald seriously suggested at the time that the state should interviene and buy Bewleys.

Campbell Catering eventually bought Bewleys a year later, but even now, Campells are still having profitability problems with the flagship cafès in Grafton St. and Westmoreland St. as was reported in the news last year. They stated that they might sell off the cafès and just keep the hotels.

Bewleys has a large amount of customers every day, but bascially, the business model is a bit 19th century. It's all down to people taking two hours to drink a cup of coffee. You don't need an MBA to work out where things are going wrong!

gaelic cowboy

Heh heh no way in the wide earthly world FF is dumping PD's it is just a load of bull from thick ignorant backbenchers is all. FF is likely to lose more seats if they chanced what the backbenchers are asking forby going into a general election. And no way Bert wants Healy Rae back calling the shots. The majority of voters couldn't give a toss about PD policy but they do care a damm sight more about FF lack of policy and morals.

gaelic cowboy

Originally posted by DublinWriter
Just remember ol' Enda kicking around the idea of refunding Eircom shareholders.

In terms of FG-madness, this one even bet Garrett Fitzgeralds idea of privatising Bewleys in the early 80's!

I think it's time we cleared out the big boys (FF/FG) in this country.

Actually that was Michael Noonan before the last general election after which he resigned that bird brained idea never came from Enda Kenny

Victor

Originally posted by DublinWriter
Nope, but Bewleys nearly went bankrupt in 1982 and Garrett Fitzgerald seriously suggested at the time that the state should interviene and buy Bewleys.

That of course would be nationalisation, not privatisation.