What if FG & LAB can't agree?

the groutch

we've know that SF & the ULA won't go in with FG, and FG won't go in with FF
there doesnt seem to be enough like-minded independents for FG to get a majority
Labour won't go in with FF, which rules out any ABFG coalition

so what happens if Fianna Gael & Labour can't come to an agreement?

will we eventually end up with a FG-FF "tallaght strategy"?
will FG run as a minority and hope they get enough support from the opposition benches on every bill?
will we have ANOTHER election?

Fr Tod Umptious

the groutch wrote: »

we've know that SF & the ULA won't go in with FG, and FG won't go in with FF
there doesnt seem to be enough like-minded independents for FG to get a majority
Labour won't go in with FF, which rules out any ABFG coalition

so what happens if Fianna Gael & Labour can't come to an agreement?

will we eventually end up with a FG-FF "tallaght strategy"?
will FG run as a minority and hope they get enough support from the opposition benches on every bill?
will we have ANOTHER election?

They will come to an agreement

It's not in Labours interest not to, they have far too much to loose.

If talks were to fail and FG trudged on with independents, FG-FF "tallaght strategy" or a minority government then it would fall sooner rather than later.

Labour would be blamed for the not creating a strong stable government in the first place and the resulting election would see a swing away from Labour towards FG giving them an over all majority.

Killer Pigeon

the groutch wrote: »

we've know that SF & the ULA won't go in with FG, and FG won't go in with FF
there doesnt seem to be enough like-minded independents for FG to get a majority
Labour won't go in with FF, which rules out any ABFG coalition

so what happens if Fianna Gael & Labour can't come to an agreement?

will we eventually end up with a FG-FF "tallaght strategy"?
will FG run as a minority and hope they get enough support from the opposition benches on every bill?
will we have ANOTHER election?

I'm seeing this proposed FG/Lab coalition becoming increasingly unlikely by the day, this will all come to the fore at the Labour Conference on Saturday when Labour members will vote against going into coalition. I would see a FG minority government backed up by a few independents. With 76 seats all FG needs is 7 like-minded independents.

Other than that an election will be called - sure we all love a good ole election.

gcgirl

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

I'm seeing this proposed FG/Lab coalition becoming increasingly unlikely by the day, this will all come to the fore at the Labour Conference on Saturday when Labour members will vote against going into coalition. I would see a FG minority government backed up by a few independents. With 76 seats all FG needs is 7 like-minded independents.

Other than that an election will be called - sure we all love a good ole election.

I Read that senior FG tds want Labour as their stable mates, But personally i won't be surprised if Labour don't go in to coalition with FG, FG wont touch FF its in their mandate could be independents, back to paying off independents

Sad Professor

A FG/LAB coalition is the only show in town. They WILL reach agreement. All this hardball talk is nonsense to appease their membership. Sure, they are all great friends and were perfectly willing to go into government together last time, nothing has changed. The policy differences between them are neither here nor there imo. The main issue for both of them will be cabinet positions.

rodento

Looks like the Unions are coming out agains't the Idea:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Killer Pigeon

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

They will come to an agreement

It's not in Labours interest not to, they have far too much to loose.

If talks were to fail and FG trudged on with independents, FG-FF "tallaght strategy" or a minority government then it would fall sooner rather than later.

Labour would be blamed for the not creating a strong stable government in the first place and the resulting election would see a swing away from Labour towards FG giving them an over all majority.

I don't agree with this at all.

1. An FG/Labour government would have 113 TDs which means there will only be 53 TDs in opposition. With such a big government and such a small opposition who will keep the government in check and to account? Nobody will listen to the opposition mainly because the opposition isn't as credible as it once was, with FF and SF being the main parties.
2. Corruption is more likely to happen in a large powerful government than a small minority government.
3. Labour and FG have very different policies and would never agree with eachother in government leading to inefficiency.
4. It's in Labour's best interests to go into opposition. If they go into opposition in future elections politics will become more two sided again amongst the public - Labour -vs- FG, much like it was with FG and FF or as it is now in Britain with Labour -vs- the Conservatives. Labour will swallow the seats of other opposition opponents in future elections.
5. An end to Civil war politics. If Labour go into governement, they will invariably lose seats alongside FG as the large government becomes ever less popular in the future - as most governments do over a period of time. FF will become the largest party in the opposition which in the future could lead to them getting into government again. If Labour were to stay in opposition, they could keep a lid on FF and bring about a more clearly defined left-right divide in government and an end to Civil war politics.
6. It's not in FG best interest for Labour to be in opposition. I think FG recognise that Labour will indeed be a formidable foe in opposition which will damage them in the future. If Labour go into government they will shrink after successive elections rather than grow - a win for FG.

westtip

Sad Professor wrote: »

A FG/LAB coalition is the only show in town. They WILL reach agreement. All this hardball talk is nonsense to appease their membership. Sure, they are all great friends and were perfectly willing to go into government together last time, nothing has changed. The policy differences between them are neither here nor there imo. The main issue for both of them will be cabinet positions.

Yes truly spoken the smell of power is very corrupting.

FF is the joker in the pack. Tallaght strategies and all that

We need FF to show humility, for those in FF that agree with the FG manifesto to cross the floor of the house and to help reshape irish politics for ever - and they need to have no expectations of any promises of government positions etc. Ten TDs to leave FF join FG take the whip and in time rebrand FG with a new name a new identity as a National right of centre party, so there is some face saving.

Unfortunately this will not happen, as after the election all they (FF) are talking about is rebuilding their party. The party is afterall more important than the national interest.

Can you imagine what fun it woudl be to have a FG/FF with all the lefties sitting opposite. Politics would at long last become interesting.

Pete_Cavan

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

They will come to an agreement

It's not in Labours interest not to, they have far too much to loose.

If talks were to fail and FG trudged on with independents, FG-FF "tallaght strategy" or a minority government then it would fall sooner rather than later.

Labour would be blamed for the not creating a strong stable government in the first place and the resulting election would see a swing away from Labour towards FG giving them an over all majority.

I agree on both counts. It is not in Labours interest not to go into coalition with FG because, as part of a coalition, they will lose left wing voters to Sinn Fein/ULA for selling out. Also FG will blame Lab for watering down their policies and protecting their vested interests - the unions.

Equally, if Lab refuse to go into coalition, leaving FG to form a government with FF/Inds, they will alienate all those who voted for Lab in order to prevent a FG majority. I know FG will not have a majority government either way but with the difference in seats between FG and FF/Inds, FG will still implement all their own policies. Lab gained a lot of support in the last week of the election on the basis that they should be part of a coalition to prevent FG from having too much control. Going back on that would be a slap in the face to all those swing voters they picked up in the final week of the campaign.

In either event, Lab will lose voters next time round. Gilmore is ruining the party, which is a good thing imo.

the groutch

very good assessment Pete, damned if they do, and damned if they don't
Sinn Fein are going to be the big winners out of all this

Pete_Cavan

the groutch wrote: »

Sinn Fein are going to be the big winners out of all this

I wouldnt be too sure about that either. Sinn Fein will take votes from Lab, thats for sure, but if Joe Higgins and ULA form a new party they would be in a perfect position to fill the void and hoover up some of the left wing vote. The new party would not have the same baggage as SF.

Also, because a large part of our electorate do not vote along left-right lines, FG will be in a good position to take a large chunk of the swing voters Lab got this time. IMO FG will take an overall majority in the next election because they will be the only party capable of doing so and the public will have no appetite for another coalition if Lab mess this one around.

MaceFace

Labour have no choice about going in.
They have been banging on for the last two weeks that people HAD to vote for Labour as they were the only ones that could make sure the government were stable and fair

They got a much larger number of seats that it appeared they would two weeks ago, so there are doubts over whether they could do better - a lot of people voted for them only because they were scared of a majority FG government.

If they go into opposition, and if FG manage to put a government together with independents or support of FF from the opposition benches, Labour will lose a lot of seats in the next election (which will occur in the next 12-18 months) as their claims that they would form a fair government would be shown to be a lie and a sham.

seamus

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

I don't agree with this at all.

1. An FG/Labour government would have 113 TDs which means there will only be 53 TDs in opposition. With such a big government and such a small opposition who will keep the government in check and to account? Nobody will listen to the opposition mainly because the opposition isn't as credible as it once was, with FF and SF being the main parties.
2. Corruption is more likely to happen in a large powerful government than a small minority government.

I don't see how Labour would care about either of these things. The opposition can do feck all except stand on the sidelines and shout at the government.
At least when part of the coalition, if Labour disagree with a proposal they can block it. In opposition they can't, they're impotent.

Labour and FG have very different policies and would never agree with eachother in government leading to inefficiency.

We would have said the same about the Greens and FF. And Labour and FG have been in coalition before.

It's in Labour's best interests to go into opposition. If they go into opposition in future elections politics will become more two sided again amongst the public - Labour -vs- FG, much like it was with FG and FF or as it is now in Britain with Labour -vs- the Conservatives. Labour will swallow the seats of other opposition opponents in future elections.

This could be a double-edged sword tbh.

They could go into opposition, hoover up a few independents and come out OK when FG have fncked the country over. Or they could end up swallowing SF or going into agreement with SF, which would be political suicide. Any kind of association with SF will lose them votes in the next election.
Of course on the other side you have FF, who are still toxic. So in order to stay the course in opposition, Labour would have to present an alternative strategy or viable alternative government without getting cosy with either of the other two opposition parties. This will make the opposition sound very disjointed and incohesive when compared to a united FG.

On the other hand they could play a much shorter game. I think it's fair to say that the Greens could have come out of this whole fiasco a lot better if they'd pulled the plug on FF in 2008 or 2009. They could even have won more seats this time around with a well-timed withdrawal.
Labour could look at the same. Into coalition, watch the media, watch the sentiment and withdraw from Government early, blaming it all on FG's failure to act in the country's best interests. Labour then look like principled statespeople with no power agenda, and will increase their vote share next time around.

gcgirl

Labour It's a bit like there dead if they don't and there dead if they do, fair enough if FG got around the 60 seat mark but they are on 76 mark let them enlist the independents and give the people a proper choice

Pete_Cavan

gcgirl wrote: »

Labour It's a bit like there dead if they don't and there dead if they do, fair enough if FG got around the 60 seat mark but they are on 76 mark let them enlist the independents and give the people a proper choice

But in the two weeks leading up to the election, Labours campaign was based on "Dont let FG get in on their own, vote us in with them and we will keep them in line". If Labour now refuse to be part of the coalition (which gained them a lot of votes) they will lose credibility and a lot of votes in the next election.

Also, they will be disliked for passing up the opportunity of giving the country a stable government (FG and Inds will not be stable) which we need now more than ever. There will be no appetite for another coalition if Labour create a big fiasco now and FG will be able to run the next election campaign on the basis that they are the only party capable of forming a single party government, which will give them the majority they seek.

IMO Gilmore has handled things very badly over the past few months and everything he has done has played into FGs hands.

gcgirl

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

But in the two weeks leading up to the election, Labours campaign was based on "Dont let FG get in on their own, vote us in with them and we will keep them in line". If Labour now refuse to be part of the coalition (which gained them a lot of votes) they will lose credibility and a lot of votes in the next election.

Also, they will be disliked for passing up the opportunity of giving the country a stable government (FG and Inds will not be stable) which we need now more than ever. There will be no appetite for another coalition if Labour create a big fiasco now and FG will be able to run the next election campaign on the basis that they are the only party capable of forming a single party government, which will give them the majority they seek.

IMO Gilmore has handled things very badly over the past few months and everything he has done has played into FGs hands.

like i said previously they(FG) have 76 seats if the people at this time had of wanted Labour in coalition,FG would not have 76 seats which is 7 short of a majority