Forming the next Irish Government - policies and personalities

Just like Super Junior Ministers, the requirement for PQs is not set out in the Constitution. If it was, you can point me to the relevant section.

I'd love to know how the worst storm for many decades is supposed to hit a country, any country, and cause no infrastructural damage.

Can you point to anyone who has said the bolded bit?

I'm not dodging anything. I'm not engaging in your bad faith arguements. You can knock yourself out if you want to dance around and ignore decades of evidence around female representations in parliaments.

What kind of 'proof' did you have in mind? As you already knew, it's a little bit tricky to provide any conclusive proof of any social change like this. What level of 'proof' would convince you that the growth in female representatives in general elections AND indeed in local elections in the decade after the new legislation landed would actually convince you of what everyone else can see, that these measures work?

In the 2016 local elections, women held about 20.1% of the seats. By the 2019 local elections, this figure had increased to 23.9%1. In the most recent 2024 local elections, women now hold 26% of the seats. What's your explanation for the improvements in female representation in local and general elections since the legislation was introduced?

You spent the last two days refusing to acknowledge or answer simple, straightforward questions. Repeatedly. That is what's known in the business as dodging them. You are now attempting to paint that dodging of the questions as some sort of noble, artful, refusal to engage in bad faith arguments, when the truth is it undermines your entire argument when you run from the uncomfortable truths those questions would expose.

You are also demonstrating that you've no idea what a bad faith argument is in the first place.

decades of evidence around female representations in parliament.

Decades of evidence that you have refused to supply, naturally. You've also just changed the goalposts. We were talking about Irish women in politics and the legislation introduced in the med 2010s. How can something that's been around for less than 9 years count as "decades"?

What kind of 'proof' did you have in mind? 

I don't have any kind of proof in my mind, because it's not my argument. You might as well ask me what kind of proof I'd need that JFK is behind 9/11. I've no fcuking idea because I don't think for a second that it's true.

You made the claim, either back it up with evidence or it will be dismissed without evidence. It's fairly simple. Simply saying "hurrr durr, more women in Government = quotas are a good thing, ipso facto" is, quite frankly, a load of shite. No direct causal link other than your own imagination. Do you know why those women were elected? No, of course you don't. But you're standing there claiming it's because of a sexist policy because it suits your argument. Truth is you made a claim, have nothing to back it up and were called out on it. Instead of accepting that, you're digging the heels in trying to say you've won.

It's not up to me to set the bar, it is up to you as the person making the argument to back it up and for everyone else to judge that argument based on the proof provided (or lack thereof). This sentence of yours, believe it or not, is an actual bad faith argument. You are pretending to be open to negotiation when, I think, the truth is you are nothing of the sort.

What's your explanation for the improvements in female representation in local and general elections since the legislation was introduced?

What's good for the goose, eh……..?

I am refusing to answer a single question of yours until you have answered mine (and there's more than one outstanding, btw). At least I have the balls to say it your face, though, instead of trying to weasel my way out of answering them.

You've made a claim, were queried on it, ignored the query, claimed you had backed the claim up, ignored the query again, then claimed victory. Now you're looking for detractors to provide proof of your claim? Absolute clownshow stuff.

 As you already knew, it's a little bit tricky to provide any conclusive proof of any social change like this.

I completely reject this assertion out of hand. I have also asked you before to stop putting words in my mouth, I already knew nothing of the sort. Please don't do so again.

an informal technical group? increasing time for questions still means opposition get relatively less time then they had.

Which bit of 'there will be no reduction of allocation of time to any party/group' did you not get?
No idea if this will be acceptable but there certainly is no suggestion they are proposing Opposition getting less time than they had.

'there will be no reduction of allocation of time to any party/group'

increase overall time, still means the ratio can change, as they see RIG as gov not opposition.

I don't know why you are cheerleading this non-solution.

the time for groups was always parcelled out relative to the number of groups, and thus should be viewed in a relative/ratio manner, not as absolute time.

Drivetime just had a segment on only 33,000 properties getting built in 2024 and discussing today's paper report that the experts say that figure will be lower in 2025

No Government rep available to speak on the show

Seems like FFFG plan is to just ignore their claims of 40,000 houses built in 2024 until everyone forgets about it

Paul Murphy and MLMD moving the goalposts, quelle surprise.

It was about speaking time, we were told. No, it wasn't.

For Paul Murphy and MLMD, it was always about silencing voices that disagreed with them.

And have been since this kicked off…but SF are controlling them apparently/allegedly.

This proposal of a solution isn't a solution. It still gives a government grouping all the rights of an opposition group.

They should be treated the exact same way back benchers of FF or FG are treated. Anything else and they straddle the line of government and opposition and it's a joke.

There are no rights of an opposition group.

The court case being taken by Sinn Fein is on the basis that the Constitution provides that only 15 people are the government.

The Constitution provides that the Government is responsible to the Dail.

If the Sinn Fein case succeeds, the logic of that case is that all of the other TDs are responsible for holding the government to account and should have the equal right to question the government, as the Constitution makes no provision for the Leader of the Opposition. That would include what are known as government backbenchers as well.

If you spent half as much energy actually trying to solve the issue you have rather than ranting and raving, you might get somewhere.

As to solutions, well there are obvious ones.

The first is to kit your house with Solar PV, and some batteries. 15kWh should suffice providing you dont use a A2W system. You can get these inverters now with a gateway that allows you to run home off the Solar and Batteries in the event of an outage.

If you want more power, then go get an EV that has the capability to do V2L.

Run an extension cord from your EV, into your house and you can use any device you want, for days on end, given the E batteries these days are so large.

The future is looking bright where EV cars will offer V2G and V2X, along with supported chargers. No need for an extension cord, just plug it into the wall charger and away you go, thats the theory anyway.

So yea, there are a lot of solutions, but you would rather have a moan than help yourself.

https://www.sigenergy.com/en/products/gateway