The return of Declan Ganley

ei.sdraob wrote: »

He was tied to them

now he claims hes not tied to them as he decided the concerns of the people have been met and switches sides

the domains are still in his name tho

theres not much to it now then so

Libertas have lost their "propaganda director"
to the YES side, thats best news i heard all week

So now we have an unelected rich bold guy who cant keep his own word and take no for an answer

thats the most hypocritical thing i heard all week

His party won 100,000 votes (5.4%). That's higher than the Green vote in 2007 and they are now in govt. A solid base to build from. In a GE that's 4-8 seats. The PDs won 8 seats in 2002 on less around 80,000 votes. A referendum is not an election - as the Euro elections have proven. A lot of people may agree with someone's views on one or two issues, but not on others. Otherwise, FF/FG/Lab would not be running against each other in elections.

Spiritoftheseventies

"Cochrane leaving Libertas is a big blow for the NO side, perhaps you should read his letter where he writes how the concerns about the commissioner has been addressed in a democratic manner, here we have an intelligent man reasoning logically"

So when he reasons logically for a yes vote thats okay. But he didn't reason logically for the no side?

I personally find it hard to believe David Cochrane's Damascus conversion on Lisbon, considering it only came after the Euros. No offence to the man, but the Commissioner was certainly not his only objection to the Treaty before then. Naoise Nunn just happened to support Lisbon when he started working for John McGuinness TD.

Happy Monday

Scofflaw wrote: »

Looks like COIR have realised they're a drug on the market, and have wheeled out their 'respectable' front man.

So much for his promise of only 10 weeks ago not to campaign in Lisbon 2 if he wasn't elected.

amused,
Scofflaw

Brian Cowen and Enda Kenny can talk to him about ethics expected from politicans now they have returned from their 5 month summer holidays.

bayviewclose wrote: »

"Cochrane leaving Libertas is a big blow for the NO side, perhaps you should read his letter where he writes how the concerns about the commissioner has been addressed in a democratic manner, here we have an intelligent man reasoning logically"

So when he reasons logically for a yes vote thats okay. But he didn't reason logically for the no side?

imho i think the whole commissioner "issue" was a non issue in the first place

the NO side made a big fuss about "our" commissioner who is not supposed to represent Ireland but EU as whole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

There is one Commissioner per member state, though Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state.

all the NO side has accomplished is keeping a bunch of expensive and useless bureaucrats in office

well done lads

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

His party won 100,000 votes (5.4%). That's higher than the Green vote in 2007 and they are now in govt. A solid base to build from. In a GE that's 4-8 seats. The PDs won 8 seats in 2002 on less around 80,000 votes. A referendum is not an election - as the Euro elections have proven. A lot of people may agree with someone's views on one or two issues, but not on others. Otherwise, FF/FG/Lab would not be running against each other in elections.

Libertas made it clear that they have no interest to run in local or national elections

so are they gonna do U turn on yet another claim of theirs?

so not only do they have no policies they also lie and turn on their own statements

and if they do run for local/national elections would we finally get to see where the money came from?

/

ei.sdraob wrote: »

imho i think the whole commissioner "issue" was a non issue in the first place

the NO side made a big fuss about "our" commissioner who is not supposed to represent Ireland but EU as whole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

all the NO side has accomplished is keeping a bunch of expensive and useless bureaucrats in office

well done lads

Libertas made it clear that they have no interest to run in local or national elections

so are they gonna do U turn on yet another claim of theirs?

so not only do they have no policies they also lie and turn on their own statements

and if they do run for local/national elections would we finally get to see where the money came from?

/

They never said the party would disband or not run in future elections. And the so-called 'promise' not to get involved in Lisbon II cannot be compared to a govt breaking a policy that might actually directly affect peoples' lives, such as FF taking away cancer services from a hospital for example. I recall the wording he used didn't close the door completely.

But could it not be argued that the decision of Intel and Ryanair to spend hundreds of thousands in their yes campaigns justifies Ganley coming back to help redress the yes camp's enormous financial advantage in this campaign?

We have a political-cartel in this country. That 5.4% who voted for Libertas are entitled to have their views reflected in Dail Eireann at the next election imho. The existing party-system is on trial in this economic crisis imho.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

They never said the party would disband or not run in future elections. And the so-called 'promise' not to get involved in Lisbon II cannot be compared to a govt breaking a policy that might actually directly affect peoples' lives, such as FF taking away cancer services from a hospital for example. I recall the wording he used didn't close the door completely.

oh i can see it now

libertas posters on every lamppost

"We are no better than FF
vote Libertas!
Declan Ganley for Taoiseach!"

:rolleyes:

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

But could it not be argued that the decision of Intel and Ryanair to spend hundreds of thousands in their yes campaigns justifies Ganley coming back to help redress the yes camp's enormous financial advantage in this campaign?

as for Intel and Ryanair

please do compare how many people they employ here in Ireland and how many taxes the pay here in Ireland compared to Declan's Empire

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

That 5.4% who voted for Libertas are entitled to have their views reflected in Dail Eireann at the next election imho

what are their views?

we are still waiting on Libertas's policies, being unable to produce them before and even after an election shows incompetence

what exactly did these people vote on or for?

/

Well clearly they oppose Lisbon. They want a more democratic, transparent Europe. And SIPO has said that the Ganley funding was a "bona fide loan" and they have resolved the Dutch Libertas funding situation by the way.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Well clearly they oppose Lisbon.

and the same ~5% would vote on local and national elections

on the same single "policy" of opposing Lisbon

are there any other policies from Libertas?

its clear that the majority of people have elected in ~3 months ago mostly Pro Lisbon and pro EU MEPs

do you deny the above fact? the people have spoken no?

and can you please stop editing your posts, that means i have to edit mine to address the additional points you bring up

ei.sdraob wrote: »

and the same ~5% would vote on local and national elections

on the same single "policy" of opposing Lisbon

and its clear that the majority people have elected in ~3 months ago mostly Pro Lisbon and pro EU MEPs

do you deny the above fact? the people have spoken no?

and can you please stop editing your posts, that means i have to edit mine to address the additional points you bring up

They did but it's much harder to get elected in a 3-seater Euro constituency. He did very well for a first timer from a party that has only just been founded very recently. 5.4% for a new party in their first election in an electorate so wedded to traditional family voting patterns was no mean feat and there is some evidence that in NW, Ganley's vote was largely the former PD vote. So perhaps he can appeal to them if he ran in a future election. And while they may not have voted for him, it is widely acknowledged Libertas played a decisive role in the first no vote. The rejection of a candidate does not necessarily mean a rejection of all of his/her views. Huge numbers of no voters voted for the pro-Lisbon parties.

I do not believe that not getting elected in your first election should mean you just give up. The Establishment parties would like that of course, because that means noone is muscling in our their territory. But if we go down that road, we will have a very closed party-system and less choice for the electorate, which in my opinion would be less democratic. Someone has to represent the eurocritical viewpoint in Dail Eireann that isn't SF imho. There is something wrong when 95% of our TDs are on the opposite side of 54% of the people in a referendum. It's not healthy for our leaders to be so out of touch.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

They did but it's much harder to get elected in a 3-seater Euro constituency.

3-seater Euro constituency? as opposed to what?

oh and did someone say Caroline Simons

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

He did very well for a first timer from a party that has only just been founded very recently. 5.4% for a new party in their first election.

Yes he did fairly well, no wonder considering the amounts of money he spent, tho they flunked badly everywhere else including other countries, where they were contradicting each other! The time i met him in Galway he managed to avoid every single question directed at him (hey a bit like yourself so)

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

. 5.4% for a new party in their first election in an electorate so wedded to traditional family voting patterns was no mean feat and there is some evidence that in NW, Ganley's vote was largely the former PD vote. So perhaps he can appeal to them if he ran in a future election.

ah yes the PDs, please do remind us what a great success they were in Irish politics.

so you are saying that Libertas would adopt PD policies? since they have none of their own....

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

The rejection of a candidate does not necessarily mean a rejection of all of his/her views. Huge numbers of no voters voted for the pro-Lisbon parties..

yet again, what are his views? (i noticed you used the word "his" as opposed to theirs, seems like "he" ran the party like a dictatorship)

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

I do not believe that not getting elected in your first election should mean you just give up.

i agree with you he shouldnt have given up, i was surprised at the tantrum he threw and was amused by the humiliation received after his allegations of vote rigging ended up in a recount which gave them even less votes!

you dont seem to understand the crux of the issue i have with libertas:
* they lie
* they dont have policies
* they are run by rich guy with dubious connections
* they go back on the their statements

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

The Establishment parties would like that of course, because that means noone is muscling in our their territory. But if we go down that road, we will have a very closed party-system and less choice for the electorate, which in my opinion would be less democratic. .

i would like to see more political parties myself, there certainly is room, but having a political party means having a manifesto and policies, something yet again lacking from libertas

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

. Someone has to represent the eurocritical viewpoint in Dail Eireann that isn't SF imho. There is something wrong when 95% of our TDs are on the opposite side of 54% of the people in a referendum. It's not healthy for our leaders to be so out of touch.

oh dear god, yet another NO campaigner with NO grasp of basic mathematics? or deliberate twisting and ignorance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland_Bill,_2008

turnout was 53.13% of the electorate

out of these 53.13% who voted > 53.20% voted NO

out of the people who did vote NO > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland_Bill,_2008

how many actually voted on anything to do with the treaty?

Reason for rejecting the Lisbon Treaty Percentage
Don't understand /not familiar 40%
Protect Irish identity 20%
Don't trust politicians/Govt policies 17%
Protect neutrality 10%
Keep commissioner 10%
Protect tax system 8%

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0618/1213735259853.html

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_245_en.pdf

/

P. Breathnach

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

... He did very well for a first timer from a party that has only just been founded very recently...

Is Libertas actually a party, with membership lists, branch structure, internal democratic structure, etc.? What are its policy-making procedures?

Spiritoftheseventies

ei.sdraob wrote: »

imho i think the whole commissioner "issue" was a non issue in the first place

the NO side made a big fuss about "our" commissioner who is not supposed to represent Ireland but EU as whole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

all the NO side has accomplished is keeping a bunch of expensive and useless bureaucrats in office

well done lads

Libertas made it clear that they have no interest to run in local or national elections

so are they gonna do U turn on yet another claim of theirs?

so not only do they have no policies they also lie and turn on their own statements

and if they do run for local/national elections would we finally get to see where the money came from?

/

Im sure the commissioner is expected to act as a European but as they same time commissioner is also there to give us a voice.
Re Ganley, the story was not carried by Today FM at noon. Either Ganley is keeping his options open or he is just not getting drawn into the story.
He was entitled to voice his opinion on the treaty to a trade magazine. Maybe FT can tell us if Ganley approached FT or they him.
Could be a journalist there asked him on spec some questions. In any case No one is any the wiser about his intentions.

bayviewclose wrote: »

Im sure the commissioner is expected to act as a European but as they same time commissioner is also there to give us a voice.

repeat after me

the commissioner does not represent "us" and he is not "our"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

There is one Commissioner per member state, though Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state.

which part of the above sentence do you not understand?

it is highly ironic that the NO side has achieved keeping a bunch of useless and expensive bureaucrat in employment

and then yee turn around and rave about "unelected EU elites and bureaucrats"

well ****ing done lads :mad:

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Is Libertas actually a party, with membership lists, branch structure, internal democratic structure, etc.? What are its policy-making procedures?

It is registered as a party so it must meet the requirements of the Electoral Acts. It was "Libertas" on the ballot last June I remember that. That wouldn't have been the case were they not registered as a party.

There's an interview with Ganley in the Irish Daily Mail, pgs 10-12.

A few extracts:

Declan Ganley wrote:

I said I wouldn't come back unless provoked. Suffice to say, I feel significantly provoked...Over the last few weeks it became even more sickening watching from the sidelines to see exactly what lengths a vociferous, shrill minority were prepared to go to force their will upon the people of Ireland and indeed, the people of Europe...The Lisbon Treaty is profoundly anti-European because it concentrates power into the hands of people who never have to seek democratic approval of the citizens of Europe.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

It is registered as a party so it must meet the requirements of the Electoral Acts. It was "Libertas" on the ballot last June I remember that. That wouldn't have been the case were they not registered as a party.

they weren't a registered party for the first Lisbon referendum but a private company

hence we still don't know how much they spend and who they got money from

P. Breathnach

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

It is registered as a party so it must meet the requirements of the Electoral Acts. It was "Libertas" on the ballot last June I remember that. That wouldn't have been the case were they not registered as a party.

Do you know anything about its structure or policy-making processes?

Only flickin through the first pages of this thread and what's the big issue with Ganley changing his mind? After all isn't the irish govt. asking the public the same thing, "Have we changed our mind?"

ShooterSF wrote: »

Only flickin through the first pages of this thread and what's the big issue with Ganley changing his mind? After all isn't the irish govt. asking the public the same thing, "Have we changed our mind?"

the government were democratically elected by the people

ganley was not

spot the difference

ei.sdraob wrote: »

they weren't a registered party for the first Lisbon referendum but a private company

hence we still don't know how much they spend and who they got money from

We still don't know how much 'Ireland for Europe' is spending and who they got their money on.

P.Breathnach wrote:

Do you know anything about its structure or policy-making processes?

They are refusing to disclose donations below the disclosure limit. Admittedly, I'm not au fait with that kind of detail on the structure of the Libertas itself. I have a senior source within Libertas though on the campaign.

This is what he's saying about Intel and Ryanair supporting the yes side:

He (Michael O'Leary) has built Tony Ryan's company into something very impressive on a global scale. And he wants permission to buy Aer Lingus, which is something he has been wanting to do for a very long time.

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

We still don't know how much 'Ireland for Europe' is spending and who they got their money on. They are refusing to disclose donations below the disclosure limit.

two wrongs dont make a right

and Libertas were at it first

ei.sdraob wrote: »

the government were democratically elected by the people

ganley was not

spot the difference

Was that an answer to a different question?

What has people changing their minds got to do with elections?

ShooterSF wrote: »

Was that an answer to a different question?

What has people changing their minds got to do with elections?

you compared Ganley changing his mind to the government asking us whether the people changed their minds on the Treaty

apples and oranges

the government have every right to call a referendum as they were elected by the people and the constitution affords them to do so, and the concerns were met

Ganley on other hand was not elected and by entering the debate again shows that his word means ****

Edited above. It's the Irish Daily Mail, not the Mail on Sunday. Was a little sleepy and forgot what day it was. Sorry.

Declan Ganley wrote:

With Intel, it appears that for the first time in the history of the company, they care passionately enough about a constitutional issue in a country which is not their home base, to want to interfere and overturn a democratic result. Or they want to reduce the €1.06 billion fine the commission slapped on them last year, which might be mitigated - I'm not sure which one.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

you compared Ganley changing his mind to the government asking us whether the people changed their minds on the Treaty

apples and oranges

the government have every right to call a referendum as they were elected by the people and the constitution affords them to do so, and the concerns were met

Ganley on other hand was not elected and by entering the debate again shows that his word means ****

So does that mean our word means **** if we dare change our minds? Or are we allowed change our mind but Ganley isn't? It has nothing to do with the government other than they asked us if we changed our mind.
I guess we shouldn't though if we wan't our word to mean something, right?

ShooterSF wrote: »

So does that mean our word means **** if we dare change our minds? Or are we allowed change our mind but Ganley isn't? It has nothing to do with the government other than they asked us if we changed our mind.
I guess we shouldn't though if we wan't our word to mean something, right?

why are you comparing Ganley to the electorate?

talk about trying to setup a straw man

ei.sdraob wrote: »

why are you comparing Ganley to the electorate?

talk about trying to setup a straw man

I'm simply asking if people can change their mind? Is that not a fair question?
Or is it that you don't like Ganley so will have a dig wherever you can? As for saying he is not elected are you as outraged about all the yes to Europe groups that are un-elected individuals?