Ivan Yates

dresden8

Is Ivan Yates coming back? He's never off the telly. On the panel now.

Does he fancy Inda's job or has he just joined celebland?

sceptre

When he retired last time the main reason was that he knew they were going to get hammered in the election and he couldn't put up with years of being in opposition.

Perhaps he sees the next election as winnable all of a sudden (historically, FG tend to do better in elections after the economy goes down the toilet)

Raiser

Ivan Yates generally seems to articulate salient points borne of rational thinking and sound logic. He is self-assured, personable, likeable and reasonably comfortable under the spotlights glare.

Is he the "Anti-Kenny" ? ?? ???

- He'd get my vote.

lostexpectation

nah making too much money in the scam game.

asdasd

he has a chance of leadership. or a cabinet position. should rejoin.

muckety

I'd be pleased to see him coming back, he's got a bit of personality as well as coming across as intelligent and competent... though not sure he's any more on the telly now - he was never off it in the run up to the last election as a pundit!

mike65

He said he wouldn't, finds the idea of being a glorified messanger boy for narky constituents a waste of his time and talent.

asdasd

He said he wouldn't, finds the idea of being a glorified messanger boy for narky constituents a waste of his time and talent.

That it is. However if fine gael look set to be in government he will be a minister,

irish_bob

ivan yates is the most charismatic politician ( former politician ) in ireland

purple'n'gold

sceptre wrote: »

When he retired last time the main reason was that he knew they were going to get hammered in the election and he couldn't put up with years of being in opposition.

Perhaps he sees the next election as winnable all of a sudden (historically, FG tend to do better in elections after the economy goes down the toilet)

You are completely wrong about the reason why Ivan stood aside from politics. I know him personally, and of course I will not say one here why he quit, but it was most definitely not the reason you gave. Also he will not be making any comeback.

gandalf

purplengold wrote: »

You are completely wrong about the reason why Ivan stood aside from politics. I know him personally, and of course I will not say one here why he quit, but it was most definitely not the reason you gave. Also he will not be making any comeback.

Its a shame that he won't be coming back because he is a very capable politician and exactly the type of man we need to get things going at the moment, a businessman.

El Stuntman

gandalf wrote: »

Its a shame that he won't be coming back because he is a very capable politician and exactly the type of man we need to get things going at the moment, a businessman.

+1

I was sorry Brody Sweeney (Mr O'Briens sandwiches) didn't get in at the last GE for the same reason....

trailerparkboy

Excatly the type of man we need my eye, the buisness he is involved in is imoral and thousands of people in ireland that can least afford it are hooked on gambling, its profiting from peoples misery. On questions and answers he was all for loyying the goverment to let bookies introduce fobt's into ireland, for those that dont know what these are they are fixed odds betting termials which are the crack cocaine of gambling, jeez we would have a nice society then wouldnt we, gambling is worse than any drug be it drinking or drugs, for example you can only spent so much on drinking and drugs, you could spent 10,000 in 2 minutes gambling if you were addicted, it destroys lifes and you have no chance of ever winning, for if you were to win consestently you would be banned from betting with the company as in they would monitor you and refuse to take your bets, so its not a level playing field they just want poor unfortunate people to gamble there wages away so they can be rich.

Raiser

Well to be fair it is a valid argument.....

As for never winning; of course you'll be allowed win enough to ensure you keep on coming back to lose day after day.....

gaf1983

trailerparkboy wrote: »

... the buisness he is involved in is imoral and thousands of people in ireland that can least afford it are hooked on gambling, its profiting from peoples misery....

Whatever happened to personal choice?

However I agree that huge problems are connected with gambling addictions. Perhaps some sort of levy could be imposed whereby companies that profited from gambling would have to fund gambling addiction treatment centres.

So are all his media appearances just to boost the profile of his company?

gandalf

Trailerboy its still a step up from the current batch in power who have pillaged the country pandering to their developer financiers.

trailerparkboy

Maybe some people on here should go to gamcare and go to there forums which is full of people where gambling has ruined there lives, i am a reformed gambling addict myself so i know that gambling is one of the bigest prooblems in this country.

Browney7

lostexpectation wrote: »

nah making too much money in the scam game.

I wouldn't say that now. No Christmas bonuses for staff apparently and did you see the Sunday independent a few weeks back whereby he was letting staff go?
He is a very capable man though in all fairness. Don't they say he was the best Taoiseach Ireland never had?;)

Mikel

Raiser wrote: »

Ivan Yates generally seems to articulate salient points borne of rational thinking and sound logic. He is self-assured, personable, likeable and reasonably comfortable under the spotlights glare.

True, but he is also liberated somewhat by not having to defend an unpopular position or policy.
I also feel he gets treated pretty favourably on tv because he is not a campaigning politician.

Frankie Lee

Him and Alan Dukes are the only Fine Gael politicians I have ever respected or liked.

Danuogma

Personally I think that Ivan Yates is an insufferable arsehole who only gets wheeled out to spin this that or the other. His slavish pro Lisbon stance was almost oscar worthy, how many radio interviews and TV appearances did he do in order to plug the Lisbon treaty?, too many to count?.

blackiebest

As the days go by I think he is more likely to become a paid pundit on some news station as his bookies is in big trouble. He nor his wife are drawing salary, people have been laid off and he is struggling big time. He is a good man and in many ways it would be great if he got back into the polilical arena however he seems to have it media wise and I think he will end up as a G Hooke or Dumphy of current affairs!

He seems nice enough, would like to see him back in politics and off the airwaves too because he's a poor presenter...

irish_bob

one of the most charismatic and personable people in ireland , a shame he left politics as he would be fine gael leader by now and would easily lead fine gael to a landslide at the next election , you dont need a charismatic in power but you need one to get into power

irish_bob

irish_bob wrote: »

a shame he left politics as he would be fine gael leader by now and would easily lead fine gael to a landslide at the next election

He never struck me as the brightest fellow though. He has had a few foot in mouth moments on the radio. I think I remember that he talked himself into a little bit of a mess when he claimed to be at two separate meetings which happened to have taken place at the same time when he was Minister? Seems affable, but not sure he would be shrewder than the likes of Kenny or R Bruton.

Shane_C

purplengold wrote: »

You are completely wrong about the reason why Ivan stood aside from politics. I know him personally, and of course I will not say one here why he quit, but it was most definitely not the reason you gave. Also he will not be making any comeback.

Good answer

I'm glad he's not coming back, I'm finding it hard to find reasons not to vote FG.

dvpower

irish_bob wrote: »

one of the most charismatic and personable people in ireland , a shame he left politics as he would be fine gael leader by now and would easily lead fine gael to a landslide at the next election , you dont need a charismatic in power but you need one to get into power

Charismatic? Is there more than one Ivan Yeats out there? I don't find him to be charismatic at all. He's personable enough, but that's about it.

A Fine Gael leader? Not a chance. There's already one in place and another in waiting and in any case, it seems that he's not making a return to party politics.

JonathanAnon

I dont think he would go back in to politics. He was asked about constituency politics one night and from his description I dont think he was too enamored with the lifestyle. Plus he seems to like his other careers.

Smiley1

Today Ivan Yates congratulated the publication of the report from An Board Snip with the words Well done Colm and Co!. The question I would like to ask Ivan is - Is he in receipt of any State pensions and if so is he over 65? If he is on both counts would he like to hand back the money please!

turgon

Yates wrote a very good editorial in the Examiner yesterday:

For all their failings entrepreneurs remain the meat in the sandwich

Of course the trade unionists will fail to admit that the entrepreneurs are nothing more than people to hurl abuse at, yet economic recovery lies with them.

P. Breathnach

turgon wrote: »

... Of course the trade unionists will fail to admit that the entrepreneurs are nothing more than people to hurl abuse at, yet economic recovery lies with them.

Put not your faith in merchant princes.

I find the glorification on entrepreneurs, capitalism, and profit tiresome. I find the attitude that the rich have no significant obligation to the rest of society tiresome. Just remember that bankers and property developers are entrepreneurs, and were recently being lionised.

old boy

trailerparkboy wrote: »

Excatly the type of man we need my eye, the buisness he is involved in is imoral and thousands of people in ireland that can least afford it are hooked on gambling, its profiting from peoples misery. On questions and answers he was all for loyying the goverment to let bookies introduce fobt's into ireland, for those that dont know what these are they are fixed odds betting termials which are the crack cocaine of gambling, jeez we would have a nice society then wouldnt we, gambling is worse than any drug be it drinking or drugs, for example you can only spent so much on drinking and drugs, you could spent 10,000 in 2 minutes gambling if you were addicted, it destroys lifes and you have no chance of ever winning, for if you were to win consestently you would be banned from betting with the company as in they would monitor you and refuse to take your bets, so its not a level playing field they just want poor unfortunate people to gamble there wages away so they can be rich.

no one is ever forced or asked to make a bet.

Smiley1

irish_bob wrote: »

ivan yates is the most charismatic politician ( former politician ) in ireland

Ivan Yates is in receipt of a TD's pension and a Ministerial pension and yet has the neck to congratulate Colm & Co on their Board Snip report! Let him do his patriotic duty and hand the money back.

irish_bob

Smiley1 wrote: »

Ivan Yates is in receipt of a TD's pension and a Ministerial pension and yet has the neck to congratulate Colm & Co on their Board Snip report! Let him do his patriotic duty and hand the money back.

by what logic reasoning does one come to the conclusion that being in receipt of a td pension , makes one excluded from commenting on the likes of an board snip

dresden8

irish_bob wrote: »

by what logic reasoning does one come to the conclusion that being in receipt of a td pension , makes one excluded from commenting on the likes of an board snip

I think it's fair to say he was commenting on someone who is in receipt of substantial state payments welcoming a report that recommends slashing the state income of people who are on significantly less state income than he is.

Since you've inherited the job of scourge of public sector employees and pensioners from jimmmy on this board surely you should be lashing this public sector pensioner out of it for his huge public sector pensions, when he's not even of pension age yet, and has a significant revenue stream from his other ventures.

You've gone off-message irish_bob.

turgon

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I find the glorification on entrepreneurs, capitalism, and profit tiresome.

Why? And entrepreneurial economy is surely the way to go.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I find the attitude that the rich have no significant obligation to the rest of society tiresome.

Why do you think they have such an obligation?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Just remember that bankers and property developers are entrepreneurs, and were recently being lionised.

Yes, and bailing them out was wrong. If entrepreneurs win, they can keep their spoils; if they lose they should not be given a helping hand.

P. Breathnach

turgon wrote: »

Why? And entrepreneurial economy is surely the way to go.

Why?

If you reflect briefly on what passes for enterprise in today's world, you might note that is often no more than a game for re-allocating profits and wealth rather than creating them.

Why do you think they have such an obligation?

To me, it's a fundamental of human existence. Entrepreneurs do not emerge from nowhere, they emerge from a society that has given them opportunities. Life has been good to me: I moved from childhood and an extended education into reasonably well-paid employment, had a couple of career adjustments, and am now retired on a reasonable pension. I hope that I did something to deserve that, but I know that I experienced a lot of good fortune, and that society was a major contributor to that good fortune. So I have a debt of honour -- to contribute to the well-being of others, just as society has contributed so much to me.

Yes, and bailing them out was wrong. If entrepreneurs win, they can keep their spoils; if they lose they should not be given a helping hand.

That's bollocks. If the banks collapse, we all lose.

I don't want to live in the sort of society that was created in the nineteenth century by the industrial revolution, the sort of society that prompted much of Dickens's writing, and that was the basis for Marx's analyses of social forces.

turgon

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Why?

Because that is the way our economy is going to be go forward the strongest, if people are not going to disincentived from starting businesses by undue red tape and ridiculous tax. Business creates employment and that what we all like, right?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

To me, it's a fundamental of human existence. Entrepreneurs do not emerge from nowhere, they emerge from a society that has given them opportunities. Life has been good to me

I agree, and Ireland has been good to me especially as I restart into free college education this coming October. But the level of debt is often blown completely out of proportion. Many maintain just because youve grown up in a stable country you owe it to the exchequer to give the majority of your earnings for every conceivable social program and state body imaginable.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

and that society was a major contributor to that good fortune. So I have a debt of honour -- to contribute to the well-being of others, just as society has contributed so much to me.

I dont see this "society" you speak of. I fully acknowledge the blessing of have grown up in a stable Ireland under the stable Irish government, which allowed me to advance which way I wanted. But why do you bring up society? What has "society" given us? Not being antagonistic, I just wonder why people so readily interchange use of 'government' with 'society.'

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's bollocks. If the banks collapse, we all lose.

Obviously its not a black and white affair. However, bailing out the banks does not exactly give the best precedent to the next round of bankers does it? That they can **** up away and come to the government on their knees begging that the people pay for their mistakes. All I would wish for is accountability, and for the average person to take more than a passive interest in their money.

As someone said to me: the bailout exhibited the worst elements of capitalism with the worst elements of socialism.

P. Breathnach

turgon wrote: »

... I dont see this "society" you speak of. I fully acknowledge the blessing of have grown up in a stable Ireland under the stable Irish government, which allowed me to advance which way I wanted. But why do you bring up society? What has "society" given us? ...

Clearly we are not on the same page. You are on Margaret Thatcher's "there is no such thing as society page"; I won't even let that book into my house.

turgon

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Clearly we are not on the same page. You are on Margaret Thatcher's "there is no such thing as society page"; I won't even let that book into my house.

Well perhaps might you explain your thoughts, even in an attempt to enlighten me? If you find someone with an opinion you find stupid theres no point in just dismissing them, you may as well explain why you think they're wrong.

P. Breathnach

turgon wrote: »

Well perhaps might you explain your thoughts, even in an attempt to enlighten me?

I have already outlined my position briefly, a few posts before this.

If you find someone with an opinion you find stupid theres no point in just dismissing them, you may as well explain why you think they're wrong.

I didn't say that I found your opinion stupid; I said that you and I were not on the same page. I believe in society; you seem not to.

turgon

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I didn't say that I found your opinion stupid; I said that you and I were not on the same page. I believe in society; you seem not to.

Its not that I dont believe in the society, I just maintain it is not a rationale to take money off of me because of debt that I apparently owe it.

You mentioned your life story, whereas you would see that as the work of society, I see its as the work of the individual people and companies you interacted with, as well of course the government.

In an economy such as ours we are all interdependent. However I think its able to see where we were lucky, and oft times in such situations somewhere benefited from that luck. So you might have been lucky and got a good job, but the company hiring you might benefit from that work by you being a good worker. I wouldnt be one to say that just because you got that job you owe "society" thousands of euro in tax.

P. Breathnach

turgon wrote: »

... You mentioned your life story, whereas you would see that as the work of society, I see its as the work of the individual people and companies you interacted with, as well of course the government...

Society is a useful term for the aggregation of persons who have a network of relationships.

Smiley1

irish_bob wrote: »

by what logic reasoning does one come to the conclusion that being in receipt of a td pension , makes one excluded from commenting on the likes of an board snip

Irish-Bob - My point about Mr.Yates is that while still a relatively young man he is in receipt of two State pensions. One because for being a former TD and the other because he was a Minister for a couple of years. If Mr.Yates wants to assist in the solution of the problem with our public finances he can voluntarily decline to accept the pensions. In a decent society he wouldn't be receiving any State pension until he was of retirement age. Don't get me wrong, Mr Yates isn't the worst of them but he is part of the problem!

Smiley1

gandalf wrote: »

Its a shame that he won't be coming back because he is a very capable politician and exactly the type of man we need to get things going at the moment, a businessman.

Gandalf - If Ivan Yates is the man to get things going let him hand his pensions back! I've met Mr. Yates and he is a personable man. But if you're going to welcome a report that advocates cutting the incomes of the most vulnerable in our society let his actions match his words!