nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Pkiernan

I haven't seen or heard anything from Mary Lou, Slab Murphy and other good Republicans in ages.

What's going on?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ThunbergsAreGo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why?

Not enough people returned FG TD's to allow them to reform the government we had.

That is a judgement on the government we had, what ever way you want to look at it.

Well it was a minority government previously, so even if they had returned more TDS then the previous election, they might not have been allowed to reform the previous government

IAmTheReign

jm08 wrote: »

Its a proposal to County Councils/Local authorities, not a PR exercise.

Irish Examiner wrote:

Housing spokesperson Eoin Ó Broin issued a draft affordable housing scheme, seen by the Irish Examiner, detailing how Sinn Féin would build thousands of affordable houses if it was in government.

It's not a PR exercise, it's just a proposal for what they would do IF they get into government, while making no real attempt to enter government, that was meant for the CC/LAs but ended up in the press, that's sounds great in the media but they decide against publishing it...

It might not be a PR exercise but if it walks like a duck and all that. Regardless, the poster who brought it up said the plan had merit. I don't think it's unreasonable to want to see the plan before deciding to see if the plan has merit or not. The devils in the details as they say.

jm08 wrote: »

There are two schemes there, one is for affordable rent and one for affordable purchase. If you can't get the cash together to buy, there is the option of renting the property at a max. of €800-900 per month.

A couple with both working should be able to afford a mortgage of €230,000.

Did you read the article? Here's the relevant section for you again

Irish Examiner wrote:

The circular states that affordable homes for €230,000 or less would be available to purchase in Dublin, and other major urban areas for households whose gross incomes are between €45,000 and €75,000 per annum with a cut-off point of €50,000 for a single person.

I didn't pick the number of 45,000 out of the air, it clearly states households earning 45,000 per annum would be able to purchase. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask how they would be able to finance the purchase. A proper plan would account for these things, which is why I wanted to see it.

jm08 wrote: »

My understanding of it is that the State would continue to own the site and if selling have to sell it back to the Scheme with adjustment for increase in value which will basically mean that the State/Council continues to have affordable housing.

I'm sure there could be a formula for working out what the value of the house is based on cost of living/building etc.

Your understanding would be incorrect. The article posted said specifically that prices would be adjusted for inflation, not for increases in value. Compare inflation versus increases in property value over the last 50 years and you'll see the two are wildly different. Now maybe the article got it wrong, and the proposal does allow people to sell properties for a profit. But without seeing it we don't know do we?

dundalkfc10

Madeleine Birchfield wrote: »

Fine Gael and Fianna Fail ought to form a coalition government. We'll see then if there exists any meaningful opposition from Sinn Fein or no opposition at all.

Its clear to tell FF won't agree to go in with FG. They could jump ship to SF, which alot of their TDs seem willing to do

[Deleted User]

Fine Gael and Fianna Fail ought to form a coalition government. We'll see then if there exists any meaningful opposition from Sinn Fein or no opposition at all.

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

You're funny
You come out with the same lines all the time
Then Countered by others with opposing lines
Rinse repeat
Its like coronation street
Come back 6 months later and you haven't missed anything

Your counter such as it is, seems to be that the electorate have 'elected' whatever government now emerges here.

They haven't. Fact. And no amount of pretending that they have is going to change that fact.
The electorate have passed judgement on the government we had by not electing enough FG TD's to allow it to form again. Fact as well.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Am I alone in spotting the cognitive dissonance between these two posts?

Why?

Not enough people returned FG TD's to allow them to reform the government we had.

That is a judgement on the government we had, what ever way you want to look at it.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fact...the 'electorate' do not 'return' governments. The electorate return 'TD's'.
In 2020 the electorate did not think FG TD's were 'useful' enough to return enough of them to reform a government like the last one.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The usefulness of a sitting government is surely easily defined by the amount of people willing to vote them back in? In FG's case, useful to 20%.

Am I alone in spotting the cognitive dissonance between these two posts?

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fact...the 'electorate' do not 'return' governments. The electorate return 'TD's'.
In 2020 the electorate did not think FG TD's were 'useful' enough to return enough of them to reform a government like the last one.

You're funny
You come out with the same lines all the time
Then Countered by others with opposing lines
Rinse repeat
Its like coronation street
Come back 6 months later and you haven't missed anything

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

But you in a see through way have unsuccessfully skewed the metric to suit your argument

That doesn't change the actual metrics
The electorate in 2016 and 2020 returned a Dáil that could either have had MM or LV as Taoiseach
Not MLM
Fact
Ergo a variation on a theme

Fact...the 'electorate' do not 'return' governments. The electorate return 'TD's'.
In 2020 the electorate did not think FG TD's were 'useful' enough to return enough of them to reform a government like the last one.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You asked how the performance of a government could be 'defined as useless'. The only metric we have is the voice of the electorate and only 20% of them said they wanted FG to lead or be in a government this time out.

Your view or my view of how they performed is not relevant to that.

But you in a see through way have unsuccessfully skewed the metric to suit your argument

That doesn't change the actual metrics
The electorate in 2016 and 2020 returned a Dáil that could either have had MM or LV as Taoiseach
Not MLM
Fact
Ergo a variation on a theme

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

You need to understand a little better then
Stuff like how your party can't command enough of the electorate to form a government whilst others can
Democracy if you will

You asked how the performance of a government could be 'defined as useless'. The only metric we have is the voice of the electorate and only 20% of them said they wanted FG to lead or be in a government this time out.

Your view or my view of how they performed is not relevant to that.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I understand it wouldn't if you are in constant defend mode.

You need to understand a little better then
Stuff like how your party can't command enough of the electorate to form a government whilst others can
Democracy if you will

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

That doesn't compute

I understand it wouldn't if you are in constant defend mode.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, as the main party of 'government' only 20% see their 'usefulness'.

That doesn't compute

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

Oh so it is FG now because it suits your argument

Yes, as the main party of 'government' only 20% see their 'usefulness'.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ah so now it was a de facto coalition last time, because it suits your argument.

Oh so it is FG now because it suits your argument

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

But but but it was ffg plus independents so Shirley closer to 50%

Ah so now it was a de facto coalition last time, because it suits your argument.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The usefulness of a sitting government is surely easily defined by the amount of people willing to vote them back in? In FG's case, useful to 20%.

But but but it was ffg plus independents so Shirley closer to 50%

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

The tiny little old Republic of Ireland is Europe's fastest growing Economy and has been most of the last 2 decades ,better than the UK lower unemployment rates and higher,much higher benefits

How that's defined as useless you'll need to explain

The usefulness of a sitting government is surely easily defined by the amount of people willing to vote them back in? In FG's case, useful to 20%.

jm08

Mortelaro wrote: »

The tiny little old Republic of Ireland is Europe's fastest growing Economy and has been most of the last 2 decades ,better than the UK lower unemployment rates and higher,much higher benefits

How that's defined as useless you'll need to explain

We may have the fastest growing economy in Europe, but health and housing are a shambles. We spend more per capita on health than everyone else. The Children's hospital has got completely out of hand and the national maternity hospital isn't much better.

Housing policy is just wrong - imagine you can get incentives to build hotels and commercial buildings that you won't get to build houses.

jm08

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Where are the details of the plan available? There's no link on the article and I couldn't find anything on the SF website. I'd like to see mrore details.

Its a proposal to County Councils/Local authorities, not a PR exercise.

From what little is in the article a couple of things stands out though. Who decided 230,000 is affordable? Someone earning 45,00 certainly can't get a mortgage for a 230,000. According to the Central banks 3.5 LTI rule someone earning 45,000 can only get a mortgage for 157,500 so who would provide mortgage finance? I assume SF would propose the government lend people the money? If so that raises questions about what happens in the event of non repayment as currently happens with government housing schemes.

There are two schemes there, one is for affordable rent and one for affordable purchase. If you can't get the cash together to buy, there is the option of renting the property at a max. of €800-900 per month.

A couple with both working should be able to afford a mortgage of €230,000.

Secondly, seems these would be leasehold purchases as opposed to freehold, and properties cannot be sold for a profit.

Sounds great but how would this work in practice? Would these be sold back to the scheme who them resell to someone on the list? Or can the property owner resell to whoever they want as long as they are able to avail of the scheme? Since historically property prices rise on average far faster than inflation the second option would be open to rampant abuse. On the other hand if you have to sell back to the housing scheme do they guarantee you the price you paid plus inflation when you decide to sell? How do you factor in depreciation to the property over that time into the purchase price, or how do you factor in improvements made during the lifetime of the property?

My understanding of it is that the State would continue to own the site and if selling have to sell it back to the Scheme with adjustment for increase in value which will basically mean that the State/Council continues to have affordable housing.

I'm sure there could be a formula for working out what the value of the house is based on cost of living/building etc.

maccored

Mortelaro wrote: »

The tiny little old Republic of Ireland is Europe's fastest growing Economy and has been most of the last 2 decades ,better than the UK lower unemployment rates and higher,much higher benefits

How that's defined as useless you'll need to explain

apple, google, facebook - youve those to thank for the financial figures. homelessness, a falling to bits health service and a social welfare system thats out of control ..... thats useless. If you think the majority of the population is well off then your view is skewed. Just wait til the recession round the corner hit - then we'll see how grand your statement is

its obvious the likes of yourself and blanch152 are cheerleaders for FF and FG so its also obvious all we'll hear from you is SF bad, FF / FG good.

Mortelaro

maccored wrote: »

By the by - I have ALWAYS stated my perference for a FF/FG govn ... mainly so they can become one party and people can see how ****ing useless they are.

The tiny little old Republic of Ireland is Europe's fastest growing Economy and has been most of the last 2 decades ,better than the UK lower unemployment rates and higher,much higher benefits

How that's defined as useless you'll need to explain

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, you can't have it both ways.

You and others have told us many times that it is wrong that FF and FG rule out Sinn Fein for government because they are in government in the North, but then say we cannot measure their performance up there.

For me, it is quite legitimate to say that SF are not fit for government down here, both because there is only a limited form of government up North, and that within that limited form, they have performed abysmally (e.g. on homelessness).

cant have it boths ways? how about having a reality check - the setup in the north is not a normal government so you cant compare here to there. might suit your twisted anti shinner angle, but its not based in reality

By the by - I have ALWAYS stated my perference for a FF/FG govn ... mainly so they can become one party and people can see how ****ing useless they are.

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

how can you compare the multifaceted nationalist/unionist/neither/british government set up in the north to a normal government?

Well, you can't have it both ways.

You and others have told us many times that it is wrong that FF and FG rule out Sinn Fein for government because they are in government in the North, but then say we cannot measure their performance up there.

For me, it is quite legitimate to say that SF are not fit for government down here, both because there is only a limited form of government up North, and that within that limited form, they have performed abysmally (e.g. on homelessness).

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

I think it is a very instructive point, it gives us a chance to assess how Sinn Fein might perform if given the chance to be in government.

The abysmal performance of Sinn Fein in government in Northern Ireland should serve as a wake-up call to voters down here.

how can you compare the multifaceted nationalist/unionist/neither/british government set up in the north to a normal government?

IAmTheReign

Bishop of hope wrote: »

The SF housing proposal has merit I think.
Its a pretty detailed plan and realistic pricing involved this time.
This, will put pressure on the others to come up with something to rival it.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sinn-fein-draft-plans-for-affordable-housing-scheme-1002267.html

Where are the details of the plan available? There's no link on the article and I couldn't find anything on the SF website. I'd like to see mrore details.

From what little is in the article a couple of things stands out though. Who decided 230,000 is affordable? Someone earning 45,00 certainly can't get a mortgage for a 230,000. According to the Central banks 3.5 LTI rule someone earning 45,000 can only get a mortgage for 157,500 so who would provide mortgage finance? I assume SF would propose the government lend people the money? If so that raises questions about what happens in the event of non repayment as currently happens with government housing schemes.

Secondly, seems these would be leasehold purchases as opposed to freehold, and properties cannot be sold for a profit.

No land will be sold or transferred out of public ownership for the purpose of delivering these homes, and if an owner wishes to sell their house in years to come, they will have to sell back to within the affordable housing scheme, adjusted for inflation.

Sounds great but how would this work in practice? Would these be sold back to the scheme who them resell to someone on the list? Or can the property owner resell to whoever they want as long as they are able to avail of the scheme? Since historically property prices rise on average far faster than inflation the second option would be open to rampant abuse. On the other hand if you have to sell back to the housing scheme do they guarantee you the price you paid plus inflation when you decide to sell? How do you factor in depreciation to the property over that time into the purchase price, or how do you factor in improvements made during the lifetime of the property?

markodaly

Bishop of hope wrote: »

The SF housing proposal has merit I think.
Its a pretty detailed plan and realistic pricing involved this time.
This, will put pressure on the others to come up with something to rival it.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sinn-fein-draft-plans-for-affordable-housing-scheme-1002267.html

Very pie in the sky, they are basically saying if you have free land, no middle management, no finance costs and developers work for free, then you can have these cheap houses.

I can see all the developers queueing up already. :P

Mortelaro

Bishop of hope wrote: »

It's the tories you know, the British ones up there, the Irish ones down here.

Perhaps they should make Eoin o Broin housing minister in northern Ireland

[Deleted User]

MLD getting a lot of stick online from pro-choice groups and SF getting some praise from the DUP of all people. Will be interesting to see how she deals with it. Not so much of an all Ireland party yesterday.