Kenny to push for debt deal after Yes vote

RichardAnd · 04-06-2012 11:37am

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's based on a view that there is no way to negotiate except by banging the table and threatening. How do you ever get to a win-win by that method? Or do you believe there is no such thing as a win-win?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Whilst I would normally agree with you that all negotiation should be carried out in a polite and mature manner, table banging and sensationalist threats are a well established method in European politics.

Our good friend, Mr Sarkozy was very fond of such antics.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/sarkozy-threatens-to-quit-zone-3046726.html

Going Forward · 04-06-2012 12:48pm

[Jackass] wrote: »

New low for forum.

Government achieves goal of yes vote => Government now committed to refocus energies on securing better terms on bailout agreement => ??? => Government being heavily criticised for being cowards, namely Enda Kenny?

Clearly patience is running out and memories are shortening, but the very point that we are a small country makes these deals difficult to negotiate, and we have to be tactical. Anyone with an absolute shred of negotiating experience or knowledge knows that threats are absolutely counter productive, it's not a hostile engagement, and you have to play ball, do your bits (i.e. treaty) and look for your concessions.

We also have to wait on terms for Spain, a much much more powerful nation, and then look to get any of their concessions applied to us also, retrospectively, as the deal was the first nations will get the better terms.

People who criticise Enda Kenny (all of you in this thread) simply have not got the first clue about the position we're in and how to handle it. You make it out like he's a joke, yet the biggest joke is the idea that he would storm into the European Parliament and start banging on the table with his demands, or else....

THAT would be the moment the other leaders laughed at us, whilst turning off the tap of funding, and why would they bother negotiating with us if we're unreasonable?

And what will they say if we cause major problems and don't play ball with our first bailout and need a second? You'll be sure they'll put a condition of "non-negotiable" on stricter terms to force us to comply...

Please, none of you, ever consider a career in diplomatic relations...

In essence then, you agree with me that he is actually just going to keep the head down from here on in.

We are quite low on the pecking list, but politically speaking, a bit of grandstanding generally goes down well with the electorate, local and European.

The diplomatic approach is the only option left at the present time, but had that been put forward as policy by FG one wonders whether they would have more credibility nationally instead of being on the defensive over never having sought any writedown, burning bondholders, red cents etc.

But it does show that FG and Labour were quite content to lie to get into office.

Sand · 04-06-2012 1:10pm

@Good Loser

We are the depositors, the borrowers and the shareholders. Certainly the majority of Irish adults. And you are, at least, a shareholder through the Government. Also the banks on lend quite a lot of this money to the Govt so they can meet their committments. The banks profits such as they are are used to pay for the Govt guarantee - at least €1 bn per annum.

No, "we" are not. "We" - the Irish people, the Irish state - are not getting any 100 billion at 1%. That's a point of fact. I'm not going to negotiate on it. Accept it or ignore it as it pleases you.

In other news, Merkel has issued some comments which would be truly puzzling if you believed the fiscal pact was about giving her the political cover to make some concessions towards fiscal transfers/joint liabilities.

GERMAN CHANCELLOR Angela Merkel has delivered her most strident rejection yet of eurobonds, saying she would agree to jointly issued euro zone debt “under no circumstances”.

So there's nothing to suggest Merkel perceives the fiscal pact as any sort of tradeoff - or at least not any sort of tradeoff where we get anything in return.

@Scofflaw

That's based on a view that there is no way to negotiate except by banging the table and threatening.

That's true, it is. There's a whole range of negotiating - from banging the table and screaming on one end, and not daring to seek a deal at all on the other. Surely Kenny could have aimed for something less than screaming and banging the table, yet more than not daring to seek a deal at all?

I am getting the sense that people are trying to make a virtue of inaction and incompetence. Anyone remember Kenny's advice to Ross in the Dail back in March? Ross was challenging Kenny to get a deal on the promissory notes, and Kenny made some nudge-nudge-wink-wink comment along the lines of "the wise mouth is silent"? All the media in Official Ireland swooned in delight, assuring everyone that Kenny had a deal up his sleeves, that Ireland was working behind the scenes with the ECB, etc, etc. And the harsh truth was the ECB said no deal on the promissory notes, leaving Kenny and Co scrambling to do something that could be spun as a deal.

The "good boy" approach has won us nothing so far bar patronising public putdowns by the like of Oli Rehn. The only relaxation of terms we have received is from the "bad boy" Greeks who won a concession on the interest rates, which was extended to us by default.

jank · 04-06-2012 2:00pm

[Jackass] wrote: »

New low for forum.

Government achieves goal of yes vote => Government now committed to refocus energies on securing better terms on bailout agreement => ??? => Government being heavily criticised for being cowards, namely Enda Kenny?

Clearly patience is running out and memories are shortening, but the very point that we are a small country makes these deals difficult to negotiate, and we have to be tactical. Anyone with an absolute shred of negotiating experience or knowledge knows that threats are absolutely counter productive, it's not a hostile engagement, and you have to play ball, do your bits (i.e. treaty) and look for your concessions.

We also have to wait on terms for Spain, a much much more powerful nation, and then look to get any of their concessions applied to us also, retrospectively, as the deal was the first nations will get the better terms.

People who criticise Enda Kenny (all of you in this thread) simply have not got the first clue about the position we're in and how to handle it. You make it out like he's a joke, yet the biggest joke is the idea that he would storm into the European Parliament and start banging on the table with his demands, or else....

THAT would be the moment the other leaders laughed at us, whilst turning off the tap of funding, and why would they bother negotiating with us if we're unreasonable?

And what will they say if we cause major problems and don't play ball with our first bailout and need a second? You'll be sure they'll put a condition of "non-negotiable" on stricter terms to force us to comply...

Please, none of you, ever consider a career in diplomatic relations...

Agreed. You would swear real life is like a video game or an episode of the Sopranos. Ireland isn't that important to Europe.

[Jackass] · 04-06-2012 2:47pm

Going Forward wrote: »

In essence then, you agree with me that he is actually just going to keep the head down from here on in.

We are quite low on the pecking list, but politically speaking, a bit of grandstanding generally goes down well with the electorate, local and European.

The diplomatic approach is the only option left at the present time, but had that been put forward as policy by FG one wonders whether they would have more credibility nationally instead of being on the defensive over never having sought any writedown, burning bondholders, red cents etc.

But it does show that FG and Labour were quite content to lie to get into office.

I'm not sure I'd call it a lie, but I do understand the frustration from the electorate. FG in particular talked about strong will in negotiating with Europe, but the landscape of Europe has changed dramatically since then.

I'm not sure if the scale of the Greece crisis was known at the time, and certainly the Spanish and Italian situation wasn't, but at the time of the elections I seem to recall that we were at the very forefront of the European discussion as we were fresh into the rescue package, but the timing was unfortunate, as almost the week they came in to power, problems elsewhere escelated dramatically, and I do remember the first meeting of the European leaders that Enda Kenny attended, he talked of his frustration at how Ireland had slipped down the pecking order of importance, as bigger problems were dominating the talks (i.e Greece and later Italy and Spain).

It's difficult to negotiate if you can't get your issue on the agenda, and whilst you can talk in private to other leaders, the only action that takes place is when all the leaders are sat together in a summit, and you are the topic of discussion and they can vote and ratify amendments. This oppertunity has not come.

I feel for Endas position, as he hasn't been able to deliver on his promise, I agree with that, but I just don't think it's for a lack of trying and circumstances have not favoured him, but I definitely think politically, he and the current Government will suffer, I just am of the opinion that the recovery is going reasonably well in terms of inward investment and stabalising expenditure and services which were in absolute free fall when they came in.

To an extent they have to bide their time with Europe, there's nothing they can do about it, but aggressive threats and "rocking the boat" will get them no where.

The biggest problem they'll face is how long the memory of the electorate is, and how much they're willing to recognise and remember and give them credit for the good they do, and how much they will blame them for the things they can't do anything about.

Personally, I trust this Government, particularly Noonan, who I think is the brains behind it all, and an incredibly competent man. Kenny isn't exactly straight out of the Kennedy dynasty when it comes to charisma, but I think he's an honest and capable leader and I think he will do all he can to lead us to recovery, and I think they're doing a good job, but as I say, I can understand peoples frustration, and it's expected given the circumstance that they would lose popularity, I just hope the Irish don't sabotage themselves as usual and get rid of the good boyfriend because it's just a rebound, and get back together with the bad boy, dangerous boyfriend who we know is wrong for us, but just can't stay away from, in the next election. (to use a weird analogy).

Scofflaw · 04-06-2012 3:06pm

RichardAnd wrote: »

Whilst I would normally agree with you that all negotiation should be carried out in a polite and mature manner, table banging and sensationalist threats are a well established method in European politics.

Our good friend, Mr Sarkozy was very fond of such antics.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/sarkozy-threatens-to-quit-zone-3046726.html

And how much of what M. Sarkozy wanted did he get? And when has banging the table and threatening achieved anything for Ireland?

Sand wrote:

That's true, it is. There's a whole range of negotiating - from banging the table and screaming on one end, and not daring to seek a deal at all on the other. Surely Kenny could have aimed for something less than screaming and banging the table, yet more than not daring to seek a deal at all?

I am getting the sense that people are trying to make a virtue of inaction and incompetence. Anyone remember Kenny's advice to Ross in the Dail back in March? Ross was challenging Kenny to get a deal on the promissory notes, and Kenny made some nudge-nudge-wink-wink comment along the lines of "the wise mouth is silent"? All the media in Official Ireland swooned in delight, assuring everyone that Kenny had a deal up his sleeves, that Ireland was working behind the scenes with the ECB, etc, etc. And the harsh truth was the ECB said no deal on the promissory notes, leaving Kenny and Co scrambling to do something that could be spun as a deal.

The "good boy" approach has won us nothing so far bar patronising public putdowns by the like of Oli Rehn. The only relaxation of terms we have received is from the "bad boy" Greeks who won a concession on the interest rates, which was extended to us by default.

Interestingly, that's not the view from outside: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/ireland-business-blog-with-lisa-ocarroll/2011/may/18/ireland-bailout-terms-interest-rate

The change applied at the same time to Greece, Portugal, and Ireland, although the Greek bailout was funded separately. I think dismissing it as "by default" is rather too strong a narrative - particularly since whatever one chooses to call it, or however much one likes to scoff at it as "being patted on the head" or whatever, the fact remains that we have a bailout facility worth tens of billions at far less than market rates, and under largely self-imposed conditions and targets, while retaining a reputation as a stable and business-friendly environment. The effects of the crisis on Ireland remain pretty much limited to the self-inflicted wounds of the property bubble, with a general expectation of, well, 'stability'.

Certainly it can all still go pear-shaped, but to date the outcomes have been very much less awful than they could have been.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sand · 04-06-2012 5:31pm

Certainly it can all still go pear-shaped, but to date the outcomes have been very much less awful than they could have been

Well, its a bit odd to presume that things could still go pear-shaped, and that outcomes have been very much less awful than they otherwise could have been.

If we start from say October 2008 (so, the bank bailout and its "We are where we are" logic is in play) the outcomes that have followed are:

- Irish sovereign bonds downgraded to junk.
- Irish sovereign has lost practical market access
- Irelands gov debt has soared from 44% of GDP to 108% GDP at year end 2011
- Irelands deficit has *increased* from 7.3% to 13.1%
- General government spending is *significantly* greater in 2011 than it was in 2008 as a % of GDP, whilst gov revenue is static. Spending is also greater in 2011 than was planned for under the NRP 2011-2014 projections.
- Unemployment at 14.3%, with half that number being defined as long term unemployed
- 10.2% of Irish mortgages (77,000 mortgages) are in arrears of greater than 3 months - 7.8% are in arrears of more than 6 months. Almost half of all restructured mortgages are already *back* in arrears.
- NAMA is in increasing difficulties and is demonstrating exactly why its bad to have an unaccountable, politically connected bad bank: property prices have declined by at least 50% from peak and NAMA is resorting to increasingly desperate plays to "get the property market moving again", lending both to developers and buyers.
- The ring-fenced National Pension Reserve Fund has been raided and invested incredibly poorly in a short term driven agenda. It was supposed to address the widely telegraphed pension funding crisis coming down the tracks as Ireland gets older, and pensioners live for longer. This has been reinforced by a short term wealth grab on private pension funds.
- There have been 5 Irish bank bailouts to date, with a cost of 70 billion Euro so far - not counting the less easily quantified costs of the influence of the bailouts on sovereign policy in other areas. The FR, Matthew Elderfield, has recently announced that despite assurances last time out that this was the end of the matter a further injection of capital on the scale of 3-4 billion will be required. It is hoped that this will be privately raised.
- As predicted at the time, Ireland has wound up nationalizing practically its entire banking system by the most expensive and time consuming way possible.
- Banking competition has declined with knock on effects for the average Irish person: a significant number of banks (Lloyds being the latest) not considered sufficiently Irish to be "pillar banks" have departed from the Irish economy as its hard for them to compete with government backed "pillar banks". This is contributing to the drying up of sources of SME lending, highlighted by the CBI
- Credit in Ireland has seized up despite immense amounts of taxpayer funds being poured into the banks: the IBF have noted that only 450 million in mortgages were approved in Q1 2012, down from 3.6 billion in Q4 2008 and down from 11 billion in Q3 2006.
- Growth has not emerged on anything like the scale imagined by the National Recovery Plan which prayed for 2.5% annual growth between 2011 and 2014. The government strategy was already produced by people on a lot of psychotropic drugs, so its not built for robust encounters with reality.
- Ireland's problems have been pushed into the background by the strife in Spain and Italy. What happens to Ireland is not important for German or Spanish politicians. Political goodwill has dried up as the damaging "extend and pretend" strategy which Ireland fully subscribes to (even today) has burnt out solidarity.

I mean, if you were posting back in late 2008 Id presume you'd consider the above to be a ridiculously pessimistic prediction - surely things could never get so bad? Yet they have and did.

So I'd hope you'd allow that whilst things could be worse, they could and should be a lot better for Ireland - if our leaders had ever dared to represent our interests instead of hoping someone else would then they would be.

Good loser · 04-06-2012 11:29pm

Sand wrote: »

@Good Loser

No, "we" are not. "We" - the Irish people, the Irish state - are not getting any 100 billion at 1%. That's a point of fact. I'm not going to negotiate on it. Accept it or ignore it as it pleases you.

The Central Bank gets this money. That is 'us' - the State.

Further the State (us/we) own all tne banks except for 85% of BOI.

Right now the State and the Banks are virtually synonymous.

Read the posts by Jackass - these tell it as it is in the real world.

You describe our dilemnas but your prescriptions are woefully simplistic.

Banging a table as a negotiating tactic is Stone Age stuff.

Scofflaw · 05-06-2012 12:04am

Sand wrote: »

Well, its a bit odd to presume that things could still go pear-shaped, and that outcomes have been very much less awful than they otherwise could have been.

If we start from say October 2008 (so, the bank bailout and its "We are where we are" logic is in play) the outcomes that have followed are:

- Irish sovereign bonds downgraded to junk.
- Irish sovereign has lost practical market access
- Irelands gov debt has soared from 44% of GDP to 108% GDP at year end 2011
- Irelands deficit has *increased* from 7.3% to 13.1%
- General government spending is *significantly* greater in 2011 than it was in 2008 as a % of GDP, whilst gov revenue is static. Spending is also greater in 2011 than was planned for under the NRP 2011-2014 projections.
- Unemployment at 14.3%, with half that number being defined as long term unemployed
- 10.2% of Irish mortgages (77,000 mortgages) are in arrears of greater than 3 months - 7.8% are in arrears of more than 6 months. Almost half of all restructured mortgages are already *back* in arrears.
- NAMA is in increasing difficulties and is demonstrating exactly why its bad to have an unaccountable, politically connected bad bank: property prices have declined by at least 50% from peak and NAMA is resorting to increasingly desperate plays to "get the property market moving again", lending both to developers and buyers.
- The ring-fenced National Pension Reserve Fund has been raided and invested incredibly poorly in a short term driven agenda. It was supposed to address the widely telegraphed pension funding crisis coming down the tracks as Ireland gets older, and pensioners live for longer. This has been reinforced by a short term wealth grab on private pension funds.
- There have been 5 Irish bank bailouts to date, with a cost of 70 billion Euro so far - not counting the less easily quantified costs of the influence of the bailouts on sovereign policy in other areas. The FR, Matthew Elderfield, has recently announced that despite assurances last time out that this was the end of the matter a further injection of capital on the scale of 3-4 billion will be required. It is hoped that this will be privately raised.
- As predicted at the time, Ireland has wound up nationalizing practically its entire banking system by the most expensive and time consuming way possible.
- Banking competition has declined with knock on effects for the average Irish person: a significant number of banks (Lloyds being the latest) not considered sufficiently Irish to be "pillar banks" have departed from the Irish economy as its hard for them to compete with government backed "pillar banks". This is contributing to the drying up of sources of SME lending, highlighted by the CBI
- Credit in Ireland has seized up despite immense amounts of taxpayer funds being poured into the banks: the IBF have noted that only 450 million in mortgages were approved in Q1 2012, down from 3.6 billion in Q4 2008 and down from 11 billion in Q3 2006.
- Growth has not emerged on anything like the scale imagined by the National Recovery Plan which prayed for 2.5% annual growth between 2011 and 2014. The government strategy was already produced by people on a lot of psychotropic drugs, so its not built for robust encounters with reality.
- Ireland's problems have been pushed into the background by the strife in Spain and Italy. What happens to Ireland is not important for German or Spanish politicians. Political goodwill has dried up as the damaging "extend and pretend" strategy which Ireland fully subscribes to (even today) has burnt out solidarity.

I mean, if you were posting back in late 2008 Id presume you'd consider the above to be a ridiculously pessimistic prediction - surely things could never get so bad? Yet they have and did.

So I'd hope you'd allow that whilst things could be worse, they could and should be a lot better for Ireland - if our leaders had ever dared to represent our interests instead of hoping someone else would then they would be.

I don't think I would have considered where we are as "a ridiculously pessimistic prediction" in 2008. Much of it is a pretty predictable outcome of the bursting of the property bubble, and some of it is very standard recession fare - the official "reasons" banks don't lend in a recession may vary, but that they don't is invariable. The unemployment I consider surprisingly low, although much of that will be the emigration valve releasing some of the pressure. Government growth predictions not being met is also extremely predictable, but to be honest that there is growth at this stage I also find fairly surprising.

I would say that compared to my personal "worst case" scenarios, this is - to put a number on it - about a quarter or a third as bad. And, to be honest, while I can see some relatively small ways in which things might be better, the only way things could be a lot better is if the rest of Europe had simply taken on chunks of our debt themselves. Unfortunately, there has never been any reason for them to do so - and the idea is frankly bizarre, or would be, were it not for the experience of the past fourty years.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Going Forward · 05-06-2012 2:20am

Mssrs. Kenny, Noonan, and Gilmore have little in their political CVs and 30+ plus each mediocre years of public service which would foster much confidence that they are capable of anything other than playing the long game and hoping for the best.

And unless they negotiate something substantial on behalf of the electorate, despite the fact that it was FF who signed the deal with the Troika, they will be remembered and reviled in the next election for so enthusiastically bringing in the full blown PT for example.

They have got to start using some more initiative in raising revenues.

They promised not to raise income tax, but as the electorate is now so disengaged going on the recent turnout, there will hardly be a revolution if that promise was also now broken, particularly if it is in lieu of some discount elsewhere.

They really appear to be playing political suicide at present.
Sinn Fein is in the wings, and FG will surely follow Labour slowly downwards unless they save their own skins by actually delivering on something from the Troika.

jank · 05-06-2012 5:15am

Going Forward wrote: »

They really appear to be playing political suicide at present.
Sinn Fein is in the wings, and FG will surely follow Labour slowly downwards unless they save their own skins by actually delivering on something from the Troika.

FG will not drop as people think. FG voters will not in any way shape or form vote for the ULA or SF. They may vote for FF or and indo but thats about it.

I will say it again. The next election will bring FG and FF into power as a coalition, thus ending civil war politics forever. Labour will be the big losers in this.

20Cent · 05-06-2012 7:30am

Looks like a deal on bank debt is off the table, that's if it ever was.

Berlin says bank deal for Ireland would send wrong signal
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0605/1224317296513.html
Taoiseach Enda Kenny raised the bank debt issue with German chancellor Angela Merkel last Friday, but senior German officials dispute Mr Kenny’s interpretation of Ireland’s fiscal treaty vote as a “message to European Union leaders” for a “just” debt deal.

“We see no need for movement at the moment,” said Martin Kotthaus, spokesman for finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble.

bull_ring · 05-06-2012 12:29pm

20Cent wrote: »

Looks like a deal on bank debt is off the table, that's if it ever was.

Berlin says bank deal for Ireland would send wrong signal
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0605/1224317296513.html
Taoiseach Enda Kenny raised the bank debt issue with German chancellor Angela Merkel last Friday, but senior German officials dispute Mr Kenny’s interpretation of Ireland’s fiscal treaty vote as a “message to European Union leaders” for a “just” debt deal.

“We see no need for movement at the moment,” said Martin Kotthaus, spokesman for finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble.

have we shot our bolt given last friday,s result

creedp · 05-06-2012 2:52pm

Varied wrote: »

Well done yes voters. Like good little sheep you voted on a referendum before even trying to negotiate a deal in relation to this burden.

After the dust settles it would be very illuminating to have an objective discussion around what the Treaty means for this country rather than the partisian screamings on both sides of the divide during the run up to the Vote. Lets be honest and say the reason many many of us voted yes was becasue we (as individuals) were afraid to vote 'No' as it might have had negative impacts on our lifestyles. Were the have's or have not's more likely to vote 'Yes'?

It also begs the question as to what role (or worth) the Referendum Commission actually has in these Votes. Another less that useful Quango!

Godge · 05-06-2012 3:24pm

creedp wrote: »

After the dust settles it would be very illuminating to have an objective discussion around what the Treaty means for this country rather than the partisian screamings on both sides of the divide during the run up to the Vote. Lets be honest and say the reason many many of us voted yes was becasue we (as individuals) were afraid to vote 'No' as it might have had negative impacts on our lifestyles. Were the have's or have not's more likely to vote 'Yes'?

It also begs the question as to what role (or worth) the Referendum Commission actually has in these Votes. Another less that useful Quango!

What would be surprising to a non-partisan viewer would be that those constituencies with most to lose from the cutting off/ending of EU/IMF funding were among those with the strongest "No" vote. The two Donegal constituencies and the working-class Dublin constituencies would be seen as those benefitting most from subsidies, welfare payments and grants yet they voted "no" despite the risk/fear that a "no" vote would cause us to lose access to that funding.

Is that a sign that the so-called scaremongering tactics of the "yes" campaign did not work? Or is it like the other example of the confused socialist opposing wealth taxes like household and water charges?

paddy0090 · 05-06-2012 3:27pm

We're already borrowing at exceptionally low rates(Effectively negative or close to it). It's hard to imagine they could get anything sizeable as the bank debt is only one part of the total debt.
I have my suspicions that if they get anything they'll count it as part of there cuts for the year i.e they'll cut less. They have access to the ESM now. So you'll end up paying for it anyway.

bull_ring · 05-06-2012 3:53pm

Godge wrote: »

What would be surprising to a non-partisan viewer would be that those constituencies with most to lose from the cutting off/ending of EU/IMF funding were among those with the strongest "No" vote. The two Donegal constituencies and the working-class Dublin constituencies would be seen as those benefitting most from subsidies, welfare payments and grants yet they voted "no" despite the risk/fear that a "no" vote would cause us to lose access to that funding.

Is that a sign that the so-called scaremongering tactics of the "yes" campaign did not work? Or is it like the other example of the confused socialist opposing wealth taxes like household and water charges?

donegal voted NO because sinn fein are strong there

K-9 · 05-06-2012 4:07pm

bull_ring wrote: »

donegal voted NO because sinn fein are strong there

Nope, Donegal generally votes No anyway, pre SF popularity there.

20Cent · 05-06-2012 4:18pm

Godge wrote: »

What would be surprising to a non-partisan viewer would be that those constituencies with most to lose from the cutting off/ending of EU/IMF funding were among those with the strongest "No" vote. The two Donegal constituencies and the working-class Dublin constituencies would be seen as those benefitting most from subsidies, welfare payments and grants yet they voted "no" despite the risk/fear that a "no" vote would cause us to lose access to that funding.

Is that a sign that the so-called scaremongering tactics of the "yes" campaign did not work? Or is it like the other example of the confused socialist opposing wealth taxes like household and water charges?

Working class areas have lost the most from austerity measures and cuts. They voted no because it clearly is not working and they are the most patriotic areas as well so the loss of sovereignty is a big issue.

bull_ring · 05-06-2012 4:20pm

K-9 wrote: »

Nope, Donegal generally votes No anyway, pre SF popularity there.

good for them , i voted NO and i dont vote SF

bull_ring · 05-06-2012 4:21pm

20Cent wrote: »

Working class areas have lost the most from austerity measures and cuts. They voted no because it clearly is not working and they are the most patriotic areas as well so the loss of sovereignty is a big issue.

austerity is going to be a reality regardless of what happens , i voted NO because we were offered nothing on bank debt write off + i dont like the idea of a federalised eurozone run by germany which is clearly how things are heading

tayto lover · 05-06-2012 4:24pm

superluck wrote: »

Ireland is definitely in a stronger position now to renegotiate it's debt because it did what the Germans requested. The yes vote demonstrates Ireland is not to be messed with.

Are you still of that opinion after we were told to fcuk off ?
Kenny should have negotiated before the Referendum as most people thought.

bull_ring · 05-06-2012 4:48pm

superluck wrote: »

Ireland is definitely in a stronger position now to renegotiate it's debt because it did what the Germans requested. The yes vote demonstrates Ireland is not to be messed with.

i once paid a roofer to slate my house , he ended up breaking one of my gutters , i paid him for the job but told him he would have to come back with a new lenth of gutter , suffice to say im still waiting several years later

a guy put down tarmacadam for me last year , i had a few kerb stones which needed replacing , he said he would be happy to do it for me , when he finished the tarmacadam , i told him i couldnt pay him there and then but that i would be happy to when he returned to fit a bunch of kerb stones , he grumbed a bit but sure enough he was back within a week

Scofflaw · 05-06-2012 6:08pm

bull_ring wrote: »

i once paid a roofer to slate my house , he ended up breaking one of my gutters , i paid him for the job but told him he would have to come back with a new lenth of gutter , suffice to say im still waiting several years later

a guy put down tarmacadam for me last year , i had a few kerb stones which needed replacing , he said he would be happy to do it for me , when he finished the tarmacadam , i told him i couldnt pay him there and then but that i would be happy to when he returned to fit a bunch of kerb stones , he grumbed a bit but sure enough he was back within a week

That's an entirely irrelevant analogy, though, since nobody needed an Irish Yes but us.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw · 05-06-2012 6:10pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Are you still of that opinion after we were told to fcuk off ?
Kenny should have negotiated before the Referendum as most people thought.

"Most people"? What "most people", exactly? The majority that voted Yes?

And how would negotiating before the referendum have made any difference?

cordially,
Scofflaw

tayto lover · 05-06-2012 6:37pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

"Most people"? What "most people", exactly? The majority that voted Yes?

And how would negotiating before the referendum have made any difference?

cordially,
Scofflaw

The majority inc those who felt it was useless voting at all i'd say. Apathy with what was on offer. I know people who wanted to vote No but were afraid because of all the scare-mongering so they decided not to vote at all.

Negotiating before the referendum might just have worked because if the Germans were going to give us anything it would have surely been then. You can't really claim off your insurance after you have mended the car.

Varied · 05-06-2012 6:37pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

"Most people"? What "most people", exactly? The majority that voted Yes?

And how would negotiating before the referendum have made any difference?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Amazing that you dole out warnings to people that disagree with you.

Negotiating a better deal before the referendum would have sent a positive signal to us that the yes vote is the right vote, but due to the sheer spinlessness of this government, they resorted to scaremongering.

You and other yes voters here seem to want to silence anyone that is anything but agreeable with your stance on political issues.

K-9 · 05-06-2012 6:47pm

Varied wrote: »

Amazing that you dole out warnings to people that disagree with you.

The Charter wrote:

Keep your language civil, particularly when referring to other posters and people in the public eye. Using unsavoury language does not add to your argument. The following words are not permitted specifically by this charter:
Scumbag (or a variant)
Beard(s)
Crusties
Teabagger(s)
Unwashed hippies (or a variant)
Zanu-FF
sheeple
zionazis

Nothing to do with you using a term specifically banned in the charter? Ironically its a pretty varied list of terms!

PM the mods if you've a problem with mod actions, don't take threads off topic discussing them.

ardmacha · 05-06-2012 6:55pm

Negotiating a better deal before the referendum would have sent a positive signal to us that the yes vote is the right vote,

Don't you think that if the government could have gotten such a deal that they would have?

but due to the sheer spinlessness of this government, they resorted to scaremongering.

A lot of people go on about scaremongering. If the government believed that a NO vote would make it harder to fund the State, then they were obliged to say so.

Scofflaw · 05-06-2012 7:32pm

tayto lover wrote: »

The majority inc those who felt it was useless voting at all i'd say. Apathy with what was on offer. I know people who wanted to vote No but were afraid because of all the scare-mongering so they decided not to vote at all.

And from that sample you deduce the thoughts of the million and a half who didn't vote? That doesn't even slightly hold up.

tayto lover wrote: »

Negotiating before the referendum might just have worked because if the Germans were going to give us anything it would have surely been then. You can't really claim off your insurance after you have mended the car.

That's another little analogy that has no relevance, though. Why would the Germans have particularly given us something in advance of the vote? What would they have got out of doing so?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Kenny to push for debt deal after Yes vote

Comments