Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

normanoffside wrote: »

John Connors might leave the country over this
https://twitter.com/johnconnors1990/status/1056028432004452352

He'd be doing the travelling community a favour. He's done them no favours since he's started representing them.

markodaly wrote: »

So, you are seeing the bigger picture here. Waste is endemic and the way we spend our money is highly ineffective.

So, how does one combat this without rocking the boats of the vested interest groups, as there are many out there. From the union-backed admin staff of the HSE to the consultants.

Be my guest if you can figure that out.

See, I know that you already know the answer, but its like you pretend there is some other easier way, when in fact you know damm well there isn't. There are too many pigs in the trough.

See, that entitlement culture coming back to bite us again.

Mark - as an FYI when you personalise it I'm simply not going to engage with you.
I am quite willing to have a discussion.
I am not going to engage in a slagging match with anyone.

There are many vested interests. It takes political will to tackle them. What we have is a government that wants to give control of our national maternity hosp to a religious order that owes the State money from the historical abuse.
That. is. insanity.

We have a mish mash of public/private. We have a crises in retaining staff because the working conditions are appalling for front line health care workers. We have an admin heavy system.
We have a lack of accountability.
And we have our elderly dying on trolleys.


Do you think Aneurin Bevan hadn't had to deal with vested interests before launching the NHS in 1948?

We need a government willing to take on all the vested interests with the clear message that this is being done to provide a free at point of access national health care service and get the electorate behind them.
Make it an election issue!

Trevor Tight Plantation wrote: »

I love how if you object to Travellers having unlimited numbers of children at the taxpayer's expense, or demanding free houses with acres of land and stables, you're a far-right racist.

Sure any African American that supports trump and his views is a member of the alt right also go figure.

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Down in Rathkeale area:

"Casey topped the poll at a booth from Rathkeale Girls National School with 44%. He also took 46% of the vote in a box that came from the Askeaton area."

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/election-reaction-pavee-point-say-strong-support-for-peter-casey-worrying-881587.html

A place all too culturally enriched.

Thats from people that see the enrichment every day with their own 2 eyes.
I used to work in a petrol station at weekends in my teens. I went from thinking the travellers got a raw deal in life to hating the sight of them in the space of a few weeks. Not every incident, but almost every one that happened at work had them as the central theme!

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What we have is a government that wants to give control of our national maternity hosp to a religious order that owes the State money from the historical abuse.
That. is. insanity.

That is not strictly true and you know that.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/maternity-hospital-will-be-religion-free-vows-harris-mt5r7k2hp

https://www.thejournal.ie/sisters-of-charity-st-vincents-maternity-hospital-3414044-May2017/

THE RELIGIOUS SISTERS of Charity have announced that they will end their involvement with the St Vincent’s Hospital Group – and will have no involvement with the National Maternity Hospital.

Ownership of the specific piece of land at the Elm Park campus, the site of the former St Vincent’s Private Hospital, which is currently subject to a rental agreement, will be sold to SVHG at commercial terms yet to be agreed.

So please tell us where the government is handing over 'control' of this hospital to a religious order? Reds under the bed paranoia indeed.

We have a mish mash of public/private.

Nothing per say wrong with that. Holland has a similar system as do many countries with better outcomes than Ireland. A red herring really, its the implementation that is the problem.

We have a crises in retaining staff because the working conditions are appalling for front line health care workers.

True, nurses are in demand the world over. So why work for a system that is so antiquated when they can go abroad for more money and better work-life balance. The system is at fault here.

We have an admin heavy system.

Very true, yet talk about reform as in culling unneeded staff and you will have the Unions out on the picket line faster than a hare at a coursing event. No political party will want that heat.

We have a lack of accountability.

Bingo! Yes, yes, yes.

No one is accountable because that is how we like it in Ireland.
It will be grand sure...
**** it, an extra few euro for everyone in the budget and it will all be grand...
That is the attitude. From the Dail bar to the Margerat Cash of this world, everyone in it for themselves.

Top execs in the HSE are not accountable for their failure in the cervical check scandal.
Top brass of the Gardai are not accountable for the cluster **** of an organisation they have led.
Travelers are never accountable for their own life outcomes in terms of education, health and crime.

This.Is.Ireland

And we have our elderly dying on trolleys.

Yes and it does not matter if you are public or private, you can end up the same way.

Do you think Aneurin Bevan hadn't had to deal with vested interests before launching the NHS in 1948?

Different times indeed. People were more willing to play ball and collaborate for the greater good and to give up a little more for the end goal.
Now its all about retaining what you have and have the hand out for more. To hell with the greater good of the nation.

We need a government willing to take on all the vested interests with the clear message that this is being done to provide a free at point of access national health care service and get the electorate behind them.
Make it an election issue!

I agree, but do you think there is anyone in the Dail willing to do that?

Leo kinda hinted at it (taking on vested interests) a bit with this 'I am for the person who gets up in the morning' but his actions have put paid to that. Interesting the reaction he got from other parties and the media he got for that comment alone. The Tory boy or Thatcher-lite pejorative was thrown at him. Maybe he just wants to toe the line.

So, who else?
FF? Give over, they are the kings of parish pump politics.
SF? LOL, Erica Flemming called and said hello.
PBP/Solidarity? They are still dreaming of the socialist revolution. Nut jobs.
Indo? Shane Ross and their like are just after feathering their own seats.
Labour? Busted flush, full of old champagne socialists like MDH
Greens? More interested in assuming Americanisms about social justice than standing up for the average person.

Who else? No one really. Utterly depressing.

I am not saying Casey is the answer but it is kinda refreshing to have someone take on the established vested interests of the state, even if it was symbolic. To bring the topic around full circle.

Make it an election issue, all well and good, until we actually put a spotlight on the nasty boil of Irish entitlement culture and society. Then you are cast out like a diseased leper.

jmayo wrote: »

Wide ranging me ass.

Have many of them not tried to play this as rural uninformed uneducated voters just voting for Casey?
Yes the odd one might make reference to fact people may have voted for him because of his comments about social welfare rather than travellers, but it always boils down to them being a bit right wing in the end.

Joyce as good as said all Casey voters were all racists.

Only Fitzmaurice had any grasp of why people voted for Casey.
Of course the rest of the panel are probably thinking he is the country bumpkin on there to keep the plebs happy.

And earlier in the day you had the old media stalwarts like Terry Prone (lets make excuses for haughey) looking down her surgically enhanced nose at Casey voters.

Didn't hear one of them say 'rural uninformed voters'.

I think you may have a bit of a complex about that.

We are talking on a day when a humanitarian dignified, intelligent man was overwhelmingly voted in for a second term, recording a record winning vote.

I think Casey and his vote amount got more than adequate discussion.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Gallagher could easily have followed Casey down the cheap rabbithole, but he didn't, and fair play to him for that imo.

Sean (brown envelopes) Gallagher never ever had a chance..

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Serious questions Francie.

Are you surprised at Casey's vote?
Disappointed or angered?

Do you genuinely think everyone voted for Casey because of the traveller/social welfare angle? Can you countenance a lot of people are fairly piśšed off with the Cashes et al?

I dont know where it goes now, but it sure as šhit got interesting.

I am disappointed and angered (not at the result, but at the way the election was basically hijacked)

I said it several times through the thread that 20% was a failure for a single issue candidate. A man with the opposite views outpolled him by 3 to 1 votes.

Huge win if you are a democrat tbh.

I think some people really should get down off their high horses. No group should be beyond criticism in this country. Casey did well because he challenged the cosy consensus between the politicians and the media that they do not speak in bad terms about travellers and that they must always be portrayed as marginalised victims. Casey did well because he was not frightened to criticise an aspect of the traveller community. And the mainstream media response was the typical "You criticise travellers, you must be a bigot".

Casey was very brave to do this because it is not easy to do. It is not easy to go against the grain even when you know deep down you are speaking the truth. I admire him for that.

This was a vote against political correctness which stifles opinion and debate. This was a vote for free speech.