General Election 2020 - See MOD note in First Post

Wanderer78

Aquos76 wrote:

Apparently there is no mention of 24/7, University status, the Airport or the North Quays in this program for government

I'd say it ll be a few electric car charge points and wind turbines tbh

hardybuck

invara wrote: »

The cupboard is bare. It will be interesting to hear what Mary Butler and Marc O'Cathasaigh have to say about the PfG. It is possible to identify specific big ticket items in each region (including border and midlands) and nothing of note for the SE. Two more roles of the dice are Mary Butler landing a spot at the adult table (long shot, but this Government has a serious lack of women, a junior will not cut it) or Matt Shanahan being bought off.

FF will probably get 5 Ministers. A female might get one of them for the purposes of gender balance and it'll either be Anne Rabbitte and Niamh Smyth.

Marc and Mary might have a shout at Minister of State positions.

BBM77

Dunmoreroader wrote: »

Jesus Christ lads; who gives a flying fcuk about blasphemy legislation one way or another??
I'm more interested to see if O'Cathasaigh gets anything for Waterford into the programme for government, University, 24/7, North Quays, airport funding etc. etc. etc....

I have never been a doom and gloom merchant about the North Quays, always though it would happen because I never heard anything to think it would not. But with Micheál Martin as Taoiseach I would have serious doubts about the government funding. The Cork political agenda usually involves taking a dump on Waterford. It was Micheál Martin that shafted WIT when upgraded from WRTC for example. There may well be a Cork minister for finance as well. I can just see it now, technological university and funding for north quays have to be cancelled because of “budget constraints” due to the COVID-19 response and recession while at the same time hundreds of millions will be spent on projects in langerland.

BBM77

invara wrote: »

The cupboard is bare. It will be interesting to hear what Mary Butler and Marc O'Cathasaigh have to say about the PfG. It is possible to identify specific big ticket items in each region (including border and midlands) and nothing of note for the SE. Two more roles of the dice are Mary Butler landing a spot at the adult table (long shot, but this Government has a serious lack of women, a junior will not cut it) or Matt Shanahan being bought off.

Mary Butler does not represent Waterford so I don’t know why you think having her as a minister will be of benefit to Waterford. (If you don’t know what I mean by this Google is your friend)

Dunmoreroader

hardybuck wrote: »

FF will probably get 5 Ministers. A female might get one of them for the purposes of gender balance and it'll either be Anne Rabbitte and Niamh Smyth.

Marc and Mary might have a shout at Minister of State positions.

Morc and Mindy might have a better chance. Nanu Nanu. Apologies to our younger listeners.

Muttley79

Last government was to Dublin central,this new government to cork central,tells you all you need to know when Michael Martin didn't even bother to come to Waterford city during the last election.if you also notice in the media,TV,radio people always refer to Ireland's cities of Dublin cork limerick and galway.we truly are the forgotten city.
We will get no capital investment in government for the foreseeable future in Waterford or the south east.proof is Fianna Gael promising us over 18 months ago about capital funding for the north quays and still nothing
The airport extension has been probably just been ripped up with the green party in power as they certainly won't want to see regional airports opening up.
We voted Fianna Gael out of Waterford that showed a statement of frustration here
We now have to vote Fianna fail out to in the next election to say the south east has had enough

Gael23

Mary will be burnt toast at the next GE if she does not deliver 24/7 cardiac care with MM as Taoiseach

spaceCreated

So are we getting anything at all from this government other than an increase in carbon tax? Disappointing but not surprising.

Funnily enough it seems like the people in Waterford are actually starting to remember how badly we were shafted by Fine Gael, so youd think Fine Fail wouldve paid more attention seeing how much Mary Butler's votes dropped this time around. I can see her vote being consumed by a West Waterford candidate next time and her wondering what happened that Michael told her it would be grand.

gscully

Aquos76 wrote: »

Apparently there is no mention of 24/7, University status, the Airport or the North Quays in this program for government

Not directly. Individual projects weren't named, but in the section for Regional Development, it mentions developing Cork, Limerick, Galway & Waterford as viable alternatives to Dublin and cites Project 2040.

spaceCreated

gscully wrote: »

Not directly. Individual projects weren't named, but in the section for Regional Development, it mentions developing Cork, Limerick, Galway & Waterford as viable alternatives to Dublin and cites Project 2040.

Following on from the massive investments we got from being designated a gateway city I couldnt be more excited.

hardybuck

Gael23 wrote: »

Mary will be burnt toast at the next GE if she does not deliver 24/7 cardiac care with MM as Taoiseach

I disagree. You're assuming that the people in West Waterford are actually bothered about that.

hardybuck

spaceCreated wrote: »

So are we getting anything at all from this government other than an increase in carbon tax? Disappointing but not surprising.

Funnily enough it seems like the people in Waterford are actually starting to remember how badly we were shafted by Fine Gael, so youd think Fine Fail wouldve paid more attention seeing how much Mary Butler's votes dropped this time around. I can see her vote being consumed by a West Waterford candidate next time and her wondering what happened that Michael told her it would be grand.

Have you read the Programme for Government?

Max Powers

hardybuck wrote: »

Have you read the Programme for Government?

Don't know about whom your asking but I bet at least half the people complaining here have not looked at it. The document is lacking in detail for all, I'd say, very few individual or specific projects mentioned, it does have some good in it. What was notable for me was increased investment in rail, to me this is exactly what we are looking for when it comes to moving the train station. Somebody mentioned we have gotten 'f all' for north quays, to be balanced, 15 million was designated for bridge works about 4 months back as part of urdf. I'd like it to be 100m in one batch...but most projects get the staged payment thing. The rehashing of extending greenway into city must be the third or fourth time we have seen that. I totally agree with more public transport funding, hopefully it will put brakes on building a motorway between cork and limerick when it can be done for half that limerick to cahir, on saying that who knows what devious stuff martin, McGrath and coveney will do on that.

BBM77

Max Powers wrote: »

Don't know about whom your asking but I bet at least half the people complaining here have not looked at it. The document is lacking in detail for all, I'd say, very few individual or specific projects mentioned, it does have some good in it. What was notable for me was increased investment in rail, to me this is exactly what we are looking for when it comes to moving the train station. Somebody mentioned we have gotten 'f all' for north quays, to be balanced, 15 million was designated for bridge works about 4 months back as part of urdf. I'd like it to be 100m in one batch...but most projects get the staged payment thing. The rehashing of extending greenway into city must be the third or fourth time we have seen that. I totally agree with more public transport funding, hopefully it will put brakes on building a motorway between cork and limerick when it can be done for half that limerick to cahir, on saying that who knows what devious stuff martin, McGrath and coveney will do on that.

Well I did read through for references to Waterford and all it does is mention regional development, by developing Cork, Limerick, Galway & Waterford as viable alternatives to Dublin, but nothing concrete. And talk about extending the green way into the city centre and building a second cath lab. These have already begun so how can that be work of a government that does not exist. So basically the document is not worth the paper it is printed on.

I said it before I can just see it now, technological university and funding for north quays have to be cancelled because of “budget constraints” due to the COVID-19 response and recession and the money will end up going to things like the M20 Cork penis extension.

dzilla

Max Powers wrote: »

I totally agree with more public transport funding, hopefully it will put brakes on building a motorway between cork and limerick when it can be done for half that limerick to cahir, on saying that who knows what devious stuff martin, McGrath and coveney will do on that.

For me this is crucial that the N24 is completed as motorway, it is the missing link that links all Cities in ireland via motorway, obviously would like a dual carraigeway between cork and waterford direct but not a hope that will happen. Can't see this happening though because the m20 was a pillar of the FF manifesto for govt.

hardybuck

Max Powers wrote: »

Don't know about whom your asking but I bet at least half the people complaining here have not looked at it. The document is lacking in detail for all, I'd say, very few individual or specific projects mentioned, it does have some good in it. What was notable for me was increased investment in rail, to me this is exactly what we are looking for when it comes to moving the train station. Somebody mentioned we have gotten 'f all' for north quays, to be balanced, 15 million was designated for bridge works about 4 months back as part of urdf. I'd like it to be 100m in one batch...but most projects get the staged payment thing. The rehashing of extending greenway into city must be the third or fourth time we have seen that. I totally agree with more public transport funding, hopefully it will put brakes on building a motorway between cork and limerick when it can be done for half that limerick to cahir, on saying that who knows what devious stuff martin, McGrath and coveney will do on that.

I'm asking the poster I quoted, I was wondering if they'd taken the opportunity to read the thing before forming an opinion.

Like you've said, the document lacks specifics for many reasons. However in addition to the high level aspirations, it does mention the following specific points in relation to Waterford:

- It mentions a draft transport strategy being developed for Waterford
- Will prioritise rail projects on existing and unused lines in all cities - including Waterford
- Support the extension of the Waterford Greenway into the city center
- Deliver the second Cath Lab in Waterford University Hospital
- Open new specialised palliative care unit in Waterford in 2020
- Develop the city of Waterford, and the other regional cities, as viable alternatives to Dublin, and use Project Ireland 2040 to help regional towns prosper.

Those are the specific items mentioned for now. If the Green Party agree to this thing the work will begin in earnest to put meat on those bones.

Dexpat

hardybuck wrote: »

I'm asking the poster I quoted, I was wondering if they'd taken the opportunity to read the thing before forming an opinion.

Like you've said, the document lacks specifics for many reasons. However in addition to the high level aspirations, it does mention the following specific points in relation to Waterford:

- It mentions a draft transport strategy being developed for Waterford
- Will prioritise rail projects on existing and unused lines in all cities - including Waterford
- Support the extension of the Waterford Greenway into the city center
- Deliver the second Cath Lab in Waterford University Hospital
- Open new specialised palliative care unit in Waterford in 2020
- Develop the city of Waterford, and the other regional cities, as viable alternatives to Dublin, and use Project Ireland 2040 to help regional towns prosper.

Those are the specific items mentioned for now. If the Green Party agree to this thing the work will begin in earnest to put meat on those bones.

I agree with the above. I think having read it, overall it has the potential to be positive for Waterford. Waterford is specifically mentioned as being one of the regionl cities to be developed as a counter balance to Dublin. Unlike previous national development plans etc it doesn't advocate a widespread designation of smaller regional towns as well.

It ticks the boxes to allow for the release of funds for the NQ for example e.g priority for development of unused city centre sites and public transport infrastructure. It commits to other Waterford specific projects as mentioned above above.

Obviously the downside is that we have been here before and funding in Ireland is primarily diven by policical patronage. However the document is centainly not negative as has been suggested. There seems to be a recognition that Waterford is part of the top tier cities. There is centainly something to build on but time will tell.

spaceCreated

Yeah I read through it, to be honest I was tired when I was reading it but was hoping I'd missed something or a lot. Everything in there relating to Waterford was something already committed by the previous Government as far as I am aware.

I might be cynical but the commitment to developing a viable alternative to Dublin is something I have read several times before and I would view as lip service, I cannot see how you can be a viable alternative to Dublin without either a massive investment in WIT to improve it or make it in to a University (which would give it the required investment to improve it). That would only be a good start as well

I find that unless there are concrete commitments then it means we get nothing going from past elections, now this may change and there will be a more detailed plan in future but right now we are being getting nothing.

This part has me worried, even without detail it is so badly wrong "Further develop Ireland’s leadership in new digital technologies including cloud computing,
data analytics, blockchain, Internet of Things and Artificial Intelligence."

Some things I would have loved to have seen that could be easily committed to would be gain a better understanding of how our healthcare system is failing so badly and what it needs to be fixed. For example we had the person (located in Cork) responsible for managing the Waterford hospital saying the mortuary had no issues after the doctors and consultants working there raised the issues - thats a systematic failure. Increase in stuff like rape crisis centres, family supports etc. would be an easy commitment as well.

Edit just to say sorry for the novel and I genuinely do hope that the things related to Waterford are more than lip service this time around.

Dexpat

spaceCreated wrote: »

Yeah I read through it, to be honest I was tired when I was reading it but was hoping I'd missed something or a lot. Everything in there relating to Waterford was something already committed by the previous Government as far as I am aware.

I might be cynical but the commitment to developing a viable alternative to Dublin is something I have read several times before and I would view as lip service, I cannot see how you can be a viable alternative to Dublin without either a massive investment in WIT to improve it or make it in to a University (which would give it the required investment to improve it). That would only be a good start as well

I find that unless there are concrete commitments then it means we get nothing going from past elections, now this may change and there will be a more detailed plan in future but right now we are being getting nothing.

This part has me worried, even without detail it is so badly wrong "Further develop Ireland’s leadership in new digital technologies including cloud computing,
data analytics, blockchain, Internet of Things and Artificial Intelligence."

Some things I would have loved to have seen that could be easily committed to would be gain a better understanding of how our healthcare system is failing so badly and what it needs to be fixed. For example we had the person (located in Cork) responsible for managing the Waterford hospital saying the mortuary had no issues after the doctors and consultants working there raised the issues - thats a systematic failure. Increase in stuff like rape crisis centres, family supports etc. would be an easy commitment as well.

Edit just to say sorry for the novel and I genuinely do hope that the things related to Waterford are more than lip service this time around.

I share your cynicism which is justified in relation to things that have been promised in the past. It might not be different this time.

However looking at the 2016 programme for government, Waterford wasn't mentioned once as far as I can see. It was much more general and talked about 'spreading growth to all areas and regions' and 'developing regions' and 'regeneration of urban centres'. This programme specifically includes Waterford as one of the main drivers of growth for the country and as a result the main driver for the SE region. Funding decisions can be more easily justified on that basis.

Of course we have to contend with the Cork and other politicians syphoning off funds for their own areas but when has it ever been different. The persistence with the TU route is also a big negative. Overall I believe we are in a better position because of it. Doesn't mean we won't have to fight for every Euro though.

lertsnim

hardybuck wrote: »

I disagree. You're assuming that the people in West Waterford are actually bothered about that.

What a load of ****e.

azimuth17

hardybuck wrote: »

Those are the specific items mentioned for now. If the Green Party agree to this thing the work wlll begin in earnest to put meat on those bones.

I don't know any of the people who post here but I have begun to at least respect some opinions and believe that there are reasonable people here trying to make sensible points. That being said, I have to say that the PfG contains little for Waterford that has not been regurgitated in one form or another over the years. We all know the details and the score. Even the Indo is now saying that the southeast is being left behind on a university. I disagree often in private with Hardybuck although he/she at least tries to present reasonable argument..

REALITY: The PfG has nothing for us.

How long must we wait for "work to begin in earnest" for anything for God's sake?" Waiting is what we do here and its futility must be self evident to everyone by now. Those who think this is a good document are being dishonest with themselves.

hardybuck

lertsnim wrote: »

What a load of ****e.

Again, I disagree. She's just been successfully reelected.

hardybuck

azimuth17 wrote: »

I don't know any of the people who post here but I have begun to at least respect some opinions and believe that there are reasonable people here trying to make sensible points. That being said, I have to say that the PfG contains little for Waterford that has not been regurgitated in one form or another over the years. We all know the details and the score. Even the Indo is now saying that the southeast is being left behind on a university. I disagree often in private with Hardybuck although he/she at least tries to present reasonable argument..

REALITY: The PfG has nothing for us.

How long must we wait for "work to begin in earnest" for anything for God's sake?" Waiting is what we do here and its futility must be self evident to everyone by now. Those who think this is a good document are being dishonest with themselves.

Many discussions in this forum seem to eventually turn into a paranoid whinge about how Waterford gets less than everyone else. I'd say if we started a thread about Christmas discussion would eventually focus on how Christmas in Waterford was ruined because we don't have a Marks and Spencer's and Galway got nicer toys.

Thank you for at least noting that I at least try make a reasonable argument though!

Do you think that the draft PFG contains nothing for Waterford, or do you think it does nothing for Waterford but also doesn't contain anything for the other regional cities?

From my read of it Waterford seems to have been mentioned at least as much if not more than the other cities.

BBM77

hardybuck wrote: »

Many discussions in this forum seem to eventually turn into a paranoid whinge about how Waterford gets less than everyone else. I'd say if we started a thread about Christmas discussion would eventually focus on how Christmas in Waterford was ruined because we don't have a Marks and Spencer's and Galway got nicer toys.

Thank you for at least noting that I at least try make a reasonable argument though!

Do you think that the draft PFG contains nothing for Waterford, or do you think it does nothing for Waterford but also doesn't contain anything for the other regional cities?

From my read of it Waterford seems to have been mentioned at least as much if not more than the other cities.

Please explain then how we are treated equally. Because I and others have be following government spending in Waterford for years and it does not look like there is much fairness compared to what the other cities get.

hardybuck

BBM77 wrote: »

Please explain then how we are treated equally. Because I and others have be following government spending in Waterford for years and it does not look like there is much fairness compared to what the other cities get.

Didn't take long to flush it out.

BBM77

hardybuck wrote: »

Didn't take long to flush it out.

So you should have no problem explaining this fairness we clearly receive then.

hardybuck

BBM77 wrote: »

So you should have no problem explaining this fairness we clearly receive then.

How about a couple of questions far more relevant to this discussion:

1. Do you feel that Waterford has been treated unfairly in the draft PFG?
2. If so, can you cite examples of same?

BBM77

hardybuck wrote: »

How about a couple of questions far more relevant to this discussion:

1. Do you feel that Waterford has been treated unfairly in the draft PFG?
2. If so, can you cite examples of same?

No no, don’t twist it back on me. I have given my opinion many times on government treatment of Waterford on boards. If you can't answer what I asked that is an answer in itself.

hardybuck

BBM77 wrote: »

No no, don’t twist it back on me. I have given my opinion many times on government treatment of Waterford on boards. If you can't answer what I asked that is an answer in itself.

You've made your mind up on the draft PFG before reading/analysing it?

I will leave an open invitation here for you to provide any examples in the document where you feel unfairness exists should you wish to discuss them.

BBM77

hardybuck wrote: »

You've made your mind up on the draft PFG before reading/analysing it?

I will leave an open invitation here for you to provide any examples in the document where you feel unfairness exists should you wish to discuss them.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113747817&postcount=1444
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113758966&postcount=1455

Have already given my opinion on the PFG.