New Dail / New Taoiseach

dixiefly

I have to say as a person who does not follow a huge amount of politics that I am really surprised (and disappointed) at the showing of the Labour Party in the polls.

Labour got an unfair amount of the blame for the bad parts of their government but very litte of the credit for what went right.

What sparked this thought was that someone said to me that they would vote Labour but they had no chance. To me I would far rather Labour than Sinn Fein as I feel they have a record of delivering a level of change - but one that is affordable.

Is it Brendan Howlin as a leader or did they just lose so many T.D.'s that they have no traction anymore?

blackbox

They became lefty and obsessed with the disenfranchised and forgot that they were supposed to represent working people.

There is an opportunity for them to come back if they decide to represent PAYE workers and self employed as there is a void here in Irish politics.

pixelburp

Labour became "lefty"?
Uhmmm... right then.

Well to parrot what has already come up in the Polling thread, when I asked the same question, the reckoning basically amounts to a brain drain of younger candidates to the Social Democrats, leaving the main Labour party full of old blood. Certainly looking at the posters dotted around the 2 or 3 constituencies I'd drive through, you definitely notice a demographic difference between Labour and SF candidates.

Hard to build up momentum and relevance when the party consists of older heads, with "youth" basically amounting to Alan Kelly and Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the former not exactly endearing himself in a national context with his waxing lyrical on the lust for power.

Nody

Was I the only one opening the thread and getting confused about Corbyn not being mentioned? Maybe I'm Brexitoxified or something :P

sid waddell

pixelburp wrote: »

Well to parrot what has already come up in the Polling thread, when I asked the same question, the reckoning basically amounts to a brain drain of younger candidates to the Social Democrats, leaving the main Labour party full of old blood. Certainly looking at the posters dotted around the 2 or 3 constituencies I'd drive through, you definitely notice a demographic difference between Labour and SF candidates.

Hard to build up momentum and relevance when the party consists of older heads, with "youth" basically amounting to Alan Kelly and Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the former not exactly endearing himself in a national context with his waxing lyrical on the lust for power.

Rebecca Moynihan in Dublin South Central is a rare exception to this. It'll be interesting to see how she goes. She's been making positive noises towards SF in the last week, perhaps in an effort to pull in some of O'Snodaigh's transfers after he smashes the quota.

dixiefly

Nody wrote: »

Was I the only one opening the thread and getting confused about Corbyn not being mentioned? Maybe I'm Brexitoxified or something :P

Maybe that in itself is an indicator of just how irrelevant the Labour Party in the Republic has become.

Marcusm

Labour has no pizazz. Dick Spring brought them up the scale in 1992 and they fell back before resurging post 2008. Coalition with FG was more toxic for them and they need a proper renewal to move out of th 5-7% range. Brendan Howlinnis not the answer and neither is Bruiser Alan Kelly. Aodhan o Riordan might be able to help but he is not charismatic. Their message is too mainstream to get protest votes.

nigeldaniel

Politics these days has become an entertainment industry like it or not a major number of voters [25%) only vote for those who keep on entertaining them. Labour just appear too shirt and tie with no real gusto attached. What they need is someone who can play the press and the media at large.

Tacitus Kilgore

blackbox wrote: »

They became lefty and obsessed with the disenfranchised and forgot that they were supposed to represent working people.

There is an opportunity for them to come back if they decide to represent PAYE workers and self employed as there is a void here in Irish politics.

When did they make the big switch to the left?

PatrickSmithUS

Essentially they moved to the centre to seek votes under Dick Spring.

When they played the role of Junior partner in various coalitions since then they've had their true self eroded.

I wouldn't be surprised if the same happened to Sinn Féin should they enter coalition as a junior partner.

Scoundrel

They have the same stale old FG puppets running them Howlin Burton etc completely discredited Stagg and Costello are standing still with a combined age of about 150 they need to sweep all the old deadwood out of the party and reinvent themselves as a proper labour party quickly. SF is already stealing plenty of ground from them soon enough they'll wipe them out entirely.

is_that_so

PatrickSmithUS wrote: »

Essentially they moved to the centre to seek votes under Dick Spring.

When they played the role of Junior partner in various coalitions since then they've had their true self eroded.

I wouldn't be surprised if the same happened to Sinn Féin should they enter coalition as a junior partner.

It happened earlier than that, really signs of it in their first coalition back in 1973 under Corish. Spring exploited that creep towards being social democrats but he was the Gilmore of his day. Here's who's running for Labour.
https://www.labour.ie/people/

boombang

I think Labour promised too much at a time of profound fiscal crisis. The electorate projected economic realities coming home onto those who deluded them. If SF get in to govt we can have this same discussion about them in a few years' time.

prunudo

Have to say that I've been impressed with Howlin in some of his recent interviews I've heard. Hadn't really been on my radar up until then.

DOCARCH

prunudo wrote: »

Have to say that I've been impressed with Howlin in some of his recent interviews I've heard. Hadn't really been on my radar up until then.

Not dissimilar myself. I have never voted Labour in my life, but in debate last week I thought Howlin was the only leader talking (a bit of) sense, and with no auction politics!

satguy

The damage was done when Joan Burton took them into coalition with Enda Kenny's then very right of center FG.

Kenny then talked Joan Burton into taking the ministry at the Department of Social Protection, a good place for a left of center TD you would think.

Labour then sat at the cabinet table while FG were busy doing what right of cente patries do.

(cutting loan patents allowence, installing water meters, and raising the pension age to 66, with 68 as a target.)

And all this while Labour sat at the table, a left of cente patry !

LeinsterDub

Labour appear to stand for nothing. And I say that as someone who follows politics quite closely

LuckyLloyd

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Labour appear to stand for nothing. And I say that as someone who follows politics quite closely

They certainly stand for getting into power. They’re all about being in power. I suppose that’s a policy.

hatrickpatrick

I supported Labour in 2011 (Gilmore #2 after Boyd Barrett #1) and for me it was their refusal to do anything about the numerous scandals which engulfed the government during that period, in particular Alan Shatter's appalling reaction to numerous justice system scandals and James Reilly's Primary Care Centre shenanigans. As a coalition partner, they could have demanded that people in government be held accountable and removed from office over the kind of gigantic f*ck ups both of these ministers presided over, but instead they simply acted as kingmakers following the election and then fell silent when things went wrong. Their role should have been as a check and balance against FG, and they abdicated this responsibility.

JohnnyFlash

Labour are a party of Government. It’s very easy to be some ideologically pure party of the left spouting on about Marx and Connolly knowing bloody well you are never going to have to implement any of the stuff you waffle on about.

It’s much more difficult to stand up for moderate left wing politics and go into coalition so some of your policies can be implemented. And Labour did that in 2011. And tried to bring in fairly basic tenets of European moderate socialism - the USC, property tax, water charges. And were then thrown out on their ear.

People say they want socialism. They don’t really though.

Tacitus Kilgore

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

People say they want socialism. They don’t really though.

They do, but in the *true sense of socialism, they want someone else to pay for it.



*may not be true

sid waddell

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

They certainly stand for getting into power. They’re all about being in power. I suppose that’s a policy.

Politics is about power.

SF are about staying out of power, party over country. Easy to throw stones from the cheap seats.

cruizer101

OSI wrote: »

Well why else would you run for a seat in the Dail? You'd hardly being running because you like the decor and just wanna see what all the fuss is about. If you're not there with the intentions of representing your constituents by exercising your power as a TD, then you have no right to be there.

I think many in there are quite happy to be in opposition to the government and would never have any real interest in being part of the government, much easier to give out about the government than make the hard decisions yourself

hatrickpatrick

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Labour are a party of Government. It’s very easy to be some ideologically pure party of the left spouting on about Marx and Connolly knowing bloody well you are never going to have to implement any of the stuff you waffle on about.

It’s much more difficult to stand up for moderate left wing politics and go into coalition so some of your policies can be implemented. And Labour did that in 2011. And tried to bring in fairly basic tenets of European moderate socialism - the USC, property tax, water charges. And were then thrown out on their ear.

People say they want socialism. They don’t really though.

Would you agree that one of the major roles of a junior coalition party is to hold the senior party to account for their failures and wrongdoings? Obviously this is just one voter's opinion, but Labour's policy positions and compromises weren't the problem, the problem was that FG were hit by scandal almost immediately upon taking office (Noonan and Kenny breaching salary caps for their own personal advisors, I believe this broke mere weeks after the coalition was formed), which continued and worsened throughout their term, and at no point did Labour force them to hold anyone accountable for any of the numerous instances of wrongdoing and incompetence which took place.

A junior coalition partner should be the ones to demand the resignation of ministers from the senior party when they are conclusively shown to have done something wrong. This should have happened after Noonan's aforementioned salary cap breach, Reilly's stacking of primary care centres around his own constituency and Shatter's appalling leaking of confidential police information live on national television to smear a political rival.

None of these things are acceptable in a democratic society and any party which was willing to stand over such outrageous instances of flagrant wrongdoing and do absolutely nothing to stop it or punish those responsible cannot call themselves any kind of legitimate counterweight in coalition. That is why I and I suspect many others lost faith in Labour. It wasn't about policy but about procedural inaction in the face of people blatantly and publicly breaking the rules (or in Shatter's case, the law) and getting away with it.

sid waddell

nigeldaniel wrote: »

Politics these days has become an entertainment industry like it or not a major number of voters [25%) only vote for those who keep on entertaining them. Labour just appear too shirt and tie with no real gusto attached. What they need is someone who can play the press and the media at large.

I agree to a large extent with this. Politics is largely about entertainment these days and SF have learned that. Mary Lou McDonald is great for the zingers and the vague, angry, emotional rhetoric which goes down well on Twitter but when she's pinned down on policy she's very poor. SF are great at portraying themselves as miracle workers and peddling easy answers yet they don't want power, and that's what people are referring to when they compare them to Trump - the simplistic populism and telling people what they want to hear.

Labour are too damn honest for their own good and rubbish at talking themselves up.

What they actually need is to look at what Corbyn did with Labour in Britain and take the best of that experiment, try and revitalise the party at grass roots level and make it a mass movement.

There's a real problem of political discourse that lies beyond Labour here, though, and it's systemic. Social media discourse is usually simplistic and peddles and believes in easy answers. So much of it just empty sloganeering and shouting. Look at some of the replies on this thread for an example. Labour have been simultaneously accused of being too left and too centrist. We talk about the dumbing down of society but political discourse has been dumbed down to a ridiculous level.

This sort of discourse means that any pretty much any party that goes into coalition, or even into government, and doesn't magically make everything better is going to be vilified - unless they're populists, who specialise in getting into power, doing a terrible job and spinning narratives of being eternal victims and somehow maintaining their popularity. If SF ever do get into government, that's exactly what I expect them to do - play the victim about everything.

And I'm not singling out SF here - FF have been the masters of that for decades, and FG go in for their fair share of it too.

quokula

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Would you agree that one of the major roles of a junior coalition party is to hold the senior party to account for their failures and wrongdoings? Obviously this is just one voter's opinion, but Labour's policy positions and compromises weren't the problem, the problem was that FG were hit by scandal almost immediately upon taking office (Noonan and Kenny breaching salary caps for their own personal advisors, I believe this broke mere weeks after the coalition was formed), which continued and worsened throughout their term, and at no point did Labour force them to hold anyone accountable for any of the numerous instances of wrongdoing and incompetence which took place.

A junior coalition partner should be the ones to demand the resignation of ministers from the senior party when they are conclusively shown to have done something wrong. This should have happened after Noonan's aforementioned salary cap breach, Reilly's stacking of primary care centres around his own constituency and Shatter's appalling leaking of confidential police information live on national television to smear a political rival.

None of these things are acceptable in a democratic society and any party which was willing to stand over such outrageous instances of flagrant wrongdoing and do absolutely nothing to stop it or punish those responsible cannot call themselves any kind of legitimate counterweight in coalition. That is why I and I suspect many others lost faith in Labour. It wasn't about policy but about procedural inaction in the face of people blatantly and publicly breaking the rules (or in Shatter's case, the law) and getting away with it.

A politician overclaiming expenses raises issues of trust, but the impact on the national budget is too tiny to measure, so while it would put me off that particular politician, I wouldn't want other parties to dedicate so much of their time to attacking them, rather than doing their own job.

A politician revealing that another got away with driving dangerously because he got information from the Gardai he shouldn't have, again raises some questions about both those politicians, but a third party should be getting on with doing their jobs rather than getting involved in the tit for tat and trying to take snipes and score cheap points.

So I don't fully agree with what you're saying, and would be far happier with a smaller coalition partner focussing on their brief and implementing policies they believe will be beneficial to the country, than belligerently threatening the stability of the government every time they saw an opportunity to take a cheap shot at their larger partner.

The stuff you're describing is what the likes of Sinn Fein love to do, sitting on the sidelines taking potshots at the big parties and acting holier than thou, without ever offering solutions of their own. Labour have proven willing to get on with the job of governing and trying to pragmatically solve the problems facing the country. Which might not be the popular thing right now but it's the right thing.

According to labour's diamond posters they're gonna

FIX HEALTH

FIX HOUSING





Rouisshhh

CrankyHaus

Labour played their time in Government terribly and FG must have laughing at them.

The best example is Irish Water. Labour let Phil Hogan of FG set up a disastrous mess of an organisation that retained all of the inefficiencies of the existing system and then added a few on top. Then Hogan flew off to Brussels just as resistence was heating up and Labour were clueless enough to be left holding the bag with Alan Kelly being reshuffled in as Minister of the Environment. Labour doubled down on this farce by turning Joan Burton's car being delayed in Jobstown into a long running saga of massed dawn raids by Gardai to press kidnapping charges against political protestors that collapsed at trial when video evidence showed the suspiciously uniform testimony of the Gardai was entirely false.

Meanwhile FG were laughing all the way to the polls getting the credit for an improving economy and the end of austerity. No wonder they want Labour back in government after such a great performance as a mudguard.

James Brown

blackbox wrote: »

They became lefty and obsessed with the disenfranchised and forgot that they were supposed to represent working people.

There is an opportunity for them to come back if they decide to represent PAYE workers and self employed as there is a void here in Irish politics.

The 'lefties' main focus is working people. They got too cosy with Fine Gael and got punished for it.
You may hear guff about being tied to the unions. Spoiler, union members generally have jobs.

FYI: the tax paying workers struggling to pay rent were home ownership is a fantasy are the disenfranchised.

SF are doing well because FG, supported by FF, looking after vulture funds isn't helping the working tax payer. Labour missed the boat on that.
I say all this as a former card carrying Labour Party member.

Alan Smithee

I think the country will be poorer for the demise of the Labour Party. They look like yesterday’s party and are becoming irrelevant.I can’t see a way back for them in the medium term if at all.
This is unfortunate as they have always accepted the challenge of government, lead on social issues (before they became popular/cool) and in the main held office in high regard with very few scandals to their name.
But now is the era of the soundbite and while Brendan Howlin has performed well during the debates (by simply speaking common sense) all twitter could do is laugh at his height or blame him for the years of austerity (quick reminder they were the only party that voted against the bank guarantee and weren’t the cause of the crash).
As a centre left leaning voter I worry about future options at the polls as ideologically I’m don’t support a populist Sinn Fein nor either of FF/FG. Still I suppose that’s democracy folks!!

rob316

Joan Burton was what happened, talk about a disaster.
Took the full brunt for water meters and they are to be remembered as the party that took medical cards from disabled children.
They betrayed absolutely every ideology and principle they had.

LuckyLloyd

OSI wrote: »

Well why else would you run for a seat in the Dail? You'd hardly being running because you like the decor and just wanna see what all the fuss is about. If you're not there with the intentions of representing your constituents by exercising your power as a TD, then you have no right to be there.

Because you believe in something, have a vision for society and will use your position in parliament to advocate for it? Not because you’re willing to dump large chunks of that vision for a couple of ministerial pensions and to be part of a government that implements a policy platform that conflicts with your vision in the main.

Don’t sell out, keep fighting and you might just get to be the big party in government some day, and implement your vision.

That’s why Labour are on the outs, and rightly so. A vapid gun for hire. Howlin will play ball with any combination after this election for a ministerial post. He and the rest of Labour believe in nothing beyond themselves.

BluePlanet

rob316 wrote: »

Joan Burton was what happened, talk about a disaster.
Took the full brunt for water meters and they are to be remembered as the party that took medical cards from disabled children.
They betrayed absolutely every ideology and principle they had.

Naw it was that JobBridge scam that did them in.
It was her baby.

beggars_bush

BluePlanet wrote: »

Naw it was that JobBridge scam that did them in.
It was her baby.

I have 3 friends that got back into work after retraining via the job bridge scheme

now in very good IT jobs.
it got them on the ladder

ok, it wasn't suited to a lot of areas but it did work in some sectors

L1011

beggars_bush wrote: »

I have 3 friends that got back into work after retraining via the job bridge scheme

now in very good IT jobs.
it got them on the ladder

ok, it wasn't suited to a lot of areas but it did work in some sectors

It worked in the IT sector, but still with significant abuse by employers - I know of somewhere that did as many 9 month contracts as possible; although it then hired quite a lot of them

It was rampantly abused elsewhere; and there were displaced jobs that should never, ever have been put on it - Subway franchisers for instance - but got advertised until called out and may even have been taken up.

A modified version of the idea could be made work, I think, but with a significant increase in admin costs. Employer should have had to make a contribution at least as the very first reform.

osarusan

Didn't negotiate hard enough with FG in 2011, or didn't force FG to stick to the deal strongly enough, and paid a terrible price for it.

Lost a lot of credibility with their own voters, didn't gain any credibility with anybody else.

Can't blame a party for going into government, but they were massively out-politicked by FG in government and are suffering for that now.

Having said that, their 2011 election high was really just part of the 'Punish FF' vote, rather than a widespread public swing towards their policies.

osarusan

L1011 wrote: »

It was rampantly abused elsewhere; and there were displaced jobs that should never, ever have been put on it - Subway franchisers for instance - but got advertised until called out and may even have been taken up.

It got so bad they removed the function to complain about a listed internship.

Mr Tickle

rob316 wrote: »

Joan Burton was what happened, talk about a disaster.
Took the full brunt for water meters and they are to be remembered as the party that took medical cards from disabled children.
They betrayed absolutely every ideology and principle they had.

I don't disagree that they were in power when some truly awful cuts were made and extra taxes applied. I also don't think it's fair to lay the blame at their feet for this.
They were handed a poisoned chalice. There was a chance to introduce some of those taxes during the boom years and to not let public spending get so out of hand. Instead we had an over-reliance on the soon-to-vanish construction industry and a (still) massively inefficient civil service.

It's a shame, because their policies should actually appeal to a lot of those who are now leaning towards SF. They just don't have the "showmanship" to get the message across. That and they seem to compete with the Greens for a similar type of voter.

optogirl

DOCARCH wrote: »

Not dissimilar myself. I have never voted Labour in my life, but in debate last week I thought Howlin was the only leader talking (a bit of) sense, and with no auction politics!

Would love to see Labour as a credible alternative but I really think Howlin is holding them back. Every time he is asked a question he launches into a state of the nation address. Step backwards, hold arms aloft. Big Jim would be proud.

optogirl

optogirl wrote: »

Would love to see Labour as a credible alternative but I really think Howlin is holding them back. Every time he is asked a question he launches into a state of the nation address. Step backwards, hold arms aloft. Big Jim would be proud.

Howlin goes on the defensive straight away.

Mr Tickle

optogirl wrote: »

Would love to see Labour as a credible alternative but I really think Howlin is holding them back. Every time he is asked a question he launches into a state of the nation address. Step backwards, hold arms aloft. Big Jim would be proud.

I wonder is that just the way he is or is it due to the fact that they now have such a small base of support. He might feel like he has to make these big speeches to have any chance at gaining support.

BluePlanet

Mr Tickle wrote: »

I don't disagree that they were in power when some truly awful cuts were made and extra taxes applied. I also don't think it's fair to lay the blame at their feet for this.
They were handed a poisoned chalice. There was a chance to introduce some of those taxes during the boom years and to not let public spending get so out of hand. Instead we had an over-reliance on the soon-to-vanish construction industry and a (still) massively inefficient civil service.

It's a shame, because their policies should actually appeal to a lot of those who are now leaning towards SF. They just don't have the "showmanship" to get the message across. That and they seem to compete with the Greens for a similar type of voter.

They should dissolve and let their members join Social Democrats since it's basically the same thing.
Social Democrats seem to cite the "Nordic model" a lot, and i think that's a more positive message than whatever Labour is pitching.

Mr Tickle

BluePlanet wrote: »

They should dissolve and let their members join Social Democrats since it's basically the same thing.
Social Democrats seem to cite the "Nordic model" a lot, and i think that's a more positive message than whatever Labour is pitching.

That does seem like a sensible choice. It would have to be a very well managed move though.
On the one hand they'd need to make it clear that it was happening in order to carry their support with them when they move. They wouldn't want to risk losing the very casual voter who has always voted labour but now won't trust any of "these new mod-ren parties".
On the other, they don't want to be seen as "Labour by a new name". The people who have dismissed the current Labour could be very difficult to persuade to come over to the new camp.

There does seem to be a space for a Centre-Left option there though. Just currently it's being scattered among too many smaller parties.

beggars_bush

The scattered nature of the left in Irish politics suits FF and FG perfectly as they've no real opposition

Mr Tickle

beggars_bush wrote: »

The scattered nature of the left in Irish politics suits FF and FG perfectly as they've no real opposition

I think Irish politics are possibly the best evidence that the world is controlled by the all powerful Lizard people.

Here's a question (I'm going to ask in another thread too) Is it possible to find polling data for your local constituency? I'd like to see how the opinion polls look to see if i should vote tactically or just based purely on my own preference.

nigeldaniel

The Labour party does have a future, it is certainly not finished and does not need to join with other players. First, it needs to be far more savvy with the media, it needs to keep itself in the news all the time not just once every four weeks. It also needs to find some backbone as it stands it looks a bit meek. To get the votes back it could do with a few characters who wear jeans and tee-shirts and the odd guy on a motorbike. It would work wonders for its image and yes, image is everything.

dixiefly

dixiefly wrote: »

I have to say as a person who does not follow a huge amount of politics that I am really surprised (and disappointed) at the showing of the Labour Party in the polls.

Labour got an unfair amount of the blame for the bad parts of their government but very litte of the credit for what went right.

What sparked this thought was that someone said to me that they would vote Labour but they had no chance. To me I would far rather Labour than Sinn Fein as I feel they have a record of delivering a level of change - but one that is affordable.

Is it Brendan Howlin as a leader or did they just lose so many T.D.'s that they have no traction anymore?

All completely my own opinion with nothing to back it up, other than anecdotal.

What happened to Labour is exactly what happens to minority parties, in Ireland.
They are, unfairly, expected to police the larger party in a coalition. This causes their core to resent their "betrayal" and the floating voters feel that they did not push the major partner hard enough.

Voters then take their anger out on the smaller party by abandoning (core) or no transfers (floating).

Labour's issue is compounded by the fact that they faced challenges from the further left, while going into government with a right leaning FG. Opened them up on both sides.

There is this weird feeling in Ireland that a party should always want to go into government, even when it results in a hiding.
Labour had the opportunity to lead the opposition in 2012 and drive FF down further, and potentially lead the 2016 or 2020 governments, but jumped into bed with Enda.

MintyMagnum

Just heard Pearse Doherty suggesting this on Rte1 - thoughts..

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Get f-cking in!

Trump
Boris Johnson
Mary Lou, shur, if the rest of the countries are taking the piss :rolleyes:

Guy:Incognito

Will she not be too busy building 100,000 public homes in 5 years?

Cos unless she grabs a shovel herself, along with everyone else, how the **** is that particular promise going to happen?

listermint

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Will she not be too busy building 100,000 public homes in 5 years?

Cos unless she grabs a shovel herself, along with everyone else, how the **** is that particular promise going to happen?

Assume tax breaks and land availability.

The builders are here. They're just building offices and hotels due to the same tax breaks.


It's .... Money... Not resources.