Another Broken Promise by FF/PD's

Villain

Well they promised to clear waiting lists for hospitals before the last election and then a few months ago on Prime Time Mr Ahern said "ah well no we won't clear them". They also promised 2000 Gardai that we are yet to see. They also promised to increase the number of people who have medical cards by 200,000 but the number has actually fallen.

Now another broken promise, "the Government had promised in its Programme for Government to cut class sizes for all children under nine years old to 20 children for each teacher by 2007."

But "last night, Ms Hanafin admitted that the Government might not be able to meet the target. Speaking on TV3's The Political Party programme, she said that it would take at least 2,500 extra teachers to meet the target."

Quoted text taken from RTE

They lied to get the votes, and it sickens me to see the state of the Health and Education system in this country. :mad:

angeldelight

Ok I can't stand Fine Fail or anything about them in general but I have to say I heard Mary Hanafin on Morning Ireland this morning, and I was quite interested because my dad is a teacher. Anyways she only has 2 years to do it (lets forget her predecessor, he was useless), and she was saying that she wants to prioritise replacing untrained teachers with fully-trained people. Also she wants to work with children who are in disadvantaged schools and who have basic literacy problems. Yes, they havent done what they've said they will but at this stage it's to late to do that so surely what she is doing is better than nothing...?

bonkey

irish1 wrote:

They lied to get the votes,

Only if they had no intention of meeting those targets when they set out the goals....which isn't necessarily a given to be fair.

and it sickens me to see the state of the Health and Education system in this country. :mad:

You and me both.

jc

Villain

You can't just say "forget her predecessor, he was useless" he was a Minister appointed by our Taoiseach. I hate this bullsh*t when a new Minister takes over saying I'm sorry but my colleague was crap. Thats no exucse promises was made and people voted for FF/PD on the back of those promises.

bonkey

Well, you can't blame the current minister for teh failings of their predecessor(s), but you can - and most certainly should - hold the party accountable.....

jc

Villain

bonkey wrote:

Well, you can't blame the current minister for the failings of their predecessor(s), but you can - and most certainly should - hold the party accountable.....

jc

Exactly

Just a comment on the health service and classroom sizes.
The week the patients together group formed Joe Duffy rang around various private nursing homes to see if there were places and he found more places in a half hour on the phone than there were people on trolleys in A+e in Dublin hospitals.

A lot of the problem seems to be that there are elderly people taking up beds who could be discharged to spend a week or two in nursing homes.
The difficulty is, old people by and large won't move to nursing homes as they feel they are being sent to a "home" which to them is a lot different to being in a hospital.
It's like they are being put in an institutuion and they just won't do that.

Now if it costs say €500 a week to pay for a private nursing home bed, that means €50k a week to free up 100 beds in dublin hospitals.
Why would or does it cost significantly more to open more space in the Dublin hospitals?

As regards teachers-what could any government do when the numbers aren't there coming out of the training colleges?
I also heard Mary Hanafin on Morning Ireland and the guy from the INTO.
All the new recruits will be given jobs, as the jobs are there.
What could any government do to increase the numbers?
Double the salaries? That would probably do it.
Any other ideas?

Villain

Earthman wrote:

As regards teachers-what could any government do when the numbers aren't there coming out of the training colleges?
I also heard Mary Hanafin on Morning Ireland and the guy from the INTO.
All the new recruits will be given jobs, as the jobs are there.
What could any government do to increase the numbers?
Double the salaries? That would probably do it.
Any other ideas?

The numbers are there to start delivering what they promised, correct me here if I'm wrong but what she's saying is that she wants to get rid of people who have been teaching for years, many of whom are middle aged, who aren't "properly qualified" and replace them with new teachers who have a few months experience and a Degree.

Then she talks about students who are in disadvantaged schools and who have basic literacy problems, well my sister is in law works in a school as a special needs assitant working with a deaf and dumb 6 year old, these assitants receive training and work very well with weak students. So why not appoint more of them and put the teachers where there needed, I have a cousin who is in 2nd class but because theres over 35 in that class 5 of the 2nd class students have to sit in the first class room where a teacher is trying to teach 2 curriculums. :rolleyes:

irish1

irish1 wrote:

The numbers are there to start delivering what they promised, correct me here if I'm wrong but what she's saying is that she wants to get rid of people who have been teaching for years, many of whom are middle aged, who aren't "properly qualified" and replace them with new teachers who have a few months experience and a Degree.

Out of curiosity, how do you know that many of the unqualified teachers in the system are middle aged? What source do you have for that?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, just practical.
If most of the untrained teachers working out there are young, they are neither suffeciently experienced or would they if parents were aware of their status hold the confidence of the parents.
The reason the untrained teachers are there in the first place is an obvious lack of supply of trained teachers.

Now do you think a majority of parents would prefer to have their kids thought by teachers with the requisite training-I'd certainly think so.

bonkey

Earthman wrote:

Now do you think a majority of parents would prefer to have their kids thought by teachers with the requisite training-I'd certainly think so.

Then you'd think they'd put some attention into improving the education facilities for teachers.

My sis has just spent 2 years working as a part-time teacher. She had the points for a grad-dip, but with competition for places she missed out. Her 2 years of experience counts exactly the same as someone who got 4 weeks of experience in a school at some stage. The fact that the headmaster and staff of the school she's worked at want her to stay and want to offer her a job counts absolutely nothing.

Her only solution is to go abroad and get a qualification in England which will be recognised when she comes home. So she's in the laughable situation where the IRish system say she's not qualified enough to give a permie job to, and not good enough to give training to....but if she can get someone else to give her the training, she gets the job - even over those who were given the grad-dip spots in Ireland in front of her.

And this from a govt. who tells us we need 2,500 more teachers? Fscking joke.

jc

RE*AC*TOR

Could someone compile all the promises they made, versus the ones they've kept. I'd really love to know.

dahamsta

angeldelight wrote:

Yes, they havent done what they've said they will but at this stage it's to late to do that so surely what she is doing is better than nothing...?

If she does it. She's making promises now, why should we believe her? She's a member of the party that lied remember.

An election promise is effectively made by a party, not an individual. While we can't blame current staff for their predecessors, we can certainly blame the predecessors themselves, and we should absolutely blame the party for lying.

But Irish people won't of course. They won't think about how their voting, they'll just vote the way mammy and daddy did. And we call Americans stupid...*

adam

*We don't of course. Just making a point.

aidan_walsh

Its wonderful how people love to use sensational words like "lie" when they want to prove a point. There is nothing to say that FF "lied" in order to win votes. In order to be able to claim this, I ask you to offer proof that they never intended on keeping the promise that they made. All they are saying is that the original deadline was optimistic and now proves unfeasible.

Villain

doodle_sketch wrote:

Its wonderful how people love to use sensational words like "lie" when they want to prove a point. There is nothing to say that FF "lied" in order to win votes. In order to be able to claim this, I ask you to offer proof that they never intended on keeping the promise that they made. All they are saying is that the original deadline was optimistic and now proves unfeasible.

They made promises that they are not going to keep, to me that means they lied, now you can get technical about the meaning of the word, but to me they lied. They shouldn't have promised to do something unless they were CERTAIN they could cary it out.

Sleepy

doodle_sketch wrote:

Its wonderful how people love to use sensational words like "lie" when they want to prove a point. There is nothing to say that FF "lied" in order to win votes. In order to be able to claim this, I ask you to offer proof that they never intended on keeping the promise that they made. All they are saying is that the original deadline was optimistic and now proves unfeasible.

If the original deadline was optomistic they shouldn't have been used. I can imagine what one of our clients was to say if I turned to them and said "well, actually, that project was based on an optomistic deadline, we hope to complete it by next year..."

We'd never work for them again, and quite rightly so.

bonkey

bonkey wrote:

And this from a govt. who tells us we need 2,500 more teachers? Fscking joke.

jc

Oh I'd agree with you,I'd like to have heard you or somebody put the point you made to Mary Hanafin this morning-nobody did, not the presenter, not the guy from the INTO.

On the broader issue of promises made at election time, is there a party in existence or an independent that one would realistically expect to have all their promises implimented?
I doubt it, so by the definition of some on this thread they must be all liars so.
I'll get me coat...

bonkey

irish1 wrote:

They shouldn't have promised to do something unless they were CERTAIN they could cary it out.

Yup. And people shouldn't vote for political parties who continuously fail to deliver (like Earthman points out just after the post I'm quoting).

The problem is that people do continue to support those who fail to deliver.....so what incentive is there to deliver? Look at Earthman's question the other way....if the same company they let down last year would be willing to give them their next contract as long as they continued to promise the sun, moon and stars - regardless of whether or not it was possible.....would his company promise the sun, moon and stars to get the contract, or would they be honest and let someone else have it?

Until people start using the power of their vote, they have no reason to expect that any politician is going to respect that power.

jc

Boggle

Its wonderful how people love to use sensational words like "lie" when they want to prove a point. There is nothing to say that FF "lied" in order to win votes. In order to be able to claim this, I ask you to offer proof that they never intended on keeping the promise that they made. All they are saying is that the original deadline was optimistic and now proves unfeasible.

They came out with a promise to do something and have done absolutely nothing. This is either a lie or a sign of complete incompetence ... you decide!!

By the way she is saying now that they need 2500 teachers to carry out their promise - did they not know that when they made the promise? Did they not do a feasability study before making commitments? Why isn't someone losing their job for a fcuk up like this??

You could understand if they encountered a setback if they, in the least, had a plan set-up to do it in the near future (extra course places, recruitment drive), but to just turn around and make the statement "Actually, we dont want to bother doing that anymore - forget the promises..." is just cheeky.

By the by, this is the case with all their promises. They say what the people want to hear without doing any kind of research or planning and then just dont do it when it proves too difficult.... The muppet electorate appear blind to this though.

angeldelight

Well tbh, I think ppl are getting what they voted for. They knew (or should have) that FF were never any good at keeping promises etc yet voted them in again.... And some of the same ppl are criticising Americans for voting for Bush :rolleyes:

AngelofFire

Is there any Pre 2002 election promise that Fianna Fail/PDs actually kept?

Boggle

Boggle wrote:

By the way she is saying now that they need 2500 teachers to carry out their promise - did they not know that when they made the promise? Did they not do a feasability study before making commitments? Why isn't someone losing their job for a fcuk up like this??

Well ok they could have done that, perhaps some parties do and some don't.
But again if you did a feasability study on a lot of the policies of a lot of the parties, you probably wouldn't be long discovering that the content of manifesto's are largely feel good reading rather than realisable.

Going back to what Bonkey said last,a lot of voters did vote for independent single issue candidates with health agendas and they got elected.
One of them has since joined fine Gael( insert a :rolleyes: here regarding that T.D's bona fidé's )

But to carry out Bonkeys plan to it's fullest, with respect to the health and teaching areas, I think,one would have to choose from the more radical parties available to give the incumbents the necessary kick in the teeth.
No not Labour,not FG, but rather more left wing for to get cracking on the job, the others would be too slow and their record is of slowness (ie not much better than FF)to be honest if the achievements of recent coalitions they've been involved with are examined.

Trouble is when the voter weighs up that choice, they generally look at what impact it might have on other aspects of their lives aswell.
A doubling of corporation taxes and a significant increase in personal taxes for example deadening incentives to do overtime or to move up in ones job/career.
So the voters do the trade off and thats how the politicians that do a semi reasonable overall rather than a 100% perfect job keep getting elected.


That said,I remember hearing Brendan Keenan Group Economic editor with the Irish Independent( relax now, imho he's a good economist and a good thinker/writer plus,although the independent might often get a dig in at SF, they dont always blindly follow the politics of O'Reilly or else they wouldn't give such prominance to Robert Fisk for instance )...

What he said of the Celtic Tiger was that it has grown so fast in less than a decade that peoples expectations have grown unrealistically in paralell with it.
The country basically he said is going to be playing a game of catch up infrastructure wise for quite some time to come yet.

Many other countries in the E.U whose wealth per capita we are now surpassing thanks in large part to their generosity have had decades of capacity that we haven't had to reach and maintain their level of services and infrastructure and that includes health and education as well as roads and rail etc.
That I thought was a valid point often overlooked in the justifiably frenzied rush to condemn, moan and counter moan.

Factor in the adversarial nature of the political game here where, the gamble of being totally true honest and forthrightly frank in your manifesto as to what is possible would mean losing an election('cause the other guys either critisise you for saying it will take a long time to get something right or outright promise they will do it better... and you have what you have got here guys.

Try changing peoples habits/attitudes and the political game radically very quickly, and I'll be getting awards for my dancing(I could with phenominal effort get awards for my dancing but I have the craziest two left feet ever, it would be a gargantuan task for any dance teacher )

Flukey

Why is anyone shocked when a government, of whatever parties, breaks their promises? It is more shocking when they actually manage to keep them!

dahamsta

Flukey wrote:

Why is anyone shocked when a government, of whatever parties, breaks their promises? It is more shocking when they actually manage to keep them!

I think that's the second time somebody's said that around me this week. Here's my response. Again.

a) Who's shocked? Is someone here shocked? How do you know? Did they all run down to your house and tell you?

b) In my experience, people who respond to annoyance with government actions with "why is anyone shocked" and suchlike are invariably the most likely to bend over and take it full up the arse, and bitch about it forever afterwards.

I hope I haven't shocked you.

adam

Boggle

earthman wrote:

Well ok they could have done that, perhaps some parties do and some don't.
But again if you did a feasability study on a lot of the policies of a lot of the parties, you probably wouldn't be long discovering that the content of manifesto's are largely feel good reading rather than realisable.

I fail to see your point here really... Are you justifying it on the grounds that everyone (FF at least!!) does it? Does it not bother you that someone can win an election based on fancyful whims and lies? What is the definition of a manifesto: things you commit to doing or things you think it would be nice to see happen???

earthman wrote:

Trouble is when the voter weighs up that choice, they generally look at what impact it might have on other aspects of their lives aswell.
A doubling of corporation taxes and a significant increase in personal taxes for example deadening incentives to do overtime or to move up in ones job/career.
So the voters do the trade off and thats how the politicians that do a semi reasonable overall rather than a 100% perfect job keep getting elected.

Again I have to argue with you about the performance of the present govt... In my opinion they piggybacked on the success of the American economy to a large degree due to the large amount of multinationals here. I am aware that many companies chose here because of the low corp tax but I would also remind you that we are/were an ideal choice for a location for multinationals due to our good skill levels, low wages (for eng jobs) and language and more than likely would have chosen the country irrespective of the corp tax rate (to a reasonable degree).

Speaking of good skill levels - the govt are now rolling back on their promises of free 3rd level again which is a large basis of our success and is liokely to be the country's one ray of light in the future.

By the way we are not sitting in anyway pretty at the minute - costs are rising to the point that I was told that its 20% more expensive to manufacture here than in London (source is a local business man trying to get his business off the ground). Companies are starting to move manufacturing away from here and as a high percentage of companies here work as suppliers to these multi's and as the govt has little or no interest in helping indiginous indusrty we could be in severe trouble in years to come... Therefore I would argue that the govt is not doing a reasonable job and due to the electorate's blindness (and the fact that Bertie just annoys people less than other politicians) they wont be found out till its too late!

P.S. I can keep going with my reasons why the gov't is doing a less than adequate job if you like...

rien_du_tout

irish1 wrote:

You can't just say "forget her predecessor, he was useless" he was a Minister appointed by our Taoiseach. I hate this bullsh*t when a new Minister takes over saying I'm sorry but my colleague was crap. Thats no exucse promises was made and people voted for FF/PD on the back of those promises.

Especially so when Mary Hanafin was a member of cabinet throughout this term and through the collective responsibility of the executive(cabinet) is just as much to blame for the problems in the education system. Nothing would have stopped her voting against education measures which were brought by the previous minister. Of course whether she did or not is confidential so I guess thats kind of a moot point:( !!!

seán

rien_du_tout

Boggle wrote:

What is the definition of a manifesto: things you commit to doing or things you think it would be nice to see happen???
.

Wouldnt it be great if jthe manifesto was the offer, voting the party in the acceptance, and payment of tax to them consideration. Unfortunatly carrying out something which you'd have to do legally cant be consideration but I'm sure we could work some way around it! But seriously it the manifesto isnt really important as the programme for government which should be stuck to and only deviated from under extreme circumstances

seán