Leaders Debate - FF? SF? LAB? FG?

Lefticus Loonaticus

So, Martin has called for a three way leaders debate between himself, Kenny and Gilmore. What is astonishing about this is that FF are actually equal or lower than SF in the Polls. Add to this that the reason a three way debate has been called is that the polls show Labour on a large amount, meaning they must be included.

Now, we all know that FF, FG and Lab will try hard to exclude Gerry Adams from the debate no matter what, the problem is they have no moral or even technical arguement to do so because the same reason labour is included should be the same reason SF are included.

If we were to go by the polls, would it not be just Lab, FG and SF in a three way debate? Martin is a complete muppet, its his own party that is the most illegitimite for the three way he called.

So, if we are debating who between FF and SF are going to be the next opposition, how can we sit here and tell SF to shag off from a debate while letting FF in?

So whats it gonna be? 3 way, 4 way, or maybe a tag team match....?

SB-08

Enda has said Martin is in no position to dictate how the debates work and has ruled out a 3 way with Martin and Gilmore. He is calling for a 5 way debate. I suppose it means he won't have as many questions asked if it's 5 way.

Lefticus Loonaticus

Just heard that Kenny said that he will only participate in a debate between all five leaders and has declined to be involved in a 3 way.

Considering he himself will be eaten alive by Gilmore + Martin, perhaps he wants Adams for some canon fodder?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Weird. If I was Martin I'd do my level best to get Adams into the leaders debates.

What I'd like to see is a series of party debates between one member of each party

IE

FG vs SF
FG vs Lab
FG vs FF
SF vs Labour
SF vs FF
FF vs Lab

Let each party decide who they want in each. I'd say Vincent Browne would definitely facilitate this

astrofool

FF will still be the the third largest party (unfortunately) after the election, to think otherwise is delusional.

We already have Gilmore in the debate to spout populist nonsense.

Biggins

FF definitely want Gerry Adams and SF sidelined.
They DO NOT want to give him a platform so that he can also he equally heard - so don't be surprised when they try to exclude him, his party and the people they might represent.

Glad to see Kenny has more democratic sense and declined the three-way for favouring a five-way instead. Lord knows after 3 failed to be called by-elections, FF are not exactly as democratic as they would like to make themselves out as - and trying to possible shove a certain percentage of a people aside just because they might support a party that is not FF, leads such people then to more desperate measures to be heard!
...And we all know where that road leads and all peace loving people don't want that route!

Rosahane

There is nothing Martin would like more than a debate, what has he to lose!

Now that he has made his "apology" he can spout his latest version of FF spin about what we need to do for the country knowing that he won't have to follow through on any of it.

This will be nothing but a different version of FF promises to buy a few votes from the forgiving, short minded electorate. He will continue this policy in opposition. He will also spout about the need for a strong opposition for the next Gov.

Now if he committed to cleaning up the party by providing the Garda with details and documentation of the criminality engaged in by elected FF people over the years and commit to outing the public servants who were appointed by FF jobbery we might have some respect for him:mad:

Is this likely? I am reminded of the famous Gogarty quote about Ray Burke giving a receipt for a briefcase full of cash "Will we F**K"

Bottle_of_Smoke

Biggins wrote: »

FF definitely want Gerry Adams and SF sidelined.
They DO NOT want to give him a platform so that he can also he equally heard - so don't be surprised when they try to exclude him, his party and the people they might represent.

Glad to see Kenny has more democratic sense and declined the three-way for favouring a five-way instead. Lord knows after 3 failed to be called by-elections, FF are not exactly as democratic as they would like to make themselves out as - and trying to possible shove a certain percentage of a people aside just because they might support a party that is not FF, leads such people then to more desperate measures to be heard!
...And we all know where that road leads and all peace loving people don't want that route!

A 5 way is pointless. Especially in our situation. The leaders debate for NI in the British general election last year was a mess and there were only four of them.

I think FG just realise themselves and Labour will do well out of it because any points FF/Greens make will be responded to with ''look at the mess you made'' There'll be snipes made at Adams about the the IRA.

Basically Labour and FG will jsut have to show up and let the other three take each other out.

Biggins

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

A 5 way is pointless. Especially in our situation. The leaders debate for NI in the British general election last year was a mess and there were only four of them.

I think FG just realise themselves and Labour will do well out of it because any points FF/Greens make will be responded to with ''look at the mess you made'' There'll be snipes made at Adams about the the IRA.

Basically Labour and FG will just have to show up and let the other three take each other out.

Well if FG just realise themselves and Labour will do well out of it, what's the fear of going ahead with a 5 way?
Clearly Kenny is not showing any such worries and desires such a more open debate.
And if Adams is evil incarnate or has some daft economic proposals, at least let some of the public be given the chance for those ideas to be questioned, him to be exposed by others and ridiculed if he/they are that bad.
Better that such things are shown in the light than shoved away and done in the background - but then previously in our recent history with FF, isn't that the way things have been done ...and look where that has got us!

the groutch

imo it would have to be either a 4 way, or a six way
if you're going to include the Greens, you'd have to also include the ULA

maybe have a week of shows (not sure which channel), with each party getting a chance to seperately put across their views, without being harangued by the opposition every time they try to talk

Bottle_of_Smoke

Biggins wrote: »

Well if FG just realise themselves and Labour will do well out of it, what's the fear of going ahead with a 5 way?

I thought you said FG do want a five way? There's no fear I just think they'll get off the hook too easily.

Clearly Kenny is not showing any such worries and desires such a more open debate.
And if Adams is evil incarnate or has some daft economic proposals, at least let some of the public be given the chance for those ideas to be questioned, him to be exposed by others and ridiculed if he/they are that bad.
Better that such things are shown in the light than shoved away and done in the background - but then previously in our recent history with FF, isn't that the way things have been done ...and look where that has got us!

The way I see it vincent Browne is on every night for 90 minutes. Why not have a more coherant detailed and more informative debate between each party rather than a bravado and rhetoric night the 5 way will inevitably be. Could also mean we'll see not only the leader but perhaps the potential future finance ministers on some of the nights

A five way won't be an open debate. It'll be frustrating as hell because it will be nothing but leaders interrupting each other and petty sniping all the way unless Vincent Brown is given a shock button for the participants seats.

outandabout

I'd prefer a five way FF-FG-Lab-Greend- Sinn Fein debate to a three way debate as it will give all parties an equal chance.

If it's properly moderated by someone like Bryan Dobson, there's no reason why it can't work.

GSF

I think the minor parties (FF and the Greens) should have a seperate debate in fairness.

Biggins

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

...There's no fear I just think they'll get off the hook too easily.

Maybe but if they do, the discerning viewer should be able to note (1) that they are indeed getting off such a hook and (2) the person letting others off that hook, is not up to the job of putting them equally on it in the first place!

...And if either come across so badly in a three-way/five-way alone, how much confidence can they inspire in us all if we are then later supposed to send them forth, to tackle others on the national and world stage!

LeixlipRed

If anyone can make a credible argument for the Greens to be included then the ULA deserve a place on the podium too. The Greens will be non-existant after this election.

The Waltzing Consumer

LeixlipRed wrote: »

If anyone can make a credible argument for the Greens to be included then the ULA deserve a place on the podium too. The Greens will be non-existant after this election.

If you have the ULA there, then Jim Corr deserves to be there too!

Dannyboy83

According to the most recent polls, Sinn Fein are likely to be the 3rd largest party - Fianna Fail are in fact probably 4th.

5 way is the fairest and nicely played by Enda, he knows his own strengths and weaknesses.;)

Why is it nicely played?
Because Gilmore is claiming Kenny is scared, which is ironic considering the truth.:pac:

The truth is thatGilmore/Labour are terrified of letting Sinn Fein in to the debate.
They know and understand that Sinn Fein will soak up the populist vote, which Labour are counting heavily on.

Gilmore/Labour depend almost exclusively on Populism/Rage.
That's fine when he's up against Enda & Micheal, but it's not going to work when he's up against Sinn Fein, because they will school him in the art of populism and capitalise on the swing vote, at his expense.;)

RobbieTheRobber

What makes Labour any more populist the fianna Fail Or fine Gael?

outandabout

Are the ULA a registered party and how many of them are directly elected to the Dail or Seanad? Do they have a leader?

Not enough I'd have thought to justify their participation in a leadership debate.

I could vote ULA in this election if they run a candidate in my constituency but I don't know enough about them (other than they are a United Left Alliance) to rate them seriously.

whippet

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

According to the most recent polls, Sinn Fein are likely to be the 3rd largest party - Fianna Fail are in fact probably 4th.

The polls mean nothing really, just an indication of casual sentiment at that snap shot in time.

I would put my house on FF securing more seats than SF in this current election, especially when the electorate get a load of Gerry in all his glory having to actually answer specific questions on economic policies.

whippet

outandabout wrote: »

Are the ULA a registered party and how many of them are directly elected to the Dail or Seanad? Do they have a leader?

Not enough I'd have thought to justify their participation in a leadership debate.

.

they are a technical group, allowing them to band together to get speaking time in the dail. They are not a political party and as such don't have a leader.

RobbieTheRobber

whippet wrote: »

The polls mean nothing really, just an indication of casual sentiment at that snap shot in time.

I would put my house on FF securing more seats than SF in this current election, especially when the electorate get a load of Gerry in all his glory having to actually answer specific questions on economic policies.

Indeed because he will be so much more clueless than the members of the FF government who told us the IMF were not coming when they where here already and talking to them! :rolleyes:

LeixlipRed

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

If you have the ULA there, then Jim Corr deserves to be there too!

Good man.

whippet

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Indeed because he will be so much more clueless than the members of the FF government who told us the IMF were not coming when they where here already and talking to them! :rolleyes:

So you think that the government were 'clueless' when they denied having a meeting with the IMF? or do you reckon the might not have wanted people to know that they were in preliminary discussions with the IMF on a potential bail out (it wasn't confirmed at that stage)?

Imagine for one moment that after the preliminary meeting with the IMF ireland didn't actually need the bailout, but had told everone and anyone including the international press that they were officially thinking about it .... they wouldn't have had a hope in hell in getting back to the bond markets.

Not everything is black and white and while I know FF made a balls of things I don't hold the contention that all and sundry should have been told about the potential of a bail out package ... and if infact the like of Martin, Dermot Ahern and the rest were not told about it officially .. does not make them 'clueless' .....

Sir Oxman

A cynic may think with the amount of televised debates MM wants he may be hoping to fight the election on the airwaves as:

a) they can't rally the troops
b) the troops they do rally would be hammered at the doors of Ireland

Laminations

whippet wrote: »

So you think that the government were 'clueless' when they denied having a meeting with the IMF? or do you reckon the might not have wanted people to know that they were in preliminary discussions with the IMF on a potential bail out (it wasn't confirmed at that stage)?

Imagine for one moment that after the preliminary meeting with the IMF ireland didn't actually need the bailout, but had told everone and anyone including the international press that they were officially thinking about it .... they wouldn't have had a hope in hell in getting back to the bond markets.

Not everything is black and white and while I know FF made a balls of things I don't hold the contention that all and sundry should have been told about the potential of a bail out package ... and if infact the like of Martin, Dermot Ahern and the rest were not told about it officially .. does not make them 'clueless' .....

Truth, honesty and realism will get us out of this, not FF bluff games. If we didn't require a bailout then we shouldn't have invited the bailout people into the country and then denied they were here.

RobbieTheRobber

whippet wrote: »

So you think that the government were 'clueless' when they denied having a meeting with the IMF? or do you reckon the might not have wanted people to know that they were in preliminary discussions with the IMF on a potential bail out (it wasn't confirmed at that stage)?

Imagine for one moment that after the preliminary meeting with the IMF ireland didn't actually need the bailout, but had told everone and anyone including the international press that they were officially thinking about it .... they wouldn't have had a hope in hell in getting back to the bond markets.

Not everything is black and white and while I know FF made a balls of things I don't hold the contention that all and sundry should have been told about the potential of a bail out package ... and if infact the like of Martin, Dermot Ahern and the rest were not told about it officially .. does not make them 'clueless' .....

Then perhaps it makes the leaders of that vile party liars!

So you want a governemnt that treats the people it represents like little children and keeps us in the dark by telling us lies?


My mother always told me if I cant tell the truth not to say anything at all!

Mr.Micro

gambiaman wrote: »

A cynic may think with the amount of televised debates MM wants he may be hoping to fight the election on the airwaves as:

a) they can't rally the troops
b) the troops they do rally would be hammered at the doors of Ireland

I am sure RTE the FF channel will oblige. Sneery Martin been in power for years and look at his legacy. Kenny is right to ask for a 5 way debate.....I would even argue there is no need for a debate at all, just look at the mess, feel the mess and the pain better than any words to convince people how bad FF are for the country.

bohsfan

If you are going to have a political leader debate then I cant see the argument for cherrypicking.

Any fully ratified and recognised political party should have the right to let their leader debate on their behalf, otherwise it is not really a fully open debate.

Colm R

I think Kenny is right to play the game this way. But whats bad, is the media will side with FF on this.

I think FG know that all the people that will vote FG now, will not change their mind. I think they also know that they are unlikelky to get any more votes from the undecided.

So what he is trying to do now is damage FF and Labour and get their potential voters to switch to SF.

Mr.Micro

bohsfan wrote: »

If you are going to have a political leader debate then I cant see the argument for cherrypicking.

Any fully ratified and recognised political party should have the right to let their leader debate on their behalf, otherwise it is not really a fully open debate.

Absolutely and SF are a real threat to Lab and FF so should be included as should the Greens as they are a party as well. Martin trying to be a slick Mick.

Dirk Gently

Enda looks very weak now. Great opening move by Martin as new FF leader it has to be said. FG must be having second thoughts about their own leadership challenge now and wishing it had turned out different.

He clearly doesn't want to go head to head with Martin and Gilmore. Pulling the other parties in is an attempt to shield himself from being the weakest link in a head to head debate.

If Labour have any sense they will use this to their advantage and advance their own vote at FG's expense. If I was in either FF or Labour I wouldn't be letting Enda squirm his way out of this. I'm sure FG would love the likes of Noonan to do all their talking for them but its a great opportunity for Labour and FF to capitalise on Enda. If Enda doesn't like the idea labour should push ahead regardless and go head to head with FF, leaving Enda out in the cold if he doesn't want to participate.

GuanYin

I dunno, it looks like he (Martin) is lining up a three way debate so he can spend it highlighting the differences between Labor and FG. That seems to be one of the angles - that as a coalition, they won't be stable?

What has Labor's response been? If they also push for 5 -party then I think this swings around to bite FF on the ass.

bleg

Good move by Kenny I think though I wouldn't mind a 1v1. FF and SF will primarily be looking to attract Labour voters tempering Gilmore's effectiveness. Gerry Adams can go and make a fool of himself again and the Greens are irrelevant.

c_man

Kenny's playing this one right. Take on Martin on one of his first utterances, who do they think they are trying to make any demands!

FF want a 3 way so as to highlight differences between the other two. Excluding a party (SF) who are level or beating FF in the polls makes no sense. Labour aren't keen on giving SF a platform I reckon since they're after the same voters in a lot of areas.


It has to be said though, what purpose do these debates serve in a system such as ours other than to indulge politicians in reliving their glory days in Lit'n'Deb?

Mr.Micro

FF have nothing to offer after 13 years. If the thinking person thought for example that oily Ahern won the last debate over honest Enda and Clegg won over Cameron and Brown, now both are discredited. So appearances and utterances are deceptive. FF are trying to split the vote that it expects FG/Lab to get by showing differences in the parties policies.....its the only ammunition they have as FF can offer only desolation, emigration and debts to name a few.

Let Martin do as he wants, even debate on his own. Its FF who are the desperate ones not the others and will only benefit by getting the other parties to engage. Ignore Martin, not hard since he has been invisible for the last 10 plus years in the cabinet.

Sir Oxman

c_man wrote: »

Kenny's playing this one right. Take on Martin on one of his first utterances, who do they think they are trying to make any demands!

FF want a 3 way so as to highlight differences between the other two. Excluding a party (SF) who are level or beating FF in the polls makes no sense. Labour aren't keen on giving SF a platform I reckon since they're after the same voters in a lot of areas.


It has to be said though, what purpose do these debates serve in a system such as ours other than to indulge politicians in reliving their glory days in Lit'n'Deb?

I tend to agree.
What i do know is that if RTE get their way, it will turnout to be a useless exercise in ratings.
Futile questions, even worse chairing is not what the country should be given.

I'd propose all party leaders to be 'interviewed' by a panel of neutral experts (economics/buisness/environment/health/education etc) who, unlike a lot of the presenters who will get the gig, won't be deferential or aligned and who will interrogate them like at a US Senate Hearing.
Tough questions, straight answers no bullsht accepted.
MM can then have his moment in the sun with Enda after, for the ratings like.

This is too important to be left to the pseudo-crap debates that RTE or TV3 will foist on the Irish public.
I know I don't want to hear 'jobs are vital' and other rubbish that MM, EK, EG and the rest will come out with, I want to know how they are going to stimulate the economy and how the hell they are going to do that with an unrepayable millstone around our necks.

Time for the bull to stop.

gandalf

To be honest if there are any debates based on their ratings in the last poll SF do have as much of a right to be involved in any leaders debates as FF do. Martin has some cheek to exclude them from the debate.

ebbsy

How about throwing Joe Higgins into the mix ? Whether you like him or not he is at least interesting to listen to. Unlike the other boring [EMAIL="f@rts"]f@rts[/EMAIL].

I have no interest in what Martin has to say, and I also do not believe he would do as well as he thinks he would do.

Get Vincent Browne to chair it.

the groutch

ebbsy wrote: »

How about throwing Joe Higgins into the mix ? Whether you like him or not he is at least interesting to listen to. Unlike the other boring f@rts.

he's part of the ULA, but he'd probably just get harangued by Joan Burton again

Trotter

Enda Kenny should write to Micheál Martin agreeing that the 3 main party leaders should debate.

He should then write to Eamon Gilmore and Gerry Adams to arrange it.

sh1tstirrer

What is Martin going to debate about, how FF have fcuked the country up after being in office 13 years?

MrThrifty

Poor Enda... Agree that he made a good move today but it's a pity that RTE seemed to misrepresent him on the news broadcasts and make it seem like he didn't want to face FF in a 3 leader debate. His point was obviously that given that his party is going to be in power in a month's time, he wasn't gonna be dictated by FF who are currently a minority party. Very interesting to see how all this TV stuff pans out - I would think that FF and RTE have become best buddies over the years and so this will be a big advantage in many respects... Anyway, clearly the election battle has begun!!!

gandalf

Of course RTE pictured it that way. Firstly they have their special relationship with FF to consider. Secondly Enda asked for the location of the debate to be in a neutral venue with a neutral chairman so that doesn't feed into RTE's controlling mantra or help feed their so called big wage packet "presenters".

I agree with Trotter, Enda should agree to a debate between the big three parties and invite Gerry and Eamon to the debate.

Dirk Gently

oh dear, FG now telling Vincent Browne that he cant legally go ahead with a debate with Gilmore and Martin without Kenny, even if Kenny refuses to turn up.

Buford T Justice

whippet wrote: »

I would put my house on FF securing more seats than SF in this current election, especially when the electorate get a load of Gerry in all his glory having to actually answer specific questions on economic policies.

I'd be careful not to underestimate Sinn Féin this time around. Look what happened in Donegal at the by election.

MrThrifty wrote: »

Poor Enda... Agree that he made a good move today but it's a pity that RTE seemed to misrepresent him on the news broadcasts and make it seem like he didn't want to face FF in a 3 leader debate. His point was obviously that given that his party is going to be in power in a month's time, he wasn't gonna be dictated by FF who are currently a minority party. Very interesting to see how all this TV stuff pans out - I would think that FF and RTE have become best buddies over the years and so this will be a big advantage in many respects... Anyway, clearly the election battle has begun!!!

I thought he was completely mis represented even on Today FM news today. They painted a totally different picture to what he was actually saying to the media about the debates.

Micheal Martin is definitely an accomplished speaker and is a fresh face for FF, but seriously, who does he think he is? He's not in the chair for a few hours and he's already trying to dictate to the other parties how the debates should take place and with whom. Like Enda Kenny said, they are in no position to make demands here. I'm disappointed to see that labour has so easily hopped aboard with them on this one, if anything they should have had the same line as FG.

Lets face it, the greens and SF will both think this is a great idea as they will get included into something that would otherwise be done without them. If Labour towed the FG line here, it would very easily leave FF out on their own again as the party who are a law unto themselves thinking they can make whatever demands they like. This just gives FF more ammunition to highlight how different the two parties are and so wouldn't be suitable for Gov't.

bohsfan

gambiaman wrote: »

I tend to agree.
What i do know is that if RTE get their way, it will turnout to be a useless exercise in ratings.
Futile questions, even worse chairing is not what the country should be given.

I'd propose all party leaders to be 'interviewed' by a panel of neutral experts (economics/buisness/environment/health/education etc) who, unlike a lot of the presenters who will get the gig, won't be deferential or aligned and who will interrogate them like at a US Senate Hearing.
Tough questions, straight answers no bullsht accepted.
MM can then have his moment in the sun with Enda after, for the ratings like.

I totally agree. The whole 'debate' notion originated in America, where the people (usually) only have a choice between 2 options (represented by 2 people). The debate format works for that kind of scenario.

In Ireland, because of our political system, we always have many more players. This 'debate' system would not be effective when it takes place between large numbers. Rather than limit the numbers, we should change the format.

We should have a set panel, as mentioned above. This panel then debates issues with one party at a time. Then we we could get to the heart of their policies, rather than watch them fling mud at each other in the hope something sticks.

MrThrifty

Fingers, you're right about Labour -> Backstabbers! I wish they'd cop themselves on for the sake of the country and see the bigger picture - they will most definately end up in government with FG so now is the time to start working together. Unfortunately, parties being parties perhaps, they seem intent on scoring as many points as possible during the election and therefore winning as many of the potential FG seats... My view is that had Labour and FG worked together 6 to 12 months ago on offering a real alternative, then they probably could have taken FF down. I'm not saying I think this would necessarily have been a good thing economically, but it would have been possible. It seems a case though of 'each for their own' in this country...

Biggins

clown bag wrote: »

oh dear, FG now telling Vincent Browne that he cant legally go ahead with a debate with Gilmore and Martin without Kenny, even if Kenny refuses to turn up.

...And If SF is excluded, I'd expect there to be an immediate court case started by them for that exclusion.

molard

Biggins wrote: »

...And If SF is excluded, I'd expect there to be an immediate court case started by them for that exclusion.

in fairness would they not be correct.who called this debate ff,in the opinion polls they are 4th so why are they calling the debate .being in power for the last 13yrs has gone to their head .sorry ff ye are so yesterday's news.take note rte tv3 and the rest of the media we want change.