How is Labour faring?

I love Joan Burton

So far how do you think they are doing? have they gained your support? changed your opinion?

Dr Galen

What do you think?

Generally around here, we ask that the OP gives their thoughts on the matter in question as part of the first post. So........ Go for it!

I love Joan Burton

Dr Galen wrote: »

What do you think?

Generally around here, we ask that the OP gives their thoughts on the matter in question as part of the first post. So........ Go for it!

Well as a Labour supporter quite well, very progressive ideas and looking forward to secure this countrys future but im wondering has the general public seen this?

Dirk Gently

With the exception of Quinn in education they're pretty irrelevant. Your friend moan Burton made one of the quickest conversions from smoked salmon socialist to Thatcherite I've ever seen. Time for them to just merge with FG I reckon, it's not like they ever took their lefty aspirations seriously anyway.

nesf

Quinn's doing well in education I think.

meditraitor

I would like to re-iterate what previous poster have said about Rory Quinn, I do wish he had of got the finance portfolio though.....we really need someone of his calibre in finance.

Realtine

To be perfectly honest I had completely forgotten the name of the Tanaiste until the weekend when some comment was made about Libya.
Eamon something....oops there it goes again.

nesf

meditraitor wrote: »

I would like to re-iterate what previous poster have said about Rory Quinn, I do wish he had of got the finance portfolio though.....we really need someone of his calibre in finance.

He would have been good in Finance but I think that FG were always going to be getting it and he'd have been wasted in the Public Sector Reform role.

Given the context, education is a good place for him to be I think. It's a big department badly in need of serious reform.

bmaxi

Labour have betrayed their constituency. They are elected on the basis they represent the underprivileged in society and they should be pressing this case with FG rather than just signing up to every FG policy.The proposed property tax is one example, no mention of ability to pay, just of the dire consequences of not paying, this is not the Labour party of James Connolly or even Frank Cluskey.
In opposition, both Burton and, in my own constituency, Howlin, spoke of the iniquitous imposition by Property management companies, of a lien on the family home. Both are now senior Ministers in a cabinet that proposes to do exactly the same thing.
Before the usual outcry of "the country's in serious trouble, where do we get the money"? try applying the same criteria to the average Joe Soap, he's in serious trouble, where does he get the money?, Labour would appear to have embraced the Marie Antoinette philosophy of their partners
Labour's journey to the right wing seems to have been speeded up since the takeover by Democratic Left and leaves a large proportion of the electorate disenfranchised at the next election. Those who would aspire to be left of centre are left with little choice, (please don't anybody suggest SF) but I suppose we could always cut out the middle man and just add Merkel and Sarkozy to the ballot sheet.

sarumite

Generally impressed with Labour minister, Gilmour being the exception. He is still the leader of Labour, yet he seems to show very little leadership imo. He needs to be standing shoulder to shoulder with his fellow labour ministers. I would rate Quinn and Howlin much higher than Gilmour. I don't know enough about Burton, but from what I hear she has a very good understanding of her brief.

That said, Labour really haven't been tested yet. The two big elephants in the room are SW and PS pay and penions, neither of which have been tackled. If and when this happens, we will see. As such its early days and the toughest part of the challenges of being in government hasn't started yet.

Dirk Gently

nesf wrote: »

He would have been good in Finance but I think that FG were always going to be getting it and he'd have been wasted in the Public Sector Reform role.

Given the context, education is a good place for him to be I think. It's a big department badly in need of serious reform.

I'd agree with this. FG were always getting finance. Quinn in education is the one silver lining I see in Irish politics at the moment. I hope he stays on for a second term. As for the rest of Labour it appears they're only tagging along for the ride. The government is blue, I see no "labour" pink/red hue in there at all tbh. Maybe the OP can help me see what progressive labour ideas he seems to be pointing to?

astrofool

It was always going to be difficult for Labour when they were very much the minority partner due to FG getting within 10 of a majority.

Combined with there being no cash to spend on the "downtrodden".

Burton's portfolio will make or break them, she has to cut deep somehow, but give the impression that it's being done fairly. Working any job should get you more money and a better lifestyle than being on SW (genuine disability cases aside), and that's going to be hard to implement.

Manach

To determine if a minister is doing well in a post, in this instance Education, would there be some type of metrics to show this? - just curious in that workers seem to have an increasing number of productivity metrics applied to them.

Dannyboy83

I don't think they can claim the title 'Labour' anymore.
Labour = capitalist workers party

They should be renamed, "The Public Sector Bourgeois party";
or "The Champagne Socialists".....something a bit more honest...............I'm sure most people would laugh at a group of Nigerians calling themselves the KKK, or a group of Jews calling themselves the National Socialists.

I love Joan Burton

They are doing their best given the circumstance and lack of resources, look at Quinn for example!

Dannyboy83

I love Joan Burton wrote: »

They are doing their best given the circumstance and lack of resources, look at Quinn for example!

Doing their best? How is that?
They've completely betrayed their principals.

They've stood over the CPA.
The CPA means we have to screw 5/6ths of Irish society through tools such as the USC, slashing services without touching wages and so on...........in order to sustain the lavish lifestyle of the other 1/6th of Irish society.

It's ironic that this is the exact scenario Labour was founded to combat if you go back to 1912!

invinciblePRSTV

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I don't think they can claim the title 'Labour' anymore.
Labour = capitalist workers party

They should be renamed, "The Public Sector Bourgeois party";
or "The Champagne Socialists".....something a bit more honest...............I'm sure most people would laugh at a group of Nigerians calling themselves the KKK, or a group of Jews calling themselves the National Socialists.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Doing their best? How is that?
They've completely betrayed their principals.

They've stood over the CPA.
The CPA means we have to screw 5/6ths of Irish society through tools such as the USC, slashing services without touching wages and so on...........in order to sustain the lavish lifestyle of the other 1/6th of Irish society.

It's ironic that this is the exact scenario Labour was founded to combat if you go back to 1912!

Why are you acting so surprised Danny? Labour are anything but a party which represents the "underprivileged" in Irish society.

I don't have 2011 figures to hand yet but a quick perusal of the background of the LP's electoral support will show that traditionally, the majority of the LP's support comes from the middle and lowe middle class income groups, exactly the kind of people most likely to be working in the professions cosseted by the CPA.

Fwiw i imagine the 2011 figures will show a substantial increase in support to the LP from the working class bracket, but don't kid yourself, Labour have long being a party of middle Ireland and its narrow interests. Anyone with a knowledge of the LP's internal groups will be aware of that.

dsmythy

I think either way Labour will be punished harder than Fine Gael in the next election bar an economic improvement.

nuac

Quinn, Rabbitte, Howlin impressing. Rest do not imho

blahfckingblah

labour are doing exactly as i expected and thats not a good thing, bowing down to Enda and his cronys, introducing a seriously flawed internship scheme thats being abused left right and centre. When FG or Labour are questioned on anything untoward we get the stock "its Fianna Fails Fault" answer, why can't they be accountable for the policies the impliment.

Dirk Gently

blahfckingblah wrote: »

labour are doing exactly as i expected and thats not a good thing, bowing down to Enda and his cronys, introducing a seriously flawed internship scheme thats being abused left right and centre. .

best reason why no working person should vote labour again. no point reversing the min wage cut if they just replace the jobs market with an unpaid labour scheme. minimum wage is now in effect unpaid labour across all sectors abusing the scheme and you're right, during the campaign it was all "labours way" and renegotiating the imf/eu deal but now the default response is "due to the previous government" and "according to the eu/imf".

Alopex

Can't believe the praise of Quinn. He hasn't delivered on getting the schools off the RC church. He's just made noises.

He has ruled out loans for student fees whilst stating fees will increase from the current level of 2000euro. So basically ensuring only the rich will go to college.

How can anyone call that left wing or progressive?

Alopex

nesf wrote: »

Quinn's doing well in education I think.

please explain why

blahfckingblah

completely agree with your criticism of the fees alopex, shambolic, i think they will be wiped out next time round and theres a long way to go yet. unfortunately

Lockstep

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I don't think they can claim the title 'Labour' anymore.
Labour = capitalist workers party

They should be renamed, "The Public Sector Bourgeois party";
or "The Champagne Socialists".....something a bit more honest...............I'm sure most people would laugh at a group of Nigerians calling themselves the KKK, or a group of Jews calling themselves the National Socialists.

This is pretty much the dichotomy every left wing party has: when you're poor and a lefty, you get derided as being lazy or unproductive and so seeking to leech off those who are richer and smarter than you.
If your wealthy and a lefty, the term champagne socialist gets trotted out at every possible opportunity.

Lockstep

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Why are you acting so surprised Danny? Labour are anything but a party which represents the "underprivileged" in Irish society.

I don't have 2011 figures to hand yet but a quick perusal of the background of the LP's electoral support will show that traditionally, the majority of the LP's support comes from the middle and lowe middle class income groups, exactly the kind of people most likely to be working in the professions cosseted by the CPA.

Fwiw i imagine the 2011 figures will show a substantial increase in support to the LP from the working class bracket, but don't kid yourself, Labour have long being a party of middle Ireland and its narrow interests. Anyone with a knowledge of the LP's internal groups will be aware of that.

That's hardly true. Like the other two large parties, Labour has a diverse support base (albeit, more urban than the other 2)
For example, in the working class Dublin South Central constituency, Labour got over a third of the vote. Ditto Dublin North East.
The same holds true in the 2009 elections, where in the deprived constituencies of Dublin, Labour performed extremely well.

Have you any evidence at all that Labour is the party of the middle class? This is something that seems to appear on Boards a lot but noone ever seems to have any evidence of it.

vellocet

Manach wrote: »

To determine if a minister is doing well in a post, in this instance Education, would there be some type of metrics to show this? - just curious in that workers seem to have an increasing number of productivity metrics applied to them.

For every 100 schools he removes from the Church's clutches he gets a silver star. For every 10 silver stars he gets, he gets a gold one.

invinciblePRSTV

Lockstep wrote: »

Have you any evidence at all that Labour is the party of the middle class? This is something that seems to appear on Boards a lot but noone ever seems to have any evidence of it.

Sure do, check out the 'How Ireland Voted' series which has stats on party support by income bracket (based on exit polls admittedly). The 2007 copy here in front of me has figures which indicates that the LP had higher % support in the higher income brackets then it did in the lower brackets in 2002 & 2007.

I expect that ratio to have changed in the 2011 election.

Btw I'm not saying the LP are 'the party of the middle class', but am saying that a sizeable proportion of its support and membership is definitely middle class. Which in turn is reflected in its policy achievements. After all whether it was Niamh Bhreatnachs free fees in the 1990s, or Pat Rabbitte's "18%" manouevere claim in 2007, the middle ground is where Labour appeal to in order to win seats.

Alopex

Lockstep wrote: »

This is pretty much the dichotomy every left wing party has: when you're poor and a lefty, you get derided as being lazy or unproductive and so seeking to leech off those who are richer and smarter than you.
If your wealthy and a lefty, the term champagne socialist gets trotted out at every possible opportunity.

You've hit the nail on the head for the likes of Richard Boyd Barrett or Clare Daly. Its a tough break for a genuine lefties due to the factors you pointed out.

But why on earth we even describe a right wing party like labour as being on the left is what I would love to know.

They're like British new labour now. Just never announced it.

Lockstep

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Sure do, check out the 'How Ireland Voted' series which has stats on party support by income bracket (based on exit polls admittedly). The 2007 copy here in front of me has figures which indicates that the LP had higher % support in the higher income brackets then it did in the lower brackets in 2002 & 2007.

I expect that ratio to have changed in the 2011 election.

Do you have any evidence to hand (that others can easily access?)

Historically, Labour was a party for the DE categories whereas since the 1990s, this has been levelled out by increased support in the higher income brackets. (Politics in the Republican of Ireland, p.175)
This does not mean that Labour is a party with a majority middle class support base (as your initial post claimed)
Rather, that Labour is attracting support from a broader background as it moves into the political mainstream.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Btw I'm not saying the LP are 'the party of the middle class', but am saying that a sizeable proportion of its support and membership is definitely middle class.

The same as every major party really, although Labour has a more urban support base (both middle class and working class) whereas FF and FG are far more rural.

invinciblePRSTV

Lockstep wrote: »

Do you have any evidence to hand (that others can easily access?).

I don't unfortunately but to be fair, 'How Ireland Voted' is the pre-eminent academic series on Irish elections, with contributions from the same people in the references you've given, so it's a valid reference and I'm not trying to con ya!. (p.115 btw)

Lockstep wrote: »

Historically, Labour was a party for the DE categories whereas since the 1990s, this has been levelled out by increased support in the higher income brackets. (Politics in the Republican of Ireland, p.175)

Historically being the key phrase here. As mentioned elsewhere, it's policy outlook now and for quite some while has been decidedly middle of the road, and, as the era of Trade Union membership continues to die out, will continue to present itself as a moderate centrist party with SF and the ULA mopping up it's remaining working class support, something I'm quite certain we'll see in action when the next GE occurs.

Lockstep wrote: »

This does not mean that Labour is a party with a majority middle class support base (as your initial post claimed)

I don't have figures to hand as I don't think they exist, but if I were a betting man I'd wager the majority, or if not a majority then close enough to it, of the LP's active membership would be middle class. At least that's been my own experience of the party at local and student level.

Lockstep wrote: »

Rather, that Labour is attracting support from a broader background as it moves into the political mainstream.

Labour moved into the political mainstream? from where? Are we talking about the same LP here? eg the one that has been a willing coalition partner for centre right parties for nearly half a century?

The same one whose Leader and cabinet members for decades gladly kissed the ring of the Archbishops when DE convened?

Sorry Lockstep, but apart from the brief '70s will be socialist' era I'd class Labour as generally being very firmly in the political mainstream for most if its existence, certainly since WWII anyway.

Lockstep wrote: »

The same as every major party really, although Labour has a more urban support base (both middle class and working class) whereas FF and FG are far more rural.

Wasn't always the case of course, the LP had significant support amongst rural labourers in times gone by. Indeed my own GF was a supporter and member a long, long, long time ago.

Pride Fighter

Alopex wrote: »

Can't believe the praise of Quinn. He hasn't delivered on getting the schools off the RC church. He's just made noises.

He has ruled out loans for student fees whilst stating fees will increase from the current level of 2000euro. So basically ensuring only the rich will go to college.

How can anyone call that left wing or progressive?

That is a complete lie. I went to University and I'm from a lone parent family living in one of the most working class areas in Dublin. I did not have to pay anything to go to University and I got grants to go. The same situation will exist, even if the student contribution goes up. I believe the cut off is 46k combined parental income to get grants and have the contribution paid for, in essence, those who cant afford to go to University, can go.

Pride Fighter

Pride Fighter wrote: »

That is a complete lie. I went to University and I'm from a lone parent family living in one of the most working class areas in Dublin. I did not have to pay anything to go to University and I got grants to go. The same situation will exist, even if the student contribution goes up. I believe the cut off is 46k combined parental income to get grants and have the contribution paid for, in essence, those who cant afford to go to University, can go.

My understanding is that there was talk of some of the county grants being reduced as they can't keep up with the new fees...

nesf

Alopex wrote: »

please explain why

He's planning on bringing in badly needed reform to second level with random unannounced inspections of teaching staff and continuous assessment making up part of your Leaving and Junior certs. It's not been implemented yet but it's a good start.

Manach

nesf wrote: »

He's planning on bringing in badly needed reform to second level with random unannounced inspections of teaching staff and continuous assessment making up part of your Leaving and Junior certs. It's not been implemented yet but it's a good start.

Once implemented, would there be plans to sanction, and ultimately dismiss a % of poorly performing staff? Figures for England/Wales show 18 were fired, over a 40yr period - link - guardian.
So inspections might look good on paper, if there is no bite, resolve or resources behind them, so what.

nesf

Manach wrote: »

Once implemented, would there be plans to sanction, and ultimately dismiss a % of poorly performing staff? Figures for England/Wales show 18 were fired, over a 40yr period - link - guardian.
So inspections might look good on paper, if there is no bite, resolve or resources behind them, so what.

The very fact that there will be inspections means many teachers who aren't performing that well might get their act together. Sure, some won't but to argue that they have zero effect because few are fired misses the point of them I think.

Pride Fighter

bluewolf wrote: »

My understanding is that there was talk of some of the county grants being reduced as they can't keep up with the new fees...

You're correct.

However, people are saying the grant has been cut when that is not true. The block grant government is giving is remaining the same, but due to supply and demand, there is going to be a net reduction of the grant by about 60%. The grant is being reduced as a result.

The grant is given on top of the council paying the student contribution. People will still get the 2k waived, just they'll get less money off the councils for books etc.

People from poor backgrounds will still get free education. Just the supporting grant wont be as high.

thebman

I thought the Labour candidate on vincent browne the other night when they were talking about education did very well. Can't recall his name though.

The woman hosting did a good job but did reveal slight bias for the churches position at times IMO. If I recall she has previously been on with Vincent Browne labeling her as a FG supporter but she isn't actually in the party but her father was or some such overly complicated position :P

So I'm not all that surprised. I think if Labour manage to decouple the church from the states schools, I will be impressed with their time in government especially if they do it on FG's watch.

doc_17

Labour are doing what every party does....tell you what you want to hear in order to get in and once there do almost the opposite of everything you said you were going to do and blame the others who were there before you.

Pride Fighter

thebman wrote: »

I thought the Labour candidate on vincent browne the other night when they were talking about education did very well. Can't recall his name though.

The woman hosting did a good job but did reveal slight bias for the churches position at times IMO. If I recall she has previously been on with Vincent Browne labeling her as a FG supporter but she isn't actually in the party but her father was or some such overly complicated position :P

So I'm not all that surprised. I think if Labour manage to decouple the church from the states schools, I will be impressed with their time in government especially if they do it on FG's watch.

Aodhan O'Riordain is the fellow you're on about. He's an ex- primary school principle and is only 35 years old, young for a Labour politician. You're perfectly right, education is something very important to Labour and if they can do what you say they should do, their time in government will be deemed a success. There is no reason why they should not, seeing as there will be more wriggle room in terms of money, Labour and FG said they'd get a 1% interest rate and got 2% so there will be an extra 4-500 million per year that can potentially be re-invested.

Dirk Gently

Pride Fighter wrote: »

so there will be an extra 4-500 million per year that can potentially be re-invested.

There's also 100's of millions worth of unsecured bonds being paid out every month. 3 billion worth of unsecured bonds in one week alone next month.

are you suggesting that the interest rate "saving" "might" "perhaps" "potentially" be re-invested in education?

Pride Fighter

Dirk Gently wrote: »

There's also 100's of millions worth of unsecured bonds being paid out every month. 3 billion worth of unsecured bonds in one week alone next month.

are you suggesting that the interest rate "saving" "might" "perhaps" "potentially" be re-invested in education?

There is also the 5 billion euro worth of bonds that have been burned since the new government has entered office. I am saying the 500 million could be re-invested in education. I'm not saying it will be.

Manach

When you say re-invested, you mean to spend on education? In that investment denotes a definite return on money spent, whilst spending money is money gone, lacking a quantifiable result. I've paid money as an adult to get extra education. This was done mostly (ignoring that ancient Greek course) to improve my CV, a definite aim and a definite return. The State spending more money, when they are incapable of the basic maths of balancing a budget is not investment, just the same old over-spending.

Lockstep

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I don't unfortunately but to be fair, 'How Ireland Voted' is the pre-eminent academic series on Irish elections, with contributions from the same people in the references you've given, so it's a valid reference and I'm not trying to con ya!. (p.115 btw)

Fair enough. I don't have a copy so I can't verify or discredit what you're saying. However, given the recent election results and historical trend of Labour support it seems very out of kilter.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Historically being the key phrase here.

Yes and as I mentioned, this support isn't gone. Labour's increased support is from more ABC people voting for it, with it's DE support remaining relatively static (again Politics in the Republic of Ireland has a graph on this) with Labour's increasing support since the 1990s being a correlation with the increased numbers of ABC voters supporting it. Not with declining working class support.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

As mentioned elsewhere, it's policy outlook now and for quite some while has been decidedly middle of the road, and, as the era of Trade Union membership continues to die out, will continue to present itself as a moderate centrist party with SF and the ULA mopping up it's remaining working class support, something I'm quite certain we'll see in action when the next GE occurs.

Labour's working class support still remains strong, given the results in both the most recent local and general election. If anything, it's a marked improvement on 2007.

Would this be the same SF that is now parading middle class representatives like Mary Lou and being ditched by the likes of working-class community activists like Christy Burke?
Your argument also relies on the idea that the working class are somehow revolutionary or far left. Which isn't the case.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I don't have figures to hand as I don't think they exist, but if I were a betting man I'd wager the majority, or if not a majority then close enough to it, of the LP's active membership would be middle class. At least that's been my own experience of the party at local and student level.

A very bold statement to make. Labour does well in middle class areas like South Dublin but does far far better in working class areas like Dublin South Central, with the local elections giving an even more candid showcase of the support that Labour enjoys in working class areas.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Labour moved into the political mainstream? from where? Are we talking about the same LP here? eg the one that has been a willing coalition partner for centre right parties for nearly half a century?

Are you honestly saying that modern day Labour is less radical than Labour in bygone days? Coalitions aside (As it's coalitions have been with the likes of Clann na Poblachta, Just Society Fine Gael. Inb4 the once off coalition with FF)

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

The same one whose Leader and cabinet members for decades gladly kissed the ring of the Archbishops when DE convened?

What does this have to do with...well...anything?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Sorry Lockstep, but apart from the brief '70s will be socialist' era I'd class Labour as generally being very firmly in the political mainstream for most if its existence, certainly since WWII anyway.

Mostly as it was a prop for FG and has moved more and more away from the trade union militancy towards it's relative moderation these days when you have Burton railing against those who claim the dole as a lifestyle choice and Quinn asserting the need to reintroduce third level fees?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Wasn't always the case of course, the LP had significant support amongst rural labourers in times gone by. Indeed my own GF was a supporter and member a long, long, long time ago.

It's pretty much always been the case. The last time Labour enjoyed significant rural support was back in the era of landless labourers and TJ O'Connell.

Using your girlfriend is a pretty disingenous example. I'm a Labour supporter living in rural Ireland. That doesn't prove anything. At all.

nesf

Lockstep wrote: »

Yes and as I mentioned, this support isn't gone. Labour's increased support is from more ABC people voting for it, with it's DE support remaining relatively static (again Politics in the Republic of Ireland has a graph on this) with Labour's increasing support since the 1990s being a correlation with the increased numbers of ABC voters supporting it. Not with declining working class support.

Reference? I find this quite surprising with the surge in support for the ULA and Sinn Fein which are both deep DE parties support wise.

anymore

Alopex wrote: »

Can't believe the praise of Quinn. He hasn't delivered on getting the schools off the RC church. He's just made noises.

He has ruled out loans for student fees whilst stating fees will increase from the current level of 2000euro. So basically ensuring only the rich will go to college.

How can anyone call that left wing or progressive?

Lets be fair Ieland has some of the most generous Social Welfare provisions in the world ! If you want a life of leisure and regular income, join the SW brigade :rolleyes:
Of course if you are self-employed and the business is going down the tube =- emigrate - Ireland doesnt want your sort ! Forget about the jobs you have provided yourself in the past, forget about all the taxes you have paid in the past - you are not wanted - you are regarded as a parasite - Up The Workers Republic !

blahfckingblah

sorry, "ABC" "DE"????

vellocet

blahfckingblah wrote: »

sorry, "ABC" "DE"????

Moirketing speak for class and income. A1 is a barrister from Dalkey. E is an unemployed chap called Whacker.

bmaxi

anymore wrote: »

Lets be fair Ieland has some of the most generous Social Welfare provisions in the world ! If you want a life of leisure and regular income, join the SW brigade :rolleyes:
Of course if you are self-employed and the business is going down the tube =- emigrate - Ireland doesnt want your sort ! Forget about the jobs you have provided yourself in the past, forget about all the taxes you have paid in the past - you are not wanted - you are regarded as a parasite - Up The Workers Republic !

What Ireland has is, not the most generous SW provisions in the world but the most easily accessible and poorly policed SW provisions. I refer of course to the likes of, but not exclusively, the "single mother" in Local Authority housing, with rent allowance, medical card and all the trimmings, who also has a live in partner, possibly earning a good wage. There is virtually no policing of this practice, I see it all around me where I live and AFAIK the usual notice period of a SW officer's visit is at least two weeks. WTF? :eek:
There are of course other examples, e.g. tradesmen in the black economy but there is virtually no provision to verify claims. I heard on radio last week of a detective agency willing to offer services on a "no foal, no fee" basis, Joan Burton is aware of this but it remains to be seen whether she will act.
The Labour party was set up to protect the working classes from exploitation. Over the years , more and more workers have become lower middle class and would have moved from traditional working class areas but would still class themselves as workers and more importantly, would be viewed by the upper and middle classes as workers, this probably explains the spread of the Labour party's demographic but does not justify the party's move to the right wing, the principles remain.

thebman

In fairness, Labour are in power with FG so it isn't really their right wing policies. They are just the minority partner of a right wing government coalition.

Godge

bmaxi wrote: »

Labour have betrayed their constituency. They are elected on the basis they represent the underprivileged in society and they should be pressing this case with FG rather than just signing up to every FG policy.The proposed property tax is one example, no mention of ability to pay, just of the dire consequences of not paying, this is not the Labour party of James Connolly or even Frank Cluskey.
In opposition, both Burton and, in my own constituency, Howlin, spoke of the iniquitous imposition by Property management companies, of a lien on the family home. Both are now senior Ministers in a cabinet that proposes to do exactly the same thing.
Before the usual outcry of "the country's in serious trouble, where do we get the money"? try applying the same criteria to the average Joe Soap, he's in serious trouble, where does he get the money?, Labour would appear to have embraced the Marie Antoinette philosophy of their partners
Labour's journey to the right wing seems to have been speeded up since the takeover by Democratic Left and leaves a large proportion of the electorate disenfranchised at the next election. Those who would aspire to be left of centre are left with little choice, (please don't anybody suggest SF) but I suppose we could always cut out the middle man and just add Merkel and Sarkozy to the ballot sheet.

Very funny post criticising Labour's support for a property tax.

Property and wealth taxes are number one priorities for most socialist parties in the world. So Labour should be stronger in calling for one and it is a sign of how right-wing this country is that we don't have a property tax.

The underpriviliged in society do not own property. I was recently helping a low-paid friend look for rented property in Dublin and that reminded me how lucky those of us who can live in our own home (even if we are still paying the bank for it) really are. A lot of people in Ireland need a reality check as to how good they have it even still.