General Irish Government discussion thread [See Post 1805]

Banner fights back · 31-05-2020 8:53pm

ddarcy wrote: »

If the government dissolved tonight, the earliest an election would be if 3 weeks. Then you’ll need a seanad election, etc. There would be no way this is possible before the end of August.

Out of curiosity, as I don’t think this has ever happened, if the government was dissolved without the Taoiseach nominees, would we be back in the scenario as last time? So effectively the Seanad can pass legislation? I wouldn’t think the former 11 would be brought forward and it would only be the sitting members. If that is the case then August is the earliest for something to happen legislation wise.

If the current 33rd Dail is dissolved by the President, on request by the taoiseach, then we are into general election time. There's no going back in the Irish poltical system.

Oh by the way, if the current govt formation talks end in stalemate then IMO Michael D who has been a beacon of light and hope during these dark times while the whole world was in crisis mode, I believe will tell Mr Varadkar to get the hell out of the Aras if he goes to to seek the dissolution of the 33'rd dail, without all avenues explored. That includes getting involved in meaningful discussions with Sinn Fein and the other left leaning parties.

A very fascinating month of political drama awaits the nation.

Cork Boy 53 · 31-05-2020 9:28pm

Banner fights back wrote: »

If the current 33rd Dail is dissolved by the President, on request by the taoiseach, then we are into general election time. There's no going back in the Irish poltical system.

Oh by the way, if the current govt formation talks end in stalemate then IMO Michael D who has been a beacon of light and hope during these dark times while the whole world was in crisis mode, I believe will tell Mr Varadkar to get the hell out of the Aras if he goes to to seek the dissolution of the 33'rd dail, without all avenues explored. That includes getting involved in meaningful discussions with Sinn Fein and the other left leaning parties.

A very fascinating month of political drama awaits the nation.

Despite being of the opinion that Michael D has been a good inspiring President I don`t believe he would take that step.

Edgware · 31-05-2020 10:38pm

Banner fights back wrote: »

The mood music 're the government formation talks appears less rosy in the garden than what was the case around a week or 10 days ago.

The consequences of no government by the end of June are huge as social welfare payments won't roll over a month, unless the Seanad can meet and of course we need a permanent Taoiseach for that to happen, so to pass the social welfare estimates into law and other legislation.

Could Mary Lou McDonald still become Taoiseach if the govt formation talks collapse or one of the 3 of FF, FG or Greens can't get the programme for government through their party membership? Don't rule anything out in the most drawn out of processes.

The prospect of GE 2020 2.0 remains very high IMO.

I think we have a few more cards to play before Michael D would give the go ahead for an election.
Micheal Martin could go back to the party and seek permission to talk to SF. Then having got that dump FG and line up a coalition with SF Soc Dems and a few indos

Podge_irl · 01-06-2020 11:35pm

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

Despite being of the opinion that Michael D has been a good inspiring President I don`t believe he would take that step.

Of course he won't, because it would be completely pointless. FG have been clear and consistent that they would never go into govt with SF and it is a perfectly legitimate position to take and no business of the president. There is absolutely no constitutional requirement to "talk to everybody" about govt formation.

He would potentially reject dissolution if a FF/SF, or any other potential govt looked remotely plausible but as of right now it doesn't.

efanton · 02-06-2020 1:45am

Edgware wrote: »

I think we have a few more cards to play before Michael D would give the go ahead for an election.
Micheal Martin could go back to the party and seek permission to talk to SF. Then having got that dump FG and line up a coalition with SF Soc Dems and a few indos

LOL

That's the last thing Micheal Martin would do.
The FF party might however force him to start talking to SF or face an immediate leadership challenge instead.
Micheal Martin is so desperate to be Taoiseach that he probably would start talking to Sinn Fein and publicly take back everything he has said if that was his only option of being Taoiseach even if it was for only a matter of months.

Of course Micheal Martin will regurgitate the same quote he made earlier this year, and claim that he hasn't done yet another U-turn

“We will not be entering into a grand coalition, people want change, it’s very clear, the message we’re receiving [is] people want change in this country, they want Fine Gael out of office,” he said.

The real question is would SF actually entertain the whole idea?
A general election would probably result in FF losing yet more seats and both SF and FG gaining seats.
The conundrum for SF would be do they go for another election expecting to gain more seats, but more importantly expecting parties that they would consider likely coalition partners also gaining seats so that combined they get that magic number of 80 seats in the Dail, or accept a coalition with FF knowing than many sparks will fly and it will be a stormy 4 years in government if Michael Martin remains leader of FF.

BonnieSituation · 02-06-2020 1:49am

FF have to go into coalition with FG. SF is odd the menu now with MM in charge. They have zero credibility at this point. Martin is solely looking out for himself here so he will do anything to ensure he's in power by the end of these negotiations.

FG have a chance to neuter FF going forward once they keep the Taoiseach, Finance and DFA.

Relent on any of them and they've rehabilitated FF and could see themselves dwindle at the next GE.

efanton · 02-06-2020 2:23am

BonnieSituation wrote: »

FF have to go into coalition with FG. SF is odd the menu now with MM in charge. They have zero credibility at this point. Martin is solely looking out for himself here so he will do anything to ensure he's in power by the end of these negotiations.

FG have a chance to neuter FF going forward once they keep the Taoiseach, Finance and DFA.

Relent on any of them and they've rehabilitated FF and could see themselves dwindle at the next GE.

But surely FG need FF to survive now more than ever.

This is the way I see it.
With the majority of the electoral vote now split three ways and not as before between FF and FG, the likelihood of any party forming a government with a handful of independents, or the Dail whores (sorry I meant to say the Labour party) is virtually nill. With that in mind who could FG rely on as a coalition partner that could deliver enough seats in the Dail.

Without FF having sufficient seats in the Dail, FG are goosed because the left of centre parties will naturally prefer a SF coalition rather than a FG coalition. It would be hard to see how FG could ever form a government unless they were winning around 60 seats in an election.

In effect FG need FF to dilute the left of centre vote, and that will not happen if FF are neutered or diminished.

BonnieSituation · 02-06-2020 3:18am

efanton wrote: »

But surely FG need FF to survive now more than ever.

This is the way I see it.
With the majority of the electoral vote now split three ways and not as before between FF and FG, the likelihood of any party forming a government with a handful of independents, or the Dail whores (sorry I meant to say the Labour party) is virtually nill. With that in mind who could FG rely on as a coalition partner that could deliver enough seats in the Dail.

Without FF having sufficient seats in the Dail, FG are goosed because the left of centre parties will naturally prefer a SF coalition rather than a FG coalition. It would be hard to see how FG could ever form a government unless they were winning around 60 seats in an election.

In effect FG need FF to dilute the left of centre vote, and that will not happen if FF are neutered or diminished.

I don't think so. Centrist liberal voters will coalesce around FG. What do FF offer them?

We're going to see a proper Nordic-esque realignment. And FF are gonna be the losers. And not before time.

I just don't see how FF can reignite a base in urban areas that SF, FG and Greens/SD have. They're going to spend their time picking up votes for the likes of conservative Catholics and very little else.

FG have been pretty consistent throughout the whole government formation process. FF have flip flopped at every turn and based on the murmurings a few weeks back with leaks from the talks, there's no discipline and FG are running rings around them.

efanton · 02-06-2020 10:08am

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I don't think so. Centrist liberal voters will coalesce around FG. What do FF offer them?

We're going to see a proper Nordic-esque realignment. And FF are gonna be the losers. And not before time.

I just don't see how FF can reignite a base in urban areas that SF, FG and Greens/SD have. They're going to spend their time picking up votes for the likes of conservative Catholics and very little else.

FG have been pretty consistent throughout the whole government formation process. FF have flip flopped at every turn and based on the murmurings a few weeks back with leaks from the talks, there's no discipline and FG are running rings around them.

I take your point that a lot of those that would consider themselves centrists might throw their lot in with FG, but there will be many of them that wont, especially after having been through the austerity measures after the banking crisis, where poor old joe public middle income worker bore the brunt, while the wealthy, and those on social welfare felt austerity least. Some of these people are still dealing with the repercussions of austerity and to tell them there's more on the way because of the massive government debts due to covid is hardly going to have them queuing up to vote for FG again.

The problem for FG will be they will need enough of the FF vote to swing them to get at least 60 seats if they ever wanted the chance of forming a government. Personally I cant see that type of swing happening if FF imploded like Labour have, but politics is a strange beast. Realistically you are looking at the majority of the FF vote migrating to FG for FG to be anyway sure of forming a government again. Essentially they would be waiting for a SF government to make such a balls up that a massive swing would be likely. Both FG ad FF have made a balls up on many occasions, so its fair to assume that if SF got into government on a number of occasions they would too.

markodaly · 02-06-2020 10:27am

efanton wrote: »

Without FF having sufficient seats in the Dail, FG are goosed because the left of centre parties will naturally prefer a SF coalition rather than a FG coalition. It would be hard to see how FG could ever form a government unless they were winning around 60 seats in an election.

In effect FG need FF to dilute the left of centre vote, and that will not happen if FF are neutered or diminished.

And where do you think the FF votes will go to in such an event? Not FG?

The polls show this to be the case, a rise of support for FG at the express expense of FF. Put simply, the centre-ground or the centre-right will coalesce around FG, therefore they will elect plenty of TD's enough to be a major force in Irish politics.

One could indeed argue the opposite, that there are not enough left-wing votes to form the elusive left-wing government. Even this time out, there are not enough votes or seats.

efanton · 02-06-2020 11:18am

markodaly wrote: »

And where do you think the FF votes will go to in such an event? Not FG?

The polls show this to be the case, a rise of support for FG at the express expense of FF. Put simply, the centre-ground or the centre-right will coalesce around FG, therefore they will elect plenty of TD's enough to be a major force in Irish politics.

One could indeed argue the opposite, that there are not enough left-wing votes to form the elusive left-wing government. Even this time out, there are not enough votes or seats.

But put it this way. If FG are current getting 35% of the vote and they need a minimum of at a least 60 seats to even have a chance of forming a government, if FF imploded they would need very high percentages of the FF vote to switch to FG. I agree that many FF would switch to FG if the FF party imploded, there is no doubt of that, but I dont think it would the the 70% plus that FG would need to be confident of being able to form a government that didn't involve SF. Without 60 seats I cant see how FG could form a government, unless that government involved virtually every independent and one other party.

I totally agree with your reverse argument, its also going to be hard for SF to get sufficient numbers of Dail seats to form a government. There is no doubt that SF's strategy from the get go would have to be a coalition government and that only. The advantage SF have is that there are more left of centre parties in the Dail than right of centre. If there is another general election this year SF are going to have to absolutely nail their transfer strategy, both within the party and between those parties that it would rely on to form a government.
If SF do well but the smaller parties do poorly then SF are up the creek without a paddle, unless FF survive and there is a significant shift within FF to supporting the idea of a SF/FF coalition. With Micheal Martin at the helm and his deputy so vehemently against any notion of a SF/FF coalition that is unlikely for the present, but could change under new leadership, or FF faced with destruction.

Going back to my previous post a few posts back, I dont believe its in FG's interest to see FF totally collapse. FG need FF to survive to ensure they have the option of a large coalition partner or a party that might give them a C&S agreement, and need FF to dilute the left of centre vote as they are doing at the moment and have always done.

Bishop of hope · 02-06-2020 11:25am

efanton wrote: »

But put it this way. If FG are current getting 35% of the vote and they need a minimum of at a least 60 seats to even have a chance of forming a government, if FF imploded they would need very high percentages of the FF vote to switch to FG. I agree that many FF would switch to FG if the FF party imploded, there is no doubt of that, but I dont think it would the the 70% plus that FG would need to be confident of being able to form a government that didn't involve SF. Without 60 seats I cant see how FG could form a government, unless that government involved virtually every independent and one other party.

I totally agree with your reverse argument, its also going to be hard for SF to get sufficient numbers of Dail seats to form a government. There is no doubt that SF's strategy from the get go would have to be a coalition government and that only. The advantage SF have is that there are more left of centre parties in the Dail than right of centre. If there is another general election this year SF are going to have to absolutely nail their transfer strategy, both within the party and between those parties that it would rely on to form a government.
If SF do well but the smaller parties do poorly then SF are up the creek without a paddle.

Going back to my previous post a few posts back, I dont believe its in FG's interest to see FF totally collapse. FG need FF to survive to ensure they have the option of a large coalition partner or a party that might give them a C&S agreement, and need FF to dilute the left of centre vote as they are doing at the moment and have always done.

Left of centre parties is an illusion, created to garner votes.
You can't have low taxes and provide the services they're promises.
If they get in and do as they say they will without raising taxes, then eventually we will be back to FG to sort out the mess they leave behind, because they'll either overborrow or stifle the economy.

efanton · 02-06-2020 11:41am

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Left of centre parties is an illusion, created to garner votes.
You can't have low taxes and provide the services they're promises.
If they get in and do as they say they will without raising taxes, then eventually we will be back to FG to sort out the mess they leave behind, because they'll either oveTHe unrborrow or stifle the economy.

And this is where we differ.

Its not in any party's interested to tax the bejesus out of the electorate. Nor is it in their interest to spend till they literally drop.

FG will use any surplus to deliver tax cuts or 'incentives', SF are likely to have little surplus but that doesn't mean they would not be capable of staying on budget.

It all depends on your beliefs. I see little evidence of wealth trickling down as is claimed by those that support conservative policies, but many truly believe in this philosophy. For myself and I am sure I can speak for the majority that would support left of centre parties, I would prefer a government that actually delivers the services and infrastructure our country so desperately needs, but they need to do so by staying on budget. If there is no surplus or no drop in taxation I would happily accept that.
.
But if SF could deliver better services and stick fairly to budget, without significant tax increases for the majority of people then they will continue to get the support and increase it.

But that is the unanswered question isnt it?
Until SF have had a term of government, your opinion and mine are simply that opinions not fact.

I think SF clearly recognise this, and will know that if they balls up their first time in government they will have to wait a very significant amount of time for another chance. Knowing that, they are likely to stick to plan and do their utmost to stick to budget.

Geuze · 02-06-2020 12:42pm

efanton wrote: »

It all depends on your beliefs. I see little evidence of wealth trickling down as is claimed by those that support conservative policies, but many truly believe in this philosophy. For myself and I am sure I can speak for the majority that would support left of centre parties, I would prefer a government that actually delivers the services and infrastructure our country so desperately needs, but they need to do so by staying on budget. If there is no surplus or no drop in taxation I would happily accept that.
.
But if SF could deliver better services and stick fairly to budget, without significant tax increases for the majority of people then they will continue to get the support and increase it.

I agree with you about wealth not trickling down.

One of my problems with SF is that they propose so much extra spending, yet they do not propose extra taxes.

I am not hardline against socialism or a bigger Govt, I simply want them to be honest.

See p109-110

https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2020/SF_GE2020_Manifesto.pdf

They plan to spend 22bn extra over five years

They plan to raise taxes by 1.4bn per annum

efanton · 02-06-2020 1:18pm

Geuze wrote: »

I agree with you about wealth not trickling down.

One of my problems with SF is that they propose so much extra spending, yet they do not propose extra taxes.

I am not hardline against socialism or a bigger Govt, I simply want them to be honest.

See p109-110

https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2020/SF_GE2020_Manifesto.pdf

They plan to spend 22bn extra over five years

They plan to raise taxes by 1.4bn per annum

I have studied that manifesto extensively.

Their appendixes simply do not add up in the way you would expect.
Also they have lump summed their capital expenditure, where you would expect any government to amortise significant capital expenditure spends.

What I think has been done is that those expenditures labelled "ADDITIONAL CURRENT SPENDING MEASURES" are measures that would be paid from yearly tax receipts but the expenditure labelled "ADDITIONAL CAPITAL SPENDING MEASURES" are measure that would involve borrowing and would be amortised over a longer period (20-25 years)

The first figure would be within what was the available fiscal space (€12.249 Billion), while the second if amortised would be account for an additional €394 million per year (9.852 billion / 25 + interest) loan repayment.
With the new tax band and other additional measure in their manifesto, if those delivered what was claimed, that would leave them just barely inside what was considered the fiscal space at the time of the election.
Looking at it that way, seems to make sense and probably is what they were trying to convey, but very badly I would admit.

markodaly · 02-06-2020 2:26pm

efanton wrote: »

But put it this way. If FG are current getting 35% of the vote and they need a minimum of at a least 60 seats to even have a chance of forming a government,

When FG got 36.1% of the vote in 2011, they got 76 seats. On 35% they will be be looking at 70 or so seats, well within the ranage of the 81 needed.

They will be fine and fine.*

* I dont think that FG will actually get that high a vote, but I am merely pointing out facts.

Without 60 seats I cant see how FG could form a government, unless that government involved virtually every independent and one other party.

See my post above, even at 60 seats FG will be fine. Plenty of people to do business with.

I totally agree with your reverse argument, its also going to be hard for SF to get sufficient numbers of Dail seats to form a government. There is no doubt that SF's strategy from the get go would have to be a coalition government and that only.

On a very very very good day for SF, based on 25-27% of the vote, they would be looking at mid-high 40's. They will still be 30 odd short and bear in mind, those seats will come at the expense of PBP/SOL/SD so they are eating into the left wing vote.

The advantage SF have is that there are more left of centre parties in the Dail than right of centre.

That is actually a weakness, the Irish left wing have always been divided, split and resentful of each other. Much better for FG and FF to eat up the centre/centre right vote and do a deal with each other, maybe throw a few indos in there.

If SF do well but the smaller parties do poorly then SF are up the creek without a paddle, unless FF survive and there is a significant shift within FF to supporting the idea of a SF/FF coalition.

This agree with, the only way SF can go into government is with FF..... but then people voted for change... right?

The idea of a SF majority left wing government is way way off at the moment. There is simply not enough votes out there for that, but there are enough votes for a FG/FF government, hence that is the most likely option.

Sir Oxman · 02-06-2020 10:01pm

Stirrings from the Irish examiner that Varadkar and his party are possibly turning their sites to Election Part Deux due to favourable polls
I believe if this occurs, FG may be in for a quite deeply unpleasant surprise.

"Irish Examiner has learnt that Leo Varadkar told FG PP tonight that if FF and Greens cannot accept need to pay back deficit in second half of coalition term, then maybe it is “better the party doesn’t go into” government with them now"
Juno McEnroe, irish examiner

ThunbergsAreGo · 02-06-2020 10:06pm

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Stirrings from the Irish examiner that Varadkar and his party are possibly turning their sites to Election Part Deux due to favourable polls
I believe if this occurs, FG may be in for a quite deeply unpleasant surprise.

"Irish Examiner has learnt that Leo Varadkar told FG PP tonight that if FF and Greens cannot accept need to pay back deficit in second half of coalition term, then maybe it is “better the party doesn’t go into” government with them now"
Juno McEnroe, irish examiner

Alot of anger about their failure to condem yesterday's actions. Could have lost them about of votes. People been isolating based on their advice and have been slapped in the face.

While no party has condemned it, FG are more closely associated for obvious reasons

Sir Oxman · 02-06-2020 10:13pm

A lot of anger for the disastrous >1,000 carehome deaths as well.
The perception of competence has definitely worn off caretaker shenanigans.

golfball37 · 03-06-2020 12:04am

I can’t believe Leo has endorsed the mass gathering in Dublin whilst funerals, weddings and people visiting elderly family members is restricted.

Not leadership

CrabRevolution · 03-06-2020 2:08pm

Sir Oxman wrote: »

A lot of anger for the disastrous >1,000 carehome deaths as well.
The perception of competence has definitely worn off caretaker shenanigans.

The devastating care home death toll has been widely publicised since early April, but the latest poll from the 31st of May has FG maintaining the surge in support they received at the start of the Covid-19 emergency.

26 March-34%
03 May-35%
31 May-35%

I'm not saying it'll last forever, or that they've done a perfect job and satisfied everyone, but there is no evidence for what you're claiming.

It reminds me of the many posters here 2 years ago claiming everyone they knew was outraged at Michael D for seeking a second term or just hated him in general, and that he'd struggle to get re-elected. All while be lead the polls by a significant amount, and ended up winning the most comprehensive victory in a presidential election in the history of the state.

CrabRevolution · 03-06-2020 2:13pm

golfball37 wrote: »

I can’t believe Leo has endorsed the mass gathering in Dublin whilst funerals, weddings and people visiting elderly family members is restricted.

Not leadership

Did he endorse it?

Or like all politicians did he hide behind saying nothing for fear of the worst fate known to man; being called a racist by people who think everything is racist.

efanton · 03-06-2020 3:05pm

CrabRevolution wrote: »

The devastating care home death toll has been widely publicised since early April, but the latest poll from the 31st of May has FG maintaining the surge in support they received at the start of the Covid-19 emergency.

26 March-34%
03 May-35%
31 May-35%

I'm not saying it'll last forever, or that they've done a perfect job and satisfied everyone, but there is no evidence for what you're claiming.

It reminds me of the many posters here 2 years ago claiming everyone they knew was outraged at Michael D for seeking a second term or just hated him in general, and that he'd struggle to get re-elected. All while be lead the polls by a significant amount, and ended up winning the most comprehensive victory in a presidential election in the history of the state.

What has to be borne in mind though is the actual poll took place a week or two before the release date of the poll results. That means the the awkward questions and answers asked by the Dail committee were not known about at the time of the poll. There is an inevitable lag between what people think and what was published in every poll.

Does that mean we can dismiss the poll? absolutely not. The government have done an extremely good job of handling he covid crisis so far, if you ignore the issue of the nursing homes, thankfully because they had the good sense to follow expert advise and not political instincts.

Its only fair to give credit where it is due, but Simon Harris will have to take full responsibility for the debacle that happened in the nursing homes. He is Health minister, not health minister only responsible for public hospitals. and should have insisted that every plan also included any provider of healthcare services. I suspect there will be a substantial dip in the next poll results because of this.

The other issue is if you look at the polls its apparent that additional support is coining from those that would normally vote independent or from other parties so to claims that these poll result cold be directly transferred to a general election situation is over emphasising the support for FG.

Having said all that, except for the the debacle of the nursing homes, I am happy we have the government we currently have and not the likes of Boris Johnston, Donald Trump, or any of the governments that simply did not take this pandemic seriously. Ireland is a small country with far less resources to deal with pandemics than most countries and it could have been an absolute disaster for the country had the pandemic not been taken as seriously as it was from the very start. Its such as shame that the health minister dropped the ball completely and not insisted that all healthcare providers were included in any plan of actions, then we would have had a world class record rather than just a better than average record.

In issues like these I will put on the team Ireland jersey and not use it to score points, something I suggest other posters do. Could things have been done better? of course they could but then again everything can be done better.
I don't think its right for some posters to continually be using this pandemic and its handling as a constant excuse to attack the government, nor do I think its right that the FG fan club use it to demonstrate how superiors their party is to others, after all if another party was in power and also had the good sense to follow expert advice we probably would end up with similar results.

Banner fights back · 03-06-2020 5:16pm

I fundamentally disagree with the narrative that the govt "have done a great job" with covid 19. 1600 plus deaths, the botched job of our nursing homes, the issues regarding PPE with key frontline staff at the beginning of the crisis, 7000 covid 19 cases with healthcare staff, their lax response to clusters in particular in meat factories, spending €300 million plus on that disastrous value for money private hospitals deal that only serves to benefit the super rich

I personally believe that barring the likes of Susan Mitchell of the Business Post, Irish times and the Irish examiner, everyone else working in the public journalism industry are giving far too much of an armchair ride to Leo and the govt here. Remember key decisions about reopening the country or introducing tough restrictions are made by Dr Holohan and NPHET. The govt then just go along with their recommendations.

If Leo and FG are not really putting in the extra mile in these govt formation talks which IMO is exactly what's happening because of their high poll ratings, once again they are putting the party interests ahead of the national interest. Thank God that the Irish Examiner are following this story as you just can't trust the pro FG MSM at all.

I always felt that FG lacked class at the best of times, but if Leo is genuinely determined that a second GE2020 during the middle of this once in a lifetime national health emergency, should take place for FG political gain then that's a new low for Irish politics. Leo is so out of touch with the realities of Irish life once again.

I truly believe that Fg are not serious about entering into a Green and FF axis. If I were a grassroots Green or FF member I would have grave concerns about FG's real agenda here. I haven't got much time at all for FG and Leo in general for a myriad of reasons.

But any attempt to railroad a second GE again in 2020 that I'm sure the majority of the Irish public do not want at this time would be most counter productive for Fg. A massive miscalculation of the public mood IMO that will backfire on them, I have no doubt.

jd1983 · 03-06-2020 10:51pm

Banner fights back wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree with the narrative that the govt "have done a great job" with covid 19. 1600 plus deaths, the botched job of our nursing homes, the issues regarding PPE with key frontline staff at the beginning of the crisis, 7000 covid 19 cases with healthcare staff, their lax response to clusters in particular in meat factories, spending €300 million plus on that disastrous value for money private hospitals deal that only serves to benefit the super rich

I personally believe that barring the likes of Susan Mitchell of the Business Post, Irish times and the Irish examiner, everyone else working in the public journalism industry are giving far too much of an armchair ride to Leo and the govt here. Remember key decisions about reopening the country or introducing tough restrictions are made by Dr Holohan and NPHET. The govt then just go along with their recommendations.

If Leo and FG are not really putting in the extra mile in these govt formation talks which IMO is exactly what's happening because of their high poll ratings, once again they are putting the party interests ahead of the national interest. Thank God that the Irish Examiner are following this story as you just can't trust the pro FG MSM at all.

I always felt that FG lacked class at the best of times, but if Leo is genuinely determined that a second GE2020 during the middle of this once in a lifetime national health emergency, should take place for FG political gain then that's a new low for Irish politics. Leo is so out of touch with the realities of Irish life once again.

I truly believe that Fg are not serious about entering into a Green and FF axis. If I were a grassroots Green or FF member I would have grave concerns about FG's real agenda here. I haven't got much time at all for FG and Leo in general for a myriad of reasons.

But any attempt to railroad a second GE again in 2020 that I'm sure the majority of the Irish public do not want at this time would be most counter productive for Fg. A massive miscalculation of the public mood IMO that will backfire on them, I have no doubt.

I agree that the government has done a poor job throughout this crisis. I'd normally have some sympathy, as difficult decisions had to be made in a panic and mistakes will be made. However any sympathy or goodwill for the government from me has gone due to all the spin, propaganda and lack of humility by the government. Two of the highest priorities by the government at the beginning of this crisis was to hire a spin doctor and to ensure that tax exiles won't be adversely affected by the crisis. If the government had more humility throughout this crisis then mistakes would have been rectified quicker instead of being allowed to fester.

Hermy · 03-06-2020 11:38pm

jd1983 wrote: »

Two of the highest priorities by the government at the beginning of this crisis was to hire a spin doctor and to ensure that tax exiles won't be adversely affected by the crisis.

Do you have a link to any news items on this?

Banner fights back · 04-06-2020 6:54am

jd1983 wrote: »

I agree that the government has done a poor job throughout this crisis. I'd normally have some sympathy, as difficult decisions had to be made in a panic and mistakes will be made. However any sympathy or goodwill for the government from me has gone due to all the spin, propaganda and lack of humility by the government. Two of the highest priorities by the government at the beginning of this crisis was to hire a spin doctor and to ensure that tax exiles won't be adversely affected by the crisis. If the government had more humility throughout this crisis then mistakes would have been rectified quicker instead of being allowed to fester.

Absolutely on the money jd1983. The narrative that "we are all in this together" rings hollow when as you correctly mention the deal that tax exiles got so that they wouldn't face any tax liability so to protect the interests of the super rich throughout this crisis.

Added to the most terrible value for money that was the private hospitals deal that again gave the wealthy owners of those hospitals a big golden handshake then really FG's reputation goes out the window.

Leo is egotisticaly obsessed about spin, good pr and above all else power. Anyone that thinks that FG will change for the better after their disastrous February general election, then they are foolishly mistaken.

With wealthy man best friend Leo in charge, then the same regressive economic policies that FG implemented since 2011 will continue unabated, that will punitively punish those with low or moderate incomes.

Look at the unemployment covid 19 payment scheme Workers could face a tax liability from this payment, according to revenue. In the coming weeks, we could see some workers who have availed of the €350 payment, return back to the less lucrative jobseekers benefit. Where's the fairness in all this. Of course the payment cannot continue indefinitely but IBEC made valid point of potential wave of job redundancies if income supports are removed too fast due to companies operating well below capacity. I hope that Minister Donohue and his dept are listening to this advise.

We are heading towards a critical phase on our nations history. The decisions and the policies that the govt pursue in these times of economic uncertainty are going to have a major impact on how and when the economy can turn around again. But I firmly believe that FG are the least capable to manage a fairer and progressive society that is what's required to deal with the economic fallout of covid 19. They failed miserably from 2011 onwards. Don't expect anything else different while Leo is at the wheel.

Bishop of hope · 04-06-2020 7:17am

Banner fights back wrote: »

Absolutely on the money jd1983. The narrative that "we are all in this together" rings hollow when as you correctly mention the deal that tax exiles got so that they wouldn't face any tax liability so to protect the interests of the super rich throughout this crisis.

Added to the most terrible value for money that was the private hospitals deal that again gave the wealthy owners of those hospitals a big golden handshake then really FG's reputation goes out the window.

Leo is egotisticaly obsessed about spin, good pr and above all else power. Anyone that thinks that FG will change for the better after their disastrous February general election, then they are foolishly mistaken.

With wealthy man best friend Leo in charge, then the same regressive economic policies that FG implemented since 2011 will continue unabated, that will punitively punish those with low or moderate incomes.

Look at the unemployment covid 19 payment scheme Workers could face a tax liability from this payment, according to revenue. In the coming weeks, we could see some workers who have availed of the €350 payment, return back to the less lucrative jobseekers benefit. Where's the fairness in all this. Of course the payment cannot continue indefinitely but IBEC made valid point of potential wave of job redundancies if income supports are removed too fast due to companies operating well below capacity. I hope that Minister Donohue and his dept are listening to this advise.

We are heading towards a critical phase on our nations history. The decisions and the policies that the govt pursue in these times of economic uncertainty are going to have a major impact on how and when the economy can turn around again. But I firmly believe that FG are the least capable to manage a fairer and progressive society that is what's required to deal with the economic fallout of covid 19. They failed miserably from 2011 onwards. Don't expect anything else different while Leo is at the wheel.

You're a bleeding heart for bleeding the system aren't you.
These payments aren't going to last no matter whose in Govt because they're just unsustainable in the long term.
What about the poorly payed shop assistants and other essential workers, still working away at their 10 euro odd per hour who can't access these great payments.
If mass unemployment continues then the economy is goosed in the short to medium term.
The payments will have to be cut once all restrictions are lifted.

jd1983 · 04-06-2020 7:52am

Hermy wrote: »

Do you have a link to any news items on this?

Sure

https://www.thejournal.ie/tax-exiles-revenue-relaxation-catherine-murphy-5067420-Apr2020/?amp=1

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/world-news/coronavirus/taoiseach-brings-back-communications-guru-for-covid-19-public-campaign-39054064.html

Chips Lovell · 04-06-2020 8:40am

There's a difference though between these things happening and saying they were two of their biggest priorities.

While the optics of the tax exiles decision isn't great, it's a.) hard to imagine that it took that much time and effort to implement and b.) probably was unavoidable because otherwise you could be opening yourself up to a legal challenge from people who could argue that it was physically impossible for them to leave the state.

Peregrinus · 04-06-2020 8:59am

Chips Lovell wrote: »

There's a difference though between these things happening and saying they were two of their biggest priorities.

Plus, it's not clear to me why making a priority of hiring a head of communications is such a terrible thing. Effective public communications are absolutely fundamental to any successful strategy for combatting the spread of the infection. We should be much more concerned if thought had not been given put putting the right people in charge of this.

CrabRevolution · 04-06-2020 9:30am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Plus, it's not clear to me why making a priority of hiring a head of communications is such a terrible thing. Effective public communications are absolutely fundamental to any successful strategy for combatting the spread of the infection. We should be much more concerned if thought had not been given put putting the right people in charge of this.

The same people giving out about a head of communications being appointed would be (or presumably are) giving out about "mixed messages" "lack of communication" "government confusion" etc.

Podge_irl · 04-06-2020 12:10pm

Banner fights back wrote: »

Added to the most terrible value for money that was the private hospitals deal that again gave the wealthy owners of those hospitals a big golden handshake then really FG's reputation goes out the window.

How does it benefit the owners of a private hospital to provide services at cost for 3 months? They are making no profit.

This focus on the private hospitals deal as some kind of payment to the wealthy owners is one of the more ridiculous conspiracy theories floating around.

jd1983 · 04-06-2020 8:39pm

Chips Lovell wrote: »

There's a difference though between these things happening and saying they were two of their biggest priorities.

While the optics of the tax exiles decision isn't great, it's a.) hard to imagine that it took that much time and effort to implement and b.) probably was unavoidable because otherwise you could be opening yourself up to a legal challenge from people who could argue that it was physically impossible for them to leave the state.

"Legal Challenge" - I'm always amazed how some people will go to great lengths to justify actions to protect the such parasites. There was absolutely no chance of a successful legal challenge, these parasites will be resident in this country for at least 183 days this year, using our tax payer services and will not have to contribute to such services.
If you consider all the business's/people (e.g. airlines, hotels, retail etc.) that were adversely affected by lockdown measures, you actually think that billionaire tax exiles would have stood a chance of mounting a successful legal challenge due to lockdown measures if the residency rules weren't relaxed. If they even tried to mount a legal challenge the case would be mocked more than GO'D's & John Watters ridiculous case.

Chips Lovell · 04-06-2020 8:45pm

Fair enough. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

jd1983 · 04-06-2020 8:50pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

Plus, it's not clear to me why making a priority of hiring a head of communications is such a terrible thing. Effective public communications are absolutely fundamental to any successful strategy for combatting the spread of the infection. We should be much more concerned if thought had not been given put putting the right people in charge of this.

Concannon is a well known spin doctor and the government propaganda has stank since he was hired. Varadkar even told Ryan Tubridy that no mistakes were made

How many lives do you think the following photo saved? That photo op occurred whilst government ministers refused to meet the heads of the nursing homes.

beggars_bush · 06-06-2020 8:38pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

How does it benefit the owners of a private hospital to provide services at cost for 3 months? They are making no profit.

This focus on the private hospitals deal as some kind of payment to the wealthy owners is one of the more ridiculous conspiracy theories floating around.

well basically they were guaranteed 3 months income when a lot of people wouldn't have been travelling for appointments or procedures

blackwhite · 06-06-2020 11:34pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

well basically they were guaranteed 3 months income when a lot of people wouldn't have been travelling for appointments or procedures

The Beacon hospital withdrawing from the Private Hospitals Association, and stating that in future they’ll negotiate their own deals, doesn’t exactly support the conspiracies that this was a generous deal for private hospitals.

efanton · 07-06-2020 1:03am

blackwhite wrote: »

The Beacon hospital withdrawing from the Private Hospitals Association, and stating that in future they’ll negotiate their own deals, doesn’t exactly support the conspiracies that this was a generous deal for private hospitals.

Have you any evidence to suggest it wasnt a good deal?

Considering that the government were paying for EVERY bed in private hospitals, and that many due to the corona virus would have chosen to delay minor elective surgeries, the private hospitals got a pretty good deal. They certainly would not have earned more had they not been called upon to provide extra public capacity by the government.

I'm not going to argue that is was wrong for the government to block book that additional capacity, any sensible government would have done exactly the same thing.

What I would argue is that having paid for that additional capacity why wasn't it utilised once we realised that it would not be required to prevent overflow of our public hospitals. Why was it not used for instance to segregate those residents in the nursing homes who had covid in order to protect any possible spread,which unfortunately is exact what happened.

Bishop of hope · 07-06-2020 9:39am

efanton wrote: »

Have you any evidence to suggest it wasnt a good deal?

Considering that the government were paying for EVERY bed in private hospitals, and that many due to the corona virus would have chosen to delay minor elective surgeries, the private hospitals got a pretty good deal. They certainly would not have earned more had they not been called upon to provide extra public capacity by the government.

I'm not going to argue that is was wrong for the government to block book that additional capacity, any sensible government would have done exactly the same thing.

What I would argue is that having paid for that additional capacity why wasn't it utilised once we realised that it would not be required to prevent overflow of our public hospitals. Why was it not used for instance to segregate those residents in the nursing homes who had covid in order to protect any possible spread,which unfortunately is exact what happened.

Perhaps to stop the spread even further?
But there are many questions surely.
I'd imagine it was important to try and keep some hospital areas covid free for non covid emergencies too.
An old man I knew quite well sent to a private clinic recently to have a stint put in, he was sent from Mullingar hospital after he accessed the emergency services there.
Anyway, he developed covid 19 while being treated and unfortunately passed away the other night. He had been sent home and was there when the symptoms hit him, he was readmitted to Mullingar and died there. His elderly wife also contracted the disease and still has it but thankfully seems to be recovering.
All these things raise questions, could more have been done, which place did he contract the virus, should he have got home before it was certain he hadn't gotten it, etc etc?
Hindsight is 20/20, why what which when and if are going to be in everyone's minds.
Hard to know what actions are or were best, but difficult to know why none of these beds were ever utilised surely

blackwhite · 07-06-2020 12:11pm

efanton wrote: »

Have you any evidence to suggest it wasnt a good deal?
.

The statement from, and actions of, the Beacon that I referenced are evidence that they certainly didn’t see it as a good deal.

efanton · 07-06-2020 12:32pm

blackwhite wrote: »

The statement from, and actions of, the Beacon that I referenced are evidence that they certainly didn’t see it as a good deal.

The government could have drafted in that hospital whether it was part of an association or not, and probably would because of its location.

They paid for every bed, so where is the evidence that they would have earned more?

Podge_irl · 07-06-2020 12:58pm

efanton wrote: »

The government could have drafted in that hospital whether it was part of an association or not, and probably would because of its location.

They paid for every bed, so where is the evidence that they would have earned more?

They paid cost price for every bed.

jd1983 · 07-06-2020 2:53pm

blackwhite wrote: »

The Beacon hospital withdrawing from the Private Hospitals Association, and stating that in future they’ll negotiate their own deals, doesn’t exactly support the conspiracies that this was a generous deal for private hospitals.

I'm not sure if you're aware of the history between Denis O'Brien (beacons owner) and FG governments regarding various state contracts. However if you are aware of the history, you'd be very naive to think that DOB isn't getting a very good deal. It would also be pretty naive to think beacon pulling out is because they got a poor deal, it's more likely evidence of the fact that DOB's relationship to FG will ensure he gets an even better deal 'negotiating' on his own behalf.

We're paying 400% more for private beds then the UK are, sounds like a pretty good deal for DOB and co.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfPayEquality/status/1264929526162882565

Podge_irl · 07-06-2020 3:09pm

We are not paying 400% more for private beds than the UK are. The cost per occupied bed is 400% more because the emergency, excess capacity did not need to be utilised. People are taking the entire cost of the private hospitals - which is being provided at cost price, with zero profit for the hospitals, and dividing it by the number of occupied beds which are being deliberately kept low. It is wilful distortion of the truth and borderline conspiracy theory nonsense.

blackwhite · 07-06-2020 3:10pm

jd1983 wrote: »

I'm not sure if you're aware of the history between Denis O'Brien (beacons owner) and FG governments regarding various state contracts. However if you are aware of the history, you'd be very naive to think that DOB isn't getting a very good deal. It would also be pretty naive to think beacon pulling out is because they got a poor deal, it's more likely evidence of the fact that DOB's relationship to FG will ensure he gets an even better deal 'negotiating' on his own behalf.

We're paying 400% more for private beds then the UK are, sounds like a pretty good deal for DOB and co.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfPayEquality/status/1264929526162882565

The 400% is per bed used - not per bed made available. It’s been widely pointed out over the past week, yet for some strange reason we have propaganda peddlers who are determined to keep repeating misleading numbers.

Most reasonable people see the fact that we didn’t need to call on many private beds as a positive - yet we’ve a few determined to try and paint the fact we did a better job than the UK in suppressing serious cases as a negative thing :rolleyes:

efanton · 07-06-2020 4:07pm

blackwhite wrote: »

The 400% is per bed used - not per bed made available. It’s been widely pointed out over the past week, yet for some strange reason we have propaganda peddlers who are determined to keep repeating misleading numbers.

Most reasonable people see the fact that we didn’t need to call on many private beds as a positive - yet we’ve a few determined to try and paint the fact we did a better job than the UK in suppressing serious cases as a negative thing :rolleyes:

Where did you get that information?

The government REFUSED to publish the agreement with the private hospitals, have you seen the agreement or have a link to it?

Scoundrel · 08-06-2020 2:47pm

Aren't we the taxpayers paying CityWest 25 million for use as a respite for Covid patients currently only 26 people in at the minute what genius 'negotiated' that on our behalf? More scandalous gifting of public money to their rich mates by FG.

blackwhite · 08-06-2020 4:46pm

efanton wrote: »

Where did you get that information?

The government REFUSED to publish the agreement with the private hospitals, have you seen the agreement or have a link to it?

It was raised in the Dail debates.

The only people latching onto the per-bed-used numbers are those trying to push their same old "everything is terrible agenda", or people too thick to understand the difference between cost per bed used and cost per bed available.

The contract is for costs incurred only, and it's been repeated stated in the Dail and in the media that all costs submitted will be subject to audit to ensure there's nothing additional charged.

Would you have preferred the Dept of Health didn't add any capacity to the system, and just crossed their fingers and hoped that the public hospitals wouldn't be pushed beyond their capacity

Or maybe you were hoping for higher numbers of severe cases so that the cost per used bed might look a bit lower?

jd1983 · 08-06-2020 6:56pm

Scoundrel wrote: »

Aren't we the taxpayers paying CityWest 25 million for use as a respite for Covid patients currently only 26 people in at the minute what genius 'negotiated' that on our behalf? More scandalous gifting of public money to their rich mates by FG.

Yea and the owner bought it outright for 29mln but that's FG's modus operandi, funelling tax payer money to uber wealthy parasites. The hotel would have been empty for the past few minutes, so the government was in a great negotiating position on behalf of the tax payer. The fact that they didn't take advantage speaks volumes.

General Irish Government discussion thread [See Post 1805]

Comments