Is FG worse than FF?

InFront

bk wrote:

Ah FFS InFront, get off your high horse, you know exactly what I was talking about, stop trying to back out of it, you are wrong plain and simple.

Wrong about what? I'm not wrong. You're the guy who doesn't accept that the government have a history of ineffective spending.

You say you have never heard of this overspending, which is very understandable given that you seem to think 'everything is grand'. There is a report about it here and this article from the IT dated Tuesday 23rd January 2007.

Many targets in first plan not achieved on time or on budget
23.01.2007
(Tim O'Brien)

The first question Taoiseach Bertie Ahern was asked in December 1999, as he launched the first National Development Plan, was whether the plan could deliver the promised roads, public transport, water services, housing and energy targets on time.

His answer was in the affirmative. However, seven years on we now know the Taoiseach was substantially inaccurate.

Despite a Cabinet subcommittee being formed to drive the development's promised infrastructure, most programmes remain unfinished, while there are substantial overspends in a number of areas.

None of the inter-urban highways - a mix of motorway and high-grade dual carriageways - from Dublin to the regional cities of Cork, Galway, and Limerick as well as the Border, were completed by the 2006 deadline. The 2007 deadline for the Waterford highway will not be met.

In fact, 2006 saw only about 38 per cent of the proposed inter-urban roads open to traffic.

The cost of the programme has not been the promised €6 billion but will be about €20 billion by the time the inter-urban motorways are complete - now scheduled for 2010.

And I presume your unwillingness to show how the government are underspending to the same degree, when asked, is a confirmation of your opinion that the government do in fact have a reputation of overderspending, and contrary to what you suggest, are not improving on that. Or are you still saying of the opinion that everything is fine?

You said you see that level of overspending every day at work, in fact your inital reaction was "ROFFLE" and yet you seem to be changing your mind about that now too and apparently this is not a daily occurance at your place of work. You say "some" directors would be fired... should the leaders of this government not be fired? This all goes back to my original point to you that in fact the new government will not need to raise taxes to better their services - they just have to spend wisely and all will be well.

You also say that you think earlier problems with the NRA will be repeated with a different government body the RPA, and this at a time when we're just entering the newer, ESRI-criticized national development plan (though we won't be out of the last one for a while yet)... so why exactly should we vote for that government back? Do you see its overspending and wastefulness as OK?
Oh wait, you don't believe it is overspending at all, apparently.

So maybe move onto specific cases of overspending and ineffective spending. Maybe start with health.
Do you think that the 14 billion euro going into the health budget is providing value for money? Do you think the ten years the government have been flinging money at health like mud to a wall has been productive?

Are cases of patient overcrowding at all hospital levels, pathology results that take months to return diagnoses of a cancer, the recent ICU/HDU crisis at St James, the case in Limerick Regional where patients had to be nursed in an ambulance because of the lack of trolleys... are these example of ineffective health spending on behalf of an irresponsible government... or are they OK?

MontgomeryClift

bk wrote:

Nearly every economist, both national and international agree that low corporate tax rates created the celtic tiger.

They (FG/LAB) are itching for power.....they would destroy the prosperity we now have.

But it was FG/Labour/DL government that introduced the low corporation tax rate of 12.5%. So you're saying they'd destroy 'our' prosperity, but saying also that they've created it?

InFront

Just came across this document this morning, it's the FF-PD Programme for Government 2002. I thought it was a pretty funny read if you have the time. A lot of it is just hazy, meaningless waffle and you can't really prove if they did these things or not, but the things I found funny so far are

• The metro link to Dublin airport by 2007
• The promise to increase ODA to 0.7% of GNP by 2007 - that's actually been shifted to 2012 these days. Not on the agenda
• We will provide broadband to offshore islands (actually a lot ofrural areas on the mainland still don't have it)
• 20:1 class sizes
• etc

lucernarian

Transport 21 is full of rebranded merchandise and vague promises. And it's a shame that FG do not have the balls to propose their own ideas on what they would do with the money, and is there any point expecting anything approaching economic sense from Labour? The opposition are basically taking their lead from FF. Talk about the blind leading the blind....

I would be suspicious of them but the greens seem to have more concise policies and ideas and they know what they want to do if they get into power. A lot to be said for them.

And that programme for government from 2002 is an interesting document. It just shows how they have made mugs out of the country. The government have shown their ineptitude in delivering technical projects and disregarding the views of a country where people are battling with the authorities for everything from planning permission to a proper A&E service (or a new hospital in the case of Drogheda).