Stag hunting bill - backbench hypocrisy

oscarBravo

I noted with interest that seven Fianna Fáil back bench TDs spoke out against the stag hunting bill, but that most if not all are expected to vote for it.

The hypocrisy is utterly breathtaking, and highlights one of the single biggest flaws in our so-called democracy. These backbenchers are talking the talk by giving speeches that they feel represent their constituents' interests, but when it comes to walking the walk - where it counts - party loyalty comes before their duty to the electorate.

Until the whip system is completely dismantled, this country will never have anything more than lip-service to representative democracy. What we have is a periodically-rotating authoritarianism.

It's farcical.

Scofflaw

oscarBravo wrote: »

I noted with interest that seven Fianna Fáil back bench TDs spoke out against the stag hunting bill, but that most if not all are expected to vote for it.

The hypocrisy is utterly breathtaking, and highlights one of the single biggest flaws in our so-called democracy. These backbenchers are talking the talk by giving speeches that they feel represent their constituents' interests, but when it comes to walking the walk - where it counts - party loyalty comes before their duty to the electorate.

Until the whip system is completely dismantled, this country will never have anything more than lip-service to representative democracy. What we have is a periodically-rotating authoritarianism.

It's farcical.

Very much the case. The only advantage to the Party Whip system is the traditional 'advantage' of authoritarian systems, which is that it allows more government to happen. The interests of party TDs are tied hand and foot to those of the party rather than their constituents.

cordially,
Scofflaw

jmayo

oscarBravo wrote: »

I noted with interest that seven Fianna Fáil back bench TDs spoke out against the stag hunting bill, but that most if not all are expected to vote for it.

The hypocrisy is utterly breathtaking, and highlights one of the single biggest flaws in our so-called democracy. These backbenchers are talking the talk by giving speeches that they feel represent their constituents' interests, but when it comes to walking the walk - where it counts - party loyalty comes before their duty to the electorate.

Until the whip system is completely dismantled, this country will never have anything more than lip-service to representative democracy. What we have is a periodically-rotating authoritarianism.

It's farcical.

Even worse none of them bother speaking out about unethical behaviour by front bench ministers, the fact their leader is the guy found responsible for creating the environment that helped sink the county's economy, or the fact that the government appears hell bent on throwing away any amount of taxpayers money into the bottom less pit that is Anglo.

These guys are just another version of joe behan, jimmy devins, john ellis.
They make a song and dance to show the locals that they are fighting for their interests and then they proceed to tow the party line.

Grudaire

Still the objections are pure local politics. TD's are forced to argue about local issues while this is why they have local councillors. However stupid irrelevant issues to the governing of the state come up in the Dáil. The Labour Parties objection to the bill is pure vote hunting for rural area's. This has to stop. TD's should work for the whole country, not for their local area. Having politicians intervening to keep roads/hospitals etc in their area isn't in the interest of the country, and they end up rewarded with votes for pandering to local issues.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

maynooth_rules

Fianna Fail backbenchers with no backbone, well I never:rolleyes:. Just listen to Matty McGrath whenever he is on Newstalk. Takes the populace stance and gives out about pretty much every cut FF are doing, yet he has never, ever voted against said cuts. It is pointless politicians like this that we can do without

Scofflaw

Cliste wrote: »

Still the objections are pure local politics. TD's are forced to argue about local issues while this is why they have local councillors. However stupid irrelevant issues to the governing of the state come up in the Dáil. The Labour Parties objection to the bill is pure vote hunting for rural area's. This has to stop. TD's should work for the whole country, not for their local area. Having politicians intervening to keep roads/hospitals etc in their area isn't in the interest of the country, and they end up rewarded with votes for pandering to local issues.

That's something that would get worse rather than better with the removal of the Whip system, of course, but it's hard to argue that TDs shouldn't represent local views on national issues when that's their raison d'etre.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BluntGuy

maynooth_rules wrote: »

Fianna Fail backbenchers with no backbone, well I never:rolleyes:. Just listen to Matty McGrath whenever he is on Newstalk. Takes the populace stance and gives out about pretty much every cut FF are doing, yet he has never, ever voted against said cuts. It is pointless politicians like this that we can do without

Almost made me feel sick to see the rambling and shouting from those FF chimps on RTE news yesterday evening. And a little depressed to think that there are people out there who will be beaming with pride in their little display, ready to once again waste their vote on the same rubbish in the next general election.

sceptre

This may well be my "post the possible exchange for amusement to make a point" week. Stay tuned.

"So, what do you think of the new ban on stag hunting, backbench TD?"
"Oh, it's terrible stuff, I'm against it"
"Ah, really. How against it are you?"
"It's awful, it'll destroy country life, I've told them, sure aren't I saying it now"
"So it's that bad that you'll be voting against it?"
"Ah sure I have to vote with the party you know, that's very important"
"So you're only against it insofar as it doesn't hurt you personally?"
"..... you're all the same in the media you are, bunch of bastards"
"Stirring stuff. After the break, something completely different and back to city representatives without a constituency, we'll be talking to Ivor Callelly."

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Unfortunately this is quite true. Judging by many contributions to Dail debates (or often, the lack of them and lack of any notion outside the division door), many haven't even managed to get decent staff support for themselves to get an idea of which way to vote on anything of genuine national importance. That's an in-breeding problem of course - the practice of hiring close relatives as researchers and support.

danbohan

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

very true , and it was forever so , sad part is i cant see it changing .

oscarBravo

Cliste wrote: »

Still the objections are pure local politics. TD's are forced to argue about local issues while this is why they have local councillors.

While true, it's the nature of a system wherein TDs are elected from constituencies. I'm not convinced that the whip system in any way mitigates the problem of parochialism; it merely replaces it with a system where loyalty to a political party trumps the duty to represent the electorate in a local area.

In the interest of clarity, I also object to the notion that opposition TDs will vote against the bill simply for the sake of opposition. The bill should live or die based on the TDs who vote for or against it; not on the basis of an arbitrary majority formed three years ago.

TD's should work for the whole country, not for their local area.

I actually disagree. I think the government should work for the whole country (as opposed to for whatever vested interests best serve the ruling parties' needs), but that elected representatives should represent their constituents' views in a national context.

That's a somewhat separate discussion: separation of powers. The executive and legislative branches in this country are indistinguishable. The holding of votes in the Dáil is an exercise in futility, and the quality of debate is risible - for the simple reason that Dáil debates (and votes) achieve precisely nothing.

donegalfella wrote: »

Alas, if our sad crop of TDs were left to their own devices, few would know which way to vote on anything of genuine national importance.

There's a feedback loop in action there. Opposition TDs will always oppose; government TDs will always support. As long as that's the case, what on earth does a TD have to gain by going to the effort and expense of becoming well-informed?

Grudaire

I should clarify @Oscerbravo, and @Scofflaw I have no problem with them representing local views, it's local issues that I have a problem with. Basically local council business should be kept at local level, and not brought up by every half witted TD.

Case in point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kpk3S0vUlY (Jackie Healy Rae - you get the picture I'm trying to paint)

johngalway

They don't get it.

No one is swallowing this crap anymore. Especially not on this issue.

Talk is cheap, but the voters are watching how the TD's vote, not what crap they spout.

Eliot Rosewater

From what I can gather, the seven TDs in question are Thomas Byrne (Meath East), Máire Hoctor (Tipperary North), Seán Power (Kildare South), Michael Kennedy (Dublin North), Johnny Brady (Meath West), Mary Wallace (Meath East) and Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South).

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0626/1224273368207.html

It's an issue you could really nail campaigners with. There's no way you could portray this as anything other than party before country.

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

They don't get it.

No one is swallowing this crap anymore. Especially not on this issue.

Talk is cheap, but the voters are watching how the TD's vote, not what crap they spout.

They'll still vote for the party, the TD will follow the party line, therefore the same thing again. Theres very few barriers against Governments power to legislate, and having that power they will indeed use it. Should this god awful idea of elected mayors take off and they gain powers they will indeed use them too......

bleg

Ban lobbying.

expectationlost

as was suggested this was just easy rebeling for the bb, they spent years telling the greens to grow up now look at the ff children

The_Minister

Cliste wrote: »

Still the objections are pure local politics. TD's are forced to argue about local issues while this is why they have local councillors. However stupid irrelevant issues to the governing of the state come up in the Dáil. The Labour Parties objection to the bill is pure vote hunting for rural area's. This has to stop. TD's should work for the whole country, not for their local area. Having politicians intervening to keep roads/hospitals etc in their area isn't in the interest of the country, and they end up rewarded with votes for pandering to local issues.

I don't really care about the Bill, but this is annoying.

They are making it clear that they support the Bill (and they could ensure it passes if FF BB rebel), but instead they are voting against it to get country votes without even pretending that they think it's right.

Scofflaw

The_Minister wrote: »

I don't really care about the Bill, but this is annoying.

They are making it clear that they support the Bill (and they could ensure it passes if FF BB rebel), but instead they are voting against it to get country votes without even pretending that they think it's right.

Yes, that's quite illustrative, to me, of the farcical nature of the Dáil - Labour are voting against a Bill that they support, secure in the knowledge that it will be voted through by Fianna Fáil backbenchers who oppose it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

baalthor

sceptre wrote: »

"So, what do you think of the new ban on stag hunting, backbench TD?"

"It's awful, it'll destroy country life ...

Bizzarely, stag hunting only takes place in one small area of the country and ironically it's in Dublin ...

I doubt the typical rural dweller cares very much one way or the other about stag hunting and indeed there are large areas of the countryside where stag hunting, fox hunting and their supporters would not be flavour of the month.

johngalway

baalthor wrote: »

Bizzarely, stag hunting only takes place in one small area of the country and ironically it's in Dublin ...

Joe Costello was on The Week In Politics last night, made it very clear that Labour are against Stag Hunting/Bloodsports (so called). Waffled on for a bit regarding reasons why, in that case Labour were voting against Gormless' Bill. The best bit, and why I quoted your post was his glib remark - which I can't fully recall, that there were no hunting people in Dublin!

Right Joe, good man, back to sleep now, it'll all be better in the morning.

Riskymove

sceptre wrote: »

Unfortunately this is quite true. Judging by many contributions to Dail debates (or often, the lack of them and lack of any notion outside the division door), many haven't even managed to get decent staff support for themselves to get an idea of which way to vote on anything of genuine national importance. That's an in-breeding problem of course - the practice of hiring close relatives as researchers and support.

not that I disagree that there is a problem....but I see the problem from the other side

it is because the system operates as it does that TDs wont bother hiring any actually legislature help...why bother if you have no actual input

its all about local issues and votes...far better to have some family member on the payroll to help with said issues then some legal expert drafting speeches and amendments for you to announce to an empty Dail chamber

Grumpypants

Nothing, absolutely nothing surprises me with politicians any more. This week we have politicians supporting stag hunting, drink driving and being entitled to expenses that are 3 times the average wage.

A great quote "you get the government you deserve"

Duffy7

Have no problem with a ban on Stag hunting but how Fianna Fail TDs can be shouting about it and yet the same TDs sat on their backsides and said nothing about NAMA, the money being poured into the Banks and so on.
Its a joke.

Wide Road

The title of this thread should also include Labour as hypocrites. Their leader is on record as being in favour of the ban. Why the change?

ANXIOUS

Wide Road wrote: »

The title of this thread should also include Labour as hypocrites. Their leader is on record as being in favour of the ban. Why the change?

You can hardly expect him to start stating his opinions on issues after all the good polls. Sure why would he do that, when he can just bluff his way through.

Wide Road

ANXIOUS wrote: »

You can hardly expect him to start stating his opinions on issues after all the good polls. Sure why would he do that, when he can just bluff his way through.

Yeah you're spot on. But this thread title is mis-leading. Why is the Labour U-turn not counted as hypocrisy, like the FF backbenchers? Why?

ANXIOUS

Wide Road wrote: »

Yeah you're spot on. But this thread title is mis-leading. Why is the Labour U-turn not counted as hypocrisy, like the FF backbenchers? Why?

Because ff are in goverment obviously :rolleyes:

The_Minister

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Because ff are in goverment obviously :rolleyes:

But even if the backbenchers rebel, Labour could carry the Bill - this decision is in their hands.

They can't just pretend that they have no power in this situation.

ANXIOUS

The_Minister wrote: »

But even if the backbenchers rebel, Labour could carry the Bill - this decision is in their hands.

They can't just pretend that they have no power in this situation.

The bill will pass without them anyway. If by chance it does fall because of this labour will say they did it in the common good anything to bring about elections, and them promise to introduce it if elected.

Micheal lowery opened a new health center in tipp last week, the sitting ff td wasnt even invited to the opening, do you think he would risk the gravy train he is on over a deer? Its just about being seen to be the big man on campus.

Wide Road

The_Minister wrote: »

But even if the backbenchers rebel, Labour could carry the Bill - this decision is in their hands.

They can't just pretend that they have no power in this situation.

Whatever about power, they have policies, don't they?

aDeener

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

you say this

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

then you say that??


has anyone any facts and figures on how many TDs are teachers and publicans and those who do not have 3rd level qualifications?

jmayo

The best laugh about this whole thing is that ff are being pushed into backing a bill that would ban a hunt favoured by ex leader charlie haughey, whose master was big time ff backer mick bailey and one of whose members AFAIK is ff supporter johnny ronan.
Nothing like pi**ing off the money men by removing their little chance of playing lord of the manor.

For once I hope a government bill makes it through.

CiaranIRL

It's PASSED... 73-70

oscarBravo

CiaranIRL wrote: »

It's PASSED... 73-70

I'm shocked. Shocked to the core, I tells ya.

danbohan

aDeener wrote: »

you say this




then you say that??


has anyone any facts and figures on how many TDs are teachers and publicans and those who do not have 3rd level qualifications?

anybody that thinks that our political system , and our country will be any better with a bunch of PHD s running the place are sadly mistaken

ANXIOUS

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm shocked. Shocked to the core, I tells ya.

Why?

Someone on the ff side voted against and someone on the fg side voted for.

ANXIOUS

It hasnt passed yet, fg asked for a non electronic vote.

CiaranIRL

passed 75-71

ANXIOUS

it actually passed 75-71 now. Fg had a few people skew away.

Grumpypants

Some sanity in our government for once.

What puzzles me is why a debate on whether a bunch of fat rich idiots on horses could take a domesticated animal and chase it with a pack of vicious dogs through land that isn't theirs, was even taking place at all.

If this was a story about some dodgy characters using pet dogs to blood fighting dogs everyone would be against it.

MysticalRain

The only conclusion I can come to is that it's a transparent example of the political elites serving the interests of the landed gentry. It's no different to the situation we had 200 years ago.

I have to laugh when people try to portray this as a "country" versus "town" issue. I'm from the country, born and bred, and I've never had the inclination to dress up in a red coat, riding boots and chase down defenseless animals. If you tried that where I come from, the neighbouring farmers would be inclined to grab their shotguns and tell you to get the hell off their land.

nacho libre

Well this is one government bill i'm glad that passed. I wonder will any ff people for life abandon the party in dismay over this.

Wide Road

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm shocked. Shocked to the core, I tells ya.

You must be easily shocked so. I wonder are you from the R Bruton school of counting.

oscarBravo

Wide Road wrote: »

You must be easily shocked so.

Maybe. Or maybe I have too much irony in my diet.

Grumpypants

Matty Magrath sacked from the party for voting against the bill. Two intelligent moves from the goverment in two days. I'm all confussed now

Wide Road

Grumpypants wrote: »

Matty Magrath sacked from the party for voting against the bill. Two intelligent moves from the goverment in two days. I'm all confussed now

Did Mattie vote against the bill or just abstain?

Grumpypants

Wide Road wrote: »

Did Mattie vote against the bill or just abstain?

Two got the sack think Matty voted against it the other guy abstained.

Finally Matty puts his money where his mouth is its just a shame that its to back this crap blood sport and not something important.

sensibleken

The whole thing was hypocracy, it was political football by all sides that had little to do with the issue at hand. Im really annoyed at labour that they didnt support this.

delta_bravo

Grumpypants wrote: »

Two got the sack think Matty voted against it the other guy abstained.

Finally Matty puts his money where his mouth is its just a shame that its to back this crap blood sport and not something important.

This is the man that once said that drink driving helps some drivers. He was saying on the radio earlier he disagreed to NAMA but "had to vote for it" and now he decides to vote against a comparatively minor law. Its purely to save his seat come next election

Wide Road

Where is Eamon Gilmore? I asked yesterday because he voted against a bill he wanted implemented. There is also some members of Labours parl. party that are anti blood sports, and I heard that Alan Shatter also had trouble voting for the stag hunting bill. So where is the opposition? I know Enda is busy with his new front bench, but what's Eamons excuse? He is not giving good leadership from the opposition. Is this a sign of things to come?