nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Would people support a protest specifically aimed at corruption and cronyism?

hatrickpatrick

Spin-off thread from the Gov't Lockout thread as today's events have rendered it (legitimately) unfair to continue discussing pre-protest ideology when what everyone wants to debate now is the fiasco which occurred after the protest (not pointing any fingers).

A lot of people in that thread stated that they don't support protests because austerity is our only option. I don't agree personally but let's leave that entire issue to one side for a moment and concentrate on the other point, which was oft overlooked in the thread, or lost in the arguing over austerity:
We do not live in a society of equals. We do not live in a society in which there is accountability, equality in the application of justice, penalties for incompetence, negligence or willful malfeasance, or the sense of "one person, one vote". I don't think there are many people who would deny that, even if there are differences over how to respond to it, or whether it's even a negative thing to begin with - people can debate those points but I doubt many will claim that any of the above is untrue. I cited several examples in the protest thread, which I will repost here for convenience - have a read through them and decide for yourself if cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society. If you don't believe they are, that's a perfectly valid viewpoint, although I would be very interested to hear how one justifies that belief in the face of the following evidence.

Exhibit A. http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/anglo/

Exhibit B. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mahon-tribunal/in-brief-the-16-key-findings-in-the-mahon-tribunal-report-3058680.html

Exhibit C. http://www.thejournal.ie/corrupt-payments-to-councillors-were-abuse-of-democratic-system-mahon-392379-Mar2012/

Exhibit D. http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0322/298932-moriarty/

Exhibit E. http://www.herald.ie/news/this-man-owes-28bn-but-gets-200k-a-year-to-live-here-27994668.html

Exhibit F. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68917498

Exhibit G. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/25-years-of-levies-to-pay-for-quinn-losses-203452.html

Exhibit H. http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-breaches-pay-cap-to-award-former-advisor-e35k-pay-rise-295889-Dec2011/

This is just a handful of examples of what I would describe as a litany of abuses over the last number of years. Any one of the items on this list would be good enough grounds by itself for anger, in my view, but taken together the list paints a picture of a wider culture in Irish politics (arguably in all politics).

My question to ye is this. Let's suppose we organized a protest movement which was very specifically not an anti austerity protest, nor a catch-all left wing protest, nor a freeman protest or any of the myriad of issues which tend to piggyback on these large movements (not saying they're invalid, but I must say I find the piggybacking objectionable as it destroys the credibility of all movements involved) and was marketed very strictly and clearly as an anti-corruption movement. March against cronyism, march for an equal society, march for fairness in the law and in the application of justice, march for new laws against political elitism, march for a proper chasing down of those who have slipped through the net, etc.

Would people support such a movement? Would people who objected to today's protest for one reason or another support such a movement?

Note: This movement would *NOT* be designed to fix the economy, so replies of "this wouldn't fix it so why bother" are redundant; This is based on the belief that fixing the economy isn't the only desirable objective and that simply living in a fair an accountable society is a good enough aim in and of itself to warrant its own protest movement.

If you would *not* support something like this, why not? Is it because you believe it would fail, you don't believe the issues I've outlined are actually bad things, or because you believe we should simply accept the broken promises of reform and accountability, and wait until the next election to do something about them? Or do you believe they are bad things but don't matter enough to warrant widespread opposition?

Would be very interested to hear replies. And let's try to keep this thread civil and troll free… Alright fine, mostly troll free

Before anyone tells me this is better suited to politics, I'll be posting it there as well later on, but as the large thread about the lockout was here on AH I'd be interested to hear from the same crowd.

Mods, please don't merge the threads, the specific reason for splintering is that the other thread is too much of a myriad of issues at this stage (ironically, much like the protest itself) for there to be any real discussion.
Would appreciate if people would stay on topic and not fall into the same trap as in the other thread.

Thoughts?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

uch

awec

Nope. Wouldn't be seen near a protest organised by these types.

P_1

While I'd agree with the aims of such a protest, past examples of protests have shown that you just can't hold one without the likes of the SWP/Eirigi/general toerags hijacking it and it generally ending in a farce.

In short, protests don't work and I haven't got a clue what would.

delthedriver

No.

Rho b

Quote "cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society"
They have always have been....nothing new there.

Banjoxed

Freemen, various breeds of Shinners, the far Left, the far Right and just the plain far Out like Foetus Man, and then the buggers sitting down at O'Connell Bridge annoying ordinary people trying to get home? Today drove any extra parliamentary campaign so far back that it will be impossible for them to recover any ground whatsoever.

dxhound2005

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Spin-off thread from the Gov't Lockout thread as today's events have rendered it (legitimately) unfair to continue discussing pre-protest ideology when what everyone wants to debate now is the fiasco which occurred after the protest (not pointing any fingers).

A lot of people in that thread stated that they don't support protests because austerity is our only option. I don't agree personally but let's leave that entire issue to one side for a moment and concentrate on the other point, which was oft overlooked in the thread, or lost in the arguing over austerity:
We do not live in a society of equals. We do not live in a society in which there is accountability, equality in the application of justice, penalties for incompetence, negligence or willful malfeasance, or the sense of "one person, one vote". I don't think there are many people who would deny that, even if there are differences over how to respond to it, or whether it's even a negative thing to begin with - people can debate those points but I doubt many will claim that any of the above is untrue. I cited several examples in the protest thread, which I will repost here for convenience - have a read through them and decide for yourself if cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society. If you don't believe they are, that's a perfectly valid viewpoint, although I would be very interested to hear how one justifies that belief in the face of the following evidence.

Exhibit A. http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/anglo/

Exhibit B. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mahon-tribunal/in-brief-the-16-key-findings-in-the-mahon-tribunal-report-3058680.html

Exhibit C. http://www.thejournal.ie/corrupt-payments-to-councillors-were-abuse-of-democratic-system-mahon-392379-Mar2012/

Exhibit D. http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0322/298932-moriarty/

Exhibit E. http://www.herald.ie/news/this-man-owes-28bn-but-gets-200k-a-year-to-live-here-27994668.html

Exhibit F. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68917498

Exhibit G. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/25-years-of-levies-to-pay-for-quinn-losses-203452.html

Exhibit H. http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-breaches-pay-cap-to-award-former-advisor-e35k-pay-rise-295889-Dec2011/

This is just a handful of examples of what I would describe as a litany of abuses over the last number of years. Any one of the items on this list would be good enough grounds by itself for anger, in my view, but taken together the list paints a picture of a wider culture in Irish politics (arguably in all politics).

My question to ye is this. Let's suppose we organized a protest movement which was very specifically not an anti austerity protest, nor a catch-all left wing protest, nor a freeman protest or any of the myriad of issues which tend to piggyback on these large movements (not saying they're invalid, but I must say I find the piggybacking objectionable as it destroys the credibility of all movements involved) and was marketed very strictly and clearly as an anti-corruption movement. March against cronyism, march for an equal society, march for fairness in the law and in the application of justice, march for new laws against political elitism, march for a proper chasing down of those who have slipped through the net, etc.

Would people support such a movement? Would people who objected to today's protest for one reason or another support such a movement?

Note: This movement would *NOT* be designed to fix the economy, so replies of "this wouldn't fix it so why bother" are redundant; This is based on the belief that fixing the economy isn't the only desirable objective and that simply living in a fair an accountable society is a good enough aim in and of itself to warrant its own protest movement.

If you would *not* support something like this, why not? Is it because you believe it would fail, you don't believe the issues I've outlined are actually bad things, or because you believe we should simply accept the broken promises of reform and accountability, and wait until the next election to do something about them? Or do you believe they are bad things but don't matter enough to warrant widespread opposition?

Would be very interested to hear replies. And let's try to keep this thread civil and troll free… Alright fine, mostly troll free

Before anyone tells me this is better suited to politics, I'll be posting it there as well later on, but as the large thread about the lockout was here on AH I'd be interested to hear from the same crowd.

Mods, please don't merge the threads, the specific reason for splintering is that the other thread is too much of a myriad of issues at this stage (ironically, much like the protest itself) for there to be any real discussion.
Would appreciate if people would stay on topic and not fall into the same trap as in the other thread.

Thoughts?

Thoughts.

1. Try to make your contributions a bit shorter and less repetitive. Practically every one of your posts in the other thread was this same stuff over and over. I saw your various exhibits in the other thread already.

2. Bring your evidence of any criminal activity to the relative authorities or seek legal advice on what you can do with the information. But be aware of this:

Any statement or admission made at a tribunal cannot be used in evidence against a person in criminal proceedings.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/national_government/tribunals_and_investigations/powers_of_tribunals_of_inquiry.html

SimonQuinlank

Would take the banning of the X Factor and Premiership football in this country for Irish people to actually protest it seems,not a trivial little thing like the government selling them and future generations down the river for the benefit of their cronies and the corporate elite.

awec

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Karl Stein

Corruption is built into the system.

If you throw me a few euro I'll withdraw that comment.

hatrickpatrick

uch wrote: »

No

Ok; But why not?

awec wrote: »

Nope. Wouldn't be seen near a protest organised by these types.

"These types"? I'm very spefically proposing a protest which isn't organized or co-opted by any of the existing establshment.

P_1 wrote: »

While I'd agree with the aims of such a protest, past examples of protests have shown that you just can't hold one without the likes of the SWP/Eirigi/general toerags hijacking it and it generally ending in a farce.

In short, protests don't work and I haven't got a clue what would.

Fair enough. Personally I believe it could be possible to hold one which wasn't hijacked, but I see your point.

delthedriver wrote: »

No.

Why not?

Rho b wrote: »

Quote "cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society"
They have always have been....nothing new there.

So what? Just because they're not new, doesn't mean we shouldn't be fighting for their eradication.

Banjoxed wrote: »

Freemen, various breeds of Shinners, the far Left, the far Right and just the plain far Out like Foetus Man, and then the buggers sitting down at O'Connell Bridge annoying ordinary people trying to get home? Today drove any extra parliamentary campaign so far back that it will be impossible for them to recover any ground whatsoever.

Today was an absolute farce, but I'm talking about a protest movement with specific and clear aims, so clear that it would be impossible for it to be hijacked. In my view, the reason these things are so often and so easily hijacked is because their message is vague enough that it can be easily twisted to fit into an agenda other than that which it was intended for.

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Thoughts.

1. Try to make your contributions a bit shorter and less repetitive. Practically every one of your posts in the other thread was this same stuff over and over. I saw your various exhibits in the other thread already.

And practically nobody responded to any of them, hence making another thread to discuss them if people want to.

2. Bring your evidence of any criminal activity to the relative authorities or seek legal advice on what you can do with the information. But be aware of this:

Any statement or admission made at a tribunal cannot be used in evidence against a person in criminal proceedings.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/national_government/tribunals_and_investigations/powers_of_tribunals_of_inquiry.html

Then that's one of the laws I would aim to have changed, along with a whole host of new anti-corruption laws to prevent anything like what we've seen ever occurring again. I stated many times in the other thread that there are a lot of things which aren't illegal but should be - part of this governments election mandate was political reform. Stamping out cronyism would definitely fall under that banner in a major way.

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Is it not pretty clear that there are people out there with more influence on how the government behaves than others? More influence on policy making than others?

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Corruption is built into the system.

If you throw me a few euro I'll withdraw that comment.

I agree. But I refuse to accept that it can't be changed. It would take an enormous amount of work but I truly believe it could be done.

MadsL

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

Would take the banning of the X Factor and Premiership football in this country for Irish people to actually protest it .

What are we waiting for? :cool:

dxhound2005

A host of new anti corruption laws will be of no use unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. If you have evidence bring it forward. You might want to study the existing legislation to inform your actions.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0027/print.html

There is also the Standards in Public Office Commission.

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/

hatrickpatrick

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A host of new anti corruption laws will be of no use unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. If you have evidence bring it forward. You might want to study the existing legislation to inform your actions.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0027/print.html

There is also the Standards in Public Office Commission.

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/

Well for example, the fact that Enda personally intervened to allow a former associate to breach a salary cap for advisors is a matter of public record, there's no question that it happened. It's not actually illegal, but it's one of the things which certainly should be.

The case of the indebted NAMA director getting 200k per year from the exchequer is another example. Not technically illegal, but utterly unacceptable - clear conflict of interest for a start, outrageous over-payment on the flip side of austerity for the masses for another thing. Neither should be allowed.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about a protest against, not the more general issue of the economy or austerity.

IRLConor

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Anyone who's a graduate of both DU and NUI has two Seanad votes. If my better half was Irish she'd be in that boat.

OP: Protests work either by fear (of violence) or shame. I think most reasonable people would consider the violent type of protest to be unhelpful and our politicians seem to be incapable of feeling shame. What do you think changes the mind of an Irish politician?

Painted Pony

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well for example, the fact that Enda personally intervened to allow a former associate to breach a salary cap for advisors is a matter of public record, there's no question that it happened. It's not actually illegal, but it's one of the things which certainly should be.

The case of the indebted NAMA director getting 200k per year from the exchequer is another example. Not technically illegal, but utterly unacceptable - clear conflict of interest for a start, outrageous over-payment on the flip side of austerity for the masses for another thing. Neither should be allowed.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about a protest against, not the more general issue of the economy or austerity.

Actually I don’t think the guidelines on caps for advisors was technically broken, though that is only because of the odd way the guideline was written. But nevertheless, your substantial point remains. Why are some paid so much (too much?) out of the public purse?

I would suggest that this is not specific to the current government. Governments past and future, and not just in Ireland, will do the same. It essentially goes back to the idea that there is competition for personnel with the private sector. And while you can point to many examples of very highly paid public officials who provided somewhat less than high quality service I think it is necessary to have broadly similar remuneration for public workers as you do for private.

If you are looking for examples of low standards in high places I think you could find better examples that the two you cite.

hatrickpatrick

Painted Pony wrote: »

Actually I don’t think the guidelines on caps for advisors was technically broken, though that is only because of the odd way the guideline was written. But nevertheless, your substantial point remains. Why are some paid so much (too much?) out of the public purse?

I would suggest that this is not specific to the current government. Governments past and future, and not just in Ireland, will do the same. It essentially goes back to the idea that there is competition for personnel with the private sector. And while you can point to many examples of very highly paid public officials who provided somewhat less than high quality service I think it is necessary to have broadly similar remuneration for public workers as you do for private.

If you are looking for examples of low standards in high places I think you could find better examples that the two you cite.

Well the thing is, in this particular case I'm not actually complaining about overpayment in general (although that's certainly something to be discussed), it's more specifically (a) the fact that Enda personally intervened to breach the rules his cabinet had set and were supposed to be enforcing (No one should be allowed to bend such rules, either they all follow them or no one does in my view) and (b) the fact that the person for whom the rules were bent just happened to be an old friend of his.

There are two issues there, firstly the fact that people in high places can choose to override or not be subject to the rules, and secondly the cronyism aspect (obvious conflict of interest in Enda intervening to help an old colleague get a pay rise, he should have stayed out of it given the conflict of interest and I would draft specific laws governing what to do in such cases).

I regard both of these as good examples of the corruption endemic in Irish politics. Things like this shouldn't be allowed to happen in the first place because there should be iron clad legislation mandating serious consequences when and if they are found to have happened.

Wibbs

hatrickpatrick, to my mind you're forgetting one thing that scuppers this from the get go and that is we actually like corruption and cronyism in this country. Look at the various scandals over the years where members of the political class were caught with their paws in the honey pot. A couple of things happened, or rather didn't happen in the case of any legal ramifications for the vast majority of them. Numero uno, these shysters share of the vote in the next election went UP. They had more support not less after being found out as corrupt. What surprises me is not so much the amount of corruption and cronyism that came out, but that more politicians didn't admit to more wrongdoing to increase their chances of re-election.

joe swanson

Nope. Legitimate protest in this country has been destroyed by 'republican', the loony left, freemen 'lets make the law up as we go along' and other nutters, supported by the likes of Clare daly (who was recently in Lithuania trying to frdd a terrorist) and Wallace etc. They have no credibility, turn a blind eye to violence and destruction. Decent people want nothing to do with them. Sad really.

Banjo String

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

That used to be a slogan up north.

Vote early and often.:pac:

[Deleted User]

Aimless "look we're really angry but have no particular goals or solutions" isn't going to achieve anything, so no. As well to sit ranting on the internet

Wibbs

I'd agree with John Lennon when he wrote the song Revolution. "You say you want a revolution?" "We'd all love to see the plan". A bunch of out of date oddballs, outliers and scroungers ain't much of a plan to be fair. If that's what passes for opposition in this nation then we are truly fcukered.

Jonny7

bluewolf wrote: »

Aimless "look we're really angry but have no particular goals or solutions" isn't going to achieve anything, so no. As well to sit ranting on the internet

Beats sitting in a tent on Dame street any day, probably more productive too

General General

So, now we've moved from away from protests that have fantastic ill thought out demands & promises... to testing the water to see if there is any demand for a promise of a fantastic protest where those ill thought of just wouldn't show up?

Yeah?

padd b1975

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

FWIW you can have more than one vote in a Seanad election.

chopper6

Charlie don't surf and internet people don't protest...give em broadsband and they want for nothing.

Menas

Set up a poll in this thread to get more responses.

My own take on it is that no, I would not participate for the reasons stated by some above. These protests tend to have no focus and get hijacked by the loo laas. Water flouridisation anyone?
Then you have the trouble element turning up just looking for a fight.

We are a democracy and I believe in the ballot box. I shudder to think what would happen to this country if one of these fringe groups actually did manage to topple the government.

AnonoBoy

chopper6 wrote: »

Charlie don't surf and internet people don't protest...give em broadsband and they want for nothing.

For all your complaining about people complaining about the protests, did you go out and protest yourself yesterday?

P_1

Wibbs wrote: »

hatrickpatrick, to my mind you're forgetting one thing that scuppers this from the get go and that is we actually like corruption and cronyism in this country. Look at the various scandals over the years where members of the political class were caught with their paws in the honey pot. A couple of things happened, or rather didn't happen in the case of any legal ramifications for the vast majority of them. Numero uno, these shysters share of the vote in the next election went UP. They had more support not less after being found out as corrupt. What surprises me is not so much the amount of corruption and cronyism that came out, but that more politicians didn't admit to more wrongdoing to increase their chances of re-election.

Yeah for some reason the rogue seems to be an almost hero-like figure in Ireland. Compare and contrast the penalty points transfer scandal involving a Lib Dem MP across the water and a similar case involving a TD from Roscommon who has a penchant for woolly jumpers and exotic herbs.

Protests aren't going to change this attitude that seems prevalent in the general populace in this country.

Foxhound38

Perhaps...

If it has a clear message, achievable goals, constructive tone, is well stewarded, is kept to a non-disruptive area of the city, is actually co-operative to the Gardai as opposed to centred on roaring abuse at them and breaking police lines, crusties/freemen/Eirigi/SWP/Dissident Republican types are kept out of the organizing process, political flags and banners are banned, people covering their faces are fooked out and professional protestors or those simply there to cause trouble are kept under control I'd consider it depending on what that message was and whether I accepted the premise. In short, it would need to be everything yesterdays fiasco wasn't.

I am downright hostile to what happened yesterday and how it played out. Not least because I don't support the government and this played straight into their hands by painting a picture of those opposed as off-the-hinge lunatics and morons of the highest order. I'm not against protesting, I've been at a fair few over the years - but that yesterday was an out-and-out fiasco...