General Irish Government discussion thread [See Post 1805]

Shefwedfan

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I think we both know that anything the government did would have been criticised by these very same people.

If they paid 10m for 6months or whatever it will still be "too much".

The contracts should be scrutinised of course, and they will, by the C&AG in time.

I would expect every party and paper in Ireland is looking to scrutinise the contract. In reality I don't expect any party to come out and say it was a great deal. They will all come out with alternatives now as it is after the case and the hospitals didnt get used


Unless someone in the hospitals comes out and says of we could have done it for free then it is pointless exercise.



Or they find something in contract which meant they paid over the odds. It is too easy to fire mud after the situation, prior to it nobody had any issue with trying to get the private hospitals onboard

BonnieSituation

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I would expect every party and paper in Ireland is looking to scrutinise the contract. In reality I don't expect any party to come out and say it was a great deal. They will all come out with alternatives now as it is after the case and the hospitals didnt get used


Unless someone in the hospitals comes out and says of we could have done it for free then it is pointless exercise.



Or they find something in contract which meant they paid over the odds. It is too easy to fire mud after the situation, prior to it nobody had any issue with trying to get the private hospitals onboard

Exactly.

As I said a few posts back, the government were being lauded at the time for their approach. No hurlers on the ditch then.

efanton

Chips Lovell wrote: »

So instead of a block takeover of entire hospitals for the period, you reckon they should have had a more flexible arrangement and only acquired as many beds as they needed at a particular time?

Was such a deal on offer? And was it possible from a practical perspective, e.g. can you go from taking 10% capacity one week to 50% the next, can COVID and non-COVID patients share facilities like this, etcl?

We have a situation where the government block booked beds, paid for them, but used very little of them. The private hospitals agreed to provide at cost, but did not expect so few to be used.

Because so few of these beds are being used but reserved for government use, and labs are being devoted to covid testing ,private consultants are unable to carry on regular treatments for other patients.
Its a complete balls up.

Had the government put private hospitals on notice that their beds could be commandeered on 3 to 4 days notice the private hospitals could have by and large carried on. The majority of their patients would not required to stay in hospital for more than three days. Day surgeries, consultations, and minor operations could have all continued as normal as long as they did not require a stay of more than 3 or 4 days in hospital. The public health system could have also transferred some of its workload to the private hospitals.
If the government had to use private hospital for the treatment of covid positive patients they could have easily taken over the private hospitals one at a time as demand necessitated.

What we have instead is the government spending hundreds of million of euro's and getting very little for it, private hospitals unable to practice normally despite the fact they are not treating covid patients, and waiting lists that were already huge now getting longer.

It would have suited both the public and private health system to have private hospitals working as normal but on standby if the state needed the extra beds. Private hospitals would continue to make profits, private patient and those on public waiting list could have continued to be treated for most elective surgeries (the government obviously paying the private hospitals for this), and the government would be saving hundreds of millions of euro's

Shefwedfan

efanton wrote: »

We have a situation where the government block booked beds, paid or them, but used very little of them. The private hospitals agreed to provide at cost, but did not expect so few to be used.

Because so few of these beds are being used but reserved for government use, and labs are being devoted to covid testing ,private consultants are unable to carry on regular treatments for other patients.
Its a complete balls up.

Had the government put private hospitals on notice that their beds could be commandeered on 3 to 4 days notice the private hospitals could have by and large carried on. The majority of their patients would not required to stay in hospital for more than three days. Day surgeries, consultations, and minor operations could have all continued as normal as long as they did not require a stay of more than 3 or 4 days in hospital. The public health system could have also transferred some of its workload to the private hospitals.
If the government had to use private hospital for the treatment of covid positive patients they could have easily taken over the private hospitals one at a time as demand necessitated.

What we have instead is the government spending hundreds of million of euro's and getting very little for it, private hospitals unable to practice normally despite the fact they are not treating covid patients, and waiting lists that were already huge now getting longer.

It would have suited both the public and private health system to have private hospitals working as normal but on standby if the state needed the extra beds. Private hospitals would continue to make profits, private patient and those on public waiting list could have continued to be treated for most elective surgeries (the government obviously paying the private hospitals for this), and the government would be saving hundreds of millions of euro's

Why would a private hospital allow that?

Operations etc are planned months in advance. Are you saying a hospital was supposed to keep booking in patients and then at the flick of a switch just cancel them all?

How could a hospital plan anything?

If the government tried that, the private hospitals would tell them where to go and rightly so.

You keep referring to very little, just because it put you out. I am sure if you talked to the hundred of people who got treatment in the private hospitals they woudl disagree.

BonnieSituation

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Why would a private hospital allow that?

Operations etc are planned months in advance. Are you saying a hospital was supposed to keep booking in patients and then at the flick of a switch just cancel them all?

How could a hospital plan anything?

If the government tried that, the private hospitals would tell them where to go and rightly so.

You keep referring to very little, just because it put you out. I am sure if you talked to the hundred of people who got treatment in the private hospitals they woudl disagree.

Not to mention the possibility of him catching Covid while there, then where would we be?

efanton

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Why would a private hospital allow that?

Operations etc are planned months in advance. Are you saying a hospital was supposed to keep booking in patients and then at the flick of a switch just cancel them all?

How could a hospital plan anything?

If the government tried that, the private hospitals would tell them where to go and rightly so.

You keep referring to very little, just because it put you out. I am sure if you talked to the hundred of people who got treatment in the private hospitals they woudl disagree.

Why would the private hospitals allow that? one word PROFIT.

If they could continue normally they would not be losing any money.
But because of this agreement they cannot continue normally. They are currently getting paid for the costs of the bed, and the bed only being that it is empty, but they a losing the profit from any treatment that would have been made from the patient occupying that bed.
With empty beds all they are getting is the agreed cost for the bed.

The result is private hospital losing profits needlessly, patients requiring day surgeries or minor operations not getting them, and the government wasting huge sums of money on beds they are not using. It's a no win situation for the public health service, the private health service and those awaiting hospital treatment. Everyone loses.

The vast majority of treatment given by hospitals requires only over night or short term occupancy of a bed (3 to 4 days). Planning for that requires no change. Admittedly there would be issues over longer term care but surely it was not beyond the intelligence of Simon Harris and Private hospital management to come to some sort of arrangement . Maybe reserved wards, redirecting long term care to a smaller number of hospital, etc ,etc.

It is nothing to do with my personal circumstances. The way the government have gone about this they have not only added unnecessary expense, they have reduced delivery of health care. As stated previously I would sooner face delay and see those beds used, especially for the elderly with covid.

Shefwedfan

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Not to mention the possibility of him catching Covid while there, then where would we be?

:p
I have no idea why people think a Private Hospital has to do anything the governement says. They can just turn around and say no. Based on the response here from a person with a little twinge the patients that would continue to get treatment wouldnt give a poo.



The government going to private hospitals and more or less saying they want them on call in case they need them would never have worked. No company in their right mind would even consider it.


Then we would have the country in uproar because the private hospitals are not available and the UK has them and blah blah blah.

Shefwedfan

efanton wrote: »

Why would the private hospitals allow that? one word PROFIT.

If they could continue normally they would not be losing any money.
But because of this agreement they cannot continue normally. They are currently getting paid for the costs of the bed, and the bed only being that it is empty, but they a losing the profit from any treatment that would have been made from the patient occupying that bed.
With empty beds all they are getting is the agreed cost for the bed.

The result is private hospital losing profits needlessly, patients requiring day surgeries or minor operations not getting them, and the government wasting huge sums of money on beds they are not using. It's a no win situation for the public health service, the private health service and those awaiting hospital treatment. Everyone loses.

The vast majority of treatment given by hospitals requires only over night or short term occupancy of a bed (3 to 4 days). Planning for that requires no change. Admittedly there would be issues over longer term care but surely it was not beyond the intelligence of Simon Harris and Private hospital management to come to some sort of arrangement . Maybe reserved wards, redirecting long term care to a smaller number of hospital, etc ,etc.

It is nothing to do with my personal circumstances. The way the government have gone about this they have not only added unnecessary expense, they have reduced delivery of health care. As stated previously I would sooner face delay and see those beds used, especially for the elderly with covid.

How would they make a profit? the biggest part of a private hospital is customer care. How would they book in patients and have a big * beside every booking telling them not to bother as they may have to cancel. It would be a PR nightmare for them

Plus the ones that did get used for Covid, when they try to reopen everyone would move to the ones that hadnt been used. Really this is ridiculous what you are talking about. People would actively move from one hospital to another if they knew that hospital was used for covid. Doesn't matter what happened they would always be tarred with that brush

I do think it is amusing now after it was determined the hospitals where not needed that you show up with this. If they had to be used and where not available I would love to see the comments from you then.


It was fairly simple, it was all or nothing and sign them up for a period of time.

Chips Lovell

efanton wrote: »

Had the government put private hospitals on notice that their beds could be commandeered on 3 to 4 days notice the private hospitals could have by and large carried on. The majority of their patients would not required to stay in hospital for more than three days. Day surgeries, consultations, and minor operations could have all continued as normal as long as they did not require a stay of more than 3 or 4 days in hospital. The public health system could have also transferred some of its workload to the private hospitals.
If the government had to use private hospital for the treatment of covid positive patients they could have easily taken over the private hospitals one at a time as demand necessitated.

Not to labour the point, but what I'm asking is if you know that all of this was possible/feasible? Obviously if it was as you suggest, then perhaps that's what should have been done, but do you have evidence to support these assertions?

For example, the 3-4 days you cite. Was there evidence available at the time the deal was done that you could anticipate demand three to four days ahead? Is it possible to transition a hospital in that timeframe? Would hospitals have agreed to this?

efanton

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Not to labour the point, but what I'm asking is if you know that all of this was possible/feasible? Obviously if it was as you suggest, then perhaps that's what should have been done, but do you have evidence to support these assertions?

For example, the 3-4 days you cite. Was there evidence available at the time the deal was done that you could anticipate demand three to four days ahead? Is it possible to transition a hospital in that timeframe? Would hospitals have agreed to this?

Put it this way, people who present themselves with symptoms, or who test positive for covid but do not show sign of symptoms are unlikely to die on the spot. It would be very reasonable to assume that there would be at least 4 or 5 days minimum before they would need to be hospitalised.

It would be highly unlikely, if not impossible, that all the private hospital beds would fill without the NPHET team knowing that demand would increase to such a degree a week in advance.

Who said the private hospitals have or had a choice? The government invoked a power that meant they could take control of any business or property in a national emergency. Obviously any government using such powers should endeavour to make that arrangement as agreeable as possible and that is what the government tried to do.

My argument is fairly simple, the private hospitals are now a key part of our health service being that successive governments have failed to fund or organise the public health system appropriately. This crisis has proven that, while bed number increased in private hospital they decreased dramatically in public hospitals. This is not a new revelation, its been known about for years.
The last thing surely a government should do unless it was absolutely necessary is stop any hospital performing as normal. Why pay for beds that were not being used? Why at the same time prevent private hospitals from treating those private patients that could easily have been treated or had minor operations within a 3 or 4 day period.
Surely having paid for beds, and finding out they are not required, you would think the government would take advantage of the situation and transfer some of work load form the public hospitals to the private hospitals.

I dont have a problem with the government booking the beds, it was a wise thing to do in the circumstances. I have a problem with them having paid for beds and not putting them to use.
Also surely the government could have planned for both scenarios, the beds in private hospital being needed to treat covid positive patients, and those beds not being needed to treat covid positive patients. Surely that's not an intellectual leap that Simon Harris was incapable of?

How many people are on waiting lists for minor operations, and have been for months, and possibly long than a year, that could have been treated by the private hospitals had the government took advantage of this unexpected surplus of bed capacity? Having paid for the beds, surely it would have made sense pay for any additional costs to use them for treatments that could be done in a matter of a few days rather than now having the waiting lists get even longer.

It strikes me that this was a panic decision, but we know how those turn out, just ask Brian Cowen and FF what happens when you make rush decisions without thinking them through thoroughly. I am sure he was using the same excuses and pleading the same arguments that FG and the health minister are now using.
The excuse that it was an emergency and rush decisions needed to be made simply does not hold water.

markodaly

efanton wrote: »

The last thing surely a government should do unless it was absolutely necessary is stop any hospital performing as normal. Why pay for beds that were not being used? Why at the same time prevent private hospitals from treating those private patients that could easily have been treated or had minor operations within a 3 or 4 day period.

Oh, hindsight is great isnt it?
When this deal was done, images were being shown around the world of Covid-19 patients in Italy being treated in Tents in hospital car parks.
The government rightly sought to increase beds dramatically in case we had the same issues here.

Thankfully, it did not come to pass, as social distancing worked to flatten that curve.

Now we have the self-appointed experts like yourself stating an alternative view, well after all the facts are known. The classic hurler on the ditch.

It strikes me that this was a panic decision, but we know how those turn out,

Well, they could have waited and waited, as they did in the UK, and guess what, its been now proven that waiting those extra days and week has cost thousands upon thousands of extra lives.
They were right to panic as no one, including your good self had any idea how all this would pan out, in early March.

The excuse that it was an emergency and rush decisions needed to be made simply does not hold water.

Classic response right there.

BonnieSituation

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, hindsight is great isnt it?
When this deal was done, images were being shown around the world of Covid-19 patients in Italy being treated in Tents in hospital car parks.
The government rightly sought to increase beds dramatically in case we had the same issues here.

Thankfully, it did not come to pass, as social distancing worked to flatten that curve.

Now we have the self-appointed experts like yourself stating an alternative view, well after all the facts are known. The classic hurler on the ditch.



Well, they could have waited and waited, as they did in the UK, and guess what, its been now proven that waiting those extra days and week has cost thousands upon thousands of extra lives.
They were right to panic as no one, including your good self had any idea how all this would pan out, in early March.



Classic response right there.

That this poster has united me, you and Shef is staggering!

---

So, efanton, say you're right, what recompense/resolution would make you happy and satisfy the wrong you feel has occurred during this unprecedented emergency?

Shefwedfan

All that’s wrong with efanton is he/she is put out. Nothing else. One post deny this and the next one says about waiting list for minor operations

They are ignoring the fact that people who did require treatment got them and actually got better treatment for a lot as they suddenly got seen in private hospitals instead of public

As I already said my mate was overjoyed as his dad was suddenly in seeing the top specialist in Dublin and had no issue getting appointments

The statement about waiting is Ridiculous. As mark said at the time of the deal the video arrived of the army having to collect dead people in Italy. The video of the road full of animal in China getting killed in case they had it. Etc All predictions meant we needed those beds and the biggest complaint was that even with all those beds Ireland was still f**ked

Now down to the people of Ireland and the government we didn’t need them and hopefully we won’t, but crying about it now because of his/her own selfish motives is a small bit distasteful to me

Chips Lovell

efanton wrote: »

Put it this way, people who present themselves with symptoms, or who test positive for covid but do not show sign of symptoms are unlikely to die on the spot. It would be very reasonable to assume that there would be at least 4 or 5 days minimum before they would need to be hospitalised.

But that isn't what was happening at the time. People were presenting with breathing difficulties who hadn't even tested positive let alone visited a doctor. There was much less of an accurate assessment of just how many cases were out there.

efanton wrote: »

The government invoked a power that meant they could take control of any business or property in a national emergency.

As a matter of interest, which power was invoked?

Sam Russell

Chips Lovell wrote: »

As a matter of interest, which power was invoked?

The power that was invoked to take over the private hospitals was the most effective power of all - money. The Gov put a lot of money on the table - so much that the hospitals could not refuse.

Of course the hospitals took the money, all of it, in the national interest.

Podge_irl

Sam Russell wrote: »

The power that was invoked to take over the private hospitals was the most effective power of all - money. The Gov put a lot of money on the table - so much that the hospitals could not refuse.

Of course the hospitals took the money, all of it, in the national interest.

The hospitals are not profiting, which is probably why a number of people in the private medicine industry wish out of the arrangement.

Banner fights back

So this Friday is d-day. The day where one of the most pathetic programme for governments in the history of the state will be either ratified or rejected by the 3 party memberships.

For the greens this is a betrayal for what they stand for. Regressive sugar and carbon taxes that will put the burden unfairly on workers on modest pay at the expense of the corporations, along with no change of the top rate of income tax and usc is a far cry of the change that so many voters wanted after the February 8th election. It will only serve to increase inequality in our society, rising poverty levels are inevitable and will only continue to make the rich even richer. The health and housing crisis will continue unabated unfortunately.

The right wing media and RTE would disagree with me on this, but if we don't get a government by the end of next Friday, it will be a huge victory for the country. A great day IMO for the reasons that I explained in the above.

My message for any green supporting posters is if they have any influence tell those party members that have vote on this disastrous programme for government is vote NO. If so then that would be a huge victory for democracy which has been slowly eroded under the 9 year reign of disaster of FG.

Common sense can be of short commodity in Irish politics. But hopefully the greens can see the sense that this deal is bad for Ireland and bad for those on the bread line, struggling to pay their mortgages, trying to buy a new home and above all else will only increase inequality in our society, which is in direct conflict of "we are in this together" during the covid 19 crisis.

Let's hope by this Friday the hashtag NO will become popular in social media and send out the biggest message to FFG that we will not accept this rubbish deal that continues to turn a blind eye on tax exiles and increase their wealth while the ordinary working family will see increase in their taxes and cuts to their take home pay. And as for M Martin becoming Taoiseach. Give me a break.

Wanderer78

Banner fights back wrote:

Let's hope by this Friday the hashtag NO will become popular in social media and send out the biggest message to FFG that we will not accept this rubbish deal that continues to turn a blind eye on tax exiles and increase their wealth while the ordinary working family will see increase in their taxes and cuts to their take home pay. And as for M Martin becoming Taoiseach. Give me a break.

It ll probably go through, ffg are here to stay, and probably for a long time yet, as many voters actually like them. The political left is a train wreck, inequality will probably continue to grow for a long time yet as we don’t really know what to do about it, and making changes seems to be impossible. I'm sure it won't be all bad with the new government, but I to expect little or no change with critical problems such as health and housing

Sam Russell

Banner fights back wrote: »

So this Friday is d-day. The day where one of the most pathetic programme for governments in the history of the state will be either ratified or rejected by the 3 party memberships.

For the greens this is a betrayal for what they stand for. Regressive sugar and carbon taxes that will put the burden unfairly on workers on modest pay at the expense of the corporations, along with no change of the top rate of income tax and usc is a far cry of the change that so many voters wanted after the February 8th election. It will only serve to increase inequality in our society, rising poverty levels are inevitable and will only continue to make the rich even richer. The health and housing crisis will continue unabated unfortunately.

The right wing media and RTE would disagree with me on this, but if we don't get a government by the end of next Friday, it will be a huge victory for the country. A great day IMO for the reasons that I explained in the above.

My message for any green supporting posters is if they have any influence tell those party members that have vote on this disastrous programme for government is vote NO. If so then that would be a huge victory for democracy which has been slowly eroded under the 9 year reign of disaster of FG.

Common sense can be of short commodity in Irish politics. But hopefully the greens can see the sense that this deal is bad for Ireland and bad for those on the bread line, struggling to pay their mortgages, trying to buy a new home and above all else will only increase inequality in our society, which is in direct conflict of "we are in this together" during the covid 19 crisis.

Let's hope by this Friday the hashtag NO will become popular in social media and send out the biggest message to FFG that we will not accept this rubbish deal that continues to turn a blind eye on tax exiles and increase their wealth while the ordinary working family will see increase in their taxes and cuts to their take home pay. And as for M Martin becoming Taoiseach. Give me a break.

But voting NO and taking to the back benches of opposition and relegates them to the hurler on the ditch.

Voting YES gets them into senior hurling where they can make a difference and actually influence the direction of the Gov. If successful, they might grow their party and become the sensible party in Government.

OK, voting YES might get them less than they want, but voting NO gets them none of their aims. If this leads to a new election, they are likely to get wiped out again.

I think voting YES is a no brainer. They have bargained strongly and have a few good wins, but that is as good as it gets. If they want more, get more votes and more TDs.

tatoo

If the Greens want to implement green policies then they need to be in government, this is their chance.
They would want to be wary of SFers soft soaping them about " change " .

Shefwedfan

Greens will be stupid if they vote no...if this goes to reelection they will be hammered in the poll and I don’t see how they will be seen as a viable option going forward

efanton

tatoo wrote: »

If the Greens want to implement green policies then they need to be in government, this is their chance.
They would want to be wary of SFers soft soaping them about " change " .

The green policies also want to impose penalties on those unable to replace their car with an electric vehicle, or unable to afford to insulate their homes or switch to a different fuel.
Very hard to see how the Green party can claim that it is fighting for the poorest sections of the population in Ireland.

Have you actually read the program for government? Serious question you are all discussing whether the greens should join this coalition but have you actually read the proposed program for government.

the 7% will not be addressed by this next government, the wording allows for that particular can to be kicked down the road for the next government to deal with.

Yes, the greens have a deal so that the transport budget is split in favour of cycling, walking and public transport, but the entire budget for the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport is 2.7 billion. No where in that document is there any commitment to borrow additional money for the Greens proposed spending.

Not once in that program for government document does it say we have earmarked and set aside funding for any of the green proposals.

What the deal the Greens have negotiated amounts to is promises that green policies will be implemented only if there is money available to do so.
With the country facing a 30+ billion debt due to covid and only getting a proposed 3 billion from the 750 billion EU covid fund does anyone seriously think any of the Green policies will be implemented.

For those Green members or supporter saying that they must form a coalition or their party will be destroyed miss is that they have already destroyed their party because even if this coalition goes ahead there will be no Green spending spree, there will be no 7% reduction the only successful policies with be yet another increase in carbon taxation that I am sure the electorate will remind them off at the next general election.

Don't believe me, read the document, The Greens have already become the mudguards for FF/FG and they are not even in government yet.

Bannasidhe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The political left is a train wreck

With respect, I'm not sure that claim is valid.

The political left is in the assent if the last GE is any indication - SF and SDs gained seats while FG and FF lost seats. Solidarity/PBP lost only one seat despite predictions they would be wiped out. At least some of the gains made by the Greens was the result of transfer left.
Labour - who I would hardly call left but they have pretentions in that direction also lost only 1 seat.

Of the parties on the right(ish) FF and FG had such a trainwreck they have to join together to try and form a govt and they still don't have enough seats.
Renua and The PDs no longer even exist in any real terms.

Shefwedfan

Bannasidhe wrote: »

With respect, I'm not sure that claim is valid.

The political left is in the assent if the last GE is any indication - SF and SDs gained seats while FG and FF lost seats. Solidarity/PBP lost only one seat despite predictions they would be wiped out. At least some of the gains made by the Greens was the result of transfer left.
Labour - who I would hardly call left but they have pretentions in that direction also lost only 1 seat.

Of the parties on the right(ish) FF and FG had such a trainwreck they have to join together to try and form a govt and they still don't have enough seats.
Renua and The PDs no longer even exist in any real terms.

What has happened to the left since? All bluster and nothing behind it. As usual they fell apart quickly

The fact PBP published a letter to try and get an acknowledgment from SF shows what a joke the whole lot of them are. To be honest PBP have gone up in my view.

efanton

Shefwedfan wrote: »

What has happened to the left since? All bluster and nothing behind it. As usual they fell apart quickly

The fact PBP published a letter to try and get an acknowledgment from SF shows what a joke the whole lot of them are. To be honest PBP have gone up in my view.

You do realise that the Green Party is a left of centre socialist party.

“We met our socialist colleagues and had a very good conversation with them and we listen and work with all sides. And we have a lot in common. But the reality is, if you look at the numbers, it’s hard to see how you get a stable government,” Ryan said.

https://www.thejournal.ie/green-party-coalition-5011725-Feb2020/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_(Ireland)

Political position Centre-left[4]

Bannasidhe

Shefwedfan wrote: »

What has happened to the left since? All bluster and nothing behind it. As usual they fell apart quickly

The fact PBP published a letter to try and get an acknowledgment from SF shows what a joke the whole lot of them are. To be honest PBP have gone up in my view.

While FF and FG have been doing a desperate deal to try and cling on to power.
I keep hearing the left are in a shambles while I see the two old bastions of power and mutual dislike having to swallow their pride and get in bed together to try and keep the left out... and to do so they need a party with a good few left wing members.

'Train wreck' more accurately describes what happened to the parties on the right(ish) in the last GE.

Now, whether that was a once off or the beginnings of a trend remains to be seen. We need another GE to determine that - but FF and FG seem reluctant to call one, they would rather forget their traditional animosity then face the voters - or so it appears.

Shefwedfan

Bannasidhe wrote: »

While FF and FG have been doing a desperate deal to try and cling on to power.
I keep hearing the left are in a shambles while I see the two old bastions of power and mutual dislike having to swallow their pride and get in bed together to try and keep the left out... and to do so they need a party with a good few left wing members.

'Train wreck' more accurately describes what happened to the parties on the right(ish) in the last GE.

Now, whether that was a once off or the beginnings of a trend remains to be seen. We need another GE to determine that - but FF and FG seem reluctant to call one, they would rather forget their traditional animosity then face the voters - or so it appears.

Why do we need another GE?


What will change? If by some magical coincidence SF do get enough votes to form a government what excuse will they come up with this time not to go into government?


After the last election I said I wanted SF in so they could be seen for how useless and get thrown out in a yearm, we never got a chance as they ran for the hills. What will change now with another election


The whole "they will run more candidates", where are these TD's? the best they pulled together was for last election and look what was in that lot!! need I remind everyone about the lovely Violet Anne etc


We have "up da Ra" boy


This one in Cavan: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-candidate-says-video-of-campaign-van-playing-pro-ira-song-may-be-fake-1.4167024?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fsinn-f%25C3%25A9in-candidate-says-video-of-campaign-van-playing-pro-ira-song-may-be-fake-1.4167024


Hillarious! what they going to run next?

efanton

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Why do we need another GE?


What will change? If by some magical coincidence SF do get enough votes to form a government what excuse will they come up with this time not to go into government?


After the last election I said I wanted SF in so they could be seen for how useless and get thrown out in a yearm, we never got a chance as they ran for the hills. What will change now with another election


The whole "they will run more candidates", where are these TD's? the best they pulled together was for last election and look what was in that lot!! need I remind everyone about the lovely Violet Anne etc


We have "up da Ra" boy


This one in Cavan: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-candidate-says-video-of-campaign-van-playing-pro-ira-song-may-be-fake-1.4167024?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fsinn-f%25C3%25A9in-candidate-says-video-of-campaign-van-playing-pro-ira-song-may-be-fake-1.4167024


Hillarious! what they going to run next?

Why not have another election if the Green party members fail to vote for the FF/FG coalition.
It would give the Greens the opportunity to increase their seats in the Dail.

Or is it you are you worried that the Greens have made such an almighty hash of this proposed coalition that they will go back down to the 5 or 6 seats they previously had.

The Greens own finance spokesperson has declared that there nothing in this deal for the Greens, there will be no money for the Green to spend on their projects. All that is guaranteed in the program for government is that carbon taxes will be increased. Not one other guarantee did they get.

25% of their TD's are against the deal, that says a lot about how competent the Green are at negotiating. Even their chief negotiator was against a deal.

At least all the other parties costed their manifestos, and outlined exactly what they intended to do. What policy did the Greens cost, what projects have the greens actually done feasibility studies on, even internally within the party?
Why hasn't one single project that they wish to promote been agreed in this program for government that wasn't already planned by the existing government?

What is hilarious is a Green supporter trying to criticise another political party when their own party have done everything possible to destroy themselves.

Podge_irl

Bannasidhe wrote: »

While FF and FG have been doing a desperate deal to try and cling on to power.
I keep hearing the left are in a shambles while I see the two old bastions of power and mutual dislike having to swallow their pride and get in bed together to try and keep the left out... and to do so they need a party with a good few left wing members.

'Train wreck' more accurately describes what happened to the parties on the right(ish) in the last GE.

Now, whether that was a once off or the beginnings of a trend remains to be seen. We need another GE to determine that - but FF and FG seem reluctant to call one, they would rather forget their traditional animosity then face the voters - or so it appears.

While running an election is more viable now then a month ago, it is still fraught with complications. There are very many good, public heath reasons not to have another election right now. Calling an election a month ago would have been basically impossible.

I don't think FG are particularly desperate to "cling to power", which is a stupid phrase anyway seeing as political parties entire reason d'etre is to try and achieve power. However, this is the only govt that has a hope of actually being formed and there are myriad obstacles to another election cycle.

Shefwedfan

efanton wrote: »

Why not have another election if the Green party members fail to vote for the FF/FG coalition.
It would give the Greens the opportunity to increase their seats in the Dail.

Or is it you are you worried that the Greens have made such an almighty hash of this proposed coalition that they will go back down to the 5 or 6 seats they previously had.

The Greens own finance spokesperson has declared that there nothing in this deal for the Greens, there will be no money for the Green to spend on their projects. All that is guaranteed in the program for government is that carbon taxes will be increased. Not one other guarantee did they get.

25% of their TD's are against the deal, that says a lot about how competent the Green are at negotiating. Even their chief negotiator was against a deal.

At least all the other parties costed their manifestos, and outlined exactly what they intended to do. What policy did the Greens cost, what projects have the greens actually done feasibility studies on, even internally within the party?
Why hasn't one single project that they wish to promote been agreed in this program for government that wasn't already planned by the existing government?

What is hilarious is a Green supporter trying to criticise another political party when their own party have done everything possible to destroy themselves.

The problem is well your post

You don’t seem to understand that FG signed the Paris agreement, the Greens are just asking them to honour it instead of wasting billions on fines, this has been explained to you multiple times but you ignore and continue on....

Have you read the Greens manifesto by the way? I think you will find it excellent

Then read the back of fag box SF one, didn’t stand up to any scrutiny

People do seem to have issues with maths again, 25% is not a majority!!!