Poll: Will this Dáil see a full term? - Support for FF falls 15% (Joe Behan Resigns from the Party)

Anmajor - my point about the EU removing or Auditing Ireland is that they only present a sort of report to the media or better, directly to the people on the state of such and such each year and at the end of each government term so the people can decide. At the moment I don't think the EU directives impinge much beyond environmental directives and economic constraints.

I think we still get about 2 billion per year from the EU - someone correct me on that but shouldn't that spending be utterly transparent and available freely to the people to scrutinise ? I wouldn't trust the EPA for some reason so that's why I'm referring to the EU. Environmental directives are a little less politically hot too so you'd imagine we'd be able to implement them without violating the principles of democracy. Our water has been judged by the EPA to be 30% polluted - I think that's something that the electorate should have to consider when voting. Forestry and management would be another thing I'd consider important.

I don't know how these things could extend into other hotter political areas like 'class size' and teacher pay and pay and tax in general. Such intrusion has been seen to be very hot indeed but the environmental and infrastructural stuff could definitely be a point on which to judge some government.

In relation to your angle where lies could be considered 'fraud' I say why not ? It's almost Treason isn't it ? The p.ie thread on the lies ...
http://www.politics.ie/green-party/37507-gormley-politicians-misled-voters-about-economy-run-up-election.html

All that is fair enough. I`d agree with all of that. I misintrepreted your post but I thought it was tongue in cheek.

anmajornarthainig wrote:

All that is fair enough. I`d agree with all of that. I misintrepreted your post but I thought it was tongue in cheek.

No you have a great point that our democracy should be in control of our people here yet they dupe us and other governmental parties and they engage in election buying as you say. This should not be allowed and people need to become aware of what those in power try to do. I don't ever want to run in an election but I'd like to make valid voting choices on a firm basis which is why I prefer to vote for the Greens. I'll hopefully assess them myself at the end of the term in fact they are posting what they have done on their website so it should be easy enough but whether you like them or not I think they are using information in a democratic and transparent way - or they want to at least. For nothing else I support them because of that alone because I'd like to have a basis on which to vote and compare other parties and the other parties themselves offer me no visible ground on which to vote for them. The Labour party had a proposition to make all land over 150m above sea level public land last election and I liked this one but if they had gotten in would they have done so?

Perhaps parties need to give a clear and concise menu of items they'll address while in office and our people need to get into a culture of prosecuting them on the basis of how much of that they have achieved.

anmajornarthainig wrote:

The first part of that post was in reference to a previous poster suggesting that a domestic government could be removed by Europe on the basis that it wasn`t doing it`s job correctly. I`d have serious issues with anything of the sort. That would be undemocratic.

My suggestion would be, to promote better government, that if it had been proven that politicians had lied in their election manifestos in order to gain votes that they would foreit their seats. You can do so for being bankrupt why not for winning a seat by fraud which is in effect what vote-buying is.

Does anyone remember controversy at the time of the last General Elections about the accuracy of the projections available? As I remember, FG and possibly Labour made some criticism of the projections government was relying on - but FG bottled out of putting forward realistic spending and taxation proposals. I don't remember if Labour put forward an alternative.

This was the FG manifesto May 2007 - tax cuts for everyone, and big increases in spending. http://www.finegael.ie/news/index.cfm/type/details/nkey/31586

If government's performances should be audited, should there also be a recall of the Government option on an annual basis? Should there be public votes on the estimates?

Gilmore and Eddie Hobbs have both called for a General Election. It looks as if Brian Lenihan would almost prefer a General Election to pushing on with Cowen.

How close are we to one now?

and Eddie Hobbs.

cactus flower wrote:

Gilmore and Eddie Hobbs have both called for a General Election. It looks as if Brian Lenihan would almost prefer a General Election to pushing on with Cowen.

How close are we to one now?

8.5 months.

I presumed until now that the government would survive for 3-4 years. I now am beginning to think that they won't see out 2009. Historically two things spell doom for leaders and governments.

1. A strained relationship between the head of government and the Finance minister/chancellor.

2. In a multi-party government, a breakdown in trust between parties.

Both those things are happening, and at speed. Cowen and Lenihan seem to have a strained relationship, with Lenihan, who is highly inexperienced but to give him his dues takes his position seriously and even if not the best Finance Minister (he is way way too inexperienced to be) is trying hard, being seriously annoyed at Cowen's traditional indecisiveness and tendency to run away from tough decisions. (Cowen did it in Health and in Finance over and over and now seems to have reverted to form in the Taoiseach's role.)

But the rumours now are of a serious collapse in personal relationships. The Greens don't trust FF and one part of FF don't trust the other. Don't believe the spin about how Bertie decided to resign. He was pushed, by Cowen, told the previous Thursday that the game was up and to pack his bags. Ahern people know that and are waiting in the long grass for Cowen, who has the old Albert 'country'n'Irish' wing behind him. Each side detests the other, but puts up with whoever is in charge once they show themselves to be a winner. It was always amazing to see just how many FFers really hated Bertie privately. They called him 'the gurrier'. But as long as he delivered wins they tolerated him. Once the tribunal damaged him they moved in for the kill. Now Bertie's people smell blood with Cowen.

The Greens were warned by Labour to be very very careful with FF, that if they got the chance they would screw them over. The Greens went into government all dreamy-eyed and now are learning the same experience Labour learnt quite quickly in the 1992-1994 government - FF were in effect cheating on them. Cowen was lovebombing Labour (who told him to shove it - they are still very distrustful of FF after the 1992-1994 experience when it got so bad a 'non-fraternisation' policy was ordered to ensure the Labour deputy Government press secretary was ignored while when the beef tribunal report came out government buildings' doors all mysteriously locked, preventing the junior government party from entering until FF had seen the report and worked out if it was damaging. The Harry Whelehan controversy may have been the trigger for the government's collapse, but it was effectively an excuse. Relationships had broken down completely before then.

That now seems to be happening between FF and the Greens. When Dermot Ahern calls a suggestion by the junior partner of reducing the number of junior ministers "facile" the relationship is bad. D. Ahern is a nasty SOB anyway. But even for him that comment was astonishing, and suggests trust is breaking down. The rumours are now that some ministers are not even on speaking terms and rows are common.

And that is before you factor in Lisbon (a likely win for the yes side. By October the economy will be in such rag order a lot of people will vote yes simply because they are afraid of Ireland's relationship with the EU being damaged and will decide that 2009 with the economy that way is not the right time to make enemies and get yourself isolated), two by-elections, potentially disastrous Local and European elections, a second budget, pay cuts, closure of a chunk of Dublin's bus routes, house prices continuing in freefall, etc.

Personal and party relationships are the glue that holds governments together. FG and Labour survived so long in the 1980s because even though they disagreed on policy there was personal trust and that enabled people to try to work through their problems. But if trust goes, the government goes very soon afterwards. I think an election is likely this year.

The Greens should walk (or rather get the bus, while there still are some left).

cactus flower wrote:

The Greens should walk (or rather get the bus, while there still are some left).

I think they will. There are already whispers that they are very very unhappy, resent having had anything to do with FF, feel they are being walked on, and are muttering that FG and Labour's warnings to watch their back if working with FF were right after all.

Papal do you think FG and Lab or whoever actually want to take over this mess ? Are they relishing looking at such a problem and trying to fix it!

Was it you who posted the analysis of FF inside Govt as opposed to in opposition and how they are better in govt. where they can do less damage and the Greens or PDs can drive them in the right direction and the opposition do less to impede that than FF would if they were in Opposition?

Otherwise you've FF on the Opposition benches saying NO to everything and kicking up a country fuss so much they do more damage than good ? Was that your analysis ? I thought it felt right.

If you feel like telling us more about your take on the splits within FF and the cast of characters in each faction then please do. All ears.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Papal do you think FG and Lab or whoever actually want to take over this mess ? Are they relishing looking at such a problem and trying to fix it!

Was it you who posted the analysis of FF inside Govt as opposed to in opposition and how they are better in govt. where they can do less damage and the Greens or PDs can drive them in the right direction and the opposition do less to impede that than FF would if they were in Opposition?

Otherwise you've FF on the Opposition benches saying NO to everything and kicking up a country fuss so much they do more damage than good ? Was that your analysis ? I thought it felt right.

If you feel like telling us more about your take on the splits within FF and the cast of characters in each faction then please do. All ears.

Not me that I can remember, though yes FF can be extremely irresponsible in opposition. The trouble is that FF right now in government are dire. FG and Labour may not be delighted to have to clean up the mess, but they do know that someone has to clean it up and if FF are so chronically incapable and it looks like they are, someone has to do it or else Ireland will have the IMF coming in. Right now FF can do less damage in opposition than in government.

Papal Knight wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

The Greens should walk (or rather get the bus, while there still are some left).

I think they will. There are already whispers that they are very very unhappy, resent having had anything to do with FF, feel they are being walked on, and are muttering that FG and Labour's warnings to watch their back if working with FF were right after all.

They will walk later this year, but not until Gormley and Ryan's pensions are secured. They will be annihilated in the ensuing election, so really there is nothing left for them but the pensions.

Papal Knight wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

Papal do you think FG and Lab or whoever actually want to take over this mess ? Are they relishing looking at such a problem and trying to fix it!

Was it you who posted the analysis of FF inside Govt as opposed to in opposition and how they are better in govt. where they can do less damage and the Greens or PDs can drive them in the right direction and the opposition do less to impede that than FF would if they were in Opposition?

Otherwise you've FF on the Opposition benches saying NO to everything and kicking up a country fuss so much they do more damage than good ? Was that your analysis ? I thought it felt right.

If you feel like telling us more about your take on the splits within FF and the cast of characters in each faction then please do. All ears.

Not me that I can remember, though yes FF can be extremely irresponsible in opposition. The trouble is that FF right now in government are dire. FG and Labour may not be delighted to have to clean up the mess, but they do know that someone has to clean it up and if FF are so chronically incapable and it looks like they are, someone has to do it or else Ireland will have the IMF coming in. Right now FF can do less damage in opposition than in government.

PapalK - I've taken the libertyof quoting your earlier post on P.ie - hope you don't mind!

Papal Knight wrote:

I presumed until now that the government would survive for 3-4 years. I now am beginning to think that they won't see out 2009. Historically two things spell doom for leaders and governments..........
I think an election is likely this year.

The word according to?

tonys wrote:

Papal Knight wrote:

I presumed until now that the government would survive for 3-4 years. I now am beginning to think that they won't see out 2009. Historically two things spell doom for leaders and governments..........
I think an election is likely this year.

The word according to?

With a name like "Papal Knight", do you think it's inspired from on high?

More seriously tonys, d'you have an alternative scenario to how they're all getting along round the ministerial table?

yehbut_nobut wrote:

tonys wrote:

Papal Knight wrote:

I presumed until now that the government would survive for 3-4 years. I now am beginning to think that they won't see out 2009. Historically two things spell doom for leaders and governments..........
I think an election is likely this year.

The word according to?

With a name like "Papal Knight", do you think it's inspired from on high?

More seriously tonys, d'you have an alternative scenario to how they're all getting along round the ministerial table?

No not really, not having the benefit of wearing my undies on the outside, ala the caped wonder, I’d be only guessing.

My guess would be that the “facile” comment had more to do with the fact that it was someone outside the cabinet flying kites, rather than a put down to the Greens, that Cowen & Lenihan get on like a house on fire and are in complete agreement and that the Bertie boys are at home in Drumcondra scratching their arse and drinking pints.

My other guess would be that there might well be an election this year and if there is, it will be because all parties in Government have agreed that an election is needed to clear the decks for action.

My other other guess would be that PK is talking through his hoop.

Could there be any truth in the rumour that I haven't just invented out of thin air, that the best of our men and women on all sides of the Dáil have got together in private and agreed that they will all need to all pull together and start building a ladder instead of digging further into the hole we're in ? i.e. there's going to be - gasp - a FG/FF coalition

Auditor #9 wrote:

Could there be any truth in the rumour that I haven't just invented out of thin air, that the best of our men and women on all sides of the Dáil have got together in private and agreed that they will all need to all pull together and start building a ladder instead of digging further into the hole we're in ? i.e. there's going to be - gasp - a FG/FF coalition

Never say never, but even without going that far, with the circumstances as they are and when push comes to shove, I think FG can be relied upon to do the right thing.

That would paint FG as not being man enough to tackle the job. Spineless to go along with a weak leader.

A coalition of dissents from both parties trying to save their skins as I predicted is as likely as any

youngdan wrote:

That would paint FG as not being man enough to tackle the job. Spineless to go along with a weak leader.

A coalition of dissents from both parties trying to save their skins as I predicted is as likely as any

You’re an old cynic Dan, where’s your better self, where’s the hopeful man who left these shores for a better life and a warm woman.

A Simple Twist of Fate.

I returned from NYC in 85 to go to South Africa with another lad. He wanted to to be legal but I never worried about legalities and was broke by the time he was ready so I went to Boston. I could be down there now complaining about global warming if things were different.

I regret not turning my hand to politics had I stayed at home. A nice cordial guy like me, who always has the good word to say about everyone, briming with optimism, how could I go wrong

Papal Knight wrote:

I presumed until now that the government would survive for 3-4 years. I now am beginning to think that they won't see out 2009. Historically two things spell doom for leaders and governments.

1. A strained relationship between the head of government and the Finance minister/chancellor.

I don't think its as strained as the papers like to say.

Papal Knight wrote:

2. In a multi-party government, a breakdown in trust between parties.

The Greens have been wary of FF from the start, and the country and western wing openly hostile to the Greens. So in that repect we are no closer to a election now than we were 12 months ago.

Papal Knight wrote:

Both those things are happening, and at speed. Cowen and Lenihan seem to have a strained relationship, with Lenihan, who is highly inexperienced but to give him his dues takes his position seriously and even if not the best Finance Minister (he is way way too inexperienced to be) is trying hard, being seriously annoyed at Cowen's traditional indecisiveness and tendency to run away from tough decisions. (Cowen did it in Health and in Finance over and over and now seems to have reverted to form in the Taoiseach's role.)

I agree that Cown is as indecisive as Bertie, who was the master of the wait-and-see approach. But listening to Cown mention the possiblility of the IMF arriving here (today on Morning Ireland), I think he's finding his balls.

Papal Knight wrote:

But the rumours now are of a serious collapse in personal relationships. The Greens don't trust FF and one part of FF don't trust the other. Don't believe the spin about how Bertie decided to resign. He was pushed, by Cowen, told the previous Thursday that the game was up and to pack his bags.

Old news and hardly relevant.

Papal Knight wrote:

Ahern people know that and are waiting in the long grass for Cowen, who has the old Albert 'country'n'Irish' wing behind him. Each side detests the other, but puts up with whoever is in charge once they show themselves to be a winner. It was always amazing to see just how many FFers really hated Bertie privately. They called him 'the gurrier'. But as long as he delivered wins they tolerated him. Once the tribunal damaged him they moved in for the kill. Now Bertie's people smell blood with Cowen.

As Tonys' says Ahern's people are all down in Fagin's. Who at cabinet counts as an Ahernite? I would say Hanafin and... well that's it. Outside cabinet you've Noel Ahern and a few other Dublin TDs. Point I'm making is that the Ahern camp isn't big enough to dislodge the Country and Western wing who had wait 10 years to get revenge for Albert.
Anyway, who in their right mind would want to be Taoiseach right now?

Papal Knight wrote:

That now seems to be happening between FF and the Greens. When Dermot Ahern calls a suggestion by the junior partner of reducing the number of junior ministers "facile" the relationship is bad. D. Ahern is a nasty SOB anyway. But even for him that comment was astonishing, and suggests trust is breaking down. The rumours are now that some ministers are not even on speaking terms and rows are common.

Dermot Ahern IS a nasty SOB, I agree there. And dismissing Dan Boyle's suggestion made him and Noel Tracey look like idiots. Especially now that Noel Dempsey, Peter Power and Mansaragh have backed the idea.

youngdan wrote:

That would paint FG as not being man enough to tackle the job. Spineless to go along with a weak leader.

A coalition of dissents from both parties trying to save their skins as I predicted is as likely as any

If such a coalition were to come about, the smarts in both FF and FG will have to be resolute in facing down the imbeciles, clowns and ignoramus's (or is it ignorami?) in both camps. The indulging of know-nothing jokers is a luxury the country can ill-afford in the present economic climate. Parish pumpery will have to be eliminated in the national interest.

coc wrote:

They will walk later this year, but not until Gormley and Ryan's pensions are secured. They will be annihilated in the ensuing election, so really there is nothing left for them but the pensions.

My understanding is that if the Greens were to pull out the decision would have to be made by the National Executive Committee of the party or at least the parliamentary party. I doubt the other TDs and senators, never mind the ordinary members who sit on the NEC, would be at all concerned about Eamon Ryan's or John Gormley's pensions.
Electoral propects would be a concern, but not the pensions of just 2 members.