PD Dishonesty

johnlambe

We've all seen the negative campaigning by the PDs, but much worse than that, they have resorted to outright lying.

For example, they have produced leaflets claiming that the Green Party is opposed to vaccination for children and want to raise corporation tax.
Both are completely untrue. (The Green Party manifesto clearly states that we would not raise corporation tax).

They are trying to scare voters away from their opponents, and have to resort to lying to do so (suggesting that the truth would not scare people).


Before the last general election, Michael McDowell promised to stop the Poolbeg incinerator. (If FF/PDs are opposing it, who, do people think, is trying to push it through?)
He has recently distributed leaflets trying to claim credit for supposedly stopping it.

In fact, McDowell did not even vote against it. (He abstained in the vote on the Green Party private members' bill). He cannot have had any intention of trying to stop it.

How can anyone believe their promises this time?


The PDs were once (in Des O'Malley's time) a party that provided an alternative to the dirty politics of Fianna Fail.
Now, they epitomise what is worst in Irish politics.
Having more funding (due to corporate donations) than smaller parties, they use it to better disseminate their lies.

A vote for the PDs is a vote for dirty and dishonest politics.

Considering their origins, I'm sure that there are some honest people left among their members, but these people are furthering dirty politics (probably against their own values), maybe not wanting to admit that the PDs are not what they used to be.

Apart from that, they fought the last election suggesting that they might keep FF honest.
They got them into power for 10 years and only pretended to be trying to do anything about corruption.


Negative Campaigning

There is nothing wrong with attacking other parties' policies (and in fact I would consider it an important part of democracy), and I don't mind other negative campaining when it is factual and not misleading.

Apart from the outright lies, some PD leaflets (for example, their cartoons) try to give a negative impression of other parties (FG, Labour, Green Party) without actually stating anything specific - trying to give an impression without providing any substance. (In contrast, making concrete statements opposing other parties helps people decide whether they agree with the statements and whether they are important to them).

It is conspicuous that the PDs don't say much about themselves (some of their leaflets say nothing at all about them). Do they have nothing positive to say about themselves? (Is that the problem? That they are as good as an extension of FF?).


It is encouraging to see that these tactics do not seem to have gained them support. It looks to me like an act of desperation due to their low support in the polls.


Hopefully, if the people are seen to oppose dirty politics on Thursday, future election campaigns will be more honest.

[EDIT: Corrected a typo.]

PH01

Wasn't McDowell alluding to the fact the Green Party's policies are inconsistent? Like they say something one year then something totally different the next?

And, I think that's the first time I've seen the words 'politics' and 'honesty' in the same sentence

toiletduck

I assume the vaccination accusation (like the sound of that) comes from stuff like this

They are trying to scare voters away from their opponents

Every party is doing that.

wow sierra

Saw a PD poster today - who do you want as minister for Health
Mary Harney,or Liam Twomey, Liz McManus, John Gormley.

Best poster I have seen for the whole campaign. I assume you could call it negative campaigning but only if you agree with the implication that mary is in a whole different class. The worst thing is I reckon Twomey is the worst of the rest - have most people even heard of him despite allegedly thinking Health is the biggest issue in the election.

By the way I am not a PD supporter.

johnlambe

toiletduck wrote:

I assume the vaccination accusation (like the sound of that) comes from stuff like this

Yes, that was a ridiculous interview on McKenna's part, but she was giving her own opinion - not party policy. Ordinary voters listening to that could well have got the impression that it was party policy, but politicians, including McDowell would know well (by now, at least) that it is not - it is not plausible that this was other than a deliberate lie.

toiletduck wrote:

Every party is doing that.

Yes, but it's their tactics I'm talking about. Anyway, it's the outright lying that I think politicians shouldn't get away with.

PH01 wrote:

Wasn't McDowell alluding to the fact the Green Party's policies are inconsistent? Like they say something one year then something totally different the next?

We've changed some policies, but how does that make us any different to other parties, including the PDs.
(One U-turn that I found amusing was when the PDs criticised a budget for being a "giveaway", but when the election came (I think it was two elections ago), they made the opposite claim in their campaign).

If they made specific claims to this effect, it could spark a useful debate.

Stark

johnlambe wrote:

Yes, that was a ridiculous interview on McKenna's part, but she was giving her own opinion - not party policy. Ordinary voters listening to that could well have got the impression that it was party policy, but politicians, including McDowell would know well (by now, at least) that it is not - it is not plausible that this was other than a deliberate lie.

It was party policy for a time until someone got it through to them how ridiculous it was and they removed it. I wonder how many of their candidates are still believers that vaccinations are a bad idea.

vallo

I think that McDowell focusses his negativity on the greens because in his constituency, he is up against John Gormley for the 4th seat.
Who could forget the image of him and his PD goons overseeing the sifting through ballot papers at the RDS when Gormley pipped him at the post 2 elections ago?

I object to McDowell on a few grounds:
- he supposedly opposed the incinerator but was absent for the vote in the Dail
- he stated that he "unfortunately" has to abide by the declaration of human rights (this prevents him from turning around all asylum seekers at the airport)
- he used dail privilege to accuse a fellow citizen of IRA related acitivities in colombia - if the man was guilty, bring charges and prove it. Why hide behind his office. And this from the minister for Justice? Does nobody see the irony in that?
- he has put it about that he is tough on the IRA ... but this is meaningless. All he has done is make statements about mcguinness et al that he "knows for a fact" as if that is going to have any effect.

I admired him before he became a TD. But now I don't like him or his PD policies.

All Dublin South Easters ... for god's sake ... put this man out of office!

Grudaire

vallo wrote:

I think that McDowell focusses his negativity on the greens because in his constituency, he is up against John Gormley for the 4th seat.
Who could forget the image of him and his PD goons overseeing the sifting through ballot papers at the RDS when Gormley pipped him at the post 2 elections ago?

Ironically I think the whole negative campaigning backfired, who wouldn't vote for Gormley after that performance? It was brilliant:D

johnlambe

Stark wrote:

It was party policy for a time until someone got it through to them how ridiculous it was and they removed it.

Actually, it was once our policy only that it should be investigated, since there was public concern about it at that time (when that policy document must have been written). (Clarified by 'Ryano' (Green Party member) on that forum). (I wasn't aware when I wrote my previous post. Sorry, I should have clarified it).

It clearly wasn't policy at the time McDowell made the claim, and he would have know that.
(And I don't know of any other candidates who think that vaccination is a bad idea.)

delta_bravo

vallo wrote:

I object to McDowell on a few grounds:
- he supposedly opposed the incinerator but was absent for the vote in the Dail

You forgot to mention that he also gave free legal advice to the anti incinerator group.

johnlambe

A PD candidate, Ben Doyle, in Dublin South Central, uses different addresses (Rathdown Road and Gurteen Park) on his leaflets, apparently depending on the area in which they are distributed (probably to give the impression of living closer to the area of the voters receiving the leaflet).

delta_bravo

johnlambe wrote:

A PD candidate, Ben Doyle, in Dublin South Central, uses different addresses (Rathdown Road and Gurteen Park) on his leaflets, apparently depending on the area in which they are distributed (probably to give the impression of living closer to the area of the voters receiving the leaflet).

Are you sure the Rathdown road one is not his office? On the PDs site his adress is given as Gurteen Park
http://www.progressivedemocrats.ie/our_election_candidates/126/

Andrew 83

johnlambe wrote:

A PD candidate, Ben Doyle, in Dublin South Central, uses different addresses (Rathdown Road and Gurteen Park) on his leaflets, apparently depending on the area in which they are distributed (probably to give the impression of living closer to the area of the voters receiving the leaflet).

I got a flyer from Ben Doyle a week or two back that mentioned Gay Mitchell and what a good job Doyle thought he'd done about 3 or 4 times. Only way you knew it wasn't a FG candidate was that he mentioned Harney too.

I saw a copy of the PD leaflet with the stuff about the Greens. Was pretty amazed at the thing about vaccinations and didn't believe it could possibly be true. Is that McKenna Last Word interview the only time it has ever been commented on?

The_Minister

Actually the Greens are going to raise corporation tax. What they are doing is going to introduce a €1 Billion levy on the banking sector, and possibly other profitable sectors. This is essentially the same as raising corporation tax, as its a huge tax on profits.

Andrew 83

The_Minister wrote:

Actually the Greens are going to raise corporation tax. What they are doing is going to introduce a €1 Billion levy on the banking sector, and possibly other profitable sectors. This is essentially the same as raising corporation tax, as its a huge tax on profits.

Surely the main point of low corporation tax is attracting the pharmaceutical and computer industries not the banking sector? A levy on the banking sector would not affect those sectors.

The_Minister

Andrew 83 wrote:

Surely the main point of low corporation tax is attracting the pharmaceutical and computer industries not the banking sector? A levy on the banking sector would not affect those sectors.

They have left it open for other areas as well.

Andrew 83

The_Minister wrote:

They have left it open for other areas as well.

Out of curiosity - If the economic situation were to decline a bit (I know you'll say it wouldn't with the PDs in charge but stay with me for a second, no economic growth will ever last forever) and a situation were to occur where there was not enough money to maintain the current levels of social expenditure, what would the PD response be?

- What public services would they privatise off? (I assume this would be part of the solution put forward?)
- Would tax be increased for the general public or for the big companies first?

Gobán Saor

johnlambe wrote:

Yes, that was a ridiculous interview on McKenna's part, but she was giving her own opinion - not party policy

Yes but there is a certain type of Green with an innate distrust of technology and science. Alternative medicine, homeopathy, herbology, healing crystals and energy fields are to be preferred to medical science and (horror of horrors) pharmaceutical company products. You know the type......

John_C

I heard Dan Boyle on newstalk after McKenna's vaccination interview and he didn't go as far as McKenna but he definately didn't trust modern medcine either. He said that the government shouldn't pay for drugs if an ailment had a drug free remidy and that alternative clinics should be given government licenses.

ednwireland

wow sierra wrote:

Saw a PD poster today - who do you want as minister for Health
Mary Harney,or Liam Twomey, Liz McManus, John Gormley.

Best poster I have seen for the whole campaign. I assume you could call it negative campaigning but only if you agree with the implication that mary is in a whole different class. The worst thing is I reckon Twomey is the worst of the rest - have most people even heard of him despite allegedly thinking Health is the biggest issue in the election.

By the way I am not a PD supporter.

for me it certainly wouldnt be harney anyway her only idea is to destroy the public health service and create a fully private system (which i cant afford)
so it would make me not vote pd

The_Minister

ednwireland wrote:

for me it certainly wouldnt be harney anyway her only idea is to destroy the public health service and create a fully private system (which i cant afford)
so it would make me not vote pd

AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That isn't what there doing at all. All they are doing is seperateing the pblic and private system, so that the two run seperately.

Andrew83, the truth is, the PDs would do whatever they felt would get the economy back up and running as fast as possible.

vallo

delta_bravo wrote:

You forgot to mention that he also gave free legal advice to the anti incinerator group.

I didn't forget it, because I didn't know that.

But, do you not think that it makes his no show for crucial dail votes on the matter all the more baffling? He wants to stay in with the campaigners through the legal aid, but not use the mechanics of the office to which he was elected.

Let him give all the free legal advice he wants as a citizen. He doesn't need to be a TD to do that. And if you asked those who voted for him last time did they expect him to use political power or legal skills to stop the incinerator what do you think they would have said?

thebman

The_Minister wrote:

AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That isn't what there doing at all. All they are doing is seperateing the pblic and private system, so that the two run seperately.

Andrew83, the truth is, the PDs would do whatever they felt would get the economy back up and running as fast as possible.

Really because it looks awfully like they are trying to move toward an American health service.

AFAIK, America has a public system that is separate from the private system. Its just crap which would make it kind of like the Irish public health system.

irish_bob

any td who is in favour of the incinnerator has my vote

yes you read it, its time we grew up and realised that hard descisons have to be made as regards what to do with our rubbish
landfill is much more enviromentally unfriendly than an incinnerator
thier used in scandanavia , austria etc

of course this is ireland and its a case of an irish solution to an irish problem

vallo

irish_bob wrote:

any td who is in favour of the incinnerator has my vote

yes you read it, its time we grew up and realised that hard descisons have to be made as regards what to do with our rubbish
landfill is much more enviromentally unfriendly than an incinnerator
thier used in scandanavia , austria etc

of course this is ireland and its a case of an irish solution to an irish problem

I don't disagree with you. However, I would have issues with the proposed position (all the rubbish would need to be transported through dublin city centre etc etc).

But this thread isn't about incinerators. It's about PD Dishonesty. If they said they were pro-incinerator they might get my vote too! But it would be political suicide. Instead they proclaim on their election posters that they are going to stop the incinerator (last election) and then do not vote against it in the Dail.

Plain old dishonesty.

BlitzKrieg

not so much dishonesty, but one must worry for a party who's campaign posters (in north dublin anyway) go for the simple 'no left wing government' stance. It smells of a party unable to put forward its own policies for the tomarrows election.

Heinrich

irish_bob wrote:

any td who is in favour of the incinnerator has my vote

yes you read it, its time we grew up and realised that hard descisons have to be made as regards what to do with our rubbish
landfill is much more enviromentally unfriendly than an incinnerator
thier used in scandanavia , austria etc

of course this is ireland and its a case of an irish solution to an irish problem

How Geneva gets rid of household rubbish!

The stuff is offloaded from the refuse lorries in a depot and transported by barge to an incinerator in the countryside miles away from habitation. For the last three years the heat generated is piped to apartment complexes for hot water and central heating. Saves the users 30% off their heating bill. Never heard anyone complaining and the incinerator is there for some 40 years. The sewage treatment plant is downriver, nearer to the city center.

The only smells people complain about are from the two essence/perfume factories, Firmeninch and Givaudan.

There again, there is no MacDowell equivelant over there. He would be caught out fairly promptly;)