Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Would you support a new Rural Political Party

1457910

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    The only way this 'new party' will have a significant presence in the next Dail is if current rural independents are reelected in a different guise. This guy puts it well

    some pundits suggesting they could plausibly win 15 seats. Which sounds like an awful lot until you realise that there’s already about 15 conservative rural-interests TDs in the Dáil. Realistically, such a party (or alliance) would probably mostly get incumbents re-elected and, I suspect, would rapidly go the way of such prior “big tent” quasi-Independent arrangements such as the Independent Alliance or New Vision...

    the story seems to have faded, with some of the highest profile rural independents saying they want nothing to do with it.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    They could be the 3rd leg in the coalition with FFG....interesting. :)

    I've made this point before but IMO that is the whole object of the exercise. The likes of Fitzmaurice are looking at the current set-up and thinking "If we independents had our ducks in a row and had been able to offer FF/FG a solid support bloc of 10-12 TDS, we could have kept the Greens and all their anti-rural policies away from government."

    Current polling suggests FF/FG will be looking to make up similar numbers after the next election, but it seems unlikely there will be a 'big small' party on the scale of the Greens to meet the demand. But the pressure will be on to get the next government up and running faster than the current one, and it would be a big ask for 10-12 completely independent independents to put together an alliance from scratch after the election, and then sit down to negotiate with FF & FG. So to avail of this opportunity, if it arises, the rural independents need to have some form of alliance, however loose, in place ahead of the election. Or that's what I believe is driving this talk of a new party anyway...



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,224 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    If anyone needs a dose of realism it`s the Irish Green Party and their supporters.


    The OEDC - FAO Agricultural Outlook Report is projecting a 14% increase in meat consumption by 2030. While the likes of Brazil are increasing their cattle numbers by 24 million, (and burning down a rainforest to facilitate that), our numpties were threatening to bring down the Government if numbers were not cut by up to 1.3 million. Even Australia by 2025 will have the highest number of cattle since the 1970`s.


    Realism is that if we culled every bovine in the country it would not make one iota of difference to global emissions as others are more than happy to step in and fill the gap rather than destroying their Agri sector which our Green Party and their acolytes are attempting to do. To add to the farce, both Brazil and Argentina are shipping 80% of the volume of meat all the way from South America to the E.U.that we, a member state does..


    Other than it being some warped virtual signalling, a dislike of farming and farmers, or Irish Greens somehow believing we live in our own little biosphere, where would Ireland culling cattle do a single thing to reduce global emissions or carbon footprint ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,108 ✭✭✭rolling boh


    A new solid bloc would definitely oust the greens and keep SF out .The question is if that bloc can be formed and stable enough to be a real option as the third wheel in the coalition.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭White Clover


    What do you mean by "sequestering is something that farms should do"?

    Do you understand the carbon cycle?

    And, can you answer why is carbon sequestration not counted when calculating Agri emissions?

    What industry do you work in yourself if you are not one of the 3 options that I gave you above?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,763 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Any group that seeks to put back the current FFG combo is unlikely to be looked on favorably by the majority of the electorate



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,290 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The whole of Ireland is "up in arms" about stuff it knows nothing about which was my point all along. Every section of Irish society bitches about stuff it knows nothing about including farmers.

    Also I have never once questioned farming methods, herd reduction or any sort of eco reductions in relation to farming.

    When the cost of food goes up so does all sorts of other things in the "urban sector" so the whinging farmer will be double hit too and the cost will spiral which is how out of control inflation works. It symbiotic not an us vs them situation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,290 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Who would this bloc represent and what would its aims be ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    I don't think 'stability' will be a major issue. The likes of Lowry bring to mind the old definition of an honest politician as one who, when he is bought, will stay bought. He stayed loyal to the FF/Green government to the bitter end, even though he's from the opposite gene poool. The problem will be coralling such a motley bunch together in the first place to the point where they can make a cohesive proposal to FF/FG. This is why I think the groundwork needs to be done before the election...



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,911 ✭✭✭older by the day


    What you can't seem to understand is that farmers are so pissed off at our FF FG rural TDs going to Dublin to vote ta' for any shite that the greens can dream up.

    It doesn't matter a fuuuck what's right and wrong but we have been blackened so we can't wait for the next election. I don't think they will even canvass farmers at this stage.

    People are looking for a centre right party.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Same as its individual members are doing as things stand: looking after their own constituents. But they'll have a few nationwide rural-friendly policies so they don't look like they're just a bunch of gombeens...



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,108 ✭✭✭rolling boh


    Still a numbers game I am not sure how many seats SF will get they should be the largest but still a long way from power unless they get a decent bloc to go in with them .Despite all the issues Ff Fg still have enough well established TD's that will get returned even if folk give out about them .I would think they will stick together even if it's just to keep SF out .If this new group take off most of them will already be in the Dail and will see the greens as the real enemy .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,493 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    if the numbers here come to pass your looking at a hung Dail.

    A cohesive group of independents might get into power but also I think SF and FF might start kite flying about putting differences aside in the national interest and democratic will of the people.

    I think we're looking at 2 out of 3 from FF, FG and SF. It's a question of if a 3rd group is needed and if so who.

    It would take very little shift in numbers from the last election for 2 parties to have a majority. In that situation I'm not sure a 3 way coalition with a partner who don't/ can't apply a whip will be what we come out with given the majority could be small. Even the greens have struggled at times to do so in this government.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,493 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    That's correct, it's the reason carbon credits should be abolished.

    Sequestration is different though, it does reduce net emissions.

    Post edited by J.O. Farmer on


  • Registered Users Posts: 41 talkie2


    yes , very disillusioned with FF/FG and the Greens are bunch of hypocrites



  • Registered Users Posts: 272 ✭✭pauly58


    I'm a bit confused reading through this thread, would a new rural party only have farmers interests at heart ; there are a lot of people who live in rural areas who aren't farmers. The state of the roads here in West Cork are worse than they were forty years ago, buses are non existent.

    I was considering not voting at all in the next election, definitely not for the current lot & I haven't any faith in SF either, so I would certainly be interested in an alternative.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    It kind of hinges on what Micheal Martin wants to do (assuming he's still leader of FF). Even if FF and FG underperform those seat projections, if they recruit Greens, Labour and SDs and rout out every last viable independent (whether or not they have come together as a 'rural alliance') they should be able to put a government together (even if only barely). If Martin means what he says here you'd think that's what they would do

    But this will surely be Martin's last spin on the merry-go-round, so maybe he has other priorities related to 'legacy'...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,493 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    I expect those numbers are probably too high for SF.

    However we are only talking about the equivalent 12 GP seats needing to be picked up by 2 out of 3 parties.

    If that happens a 2 way coalition is more likely than an anyone but Sinn Fein coalition. Such a coalition similar to what you described would be too unstable.

    If MM is still leader at that point I don't think it will matter, it's what the majority in the parliamentary party want at that point. He will either go along with it especially if he can get another stint as Taoiseach or resign as party leader as a point of principle to not lead SF into coalition with SF.

    There is of course the possibility that FF and FG get close enough to have a coalition either on their own or a 3rd smaller party such as Labour or maybe whatever greens are there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,290 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Going by this thread it would be a farmers party or an anti-Green party.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,211 ✭✭✭893bet


    Such a great post. And to add the “biosphere” only works in one direction.


    ie our emmisios are critical at a global level but our contribution to food production is not.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,122 ✭✭✭alps


    Very few are happy to pay more, including government. See now that Minister Redmond has instructed supermarkets to force down prices.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,122 ✭✭✭alps


    Reducing emissions costs money. We have Ryan and Hackett constantly proclaiming we'll get paid more for food.

    At this stage, no farmer believes that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    There is of course the possibility that FF and FG get close enough to have a coalition either on their own or a 3rd smaller party such as Labour or maybe whatever greens are there.

    Yes, if a deal with one or two of those parties took FF/FG to even a tight, 3 or 4 seat majority I think they would prefer to leave it at that rather than try to negotiate with an unwieldy independent alliance/farmers party/whatever umbrella they are operating under. But that's looking a bit of a stretch at this stage...



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,224 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    While the Irish Green Party were jumping up and down threatening to collapse the government, (and some of their supporters were salavating at the demand for up to 1.3 million head of cattle beng culled), if they didn`t get their way because according to them it was an EU requirement, the E.U. Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski addressing an IFA meeting in Dublin 30th May 2022 where he stated that the EU had no intentions of forcing Irish farmers to reduce their herd size. Going on to state that the EU`s priority was food security.

    In an interview on 21st Dec 2022 he futher reiterated that stating "In the future, we must achieve a better understanding that 0.4% of EU GDP for CAP for food security is not enough"



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It shouldn't be a farmers party.

    But, I don't think being an anti GP party is necessarily a bad thing.

    Some conversion on the road to Dam... Dail Eireann. Hypocritical comments so as not to offend his jet set voters who'd prefer someone else sort out this climate crisis thing.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/my-secrets-out-green-td-who-refuses-to-fly-for-climate-reasons-admits-he-has-pilots-licence/a48568244.html



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Castlekeeper


    I wouldn't see that as hypocritical at all,in fact the opposite, the man is setting an example of changing how he lives, practicing what he preaches so to speak.

    Most fair minded people wouldn't see anything wrong in the above.

    The mention of the word green seems very triggering these days.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,041 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Any sequestered carbon in the Agri sector is used as offset in the EU ETS carbon trading/credit scheme under LULUCF and/or the energy sector.

    If I was to get rid of all my cows, just grow grass for Bio methane production the reduction in emissions from the cows would go into the LULUCF and the reduction in CO2 due to bio methane being produced would go into the Energy sector. Agri sector would get absolutely no credit - grotesque really.

    The EU ETS is a total load of bolloxs that was purely designed to green wash and give the huge polluters and multinationals a easy ride as they are the ones creating employment and providing the golden goose 'GDP'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,808 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Pauly, thought Michael Collins would have all that sorted for you.

    If polls are correct then SF will be the largest party after the next GE. They then will have the making to the next Govn't. How will that play out? Do they put together a minority Govn't if they fail to cobble together a majority coalition?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,041 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Personally I would vote for the Rural Independent party in the morning. I believe the people of rural Ireland need a group that voices and listens our opinions. This is coming from a progressive Renewable Energy Engineer and part time farmer.

    If the rural areas of Ireland become even more forgotten about and the emphasis is solely placed on Urban centers, we will have serious socio economic divides ripple throughout Ireland. If a enforced land use change/rewetting forestry etc, being touted by the Greens is let happen the whole social fabric of rural Ireland will be destroyed as the knock on affect in terms of employment would be devastating.

    This will do nothing bar cause extreme resentment amongst the population outside of the urban centers. We only have to look at England and how badly they got things since the 80s and Thatcher. When employment steel works coal mines etc. in the midlands of England was destroyed by Thatcher and farming became increasingly unviable, there has risen an extreme divide between urban and rural - so much so it resulted in Brexit.

    Ireland will run into the exact same scenario here if we do not look after the rural areas. The Greens will only fast track these divides.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,952 Mod ✭✭✭✭Siamsa Sessions


    And de-populating rural areas flies in the face of what Brussels wants. They don't want everyone moving into cities and putting even more strain on energy, water, waste, transport, and other services. That's a recipe for uncertainty and unease in the general population, which is the last thing the EU wants. They want slow and steady development with no major potholes. They don't always get that but that's the aim.

    Neither do they want vast tracks of the countryside turning into unpopulated wasteland. This is a bigger issue on mainland Europe than in Ireland. Again, this causes uncertainty - what might happen out there? Multinationals or local authorities dumping waste? Unstable plant or wild animal populations (e.g. knotweed or wolves)? The EU can't control this but that doesn't mean they don't have policies in place to try take the edge off any such developments. Their Rural Development Program, DG-Regio, etc. is all about keeping rural and under-developed regions ticking over.

    My only point is that the urban-focussed political parties in Ireland (and they are all urban-focussed - left or right doesn't come into it in this respect) are running against the grain of what's happening in Europe. Any new "rural political party" would find common cause in Brussels and could easily out-flank the current parties when it comes to supporting rural regions.

    Trading as Sullivan’s Farm on YouTube



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,041 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Exactly and Europe knows that a politically divided nation between rural and urban could have detrimental effects on the overall EU project. If policies come into play that cause resentment and huge divides in Ireland or any other EU country, who's to say they might be more countries pulling out of the EU like the UK.

    I think that's why there is a total rethink and more than likely reversal over the Biodiversity/Nature restoration regulation etc in Europe at the minute. If that was passed into law in its current form the EU would have destroyed rural areas and come 2030 there would be huge anger, resentment and possible referendums regarding the EU project.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,356 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    They don't want everyone moving into cities and putting even more strain on energy, water, waste, transport, and other services.

    surely cities makes provision of these services much easier?



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,952 Mod ✭✭✭✭Siamsa Sessions


    Yes they do. But it's not as simple as scaling up.

    Cities have already sprawled out in recent decades so need constant investment and upgrading. Massive movements of people in short spaces of time (up to say, 10 years) mean investment can't keep up with changing needs. You're also increasing the complexity of delivering services - more points of failure, especially with everything moving online. And if something does fail in a city such as the ICT network running ATMs, it'll have a bigger impact than if the ATM system in the whole of Co. Waterford went down. So, you need bigger and more costly back-up systems for cities. That's only one simple example.

    The "business case" for fibre broadband to run up every boreen in Ireland isn't there. I accept you can't have a hospital at every crossroads either, notwithstanding the Scrooge approach being taken by the current Govt when it comes to providing health services.

    But it's all comes back to scale. Providing services doesn't follow a straight line graph when you start adding on zeros to the numbers.

    Trading as Sullivan’s Farm on YouTube



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Dismissing peoples legitimate concerns regarding national and super-national dictations as being triggered does deserve an apology.

    Your fair minded nature has blindly proven the point I'm making. He's doing something - however late in the day his transformation on the road to the Dail occurred - voluntarily. Yet he is part of a group that wants outright control of what belongs to others to satisfy an agenda, a religion almost, as opposed to solving problems in concert with the people who own the land.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,122 ✭✭✭alps


    Rural Alliance will not happen.

    By now there should be enough tinsel hat brigade arriving on the scene, hoping for this to be a vechicle to vent scepticism and far right and left wing views that the organisers original concepts will be hard to keep on track.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Castlekeeper


    My comment about people being triggered was a more general one, not directed at you specifically. If it hit a nerve, I'm sorry for you.

    You wrote a simple post, promoting an anti GP agenda, and based on an attached article, accusing a man of hypocrisy. I disagreed and highlighted the relevant text.

    Your subsequent railings about dictations and control seems like certain road users giving out about speed limits based on vehicle ownership.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,041 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    The control and dictations the Green Party and some in europe want to force on farmers will involve reducing their assets from 12,000 per acre to 0 per acre. I personally think there a huge difference between land ownership and car ownership. Would you like your assets to have a forced devaluation to being worthless?

    The Green party are willing to back the Nature restoration law in its current form to the hilt, therefore emplying they have no problem with forced land devaluation and control of other peoples assets



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,920 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    This is partly why I don't believe a full-fledged political party will emerge from the current conversations but I still think rural indepndents may go into the next election under some form of loose umbrella, mainly so they'll be in a position after the election to negotiate as a bloc about the formation of the next government, in a way they weren't this time round...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,843 ✭✭✭Lime Tree Farm




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't accept the Ivan Yates style non apology.

    The post I wrote, for anyone paying attention to that particular article, issue, and TD outlines his hobby horse of criticising the arterial drainage act as bad, promoting various intrusive dictatorial laws and legislation as good but refuses to condemn recreational flying as bad. Hypocritical. No sooner will Mr Leddin be voted out than he'll be back in the cockpit.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Castlekeeper


    It's hard to accept what isn't offered. Unless I'm missing something, which is quite possible, your post which I replied to never mentioned arterial drainage, land designation or anything else other than Brian Leddin giving up flying and you seeing it as hypocritical and using at as a stick.

    I see it as similar to someone giving up smoking. Times and attitudes to smoking have changed yet many people still have a smoking habit Most would acknowledge that it's not for the best, especially for someone in public office or a position of influence, and I doubt anyone would call someone hypocritical for giving it up, even if they worked in the health service.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Voluntary self action vs involuntary forced action.

    It's not hard.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Castlekeeper


    Exactly, personal behaviour versus public benefit.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    No. There's no public benefit to decimating vast swathes of rural Ireland due to a minority religion of rewetting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭Castlekeeper


    But that as it may be, it doesn't take away from the fact that there's credit due to him, especially as an urban TD, for giving up both his hobby and the convenience of air travel. If he were not to, then that may be considered hypocritical alright.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's easy you're taken in. I haven't been on a plane since 2017, and 2011 before that. Yet I don't feel the need to virtue signal. There's no gun to anyone's head to leave the country.



  • Posts: 1,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I would say no.

    Every party should have the interest of the whole country, urban and rural alike, front and centre, not just either / or, rural or urban.

    I would consider it the role of the locally elected TDs and/or county councillors to lobby for their constituencies.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 268 ✭✭Cyclonius


    Non-farmer here, but would gladly vote for a rural political party. Our existing political parties are too Dublin-centric, to the detriment of rural Ireland. We already have political parties that are largely urban based, in the form of the Greens, Labour, the Social Democrats, etc. Having an exclusively, or at least primarily, rural political party would be a useful counterweight.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,548 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    To be fair to him, the original story was put out there as a kind of 'Gotcha" against him, which subsequently failed. He wasnt trying to virtue signal here.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,548 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Fair play to you but how someone can say "I'd vote for them" when not a single policy has been articulated is beyond me.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement