I Know what Healy-Rae wants - what about McGrath and Gregory?

spalad

I am aware of Jackie's requests, http://kerryview.blogspot.com/2007/05/jackie-healy-raes-list-1.html, but can anyone help me with Tony G's and Finian's demands? (other than ceann comhairle)

Money Shot

Short answer - well Tony Gregory will be looking for various housing, crime and health inititatives aimed the inner city - possibly a number of drug related initiatives. McGrath will do likewise for Dublin North central, but with more emphasis on people with disabilities and mental health issues.

jjbrien

Did you not see Q&A last night Finian made his list quite clear.

Your healy rae bridge is funny lol but its just that funny.

redspider

Well, I saw Finian McGrath on Q&A and he said he was open to both sides. He said that briefly his issues for forming a deal were something along the lines of:

Health and Education for the handicapped, etc
(ands bascially in line with Tony Gregory's national wishes for the less well off, etc)
and then some local issues, such as something for Cabra CRC (a health service)

He does seem fairly open to both sides. He has a lot of policy aspects in common with Tony Gregory, and they 'de facto' form an alliance of two, you could say, although they have not come out formally.

He has received phone calls from Richard Bruton (FG), Labour (Gilmore) and someone else that he wanted left anonymous. He also came out and said that unlike the two main parties (FF, FG) he would not be against going into government with SF.

Tony Greogory also has similar requirements, nationally, and some for his local area. He has been in government with FF before, but Labour would obviously be closer to his heart as he seeks to help the less well-off in his society. I'd say he is less open to FF and more to FG/Lab.

Ironically the numbers on both sides with these two chaps are as follows, presuming Flynn, Healy-Rae are for the FF side and Lowry is for the FG side:


FF+PD+4 Inds = 78+2+4 = 84
(enough for a majority, but if they stay out ie: 82, then FF will require the Green's)

FG+Lab+GP+3 Inds = 51+20+6+3 = 80
(is not enough, so they will require Flynn and the PD's = 83,
Could Labour persuade FG to allow SF to vote with the 'alliance'?
If so, that would be more stable than the above).

A lot will depend on IF Flynn is declared a bankrupt and thrown out in the short term. That of course may not happen. Bertie may also get more flak thrown at him from the Mahon Tribunal, but he is teflon to that so its unlikely that PD's would walk. The Green's could however snub, as could Gregory, and McGrath, although McGrath seems to favour waiting until Mahon reports, which could take ages.

No conclusions can be drawn so far ..... if this was a horse race, its FF by a neck and there is still a furlong to go.

Redspider

Jimoslimos

redspider wrote:

Well, I saw Finian McGrath on Q&A and he said he was open to both sides. He said that briefly his issues for forming a deal were something along the lines of:

Health and Education for the handicapped, etc
(ands bascially in line with Tony Gregory's national wishes for the less well off, etc)
and then some local issues, such as something for Cabra CRC (a health service)

Tony Greogory also has similar requirements, nationally, and some for his local area. He has been in government with FF before, but Labour would obviously be closer to his heart as he seeks to help the less well-off in his society. I'd say he is less open to FF and more to FG/Lab.

Exactly the reasons why Independents should never be considered for government. Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

Heinrich

Jimoslimos wrote:

Exactly the reasons why Independents should never be considered for government. Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

Ouch!:D

LuckyLloyd

Jimoslimos wrote:

Exactly the reasons why Independents should never be considered for government. Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

Calling Tony Gregory a "cowboy" pays great disservice to one of the hardest working politicians you will come across - a guy committed to improving the lot of some of the most marginalised and downtrodden elements of the Celtic Tiger. Whatever mate. In any case, Finna Fail could hardly be accused of having a pure and whiter than white political soul.

Money Shot

Jimoslimos wrote:

Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

You would be very happy if Tony Gregory was representing your area - he has done unbelievable work for the inner city over the years, and I don't think self-serving and greedy are words you could apply to him. He works very, very hard and has good intentions.

In my opinion, he would be an asset for any government to have. It's his job to look out for his constituents, and I'm sure if he was given the chance, he would do a wonderful job at a national level. Besides, not being involved in the back slapping culture of a major party is a positive in my book.

Jimoslimos

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Calling Tony Gregory a "cowboy" pays great disservice to one of the hardest working politicians you will come across - a guy committed to improving the lot of some of the most marginalised and downtrodden elements of the Celtic Tiger. Whatever mate. In any case, Finna Fail could hardly be accused of having a pure and whiter than white political soul.

OK, "cowboy" is on reflection a little harsh, apologies. My point however still stands. The reason we elect TDs from different areas around the country is to have a representative view on how the country should be run NOT to have local parish issues (i.e, move the incinerator somewhere else, build a big new hospital down my area, etc.,) sorted out at expense of every other constituency. Otherwise we might as well abandon local government and county councillors(hmmm.....:rolleyes: )

Money Shot wrote:

It's his job to look out for his constituents

It's his job to represent his constituents views at national level.

Again apologies if I may have touched upon a raw nerve here. Indeed many independent politicians (Flynn and Healy-Rae excluded) I would recognise as having far greater integrity than members of the larger political parties. I just fail to see how they propose to improve the lives of people outside their single issue manifesto/constituency.

Money Shot

A lot of the issues that effect Dublin central are also issues on a national level. Surely a good idea that works at local level, can work at national level.

The issuses the independents deal with are Health, Crime, etc - national issues. But you're right, and deal they do will be primarily for their constituents. However, that says nothing about what they contribute to the government once it is formed.

Anton74

Jimoslimos wrote:

Exactly the reasons why Independents should never be considered for government. Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

This is a silly and untrue comment to call Independents "Cowboys". There are many political reasons why these politicians are running on their record and name and why they are elected by thousands of their constituents. They are public servents who dedicate their lives to helping people. A Cowboy would be something else!:mad:

Anton74

Jimoslimos wrote:

OK, "cowboy" is on reflection a little harsh, apologies. My point however still stands. The reason we elect TDs from different areas around the country is to have a representative view on how the country should be run NOT to have local parish issues (i.e, move the incinerator somewhere else, build a big new hospital down my area, etc.,) sorted out at expense of every other constituency. Otherwise we might as well abandon local government and county councillors(hmmm.....:rolleyes: )

It's his job to represent his constituents views at national level.

Again apologies if I may have touched upon a raw nerve here. Indeed many independent politicians (Flynn and Healy-Rae excluded) I would recognise as having far greater integrity than members of the larger political parties. I just fail to see how they propose to improve the lives of people outside their single issue manifesto/constituency.

RE: Healy Rae - you obviously know nothing about his character, his public service record or his knowledge for you to have the audacity to call him a cowboy. He stood up for what he believed in his whole life and overcame many difficulties to be a successful Irishman and to represent those who elected him. He is one in a million and he represents the people that elected him and does it well.

thebman

Jimoslimos wrote:

OK, "cowboy" is on reflection a little harsh, apologies. My point however still stands. The reason we elect TDs from different areas around the country is to have a representative view on how the country should be run NOT to have local parish issues (i.e, move the incinerator somewhere else, build a big new hospital down my area, etc.,) sorted out at expense of every other constituency. Otherwise we might as well abandon local government and county councillors(hmmm.....:rolleyes: )

It's his job to represent his constituents views at national level.

Again apologies if I may have touched upon a raw nerve here. Indeed many independent politicians (Flynn and Healy-Rae excluded) I would recognise as having far greater integrity than members of the larger political parties. I just fail to see how they propose to improve the lives of people outside their single issue manifesto/constituency.

All politicians do that! They all do work in their constituency to get back in next time. Name one politician that never did a thing for his constituency and got re-elected?

Heinrich

brim4brim wrote:

All politicians do that! They all do work in their constituency to get back in next time. Name one politician that never did a thing for his constituency and got re-elected?

Bertie?

Before you get on the horse, what did he do?:rolleyes:

redspider

Well, Bertie makes sure that after-hours drinking in Fagan's and Kennedy's is 'allowed' to happen as the Gardai turn a blind eye to it. If that can be considered a service to the local community is another story. I'm sure there must be others.

But in all seriousness, these TD's are not cowboys and many of the local issues they are campaiging for are actually national issues, with just a local manifestation. Our system is geared twards local issues as we have 43 constituencies. Until we have a national election system, these wont go away. And many local issues have a national dimension. Cowboys, indeed .....

I heard Gregory on the radio yesterday. He hasnt been contacted yet. Obviously both FF and FG think thath McGrath is an easier convert, and perhaps that is true. They both want to have McGrath on their side before they approach Gregory, wo out of the 5 is seen as the 'most difficult'.

Whether Flynn can be seen as a dead-cert for FF is another story. Her words have been quite neutral but perhaps she is just making them sweat a bit. That will probably be the hright of her revenge.

S, the main question is which way McGrath is going.

Of course, if FF dont get Gregory, they cant form a Government:

FF+PD+3 Inds (Bev, Rae, McG) = 78 + 2 + 3 = 83 (not enough)

The Green's wont be as easy to convert as the independents.
McGrath has also indicated that he wants to be on the same 'side' as Gregory, and I ave no doubt that the two are in contact. So perhaps FF and FG are negotiating with Gregoy via proxy, to some extent.

No clear government so far, and certainly not a stable one.


I think FG and Labour would even look forward to a re-election in Sep and maybe even the Greens would, although I dont know what the rules are if a Government cant be formed on June 14th and subsequent days.

Interesting times .....

Redspider

bk

redspider wrote:

I think FG and Labour would even look forward to a re-election in Sep and maybe even the Greens would, although I dont know what the rules are if a Government cant be formed on June 14th and subsequent days.

I don't think so and if they did I'm sure FF would be delighted.

Here is the thing, most people don't like politics and elections. Many people think it is bad enough having to listen to the BS every 5 years. If FG/Labour forced a re-election, I'm certain that FF's vote would greatly increase as people would vote to put in place a stable government. FF might even get a majority.

So no it wouldn't happen.

Voipjunkie

bk wrote:

I don't think so and if they did I'm sure FF would be delighted.

Here is the thing, most people don't like politics and elections. Many people think it is bad enough having to listen to the BS every 5 years. If FG/Labour forced a re-election, I'm certain that FF's vote would greatly increase as people would vote to put in place a stable government. FF might even get a majority.

So no it wouldn't happen.

It would depend on who was viewed as being at fault I would imagine so if FG and Labour played it right and made it look like FF could not get any of the available deals then a relection could also swing the other way with FG/Lab/greens getting an OM they are alot more viable now than they were a fortnight ago they are only 6 or 7 seats away.
Remember the last time FG/Lab eventually won out

redspider

bk wrote:

I don't think so and if they did I'm sure FF would be delighted. Here is the thing, most people don't like politics and elections. Many people think it is bad enough having to listen to the BS every 5 years. If FG/Labour forced a re-election, I'm certain that FF's vote would greatly increase as people would vote to put in place a stable government. FF might even get a majority. So no it wouldn't happen.

Well, 1m people tuning in for the FF/FG leaders debate and 600k for the other main parties leaders debate, and a turnount of 65-70% does in fact show that most able-bodied, non-senile and adult people ARE interested in politics (ie: the running of the country they live in) and are willing to listen to the BS more often than every 5 years!

It wouldnt be a case of FG+Labour forcing a re-election if FF cant get the numbers from the PD's and Independents. Only if FF said that they had offered everything that the Greens wanted, then and only then could it be portrayed that the Greens would be forcing a re-election. But that isnt going to happen becuase then it would be the Green's with the power and policy-driving (if that was a real offer) and not FF.

I dont think FF would be delighted with another quick election. It could mean a swing back towards independents again, and if the Greens would decide to go forward on an alternative government platform, it could see a swing large enough (ie a handful of seats) to give FG/Lab/GP a majority.

The thing that people forget is that FF lost 3 seats from 2002 to 2007 (ie: 81 to 78). Dont believe the hype that is saying that FF won. The core voters of FF wont desert (as the core voters of FG did in 2002), but depending on how the campaign went, I could easily see them losing another 3 seats and more is possible.

Redspider

nollaig

Whether Flynn can be seen as a dead-cert for FF is another story. Her words have been quite neutral but perhaps she is just making them sweat a bit. That will probably be the hright of her revenge.

Surely, a little bit of a contradiction if fianna fail go into government with her after expelling her from the party

ateam

Regarding Flynn, why would she lose her seat if she was declared bankrupt?

Sleepy

A bankrupt person can't hold the office of TD.

EDIT: Obviously I mean financially bankrupt, there's plenty of morally bankrupt TD's in this country.

I'd agree with Jimoslinos that TD's shouldn't be active at a local level, although I don't think the independents (healy rae aside) are really any worse for this than most FF politicians tbh. Most FF voters I know don't take national strategies or issues into consideration when voting, merely giving someone their first preference to the candidate because 'he's been good for the area' etc.

ateam

Sleepy wrote:

A bankrupt person can't hold the office of TD.

EDIT: Obviously I mean financially bankrupt, there's plenty of morally bankrupt TD's in this country.

But she will argue it's a private matter?

redspider

nollaig wrote:

Surely, a little bit of a contradiction if fianna fail go into government with her (Beverly) after expelling her from the party

Possibly so, but FF need her and in her heart of hearts she is an FFer, a lifetime family member. She really wants her financial situation sorted out though, so maybe something could be done on that front although I dont know what apart from a whiparound. Bertie will know how perhaps.

Allowing her to re-enter the party too, that is possible. eg: Niall Blaney was welcomed back in after his family were a 'black sheep' for a long time, although more voluntarily perhaps.

I dont have any insider information on the Flynn camp or the FF camp on this one, but either a welcoming back or a "I'll never work with FF again" are possible outcomes, but betting money would surely be on the 'welcome back' scenario. ps. I'm not betting.

Look at the Lenihan's and O'Rourke. Their father and Mary herself got shafted several times by FF yet they come back for more. Sometimes political ties are more important than principles .... well, especially for politicians perhaps.

The art of the possible?? - the art of no scruples more like!

Redspider

Jimoslimos

Of course if Flynn gets into government with FF and "miracuously" manages to avoid bankruptcy.....well a few alarm bells will go off in many peoples' heads.

horseflesh

It's the major downfall of our PR system, that we can end up with these independents pulling their "shopping lists" out of their holes, and holding the bigger parties to ransom.
Sickens me.

Maybe Gregory, McGrath, Healy-Rae, et al are good politicians, I don't know, but they are nothing but trumped up councillors.
This business of offering support to FF/FG in return for an extra few buses in my constituency or another backhander for a few farmers is disgraceful.

Boston

redspider wrote:

Tony Greogory also has similar requirements, nationally, and some for his local area. He has been in government with FF before, but Labour would obviously be closer to his heart as he seeks to help the less well-off in his society. I'd say he is less open to FF and more to FG/Lab.

You realise thats a personal view of yours that Labour are more about helping the less well-off. That particular piece of fiction might not be shared with everyone) Greogory has shown in the past he will go with who ever offers the best deal for inner city people.

Jimoslimos wrote:

Exactly the reasons why Independents should never be considered for government. Greedy self-serving "local" policies (i.e. get me elected next time) have no place in national government. I'd rather have FF with any combination of PD/GP/Lab than see our political leaders sell their souls to these cowboys.

You've proven you don't know anything about the track record of the man.