Forming the next Irish Government - policies and personalities

You do know that Denmark, Finland and norway are all unicameral so it's impossible to compare

The wholly negative start continues unabated. Some of the coalition were hugely excercised about waste and profligate spending before so let's see can they do something now they are inside the wall…so to speak.

Ah yeah,lightweight stuff really though compared to the trials and tribulations of the previous government and they still won the election

Mainly because,the answer to the Trump question in the exit poll ,are you better off than you were 5 years ago for most voters was yes

Depends on definition really

Mine would include in the recipe whether you can form a government or not

I don’t think this current government use the terminology at all but yes defacto,they did win it as it was returned (thankfully without the greens)

The Taoiseach/Tanaiste were not the 'last government' Pureza no matter what you think.

Very difficult to debate with someone who pivots like yourself.

The 'previous government' did NOT 'win the election'.

To deflect from the point made about waste you claimed 'the previous government' 'won the election'.
Pivot, deflect some more, but they didn't.
The previous Tanaiste, Taoiseach did a deal with a raft of independents and formed a new government.

My point was not about that 'new' government but continued examples of waste by departments which seem to not be under the control of their line ministers, those of previous governments or this one.

We now have in government people who complained and criticised that waste/overspend/lack of accountability. Would you call on them to now do something about it and seek accountability or not?

Or is it, 'as you where' because the Tanaiste and Taoiseach are back in the same office and 'won' the right to continue the waste/overspend/lack of accountabilty?

By 2040 on current population projections, we will be going past 200 TDs. At that point, it will definitely be more cost-efficient to have more Ministers and junior Ministers than foghorns looking for social media exposure.

So let me get this straight. The government is not the same government, but they have had too many years in power and are clinging to power at whatever grubby cost???

Do you realise that you are maintaining two completely contradictory positions at the same time?

Nothing was dodged.

I asked you a direct question: "So a job shouldn't be given on merit, then?"

There are two possible answers to this question, either you do, or you do not. You didn't address it, therefore you dodged it. Feel free to answer yes or no now but, just in case you're unaware (which everyone reading this doesn't believe) if you answer anything else other than a yes or a no, that's another dodge.

You're trying to ignore the basic facts that gender quotas have been effective in bringing out signficant improvements

[Citation needed]

That's a pretty big assertion to be making with SFA to back it up. Correlation ≠ causation. We have made huge strides in improving the access and availability of decent, high-paying jobs to women that were previously out of reach. Access is the important word in that sentence. If you have ten candidates for a job and you select one based on their sex, you, sir, are a sexist.

The new legisation came in in 2012, to apply from 2016 onwards. In the 2016 election, women's representation in the Dáil increased from 15.1% to 22.2%. This further improved in the 2020 election, reaching 22.5% of TDs. In the current Dáil, there are 37 women TDs, representing 23.3% of the total 160 seats. This is the highest number of women TDs in the history of the Irish parliament.

And you want to take away these quotas for some reason, rather than continuing to work towards a gender balanced Dáil?

No, I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth to bolster your own feeble argument, which is a particularly nasty habit of yours. I said having a quota for the number of TDs is sexist. I never mentioned candidates, which is what the legislation addresses.

Why should the Dáíl be gender balanced? Why should anything be gender balanced? Why would you pick a worse candidate because they do/do not have a pair of tits? Surely you'd want the best person for the job, no matter their sex, sexual orientation, race, religion etc. Especially when that job could potentially impact the lives, health and financial situation of literally millions of people. Insisting that a certain sex or gender are better at representing their gender is also, in and of itself, sexist.

Positive action measures in employment have been around since the 1980s, with mixed successes. They aren't some imported 'woke DEI' initiative. They were around long before that and they'll be around long after that.

Cool story bro. This has nothing to do with the argument being made. (My argument, for the sake of clarity). I never mentioned the word woke, BTW, so I've no idea who you're proselytising to.

It is not discrimination to level the playing field and ensure equal access for all, regardless of gender, age, disability and more.

It is discrimination if you level the playing field by excluding a candidate because they piss standing up.

Again, the important word in your sentence is ACCESS.

Do women have equal access to running for office?……Yes, of course they do.

Were they deemed suitable enough and were they voted for by the public in sufficient numbers to match some bullsh1t quota?…………No, they weren't.

So wtf is the problem, then? They had equal access and were rejected based on their policies and promises. Same as all the men who didn't make it. Equal access is ALREADY in place. You're trying to subvert that by giving PREFERRED ACCESS to women because of historic transgressions, which is, again, sexist.

You have been claiming for the last few pages that this government is not the same as the last government.

You have been claiming for the last few years that the two parties of FF and FG are always the government.

You have also been claiming for the last few years that the smaller parties and independents that go into government with FF and/or FG are mudguards and never achieve anything policy wise and are irrelevant hence SF won't go into government.

The first statement of yours is in complete contradiction of the last two long-held views.

It is as simple as that. Oh, and before you ask me in a nitpicking pedantic way to point to which of your tens of thousands posts said those, I am paraphrasing, which allows me to summarise.

For instance as the government TD just revealed on RTE and had no explanation for - 14 Hubs have been rolled out but 11 of them are in one county. That's bizarre and there needs to be accountability for why that happened. There also needs to be discussion of aid and emergency resources. And steps that need to be taken before we have another event re: the failure of maintenance on power lines. Multiple people claiming trees haven't been cut back in years etc. Indeed I have a tree overgrowing from neighbouring land here and it is growing through 3 phase powerlines, nothing done in several years despite EI being told of it.

Cutting back trees is the responsibility of local authorities.

And everything else you mentioned is guff.

There is plenty of time to be the arm chair general once the situation has passed and everyone has their water and power back, but you don't do a review in the middle of an incident. No one does that, NO ONE!