Labour Party

Farmer Pudsey

Has the oldest party in the state a need to decide where it political path is. It lloks like it will take a hammering in this election with no European seats for the first time in its history. It will also find itself as a rump in the council chamber's.

It tried to be a catch all party and it panic to get into government in the last election look as if it will cost it dear. Is it political place as a party of 15-20 TD'd. It is being squeezed fronm the left by SF and a group of left wing minin parties. From the centre it failure to protect workers (especially it abandonment of private sector workers) as opposed the unemployed makes it no longer a party of labour but rather a party of the ''vulnerable'' who loyalty to any party is questionable (SF may find this out if it ever gets into power).

If Labour follows FF into the political wilderness will this mark a virtual end to them leaving space for a new party of center who will target workers and small business people. Or else will we have an issue for 10+ years where FG will form a few governments with a rump of Independands like FF did from 1997-2010 with not political opposition.

It looks like for all Micheal Martins huffing and puffing the reentreance of Cowen and Ahern ex politicians will slow there recovery reminding the electrote of the great bust.

The left has fragmented with SF starting to gain traction and FG at the other end a centre right party it leaves a gap in the middle and maybe further to the right for 1-2 party's. If neither Labour or FF are capable of moving away from being catch all party's and targeting a specific part of the political spectrum will it leave a gap that will have to be filled so that we have an effective political opposition

Idbatterim

you know I never really thought of them as a catch all party like FF, but they are. They dont want any cuts to welfare or the PS, they are happy to hit workers though, including the working poor. I doubt we will see FG get a majority though, or even close to it and getting a few independents like Shane Ross, Stephen Donnelly etc on board. It would be interesting to see what they would do without being hamstrung by the Labour wasters...

The proportion of the electorate who don't have a clue how an economy and society functions, are going to be easy prey for all the left leaning parties...

It is being squeezed fronm the left by SF and a group of left wing minin parties. From the centre it failure to protect workers (especially it abandonment of private sector workers) as opposed the unemployed makes it no longer a party of labour but rather a party of the ''vulnerable'' who loyalty to any party is questionable (SF may find this out if it ever gets into power).

very well put, those left leaning are going to be by far the easiest to sway, bang out the rhetoric, the bankers, high earners etc. the centreist or right leaning ones tend to inform themselves or are likely to be more educated in general...

Godge

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

. From the centre it failure to protect workers (especially it abandonment of private sector workers) as opposed the unemployed makes it no longer a party of labour but rather a party of the ''vulnerable'' who loyalty to any party is questionable

I don't see any evidence for the statement that the Labour Party abandoned private sector workers. It reversed the cut in the minimum wage, it introduced more worker protection legislation etc. Beyond that, there is little any government can do directly to protect the wages and conditions of private sector workers. If business owners in Ireland want to keep the vast majority of company profit for themselves and not for their workers, there is little the government can do.

However, if you analyse the last general election, one evident trend was that public sector workers who had disproportionately voted for FF over the years moved to vote for Labour on the basis that Labour had promised that there would be no further cuts for public servants. Labour ignored this promise and will reap the fruits of that in every future election. Public servants vote in every election, they remember past misdeeds and Labour will pay.

sarumite

PS workers would be foolish to abandon labour. It was naive of Labour or any party to think that they could continue with the original economic plan considering that at that time projected economic outlook had not been matched in reality. Labour should be able to go into the election touting the HRA as one of their main achievements in government, having managed to protect the core pay of the vast majority of workers and ensured no compulsory redundancies occured. Relative to what we have seen in other countries and what we were hearing from FG, the changes under HRA were softer than what could have been envisaged and I would put this down to labour. While I am not a traditional voter I have been impressed with them in government. They have put the country before party and have been willing to make the hard decisions. As a junior member of government they were always going to have to concede some ground to the major party but I think they ca be proud of what they have done in government. Sadly labour relies on support from people who blame them for the austerity. Personally I have yet to see many of their traditional supporters provide an alternative to the current government strategy.

Sheldons Brain

Labour promised things they could not deliver. The "Labour" party passed legislation to renege on an industrial agreement and did so in the most cynical way possible. Anyone that thinks they put the country before expediency is naive. They deserve everything they'll get.

coolshannagh28

sarumite wrote: »

PS workers would be foolish to abandon labour. It was naive of Labour or any party to think that they could continue with the original economic plan considering that at that time projected economic outlook had not been matched in reality. Labour should be able to go into the election touting the HRA as one of their main achievements in government, having managed to protect the core pay of the vast majority of workers and ensured no compulsory redundancies occured. Relative to what we have seen in other countries and what we were hearing from FG, the changes under HRA were softer than what could have been envisaged and I would put this down to labour. While I am not a traditional voter I have been impressed with them in government. They have put the country before party and have been willing to make the hard decisions. As a junior member of government they were always going to have to concede some ground to the major party but I think they ca be proud of what they have done in government. Sadly labour relies on support from people who blame them for the austerity. Personally I have yet to see many of their traditional supporters provide an alternative to the current government strategy.

While diametrically opposed to Labour I have to profess my admiration for what they have achieved in government . They have very effectively protected the PS as well as social welfare and pensioners, whom I perceive as their core vote. Their experienced heavyweight ministers Rabbitte Quinn Howlin and Burton have played FG like amateurs and I am at a loss to understand how they can be polling so badly in light of this.

Farmer Pudsey

It amazes me the way those that Labour tried to protect as best it could are first to abandon it. In reality the penal rates of taxation left no choice but to cut spending. In reality the portion of spending that was on pay led to a readjustment in PS pay.

Those that really have suffered inequality those recruited into teaching and health posts that are lesser rates than long established workers. Maybe labour mistake was in trying to protect these that were deserter from FF and expected thanks and loyalty. These are the same core that abandoned it in 1997 to allow FF back into power to wreck the country and aided and abetted it with excessive wage rises and benchmarking.

Along with the unemployed (especially the long term) who it has cossetted by not being willing to cut the headline rate. It is being well rewarded by these supporters.It will be interesting to see where these flock to. The vulnerable wi head towards SF but who will PS turn to FF again, a resurgent green party(although not yet) or will it be independents.

I think if the government survives another 18 months (and Labour have little choice) FG may well survive any backlash and have about 70 seats ( maybe even get to the magical 80 that would allow it to go into power with a cabal of like minded Independents. Labour maybe a left wing rump and the FF rumps may be immaterial to the election outcome. SF may be he real opposition leading a left wing grouping of 50+TD's(inc Labour). Micheal Healy Rae, Mick Wallace may be king makers imagine that. Or Lucienda may be Enda chess queen taking all before her.

Idbatterim

I just posted this in another thread, but if FG arent the main party come the next election, I will lose my mind, any of the other parties will destroy all the hard work and all of the hard fought gains to put a proper stable tax base in place once and for all. They will do it out of ignorance, not malice.

Dob74

Labour has no business being in coalition with fine gael. It makes a mockery of our demorcratic system that a the two largest parties are in coalition together. The age of the the labour cabinet members is the most frightening thing. Time to move out the fg loving rabitte, Gilmore and Howlin.
Hopefully J burton will be leader and she can drive economic change rather than usual lets push property higher.
Kenny said in his speech before xmas he wants to reward productive workers. Pushing up property rewards non productive and older people. While punishes productive and the young.
Labour will get whats going to it for sleeping with the enemy. From a labour surporter.

alastair

Dob74 wrote: »

Labour has no business being in coalition with fine gael.

The previous rainbow coalition was pretty successful. If you're waiting for the day that an Irish left-wing party will govern outside a coalition that doesn't involve a centre party of some shade, you'll be waiting a long time.

Dob74 wrote: »

It makes a mockery of our demorcratic system that a the two largest parties are in coalition together. The age of the the labour cabinet members is the most frightening thing. Time to move out the fg loving rabitte, Gilmore and Howlin.
Hopefully J burton will be leader and she can drive economic change rather than usual lets push property higher.

Joan Burton is the same age as Pat Rabbitte, and older than Eamonn Gilmore and Brendan Howlin. None of them are particularly old - or remotely frightening on the back of their age.

Dob74 wrote: »

Kenny said in his speech before xmas he wants to reward productive workers. Pushing up property rewards non productive and older people.

What's rewarding workers got to do with pushing up property prices?

Dob74 wrote: »

While punishes productive and the young.
Labour will get whats going to it for sleeping with the enemy. From a labour surporter.

But not a supporter of 'frighteningly old' labour leaders, eh?

Godge

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

. They have very effectively protected the PS as well as social welfare and pensioners, whom I perceive as their core vote. Their experienced heavyweight ministers Rabbitte Quinn Howlin and Burton have played FG like amateurs and I am at a loss to understand how they can be polling so badly in light of this.

The bit in bold is nonsense.

Public sector workers have seen 3-4 pay cuts depending on which level they are at.
They have seen increased working hours and reduced annual leave.
They have seen a new pension scheme put in place which will reduce the benefits by about a third (given the figures presented by D/PER to the PAC).
They have seen reductions and cuts to other benefits as well.

Idbatterim

the amount of cuts in my mind is irrelevant, is the remuneration and I hate using this word accurate and "fair". I could be massively over paid for my private sector job, say oh I have had 2 or 3 paycuts of 1% 2% etc, i.e. virtually nothing if you are paying the marginal rate, and I'd be complaining, but I would have absolutely no room to complain... To my mind, Labour have got the absolute best deal possible for welfare recipients and the Ps... What was the alternative, just hike income or other taxes. FG are the senior party and to be honest, as a FG voter, I dont have anywhere else to go, so will vote for them, but I think they bowed to Labour too much...

Dyr

Dob74 wrote: »

Hopefully J burton will be leader and she can drive economic change rather than usual lets push property higher.

Burton is older than gilmore and its hard to distinguish her from the FG ministers at this stage.

Labour are probably goosed in the long term, mainly thanks to their sticky faction

Farmer Pudsey

Godge wrote: »

The bit in bold is nonsense.

Public sector workers have seen 3-4 pay cuts depending on which level they are at.
They have seen increased working hours and reduced annual leave.
They have seen a new pension scheme put in place which will reduce the benefits by about a third (given the figures presented by D/PER to the PAC).
They have seen reductions and cuts to other benefits as well.

The reality is Godge that PS wages, pensions and conditions had gone out of skew with the rest of the economy. However Labour protected them, Haddington Road only happened only after no other option, Croke {ark was the same. I like to know where the money would have come from if neither of these happened.

Recently I was discussing a wealth tax with a colleague, yesterday I handed him a SR rich list of the first 50, about 40% are already expats another few are in Ireland for tax reasons and most of the rest could run there operations outside of Ireland. It get little better after no 50 either.

The reality is that capital is too mobile, even PS workers have holiday homes in France. It hard to see where the tax to replace the PS cuts would have come from.

However we will leave that there, who should the PS vote for if not Labour. TBH the best government we had was the rainbow from '95-'97 it was a pity it was not reelected. However too many believed FF base promises, John O'Donoghue was the darling of the Gardai, after supporting there Blue flu.

Idbatterim

i reckon FF would be the best bet for PS. Sure they certainly over delivered for them last time. Sure we can start benchmarking again, send inflation crazy, competitiveness out the window, flood the country with money, send property stratospheric again, tie ourselves down to massive debt, be back here in another few years, hooray! To be honest, this may seem counter intuitive, the party that will be best for the economy will be the best for for all stake holders in society PS included. All the fighting is about money at the end of the day = economy. I think in the immediate short term and with no vision they benefit voting for irresponsible parties, but there are potentially huge prices to pay, not just financial... Their kids having to emigrate, the headf*ck of of every having to live through this again, makes me feel sick! The endless pessimism, squabbling, infighting, debate etc...

Sheldons Brain

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

The reality is Godge that PS wages, pensions and conditions had gone out of skew with the rest of the economy.

If that were true and these cuts had been designed to reflect this imbalance, then there would be a case. However, the cuts were not informed by any analysis of anything other than political advantage.

Idbatterim

by any analysis of anything other than political advantage.

political advantage for who?

Lou.m

sarumite wrote: »

PS workers would be foolish to abandon labour. It was naive of Labour or any party to think that they could continue with the original economic plan considering that at that time projected economic outlook had not been matched in reality. Labour should be able to go into the election touting the HRA as one of their main achievements in government, having managed to protect the core pay of the vast majority of workers and ensured no compulsory redundancies occured. Relative to what we have seen in other countries and what we were hearing from FG, the changes under HRA were softer than what could have been envisaged and I would put this down to labour. While I am not a traditional voter I have been impressed with them in government. They have put the country before party and have been willing to make the hard decisions. As a junior member of government they were always going to have to concede some ground to the major party but I think they ca be proud of what they have done in government. Sadly labour relies on support from people who blame them for the austerity. Personally I have yet to see many of their traditional supporters provide an alternative to the current government strategy.

I think the fact that we have seen massive corruption at the highest levels of this govt regarding the justice system, and refusal for the elite to also accept pay cuts in govt and the current mess of the health service will have to be addressed by them.

I think many hold them responsible for any grace in the budget for the country and in reigning in FG.

But the cuts are not distributed fairly.

Reilly has accepted that some people are being accidently caught up in attempts to remove cards from people who do not need them.He has still defended the “probity” policy. Alex White, the primary care minister, has on numerous occasions insisted there is “no such entity” as a discretionary medical card as it is simply another way to access the general medical card system. Despite 1,000 people losing the card every month last year and a discretionary medical card estimate not being stated this year for the first time in the HSE’s existence, the barrister has simply told interviewers this legal argument means no cull exists.

This is topsy turvy policy ...this is not a water charge this is a serious perhaps life saving or threatening issue for families.

Reilly has acknowledged the LAW is the problem. But the govt have not made a statement on what they will do. I am inclined to believe this indicates they will do nothing or that they will do something they think we will not accept without punishing them at the polls.

In 2011, there was a cast-iron guarantee that services would not be cut at Roscommon General Hospital, before they were cut after the vote.

The Coalition needs to explain exactly how officials will finally address the discretionary medical card scandal. Labour is very much at the center of this and their voters are more likely to be aggravated by it and they should know this. Everyone should be aggravated by it.

BACKBENCH Labour TDs have demanded that Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore immediately address the on-going controversy surrounding the removal of discretionary medical cards for elderly and sick people.BACKBENCH Labour TDs ..note that.

And what is the govt response?

http://www.thejournal.ie/discretionary-medical-cards-review-1474877-May2014/

MICHAEL NOONAN HAS said the government will review its approach to discretionary medical cards after this week’s European and local elections.

Their excuse?

The finance minister said action would not be taken on the matter this week to avoid it being dismissed as a “stunt”

The minister thinks it would be seen as a stunt? I don't think so it would be seen as something far more sinister. And it is.
This issue hurts labour much much more.

FF are worse ...SF are made up of ex terrorists and are too small...a govt of independents would be chaotic. FG is the govt we want out ....I wonder could labour spin it like that??If they can't they are done for.

jank

Godge wrote: »

I don't see any evidence for the statement that the Labour Party abandoned private sector workers. It reversed the cut in the minimum wage, it introduced more worker protection legislation etc. Beyond that, there is little any government can do directly to protect the wages and conditions of private sector workers. If business owners in Ireland want to keep the vast majority of company profit for themselves and not for their workers, there is little the government can do.m

However, if you analyse the last general election, one evident trend was that public sector workers who had disproportionately voted for FF over the years moved to vote for Labour on the basis that Labour had promised that there would be no further cuts for public servants. Labour ignored this promise and will reap the fruits of that in every future election. Public servants vote in every election, they remember past misdeeds and Labour will pay.

How about reducing the tax burden on workers by reforming the public sector and welfare? Labour doesn't care about workers it only cares about lobby groups.
Also if a company is profitable they are likely to employ more people, we can leave the warfare out of there.

glued

The Labour Party got into Government because they pushed the populist vote and they're suffering because a lot of what they said pre-election was completely unrealistic.

creedp

Lou.m wrote: »

The Coalition needs to explain exactly how officials will finally address the discretionary medical card scandal. Labour is very much at the center of this and their voters are more likely to be aggravated by it and they should know this. Everyone should be aggravated by it.

BACKBENCH Labour TDs have demanded that Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore immediately address the on-going controversy surrounding the removal of discretionary medical cards for elderly and sick people.BACKBENCH Labour TDs ..note that.

Im a bit confused by all of this about taking medical cards from people whose income is above the medicalcard income thresholds - surely if they don't qualify under the criteria they shouldn't have cards? Should someone who earns €100k a year but has a serious illness get a medical card? Maybe everyone should get a medical card? Would people be happy then I wonder? In all of this so called controversy I haven't heard too many people making the point that if people have an illness/medical condition that requires medical services then they should get those services. No in little old Ireland if you are ill it seems you must get a medical card - worry about accessing services afterwards.

I can never understand people who give out about people abusing the welfare system when they aren't entitled to it and at the same time get all worked up about giving a medical card, which is designed to give free GP services and prescribed drugs, fee public hospital services etc, to poor people, to people who are not poor. Instead people should be focusing their efforts to ensuring that everyone can access the services they need and in that context maybe non-medical card holders should be priopirised for those services ahead of medical card holders on the basis of clinical need! Why should a medical card holder have priority access to a service when a non-medical card holder has a much higher clinical need for that service? Could that be classed as a greater scandal that the current politically motivated medical card scandal I wonder?

Godge

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

The reality is Godge that PS wages, pensions and conditions had gone out of skew with the rest of the economy. However Labour protected them, Haddington Road only happened only after no other option, Croke {ark was the same. I like to know where the money would have come from if neither of these happened.

You keep coming out with rubbish like this. The facts are that the only thing that Croke Park and Haddington Road prevented was compulsory redundancy. This was a meaningless protection as the public service reduced its numbers in a voluntary and natural retirement way to reach the targets set by the government.

The reality is three to four paycuts, increased working hours, cheaper pension scheme for the government, decreased annual leave, reduction in other terms and conditions etc.

There are lots of other places for the money to come from - a decent property tax is one. Abolition of farming subsidies is two. Reduction in child benefit with some of the saving on direct provision of school books, uniforms and after-school care etc. I have listed many times alternative sources of funding.

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Recently I was discussing a wealth tax with a colleague, yesterday I handed him a SR rich list of the first 50, about 40% are already expats another few are in Ireland for tax reasons and most of the rest could run there operations outside of Ireland. It get little better after no 50 either.

The reality is that capital is too mobile, even PS workers have holiday homes in France. It hard to see where the tax to replace the PS cuts would have come from.

"Even PS workers have holiday homes in France". Your invective against PS workers comes through in those words. Are public servants to be always downtrodden and treated as servants and paid peanuts?

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

However we will leave that there, who should the PS vote for if not Labour. TBH the best government we had was the rainbow from '95-'97 it was a pity it was not reelected. However too many believed FF base promises, John O'Donoghue was the darling of the Gardai, after supporting there Blue flu.

What is worrying is that highly educated public servants (in general the level of educational achievement is higher in the public sector than the private sector) are moving to vote for SF or going back to vote for the FF that ruined the country. The fact that they have been victimised by the last two governments is part of that problem.

Lou.m wrote: »

I think the fact that we have seen massive corruption at the highest levels of this govt regarding the justice system, and refusal for the elite to also accept pay cuts in govt and the current mess of the health service will have to be addressed by them..

When you start a rant with the lie that there have not been pay cuts to politicians and senior civil servants, it is hard to take the rest of your post seriously.

Lou.m wrote: »

Reilly has accepted that some people are being accidently caught up in attempts to remove cards from people who do not need them.He has still defended the “probity” policy. Alex White, the primary care minister, has on numerous occasions insisted there is “no such entity” as a discretionary medical card as it is simply another way to access the general medical card system. Despite 1,000 people losing the card every month last year and a discretionary medical card estimate not being stated this year for the first time in the HSE’s existence, the barrister has simply told interviewers this legal argument means no cull exists. .

2 million people have medical cards - that number is not sustainable as the total number of people working is around 2 million. Each worker paying tax has therefore to support 1 person on a medical card as well as social welfare costs, policing costs etc. While there are deserving people losing out, in the context of 2 million people with medical cards, there must be a hell of a lot who don't need one out there.

jank wrote: »

How about reducing the tax burden on workers by reforming the public sector and welfare? Labour doesn't care about workers it only cares about lobby groups.
.

How many more pay cuts do you want to impose on civil servants?

Scofflaw

Lou_m wrote:

FF are worse ...SF are made up of ex terrorists and are too small...a govt of independents would be chaotic. FG is the govt we want out ....I wonder could labour spin it like that??If they can't they are done for.

This isn't a general election, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

realweirdo

Labour are the one party today who are in a no-win situation.

If Labour say taxes should be cut, as Pat Rabitte called for a few years ago, people will argue they are pandering to populism and the right and so on, or those on the right say they can't be trusted in government.

If they say taxes should be raised they get it from the working class and middle class, although are praised by some on the right for responsible economic policies.

In fairness to Labour, core social welfare payments have largely been protected, they inherited a FF created mess, and the IMF/EU deal was already done and dusted. As for water rates, every other European country has them including Northern Ireland, so it's not as if its something drastic that's being imposed. And some people bizarrely think water costs nothing to deliver to their homes.

Many Labour supporters are however working class and their economic literacy wouldn't exactly be the best.

View

realweirdo wrote: »

In fairness to Labour, core social welfare payments have largely been protected,

There has been little electoral benefit to Labour in doing so either now or on previous occasions in government.

Had they deliberately decided to dismantle the welfare system they probably wouldn't have lost much more votes than they did.

If the group of voters a party is trying to protect don't "reward" the party for doing so (by voting for them), there is no point in ANY political party acting for that group since those voters will turn on them too sooner or later.

Godge

View wrote: »

There has been little electoral benefit to Labour in doing so either now or on previous occasions in government.

Had they deliberately decided to dismantle the welfare system they probably wouldn't have lost much more votes than they did.

If the group of voters a party is trying to protect don't "reward" the party for doing so (by voting for them), there is no point in ANY political party acting for that group since those voters will turn on them too sooner or later.

Exactly the point I was making except in reverse.

Last time out the public servants voted for Labour and were subsequently targetted for cuts. No surprise to see Labour hammered.

cast_iron

realweirdo wrote: »

In fairness to Labour, core social welfare payments have largely been protected,

How many people on these payments actually vote though?

It's always tough being the minority party in government, but Labour way over sold what they would do in government, and they were never going to be able to live up to their promises.
That's why they are suffering today. They went back on almost everything their voters elected them on.

Interestingly, if Labour didn't go into bed with FG after the last election, where would they be today?
I'd argue they would be the most popular party in the country given that their core voters have veered for SF as they have no alternative.

Farmer Pudsey

Godge wrote: »

Exactly the point I was making except in reverse.

Last time out the public servants voted for Labour and were subsequently targetted for cuts. No surprise to see Labour hammered.

It was not so much that the public service was targeted as that there was little choice. The sums did not add up otherwise. The reality is that there is only so much tax you can rise, Labour biggest error was to protect headline welfare rates, this caused harder cuts in specific area's that hit sectional area's hard.

You made a point that SF would be the big winner in an earlier post, it is not happening IMO. They remain transfer unfriendly and 16% nationally is a poor showing, FF are still Toxic, the big winner in this election IMO is FG.

There vote while hit has not collapsed, Labour has no choice but to stay the course. This leaves them with the opportunity to recover ground in a rising economy with an election in early March 2016. it is in there interest to go as long as possible in government and Labour have little choice.

cast_iron wrote: »

How many people on these payments actually vote though?

It's always tough being the minority party in government, but Labour way over sold what they would do in government, and they were never going to be able to live up to their promises.
That's why they are suffering today. They went back on almost everything their voters elected them on.

Interestingly, if Labour didn't go into bed with FG after the last election, where would they be today?
I'd argue they would be the most popular party in the country given that their core voters have veered for SF as they have no alternative.

Labour made a serious error in the weeks before the last election. But as I thing a PD said the worst days in government are better than the best days in opposition. However if they had left FG win the last election they would have ended Civil War politics we would have moved more to a right/left divide. It is unliky that they would have won a overall left majority in 2016 but could have held out for a FG/FF government in 2016 which would have removed the existance of one of these parties. however the left is very fractured in it existance in Ireland

Tombo2001

the things I find interesting about Labour is that the party really did nothing different to what was expected of it at the last general election.

It absolutely delivered on its mandate, which was to get Ireland out of the economic mess it was in, in the most pain free way possible.

I think it is is reasonably fair to say that this has been achieved.

And yet the electorate is giving it a kick in the teeth.

I'm not a Labour supporter, I've never given the party a No.1.....

But personally, i think the bigger issue here is for the Irish electorate not the labour party. The electorate is constantly in the mindset of "lets lash out, but not in a way that disturbs the status quo too much"........The PDs, the Greens, the Labour Party.....all getting lashed out of it, unfairly so in my view.

Did the Greens really deserve to lose all their seats last time round?

Is the political arena really better because the PDs are no longer around?

.....while FG and FF remain the two largest parties effectively, or the two parties most likely to be the larger coalition partner.

At this point if you were leader of a minority party - why would you go into coalition. it would seem like a nuts move politically. And I think thats a problem the electorate has brought on itself.

Tombo2001

One additional point:

Arrogance:

John Whelan made the point this morning. There is a whiff of arrogance about the Labour leadership. Pat Rabitte in particular, and also Gilmore to some extent. While Ruairi Quinn, while I wouldnt say he is arrogant, he is most definitely a 'toff' more likely to be seen at the opera in the national concert hall than the bingo in Donaghmede.

The one thing that particularly annoyed me about Gilmore was this:

"
In a candid disclosure that will prove embarrassing for the Labour Party leader, a leaked US Embassy cable says he admitted a "public posture" of opposition to a second referendum because it was "politically necessary".
At the same time, Mr Gilmore fully expected a second referendum and said he would support it."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gilmore-took-opposing-views-in-public-and-in-private-26738375.html

However I dont know if it has particularly registered with the public.

alastair

Tombo2001 wrote: »

However I dont know if it has particularly registered with the public.

If it did, they would have recognised that this was a bit of politicking that wasn't far removed from the position of FF or FG. Asking the electorate to review their vote is always a delicate affair - with all kinds of BS rolled out to plámás people.

As to the arrogance of Pat Rabbitte? Isn't that his trademark? Sure you'd miss it if he changed.