Following on from
this thread
Please remain civil or posting privileges will be removed
Always taught Italy had a fairly solid base for far right,as people will get fedup of the endless coalitions and it's endless stagnation,while being at forefront of immigration crisis
As a Techie, I'm too busy to sort out the country's problems. :) Seriously though, politicians are generally reined in by their departments though some of them do have ideas of their own and cause problems.
Regards...jmcc
It does. But the war in Ukraine has caused a lot of countries to reevaluate their blind obedience to German directives on various matters. Austerity was largely a German idea and it caused massive problems in Ireland. The problem with FFG is that they are always looking for a pat on the head from Berlin/Brussels.
Not all politicians are the same.
I admire your optimism. Once they get into office, they find that what they can do is often quite limited. Some of them have been complete disasters and others less so. Donohoe and McGrath are unusual in that they have business backgrounds.
Well that's kind of my point. Different politicians have different capabilities and that's what should govern appointments rather than parity of esteem between political parties or geography, regional balance etc.
If Donohoe is the best man for the job leave him there. If he's done a bad job move him on.
As per Martins comments this morning he's only interested in what's best for Fianna Fáil rather than what is best for the country.
I didn't catch this personally, but sounds like DOB got destroyed.
When I first saw that, I wondered was it Dara or Denis? :) It damages FFG's claims about how it is dealing with the Housing issue.
Italy's problem is that there is a very low bar of 3% for parties to get into Parliament. In such a politically divided country you will get all manner of extremes of representation. They did propose bringing it up to 5% but it was never agreed.
They are not losing a whole lot by McGrath switching and it remains the same pairing. Apart from it being part of the deal it gives FF a chance to look like they are finally looking after the national finances for the first time in over a decade.
Loads of these schemes launching now but most are 12 months away from delivering the first house on site. 157 families actually housed sounds about right.
It's a very easy format, on any given day pick a problem like housing that is extremely slow and complex to fix and one that people get very wound up about, then get the minister in, preferably the right one, and go all Paxman on them to hold them to account and you have a news cycle. I don't deny that all of this seems frustratingly slow but I also understand there are massive lead times. There's a section of a new estate at the back of the gym I go to and they have been clearing the ground almost since pre-COVID. It's really only in the last 3-4 months that houses have suddenly begun to appear and even at that it's a limited number of units at a time.
So you're agreeing that its just for the sake of party politics.
We do appear to be losing the presidency of the Eurogroup of finance ministers if the switch goes ahead.
If you can understand that there are massive lead times surely the minister can? Why set unachievable targets?
It was just another FFG government plan. Great targets, no details...
You get used to it.
Such things tend to be agreed by stakeholders as targets. Why they seem to be so far off for this year is unknown and usually gets lost in all the political point scoring of how much of a disaster housing is.
According to Martin it's part of the deal for government so a deal is a deal. Regardless there will be a major reshuffle anyway. The Donohue Eurogroup position is still unclear at present but is also a form of party politics to want to keep him there just to hang onto that position.
It was very clear from the minister's interview yesterday why they are so far off target. It was never intended that there would be 4,100 affordable/cost rental homes built this year. Homes bought under the first home (shared equity) scheme are included in this target and the minister only launched this scheme in July despite talking about it for much of the year. Whether you agree or disagree with the shared equity scheme it's impossible for it to pick up the slack given the timeframes.
I think it would be in Ireland's best interest to keep that position and not just party politics. A deal is a deal? Should we apply that to all utterances made by those in power? I'm still waiting for the USC to be abolished, waiting lists to be reduced etc etc.
USC will not be abolished now as it's a perfect tax which catches almost everyone and nets the State €4bn+ annually. Nobody really wants to get rid of it but it can be adjusted. SF may have had abolition as a policy in the past but think even they have now tweaked that.
We all know it won't be abolished anymore but to quote your "a deal is a deal" guff, did Fine Gael not make a deal with the electorate on this??
How do we ascertain when politicians are lying or telling the truth?
It was reported that Martin said it was going ahead, but when I read his words, there is enough wriggle room for a change. I am sure he would be happy to stay on as Taoiseach if presidency of Eurogroup is that important.
Will FG let him stay on as Taoiseach?
They did promise to do so around 2014 IIRC but they went quiet when they spotted just how good a tax it is. The lying thing is down to you. Personally believe very few election promises and commitments in government generally get shown up pretty quickly. Some may be lies but mostly they tend to be incompetence, bad planning, poorly enacted or just stupid overpromising, which Labour have down to an art form.
I think you'll find lying is down to the person who speaks not the person who listens.
Sure, but it's up to you to decide what you feel about that. You can go all six year old on the lying thing or just not vote for them in future. I don't think there is too much of the outright lying but a hell of a lot of misplaced hubris about what can be achieved.
What's the benefit to Ireland of PD being president of the EU group exactly?
Once again it looks like LAs are at fault.
Here's a bit more on "pipelines".
No, but he could play the game on Paschal.
A lot of it is intangible but the president chairs and sets the agenda for the eurogroup meetings which gives Ireland influence beyond its size. Better than the next minister of finance sitting down the back of the room with his hand up waiting for an opportunity to speak.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c6e76a2e0d85c3808d93c2f75a0c528d.svg)
