Libertas: Are they to be taken seriously?

Denerick

They probably shouldn't be taken seriously, but feck it, I'm voting for Ganley.

Don't get me wrong, their political campaign is certainly based on exploiting ignorance and hysterical emotionalism, but they do actually stand for something I stand for - a controlled Europe. Europe is gradually becoming more centralised, more layered up with buraucracy and red tape. Anyone who is remotely involved in the agricultural business (Farming or fishing) will have first experience of the headache the EU causes for their lives. But thats not even the issue. The problem is one of encroaching authoritarianism, a tendency we've seen thoughout the 90s and which has accelerated in the 00s. Britain of course, under the most authoritarian governments in decades, is leading the way with ID cards, national databases, and the gradual dissension of the liberal, innocent until proven guilty judicial system the west has until recently held so close to its heart.

So yes, Libertas is a deeply flawed party, which is decidedly vague on policy and prone to capitalise on general ignorance, but damn it, the EU needs a spanner in its wheels. It needs to rethink things and really consider where its going. Politics has to change. At the moment, the EU is moving far quicker than the citizens are willing to go. In short, we're not politically aware enough as a society to make any pledge in Europe. Europe is too apathetic to really decide on whether we want a massive European government deciding our legislation, because that is where we are very gradually going. And its not necessarily a bad thing, but when only half of the population bothers turning out to vote it says a lot about our civic culture.

And frankly the thought of a true European wide political party with (In theory at least) liberal, democratic ideals spanning the continent is a very exciting advancement if we wish to see Europe advance along the lines of a Liberal federal Republic across the continent.

/stream of consciousness.

turgon

Tbh Denerick I don't doubt that Libertas say they are for a controlled Europe, however I think the fact is that their idea of "control" is the removal of the EU.

They say they are for accountability and better decision making, but these are two issues Lisbon would have helped which for some reason they opposed.

I think it is all just political opportunism and skepticism.

BlitzKrieg

And frankly the thought of a true European wide political party with (In theory at least) liberal, democratic ideals spanning the continent is a very exciting advancement if we wish to see Europe advance along the lines of a Liberal federal Republic across the continent.

except that party doesnt exist. Libertas being a pan european party is the same as the Greens being a pan european party, they're not. They are a pan european political group (which if they have 25 meps across seven states they can be recognised by the EU and supported) they lack all the attributes of a politcal party on a european level. They have no manifesto and no elected leader. They do have all the trappings of a european group though, different parties with different policies and agenda's forming together to support each other for a common goal.

Libertas has openly bought and integrated parties into their ranks and even with all this talk of pan european wonder they still name each party as a seperate identity, libertas UK, libertas Sweden etc etc.

There is no pan european party.


And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

He's no good, he even endorsed an irish mep thats been caught abusing her powers (kathy sinnot) and still has the nerve to say he is the only one standing against mep abuse

is_that_so

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's not something I have done before, so I don't know if you will get it. [It seems to have worked.]

Now that is a truly fine piece of work. I did learn from your postcard that Declan Ganley can do better and then it just gets really confusing. As clear as what we were being asked to vote on last year maybe?

For those who think that Ganley may get in, remember that the constituency covers 1/3 of the counties in the country. It includes Counties Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, Leitrim, Sligo, Mayo, Roscommon, Galway Clare, Westmeath and Longford. He will need somewhere in the order of 13% of first preferences to even stand a chance, that was about 54,000 votes the last time. I don't think the other two are even in with a prayer and the lady in Dublin must be odds on to be eliminated first.

eightyfish

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

Interesting. Opportunism again.

eightyfish

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

So you where perpared to publicly denonce the party becuase they disagree with a friend of yours ? If you are to publicly denonce every person/group of people that are anti-Homosexuality then you are going to be a very tired man by the time your finished denoncing.

You oversimplify. It's not just that they don't agree, it's that he is now married (or in a civil union, the terminology is not important) and can't come home to his friends and family with his partner like everybody else can. He had to leave a well-paid job in an Irish hospital to go and work in a Scottish hospital and they have to live in a city were they know no-one. Freedom of the EU is a basic right for every other person married to an EU citizen, why should it be any different for them?

And yes, I think it is justified to publicly denounce a party if they support such backward legislation.

Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

except that party doesnt exist. Libertas being a pan european party is the same as the Greens being a pan european party, they're not. They are a pan european political group (which if they have 25 meps across seven states they can be recognised by the EU and supported) they lack all the attributes of a politcal party on a european level. They have no manifesto and no elected leader. They do have all the trappings of a european group though, different parties with different policies and agenda's forming together to support each other for a common goal.

Libertas has openly bought and integrated parties into their ranks and even with all this talk of pan european wonder they still name each party as a seperate identity, libertas UK, libertas Sweden etc etc.

There is no pan european party.


And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

He's no good, he even endorsed an irish mep thats been caught abusing her powers (kathy sinnot) and still has the nerve to say he is the only one standing against mep abuse

In an illustration of the divergence of the various bits of Libertas, here's his Dutch candidate, Elise Van Den Broek, supporting waterboarding:

Libertas has made itself heard again. Today, head of list Eline van den Broek debated on two core competences of the European Union: economic cooperation and security.

Eline was a guest in the Radio 1 programme Standpunt cafe (opinion cafe). Today this programmme dealt with the statements of Dick Cheney. The former US vice-president has stated he has no regrets of the controversial interrogation techniques that have been executed under his term of administration. Methods such as waterboarding are assumed to have helped in getting the necessary information to prevent terrorist attacks. Libertas head of list Eline van den Broek says she agrees with Cheney´s statements. In order to ensure the security, sometimes you need to interrogate the hard way, according to Libertas. "terrorist suspects need to be dealt with in a tough way, because we do not tolerate terrorists in a safe and secure Europe" says van den Broek. Taking care of the security of citizens is one of the core tasks that the EU should keep in mind, according to Libertas.

That's a slightly tidy version, but the Google Translate version is here. A stance I don't imagine Irish Libertas would be exactly keen to publicise.

Here's Swedish Libertas pointing the opposite way from Libertas' campaign in Ireland:

Afterwards got Marita Ulvskog to comment and said that Ganley has a vision of society which is characterized by "the Catholic values." It is true enough in a private plane for the Irishman Declan Ganley, like most other Irish, but it has no relevance for the political ideology and Libertas Sweden?

In the first place. None of the Swedish Libertas candidates or staff are Catholics. Like all Swedes, we are influenced by the secular Sweden, and goes well in the church as often as most - in other words, to baptisms, weddings and funerals. One of our candidates - Kenneth Landelius - Marriage is a priest and has worked as a priest in 21 years in the Swedish Church. And the Swedish Church is not Catholic - at least it was not there, the last time any of us were there.

Drumming up the Catholic vote in Ireland via adverts (and hagiographic pieces) in Alive!, while denying it thrice in Sweden...

Their Slovenian branch (or web page) calls for lobbying transparency:

The European Commission will not require an entry in the register of around 15,000 lobbyists. Until now, only 9% enter in the register of lobbyists, which was introduced in June 2008. The Libertas is unacceptable that thousands of lobbyists not to disclose and not to clarify their interests. Without transparency and openness of the exercise decision-making behind closed doors.

According to a study should not be 55% associations, 53% of the enterprises and 41% of companies have the intention to be entered in the register.

Libertas calls for a mandatory entry in the register, as the only way to ensure transparency of decision-making.

Which is good...but one of their UK candidates is a lobbyist, and neither her company nor the Association she is a Fellow of are on the Register.

And so on, and so forth. One presumes that a pan-European party of principle would sound the same wherever it was running - this doesn't look like that. What do you get when you vote for Libertas?

cordially,
Scofflaw

eightyfish

Scofflaw wrote: »

And so on, and so forth. One presumes that a pan-European party of principle would sound the same wherever it was running - this doesn't look like that. What do you get when you vote for Libertas?

Reminds me of the Daily Mail.

Iwasfrozen

You oversimplify. It's not just that they don't agree, it's that he is now married (or in a civil union, the terminology is not important) and can't come home to his friends and family with his partner like everybody else can. He had to leave a well-paid job in an Irish hospital to go and work in a Scottish hospital and they have to live in a city were they know no-one. Freedom of the EU is a basic right for every other person married to an EU citizen, why should it be any different for them?

What you consider over-simpliying I consider calling a spade a spade. The main parties in Ireland Finne Fail, Fine gael etc. do not want Civil Partnerships as do the majority of the people, I sorry about your friend but the law is the law. If I wanted smoke weed I have two choices, Move to Amsterdam and smoke every day or stay in Ireland and stay off weed. The law cannot and willnot change for these people while the People do not want it. Also your friend can live in Ireland but the State won't recognise their union.

And yes, I think it is justified to publicly denounce a party if they support such backward legislation

And this is where your arguement becomes insulting, are you calling the majority of the Irish People and the Irish Government backward because they don't adhear to the same ideology as you ?

PopeBuckfastXVI

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And this is where your arguement becomes insulting, are you calling the majority of the Irish People and the Irish Government backward because they don't adhear to the same ideology as you ?

Way off topic, but I think that in 100 years time, those that now say a woman cannot marry another woman, or a man cannot marry another man will be viewed in the same light as those who said a black person cannot marry a white person, or a jew cannot marry a christian are viewed now.

Call it what you like; conservative, atavistic, anachronistic, reactionary, backward.

Please don't be insulted, it's just been pointed out that you're against societal progress, and you're well within your rights to be.

Scofflaw

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Way off topic, but I think that in 100 years time, those that now say a woman cannot marry another woman, or a man cannot marry another man will be viewed in the same light as those who said a black person cannot marry a white person, or a jew cannot marry a christian are viewed now.

Call it what you like; conservative, atavistic, anachronistic, reactionary, backward.

Please don't be insulted, it's just been pointed out that you're against societal progress, and you're well within your rights to be.

PopeBuckfastXVI, either change your signature line to something shorter, or I will ban you from these forums.

annoyed,
Scofflaw

PopeBuckfastXVI

Scofflaw wrote: »

PopeBuckfastXVI, either change your signature line to something shorter, or I will ban you from these forums.

annoyed,
Scofflaw

No problem!

Changed to comply with signature rules.

eightyfish

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What you consider over-simpliying I consider calling a spade a spade. The main parties in Ireland Finne Fail, Fine gael etc. do not want Civil Partnerships as do the majority of the people, I sorry about your friend but the law is the law.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And this is where your arguement becomes insulting, are you calling the majority of the Irish People and the Irish Government backward because they don't adhear to the same ideology as you ?

Firstly, Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein and the Green Party are all in favour of civil unions. As far as the opinion of the Irish people, that is simply your opinion, and according to Marraige Equality and GLEN surveys it is incorrect.

So I am not calling the majority of the Irish people or any of the above mentioned political parties backward. I am calling the current legislation backward. Any yes, it is my opinion that any political party that does not support the equal rights of gay people is backward.

(PS- I am not sure of Fianna Fail's official position on this issue.)

mike65

Their East constituency runner Raymond O'Malley just showed his unelectablility on The Last Word, suggesting no more peeps from the accession states should be alowed in.

eightyfish

mike65 wrote: »

Their East constituency runner Raymond O'Malley just showed his unelectablility on The Last Word, suggesting no more peeps from the accession states should be alowed in.

What time was this on at? I'll check the podcast tomorrow.

mike65

The whole programme is about the Euro elections with the odd diversion.

The bit in question was at about 5.50.

eightyfish

Thanks.

For anyone interested it should be available here tomorrow.

eightyfish

mike65 wrote: »

Their East constituency runner Raymond O'Malley just showed his unelectablility on The Last Word, suggesting no more peeps from the accession states should be alowed in.

This has made the Independent.

_blank_

I agree with his point tbh.

Kotek Besar

mike65 wrote: »

Their East constituency runner Raymond O'Malley just showed his unelectablility on The Last Word, suggesting no more peeps from the accession states should be alowed in.

So Libertas are effectively advocating that Ireland leave the EU then.

thebman

I would say part of our problem is our small population so immigration isn't a bad thing and immigrants tend to bring money with them to spend in our economy while they look for work IMO.

Despite the numbers coming here, more are still leaving I imagine.

PopeBuckfastXVI

mike65 wrote: »

Their East constituency runner Raymond O'Malley just showed his unelectablility on The Last Word, suggesting no more peeps from the accession states should be alowed in.

Doesn't he realise that they can vote in EU elections!?

mike65

Maybe its 10% of the electorate he can live without.

Esel

Sorry if this has been asked/said already.

They are running 300 candidates accross the EU. Wonder who's paying? :cool:

Jack Sheehan

esel wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked/said already.

They are running 300 candidates accross the EU. Wonder who's paying? :cool:

Probably Ganley himself. Serious fortune he has...

Hitman Actual

esel wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked/said already.

They are running 300 candidates accross the EU. Wonder who's paying? :cool:

The latest figure is 500 candidates, according to Ganley himself at an address in Galway last week. I'm sceptical of that myself, but I'm not sure where to go to check it out.

Re. funding, Libertas claim that the majority of their funding comes from grass roots donations (max of ~€6500 per donor). Also, candidates can fund themselves to the tune of ~€200,000, iirc.

There was some controversy over the the Polish Libertas branch, where it was alleged that Ganley was loaning them the funds for their campaign. I'm not sure how that's played out since.

Scofflaw

Hitman Actual wrote: »

The latest figure is 500 candidates, according to Ganley himself at an address in Galway last week. I'm sceptical of that myself, but I'm not sure where to go to check it out.

Re. funding, Libertas claim that the majority of their funding comes from grass roots donations (max of ~€6500 per donor). Also, candidates can fund themselves to the tune of ~€200,000, iirc.

There was some controversy over the the Polish Libertas branch, where it was alleged that Ganley was loaning them the funds for their campaign. I'm not sure how that's played out since.

The answer appears to be that the same system was rolled out in Slovenia and Lithuania - Libertas Poland is reported to have received €250,000, Libertas Slovenia €250,000 and Libertas Lithuania has so far received €100,000. It's legal, so no more appears to be happening about it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

cat&mouse

Put a bet on today. The stakes are running low against Ganley on this & the tv. Well one who likes a bit of a gamble & very seldim I do, but when I do I've been known to have a nice holiday afterwards !!! (a handy way to make a few bob).. So here it is: 200:1 in favbour of GANLEY getting elected on the 1st count. + 300:1 on 2 MEP"s loosing. I like to sudy the form a couple of weeks in advance, so lads will it be CHEERS on G DAY from me ?

Hitman Actual

cat&mouse wrote: »

Put a bet on today. The stakes are running low against Ganley on this & the tv. Well one who likes a bit of a gamble & very seldim I do, but when I do I've been known to have a nice holiday afterwards !!! (a handy way to make a few bob).. So here it is: 200:1 in favbour of GANLEY getting elected on the 1st count. + 300:1 on 2 MEP"s loosing. I like to sudy the form a couple of weeks in advance, so lads will it be CHEERS on G DAY from me ?

By two MEP's losing, you mean current sitting MEP's, I assume? That part of your bet might not be too bad- Eoin Ryan, Colm Burke, Mary Lou McDonald and Kathy Sinnott are predicted to be in a dog-fight for a last seat. Ganley's bet is not good. He's polling at 9% and will need to double his first preference vote to even have a chance of a seat, let alone getting in on first count. But who knows what shenanigans he has in store for the next couple of weeks.

Hitman Actual

I'm not sure if the Libertas claim that they are the most visited political site on the web has been debunked on here, but here's one site that has debunked it. Here's another one; it appears that the Alexa 'trick' was the brainchild of David Cochrane of Politics.ie/Libertas fame.

Jack Sheehan

cat&mouse wrote: »

Put a bet on today. The stakes are running low against Ganley on this & the tv. Well one who likes a bit of a gamble & very seldim I do, but when I do I've been known to have a nice holiday afterwards !!! (a handy way to make a few bob).. So here it is: 200:1 in favbour of GANLEY getting elected on the 1st count. + 300:1 on 2 MEP"s loosing. I like to sudy the form a couple of weeks in advance, so lads will it be CHEERS on G DAY from me ?

I really hope you lose your money. Not that I have anything against you, but Ganley getting in? I think I might die of shame.

slippy wicket

Theres more chance of Brian Cowen getting down on his knees and begging forgiveness for his many sins than Declan Ganley getting elected.

By the by, these boyos scare the bejayus out of me. They seem to me to be the closest we have come to a pan-european neo-fascist/neo-nazi group.

eightyfish

slippy wicket wrote: »

By the by, these boyos scare the bejayus out of me. They seem to me to be the closest we have come to a pan-european neo-fascist/neo-nazi group.

Me too. They're on Newstalk every day. They're on now. They get so much coverage it's crazy.

Ronan|Raven

Simmons is some clown.

peasant

sorry for cross-posting, but are they to be taken seriously?

see here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60308526&postcount=56

so, in short, no serious policy to be found here ...personally I do take overtly populistic parties very seriously though ...as a threat to democracy, that is.