Opposition parties . . All hot air . .

Drumpot

FF are getting it both barrels again for the way they handled (mishandled) the recent weather trouble . .

Personally, I dont see what FG or Labour would of had prepared for this kind of Winter . .

That aside, there was alot of criticism (rightly) towards the government for not clarifying the whole legal issue of people cleaning their footpaths of snow (and whether or not they could be sued if people had accidents).

What I cannot understand for the life of me is why FG or Labour didnt bother their ass finding out themselves and getting one up on FF. . Perfect opportunity . .

Instead they waste everbodys time on PR stunts with cardboard cutouts of Dempsey . .

I am a floating voter and would not have an awful lot of confidence in FF . . But I would have even less confidence in parties that spend most of their times just looking to just point-score at a time when the country needs all the help it can get .

Some might say thats the opposition partys job . . These are unprecedented times (or so we keep getting told) . . Surely they can pointscore while doing something remotely constructive for the rest of us . .

Personally I believe there is huge potential for a national party that works for the people, with the peoples interest at heart . . Problem is that there is no national will for such a party to succeed .

doc_17

Of course they are, But they have no power to do anything else. I have no great belief that they are more noble that the fianna fail gangsters and the idiotic greens but surely its time to find out. Thats why we have elections. If they fail, get them out.

Liam Byrne

There have been numerous occasions where the opposition have been found badly wanting, - Ahern's finances, the banks, TD's pay and expenses, the banking inquiry, NAMA - and the weather was just the most recent.

While - to me - it's a no-brainer to ensure that FF don't get back in, it's certainly a worry that the opposition has been so weak.

They can't possibly be worse, but whether they'll be good enough for what we need is a whole other question.

Voting in "the best of a bad lot" is a horribly resigned scenario.

imme

Drumpot wrote: »

Instead they waste everbodys time on PR stunts with cardboard cutouts of Dempsey . .

I am a floating voter and would not have an awful lot of confidence in FF . . But I would have even less confidence in parties that spend most of their times just looking to just point-score at a time when the country needs all the help it can get .

Personally I believe there is huge potential for a national party that works for the people, with the peoples interest at heart . . Problem is that there is no national will for such a party to succeed .

Dear Floating Voter,
I'm unsure how much of the population could still have confidence in FF.
I believe Fine Gael were representing the absence of Noel Dempsey by a cut-out, and the inaction of John Gormley by a cut-out, as cut-outs aren't very effective in solving problems (I'm sure some survey will testify to the ineffectiveness of card board cut-outs in handling problems:rolleyes:).
I'm unsure how Fine Gael wasted everybody's time by engaging in this 'stunt'. Maybe you can tell me.

If you're looking for a national party that has everybody's interest at heart I'm sure FF, FG, Labour, SF would say that's their role. You could also look at Amhrán Nua.:D

Drumpot

imme wrote: »

Dear Floating Voter,
I'm unsure how much of the population could still have confidence in FF.
I believe Fine Gael were representing the absence of Noel Dempsey by a cut-out, and the inaction of John Gormley by a cut-out, as cut-outs aren't very effective in solving problems (I'm sure some survey will testify to the ineffectiveness of card board cut-outs in handling problems:rolleyes:).
I'm unsure how Fine Gael wasted everybody's time by engaging in this 'stunt'. Maybe you can tell me.

If you're looking for a national party that has everybody's interest at heart I'm sure FF, FG, Labour, SF would say that's their role. You could also look at Amhrán Nua.:D

So you don't think that one of the "talented" opposition partys could of put some peoples mind at ease by finding out the legal ramifications of clearing the snow on front of peoples houses . . . By actually taking the initiative to actually do something for the public (that they could physically do) !!

Instead they were way more "productive" in pointing out (with cardboard cutouts!) what Pat Kenny does better then any of them ! ! ! Please . . .

What's even sadder is that they simply have no credibility even when they do have opportunities to catch out FF . .My dogs could attack FF over the last 2 years with more effect then the opposition partys. . Its as if FF have been the pinata , hanging in an open clear room and the opposition party had an opportunity to pin the tail on them with no blindfold and yet they still missed . . .

If you are wondering why some people still have "confidence" (use this term wisely) in FF, its basically because they have no confidence in the alternative . . Some of the opposition are actual living, breathing cardboard cutouts . . Better the devil you know, so to speak . .

imme

Drumpot wrote: »

So you don't think that one of the "talented" opposition partys could of put some peoples mind at ease by finding out the legal ramifications of clearing the snow on front of peoples houses . . . By actually taking the initiative to actually do something for the public (that they could physically do) !!

Instead they were way more "productive" in pointing out (with cardboard cutouts!) what Pat Kenny does better then any of them ! ! ! Please . . .

What's even sadder is that they simply have no credibility even when they do have opportunities to catch out FF . .My dogs could attack FF over the last 2 years with more effect then the opposition partys. . Its as if FF have been the pinata , hanging in an open clear room and the opposition party had an opportunity to pin the tail on them with no blindfold and yet they still missed . . .

If you are wondering why some people still have "confidence" (use this term wisely) in FF, its basically because they have no confidence in the alternative . . Some of the opposition are actual living, breathing cardboard cutouts . . Better the devil you know, so to speak . .

FF-led govt has a majority in the Oireachtas. Their poll ratings are not good though. FF were at the risk of being beaten into third place in the last few polls, after FG and Labour. Does this say anything to you as to the position of FF.

The opposition parties could have given their 'opinion' of the position of people clearing the public footpaths, I don't know did they. Their opinion would be their opinion, not legally significant. How do you think this would have increased their standing in the public imagination.

You said you're a floating voter, well you don't sound too floating, you sound quite FF orientated. :cool:
Maybe you're happy with what they've done with the economy, the health system, infrastructure.........

Drumpot

imme wrote: »

FF-led govt has a majority in the Oireachtas. Their poll ratings are not good though. FF were at the risk of being beaten into third place in the last few polls, after FG and Labour. Does this say anything to you as to the position of FF.

The opposition parties could have given their 'opinion' of the position of people clearing the public footpaths, I don't know did they. Their opinion would be their opinion, not legally significant. How do you think this would have increased their standing in the public imagination.

You said you're a floating voter, well you don't sound too floating, you sound quite FF orientated. :cool:
Maybe you're happy with what they've done with the economy, the health system, infrastructure.........

I thought I would get accused of being Pro-FF . .

Its kinda of a "your either with us or against" us attitude . . I dont have any confidence in any of our parties . . By saying that Im pro - FF you just prove my point (that people simply don't believe there is much choice out there). Not only that it shows that people dont have the vision to try to change the way politics is run, in this country . .

I don't believe in mob rule and prefer to ask questions (unpopular ones). . Any numpty can see FF have been a disaster and there are plenty of threads about their disasters on boards.ie alone. . I was hoping to find some open minded intellectuals who could actually objectively discuss the opposition . .

The whole reason the country is in the mess is alot to do with the fact that our voting community aren't concerned with the credentials of who they vote in . . Nor are they concerned with how to fix them up (sure vote in anybody but FF) . . They are simply worried about getting FF out & Blaming somebody when the truth is that its the fault of the voters that we are in this mess . . Who else helped give FF a majority to lead the country ? Accountability is not just lacking in the Dail, the whole country is incapable of taking responsibility for its own actions. .

What was stopping FG or Labour actually doing some research and finding out the legal standing of this query ? Is this information only available to the government ? (hint - rhetorical question ) . .

Liam Byrne

Drumpot wrote: »

So you don't think that one of the "talented" opposition partys could of put some peoples mind at ease by finding out the legal ramifications of clearing the snow on front of peoples houses . . . By actually taking the initiative to actually do something for the public (that they could physically do) !!

All FF bias aside, Drumpot does have a point - up to a point.

But if it were easy enough to find out the legal ramifications, then why didn't FF do it in the first place ?

And secondly, why should the opposition do FF's job for them by suggesting solutions ? If FF want their power, let them earn their keep!

And if they can't (as they've shown) let them get the hell out.

Biggins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

There have been numerous occasions where the opposition have been found badly wanting, - Ahern's finances, the banks, TD's pay and expenses, the banking inquiry, NAMA - and the weather was just the most recent.
While - to me - it's a no-brainer to ensure that FF don't get back in, it's certainly a worry that the opposition has been so weak.
They can't possibly be worse, but whether they'll be good enough for what we need is a whole other question.
Voting in "the best of a bad lot" is a horribly resigned scenario.

Just about sums up the present situation nicely - or un-nicely when we're talking about FF...

Well surmised.

Drumpot

Liam Byrne wrote: »

All FF bias aside, Drumpot does have a point - up to a point.

But if it were easy enough to find out the legal ramifications, then why didn't FF do it in the first place ?

And secondly, why should the opposition do FF's job for them by suggesting solutions ? If FF want their power, let them earn their keep!

And if they can't (as they've shown) let them get the hell out.

So you don't think opposition parties would of gotten credit for actually doing FF's job ? That said, am I correct in saying that the job of the opposition isnt to help the public in anyway, but to focus solely on getting into power by making the government look bad? ? I personally would of taken great heart if FG or Labour had shown a bit of initiative and come out with the answers (afterall they will be the next party running the country) . . But nope, instead we got cardboard cutouts . .


Its funny . . It seems if you attack the opposition parties you are a FF'r . .

I forgot . . People arent used to having objective debates on politics in Ireland . .

imme

I'm not sure what you're trying to say in that last post OP.
You introduced yourself as a floating voter. Then you said I accused you as being an FF voter, it is ok you know. We can get you an antidote (joke).
You are free to vote how you so chose. There are alternative parties, myriad independents to vote for. It's your choice.

You keep going on about the footpath legal issues. Why are you fixated on this issue. There are lawyers on the FG frontbench, Alan Shatter, Charlie Flanagan among others. I'm sure they could have (maybe they did) proffer an opinion as to the legal issues of shoveling show off the public footpath. How would this have enhanced the public opinion of the opposition. It would have been the opinion of an opposition party, not the official position of the govt.

Drumpot

imme wrote: »

I'm not sure what you're trying to say in that last post OP.
You introduced yourself as a floating voter. Then you said I accused you as being an FF voter, it is ok you know. We can get you an antidote (joke).
You are free to vote how you so chose. There are alternative parties, myriad independents to vote for. It's your choice.

You keep going on about the footpath legal issues. Why are you fixated on this issue. There are lawyers on the FG frontbench, Alan Shatter, Charlie Flanagan among others. I'm sure they could have (maybe they did) proffer an opinion as to the legal issues of shoveling show off the public footpath. How would this have enhanced the public opinion of the opposition. It would have been the opinion of an opposition party, not the official position of the govt.

But why cant a legal representitive of the opposition party say publically "legally you cant be sued for xxx" . . Ok its a statement, but a statement of law (why does it have to be an opinion?) . . Of course it should be said by government, but wouldnt that simply show them up even more ? I dont know about you, but I would have more confidence in an opposition party that shows me how much they care for the people of the country (as opposed to one that devotes most of its time to scoring brownie points!). . But thats just the problem. . I talked to somebody in a PR position in politics and my kind of values are not important to partys because most people of this country simply want to hear what they like to hear - Bankers are bad ... FF are bad . . Builders are bad . . Anything that backs up this one dimensional view is enough for their vote ! !

The reason I am getting annoyed with being accused of being pro FF is because its sidestepping the debate. . I wanted a debate on the opposition and of course I had to be accused of being a FF'r . .

I believe that until the electorate changes their attitudes to politics and who they want running their country we will simply get the same shower in different colors into office . .

Why has all the expenses scandal died down ? Why did it take so long in the first place to get a "sacrificial lamb" ? (and even at that O'Donohue didnt have to resign completely). Because they were all putting the gravy on their dinners and none of them want it to become public (look in the UK at the heads rolling) . . The fickleness of the electorate is baffling . . Why arent we demanding more expenses be explored ? ? Because as a nation we dont like to delve too deeply . . We dont want problems sorted from the roots, we want the top of the weed chopped so we can at least see a nice garden for awhile. .

The opposition do deserve a chance to lead the country, but not necessarily the people we have in opposition at the moment . . This is my main point . .

I heard something recently about politics in Scandinavia. They were saying these are the least corrupt politically run countries in the world. . Their politicians are grown with moral beliefs . . So much so that they dont need any laws or restrictions in place to protect their taxpayers from questionable expenses and likewise. .

We have a cultural moral deficiency in this country . . I really believe a country gets the government it deserves and the government mirrors its people . . With that in mind, when people slag off FF, you can see how I find it slightly ironic . .

imme

Drumpot wrote: »

But why cant a legal representitive of the opposition party say publically "legally you cant be sued for xxx" . .

The opposition do deserve a chance to lead the country, but not necessarily the people we have in opposition at the moment . . This is my main point . .

We have a cultural moral deficiency in this country . . I really believe a country gets the government it deserves and the government mirrors its people . . With that in mind, when people slag off FF, you can see how I find it slightly ironic . .

again with the snow:D
the opposition could have offered an opinion of the legal position regarding clearing of public footpaths by the public. It would not have had the legal standing of a govt opinion.
Yes, oppositions sometimes do become governments. If you don't see the next govt coming from the current opposition who do you see it coming from Amhrán Nua, Sinn Féin?????
How is our culture morally deficient?
The citizens of the state are all living through the current economic mess, the citizens didn't get us here though, I think that was the FF led govt's of the last few years.:rolleyes:

View

There seems to be some confusion about who can give a "definitive" answer concerning possible accidents that might occur after paths have been cleared of snow.

At the end of the day, the only people who can give a "definitve" answer to such a question would be the judges in a court (or courts!) after legal counsel have argued their cases. Obviously, any defendant in such a case would ideally be able to point out that they only cleared the path after they heard an opinion that what they were doing was okay from an authorative source (i.e. an official one).

The offical sources in the state are Government sources - usually, legal ones such as the AG etc. The Opposition does not have right of access to these figures as they answer to/deal with the Government parties.

Hence, the opposition parties cannot provide "official advice" as this is a Governmental function.

View

Drumpot wrote: »

I heard something recently about politics in Scandinavia. They were saying these are the least corrupt politically run countries in the world. . Their politicians are grown with moral beliefs . . So much so that they dont need any laws or restrictions in place to protect their taxpayers from questionable expenses and likewise. .

The Scandinavian countries have extensive laws to protect the taxpayers from questionable expenses and other abuses of power. If they didn't they'd be just as bad as anywhere else.

The reason they have these is because people there vote for parties that advocate these policies, hence it would be stupid for politicans to ignore the topic.

By way of contrast, people here don't vote on this basis, therefore our politicans don't prioritise legislation in this area.

nesf

View wrote: »

The Scandinavian countries have extensive laws to protect the taxpayers from questionable expenses and other abuses of power. If they didn't they'd be just as bad as anywhere else.

The reason they have these is because people there vote for parties that advocate these policies, hence it would be stupid for politicans to ignore the topic.

By way of contrast, people here don't vote on this basis, therefore our politicans don't prioritise legislation in this area.

Also bear in mind that Sweden for example has a very different election system. They use a variation of the party list method called an open list. See here for details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_list

If you compare this to our constituency based Single Transferable Vote system you can get an idea of why Sweden wouldn't fall into the same "local politics" traps with their national politicians.


Nothing would make me happier than a dropping of the constituency system for Dáil elections and a move to a party list, open list system. It would remove all the Jackie Healy Rays of the current mess.

hallelujajordan

My theory is that the opposition genuinely don't want to bring down the government. .

Sure, they will attack individuals like Gormley and Dempsey but when it comes to making a real surge on the government and in trying to force a general election FG & Labour have been found seriously lacking. There have been a number of times over the past year where I have felt that if FG & Labour were to work together they might have more success yet as Gilmore & Kenny demonstrated during the O'Donoghue affair, they seem unable to do this effectively (Rather ominous, considering they may be Taoiseach and Tanaiste at some point in the future !)

I think it is easier for them to throw stones from the opposition benches. . Bask in their popularity increases (which incidentally has nothing to do with them and everything to do with a fall in support for the government parties) and wait for the government to make the hard and unpopular decisions neccessary to bring about any sort of economic recovery.

For instance, can we really imagine that a party that is strongly funded by the unions (labour) would really be ready and willing to bring about the much needed but rather savage public sector and social welfare pay cuts . . Easier to allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done.

nesf

hallelujajordan wrote: »

My theory is that the opposition genuinely don't want to bring down the government. .

Sure, they will attack individuals like Gormley and Dempsey but when it comes to making a real surge on the government and in trying to force a referendum FG & Labour have been found seriously lacking. There have been a number of times over the past year where I have felt that if FG & Labour were to work together they might have more success yet as Gilmore & Kenny demonstrated during the O'Donoghue affair, they seem unable to do this effectively (Rather ominous, considering they may be Taoiseach and Tanaiste at some point in the future !)

I think it is easier for them to throw stones from the opposition benches. . Bask in their popularity increases (which incidentally has nothing to do with them and everything to do with a fallin support for the government parties) and wait for the government to make the hard and unpopular decisions neccessary to bring about any sort of economic recovery.

For instance, can we really imagine that a party that is strongly funded by the unions (labour) would really be ready and willing to bring about the much needed but rather savage public sector and social welfare pay cuts . . Easier to allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done.

The thing to remember is that if it was FF in Opposition they'd do the exact same thing. No one wants to be in power during the first half of a recession rather than the second half.

hallelujajordan

nesf wrote: »

The thing to remember is that if it was FF in Opposition they'd do the exact same thing. No one wants to be in power during the first half of a recession rather than the second half.

You are probably right . . I am sure that they would. .

I do think there is a deeper problem with FG/Lab and I'd be concerned about their ability to form a stable coalition even after the difficulties subside a little. .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

......and wait for the government to make the hard and unpopular decisions neccessary to bring about any sort of economic recovery.

Now where have we heard that description before....?

I can think of a good few decisions that would be "easy and popular" - a banking enquiry, for example, or a review of TD expenses, or an abolition of all quangos, or legal safeguards on our bailout, but this government has no interest in implementing them.

Money-wise, they may not be cash-cows, but they would certainly steady the ship and let the public see that everyone was being affected, and thereby reduce public disquiet.

But no, no action whatsover on any of those despite being 2 years into this disaster.

In addition, this government made none of the "hard and unpopular decisions necessary" during the boom, which would have prevented this mess.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

For instance, can we really imagine that a party that is strongly funded by the unions (labour) would really be ready and willing to bring about the much needed but rather savage public sector and social welfare pay cuts . . Easier to allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done.

Bad and all as the unions might be (particularly due to their new-found power after Ahern pandered to them), I'd prefer a party tied in with the unions than one tied in with the corrupt builders and bankers.

And as for "allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done", well my mum used to have a saying - if you make a mess, you clean up after it.

I'm not confident that FF can (or even want to) clean up their mess, but I can certainly see why FG & Labour would take that stand; I don't agree with it or condone it, but I do understand it.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Now where have we heard that description before....?

I can think of a good few decisions that would be "easy and popular" - a banking enquiry, for example, or a review of TD expenses, or an abolition of all quangos, or legal safeguards on our bailout, but this government has no interest in implementing them.



Money-wise, they may not be cash-cows, but they would certainly steady the ship and let the public see that everyone was being affected, and thereby reduce public disquiet.

But no, no action whatsover on any of those despite being 2 years into this disaster.

In addition, this government made none of the "hard and unpopular decisions necessary" during the boom, which would have prevented this mess.



Bad and all as the unions might be (particularly due to their new-found power after Ahern pandered to them), I'd prefer a party tied in with the unions than one tied in with the corrupt builders and bankers.

And as for "allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done", well my mum used to have a saying - if you make a mess, you clean up after it.

I'm not confident that FF can (or even want to) clean up their mess, but I can certainly see why FG & Labour would take that stand; I don't agree with it or condone it, but I do understand it.

Jaysus, every thread comes back to the same 'I hate FF messages' . .

This thread is about the stength/weakness of the opposition

For what its worth you are out of date with a couple of your messages. It appears that there will be some form of banking inquiry. . we will learn more in the coming days I guess. . Also, there is firm commitment in the Programme for Government to tackle the expenses issue. . but don't lets get into a debate over this cos its way off topic.

Drumpot

imme wrote: »

How is our culture morally deficient?
The citizens of the state are all living through the current economic mess, the citizens didn't get us here though, I think that was the FF led govt's of the last few years.:rolleyes:

Would you class our government as morally deficient in areas? Most people would . .Like I said a government mirrors its people . .


What do you think would of happened had the government (during the boom years) not reduced financial regulation (to open the floodgates for mortgages) and hindered the building of houses/Apt's ?

Yes. . There would of been call for their heads as hundreds of thousands would of been desperate to get on the ladder and our conservative government would be pushed out for the opposition party . .

Of course things could of been done a lot better, but the biggest problem this country has is a reactive population and people are not looking for things to be done better. .

People also forget that the opposition partys were berating FF for not spending enough in the boom years (something they like us to forget) . .

View . . I accept that you may indeed be correct regarding the Scandinavian laws (it was simply something I heard in a debate). however, The very fact that this is something of paramount importance to the people of these countries highlights my point (that the important things really don't bother the Irish People) . . The Irish people still love the "cute Hooers" and will continue to do so until we change our mentality . .

Deep down in your hearts you know that while we will get a government change in the next election (which is needed), we will not get any significant culture change within the dail . . . . That in itself is a crime considering the pain we have had to endure over the last 2 years . .

Biggins

hallelujajordan wrote: »

...It appears that there will be some form of banking inquiry. . we will learn more in the coming days I guess...

It will also be interesting to see how far will be the range/scope of the inquiry allowed.
Conveniently a FF government will set what and what cannot be investigated! Nice and convenient for them I suspect.
They know sooner or later, under one government or another, an inquiry will be held so if I was them, I'd (reluctantly) create one while still in power (and keep investigations from coming too close to home!) than have an elected winning opposition do it. A new government (not FF) who would perhaps even dig deeper into the murky goings on of the political FF attachments to the banking sector.

Laminations

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Jaysus, every thread comes back to the same 'I hate FF messages' . .

This thread is about the stength/weakness of the opposition

But why? why talk about the fly on your finger when there's a dog eating your leg?
The opposition parties must really despair, after all that has gone on, all the corruption, mismanagement, waste, there are still floating voters, there are still people looking for a reason to not vote FF. I'm not affiliated to any party but I'd never describe myself as a floating voter after all thats gone on. There seems to be a suggestion that there is a bias against FF but I think the bias is towards the opposition. People still say they think they'll be no good in government but they'll only be tested when in government. You can't implement policy in opposition. And the argument that the opposition suggest no alternatives is unfair, for example look at the alternatives to NAMA. On the snow issue as someone has said, the government has access to the AG and state solicitors, the opposition parties are not in a position to confirm anything here.

I do agree we need a significant (cultural) change in politics as a whole, we need people from all socioeconomic backgrounds entering politics out of a desire to help society, as a vocation instead of family dynasties. This wont happen in the next election, its a slow change if it happens at all and again depends on voters.

Finally apologies if my recent thread was overly provocative, I used two groups who continued to show support, overlook wrong doing out of some sense of loyalty perhaps and I agree it was crossing a line. Apologies

Laminations

And just to play along -

Strengths:

• They didn't screw up the country
• They demand a proper top level clean out in the banks
• Listen to the opposition budget speeches (Richard Bruton at least was pointing out flaws in government policy and indicating problems in housing boom and inequality back in 2006)
• FG, Charlie Flanagan has proposed changes to the criminal justice bill that I believe are needed.
• They offered imo a better solution (less risk to the taxpayer) than NAMA - but it seems that even if they get power NAMA cannot be changed
• They offer an actual plan for universal health care
• They have Richard Bruton
• They have Dr. James O Reilly
• They dont have Mr Sterling Deposit

Weaknesses:

• They have Enda
• They have Joan Burton

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Jaysus, every thread comes back to the same 'I hate FF messages' . .

You mentioned the party line

hallelujajordan wrote: »

....the hard and unpopular decisions neccessary...

And I responded appropriately.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

This thread is about the stength/weakness of the opposition

And I agree that it's weak; anyone worthwhile would whitewash FF at the moment.

That said, when some people are saying "FG wouldn't do any better" (based on zero proof or facts), then the opposition parties must be bashing their heads off the wall wondering what they have to do to be seen as an alternative to the current crowd dragging the economy to its knees and hanging future generations for no reason.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

It appears that there will be some form of banking inquiry. . we will learn more in the coming days I guess. . Also, there is firm commitment in the Programme for Government to tackle the expenses issue. . but don't lets get into a debate over this cos its way off topic.

Agree that it's off-topic in terms of discussion the opposition, but it's on-topic in terms of hot air.......FF investigating corruption and f-ups and milking the system from within FF is not going to find anything worthwhile or punish wrongdoing or sort out expenses.

Take it from me, it'll be like the election promises of "zero tolerance".....all hot air and no worthwhile outcome.

Raiser

I honestly believe that the current Government Opposition has no right to any claim of having fulfilled a valid and meaningful role in a steadily worsening debacle that is unfolding with each new headline day on day.....

Is it acceptable to stand Witness to wrongdoing while making the odd feeble, vapid, token empty gestures and half-hearted protestations?

Mutter, mutter, Boo, boo - Right lets go make another pot of Tea.

As Political targets go Fianna Fail are a veritable Hindenburg; Large so as easy to hit, fundamentally flawed, floundering and on the verge of a spectacular demise........All we are missing is one bright Spark to set off the explosion of these Corrupt, self-serving Cretins Airship..... And going on form we'll be waiting for some time yet.....

Laminations

Raiser wrote: »

I honestly believe that the current Government Opposition has no right to any claim of having fulfilled a valid and meaningful role in a steadily worsening debacle that is unfolding with each new headline day on day.....

Is it acceptable to stand Witness to wrongdoing while making the odd feeble, vapid, token empty gestures and half-hearted protestations?

Mutter, mutter, Boo, boo - Right lets go make another pot of Tea.

As Political targets go Fianna Fail are a veritable Hindenburg; Large so as easy to hit, fundamentally flawed, floundering and on the verge of a spectacular demise.....

........All we are missing is one bright Spark..... And going on form we'll be waiting for some time yet.....

I agree with you to some extent but suggesting the opposition need a bright spark lacks a bit of detail. What would you suggest they do?
Vote of no confidence?
Defeated in the dail

Highlight FF ineptitude?
Political point scoring

Suggest alternative policies or approaches?
Be told your ideas wouldn't work and you dont know what you are talking about. Now obviously i have no proof that opposition party policies would have a better outcome but its too easy to knock an approach that is never implemented and tested.

My question to you is rhetorical, i dont think its necessary for someone to have a solution or answer when they highlight a problem.

Drumpot

Laminations wrote: »

I agree with you to some extent but suggesting the opposition need a bright spark lacks a bit of detail. What would you suggest they do?
Vote of no confidence?
Defeated in the dail

Highlight FF ineptitude?
Political point scoring

Suggest alternative policies or approaches?
Be told your ideas wouldn't work and you dont know what you are talking about. Now obviously i have no proof that opposition party policies would have a better outcome but its too easy to knock an approach that is never implemented and tested.

My question to you is rhetorical, i dont think its necessary for someone to have a solution or answer when they highlight a problem.

Thats fair enough . . But the major arguements usually put across for the opposition is that we need change and they have come out with some decent ideas . . on the flipside, they have come out with bad ideas (again over expenditure when times were good) and its not a credential to say "sure they couldnt do much worse then the shower in" . .

To properly analyse them, you have to look at their strengths and alternative policies that were suggested before the Sh*t hit the fan . . Hindsight policy thats spewn out annoys me ('Oh we would of done this or that ') . . Were they constantly demanding mortgage offers be reigned in ? Were they constantly demanding that the financial regulator tighten its regulation (which many people in financial services could of told you) . . Were they suggesting policies that would of improved our existing status (or just government bashing as usual) . .

Thats the first barometer to get a decent idea on how they would of handled themselves over the last few years . .

Liam Byrne

Drumpot wrote: »

Were they constantly demanding mortgage offers be reigned in ? Were they constantly demanding that the financial regulator tighten its regulation (which many people in financial services could of told you) . . Were they suggesting policies that would of improved our existing status (or just government bashing as usual) . .

Thats the first barometer to get a decent idea on how they would of have handled themselves over the last few years . .

Well, they certainly weren't claiming that anyone pointing out the problems would be better off committing suicide, and they weren't the ones that appointed said-same non-performing financial regulator.

So on that alone they'd have been "better".

Drumpot

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Well, they certainly weren't claiming that anyone pointing out the problems would be better off committing suicide, and they weren't the ones that appointed said-same non-performing financial regulator.

So on that alone they'd have been "better".

That means nothing Liam . . Either they were constructively trying to force changes for the good or they were simply pandering to the auditorium and just saying the exact opposite to government (or jumping on populist agendas). . .

Im only asking questions of the opposition, you just keep putting down FF as if it highlights the positive credentials of the opposition . . . You are stuck in that "anybody's better then FF" stage which is exactly what worries me . .

The barometer you (and thousands of others) have set for the opposition party is so low, they couldnt fail but to live up to your expectations . . This is why the country is in danger of voting in the opposition , without any real change occurring . .

Raiser

Laminations wrote: »

I agree with you to some extent but suggesting the opposition need a bright spark lacks a bit of detail. What would you suggest they do?

Edited that to make my point a little clearer

- I see Fianna Fail as the compromised, talentless Fighter in the Ring, all talk and swagger, but crooked and with no real substance - a few well aimed punches from any opponent should be enough to begin the count at this stage - But all we got in the Ring is lightweights standing around and wittering inanely with no fight in them at all......

Laminations

Setting your expectations too high is a sure fire way of being disappointed. I suppose like testing individual differences, any test of performance of political parties must have sensitivity. Set the bar too high and they all fail, set it too low and they all pass and you cannot tell them apart. Setting the bar so low that the opposition can never fail our expectations does not mean that the government cant. The opposition are better than the government. I'd hope if the opposition got into power FF would buck up their game as the bar would be raised, even if only slightly. And so on we would get incremental increases and better performance out of our politicians as time went on, hopefully until the bar is at a reasonable level expectation. This will never happen with one party being in power constantly.

Laminations

Thinking about it I suppose we dont set the bar at all, the government do with their performance. Thinking the opposition cant do any worse is an admission that you'd think they'd do better, again even if only slightly. Then given that politicians crave power, FF would have to improve to be reelected. Although it would all fail if the opposition are elected and make a total balls of it. The bar would go nowhere and the country would be in a terribly depressing state.

Drumpot

Laminations wrote: »

Setting your expectations too high is a sure fire way of being disappointed. I suppose like testing individual differences, any test of performance of political parties must have sensitivity. Set the bar too high and they all fail, set it too low and they all pass and you cannot tell them apart. Setting the bar so low that the opposition can never fail our expectations does not mean that the government cant. The opposition are better than the government. I'd hope if the opposition got into power FF would buck up their game as the bar would be raised, even if only slightly. And so on we would get incremental increases and better performance out of our politicians as time went on, hopefully until the bar is at a reasonable level expectation. This will never happen with one party being in power constantly.

I completely disagree . . The only way we will ever get any better out of our politicians is by consistently demanding that they raise the bar, not by comparing them to the worst case scenario alternative . .

When I say have higher expectations, I mean you should demand more (then you realistically expect) from your politician . . Theres nothing wrong with demanding perfection and accepting a decent attempt at it. . Up until now , people are just demanding change (which is asking nothing of the opposition) . .

Incidentally saying the opposition are better then the government is your opinion, not a fact . . (and saying that doesnt make me a pro-FF'r) . .

Its up to the people of the country to set the bar, make the governments mandate and to assess it every 4-5 years . . By hoping that FF would up their game being out of power (which would of course happen) is once again putting the owness back on politicians to raise their game and taking responsibility back off the electorate which is why we are in this mess in the first place! . The only people who can force change are the people of the country . . People forget that while the government has the power to change things, the people of the country can dethrone them and shape the countries destiny . . A democratic government can only do what its people allows it to do . .

jmayo

Liam Byrne wrote: »

There have been numerous occasions where the opposition have been found badly wanting, - Ahern's finances, the banks, TD's pay and expenses, the banking inquiry, NAMA - and the weather was just the most recent.
...

Remember when they did attack ahern and how the great Irish voting public were seen to react in the polls.
It was seen as political suicide to question the tearful one.
Thus they didn't bring it up in the run up to the election and said they would wait for tribunal.
When Kenny did attack ahern on his resignation he was accused of sour grapes and kicking a man when he is down.
So how was he supposed to win.

Was Enda Kenny not the first politican (bar maybe Joe Higgins or some such) who actually came out and said he was taking a voluntary paycut.
What was accused of, oh yes pulling PR stunts :rolleyes:
Some of his party refused including Phil Hogan claiming his personal circumstances didn't allow it.

A huge chunk of the Irish electorate bought bertie's fables because it suited them and they were doing all right jack so who cared.
Some of these same voters are now complaining that the likes of Kenny weren't strong enough to attack ff, their cronies and their policies.
The word that comes to mind his hypocrit.

BTW I am not syaing you are one, you are one of the people like me who has probably had a low opinion of ff and their little deals for years.
But there are some out there who were lauding bertie and his fine economy until it ran off the rails.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

My theory is that the opposition genuinely don't want to bring down the government. .

Sure, they will attack individuals like Gormley and Dempsey but when it comes to making a real surge on the government and in trying to force a general election FG & Labour have been found seriously lacking. There have been a number of times over the past year where I have felt that if FG & Labour were to work together they might have more success yet as Gilmore & Kenny demonstrated during the O'Donoghue affair, they seem unable to do this effectively (Rather ominous, considering they may be Taoiseach and Tanaiste at some point in the future !)

I think it is easier for them to throw stones from the opposition benches. . Bask in their popularity increases (which incidentally has nothing to do with them and everything to do with a fall in support for the government parties) and wait for the government to make the hard and unpopular decisions neccessary to bring about any sort of economic recovery.

Easier to allow FF to do it and then come in when all the hard work is done...

How many times have FG and Labour had to come in and inherit the mess created by ff.
They had to do it in the early 80s and haughey and his ff boyos (remember these fine upstanding names burke, flynn, ahern) weresniping at them about making cuts.
Lo and behold haughey took over in 1987 and had to make savage cuts to ensure the IMF were not coming in.
Guess what Alan Dukes leading FG sacrificed his own political career to ensure haughey could make the cuts to save the country.

Why should the opposition come in, make all the hard decisions and take the brunt of the public anger and the very probable sniping from ff to be promptly rewarded by the electorate, who like a battered wife always returns to the arms of ff, with decimation at the next election.
Maybe some in the opposition parties want the electorate to see what ff are capable or rather incapable of before they have to take over.

Irish voters don't tend to reward honest hard workers or even visionaries, they reward the cute hoors, the charmers and that is why we are where we are.

Liam Byrne

Drumpot wrote: »

TEither they were constructively trying to force changes for the good or they were simply pandering to the auditorium and just saying the exact opposite to government (or jumping on populist agendas). . .

I agree that the standards should be much better than "not con-men and not corrupt", but the way things are that would still be an improvement.

Ideally, I'd prefer if we had a stronger opposition, of course I would; and I've said as much.

But getting FF and their hair-brained, self-interested policies out would be an improvement, and that's a start.

Drumpot wrote: »

Im only asking questions of the opposition, you just keep putting down FF as if it highlights the positive credentials of the opposition . . . You are stuck in that "anybody's better then FF" stage which is exactly what worries me . .

Just because it worries you doesn't mean it's not true.

I've said elsewhere that Enda Kenny & FG let us down by not tackling FF about O'Donoghue, and a few other issues.

And yes, I'd like a stronger, ethical, sense-of-fairness opposition....and if a stronger one appears I'll gladly vote for it.

But for the moment, the "anybody's better than FF" is the best option that we have.

The barometer you (and thousands of others) have set for the opposition party is so low, they couldnt fail but to live up to your expectations . . This is why the country is in danger of voting in the opposition , without any real change occurring . .[/QUOTE]

Drumpot wrote: »

A democratic government can only do what its people allows it to do . .

That's incorrect, for a start.

The Greens were voted in on the promise that they wouldn't lie down with FF; once elected, they did just that.

FF are going ahead with NAMA, with little-or-no support from the general public, and apparently there is no way of stopping it. The opposition did their job in this case, giving options in relation to nationalisation and letting the country gain in return for the risk, but FF - including the cowardly con-artists that resigned and still voted with them - ignored that and ploughed ahead with their buddies.

How, exactly, would you propose that the people "disallow" NAMA ?

The only way we can show our disgust in a meaningful way is at the next General Election, at which stage it will be too late.

But if you truly agree that governments cannot impose what people don't want and won't allow, then by all means fill us in on how we can stop this disgusting transfer or wealth.

Liam Byrne

jmayo wrote: »

BTW I am not syaing you are one, you are one of the people like me who has probably had a low opinion of ff and their little deals for years.

True. Their actions (and inactions) over the years have led me to that opinion.

jmayo wrote: »

How many times have FG and Labour had to come in and inherit the mess created by ff.

I was fairly young, but I remember it.

jmayo wrote: »

Some Irish voters don't tend to reward honest hard workers or even visionaries, they reward the cute hoors, the charmers and that is why we are where we are.

I know it was a general comment, but I had to correct/qualify that - sorry.

Raiser

If you made a few phone calls to help a Planning Authority reach a decision on granting planning permission to your Nephew, Friend or Neighbour.... Or perhaps used your Political platform to secure access to rights, privileges or perks that you were not ethically due would you feel comfortable criticising any living Man you saw doing the same thing - knowing as you do that he will turn on you and happily expose your dirty washing to the Media?

Quite often People are scared to speak out against against corruption, scheming, profiteering and the Criminals operating amongst us for fear of putting their own crooked selves in the Dock.

- It is certainly interesting how the Opposition has taken to NAMA like Ducks to a Water Park.... How many of those Fianna Fail by-a-different-name Crooks have a history in Planning, Zoning, Lending and Petitioning that they'd feel very uncomfortable reading about on the front page of the Irish Times?

Drumpot

jmayo wrote: »

Irish voters don't tend to reward honest hard workers or even visionaries, they reward the cute hoors, the charmers and that is why we are where we are.

Sort of sums up what I have been saying . . Couldn't of put it better myself . . . However, the cute hoors aren't limited to FF . . .

Incidentally, part of the reason Kenny's gesture (on pay) was seen as a PR stunt because it was just that . . To of been a real statement of intent he should of gone much much further and as leader of FG he should of been actively/publicly pushing all his colleagues to do so . . Ah, that wouldnt of gone down well in the party . . Exactly, it would of been a real sacrifice for the greater good, risking derision by his own, by looking for them to do the morally appropriate thing . .

Drumpot

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's incorrect, for a start.

The Greens were voted in on the promise that they wouldn't lie down with FF; once elected, they did just that.

FF are going ahead with NAMA, with little-or-no support from the general public, and apparently there is no way of stopping it. The opposition did their job in this case, giving options in relation to nationalisation and letting the country gain in return for the risk, but FF - including the cowardly con-artists that resigned and still voted with them - ignored that and ploughed ahead with their buddies.

How, exactly, would you propose that the people "disallow" NAMA ?

The only way we can show our disgust in a meaningful way is at the next General Election, at which stage it will be too late.

But if you truly agree that governments cannot impose what people don't want and won't allow, then by all means fill us in on how we can stop this disgusting transfer or wealth.

Look at the OAP's . . Heck look at the public servants . .

Do you think if Hundreds of thousands protested on the streets daily, that NAMA would go through . .

Forgetting whether or not NAMA is the correct way to go, your attitude again highlights the problems with the Irish Persons Psyche (not insulting you, 95% of the population would agree with you!) when it comes to having the country run . . I used to laugh and sneer at the French (who strike whenever they are unhappy about something) but they get what they want . . . Low and behold - http://www.internationalliving.com/Internal-Components/Further-Resources/qofl2009

Irish people have choices, but the problem is they arent interested in fighting for anything that they dont think directly impacts their wages (NAMA indirectly affects us all!) . . Why werent there mass protests about NAMA ? If people got as upset about NAMA as they did about their own wages, there would be no NAMA . Mark my words . .

The people do have the power to make ALL major decisions for this country . . We have all been too busy pointing fingers at others and feeling sorry for ourselves to actually realise that the power of change is in our hands. . Hell if we want an election tomorrow . . Take to the streets . .

Drumpot

Liam Byrne wrote: »

True. Their actions (and inactions) over the years have led me to that opinion.



I was fairly young, but I remember it.



I know it was a general comment, but I had to correct/qualify that - sorry.

I didnt say any of those things you quoted me on ! ! ! !

Laminations

Drumpot wrote: »

I completely disagree . . The only way we will ever get any better out of our politicians is by consistently demanding that they raise the bar, not by comparing them to the worst case scenario alternative . .

When I say have higher expectations, I mean you should demand more (then you realistically expect) from your politician . . Theres nothing wrong with demanding perfection and accepting a decent attempt at it. . Up until now , people are just demanding change (which is asking nothing of the opposition) .

The barometer you propose is an abstract ordinal method of rating performance and while this is a commendable measure it would be uninformative. I agree all parties are performing far below expectations, therefore measuring performance needs to be relative. There is little point comparing parties to an ideal that doesn't exist.

Also I dont simply demand change, I demand it with the expectation of a better performance (even as I have said if its only slightly better). In voting in the opposition I am asking them to do a better job.

Drumpot wrote: »

Incidentally saying the opposition are better then the government is your opinion, not a fact . . (and saying that doesnt make me a pro-FF'r) . .

I completely agree, I was just expressing my optimism, I can't imagine them doing worse and if they performed the same then we would all be screwed so out of optimism I expect them to do better - and in so doing FF will buck up their game to compete...but my point is you need to give them a chance.

Politics needs to work the same way any competition works, the politians strive for power, they achieve it through serving the people to the best of their ability, and so in order for the opposition to claim power they must outperform. We've seen what FF can do now lets give the opposition a chance, and if they don't perform (underperform) then we are totally lost

Laminations

Drumpot wrote: »

Incidentally, part of the reason Kenny's gesture (on pay) was seen as a PR stunt because it was just that . . To of been a real statement of intent he should of gone much much further and as leader of FG he should of been actively/publicly pushing all his colleagues to do so . . Ah, that wouldnt of gone down well in the party . . Exactly, it would of been a real sacrifice for the greater good, risking derision by his own, by looking for them to do the morally appropriate thing . .

Have to say I totally agree here - Emergency pay for an emergency crisis. The people at the top regardless of party have been very reluctant to show real leadership here

However using this as a test it is not sensitive to distinguish between the parties in the Dail, none of them showed leadership.

Unfortunately even if you don't like it it must come down to choosing the best of a bad lot. Havng standards for our politicians that none of them currently reach doesn't mean that next election we can disband the Dail until there is a party ready to govern with these standards. Incremental improvements is the best we can expect.

Laminations

We need to see a cat amongst the pigeons but what pigeons are going to vote for that. Hence voter apathy, there will never be a sea change. But we must punish underperformance or abysmal performance and reward good performce (while all the time demanding more, demanding better). Still the government set the bar, we just respond to this when we get the chance in an election

Laminations

This is a FG weakness in my opinion
www.rte.ie/news/2010/0114/banks.html

There needs to be a mechanism to compel people to attend. Most of those i'd like to see questioned are now retired, Sean Fitz. Michael Fingleton, Patrick Neary. David Drumm is living abroad. What would compel them to show up for questioning? Seanie Fitz cant even be compelled to pay the interest on his loans.

This is a definite weakness compared to the Labour party position but it is a strength compared to FF who didn't want any inquiry in the first place. See Drumpot, its all relative

Shea O'Meara

Anyhoo.......the footpath directly outside your home, is part of your property. You are responsible. If you are in rented council accomodation, the Council is responsible or the private landlord if that's the case.
However you cannot say, put a dip in the footpath for your car to drive up unless you get Council permission.
In a nutshell; if Council property, the footpath outside the dwelling is the Council's to look after. If Private, it's your's to look after, but you don't own it.
The road is everbody's to use and belongs to the Council, which is why anyone can park outside your house.

On bitching that Fianna B******s aren't doing their job; I think the best move FG & Labour could have done is to show them up by pretty much doing it for them rather than pointing and geering. It's an alternative we need, FF have done a good enough job themselves in showing the public they are nincompoops...that's right I said nincompoops;) We don't need a shower of Schoolyard messers poking fun, we need leaders to take initiative.

Liam Byrne

Drumpot wrote: »

I didnt say any of those things you quoted me on ! ! ! !

Sincere apologies.....my multi-quote or cut-and-paste went completely awry. No misquoting/misrepresentation intended.

Sorry again.

Drumpot

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Sincere apologies.....my multi-quote or cut-and-paste went completely awry. No misquoting/misrepresentation intended.

Sorry again.

No Probs . . Thought as much . . Just thought it was funny . . Not the first time I have been misquoted and certainly not the worst . . .

And Laminations, I agree with a lot of what you said . . Just a bit waffled out ! ! !:(

Laminations

People mention not being FF as being an opposition strength. Some posters have argued against the 'anyone but FF' line of voting. But is there a problem with this strategy or just applying it to FF. In britain would an 'anyone but the BNP' be an acceptable stance? I'm not comparing the two parties, I'm just trying to establish whether the 'anyone but' stance is fundamentally wrong or just unreasonable in the case of FF. If its unreasonable then we differ on the quantification of damage done to this country by FF. Their incompetent governance has wasted the wealthiest years of our country. i think this is unforgiveable at least for the next election or 2.

Drumpot

Laminations wrote: »

People mention not being FF as being an opposition strength. Some posters have argued against the 'anyone but FF' line of voting. But is there a problem with this strategy or just applying it to FF. In britain would an 'anyone but the BNP' be an acceptable stance? I'm not comparing the two parties, I'm just trying to establish whether the 'anyone but' stance is fundamentally wrong or just unreasonable in the case of FF. If its unreasonable then we differ on the quantification of damage done to this country by FF. Their incompetent governance has wasted the wealthiest years of our country. i think this is unforgiveable at least for the next election or 2.

Does it not scare you, considering how poorly you rate FF, that the opposition havent been able to take advantage (so far) of their incompetence . .

In any given field you can only be as bad as your opponent and the opposition have been shockingly found wanting . . The major reason for their rise in popularity is because of FF's monumental fall . .

This begs the question again, how good will this country actually be off with parties who are "surely not as bad as FF" . . In truth its just not good enough and whether you think its unfair to set high targets for individuals who havent even had a shot in the office, its plain downright crazy not to look for a better opposition, who can offer us more then "not FF" . . We deserve better and we should give ourselves a chance to get better . .