Dublin Bay South By-Election

Yurt2 · 05-07-2021 11:21am

Larbre34 wrote: »

PBP are just like SF. Once you get below the brains trust of the top 5 or 6 operators in the party there is just a chasm of untalent.

Believe it or not, this Mary Whitehouse meets Brass Eye sketch character is touted by FG as one of their 'bright young things'

CarProblem · 05-07-2021 11:30am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have a think about what FG would have done without Labour, with the support of Ross's gang and the Kerry Mafia.

I have seen you and others post similar on this site many times. Without Labour we'd have had more FG led austerity (as an aside I think it's hilarious that people think less public expenditure could possibly be a bad thing).

Question: what happened after 2016 when FG was in power without the watchdogs of Labour?

Answer: Massive increase in government expenditure - see here

By the way this is an attack on FG, not a defence. Idiotic levels of public expenditure, debt and personal taxation are some of the main reasons (from a list of many) that I refuse to even countenance voting for any party that has been in power since 1997

Blut2 · 05-07-2021 11:41am

CarProblem wrote: »

Question: what happened after 2016 when FG was in power without the watchdogs of Labour?

Answer: Massive increase in government expenditure - see here

The state's finances in 2016 were in a very different position to 2011. The massive increase in government expenditure that was possible after 2016 was due to the economy booming 2016-2020, not FG ideology.

Chiparus · 05-07-2021 11:46am

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Even with with that MoE SF haven't a hope. And I say that as someone who took a punt on Boylan at 7/1 a month ago. It's a 2 horse race now.

This is true for pretty much all parties, the only difference being that that the morons hide it a bit better in some of the other parties.

Well, there's a shock :rolleyes:

The way the poll was carried out would lead to a bias, the fact that Irish Times took down the paywall for it also is strange.

Are they trying to channel the anti government vote in a certain direction?

That said I am not sure it is an election SF would mind losing.

CarProblem · 05-07-2021 11:46am

Blut2 wrote: »

The state's finances in 2016 were in a very different position to 2011. The massive increase in government expenditure that was possible after 2016 was due to the economy booming 2016-2020, not FG ideology.

It was possible - that's not saying it should have happened.

Why did FG simply match increased levels of income with more expenditure with no benefit to the user of public services?

Why did we need to increase the pension when inflation was practically zero and rates of poverty, at risk of poverty and deprivation are lowest among pensioners?

Why did we increase dole (twice I think) by more a week than a worker on the median wage got in a tax cut?

Why did the bill for public sector pay increase so much?

Anyway the "Labour is the watchdog for nasty FG" narrative - zero basis IMO

Brussels Sprout · 05-07-2021 11:51am

SNIP. Don't do this here please.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 12:12pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That series started weeks ago, and at a guess, was scheduled for the summer season long before Murphy resigned. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Don’t know about the other poster but I saw it more as a cock up than a conspiracy. It should have been pulled until after the election. In an environment where the mere mention of one candidate on the radio necessitates a listing of all the runners/riders, this should not have happened.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 12:15pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

This ff candidate is useless

Bad reflection on the director of election for this ocallaghan

Well now that needs to be considered. They had little in the way of prospect of winning, certainly not prospect of 2 seats. I think O’Callaghan has been on a winner of finding someone who ostensibly paints a better picture than the typical FF candidate but who can completely self-destruct (old blog posts and suing a travel company to offset against positive D case narrative) that he might have played his cards very well. He can blame the underperformance on her and not on his sway within the constituency. Overall a neutral result for him which is the best he could possibly have hoped for. Had she won or placed well then he almost certainly would have lost his seat at the next election.

Brussels Sprout · 05-07-2021 12:28pm

If Bacik does win the by-election it's going to make the next General Election in DBS very very interesting. That's due to the fact that FG will have no seat in the constituency but they will definitely win one at the next election.

The reason for that is that their vote may not be enough to reach the 50% quota needed to win a by-election but it will definitely be enough to hit the 20% quota required to take a seat in a 4-seat General Election.

In that scenario what sitting TD would lose out?

Eamon Ryan - topped the poll last time out but will likely see a drop in his support as a result of being in government
Chris Andrews - a surprise winner last time around. As the largest opposition party SF would be expected to do even better next time around so he would be expected to hold on
Ivana Bacik - Labour traditionally had a seat here (with Ruarí Quinn) and Bacik has a high enough profile to potentially hold this especially as an opposition TD
Jim O'Callaghan - got elected on the final count here in 2016 & 2020. Could potentially be a minister (or even Tanaiste) by the time of the next election (if MM stands down after leading the Taoiseach's office)

blackwhite · 05-07-2021 1:04pm

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

If Bacik does win the by-election it's going to make the next General Election in DBS very very interesting. That's due to the fact that FG will have no seat in the constituency but they will definitely win one at the next election.

The reason for that is that their vote may not be enough to reach the 50% quota needed to win a by-election but it will definitely be enough to hit the 20% quota required to take a seat in a 4-seat General Election.

In that scenario what sitting TD would lose out?
Eamon Ryan - topped the poll last time out but will likely see a drop in his support as a result of being in government

Chris Andrews - a surprise winner last time around. As the largest opposition party SF would be expected to do even better next time around so he would be expected to hold on

Ivana Bacik - Labour traditionally had a seat here (with Ruarí Quinn) and Bacik has a high enough profile to potentially hold this especially as an opposition TD

Jim O'Callaghan - got elected on the final count here in 2016 & 2020. Could potentially be a minister (or even Tanaiste) by the time of the next election (if MM stands down after leading the Taoiseach's office)

I think Andrews would be the only one that could be considered "safe" in that scenario TBH. He'll likely poll in the 16-19% range, and pick up enough transfers from PBP INDs and SDs to get over the line.

Ryan has a fairly strong personal vote in the constituency, and I think he'll get enough FPVs and take enough transfers to hold on - but won't be straight in on first count like last time.

O'Callaghan could struggle to get above 13-14% (similar to 2020). He really struggled for transfers last time, and hard to see where he gets any new ones next time out.

If Bacik takes this seat then she will struggle to retain it. Her path to winning the bye-election is based on transfers from the Green and SF candidates being eliminated. In a full election, she needs one or both of those to be eliminated to get her enough transfers. If Ryan and Andrews both retain their seats, then it's very hard to see a path for Labour to hold a seat as well.

The biggest question in DBS for the next general election will be whether FG go for 1 or 2 candidates. Last time out they were a whisker from taking the 2nd seat, but if they are going into an election with no sitting TD then they could be tempted to go for the "sure thing" instead of putting up two candidates and not being sure which of them might miss out.

Annasopra · 05-07-2021 1:18pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Just for info folks

SF already have a husband and wife combo in the dail

David cullinane and Kathleen funchion

I thought they were divorced

Blut2 · 05-07-2021 1:27pm

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

If Bacik does win the by-election it's going to make the next General Election in DBS very very interesting. That's due to the fact that FG will have no seat in the constituency but they will definitely win one at the next election.

The reason for that is that their vote may not be enough to reach the 50% quota needed to win a by-election but it will definitely be enough to hit the 20% quota required to take a seat in a 4-seat General Election.

In that scenario what sitting TD would lose out?
Eamon Ryan - topped the poll last time out but will likely see a drop in his support as a result of being in government

Chris Andrews - a surprise winner last time around. As the largest opposition party SF would be expected to do even better next time around so he would be expected to hold on

Ivana Bacik - Labour traditionally had a seat here (with Ruarí Quinn) and Bacik has a high enough profile to potentially hold this especially as an opposition TD

Jim O'Callaghan - got elected on the final count here in 2016 & 2020. Could potentially be a minister (or even Tanaiste) by the time of the next election (if MM stands down after leading the Taoiseach's office)

O'Callaghan will really struggle in this scenario I'd imagine. FF's Dublin and/or aged under 50 support numbers are already horrific, and with every year that goes by getting worse as what remains of their vote base quite literally dies off and they're deemed more and more out of touch.

If it was an FF backbencher they'd have absolutely no hope. But if O'Callaghan is leader of the party by then it does give him a chance at least.

jm08 · 05-07-2021 1:37pm

Blut2 wrote: »

O'Callaghan will really struggle in this scenario I'd imagine. FF's Dublin and/or aged under 50 support numbers are already horrific, and with every year that goes by getting worse as what remains of their vote base quite literally dies off and they're deemed more and more out of touch.

If it was an FF backbencher they'd have absolutely no hope. But if O'Callaghan is leader of the party by then it does give him a chance at least.

Chris Andrews would have taken a large slice of the FF vote with him to SF. One thing I'll say for Jim O'Callaghan - he is one of the few Councillors/TDs in this constituency that has been knocking on doors continually for the last few years. He is a very hard worker, and if he is the next leader of FF, I'd say he might take back a few votes from Chris Andrews in next gen. election.

Faugheen · 05-07-2021 2:13pm

Annasopra wrote: »

I thought they were divorced

They are.

Blut2 · 05-07-2021 4:07pm

jm08 wrote: »

Chris Andrews would have taken a large slice of the FF vote with him to SF. One thing I'll say for Jim O'Callaghan - he is one of the few Councillors/TDs in this constituency that has been knocking on doors continually for the last few years. He is a very hard worker, and if he is the next leader of FF, I'd say he might take back a few votes from Chris Andrews in next gen. election.

My impression of O'Callaghan is hes actually one of the better TDs in FF. Hes exactly what they need as leader to modernise the party and win back some urban support. Its just unfortunate that he happens to be in a very competitive constituency where theres no secure FF seat. If he was in Dublin West or Dun Laoghaire he'd be much safer.

KevRossi · 05-07-2021 4:11pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

This ff candidate is useless

Bad reflection on the director of election for this ocallaghan

O'Callaghan probably wanted her to run as she hasn't a hope. Means he has a free run at it at the next GE. That's also why he was made her Director of Elections, he can make sure she polls really badly.

05-07-2021 5:03pm

Once again the Indo/Sindo axis making a right tool of themselves. Giving very supportive and positive feedback about James Geoghegan while dismissing other candidates by giving them less coverage. I keep on saying this and I will say it again. The FG Indo/sindo are a danger to press freedom and democracy. They continue to turn a blind eye on the dark side of FG and continuously attack and discredit SF with gutter clickbait in order to satisfy their FG friends. Praying that Ivana Bacik will win the DBS by-election for those reasons in the above that I mentioned.

KevRossi · 05-07-2021 5:30pm

The Sindo got Kate O'Connell elected in 2016. They did anything to get Lucinda Creighton out. It's a privately owned newspaper so they can pretty much print whatever opinion they want, that's the pity of it.

AndrewJRenko · 05-07-2021 6:03pm

CarProblem wrote: »

I have seen you and others post similar on this site many times. Without Labour we'd have had more FG led austerity (as an aside I think it's hilarious that people think less public expenditure could possibly be a bad thing).

Question: what happened after 2016 when FG was in power without the watchdogs of Labour?

Answer: Massive increase in government expenditure - see here

By the way this is an attack on FG, not a defence. Idiotic levels of public expenditure, debt and personal taxation are some of the main reasons (from a list of many) that I refuse to even countenance voting for any party that has been in power since 1997

It's far from hilarious from those who depend on public expenditure for their health, their housing, their safety, their access to economic opportunities - for those people, less public expenditure is a serious threat to their health and welfare.

Comparing 2011 to 2016 is comparing apples and oranges - vastly different economic environments. We were literally bankrupt and depending on lenders for daily support in 2011.

AndrewJRenko · 05-07-2021 6:06pm

CarProblem wrote: »

It was possible - that's not saying it should have happened.

Why did FG simply match increased levels of income with more expenditure with no benefit to the user of public services?

Why did we need to increase the pension when inflation was practically zero and rates of poverty, at risk of poverty and deprivation are lowest among pensioners?

Why did we increase dole (twice I think) by more a week than a worker on the median wage got in a tax cut?

Why did the bill for public sector pay increase so much?

Anyway the "Labour is the watchdog for nasty FG" narrative - zero basis IMO

What kind of increases in public expenditure had no benefit to users? We wouldn't have been able to keep public services going at all on the austerity levels of 2008-2010, either in terms of absolute number of employees or ability to retain skilled employees in their posts.

The bill for public sector pay increased 'so much' because we had cut numbers of public servants to bare survival levels. Ask any parent who needed an SNA or nursing care to follow a critical operation.

Beechwoodspark · 05-07-2021 6:07pm

KevRossi wrote: »

O'Callaghan probably wanted her to run as she hasn't a hope. Means he has a free run at it at the next GE. That's also why he was made her Director of Elections, he can make sure she polls really badly.

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 6:16pm

Forgot that FF oddity that they used to expect of the entire front bench. Wasn't Martin the only one to do so in 2011?

When you can no longer be sure of even one seat in every constituency it becomes unworkable but if they choose to cling to it that's their choice!

jm08 · 05-07-2021 6:26pm

L1011 wrote: »

Forgot that FF oddity that they used to expect of the entire front bench. Wasn't Martin the only one to do so in 2011?

When you can no longer be sure of even one seat in every constituency it becomes unworkable but if they choose to cling to it that's their choice!

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

KevRossi · 05-07-2021 6:30pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

I disagree. The days when FF were guaranteed 2 seats in most constituencies is long gone. Added to that, DBS and its preceding versions were always a bit fickle in how they voted. I think they have some record of failing to elect sitting ministers, but I could be wrong on that (it could be Dun Laoghaire).

Nobody in FF would expect JOC to bring in a 2nd running matein this bye-election, least of all someone as poor as Conroy. They had other options but knew that they had no hope of a seat. It suits JOC that he'll be the only one running there at the next GE. I actually don't see any party getting more than one seat there at the next GE.

As for JOC, he'll put JOC first, party second, country third.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 6:41pm

jm08 wrote: »

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

I meant the only FF TD at all - its almost solely an FF obsession that you need to get the running mate in to be seen as serious.

And I was wrong, on checking the list there were two in Laois Offaly - Fleming and Cowen II - as well as Martin and McGrath

In that election Enda Kenny had three running mates elected! Not common since the days of 9 seaters.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

There is no hope of a second FF TD in DBS and that would be clear to FF. JO’C’s actual problem is that his own seat is not safe.

Augme · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

I doubt I'll ever see two FF TDs elected in a Dublin constituency ever again. They've completely lost their way in Dublin and will find it extremely difficult to get it back unless there is a massive shift in their mind set.

Marcusm · 05-07-2021 7:03pm

jm08 wrote: »

Leo has never brought in another FG TD in his constituency. FF got 2 in MM Cork South Central last time which was very good going as Coveney is in that constituency as well.

Remember, Cork is an oddity all of its own. One female TD and is it 6 or 7 Michaels.

L1011 · 05-07-2021 7:05pm

Marcusm wrote: »

Remember, Cork is an oddity all of its own. One female TD and is it 6 or 7 Michaels.

And two unrelated Moynihans in the same constituency for the same party.

zimmermania · 05-07-2021 9:07pm

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I know you are probably saying this half in jest but if JOC has designs on FF leadership (which appears to be the case) then he simply must show he can bring in a running mate in his constituency.

He is failing miserably regarding this, this time out at least...

There will be fierce backbiting in FF should she (and by extension JOC) have a ‘mare of an election.

It’ll be a stick used to beat him by rivals in FF, you can be sure of it.

It certainly is not JOCs fault that FF chose a poor candidate who has not got a prayer of competing with some of the women candidates and is going to poll badly.

Blut2 · 05-07-2021 10:28pm

Dublin Bay South byelection candidate James Geoghegan organised an event for politicians expelled from Fine Gael for their opposition to abortion legislation.

Geoghegan also wrote a number of policy papers for the group of expelled politicians.

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

Yellow_Fern · 05-07-2021 10:36pm

Blut2 wrote: »

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

Breezer · 06-07-2021 12:16am

CarProblem wrote: »

By the way this is an attack on FG, not a defence. Idiotic levels of public expenditure, debt and personal taxation are some of the main reasons (from a list of many) that I refuse to even countenance voting for any party that has been in power since 1997

Out of interest, who would you countenance voting for then? Surely any party that hasn’t been in power since 1997, except perhaps far right parties, espouses more public spending than FG? I agree FG has actually spent quite a bit, but if you value fiscal conservatism, surely it is still the best of a bad lot?

banquo · 06-07-2021 2:34am

Chiparus wrote: »

That said I am not sure it is an election SF would mind losing.

Ah I'd say they'd love to clear out Andrews there and swap in Boylan.

I imagine (but do not know) that they'll have a few reps they'd love to replace in the next election.

banquo · 06-07-2021 2:36am

zimmermania wrote: »

It certainly is not JOCs fault that FF chose a poor candidate who has not got a prayer of competing with some of the women candidates and is going to poll badly.

This is true. JOC had no say in her selection, and it looks more like MM lumped him with DOE as a poison chalice.

Tbh, if she gets above 5%, I'll be impressed.

L1011 · 06-07-2021 8:13am

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

Being familiar with academic literature is no use if your party isn't going to do whatever is suggested regardless

iffandonlyif · 06-07-2021 8:33am

Has Una Mullally’s article on James Geoghegan been mentioned? Behind paywall, but the sub-headline is, ‘Dublin Bay South candidate has run superficial campaign based on brand of bland nothingness.’ Seems bizarre to single out a candidate for criticism like that.

Blut2 wrote: »

https://www.ontheditch.com/james-geoghegan-organised-conference-for-anti-abortion-tds-senators/

This sort of news coming out definitely won't be helping Geoghegan with younger or female voters.

I actually went to that conference because it seemed like it might be a significant moment in Irish politics (how wrong I was). I went as a sceptic and came away doubly so, but calling it a conference for anti-abortion TDs is very misleading. It was more a platform for pie-in-the-sky ideas for reform in Ireland. David McWilliams and Olivia O’Leary spoke, whom you’d hardly expect at a conservative conference.

blackwhite · 06-07-2021 10:30am

Mullaly also spends plenty of time giving out about how Geoghegan "comes from an intensely privileged background", but then cheerleads for Bacik who comes from the truly "humble beginnings" (to quote Mullaly's criticism of Geoghegan) of her family being the founders of Waterford Crystal.

No issue with either of their backgrounds, but using it to attack one candidate whilst cheerleading for another who also comes from a wealthy background is hypocrisy at it's finest (but no surprise from Mullaly tbh)

Brussels Sprout · 06-07-2021 10:31am

Johnny Fallon has released a podcast on the by-election. Clocking in at over 2 hours it's his usual deep dive:

https://twitter.com/jonnyfallon/status/1411768156226473986

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 10:58am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What kind of increases in public expenditure had no benefit to users?

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 11:03am

Breezer wrote: »

Out of interest, who would you countenance voting for then? Surely any party that hasn’t been in power since 1997, except perhaps far right parties, espouses more public spending than FG? I agree FG has actually spent quite a bit, but if you value fiscal conservatism, surely it is still the best of a bad lot?

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Yurt2 · 06-07-2021 11:42am

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Geoghegan seems to be the only candidate who seems to be at least vaguely familiar with the academic literature on how to actually improve the housing market but yet people will vote against because he was formerly prolife. Joke of an electorate.

I haven't seen Geoghegan waxing lyrical about his knowledge of the intricacies of housing, but one thing you should know about barristers:

They are experts at condensing masses of information about a case, vomiting it back out using rhetoric and flourish to sound convincing, and then if you ask them 5 minutes later what they said, they'll give you a blank stare.

They're like actors in funny wigs. Simply put, they're paid to know their lines - and that looks very much like Geoghegan.

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:53am

CarProblem wrote: »

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

There are no religious parties/zenophobic parties in the Dail.

So you want more expenditure?

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:54am

Yurt! wrote: »

I haven't seen Geoghegan waxing lyrical about his knowledge of the intricacies of housing, but one thing you should know about barristers:

They are experts at condensing masses of information about a case, vomiting it back out using rhetoric and flourish to sound convincing, and then if you ask them 5 minutes later what they said, they'll give you a blank stare.

They're like actors in funny wigs. Simply put, they're paid to know their lines - and that looks very much like Geoghegan.

Bacik is a barrister.

hotmail.com · 06-07-2021 11:59am

CarProblem wrote: »

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

FG is the only party to suggest reducing income tax in the next few years. They also reduced the top rate of tax under Michael Noonan.

If you want lower income tax, FG is the party for you.

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2021 12:03pm

CarProblem wrote: »

I don't believe I or anyone should accept mediocrity so "best of a bad bunch" isn't what I believe we should settle for. I don't settle for it in my daily life, I don't accept it from my team in work and I'm not going to settle for it when voting

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Can't wait for SF to get a term in Government so you can rule them out too.

CarProblem wrote: »

Irrelevant to the point I was making but.....

No matter how much we spend I never see increased user experience in Public Services. I have 2 extended family members that have been exposed to the vagaries of health services (one with physical Health problems, one with mental). The so called care both received would shame a third world country, not one spending huge amounts per capita on health and taxing to death anyone with a half decent income

No point arguing - you appear to think we get value for money in public services, I don't.

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making btw which is there is no evidence around the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards when the "right wing" :rolleyes: FG continued to tax workers heavily, spend freely (with IMO little to no improvement in services) and increase welfare even further

You brought up the issue, so don't blame me for the irrelevance.

I don't think the experience of your two extended family members is a great measure of the success or otherwise of the health service.

Have a look at the improvements in cancer outcomes, or stroke outcomes. Have a look at the quality of services provided to people with CF or residential services for people with intellectual disabilities.

There is a lot wrong with the health services, and lots of room for improvement. But to say we've had no improvement in services is just not true, by any objective measure.

FG manifesto had planned a €4 billion sell off of state assets. Labour's agreement to the Programme for Govt brought this down to €2 billion. The power lines bringing electricity to your house and the gas line fuelling your central heating (if you're in a big city) would almost certainly be in private hands today without Labour in govt. That's one very specific change to FG policy brought about by Labour in govt.

Brussels Sprout · 06-07-2021 12:07pm

CarProblem wrote: »

The first (non religious zealot / non xenophonic) party that merely looks at our model of expenditure and taxation and says out loud its unsustainable will get my vote. They don't even have to agree with me that its idiotic, unfair and completely punishes ambition. Just recognise in public that it's unsustainable

Until then my mantra is (almost) anyone but FF/FG/Labour/GP.

Sounds like the Progressive Democrats are the party for you. Unfortunately they spontaneously combusted in 2007 so FG are the only party that are anywhere near what you want but you've ruled them out so you're out of luck.

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 12:13pm

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

so you're out of luck.

And I recognise that

But until (if ever) I get a party I want to vote for I'll continue to vote against what we've been getting for the last 20+ years

CarProblem · 06-07-2021 12:15pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You brought up the issue, so don't blame me for the irrelevance.

Any response to there is no evidence for the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards or do you still want to continue eulogising over the Irish public sector?

AndrewJRenko · 06-07-2021 12:16pm

CarProblem wrote: »

Any response to there is no evidence for the "Labour saved us from nasty FG" narrative based on FG actions from 2016 onwards or do you still want to continue eulogising over the Irish public sector?

Did you read my post?

FG manifesto had planned a €4 billion sell off of state assets. Labour's agreement to the Programme for Govt brought this down to €2 billion. The power lines bringing electricity to your house and the gas line fuelling your central heating (if you're in a big city) would almost certainly be in private hands today without Labour in govt. That's one very specific change to FG policy brought about by Labour in govt.

Dublin Bay South By-Election

Comments