Claiming The Future

Lenny Lovett · 31-10-2010 09:34PM #1

Just reading about this event yesterday at the RDS.
http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/oct/31/mood-incredible-at-alternative-ideas-forum/

Was any posters from here at it? Or does anyone know anything about it apart from what was in the papers?

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 12:58AM

I was at the Leitrim meeting but didn't make it to Dublin for the big one. Here's their website anyway, I'd say you'll get some information there.

http://www.claimingourfuture.ie/

ei.sdraob · 01-11-2010 09:08AM

FF should be renamed to Wasting/spending our Future

Macha · 01-11-2010 09:57AM

It was full of champagne socialists - the only thing they agreed was a maximum wage threshold. It's a shame none of them ever sit down and cost any of their lovely policy ideas.

Oh and apparently employment should be a right.

bijapos · 01-11-2010 10:03AM

Yes I was at it, it was a very interesting and productive day. Essentially involved 1000 people from all walks of life and various experiences debating a list of issues and ideas in groups of 10. decisions were achieved on consensus. Groups were also encouraged to contribute their own ideas as well. Its essentially about which direction people feel this country should go in the future and what is important to the future of the country.

People were not invited but could apply to join, it was funded by a few organisations which are listed on the website. The issues to be discussed were agreed in advance through discussion on the net and some regional meetings.

It is not the attempted start of a new political party, this wish was expressed by an overwhelming majority of the groups, but instead a modus should be implemented to get more people involved in future groups.

bijapos · 01-11-2010 10:05AM

taconnol wrote: »

It was full of champagne socialists

Wrong

the only thing they agreed was a maximum wage threshold.

Wrong

Oh and apparently employment should be a right.

Wrong

I take it you weren't there.

ei.sdraob · 01-11-2010 10:17AM

bijapos wrote: »

Wrong
.

they were banging on about maximum wage on last frontline...

southsiderosie · 01-11-2010 10:23AM

OK, but looking at the "results" documents they issued, these are some of the conclusions from the "Making our economy work for the people" session:

• Achieve greater income equality and reduce poverty through wage, tax and income policies that support maximum and minimum income thresholds. 395 votes
• Prioritise high levels of decent employment with a stimulus package to maximize job creation in a green/social economy. 336 votes
• Recognise and reward all meaningful work, enable more flexible work arrangements and greater job sharing, and care work to be shared more equally between men and women. 252 votes
• Increase the overall tax take to the EU average and broaden the tax base. 225 votes
• Utilise the ‘pension reserve fund’ to invest in capital works programmes of social infrastructure and in private and social enterprise small business start ups. 195 votes

Oy vey, the number of consultant-speak buzzwords on that website gives me a headache. As for the "policies", where is the money for a stimulus package going to come from? What is a "green/social economy"? Pension funds should fund social enterprise? What? Why not make it easier to start a business, encourage more banks to come in to Ireland so they could get access to capital, and change bankruptcy laws so they can be wound down and started up again?

I am all for flexible work, but I suspect that ICTU would have problems with how this would work in practice.

bijapos · 01-11-2010 10:32AM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

they were banging on about maximum wage on last frontline...

Taconnel said

the only thing they agreed on was a maximum wage threshold

which is wrong, there were a lot of things agreed on, but Taconnel said this along with tarring the whole 1000 people there as champagne socialists, which is frankly childish and moronic. Either Taconnel should educate him/herself a bit better on who was there or s/he try to desist from the tabloid cliches.

bijapos · 01-11-2010 10:38AM

southsiderosie wrote: »

OK, but looking at the "results" documents they issued, these are some of the conclusions from the "Making our economy work for the people" session:

What happened is that at each session we were given 5 points like te above to debate and put them in order 1-5 of which is the most desirable. I personally did not agree with some of the options we were given but they were agreed on in advance and thats fair enough. Each group could also contibute up to 5 of their own ideas as well.

southsiderosie · 01-11-2010 10:56AM

bijapos wrote: »

What happened is that at each session we were given 5 points like te above to debate and put them in order 1-5 of which is the most desirable. I personally did not agree with some of the options we were given but they were agreed on in advance and thats fair enough. Each group could also contibute up to 5 of their own ideas as well.

I see. So the voting outcomes suggest that the most popular economic recommendation was the suggestion that maximum and minimum wage thresholds should be established in order to reduce inequality. What was the rationale behind this?

irishh_bob · 01-11-2010 11:24AM

is that the outfit which is headed by ubber PC wooly liberal do - gooder niall crowley and that shirll , pontificating woman who,s always on with vincent browne lecturing tax payers about how thier not paying enough tax and social wellfare is too low , i often hear those wafflers banging on about stuff which is purely aspirational and which is of little concern to anyone who lives outside left liberal dublin 4 or vincent brownes studio , never once heard them offer a single practical solution as to how to tackle job creation and unemployment

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 11:40AM

I'm really starting to get pissed off with the implication that being "liberal" is something to be mocked and looked down upon. The civil rights movement came from these "liberal lefties", as did many other popular movements. What new ideas have conservatives brought forward? None, because they're happy enough living in the past where inequality and social injustice reign supreme.

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 11:46AM

southsiderosie wrote: »

I see. So the voting outcomes suggest that the most popular economic recommendation was the suggestion that maximum and minimum wage thresholds should be established in order to reduce inequality. What was the rationale behind this?

Here is where people put forward their ideas and were asked to vote on them, so you can probably get more answers there. I'm disappointed with the shortlist they presented in the meeting but I don't think it will be the last and nobody is drawing up any policies or creating any parties. This is just a discussion and an exchange of ideas about how we can move forward and out of this mess we're in at the moment. There's no point being negatively critical of people trying to think of new ways to make things work.

As the old saying goes, if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Lenny Lovett · 01-11-2010 11:47AM

taconnol wrote: »

It was full of champagne socialists - the only thing they agreed was a maximum wage threshold. It's a shame none of them ever sit down and cost any of their lovely policy ideas.

Ok. So it's another Green Party then? I take it you were at it?

ei.sdraob · 01-11-2010 11:48AM

The good:

it is nice seeing people coming together and talking politics/economy
we sure need more of that

The bad:

Unfortunately things like that tend to get hijacked by extremist lefties and whoever shouts the loudest

Macha · 01-11-2010 11:51AM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

Ok. So it's another Green Party then? I take it you were at it?

Hah, gibe taken on the chin. But it was more SWP & the left of the left.

Yes I was there.

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 11:59AM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The good:

it is nice seeing people coming together and talking politics/economy
we sure need more of that

The bad:

Unfortunately things like that tend to get hijacked by extremist lefties and whoever shouts the loudest

The thing that kind of pissed me off was all 5 options were in regards to the economy. We all know the economy's fúcked and needs changing. There was no mention of reform of political structures, no mention of judicial reform, nothing really about anything that will prevent us from sliding back into this mess we're in at the moment. I imagine the union reps present at the meeting had something to say about that. The current system serves them well.

Edit: Ok, scratch all that. They have the results on four different PDFs. Would have been handy if they had them all on the one with titles for each session. Anyway...

National development and sustainability
Economy
Governmental and judicial reform
Social services and education

Lenny Lovett · 01-11-2010 12:00PM

taconnol wrote: »

It was full of champagne socialists - the only thing they agreed was a maximum wage threshold. It's a shame none of them ever sit down and cost any of their lovely policy ideas.

taconnol wrote: »

Hah, gibe taken on the chin. But it was more SWP & the left of the left.

Yes I was there.

It wasn't a jibe. Merely an observation. What you say went on: "It was full of champagne socialists"...."It's a shame none of them ever sit down and cost any of their lovely policy ideas".
That analogy could be applied fairly to The Greens could it not?

southsiderosie · 01-11-2010 12:08PM

PanchoVilla wrote: »

Here is where people put forward their ideas and were asked to vote on them, so you can probably get more answers there. I'm disappointed with the shortlist they presented in the meeting but I don't think it will be the last and nobody is drawing up any policies or creating any parties. This is just a discussion and an exchange of ideas about how we can move forward and out of this mess we're in at the moment. There's no point being negatively critical of people trying to think of new ways to make things work.

As the old saying goes, if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

If nobody is drawing up policies and either putting them on their political agenda or moving towards organizing a new party, then what is the point?

I've been to a lot of these (and organized a few in my day), and they tend to be giant circlejerks. My guess would be that the organizers (most of whom seem to have ties to the Labour party) are going to use the "outcomes" to further a very specific political agenda; otherwise from their perspective it was a waste of time and energy. The fact that so many of the "questions" were pre-determined only deepens my skepticism; I don't see that as a discussion and exchange of ideas, but rather a search for validation of a political platform.

Macha · 01-11-2010 12:09PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

It wasn't a jibe. Merely an observation. What you say went on: "It was full of champagne socialists"...."It's a shame none of them ever sit down and cost any of their lovely policy ideas".
That analogy could be applied fairly to The Greens could it not?

I wouldn't consider the Greens socialists in the true sense of the word. And to be honest there were probably a lot of ex-Green Party members there-that's what I meant by the gibe comment - there's probably some truth in it. But I do think the Green Party members who are left are certainly more pragmatically minded than those who have gone.

(I'd rather this didn't turn into a discussion of the Greens)

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 12:15PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

If nobody is drawing up policies and either putting them on their political agenda or moving towards organizing a new party, then what is the point?

To encourage discussion and engagement in a largely apathetic country?

I've been to a lot of these (and organized a few in my day), and they tend to be giant circlejerks. My guess would be that the organizers (most of whom seem to have ties to the Labour party) are going to use the "outcomes" to further a very specific political agenda; otherwise from their perspective it was a waste of time and energy. The fact that so many of the "questions" were pre-determined only deepens my skepticism; I don't see that as a discussion and exchange of ideas, but rather a search for validation of a political platform.

Yeah, some of the ideas were put forward by the organizer but people were able to add their own and vote for what they liked best. I personally think most of it made a lot of sense regardless of who suggested the ideas. So what if it's just a tool for Labor or whoever to base their policies on? At least they're asking the public what they want/need, as opposed to dictating to the public what they're getting. I think your cynicism is getting the better of you. We have an opportunity to have a say and to change things for the better, don't be foolish enough to just throw it away.

southsiderosie · 01-11-2010 12:24PM

PanchoVilla wrote: »

To encourage discussion and engagement in a largely apathetic country?

Yeah, some of the ideas were put forward by the organizer but people were able to add their own and vote for what they liked best. I personally think most of it made a lot of sense regardless of who suggested the ideas. So what if it's just a tool for Labor or whoever to base their policies on? At least they're asking the public what they want/need, as opposed to dictating to the public what they're getting. I think your cynicism is getting the better of you. We have an opportunity to have a say and to change things for the better, don't be foolish enough to just throw it away.

My cynicism is hard-won, and I am never letting go. NEVER!

People can have a say by writing their TDs, organizing protests, whatever. Apolitical activity is not going to lead to political change. If TDs aren't listening, it is in part because citizens are directing too much attention towards each other, and not enough towards those who actually operate the levers of power.

Let me ask you this: was there an "ask" at the end of the day? What exactly were the next steps the organizers put forth?

PanchoVilla · 01-11-2010 12:30PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

My cynicism is hard-won, and I am never letting go. NEVER!

People can have a say by writing their TDs, organizing protests, whatever. Apolitical activity is not going to lead to political change. If TDs aren't listening, it is in part because citizens are directing too much attention towards each other, and not enough towards those who actually operate the levers of power.

Let me ask you this: was there an "ask" at the end of the day? What exactly were the next steps the organizers put forth?

Well then, this is just another way to reach our TDs. One person writing one letter that can be largely ignored won't do much. A room of 1000+ people getting media attention will probably have a bit more influence.

I wasn't at the final meeting, they'd probably think some homeless guy wandered in accidentally.

I attended my local meeting and I'm not really sure what they're planning next. I'm gonna try planning my own meeting if there's no news because we didn't really get a chance to discuss this as much as we would have liked.

dan_d · 01-11-2010 03:56PM

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The good:

it is nice seeing people coming together and talking politics/economy
we sure need more of that

The bad:

Unfortunately things like that tend to get hijacked by extremist lefties and whoever shouts the loudest

Well, obviously it's easier to sit at a keyboard and whinge on an internet forum all day.....it's a far more effective way to do business.:D

Scofflaw · 02-11-2010 09:55AM

irishh_bob wrote: »

is that the outfit which is headed by ubber PC wooly liberal do - gooder niall crowley and that shirll , pontificating woman who,s always on with vincent browne lecturing tax payers about how thier not paying enough tax and social wellfare is too low , i often hear those wafflers banging on about stuff which is purely aspirational and which is of little concern to anyone who lives outside left liberal dublin 4 or vincent brownes studio , never once heard them offer a single practical solution as to how to tackle job creation and unemployment

If you can't post without indulging in an insulting rant, perhaps it would be better that you didn't post. Do take that as a warning.

moderately,
Scofflaw

irishh_bob · 02-11-2010 10:34AM

Scofflaw wrote: »

If you can't post without indulging in an insulting rant, perhaps it would be better that you didn't post. Do take that as a warning.

moderately,
Scofflaw

sorry , i thought insults were only disallowed against members of boards . ie , i didnt realise thier were any rules against ( insulting ) public figures , you gave me an infracture a while back for criticising travellers but at least their not public figures

confused

irish_bob

bijapos · 02-11-2010 10:57AM

taconnol wrote: »

Hah, gibe taken on the chin. But it was more SWP & the left of the left.

Yes I was there.

I've no idea where you got the idea that that meeting was SWP dominated, my table certainly was not, there was one person at it who I would describe as well left the others were definitely not, I would describe them as centre/centre-left. There was one fully paid up member of the Greens there as well. From speaking to people at the breaks I found in no way that it was as you are trying to represent.

taconnol wrote: »

And to be honest there were probably a lot of ex-Green Party members there-that's what I meant by the gibe comment - there's probably some truth in it. But I do think the Green Party members who are left are certainly more pragmatically minded than those who have gone.

I saw one ex-Green who is a former councillor there that I can recognise, but there were plenty of active paid up members there as well. I have no idea why you want to tarnish the whole thing as being SWP-Communist-PBP-Socialist when it quite clearly was not. Maybe you could comment on the fact that the second highest of the preferred values was "environmental sustainability".

You complain here on a regular basis on the treatment of the Greens and stereotypes associated with them but you still have no problem tarring 1000 people with the same brush.

Macha · 02-11-2010 11:53AM

bijapos wrote: »

I've no idea where you got the idea that that meeting was SWP dominated, my table certainly was not, there was one person at it who I would describe as well left the others were definitely not, I would describe them as centre/centre-left. There was one fully paid up member of the Greens there as well. From speaking to people at the breaks I found in no way that it was as you are trying to represent.

I am reporting my experience. If your experience was different, fair enough. That doesn't make my experience any less valid.

bijapos wrote: »

I saw one ex-Green who is a former councillor there that I can recognise, but there were plenty of active paid up members there as well. I have no idea why you want to tarnish the whole thing as being SWP-Communist-PBP-Socialist when it quite clearly was not. Maybe you could comment on the fact that the second highest of the preferred values was "environmental sustainability".

What about it? environmental sustainability as a goal has entered the mainstream discourse in Ireland. Acceptance of realistic, sometimes unpopular measures to achieve it have not. I found that to be the theme of the whole day. I mean, who would be against things like "justice" and "sustainability" and "participation"? Unfortunately, they all mean different things to different people and we all have different ideas of how to achieve them. Ie, most people I spoke to were against water charges. Go figure.

bijapos wrote: »

You complain here on a regular basis on the treatment of the Greens and stereotypes associated with them but you still have no problem tarring 1000 people with the same brush.

I don't do anything on a regular basis in this forum anymore. The people I met at the event, and not just at my table, were mainly PANA, SWP, very left Labours, trade union members and other environmentalists. The acceptance at the end of the event of the idea of a maximum wage cap just encapsulated how unrealistic many people at the event were about their proposals. I felt the event was very much guided in a particular direction and it was very loaded in its format. As I said at the top, I don't see why you have a problem with me reporting my experiences. If you had a different experience, let us hear about it but don't try to invalidate mine.

Lenny Lovett · 02-11-2010 01:11PM

taconnol wrote: »

What about it? environmental sustainability as a goal has entered the mainstream discourse in Ireland. Acceptance of realistic, sometimes unpopular measures to achieve it have not. I found that to be the theme of the whole day. I mean, who would be against things like "justice" and "sustainability" and "participation"? Unfortunately, they all mean different things to different people and we all have different ideas of how to achieve them. Ie, most people I spoke to were against water charges. Go figure.

I reckon the environmental sustainability issues have been driven back decades by the political actions of the Greens since they sold their souls to Fianna Fail. People were willing to embrace "Green" initiatives pre '08 for the right reasons then the Greens blundered their way into Power and made a balls of the whole issue by creating the totally incorrect perception that recycling and protecting the environment will cost everyone a fortune. They also had three years to introduce water charges properly (ie pay for what you use by metering it) but they p1ssed about instead and now it's coming in as a tax that everyone must pay regardless of use - no incentive to save and recycle water at all but every incentive to waste even more of it.:mad:.

If those leaving the shambles Greens, now try and hijack this new movement then it is doomed to failure. The "Claiming te Future" initiative is to be applauded. At least they are doing something to try and change the future. There is a definite place in Irish Politics for Socialism.... Real Socialism.

Macha · 02-11-2010 01:14PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

I reckon the environmental sustainability issues have been driven back decades by the political actions of the Greens since they sold their souls to Fianna Fail. People were willing to embrace "Green" initiatives pre '08 for the right reasons then the Greens blundered their way into Power and made a balls of the whole issue by creating the totally incorrect perception that recycling and protecting the environment will cost everyone a fortune. They also had three years to introduce water charges properly (ie pay for what you use by metering it) but they p1ssed about instead and now it's coming in as a tax that everyone must pay regardless of use - no incentive to save and recycle water at all but every incentive to waste even more of it):mad:.

If those leaving the shambles Greens, now try and hijack this new movement then it is doomed to failure. The "Claiming te Future" initiative is to be applauded. At least they are doing something to try and change the future. There is a definite place in Irish Politics for Socialism.... Real Socialism.

I couldn't disagree more. But I don't know why this is turning into yet another Green-bashing thread. It's tedious and the main reason I don't post in this forum any more.

Claiming The Future

Comments