Green Tide?

Múinteoir

So how do people rate the Greens growth in 2007? King-makers or also-rans?

LostinBlanch

Well they've certainly succeeded in putting green issues on the agenda. Everybody wants to steal their clothes. Just like Mary Harney did with the smoky coal ban in Dublin in the late 80's. She gets all the credit but the Greens were calling for it years before, she just took their policy and all the credit.

They are doing the correct thing in not specifically aligning themselves with any parties before an election as they would just be taken for granted by those parties and wouldn't do as well in the election. The Greens have been slowly growing and could very well find themselves in position as Kingmakers. Which is one reason why they are coming in for such stick from the govt. McDowell's outrageous and baseless charge that greens attacked the PD HQ was borne more of a fear of the fact that John Gormley will most likely get in before McDowell. Don't forget that he took McDowells seat at the election before last. I'm not sure that there is much appetite for going into government with FF though if they do go in with them it'll probably be without Trevor Sargent as leader, seeing as he said as much in an interview a couple of months back. Oh yeah Dick Roche'll be sacked as well. I think they said that is non negotiable . One reason to vote Green for me!

silverharp

I tend to vote green but more as a protest vote. However they are years ahead of FF on energy issues and the other environmental crazyness that FF have presided over. However given paddys obsession with consumer culture, if people thought they would have a real influence then their vote would probably level off at 10%

Being in Munster, imagine their impact here will be negligible. Presume Boyle will retain his seat, don't know if they'll even run candidates in many other areas. They seem to be electable mainly in more affluent urban areas who like a good photo shoot and can afford to think green.

MontgomeryClift

Green policies make economic sense, so it's more a question of 'can you afford not to think green?'

Villain

I think the Green Party could suffer from all the major Party's turning green in the next few years. But if they can come up with some good practical policy's that the voters can relate to then they might manage another seat or two.

flogen

I don't think the Greens have succeeded in putting green issues on the agenda, I think it's just part of a global sea-change... in other words the Greens haven't been the cause but they have every chance of enjoying the effect in 2007.

Even though the other parties have started to dip their toes into green policies, it's interesting to notice that it hasn't happened to the same extent as in the UK, where the likes of the Conservatives are all but the Green Party with a new name (or at least that's what they want everyone to think).

I'd suspect that the big players like FF and FG will start to steal the green's clothes to a greater extent should it become obvious that the environment is an important subject next year, but I do think the Green Party hold every chance of being the balance of power - they're one of the few small parties who have a free hand in chosing a coalition partner and it's interesting to note that while FG and the PDs duke it out, and Labour and FF throw mud (with SF being ignored by everyone for the time being), the Greens are the only ones that people are afraid to critique.
In fact the only obvious enemy of the Greens are the PDs, because they appeal to the same kind of people (in Dublin anyway).

nlgbbbblth

I vote for the Greens or Labour but there's something fundamentally wrong (and almost defeatist) with a political system where only one party (out of several) runs enough candidates to win an overall majority.

ballooba

My Vote for next year is:
1. FG
2. Lab
3. Green
The End.

Last time round I didn't vote Green because I thought they were sandal wearing krusties a la (Local TD) Mick McDowell's comments.

This time round I am better informed.

ballooba

ballooba wrote:

My Vote for next year is:
1. FG
2. Lab
3. Green
The End.

Mine will be
1. FF
2. FF
3. FG
The End.

As pointed out above, Constituency not rich enough for a Green candidate. If they ran, would certainly give them a high preference.

Múinteoir

ballooba wrote:

Last time round I didn't vote Green because I thought they were sandal wearing krusties a la (Local TD) Mick McDowell's comments.

This time round I am better informed.

What changed your mind?

brianthebard

Didn't the greens have some lads in the celebrity your a star competition(might have been last year)? Not the type of publicity stunt I'm impressed by.

I doubt there will be any green candidate running at home, but if there were, he would get my preference after labour and fg (socialist party would go at the top if they had a candidate, but how and ever)

Múinteoir

brianthebard wrote:

Didn't the greens have some lads in the celebrity your a star competition(might have been last year)? Not the type of publicity stunt I'm impressed by.

Certainly a publicity getter, but Dan Boyle and the others in the political group did raise about 100,000 for a children's charity. He also got insulted by Louis Walsh for his troubles. (called him fat)

brianthebard

Its not an insult when its true.

The_Minister

LostinBlanch wrote:

Well they've certainly succeeded in putting green issues on the agenda. Everybody wants to steal their clothes. Just like Mary Harney did with the smoky coal ban in Dublin in the late 80's. She gets all the credit but the Greens were calling for it years before, she just took their policy and all the credit.

That's not fair at all. Mary Harney had to overcome huge opposition within the government to get that through. She had to go over the head of a senior minister, directly to the Taoiseach (something that would have hit her hard if she had failed). She put it on the public agenda and forced it through. The Green proposal was AFAIR alot more expensive then hers.

The Green party has not put anything on the agenda. With talk about global warming, and pending doom abounding, it has risen in people's minds, but that was not through the efforts of the Greens.

I won't vote for a one-trick pony like the Greens, and I don't think that enviornmental issues trump other issues such as the economy.

Judt

The problem with the greens is that they have to get over or beyond the image of being a one-issue party, whatever the reality. As well as that, 99% of people are for going green. However, ask them if they go to the effort of sorting their garbage, the expense of insulating their houses, or if they'd put up with more green taxes and the percentage of people in favour of individual items on the shopping list goes down dramatically. People don't want to have to pay for saving the earth, and that's another problem the Greens might have - like so many parties in so many countries who have said "To be honest, for the greater good, I'm going to cost you money".... well, the people vote with their feet, as magnetically drawn by their pockets.

SeanW

Like balloba, I'll be giving my votes to FG, Lab, and any Greens that may be on the ballot 3rd, because it's dead obvious that FF/PD only cares about screwing as many people, esp. young, as possible and staying in power. I hope to see them in the next govt but I also hope they get real about some of the problems we and our environment faces.

SeanW

SeanW wrote:

Like balloba, I'll be giving my votes to FG, Lab, and any Greens that may be on the ballot 3rd, because it's dead obvious that FF/PD only cares about screwing as many people

At least you're honest enough to admit that you'd only vote Greens because you hate the Government, and you don't hide behind that 'I'm willing to pay more to save the planet' stuff...

LostinBlanch

The_Minister wrote:

That's not fair at all. Mary Harney had to overcome huge opposition within the government to get that through. She had to go over the head of a senior minister, directly to the Taoiseach (something that would have hit her hard if she had failed). She put it on the public agenda and forced it through.

Hmmm so let me get this right, the Greens advocate getting rid of smoky coal in Dublin due to severe environmental effects of continued use. Mary Harney takes this idea and runs with it, and it's her idea?

The_Minister wrote:

The Green party has not put anything on the agenda.

Sounds like you're getting yourself wrapped up in knots here. Even taking the relatively minor example of the smoky coal ban. It is fact that the Greens had this as official policy before Mary Harney even stirred herself on this issue. I'm sure some Green representative or member would be able to give you the full details. I can't as I'm not a member.

The_Minister wrote:

With talk about global warming, and pending doom abounding, it has risen in people's minds, but that was not through the efforts of the Greens.

So they haven't been saying anything about the fact that we need to act to mitigate the effects of global warming? Strangely enough I remember hearing this kind of stuff over ten years ago before it even got onto any mainstream political agenda. So the Greens haven't been saying anything about the need to address energy policy? Or the fact that years of corruption, bad planning and sheer cronyism haven't adversely affected peoples quality of life? Housing and transport are two particular areas that come to mind with people having to travel as far as Athlone to get a house and commute to Dublin daily to work.

The_Minister wrote:

I won't vote for a one-trick pony like the Greens, and I don't think that enviornmental issues trump other issues such as the economy.

Keep on trotting out the Dick Roche / McDowell line that the Greens are only a one issue party; and who knows? If you say it enough times you might actually begin to believe it. Meanwhile don't read articles like this.

The_Minister

LostinBlanch wrote:

Hmmm so let me get this right, the Greens advocate getting rid of smoky coal in Dublin due to severe environmental effects of continued use. Mary Harney takes this idea and runs with it, and it's her idea?

The Green party got their first Dail member in 1989, after Mary Harney began to introduce the ban. They were nobodies on the political landscape and influenced nobody. They were a tiny marginal party, who few people had heard of. I can't even find their policy document on it now.

LostinBlanch wrote:

Sounds like you're getting yourself wrapped up in knots here. Even taking the relatively minor example of the smoky coal ban. It is fact that the Greens had this as official policy before Mary Harney even stirred herself on this issue. I'm sure some Green representative or member would be able to give you the full details. I can't as I'm not a member.

See above. My point is that the Green's were so unknown that I doubt that Mary Harney would have known of the policy. It is only since about 2000 that the Greens have become a "real" party. They had no lobby power before this.
Also, I am not tying myself wrapped in knots, my point was easy enough to understand.

LostinBlach wrote:

So they haven't been saying anything about the fact that we need to act to mitigate the effects of global warming? Strangely enough I remember hearing this kind of stuff over ten years ago before it even got onto any mainstream political agenda. So the Greens haven't been saying anything about the need to address energy policy? Or the fact that years of corruption, bad planning and sheer cronyism haven't adversely affected peoples quality of life? Housing and transport are two particular areas that come to mind with people having to travel as far as Athlone to get a house and commute to Dublin daily to work.

I never said that they hadn't been saying it. What I said was that everyone was ignoring them, and that it was outside issues that have forced Green issues onto the agenda, not the Greens. The country as a whole is well used to ignoring the greens, just because their issues finally came on the agenda, after, as you say, 10 years of trying, does not mean that the greens had anything to do with it. Indeed, the last year has seen a rise in the importance of Green issues worldwide, not just in Ireland. This would imply that the new focus on these issues is not the doing of the Greens.

LostinBlach wrote:

Keep on trotting out the Dick Roche / McDowell line that the Greens are only a one issue party; and who knows? If you say it enough times you might actually begin to believe it. Meanwhile don't read articles like this.

I do believe it. I have met John Gormley and several Green councilers, and have listened to Green T.Ds speak in the Dail, and on Q&A. THey are a one issue party, with an ideology that subjugates all other issues, such as the economy, to being enviornmentally friendly. They are blinkered, and they are small-minded, pushing for renewable energy when it is not practical, and saying hell to the economy whhile they are at it.
I will never vote for a one-trick pony. If an Independent came to me tomorrow and said that he was running to highlight father's rights (an issue I have great sympathy for), I would not vote for him, because I believe that the Dail should be made up of balenced, rational people, and that no member of the Dail should be there to bang just one drum.

Múinteoir

Incidentally the Greens just celebrated their 25th birthday as a party. The party was established (originally as The Ecology Party) at a meeting in the Central Hotel Dublin, on 3rd December 1981. They've just launched a book documenting those 25 years

So, seat predictions for 2007? Up, down, stay the same?

LostinBlanch

The_Minister wrote:

The Green party got their first Dail member in 1989, after Mary Harney began to introduce the ban. They were nobodies on the political landscape and influenced nobody.

I remember hearing Green members of Dublin Corporation calling for a ban on smoky coal prior to Roger Garland getting elected. They may have been small but still got publicity on this Dublin issue and put it on the agenda. Mary Harney examined it on it's merits, saw that it was a vote getter and ran with it. So to say that she wasn't influenced by this despite the fact that it was in the public domain before she ran with it is beyond belief, or is it just you'd prefer to keep your head in the sand?

The_Minister wrote:

It is only since about 2000 that the Greens have become a "real" party. They had no lobby power before this.

That reflects a dialogue between different wings of the Green Party, the Fundos who were more comfortable with idea of remaining "pure" Greens and saw the party more as an instrument of advancing the Green agenda. This point of view was concerned more with getting Green policies implemented and didn't concentrate on which party introduced them. The realists recognised the fact that to operate as a "real" party as you call it, they had to make some changes to the way the party was run and streamline the decision making process.

The_Minister wrote:

Also, I am not tying myself wrapped in knots.

That depends whether you want to believe that the Greens never did or said anything before they got their first TD. I'm saying that they did using the example of what was a local Dublin issue, the smoky coal ban. In your first post you admit that there was a Green proposal. I don't understand how you can argue that the Greens never influenced any agenda on one hand and then accept that there was a Green proposal on this issue at the same time.

The_Minister wrote:

I never said that they hadn't been saying it. What I said was that everyone was ignoring them, and that it was outside issues that have forced Green issues onto the agenda, not the Greens. The country as a whole is well used to ignoring the greens, just because their issues finally came on the agenda, after, as you say, 10 years of trying, does not mean that the greens had anything to do with it. Indeed, the last year has seen a rise in the importance of Green issues worldwide, not just in Ireland. This would imply that the new focus on these issues is not the doing of the Greens.

So you're discounting the fact that they have been going on about these issues for the last 10 years and you think that everyone ignored them. So the fact that their vote has risen in every election (AFAIK) since their inception means that they are being ignored. Also you ignore the fact that they are part of an international Green movement which has put much time and effort highlighting these issues. Many voices, one message. It gets home eventually, and who is to say who's voice was the effective one?

The_Minister wrote:

I do believe it. I have met John Gormley and several Green councilers, and have listened to Green T.Ds speak in the Dail, and on Q&A. THey are a one issue party, with an ideology that subjugates all other issues, such as the economy, to being enviornmentally friendly.

I think you see what you want to see. One of the main complaints of the Green Party is that they are portrayed as a purely environmental party but they have many other policies on other different issues. As Judt said they have to change this image of them being purely a one issue party. Which allows people like you to call them one trick ponies. [When I say people like you I am not using it in any perjorative sense, just that you are the one in this thread calling them that]

The_Minister wrote:

I believe that the Dail should be made up of balenced, rational people.

So do I which is why I will be looking around very carefully before I vote at the next election. But somehow I can't see myself voting for any government candidate. Though as a floating voter this could change, it could, but I just can't see it right now.

LostinBlanch

M&#250 wrote: »

So, seat predictions for 2007? Up, down, stay the same?

I think that they will hold onto their current seats and are in with a good shout with mary White in Carlow, and Niall O Brollchain in galway West. I'm not sure of who else they are running in what other constituencies so can't comment.

ballooba

M&#250 wrote: »

What changed your mind?

I have only really started to take an interest in politics since last G.E. I was so confident that FF would not get back into government that I didn't vote.

I like the Greens because at the end of the day someone does need to look after the environment and it would be nice for them to have a little pull in the Dail. If they were minority party in a FG/Lab/Green coalition that would be fine by me.

I also like the way they think outside the box and look around at other countries for best practice. I think it was Trevor Sargent was on Prime Time a few weeks ago. Thought he came across well "We don't mind progress as long as it's done right".

There's also the fact that Mick McDowell doesn't like them and I don't like Mick McDowell.

Incidentally, Joe Higgins is a man I would hate to see lose his Dail seat. He's so entertaining in Dail debates. Not sure i could vote for him personally though.

lostexpectation

well is clearer the the greens arn't green

Múinteoir

lostexpectation wrote:

well is clearer the the greens arn't green

Eh?

ballooba

M&#250 wrote: »

Eh?

Eggsactly.

ryanoid

The_Minister wrote:

The Green party got their first Dail member in 1989, after Mary Harney began to introduce the ban.

I don't know how you worked that one out - Mary Harney only got into government after the same election, and the ban was introduced in 1990.

See above. My point is that the Green's were so unknown that I doubt that Mary Harney would have known of the policy.

Mary Harney certainly knew about the Green Party, having been beaten by Trevor Sargent in the 1989 European elections. In any case, the fact is that there was a major anti-smog campaign in Dublin at the time, led by the Green Party. It may not have catapulted the Party onto the national stage, but it certainly put smog on the agenda, and the GP benefited electorally in the 1991 local elections in Dublin.

Múinteoir

ryanoid wrote:

I don't know how you worked that one out - Mary Harney only got into government after the same election, and the ban was introduced in 1990.


Mary Harney certainly knew about the Green Party, having been beaten by Trevor Sargent in the 1989 European elections

Yeah I get the impression she'll never forgive them for that one.

LostinBlanch

Ryanoid,

I'd forgotten that! Ah well I notice that the minister hasn't come back with any kind of rebuttal there.

Múinteoir

Greens angry over Kenny comment

is_that_so

TBH The Greens suffer from other difficulties.

The Green agenda was always likely to drift into the mainstream once we understood why it was actually important. As a result other parties were always likely to queue up for their Green credentials.

Meanwhile the Greens in Ireland do seem better suited , at present, to urban areas. The problem I see for the Greens is that we know that they are green and we think that is good but what else would they do?
What other policies do they have that are a) sensible and b) would actually make a difference c) and we might vote for?

With respect to the smoky coal ban who did or did not come up with is almost like arguing Civil War politics. 1989/1990 is very long time ago. It was done, we all knew it needed to be done and hell if you're a Minister you take the credit. That's politics.

Múinteoir

is_that_so wrote:

TBH The Greens suffer from other difficulties.

The Green agenda was always likely to drift into the mainstream once we understood why it was actually important. As a result other parties were always likely to queue up for their Green credentials.

Meanwhile the Greens in Ireland do seem better suited , at present, to urban areas. The problem I see for the Greens is that we know that they are green and we think that is good but what else would they do?
What other policies do they have that are a) sensible and b) would actually make a difference c) and we might vote for?

With respect to the smoky coal ban who did or did not come up with is almost like arguing Civil War politics. 1989/1990 is very long time ago. It was done, we all knew it needed to be done and hell if you're a Minister you take the credit. That's politics.

This is a common argument and it has a certain merit, but the big problem with it is that it doesn't acknowledge that the larger parties have been paying lip-service to Green issues for well over a decade now, not just in the last year or two. Certainly as the problems of peak oil and global warming become clearly obvious, they have become somewhat more vocal recently, but it's still the same wishy washy smoke and mirrors. Bertie tries to call himself Green and the government publishes a white paper on energy, yet it's still clear we're failing miserably to fulfill Kyoto and to protect our fossil fuel dependent economy from rampant prices increases in the near future.

In fact I would trace the first time the bigger parties seriously clearly copped onto the Green agenda was in 1994 when the Greens stunned everyone to take two MEP seats. After that all the major parties have had the standard one or two sentences to the environment in their manifestos, but it hasn't stalled the growth of the Greens, has it. It's not that new an approach to stave off their support. So although its perfectly plausible that bigger parties will attempt to steal the greens' clothes(and they certainly do try), the fact is that their attempts to do so for over a decade have failed badly.

is_that_so

I don't think there is any question that the Green tide is being forced upon us by external events but good Socialist/Green that he is Bertie has seen the light and other parties will merely follow suit.

Nor indeed is there much dispute about the dubious government attitude but the times are a changing and on a practical level there is the spectre of massive fines looming in a few years time if we don't start addressing the emissions problems in particular.

My assertion about their appeal in the next election stands. There needs to be more to them than we're Green and we're not the government.

Múinteoir

is_that_so wrote:

My assertion about their appeal in the next election stands. There needs to be more to them than we're Green and we're not the government.

Oh I can agree with that certainly. I'm just doubtful of the ability of the other parties to steal their clothes politically, with a bit of cut and paste.

Húrin

Deleted User wrote:

They seem to be electable mainly in more affluent urban areas who like a good photo shoot and can afford to think green.

Voting, thinking or acting green is usually cheaper than the norm. The affluent urbanites are just the only ones who have been open-minded enough to embrace it en masse. Not that rural people don't, but they're not concentrated enough to have as much political effect. The poorer urban classes tend to be too short-sighted or lazy to change their lifestyles en masse. (sorry, I know that most people are too politically correct to say this but we all know it's true)

marie_85

is_that_so wrote:

My assertion about their appeal in the next election stands. There needs to be more to them than we're Green and we're not the government.

There is more to them. In doubt? Check out www.greenparty.ie and have a look at their policies.

constitutionus

you know the one thing I'll give the greens is they have to courage to speak with conviction on their intentions at the next election. unlike labour and their " we WONT go into coalition with FF!!!!, well maybe but we'd have to sack the guy running the party now and install brendan howlin. but we'd really prefer to go into gov with FGbut if the numbers add up we'll be in the sack with FF quicker than you can say "stab in the back""

when you compare this with the greens " we will deal with FF if we have to but its on our terms and we wanna make damn sure certain ministers don't get a ministry before we do go in with em" your left with what can only be called a breath of fresh air in Irish politics.

i reckon theyre onto a winner with this attitude, makes em look like they re gonna get the concentration on their issues that the PDs did making em the "meat in the sandwich" so to speak.

the greens arent the party of choice for me, but they'll get my vote before labour and FG and they certainly look the stronger party in the dail in terms of forthrightness on issues

Sonderval

After the green's made an ass of themselves on the Late Late recently, when they were debating the possibility of nuclear energy in Ireland, I have most of my faith in their competency. I'm sure the French physicist they had on the show was scratching his head...

Múinteoir

Sonderval wrote:

After the green's made an ass of themselves on the Late Late recently, when they were debating the possibility of nuclear energy in Ireland, I have most of my faith in their competency. I'm sure the French physicist they had on the show was scratching his head...

I missed that. Is it up on RTÉ website?

ryanoid

Sonderval wrote:

After the green's made an ass of themselves on the Late Late recently, when they were debating the possibility of nuclear energy in Ireland, I have most of my faith in their competency. I'm sure the French physicist they had on the show was scratching his head...

There was only one Green on the panel on that show, Trevor Sargent. Please explain how he "made an ass of himself".

I doubt the French physicist was "scratching his head" - he is paid to promote nuclear power and I'm sure he's been in dozens of similar debates.

I was more amused by the pronouncements of the likes of John McGuirk and Richard Waghorne on that show - I think Mr Waghorne said he found the Greens "scary" because they wanted to return us all to the stone age. This is the chap who later went on to become "Chief Political Commentator" for the Irish Daily Mail.

Duncan Stewart, who was the other person on the panel opposing nuclear energy for Ireland, did make a bit of an eejit of himself, it has to be said.