The Greens in Power

Grudaire

My question is:

Since the greens have come into power have they made any positive impact on the running of the government? I've been away, and haven't seen how they've done, but did they sell their principles by going into government?

mike65

The Greens are in power?

/checks calander...

Mike.

Dalfiatach

They've been appalling. And I voted Green #1 in 2007 and 2002.

They've just rolled over on every single issue and let FF do whatever they want to. But what's even worse is the way the Greens have been justifying it.

"But we only have 6 seats, sure we don't deserve much of a say, we're just glad to be involved at all really..."

Spineless and pathetic, IMO. I loathe the PDs and all they stand for, but you have to give them credit for punching well above their weight and getting their policies rammed through for the last decade, despite being a tiny fringe party. The Greens are just happy to be along for the ride and enjoying the mercs and perks. So far they've been astonishingly disappointing, vacuous, really really pointless. I've not seen any sign that they have any intention of even timidly proposing any reforms whatsoever, never mind having the ruthless streak required to actually deliver any change.

All that guff about high standards, clean politics, proper planning, a new way of doing things was just that: guff. Conned again. They'll never get a sniff of a preference from me ever again.

Jackie laughlin

The reason that the Pds (or for that matter, Labour) did so well in coalition with FF is that they have a coherent political position. The Greens do not. It's unfair - even cynical - to label them as corrupt: the usual mercs. and perks slur. That isn't the problem. Their problem is that they haven't yet come to terms with whether they are neo-liberal or socialist/social democratic. ("Neither left nor right but Green" is nonsense.) They waffle on about the environment but do not even have an air transport policy for fear of upsetting "Dublin 4" supporters who go to the bottle bank, have compost bins/heaps but take off regularly for the sun and possibly have a holiday home abroad. Indeed the Green Party is very similar to FF; they know their constituency and serve it very well.

Húrin

Dalfiatach wrote:

They've just rolled over on every single issue and let FF do whatever they want to. But what's even worse is the way the Greens have been justifying it.

It sounds like you cannot be pursuaded out of the opinion you have decided to hold. But it's worth highlighting that the Greens have secured €350 million in education funding that we would never have obtained without them; carbon taxes are on the way and so are powerful elected mayors for Ireland's cities.

To say that nothing has changed makes you simply a liar.

Dalfiatach wrote:

I loathe the PDs and all they stand for, but you have to give them credit for punching well above their weight and getting their policies rammed through for the last decade, despite being a tiny fringe party.

Actually, the weilding of an unjustified amount of power that was one of the main problems with the PDs. Or do you think that the Irish people should not get what we vote for?

Dalfiatach wrote:

The Greens are just happy to be along for the ride and enjoying the mercs and perks.

The two green ministers cycle to work; Sargent takes the train. However it sounds like you will vote against the Greens from now on no matter how much good they achieve.

John_C

They've rejected a poor development plan in Monaghan and banned the county council's from offering guarentees to incinerator companies so they seem to be achieving in their core envoirnmental policies.

ednwireland

i've been impressed with their pragmatic approach and the fact they got prius's as there cars cycle to the office and use scheduled flights. more lkely to vote for them now

is_that_so

H&#250 wrote: »

It sounds like you cannot be pursuaded out of the opinion you have decided to hold. But it's worth highlighting that the Greens have secured €350 million in education funding that we would never have obtained without them; carbon taxes are on the way and so are powerful elected mayors for Ireland's cities.

€350 million is a bargain for FF not having to go "clean" plus they can bask in the warm glow of its success. There is no way to know that it would never have happened .
As for the rest I wouldn't hold my breath. They are still only promises and something to beat them with if they don't happen.

My own thoughts on them is, after the initial flurry of PR, that they have been fairly invisible aside from the very correct decision on Monaghan but it is very early days. That aside it's all promises that may or may not happen. I think that they have been adequate but display some considerable immaturity. Gormley should have resisted the temptation to enter the fray on Shannon.

They have a bit of time to prove us wrong. If it was a school scorecard I would say a D+ so far.

Good

Monaghan plan

Negative or still a Promise

"Dublin Cycle City" Unworkable visions like this are what make people snigger
Get the damned transport system working first.
Tara -Why did Gormley lie or make a promise he knew he couldn't keep?
Gormley on Shannon :rolleyes:
Mayors - Still a promise
Carbon Tax - Also a promise.
Trev slithering out of the hot seat and into government with "cunning linguistics".
Not getting FF to sign up to proper ethics. A big black mark in my book.

oscarBravo

H&#250 wrote: »

To say that nothing has changed makes you simply a liar.

Please read the charter - carefully - before posting here again.

MrSquishSquash

H&#250 wrote: »

To say that nothing has changed makes you simply a liar.

Them hypothetically making changes and him not knowing would make him ignorant!

If they hypothetically made changes and he knew all about it, that would make him a liar!

You can't show either!

As for the greens, great their using bikes & public transport and at least they gave a shot at protecting a sacred monument like Tara and talked about removing corruption from the Government!

I mean they did do their best after all and thats the important thing, isn't it?

CptSternn

The greens were railroaded - plain and simple. They compromised on many of their parties platforms in exchange for power.

Thats not to say any other party put in the same position wouldn't do the same thing, but the greens did sell out their voter base on many important issues.

FF has enough power to do what they want. They take whatever party that gets the slim majority of the vote for them, and use them as a scapegoat for any unpopular things they do.

The greens are now the FF whipping boy. Sure, they might throw them a bone once and a while, but the greens right now are pretty much like a neutered party.

Jackie laughlin

This isn't true. There is some evidence that parties who coalesce with FF tend to do badly at subsequent elections. However, ideological partners have achieved beyond their numerical strength as FF is without principles. (No, that wasn't a moral statement or a criticism. I mean, there is no core belief.) The problem with the Greens is that they are not a party with an ideology.

Múinteoir

Gormley publishes €5.8 billion Water Services Investment Programme

Elmo

They have been in government for 4 and a half months. Lets give them a little more time, lets all remember that they are taking over from FF Ministers who did nothing for the last 10 YEARS.

piraka

They have been in government for 4 and a half months. Lets give them a little more time, lets all remember that they are taking over from FF Ministers who did nothing for the last 10 YEARS.

.......and how many U-turns were completed in that time!!!

Elmo

.......and how many U-turns were completed in that time!!!

Alot less then in the last four and 1/2 months of the PD/FF government.

edanto

U-turns are fine, sometimes new information comes to light and you can change your mind.

For example, there may be an argument for disposing of unrecyclables via incineration ;I don't have any evidence to suggest that there is but if there is, and it's convincing then the greens may change their policy on that.

As it is, the Greens have a lot to learn in government and may be just settling in to get to know the people and the ways before deciding on their major objectives for the current government.

There are suggestions that Bertie may have things to hide and possibly even the kind of things that can bring down governments, but that's only conjecture. If such a thing is to come to pass, that is the time for the Greens to railroad Fianna Fail into accepting the the socially just measures that they have been ignoring for decades.

piraka

Elmo wrote:

Alot less then in the last four and 1/2 months of the PD/FF government.

That's why I did not vote PD/FF. I expected a lot more from the greens.

piraka

edanto wrote:

U-turns are fine, sometimes new information comes to light and you can change your mind.

Even if it's against the core principles of what they are suppose to represent

Elmo

That's why I did not vote PD/FF. I expected a lot more from the greens.

With the way the FF/PD governments have ran this country in the last 10 year the first 4 months would see FG/LP/GP government doing far more UTurns.

FG = FF

lostexpectation

gormley during the election and formation of government, "we want power, we want power",

after "im powerless to do anything about that, im powerless to do anything about this...."

:rolleyes:

-Els-

I lost any shred of respect I ever had for the Greens back in May when they went into government with FF. Does anyone remember their campaign for "Clean Politics"- and yet now, with Bertie Aherns credibility shot (mod snip)- have we heard a peep out of the Greens about it. I think it was Eamon Gilmore who even pointed out that back during the election the Greens had a proposal on their website that all TDs must be Tax certified before they go into government. Have we heard anything about tat since the Greens went to bed with Fianna Fáil- No, of course not.

edanto

Ya missed the memo about the new plans to block developments without infrastructure - they are taking on the building lobby. You can't do that from the other side of the house. Sometimes ya need to bite a bullet to get a good dig in.

DadaKopf

edanto wrote: »

Ya missed the memo about the new plans to block developments without infrastructure - they are taking on the building lobby. You can't do that from the other side of the house. Sometimes ya need to bite a bullet to get a good dig in.

I can't see that working without substantial, whole-of-government reform, which simple is not going to happen. Gormley might make a few high-profile announcements akin to the smoking ban, but there are simply too many vested interests preventing the kind of planning and local government reform we need.

The consequences of the present situation is plain for all to see: inadequate public services, too few school places and hospital beds, inadequate transport, future suburban ghettos, a confusing morass of local government quangos and red tape, and a system commanded from on high by the party of perpetual government.

On the planning issue in particular, the proposals look weak and won't be accompanied by the necessary reforms. And introducing elected mayors is so complicated and fraught with conflict.

The Greens have good ideas on this issue, but I don't believe we can expect anything major because of the political reality. I'm not saying the Greens are awesome, but just look at what they're up against. The Machine.

Akrasia

The greens aren't in power.

They sold their principles for a fraud, an illusion of power, but they have no bargaining position in government because FF can still hold government together even if they walk in the morning.

They have about as much influence over the FF government as Bertie Ahern has over George Bush.

great unwashed

I think the 350 million for education is very important. Also the CFL lightbulbs though harsh sounds like it could be needed. Didn't they push through the Seanad reform also? I wish they'd start grant-aiding and promoting procedures and methods for retro-fitting older houses so as to make them close to if not passive. It would pay off in our oil balance of payments. Ryan is also ensuring that wind-farmers will be paid a fixed fraction of the overall price so they don't lose out.

I really don't understand the car tax thing but I think it might be good if it helps people keep older, smaller cars on the road. Personally I think the car tax should be imposed by the mileage done on the car (checked at NCT time)

and if anyone would like to swoon and explain about upgrade of mayoral powers go ahead - I'm all ears - because I haven't a bull's notion about that either

djpbarry

great unwashed wrote: »

I really don't understand the car tax thing but I think it might be good if it helps people keep older, smaller cars on the road. Personally I think the car tax should be imposed by the mileage done on the car (checked at NCT time)

Surely it's easier to just load the tax on the petrol?

brianthebard

Akrasia wrote: »

The greens aren't in power.

They sold their principles for a fraud, an illusion of power, but they have no bargaining position in government because FF can still hold government together even if they walk in the morning.

They have about as much influence over the FF government as Bertie Ahern has over George Bush.

Yeah I've said from the beginning that they were brought in to bulk up the numbers in votes and to quieten the jeers from the opposition.

great unwashed

djpbarry wrote: »

Surely it's easier to just load the tax on the petrol?

Instead of on the mileage done like I said - checked every two years at NCT time and a rebate or tax discount given...

It doesn't sound like there is effectively a difference does it? taxing the petrol is simpler while the other way sounds a bit more cumbersome and possibly open to abuse

I believe this is already done on the continent with lorries through the disk graph thing (odometer?) they have to keep. Perhaps people tend to be stingier with petrol they haven't already spent, though it can often be the opposite with money. Is the difference only psychological but could the end results be radically different from the two systems?

The difference is the same difference between saving and not spending.

Riddle101

I used to support the Greens because they said they wanted to help the environment but ever since coming into power they've just become the pawns of the FF, just like PD's and now Green don't even try to help. Just shows you how money changes people pretty fast

barclay2

I think they've been reasonably good, as someone who voted for them. Given their position as junior partner in a coalition, i cant expect their impact to be enormous. But they've brought in new housing standards that will make homes a lot more efficient (bringing them in at the END of a housing boom is unforunate timing but they cant do anything about what didnt happen 5 years ago), they've changed motor tax to favour lower emission vehicles, are banning inefficient lightbulbs (something that was noted in the New York Times the other day), have brought in new urban planning guidelines.....and gormley and ryan have been very good on tv whenever i saw them, good at justifying their actions.

I think it's still too early to say whether or not they're a success in government - they still haven't brought in a carbon tax. They say they will, i hope they do. But until they actually do, it leaves a question mark.