Greens: "10,000 green jobs created since March"?

Sleipnir

Has anyone seen this? I've seen it up on quite a few lamposts and I'm wondering if it's true?
I mean, ten thousand green jobs in 3 months? Where?

solice

Is it specifically Green jobs?
Are the jobs in place or is it just that they have been announced?

Sleipnir

I would have thought it was a promise for future jobs but it says "since March"
"10,000 green jobs since March"
Maybe it's since March 1990?

Darsad

This is what really pi**es me off about the greens they will try to take credit for anything with an environmental slant despite the fact that every party has environemental policies. There is no doubt many companies with no afffiliation to Gormless and his clowns are working to create alternative jobs or industries but this in no way entitles the Greens to take credit for them. These people are dangerous tree hugging fools who would have us all back living in caves if they had their way. We cannot afford to give these clowns a comfort vote.

manc

have seen the posters too, from a google

"The Green Party has unveiled figures showing that over 50 per cent of new Irish jobs created this year are green. Research shows over 10,000 of the jobs created in Ireland over the past three months have been in \the green economy,"



Also Fine Gael have ones with "a plan for 180,000 jobs" or similar


from their website....

“On June the 5th the public should vote for Fine Gael because we have the plans and the ideas to get our economy back on track. We have published detailed plans to get 100,000 people back to work through an €11bn stimulus package for major investment in new infrastructure and just last week we set out how 80,000 jobs in the SME sector can be saved. The choice couldn’t be clearer. Unfair, job killing tax hikes from Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael’s plans to protect and create jobs.”

ednwireland

if you on their website and click on that poster you get a blank page - think that explains it

solice

manc wrote: »

have seen the posters too, nothing to back it up thought.

Also Fine Gael have ones with "a plan for 180,000 jobs" or similar

FG are saying that they have an independently assesed plan which will create 98k jobs.

bijapos

Darsad wrote: »

This is what really pi**es me off about the greens they will try to take credit for anything with an environmental slant despite the fact that every party has environemental policies. ]


In fairness other parties have "environmental policies" because the environment has become such an issue today, mostly through the success of the green party policies.

The 10,000 jobs (if it is that many) are in areas such as wind power, and the grants for home energy efficiency improvemants amongst others, its on their website.

In all fairness some of the work they have done in their own departments makes sense, like new planning legislation and investment in renewable energy and the spin offs from this. I dont agree with them being in with FF but they are actually doing something positive in this area in my opinion.

People voting today will make up their own minds on it. And yes I voted today and after some thought gave them a nr 1 in the locals.

fly_agaric

bijapos wrote: »

In fairness other parties have "environmental policies" because the environment has become such an issue today, mostly through the success of the green party policies.

didn't know it was a Irish green party policy to wreck the planet:pac:

The Irish Greens care more about the big stuff like election posters disfiguring the glory of Sorrento on the Irish Sea and the evils of water fluoridation.

And many of them go on about how the EU is the great Moloch of our times despite the fact that it has been a major force for good when it comes to trying to get the Irish not to p!ss in their own bed when it comes to the nice countryside and coastline we are fortunate to possess.

edit: as for the "10k Jobs" thing - saw it on a leaflet of theirs and even if true they show massive effrontery and arrogance to be boasting about job creation given the growth in unemployment during their period in govt.

Raiser

Darsad wrote: »

This is what really pi$$es me off about the greens they will try to take credit for anything with an environmental slant despite the fact that every party has environemental policies. There is no doubt many companies with no afffiliation to Gormless and his clowns are working to create alternative jobs or industries but this in no way entitles the Greens to take credit for them. These people are dangerous tree hugging fools who would have us all back living in caves if they had their way. We cannot afford to give these clowns a comfort vote.

You've saved me the trouble of having to type the above sentiment.........Thanks

Dubh Geannain

Maybe by that statement they mean than 10,000 jobs in the Green Party have been created this year e.g. New Members join and they're given "jobs" like canvassing and what not

Macha

Darsad wrote: »

This is what really pi**es me off about the greens they will try to take credit for anything with an environmental slant despite the fact that every party has environemental policies. There is no doubt many companies with no afffiliation to Gormless and his clowns are working to create alternative jobs or industries but this in no way entitles the Greens to take credit for them. These people are dangerous tree hugging fools who would have us all back living in caves if they had their way. We cannot afford to give these clowns a comfort vote.

So you're perfectly happy with 90% of Ireland's energy coming from abroad? You think it's a good idea for billions to leave our economy every year on energy, something that we can produce here?

The minute you wrote "tree hugging fools" you lost me.

Oafley Jones

taconnol wrote: »

So you're perfectly happy with 90% of Ireland's energy coming from abroad? You think it's a good idea for billions to leave our economy every year on energy, something that we can produce here?

The minute you wrote "tree hugging fools" you lost me.

Care to back up those figures of 90% and "billions"?

Macha

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Care to back up those figures of 90% and "billions"?

Most certainly:

Imported oil and gas accounted for 82% of energy supply and Ireland's overall import dependency was 89% in 2007.

(pg 3)

http://www.sei.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Energy_in_Ireland/Energy_in_Ireland_1990-2007.pdf

And the cost of imported fuel:

Eamon Ryan, the energy minister, has discussed plans with the cabinet to reduce Ireland’s €6 billion fuel import bill by 20% in 12 years. Between now and Christmas, Ryan will allow backyard electricity producers to sell surplus power to the national grid at a higher price than that paid to the ESB.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5163065.ece

Darsad

[quote=bijapos;60551550

People voting today will make up their own minds on it. And yes I voted today and after some thought gave them a nr 1 in the locals. quote]


Hopefully the rest of us wont have to reap the consequences of what you are trying to sow ! :rolleyes:

Just had a look and there are 10 candidates in my constituence for the MEP seats and Deburca will be my first one on the paper at number 10 followed by the annoying P McKenna at 9 its pretty much a toss up after that.

bijapos

Darsad: Like I said I gave a nr 1 in the Locals. Take South Dublin Coco, FF, FG and Labour voted in favour of the incinerator in our backyard (Rathcoole). Greens opposed it, I cant remember how SF voted tbh. Doubt if even 1% of the population in this area would be in favour of the bloody thing and the politicians know this, so why did they still vote in favour of it?? Thankfully it has been overturned (provisionally at least) by An Bord Pleannala. This is one of the reasons why I voted Green.

I voted green because they dont take corporate donations and therefore IMO will have a better chance of representing ME on the council rather than than the crowd who donateto/bribe the others.

Are they perfect? No, far from it but some of their stuff makes sense, and at what I have done today is try to look at the election for what it is, a local and not a national election.

Darsad

Personally I dont know what all the hooha is about an incinerator i would have no problem with one its just grand standing by the greens , There is plenty around europe and in holland one of the most environementally cocious countries in the world. I think disposing of our rubbish in a modern facility and deriving the benefit of it would be far better than shipping it to China in bulk containers to be mixed in with and burnt in open coal fires. The greens of europe would be far better off heading off to China and India where there is real environemental polluting and leave us to try and recover so economic stability

bijapos

There is no hooha about it, fact is nobody in the area wants it, plenty of petitions etc to that effect too, but they still voted it in. I just used it as an example, plenty of other examples too.

As you use Holland as an example, go look at how their communities are run there, then look here, in fairness years of continuous FF-FG led councils have done sweet FA for us here, at least on issues like urban planning and sustainability. On this basis I think the Greens are better than what went before them.

Like I said, I voted for them locally, if there was a general election next month I dont know how I would vote. Btw didnt vote Green in 2007.

Darsad

if building an incinerator in Gormleys back yard means he will loose his seat next time out then im all for one !

Macha

Are you going to bother responding to any posts that don't suit your argument?

Darsad

taconnol wrote: »

So you're perfectly happy with 90% of Ireland's energy coming from abroad? You think it's a good idea for billions to leave our economy every year on energy, something that we can produce here? .

Sorry where did i say that ! absolutly we need to look at ourselves and our energy resources and imports but I object to the greens slapping themselves on the back for any and all green projects it is not their sole preserve.Its almost like they think they own the franchise for all things green.

Now got to go give ms Deburca my No 10 !

Macha

Darsad wrote: »

Sorry where did i say that ! absolutly we need to look at ourselves and our energy resources and imports but I object to the greens slapping themselves on the back for any and all green projects it is not their sole preserve.Its almost like they think they own the franchise for all things green.

Now got to go give ms Deburca my No 10 !

If the Greens weren't in power, it wouldn't even be on the agenda. We had our first carbon budget once the greens were in, DCC has it's first cycling officer..There have been a lot of firsts since the Greens came in.

FF have done the complete opposite of what would be considered 'green' policies to the point where Ireland has the highest per capita carbon emission in Europe. I really don't see other parties with strong environmental policies, do you?

the_syco

Well, the Greens seem to count gas as a "green" source or energy...

taconnol wrote: »

Ireland has the highest per capita carbon emission in Europe

If you look into it you'll see it's cos of the amount of cows we have, compared to the amount of land. Lots of cows, small country equals highest per capita carbon emission in Europe...

Macha

the_syco wrote: »

Well, the Greens seem to count gas as a "green" source or energy...

One person slip and an entire party is slammed. Nice.

the_syco wrote: »

If you look into it you'll see it's cos of the amount of cows we have, compared to the amount of land. Lots of cows, small country equals highest per capita carbon emission in Europe...

Seriously? Have you looked at a break-down of Irish carbon emissions? Your statement is totally misleading.

is_that_so

taconnol wrote: »

One person slip and an entire party is slammed. Nice.


Seriously? Have you looked at a break-down of Irish carbon emissions? Your statement is totally misleading.

I do love the redirection of the Green supporters towards "look at all we have done" and deliberately ignoring the reason why people are annoyed with them The initial claim is utter nonsense along with a lot of the rest of the rubbish Gormley et all produce and it is insulting to us to claim that they have. Perhaps they might address their own emissions first.

As to the case that FF might not done anything it has a degree of merit but circumstances would have forced us down that route anyway. And as regards an even more important question if would you vote for the Greens again because they're good for the environment, well I can't say they have much of a case.

Macha

is_that_so wrote: »

I do love the redirection of the Green supporters towards "look at all we have done" and deliberately ignoring the reason why people are annoyed with them The initial claim is utter nonsense along with a lot of the rest of the rubbish Gormley et all produce and it is insulting to us to claim that they have. Perhaps they might address their own emissions first.

The initial claim is not utter nonsense. No one here has proven it to be nonsense. No one here has even gone as far as looking at the definition of a green vote!

is_that_so wrote: »

As to the case that FF might not done anything it has a degree of merit but circumstances would have forced us down that route anyway.

What exactly does that mean? That we were fated to have the highest emissions in Europe and we had no choice but to build ourselves into one of the highest-carbon economies in the world? Come off it.

is_that_so wrote: »

And as regards an even more important question if would you vote for the Greens again because they're good for the environment, well I can't say they have much of a case.

Where's your case to the contrary? They are a minority party in a coalition and so they are limited in what they can achieve. Even so, they have pushed through considerably more measures than previous governments.

is_that_so

taconnol wrote: »

The initial claim is not utter nonsense. No one here has proven it to be nonsense.

Well at a glance 3,600 of those jobs have nothing to do with the Greens and had been in planning by the ESB long before the Greens showed up, yet Mr Ryan claimed them.

taconnol wrote: »

What exactly does that mean? That we were fated to have the highest emissions in Europe and we had no choice but to build ourselves into one of the highest-carbon economies in the world? Come off it.

I think you're projecting here and this is not what I said at all. This is pretty self-evident and this confirms it.

taconnol wrote: »

Where's your case to the contrary? They are a minority party in a coalition and so they are limited in what they can achieve. Even so, they have pushed through considerably more measures than previous governments.

There are a number of these that were proposed before they got in but no-one got round to eg Mayor for Dublin. The word limited here I think also applies to the ministries they could be trusted with. All of the other parties, even Labour could fill ministries. The Greens are a niche party. They are also a soft option for left leaning voters who do not want to go to Labour or who find SF and others unpalatable. They are have also been seen as a vote against FF.

Eh it really really really doesnt matter what the greens have done except that they, while in Government, will be throwing BILLIONS down the hole that is Anglo Irish Bank.

Im all for green research and projects to get us off importing energy but think of how much faster we would be able to do it had they let the banks go under.

Very disillusioned with the greens they are pissing into the wind.

wilson10

Sleipnir wrote: »

Has anyone seen this? I've seen it up on quite a few lamposts and I'm wondering if it's true?
I mean, ten thousand green jobs in 3 months? Where?

Electioneering lies as far as I can see.

My son has spent the last 3 months looking for an interview for one of these mythical jobs and failed, despite having an engineering trade, a first class honours degree in mechanical engineering and three years experience in electro mechanical R&D and excellent references, not even an interview.

The jobs just aren't there.

Macha

is_that_so wrote: »

Well at a glance 3,600 of those jobs have nothing to do with the Greens and had been in planning by the ESB long before the Greens showed up, yet Mr Ryan claimed them.

Nonsense. ESB only announced it's 'green' agenda in 2008, almost a year after the Greens had been in power. Before that, they actively pushed against the unbundling of the grid, a vital step in allowing renewables better access to the grid. Actually here's the news story, dated 27th March 2008:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhojeyidsnsn/

is_that_so wrote: »

I think you're projecting here and this is not what I said at all. This is pretty self-evident and this confirms it.

I'm sorry but this section is not comprehensible. What is self-evident and what confirms what? In response to my statements about Ireland's high CO2 emissions, you stated that:

As to the case that FF might not done anything it has a degree of merit but circumstances would have forced us down that route anyway.

I don't see how I was projecting anything but if you'd like to make your statement more comprehensible, go ahead.

is_that_so wrote: »

There are a number of these that were proposed before they got in but no-one got round to eg Mayor for Dublin.

What do you think "no-one getting around to it" means? It's proof that an item is not a political priority. The Greens made items like local government reform and renewable jobs a priority. Er..that's what political parties do - put it on the agenda.

is_that_so wrote: »

he word limited here I think also applies to the ministries they could be trusted with. All of the other parties, even Labour could fill ministries. The Greens are a niche party.

I've answered this issue here before. Anyone who thinks the Greens are a single-issue party are just being lazy. The greens have policies on all issues.

is_that_so wrote: »

They are also a soft option for left leaning voters who do not want to go to Labour or who find SF and others unpalatable. They are have also been seen as a vote against FF.

If that results in people voting for them, so be it but I don't see how you can label them the "soft option", or what that really means, to be honest.

wilson10 - I'm sorry but your own personal anecdote is not exactly scientific evidence.

blindjustice - I think you need to accept that there are limits to what a minority party can achieve when in power.

is_that_so

taconnol wrote: »

Nonsense. ESB only announced it's 'green' agenda in 2008, almost a year after the Greens had been in power. Before that, they actively pushed against the unbundling of the grid, a vital step in allowing renewables better access to the grid. Actually here's the news story, dated 27th March 2008:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhojeyidsnsn/

Again the salient point is that the ESB is providing the jobs and the Greens are playing politics with it. If you find that acceptable then who am I to argue?

taconnol wrote: »

I'm sorry but this section is not comprehensible. What is self-evident and what confirms what? In response to my statements about Ireland's high CO2 emissions, you stated that:
I don't see how I was projecting anything but if you'd like to make your statement more comprehensible, go ahead.

Higher emissions bad for the environment. High emissions = Fines under Kyoto, ie more costs. Higher imported energy costs = need for other solutions. Not that hard really.

What do you think "no-one getting around to it" means? It's proof that an item is not a political priority. The Greens made items like local government reform and renewable jobs a priority. Er..that's what political parties do - put it on the agenda.

The point here is that the Greens have continually attempted to give the impression they've come up with all of these policies, under the category of all the things they've achieved. One thing I will give them credit them for is fantastic spin.

I've answered this issue here before. Anyone who thinks the Greens are a single issue party are just being lazy. The greens have policies on all issues.

Indeed so why have most of your posts here focussed almost exclusively on the single issue most closely associated with them?

If that results in people voting for them, so be it but I don't see how you can label them the "soft option", or what that really means, to be honest.

Again you're misreading my posts.
My point is that none of the Green ministers would function effectively outside their current ministries. This has nothing to do with policies, which I didn't mention at all.

This leads me to the niche parties. SF have policies to beat the band, the Socialist Party have their own lists but, politically, they like the Greens, are still niche parties in that certain types of voters will support them.

As for the soft option, this just means that certain types of voters, especially in Dublin suburbs, where the Greens have most of their TDS, who have a slight fondness for the environmental side of the party. It also allows them to make a protest vote and not vote for FF/FG without having to pick parties further to the left. It is the soft left feel to the Greens that I am referring to. These are the type of voters who will give the Greens a lower preference which are essential to them getting elected.

The Green core vote will never be big enough and their perceived behaviour to date is likely to reduce those transfers and therefore produce a reduced number of seats.