What would the opposition have done?

FF and proud

I am just wondering what them people in the opposition would have done today because they and their supporters seem to be all over the place today going mad over the stimulus package released by the government. It seems like the perfect time to jump and slam the government about this and that. No allowance is made for Cowen or Lenihan about how tight finances are and that real measures have to be taken, whether they will cause a bit of pain. But its necessary to get things back up and running.

Its easy to criticise when you dont have to do and when your just in the opposition benches or shouting on internet boards. Sure what would ye have done yourselfs had you been in Lenihan or Cowens boots. Sure lets hear it, your all very good at criticising but lets see do you actually have an alternative, or would you or your party be able to come up with some magical solution to our ills?

Stheno

I've no real political affiliation tbh, but I'd have done the following:

1. Scrapped individualisation: Would increase the net pay of working families and somewhat deflated demand in the job market as families could afford to be on earner as opposed to two.

2. Use higher tax models for single people to offset individualisation

3. Decreased welfare more: I'm currently unemployed, and budgeted for it to go down to €150 per week on JSB

4. Instead of increasing the price of fuel, I'd have increased it more and abolished car tax so that those who drive more, pay more (I do 40k mileage per annum)

That's all from me

Wide Road

I watched the end of prime time and heard R Crowley ask Joan Burton the question on 2 occasions, what stimulus package would The Labour Party have brought in today. She waffled away but I still don't know the their policy. Can anyone around here tell it to me, based on Joan's answers tonight. Also, given the assumption that I didn't miss it, why did R Crowley let her away with it, TWICE. After the first attept Richard tried again to get an answer, but gave up and let her off again!!!
Why?

DeVore

Review the salary of anyone in the Public Sector earning over 120K. Exception can be made but realistically most should be cut to that. Let them walk if they dont like it.

Tell the IMF we'll take their money to solve their banking crisis, but not at an interest rate. We are "too big to fail". Its not our problem, it shouldnt be on our shoulders.

Let Anglo go to the wall if its still feasible to do so. Let the markets scream blue murder cos at 8% we're not going to be wanting to sell bonds anyway.

None of them have the balls or the brains to do these necessary things.

DeV.

ArtSmart

Stheno wrote: »

I've no real political affiliation tbh, but I'd have done the following:

1. Scrapped individualisation: Would increase the net pay of working families and somewhat deflated demand in the job market as families could afford to be on earner as opposed to two.

2. Use higher tax models for single people to offset individualisation

3. Decreased welfare more: I'm currently unemployed, and budgeted for it to go down to €150 per week on JSB

4. Instead of increasing the price of fuel, I'd have increased it more and abolished car tax so that those who drive more, pay more (I do 40k mileage per annum)

That's all from me

new rule: people on the dole for less than two years - stop commenting about it.

ok - new, new rule - those who comment on the joys of dolism, state a/ how long you are on it and b/ did you use funds other than the dole at any time and c/ what resources are you using that you obtained before the dole eg, your own house, a car, etc.

I'm willing to bet big dollars, that the 'dole is too much' heads are on the dole less than two years and probably less than 18 months. - ie they're still in the 'honeymoon' period. (using previous resources)

StupidLikeAFox

Stheno wrote: »

3. Decreased welfare more: I'm currently unemployed, and budgeted for it to go down to €150 per week on JSB

4. Instead of increasing the price of fuel, I'd have increased it more and abolished car tax so that those who drive more, pay more (I do 40k mileage per annum)

Just out of curiosity, how are you doing so much mileage when you are unemployed?

hallelujajordan

I listened with a little bemusement last night to Joan Burton's Dail speech . . one particular piece caught me ..

"This budget coming after 13 years of FF misrule, might be described as the last sting of the dying Fianna Fail wasp, but a pretty vicious sting and one that carries a long tail life, not just for today, but for the next four years."

What I really do not understand is why anyone in opposition would be critical of the long term effects of this budget when there is an election around the corner.

If Labour were serious about their criticisms then why did they not promise (like David Cameron did in the UK) to hold an extraordinary budget within 50 days of the General Election to reverse the moves made yesterday by Lenihan and replace them with their own changes ?

DeVore wrote:

Tell the IMF we'll take their money to solve their banking crisis, but not at an interest rate. We are "too big to fail". Its not our problem, it shouldnt be on our shoulders.

Easy to declare such an intent on boards but rather a big gamble to take with the nations welfare don't you think. . .? If the IMF says stuff it, we are back on the bond markets, at that stage probably way in excess of 8% and at real risk of running out of cash to pay public servants and welfare recipients sometime early in 2011 . .

DeVore wrote:

Let Anglo go to the wall if its still feasible to do so. Let the markets scream blue murder cos at 8% we're not going to be wanting to sell bonds anyway.

None of them have the balls or the brains to do these necessary things.

DeV.

How can you consider that it takes either brains or balls to let a now nationalised bank fail ? Anglo belongs to the Irish taxpayer now, as does its debt. There may be different opinions about whether or not it was possible to let it fail before nationalisation but I don't believe there is any way it can be allowed to happen now.

Ash.J.Williams

Would you say Labour are dead after yesterdays performance?

Wide Road

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Would you say Labour are dead after yesterdays performance?

No, not at all. But it shows imo, that yesterday doesn't really matter in terms of the opposition. The reason I say this is we all know the next govt will be FG and Labour. Then we will have Enda as Taoiseach and Joan as Minister for Finance. So Joan's bad Dail display yesterday will count for nothing, same Ml' Noonan's good showing will not get him Finance.

Saila

FF and proud wrote: »

I am just wondering what them people in the opposition would have done today because they and their supporters seem to be all over the place today going mad over the stimulus package released by the government. It seems like the perfect time to jump and slam the government about this and that. No allowance is made for Cowen or Lenihan about how tight finances are and that real measures have to be taken, whether they will cause a bit of pain. But its necessary to get things back up and running.

Its easy to criticise when you dont have to do and when your just in the opposition benches or shouting on internet boards. Sure what would ye have done yourselfs had you been in Lenihan or Cowens boots. Sure lets hear it, your all very good at criticising but lets see do you actually have an alternative, or would you or your party be able to come up with some magical solution to our ills?

The reality is that its your party which you are so proud have absolutely raped this country and any new parties entering will have their hands tied by the mess you lot got us all into.

Het-Field

A totally irrelevant question.

The opposition are not in Government. They have NO executive power. They have NO bargaining power. They have NO political clout. They can do nothing. As such, all we can do is speculate as to what the opposition would have done.

The OP is a pathetic spin merchant.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

A totally irrelevant question.

The opposition are not in Government. They have NO executive power. They have NO bargaining power. They have NO political clout. They can do nothing. As such, all we can do is speculate as to what the opposition would have done.

The OP is a pathetic spin merchant.

Sorry Het-Field but that is nonsense . .

We have a general election around the corner when Labour and Fine Gael will ask for our vote and will criticise the current governments decisions. It is perfectly reasonable to ask what they would have done and given that they each made pre-budget submissions it is more than just speculation . .

c montgomery

ArtSmart wrote: »

new rule: people on the dole for less than two years - stop commenting about it.

ok - new, new rule - those who comment on the joys of dolism, state a/ how long you are on it and b/ did you use funds other than the dole at any time and c/ what resources are you using that you obtained before the dole eg, your own house, a car, etc.

I'm willing to bet big dollars, that the 'dole is too much' heads are on the dole less than two years and probably less than 18 months. - ie they're still in the 'honeymoon' period. (using previous resources)

The dole should be reduced after 2 years. If you cant find a job after 2 years your either not looking hard enough or else not prepared to work in the jobs that are out there.

c montgomery

Wide Road wrote: »

No, not at all. But it shows imo, that yesterday doesn't really matter in terms of the opposition. The reason I say this is we all know the next govt will be FG and Labour. Then we will have Enda as Taoiseach and Joan as Minister for Finance. So Joan's bad Dail display yesterday will count for nothing, same Ml' Noonan's good showing will not get him Finance.

FG being the bigger party ( i hope) after the elsection will take the ministry of finance, its the biggest ministry in the government so of course they will take it. Gilmore will be endas #2 and noonan will be finance minister.

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Sorry Het-Field but that is nonsense . .

We have a general election around the corner when Labour and Fine Gael will ask for our vote and will criticise the current governments decisions. It is perfectly reasonable to ask what they would have done and given that they each made pre-budget submissions it is more than just speculation . .

The pre-budgetary submissions are lists of what oppositions parties would do. As they are without executive power, there is nothing they can do. Obviously your FF buddy who is the OP fails to recognise the pre-budgetary submission entirely. I simply deem it to be a redundant exercise in executive terms.

With regard to the next election all parties will place a manifesto before us when it comes to election time. What FG and LAB would do once they hold executive power is of great relevance to me, and all voters. However, the mantra of "what would you do" is a product of the FF spin machine. Both you and I know that they can do NOTHING in opposition.

DeVore

What I'm MUCH more interested in is what WILL they do....

DeV.

hallelujajordan

DeVore wrote: »

What I'm MUCH more interested in is what WILL they do....

DeV.

Refer to my post re: Joan Burtons speech . . A lot of talk about how terrible this budget is but why did she not, for example, promise to correct all of this within X days of entering government . .

Are we to assume in the absence of such a commitment that they WILL do nothing before next years budget ?

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

The pre-budgetary submissions are lists of what oppositions parties would do. As they are without executive power, there is nothing they can do. Obviously your FF buddy who is the OP fails to recognise the pre-budgetary submission entirely. I simply deem it to be a redundant exercise in executive terms.

With regard to the next election all parties will place a manifesto before us when it comes to election time. What FG and LAB would do once they hold executive power is of great relevance to me, and all voters. However, the mantra of "what would you do" is a product of the FF spin machine. Both you and I know that they can do NOTHING in opposition.

He is not my buddy and he is asking a perfectly reasonable question. If I am a voter who may vote for FG or LAB in the next election it is perfectly reasonable to ask what they WOULD do . . From that, we can be informed on what they WILL do . .

veXual

DeVore wrote: »

What I'm MUCH more interested in is what WILL they do....

DeV.

I'll second this.

Fair enough the FF budget has been met with fierce opposition but would like to know what will FG or Labour do in a couple of months time should they get into power.

At the moment they just seem content with shouting down whatever FF put out there. There has to be logic to both sides of a debate and at the moment I don't see the opposition putting forward anything logical, they just seem content with disagreeing with whatever FF say.

Enda Kenny has just said that his party would not cut welfare or increase taxes, what alternatives are there?

Surely I'm not the only one thinking like this?

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

He is not my buddy and he is asking a perfectly reasonable question. If I am a voter who may vote for FG or LAB in the next election it is perfectly reasonable to ask what they WOULD do . . From that, we can be informed on what they WILL do . .

I never said it was unreasonable. I said it was irrelevant to the point of redundancy.

I am interested to know what FG/LAB will do WHEN they have executive power in their hands, and our tax dollers are administered at their whim. As things stand, they can do nothing, and what they "would do" is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

I know your new mantra of "the opposition should shoulder some of the blame for the crisis as they didnt offer any useful alternative policy in the past 13 years". However, I can only imagine you trot this line out in an attempt to alleviate a chronic case of cognitive dissonance on your part. You know as well as I do that FF would not have accepted ANY policy from the other side of the house. You know well that Brian Cowen considers Enda Kenny a "fool". You know well that FF are at the heart of this crisis.

We will be informed on what all parties will do in the weeks prior to the next General Election. Currently, the only thing which is of relevance is what those who have executive power ARE doing.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

I never said it was unreasonable. I said it was irrelevant to the point of redundancy.

I am interested to know what FG/LAB will do WHEN they have executive power in their hands, and our tax dollers are administered at their whim. As things stand, they can do nothing, and what they "would do" is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

Does what they 'would do' not inform you as to what they 'will do'

I know your new mantra of "the opposition should shoulder some of the blame for the crisis as they didnt offer any useful alternative policy in the past 13 years". However, I can only imagine you trot this line out in an attempt to alleviate a chronic case of cognitive dissonance on your part. You know as well as I do that FF would not have accepted ANY policy from the other side of the house. You know well that Brian Cowen considers Enda Kenny a "fool". You know well that FF are at the heart of this crisis.

We will be informed on what all parties will do in the weeks prior to the next General Election. Currently, the only thing which is of relevance is what those who have executive power ARE doing.

Nice personal attack but all entirely irrelevant to this thread where all I am doing is supporting the OP's desire to understand what the opposition 'would do' . . Not only a reasonable question but also a very relevant one and in no way an attempt to even discuss 'blame'

DeVore

The opposition shouldnt shoulder the blame for the situation beyond the criticism that they should have had the backbone to oppose the tax give aways and property stimuli more. Thats 20/20 hindsight for sure but they could have done more imho. Still... mostly not their fault.

However, asking what they would do now WOULD inform me of what their future actions will be and thats all I'm interested in.

For example, some fairly simple broad-brushstroke questions:

1. Will they cut the excessive wages in the PS (excessive = >120k P/A)

2. Will they raise taxes?

3. Will they reform Parish-Pump-Politics?

4. Will they put in place measures so that history cant repeat itself again (unbeknownst to most people, this isnt the first time we've had to bail out the banking sector, even in my lifetime.... surprised?)


I'd like simple answers to those questions so that I know broadly who to vote for.

DeV.

Saila

DeVore wrote:

3. Will they reform Parish-Pump-Politics?

4. Will they put in place measures so that history cant repeat itself again
DeV.

This is literally inbred in ireland, going to be VERY difficult to weed it out. I heard one poster the other day saying as a part of a possible solution to this to legislate to have people in one constituency vote in the TD which is in another far away constituency, this way there will be 'no' way of voting for charlie mc X when you simply cant, all you can do is vote for mr clare or mrcork, and so there is no incentive for you to vote for your own constituent...because you cant, you simply have to look at the list of candidates for say cork [when you are living in clare] and decide which is best for THE COUNTRY not which the one who said he was going to do something for you personally or your home town.

That idea is amazing simple and its a wonder no one has thought about it yet as a solution to pub parish politics :rolleyes:

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Does what they 'would do' not inform you as to what they 'will do'



Nice personal attack but all entirely irrelevent to this thread where all I am doing is supporting the OP's desire to understand what the opposition 'would do' . . Not only a reasonable question but also a very relevant one and in no way an attempt to even discuss 'blame'

Nope. The manner in which the OP has phrased the question is retrospective. The ground rules have changed now that a new budgetary framework has been introduced. New ground rules = new ground. What FG/LAB would have done for budget 2011 is irrelevant. What FG/LAB will do for budget 2012 is of great relevence. What they will do will become clear in their respective manifestos.

I see you have not lost your ability to play moderator and use that in an attempt to fudge.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

Nope. The manner in which the OP has phrased the question is retrospective. The ground rules have changed now that a new budgetary framework has been introduced. New ground rules = new ground. What FG/LAB would have done for budget 2011 is irrelevant. What FG/LAB will do for budget 2012 is of great relevence. What they will do will become clear in their respective manifestos.

I see you have not lost your ability to play moderator and use that in an attempt to fudge.

Just like you have not lost your ability to twist a debate into a personal attack in an attempt to fudge . .

This argument is ridiculous. . If you think it is not relevant to try to understand how FG or LABOUR might have approached Budget 2011, then I cannot argue with you.

But let me go back on-topic and look at the original OP question. . .

Its actually not too difficult to work out what the opposition would have done. . If you go to their respective websites you can see both Joan Burton's and Michael Noonan's speeches . .

Noonan was actually impressive and made some sensible suggestions about things he would have done differently . . some of which I would actually like to see Lenihan consider as they move the Finance Bill.

Burton said a whole lot of nothing in a speech that was obviously prepared well in advance of the budget and addressed nothing that was actually contained in the budget itself

Both made a lot of noise about jobs stimulus / jobs creation but there were few real ideas about what such a package could/would actually look like.. It will be interesting to see if they have some real ideas about this when they come into government . . I suspect that its this kind of criticism without alternative ideas that motivates the OP.

George Orwell 1982

It all depends on whether labour or Fine Gael are the larger party. If Fine Gael were larger there would be more cuts, if labour were larger there would be more tax hikes.

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Just like you have not lost your ability to twist a debate into a personal attack in an attempt to fudge . .

This argument is ridiculous. . If you think it is not relevant to try to understand how FG or LABOUR might have approached Budget 2011, then I cannot argue with you.

But let me go back on-topic and look at the original OP question. . .

Its actually not too difficult to work out what the opposition would have done. . If you go to their respective websites you can see both Joan Burton's and Michael Noonan's speeches . .

Noonan was actually impressive and made some sensible suggestions about things he would have done differently . . some of which I would actually like to see Lenihan consider as they move the Finance Bill.

Burton said a whole lot of nothing in a speech that was obviously prepared well in advance of the budget and addressed nothing that was actually contained in the budget itself

Both made a lot of noise about jobs stimulus / jobs creation but there were few real ideas about what such a package could/would actually look like.. It will be interesting to see if they have some real ideas about this when they come into government . . I suspect that its this kind of criticism without alternative ideas that motivates the OP.

Fine, walk away.

The reality is that FG/LAB had no imput, nor could they have had imput into Budget 2011. I am simply criticising your entire mantra of "what would the opposition do" ? You know as well as I do that it is an attempt to deflect responsibility. They have no executive power, and as such their "alternatives" are irrelevant to the point of redundancy. You know well that they would not be put into practice. While alternatives are interesting to read, they will be rubbished by partisans, and will not get an airing. What will be or relevence is the manifestos of FG/LAB. These can be scrutanised, and we can view them as viable alternatives, non-viable, or more of the same. On the back of this, we can make an educated decision as to whether their menu is acceptable to us as voters. In terms of the recent budget, it is for the Government to promulgate the financial programme for the following fiscal year, and given that it is the ONLY show in town, it is the ONLY relevent document.

Today, the Taoiseach suggested that a FG/LAB Government wouldnt be credible as there is a distinct difference in their rhetoric. I think you would agree that FF and FG are four square in terms of the defecit, and the targets which need to be reached, and are broadly in agreement as to how it should be done, even if the nuance of their respective plans is somewhat different. On the other hand, Labour are obsessed with the idea that taxation, and see it as the cure to our ailments. Given the clear divide between FF/FG v Labour, it is easy to suggest that neither a FF/LAB or a FG/Lab government is appropriate or credible. Lets be clear, Labour will be kingmakers no matter who the larger party is.

DeVore

Saila wrote: »

This is literally inbred in ireland, going to be VERY difficult to weed it out. I heard one poster the other day saying as a part of a possible solution to this to legislate to have people in one constituency vote in the TD which is in another far away constituency, this way there will be 'no' way of voting for charlie mc X when you simply cant, all you can do is vote for mr clare or mrcork, and so there is no incentive for you to vote for your own constituent...because you cant, you simply have to look at the list of candidates for say cork [when you are living in clare] and decide which is best for THE COUNTRY not which the one who said he was going to do something for you personally or your home town.

That idea is amazing simple and its a wonder no one has thought about it yet as a solution to pub parish politics :rolleyes:

This is a recipe for getting Dustin the Turkey voted into Galway as a joke by Wexford. Sorry.

DeV.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

Fine, walk away.

The reality is that FG/LAB had no imput, nor could they have had imput into Budget 2011. I am simply criticising your entire mantra of "what would the opposition do" ? You know as well as I do that it is an attempt to deflect responsibility. They have no executive power, and as such their "alternatives" are irrelevant to the point of redundancy. You know well that they would not be put into practice. While alternatives are interesting to read, they will be rubbished by partisans, and will not get an airing. What will be or relevence is the manifestos of FG/LAB. These can be scrutanised, and we can view them as viable alternatives, non-viable, or more of the same. On the back of this, we can make an educated decision as to whether their menu is acceptable to us as voters. In terms of the recent budget, it is for the Government to promulgate the financial programme for the following fiscal year, and given that it is the ONLY show in town, it is the ONLY relevent document.

Walk away from what ? ? Its a stupid argument you are putting forward based on an incorrect assumption that either me or the OP are questioning what the opposition would have done as an attempt to deflect responsibility. We are not. . I don't think either I or the OP are suggesting that the opposition are responsible in any way for yesterdays budget.

The government are making difficult decisions not because they want to but because they have to. The opposition are criticising these decisions and the motivation for making them and if they are going to do that then it is reasonable to ask them what the alternatives are . . It's very easy to sit on the fence and throw rocks at the government for making bad decisions. Eamon Gilmore has made a career of it. But if neither Gilmore or his finance spokesman are able to tell us what alternative decisions could have been made then it is absolutely appropriate to question them on that . .

ArtSmart

c montgomery wrote: »

The dole should be reduced after 2 years. If you cant find a job after 2 years your either not looking hard enough or else not prepared to work in the jobs that are out there.

I envy your wisdom.

Euroland

Wide Road wrote: »

No, not at all. But it shows imo, that yesterday doesn't really matter in terms of the opposition. The reason I say this is we all know the next govt will be FG and Labour. Then we will have Enda as Taoiseach and Joan as Minister for Finance. So Joan's bad Dail display yesterday will count for nothing, same Ml' Noonan's good showing will not get him Finance.

Enda is absolutely useless, but still wants to be a Taoiseach. Why don't they replace Enda with someone like Ml Noonan?

thebman

DeVore wrote: »

This is a recipe for getting Dustin the Turkey voted into Galway as a joke by Wexford. Sorry.

DeV.

Agree with this (as I suggested something similar before and got this response and it is correct ;P).

It sounds lovely in theory but as long as people are voting for a single person to represent them, they will vote for the gombeen.

The only way forward is a list system as decisions are made at a party level anyway with the whip system so we might as well reform the system to be what it has had to be hacked into becoming with the current system.

National TD's focus on winning prizes for local area and then vote whatever way the whip tells them to in national affairs. The system is clearly broken.

Dorcha

FF and proud wrote: »

I am just wondering what them people in the opposition would have done today because they and their supporters seem to be all over the place today going mad over the stimulus package released by the government. It seems like the perfect time to jump and slam the government about this and that. No allowance is made for Cowen or Lenihan about how tight finances are and that real measures have to be taken, whether they will cause a bit of pain. But its necessary to get things back up and running.

Its easy to criticise when you dont have to do and when your just in the opposition benches or shouting on internet boards. Sure what would ye have done yourselfs had you been in Lenihan or Cowens boots. Sure lets hear it, your all very good at criticising but lets see do you actually have an alternative, or would you or your party be able to come up with some magical solution to our ills?

FF and proud wrote: »

I am just wondering what them people in the opposition would have done today because they and their supporters seem to be all over the place today going mad over the stimulus package released by the government. It seems like the perfect time to jump and slam the government about this and that. No allowance is made for Cowen or Lenihan about how tight finances are and that real measures have to be taken, whether they will cause a bit of pain. But its necessary to get things back up and running.

Its easy to criticise when you dont have to do and when your just in the opposition benches or shouting on internet boards. Sure what would ye have done yourselfs had you been in Lenihan or Cowens boots. Sure lets hear it, your all very good at criticising but lets see do you actually have an alternative, or would you or your party be able to come up with some magical solution to our ills?

I think your motives in asking that question is simply no more than a dersire to paint fine Gael and Labour in a negative light.


Criticizing the opposition when they were in power without offering any solutions of their own was something Fianna Fail were very good at (if you can remember back that far). It’s certainly not what people like to hear, I’ll grant you that. Were you happy with that behaviour of your party at the time?


An example of Fianna Fail chicanery is their u-turn about holding a Dail vote over the IMF/ECB deal. They have now said they will do this after saying it wasn’t necessary. Sinn Fein think it was their threat of court action which swayed them, but I think it’s simply because having seen how the budget was passed, they are now confident of winning this vote as well.


For the record, Eamon Gilmore has already said that Labour will present their program for government when an election is announced.


Fine Gael made their own budget submission before the budget was presented by Linehan.

liammur

FF and proud wrote: »

I am just wondering what them people in the opposition would have done today because they and their supporters seem to be all over the place today going mad over the stimulus package released by the government. It seems like the perfect time to jump and slam the government about this and that. No allowance is made for Cowen or Lenihan about how tight finances are and that real measures have to be taken, whether they will cause a bit of pain. But its necessary to get things back up and running.

Its easy to criticise when you dont have to do and when your just in the opposition benches or shouting on internet boards. Sure what would ye have done yourselfs had you been in Lenihan or Cowens boots. Sure lets hear it, your all very good at criticising but lets see do you actually have an alternative, or would you or your party be able to come up with some magical solution to our ills?

Hopefully they would make it illegal to be a member of FF.

imme

OP each party in the Dail not in government did actually publish an alternative budget, maybe you're too blinkered to have seen them:rolleyes:.

http://www.finegael.ie/polcol/a/36/article

http://www.labour.ie/policy/listing/129137549830712789.html

http://www.sinnfein.ie/pre-budget-submissions

Padkir

imme wrote: »

OP each party in the Dail not in government did actually publish an alternative budget, maybe you're too blinkered to have seen them:rolleyes:.

http://www.finegael.ie/polcol/a/36/article

http://www.labour.ie/policy/listing/129137549830712789.html

http://www.sinnfein.ie/pre-budget-submissions

They may have published them, but whether they're any good is another story. Both Labour and Sinn Fein, it all sounds wonderful but they are nowhere near saving €6bn.
Again, Fine Gael, better, but still not quite enough. They still remain the best opposition, although I believe that Brian Lenihan's budget is the best option of the 4, it's just a pity he won't be there to see it through.

johnnyskeleton

ArtSmart wrote: »

new rule: people on the dole for less than two years - stop commenting about it.

ok - new, new rule - those who comment on the joys of dolism, state a/ how long you are on it and b/ did you use funds other than the dole at any time and c/ what resources are you using that you obtained before the dole eg, your own house, a car, etc.

I'm willing to bet big dollars, that the 'dole is too much' heads are on the dole less than two years and probably less than 18 months. - ie they're still in the 'honeymoon' period. (using previous resources)

Generally its the opposite. Those who are newly on the dole are complaining because they can't afford their too high interest rates. Those more long term on the dole have settled in nicely and aren't too worried about keeping up debt payments.

I've never seen anyone post a weekly income/outgoings for being on the dole that suggests that the dole is too little, other than those who have massive debts or other committments.

johnnyskeleton

OP, to answer what FG/Labour would have done in Budget 2011 you must also ask what they would have done over the last few years.

For a start, they would either not have guaranteed the banks at all, or else would have given a much smaller guarantee and allowed many of the bondholders to lose out.

That would go some way to preventing the bailout and thus give the parliament some greater scope as to how Budget 2011 would be done.

Secondly, even on Labour's plan they would have made more cuts to current expenditure than FF did. FF basically sliced a massive chunk out of the capital expenditure part of the budget so as to avoid the politically senstive issues of welfare and PS pay coming into the next budget.

On FG's plan, they would have slashed current spending, by cutting quangoes and unnecessary admin and also by dramatically reducing welfare and higher paid public sector wages.

K-9

Look at the 2007 Manifestos, simple.