To the 24.8% who gave Fianna Fail a first preference: Why ?

T runner

solice wrote: »

First of all, he posed the question in 2004 in general business. The response from the Government was to dismiss the IMF report as being wrong. Hindsight is a great thing. Instead the govt referred to a Central Bank report that everything was ok (I wonder who was head of the central bank and how did they get there?) and they also stated that they were capable of controlling the supply and demand required in the housing market. I suppose history has been their judges in that respect. They even eliminated the first time buyers grant with the promise that when they did, house prices would come down by the equivalent BUT THEY CONTINUED TO GO UP!!!!
The opposition have been loud and clear on this message for many years, not just the backbenchers like i stated and referenced but also Richard Bruton and Joan Burton as front benchers.

They most certainly havent. If they were then why have a backbencher questioning this important report: why not involve a big gun if they forsaw disaster?
Because they didnt think it that significant.

If you truly do believe that the opposition didnt raise enough concern over this, why wasnt the govt in control of things ANYWAY.

They werent in control of things thats for sure but FGs stance in opposition demonstrates that they would have been in exactly the same boat.

Im not saying FF werent poor, Im saying that they werent the murdering rapists of the country that people are making them out to be.

Some of us are prone to exageration in this country, and its not harmless.

The balance in the Lisbon outcome could be argued to be supplied by voters giving the fingers to FF, using it as a protest against the government.

A lot of peoples reason for shopping up north was "how dare those arrogant bastards tell me to shop in the south". Im not talking baout people who had no choice here Im talking about people who had.

This type of foolish overreaction and blame actually hurts the country.

You voted for the Greens, they went into the govt in 2007 and what have they done in order to curtail Govt incompetence?

Not that much but Im glad you acknowledge that it was not just FF in power.
In fairness to them environmental issues are their forte. They supported dealings in NI which were generally successful and not incompetent I think youll agree? If they had been in with FG it would have been the same for them (minus the NI success Id wager).

gcgirl

heres a bit if Humour

http://newstalk.ie/newstalk/shows/recommendations/0806_Emergency_FF_Post_Mortem.mp3

solice

T runner wrote: »

They most certainly havent. If they were then why have a backbencher questioning this important report: why not involve a big gun if they forsaw disaster?
Because they didnt think it that significant.

I could do this all day but I dont see the point.

Pat Rabbitte, 11th January 2007
"We have been here before, in Jack Lynch's time and in Mr. Haughey's time. They discovered government borrowing as a way to create a false sense of economic success and an equally false popularity. They left Ireland the biggest public debt burden in Europe. Their successors have encouraged and talked up the creation of the biggest private debt in Europe, now almost one and a half times national income."
Relevant article can be found here

Joan Burton, 6th December 2006
"These huge increases in mortgage repayments, together with high childcare costs and fluctuating travel costs, not to mention travel times are putting an enormous financial strain on many families. By consequence it is corroding the quality of family life and affecting marriages and relationships.
The Americans have a name for this phenomenon. They call it toxic debt. It occurs when families and individuals buckle under the strain of buying and furnishing a house and having some quality of personal life.
This Government will be remembered for introducing toxic debt to Ireland."

Relevant article can be found here

If only the Government had listened to the lowly backbencher Bernard Durkan in 2004 (see previous post) then the front benchers, Rabbitte and Burton wouldnt have had to make those warnings in 2006 and 2007.

And if you think that the opposition have shown no ability in the past and are just the same as what we have now this following piece of text from a speech that Pat Rabbitte gave in 2005 may be of interest:
"The facts are that in the final year of the previous Rainbow Government, the economy was growing at 9.7%, jobs were being created at the rate of 55,000 a year, the first budget surplus in decades was being recorded, and inflation was running at 1.5%. These facts seem to be lost on those who advanced this argument. In fact, the record shows that economic performance under Ruairi Quinn was every bit as impressive as the first three years of Mr McCreevy, and far more impressive than his second three years."
Relevant article is here

K-9

solice wrote: »

I could do this all day but I dont see the point.

Pat Rabbitte, 11th January 2007
"We have been here before, in Jack Lynch's time and in Mr. Haughey's time. They discovered government borrowing as a way to create a false sense of economic success and an equally false popularity. They left Ireland the biggest public debt burden in Europe. Their successors have encouraged and talked up the creation of the biggest private debt in Europe, now almost one and a half times national income."
Relevant article can be found here

Joan Burton, 6th December 2006
"These huge increases in mortgage repayments, together with high childcare costs and fluctuating travel costs, not to mention travel times are putting an enormous financial strain on many families. By consequence it is corroding the quality of family life and affecting marriages and relationships.
The Americans have a name for this phenomenon. They call it toxic debt. It occurs when families and individuals buckle under the strain of buying and furnishing a house and having some quality of personal life.
This Government will be remembered for introducing toxic debt to Ireland."

Relevant article can be found here

If only the Government had listened to the lowly backbencher Bernard Durkan in 2004 (see previous post) then the front benchers, Rabbitte and Burton wouldnt have had to make those warnings in 2006 and 2007.

And if you think that the opposition have shown no ability in the past and are just the same as what we have now this following piece of text from a speech that Pat Rabbitte gave in 2005 may be of interest:
"The facts are that in the final year of the previous Rainbow Government, the economy was growing at 9.7%, jobs were being created at the rate of 55,000 a year, the first budget surplus in decades was being recorded, and inflation was running at 1.5%. These facts seem to be lost on those who advanced this argument. In fact, the record shows that economic performance under Ruairi Quinn was every bit as impressive as the first three years of Mr McCreevy, and far more impressive than his second three years."
Relevant article is here

That's all very well and good but the fact remains that none of this was reflected in either FG or Labours GE Manifestos as it wasn't in FF's.

the_dark_side wrote: »

sorry, you are right, It was Quinn and McGinty, both who ran as independants, that took votes from Kennedy, not Boyle. Apparently alot of very angry people in Donegal because of it... but dont quote me

I'm originally from Quinns town and he's a great "character". Most of his transfers went to Pringle and other Independents, Kennedy actually did the best out of the FF transfers. McGinty got a 101 votes and finished last, hardly an election changer.

It's a PR Election, unless you are suggesting FF influenced how everybody voted including how they transferred, it sounds like anti FF Paranoia. These things often end up like lotteries as the difference between getting elected and eliminated can come down to single votes and who gets eliminated first.

Badabing

gcgirl wrote: »

heres a bit if Humour

http://newstalk.ie/newstalk/shows/recommendations/0806_Emergency_FF_Post_Mortem.mp3

Was that children with the impressions? Most unfunny thing i have ever heard.

the_dark_side

K-9 wrote: »

That's all very well and good but the fact remains that none of this was reflected in either FG or Labours GE Manifestos as it wasn't in FF's.



I'm originally from Quinns town and he's a great "character". Most of his transfers went to Pringle and other Independents, Kennedy actually did the best out of the FF transfers. McGinty got a 101 votes and finished last, hardly an election changer.

It's a PR Election, unless you are suggesting FF influenced how everybody voted including how they transferred, it sounds like anti FF Paranoia. These things often end up like lotteries as the difference between getting elected and eliminated can come down to single votes and who gets eliminated first.

Well in that case, what I heard sounded like anti FF paranoia. I was told that McGinty and Quinn were planted so as to take votes away from Kennedy, as he would eventually pose a threat to Coughlan in the upcoming elections.
It seems like a bit of a tall tale

T runner

solice wrote: »

I could do this all day but I dont see the point.

Not for FG you cant.

Well fair play to Labour. Ivana Bacik did get my vote this time. Dont see anything from FG there though which is not a surprise.
I disagree with Rabitte's assesment of the debt burden in 2007. Our national debt was by no means the largest in Europe, not even close. How could it be with our surplus and income?

Because of the drop in income our rate of borrowing subsequently hugely increased. Are overall debt as a ratio is far lower than that of the UK for example.

Joan Burton, 6th December 2006
"The Americans have a name for this phenomenon. They call it toxic debt. It occurs when families and individuals buckle under the strain of buying and furnishing a house and having some quality of personal life. This Government will be remembered for introducing toxic debt to Ireland."

She has either got that wrong or the meaning of toxic debt has changed somewhat.

gcgirl

Badabing wrote: »

Was that children with the impressions? Most unfunny thing i have ever heard.

You cant please some people :-)))
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

I happen to think its very funny!!

solice

T runner wrote: »

Not for FG you cant.

Yawn :rolleyes:

Richard Bruton, October 2007, Speech on Markets in Financial Instruments Bill 2007

Richard Bruton wrote:

The warning clouds of Ireland's vulnerability have been gathering for a number of years now. The Government have ignored these threats and left Ireland more exposed than we should be. We are now well past the stage for talking about 'early warnings' or 'wake up calls'. Ireland now needs a Comprehensive Strategy of Economic Renewal that harnesses effort right across the public and private sectors, in order to manage the transition that we have to make. Important ground has been lost and it will make the journey harder.

And when were the "Early Warnings" that he speaks about given? In the same speech he mentions:

Richard Bruton wrote:

The Central Bank has been warning for two years the major systemic vulnerabilities for financial stability in Ireland. These have
included:
- Credit growth faster than any other country in Europe which now makes Ireland the most indebted of Euro area countries with private debt representing 2½ times gross national product;
- Over-concentration on property-related lending, representing over twice the European average, in a property market which is over-valued and experiencing the double squeeze of rising interest rates constraining affordability and rental yields that are historically low;

Relevant speech can be found here

But if you are still complaining that the oppostition wasnt doing the Governements job and raising concerns and leaving it to the Central Bank to do all the work, a press release on Social Partnership by Richard Bruton on the 14th of June 2006 states:

Richard Bruton wrote:

The construction sector is crying out for reform:
o We have not succeeded in creating a framework that can offer stability in the housing and construction markets;
o A dysfunctional planning system is creating a contrived scarcity of development land;
o A poorly structured tax system is ratcheting up costs;
o And subsidies towards housing costs have no coherent structure.

Relevant speech can be found here

And in relation to the FG manifesto not dealing with the property bubble. A speech by Richard Bruton at the FG Ard Fheis on the 6th of May 2006 states:

Richard Bruton wrote:

It (the govt) can no longer offer the leadership necessary for important changes that challenge the cosy consensus. Already we can see the serious challenges which we face as a society with which this Government is struggling to come to terms.

The pattern of housing development in Ireland has become unsustainable but the Government is wedded to interests and to an approach that perpetuates these shortcomings. The critical balance between economic growth and environmental protection has not been properly struck. Dependence on fossil fuels, patterns of waste generation and disposal, building design and settlement patterns are all cementing in unsustainable features;

.....

We (FG) will bring an end to:
Ø Antiquated systems of budget formation which are insufficient to run a corner shop;
Ø The culture of ‘pass the parcel’ when it comes to Ministers shouldering responsibility;
Ø Agencies with no Performance Agreements ;
Ø The use of resources to plug failings instead of resources following success and high performance.

Relevant speech can be found here

All or any of those promises would have gone toward slowing down our reliance on the property market and would have alleviated some of the diffuclties we now find ourselves in.

So T Runner, as I have shown, the two main opposition parties have been flagging their concerns about the Govts. irresponsible attitude to developers and banks for many years, at least going back to 2004 if not earlier. Your assertion that they were not doing their job is not just inaccurate, it is completly false!

The govt didnt listen, they did not take any advice from the opposition, the ignored countless reports from the OECD, IMF, ECB as well as the economists in this country such as David McWilliams and George Lee. The kept the blinkers on and did what they thought was good for the FF/PD/Green parties, not what was good for the country. FF, PDs and the party that you voted for the Greens are all guilty of bad planning, bad ideas and bad governance. They did not do their job, they did not act on behalf of the electorate, they are responsible for this mess.

K-9

solice wrote: »

And in relation to the FG manifesto not dealing with the property bubble. A speech by Richard Bruton at the FG Ard Fheis on the 6th of May 2006 states:



Relevant speech can be found here

All or any of those promises would have gone toward slowing down our reliance on the property market and would have alleviated some of the diffuclties we now find ourselves in.

So T Runner, as I have shown, the two main opposition parties have been flagging their concerns about the Govts. irresponsible attitude to developers and banks for many years, at least going back to 2004 if not earlier. Your assertion that they were not doing their job is not just inaccurate, it is completly false!

The govt didnt listen, they did not take any advice from the opposition, the ignored countless reports from the OECD, IMF, ECB as well as the economists in this country such as David McWilliams and George Lee. The kept the blinkers on and did what they thought was good for the FF/PD/Green parties, not what was good for the country. FF, PDs and the party that you voted for the Greens are all guilty of bad planning, bad ideas and bad governance. They did not do their job, they did not act on behalf of the electorate, they are responsible for this mess.

Yet their GE manifestos promised tax cuts and extra spending when they knew windfall revenues from Construction was coming to an end.

solice

K-9 wrote: »

Yet their GE manifestos promised tax cuts and extra spending when they knew windfall revenues from Construction was coming to an end.

Put whatever it is that you are suggesting into context. Dont just come along and say part of a manifesto...what else did the manifesto say?

And then compare FG & Labor manifestos with that of FF and the Greens, which ones were more conservative and thought out and which ones were "buying votes"? I would argue that every party to some extent were buying votes, after all times were good, we had cash to spend...we dont now...maybe FF and the Greens spent too much "buying votes"...

K-9

solice wrote: »

I would argue that every party to some extent were buying votes, after all times were good, we had cash to spend...we dont now...maybe FF and the Greens spent too much "buying votes"...

Exactly my point.

solice

K-9 wrote: »

Exactly my point.

So you expect the opposition not to try and buy votes as they are the opposition but its ok for the Govt. to lie about our economic strengths and to buy votes?

The aim of the opposition is to get into government. The aim of the Government is to stay there. They should both be aiming to be good governments. Alas, our current government is only 50% successful in that i.e. its still there.

I ask again, put your previous comment about tax cuts and increased spending into context with the rest of their manifesto and compare it to that of FF and the Greens. And then determine how much of their respective manifestos have they lived up to?

T runner

solice wrote: »

All or any of those promises would have gone toward slowing down our reliance on the property market and would have alleviated some of the diffuclties we now find ourselves in.

The test of their commitment and how seriously they regarded the property situation is what they intended to do with the that knowledge. Those promises are just generalised non-sense, no specifics with how to alleviate the property situation. Just wind at an ard fheis.

The fact that FG were also predicting 4% growth for the following year in their election manifesto shows that they were more interested in the baseball bat value of the information rather than trying to find any solution.

If they knew that the property market would burst how could they predict 4% growth?

Daragh101

I cant understand how FF are still in government its crazy........there a bunch of idiots, couldnt even get lisbon through....No one has any confidence in the FF anymore, all they do is cut,cut,cut instead of trying to come up with "good" ideas to conbat the recession!!!

And to all those people who say FG wouldnt have done any better "how do you no" they arent been given a chance, god no's they cant be much worse!!!:mad:

gcgirl

with ff still in government the lisbon agreement is not going to be passed and i am after reading that Shane Ross has said they should have left anglo as it's a treat to the stability of the nation !

kmart6

Because they are the party that were there for the good times,when infrastucture around the country was modernised etc....yet now because there's aGLOBAL RECESSION they are suddenly doing a bad job....absolute bullsh1t!!!! No way FG or any other party would have done any different! As some Junior Minister pointed out in the last few days if FG are so good why didn't they see this coming instead of predicting the same 4% growth as FF!

solice

kmart6 wrote: »

Because they are the party that were there for the good times,when infrastucture around the country was modernised etc....yet now because there's aGLOBAL RECESSION they are suddenly doing a bad job....absolute bullsh1t!!!! No way FG or any other party would have done any different! As some Junior Minister pointed out in the last few days if FG are so good why didn't they see this coming instead of predicting the same 4% growth as FF!

Because they dont have control over global events but they would like to have a say in national events and policy and if you took the time to read a few posts in this thread you would see that it has been proven that FG & Labour were warning the govt. since at least 2004 about the potential downfall of being over reliant on the building sector as a means of generating wealth.

And it is our over reliance on the building sector that has us at a much worse position than many countries in this global recession.

solice

T runner wrote: »

The test of their commitment and how seriously they regarded the property situation is what they intended to do with the that knowledge. Those promises are just generalised non-sense, no specifics with how to alleviate the property situation. Just wind at an ard fheis.

The fact that FG were also predicting 4% growth for the following year in their election manifesto shows that they were more interested in the baseball bat value of the information rather than trying to find any solution.

If they knew that the property market would burst how could they predict 4% growth?

For some reason who seem to be under the impression that it is up to the opposition to hand solutions to the Government. I ask you, after all the repeated warnings from national & international sources, what did the government do since 1997 to protect us from this mess?

FF Election Manifesto 2007

Sound budgetary management is essential if Ireland is to continue enjoying low taxes and high levels of spending on public goods and services. Our guiding principles for fiscal policy for the next five years are to:
Keep the budget in broad balance and fully within our commitments under
the Stability & Growth Pact.
Retain the flexibility to deal with any future shocks

FG Election Manifesto 2007

We will subject all spending and tax commitments to the over-riding commitment to adhere to the EU Growth and Stability Pact. This means respecting the requirement that, over the course of an “economic cycle”, the General Government Balance will, on average, not exceed 1% of GDP.
We will keep sufficient flexibility in the public finances to allow for a sharper than expected slowdown in tax growth without breaching EMU commitments.

Labour Election Manifesto 2007

We will avoid pro-cyclical fiscal policies that increase inflation and reduce long-run competitiveness. There is a requirement to slow growth in day-to-day spending down from the present unsustainable rate towards the rate of growth in the economy.
We will maintain sufficient flexibility in the public finances to prevent a sharper than expected slowdown in growth breaching our EMU commitments, and without the need for cutbacks in public investment and services.

So fact was, they all said the same thing in 2007 on the run up to the election. They all made the same promise. But only one party failed to live up to that promise and that was FF. They and only they failed (as they were the ones in Govt at the time) due to a number of reasons and the global recession was indeed a part of it. But the govts over reliance on the property bubble, for which they received ample warning as I have demonstrated, is the main factor for us being in a very precarious situation. Anglo Irish Bank took complete advantage of the property bubble and now the tax payers have to bail it out. We will be paying for this for decades!

They all said the same thing in 2007, the greens went into government in 2007. Only the government broke its promise! You voted for the government last friday!

Fact is, nobody can honestly say that FG or Labour would do any better or any worse. But what we do know is that FF did not deliver on their promises! They fooled the electorate once again.

So answer my question, what did the Government do since 1997 to prevent this from happening?

Daragh101

kmart6 wrote: »

Because they are the party that were there for the good times,when infrastucture around the country was modernised etc....yet now because there's aGLOBAL RECESSION they are suddenly doing a bad job....absolute bullsh1t!!!! No way FG or any other party would have done any different! As some Junior Minister pointed out in the last few days if FG are so good why didn't they see this coming instead of predicting the same 4% growth as FF!

no i think the only bullsh1t is your post!!!
mabe if bertie paid attention to Irelands top economists when they were saying the property bubble was going to burst, we may have had a different story..... all it would have taken was a large tax on investment properties!!!!
all FF did over the last few years was lay back in there chairs, and let things happen for itself!!!!! there was no risk management involved in some of the decisions made by FF...........
FF is a dying party with a dull future and they no it !!!!!


Also its A) not up to the opposition to come up with ideas for FF and its hard when your been left in the dark with figures etc...

at the end of the day FF should not be in gov after the berage of poor decisions made by them!!!!!!!!!1

Liam Byrne

kmart6 wrote: »

Because they are the party that were there for the good times,when infrastucture around the country was modernised etc....yet now because there's aGLOBAL RECESSION they are suddenly doing a bad job....absolute bullsh1t!!!! No way FG or any other party would have done any different! As some Junior Minister pointed out in the last few days if FG are so good why didn't they see this coming instead of predicting the same 4% growth as FF!

PUTTING WORDS IN CAPITALS AND BOLD DOESN'T MAKE THEM RIGHT

Yes, the global recession would have landed us in the **** to some extent, but NOWHERE NEAR as much in the **** as the crowd that took their eye off the ball while their leader delayed and confused the tribunal as much as possible and told those warning him that they were begrudgers and pessimists and that people like that should commit suicide!

Yes, there's was a huge debate over his exact words and meaning, but at least the controversy over that means that it sticks in the memory and PROVES BEYOND DOUBT that he was warned in plenty of time and chose to ignore it.

Having distracted the public, he then - without a mandate (remember that FF were elected solely on the "Bertie's Team" crap posters) - put in as leader the very guy who was Minister for Finance with his foot on the foot-pump inflating the bubble for all it was worth!

So quit ignoring the elephant in the room, please. Only blinkered/deluded/ass-licking FF spokesmen on the various TV & radio shows since are pathetic and arrogant enough to claim that the crap we're in is because of a "global recession".

It's PARTLY that that landed us in it, but it's ALSO the FF policies for the past whatever number of years, and the tactic of "giving jobs because they were my friends" (no qualifications required, other than being Bertie's mate) and payoffs and corruption and greed, and not reading important reports, etc, etc.....

At BEST (being charitable to FF) it was 50-50; so they're COMPLETELY responsible for 50% of the crap, and are adding insult to injury by using OUR money to bail out Anglo-swamp-Irish while telling us there's no cash for the services we need and deserve! :mad:

Daragh101

Liam Byrne wrote: »

PUTTING WORDS IN CAPITALS AND BOLD DOESN'T MAKE THEM RIGHT

Yes, the global recession would have landed us in the **** to some extent, but NOWHERE NEAR as much in the **** as the crowd that took their eye off the ball while their leader delayed and confused the tribunal as much as possible and told those warning him that they were begrudgers and pessimists and that people like that should commit suicide!

Yes, there's was a huge debate over his exact words and meaning, but at least the controversy over that means that it sticks in the memory and PROVES BEYOND DOUBT that he was warned in plenty of time and chose to ignore it.

Having distracted the public, he then - without a mandate (remember that FF were elected solely on the "Bertie's Team" crap posters) - put in as leader the very guy who was Minister for Finance with his foot on the foot-pump inflating the bubble for all it was worth!

So quit ignoring the elephant in the room, please. Only blinkered/deluded/ass-licking FF spokesmen on the various TV & radio shows since are pathetic and arrogant enough to claim that the crap we're in is because of a "global recession".

It's PARTLY that that landed us in it, but it's ALSO the FF policies for the past whatever number of years, and the tactic of "giving jobs because they were my friends" (no qualifications required, other than being Bertie's mate) and payoffs and corruption and greed, and not reading important reports, etc, etc.....

At BEST (being charitable to FF) it was 50-50; so they're COMPLETELY responsible for 50% of the crap, and are adding insult to injury by using OUR money to bail out Anglo-swamp-Irish while telling us there's no cash for the services we need and deserve! :mad:

spot on!!!!!

gcgirl

Liam Byrne wrote: »

PUTTING WORDS IN CAPITALS AND BOLD DOESN'T MAKE THEM RIGHT

Yes, the global recession would have landed us in the **** to some extent, but NOWHERE NEAR as much in the **** as the crowd that took their eye off the ball while their leader delayed and confused the tribunal as much as possible and told those warning him that they were begrudgers and pessimists and that people like that should commit suicide!

Yes, there's was a huge debate over his exact words and meaning, but at least the controversy over that means that it sticks in the memory and PROVES BEYOND DOUBT that he was warned in plenty of time and chose to ignore it.

Having distracted the public, he then - without a mandate (remember that FF were elected solely on the "Bertie's Team" crap posters) - put in as leader the very guy who was Minister for Finance with his foot on the foot-pump inflating the bubble for all it was worth!

So quit ignoring the elephant in the room, please. Only blinkered/deluded/ass-licking FF spokesmen on the various TV & radio shows since are pathetic and arrogant enough to claim that the crap we're in is because of a "global recession".

It's PARTLY that that landed us in it, but it's ALSO the FF policies for the past whatever number of years, and the tactic of "giving jobs because they were my friends" (no qualifications required, other than being Bertie's mate) and payoffs and corruption and greed, and not reading important reports, etc, etc.....

At BEST (being charitable to FF) it was 50-50; so they're COMPLETELY responsible for 50% of the crap, and are adding insult to injury by using OUR money to bail out Anglo-swamp-Irish while telling us there's no cash for the services we need and deserve! :mad:

Once again mr byrne you are spot on keep up the good work

Liam Byrne

Liam Byrne wrote: »

PUTTING WORDS IN CAPITALS AND BOLD DOESN'T MAKE THEM RIGHT

but NOWHERE NEAR as much in the ****
and PROVES BEYOND DOUBT that he was warned
It's PARTLY that that landed us in it, but it's ALSO
At BEST (being charitable to FF) it was 50-50; so they're COMPLETELY responsible

Ahem...

The general point you make is correct. FF must take some of the blame for the particular predicament we are in. Of course, by the same token, for the years when we were doing fer better than our neighbours, and outstripping the global boom, I guess McCreevey must take the credit.

As for mandate, I'm not too sure about that point - or at least that it is peculiar to FF. They can scan the opposition and comment that many of them were happy to take ministerial positions in a Government that wasn't elected at all, merely formed when Labour crossed the floor rather than face the electorate in 1994. The system permits for such changes, in the whole make up of the Government then, in the identity of the Taoiseach now, without the need for ana election.

solice

Deleted User wrote: »

Ahem...

The general point you make is correct. FF must take some of the blame for the particular predicament we are in. Of course, by the same token, for the years when we were doing fer better than our neighbours, and outstripping the global boom, I guess McCreevey must take the credit.

That is true. Credit must go to McCreevy for anything that he did which made this country prosperous. But only give him credit for things that he did which made this country prosperous in a sustainable manner. Alot of his policies are questionable, it was McCreevy that began the over reliance on the property market.... but credit must also go to the current opposition. In a speech from Pat Rabbitte back in 2005:

Pat Rabbitte wrote:

The facts are that in the final year of the previous Rainbow Government, the economy was growing at 9.7%, jobs were being created at the rate of 55,000 a year, the first budget surplus in decades was being recorded, and inflation was running at 1.5%. These facts seem to be lost on those who advanced this argument. In fact, the record shows that economic performance under Ruairi Quinn was every bit as impressive as the first three years of Mr McCreevy, and far more impressive than his second three years."

So McCreevy inherited a good situation, so in reality, what real credit does he deserve?

K-9

solice wrote: »

That is true. Credit must go to McCreevy for anything that he did which made this country prosperous. But only give him credit for things that he did which made this country prosperous in a sustainable manner. Alot of his policies are questionable, it was McCreevy that began the over reliance on the property market.... but credit must also go to the current opposition. In a speech from Pat Rabbitte back in 2005:



So McCreevy inherited a good situation, so in reality, what real credit does he deserve?

And Quinn inherited it from McSharry, Reynolds and Bertie so what real credit does he deserve?

solice

K-9 wrote: »

And Quinn inherited it from McSharry, Reynolds and Bertie so what real credit does he deserve?

You dont think that Quinn creating the first budget surplus in decades is worth recognition?

K-9

solice wrote: »

You dont think that Quinn creating the first budget surplus in decades is worth recognition?

Huh? Where did I hint at that?

Of course he does, though I'll always blame him for the free 3rd level fees cave in to the middle classes.

All Finance Ministers when they inherit the portfolio are dependent on the previous incumbents performance. I think it's better to judge each on their own merits which makes McSharry winner hands down!

paddyland

Deleted User wrote: »

Ahem...

The general point you make is correct. FF must take some of the blame for the particular predicament we are in. Of course, by the same token, for the years when we were doing fer better than our neighbours, and outstripping the global boom, I guess McCreevey must take the credit.

This is one of the most annoying, sickening things about FF and their sycophants. "The years when we were doing far better than our neighbours, and outstripping the global boom..." Can't you see, this is exactly what has us in this shagging mess, and why good, solid, healthy employers are packing up and fleeing, and have been all through the 'boom,' not just today or yesterday! Bloody Cowen can't wait to get us right back into that self destructive mode as soon as he can. It's totally, totally, wrong, and McCreevy is an arch enemy of this country because of it.

Deleted User wrote: »

As for mandate, I'm not too sure about that point - or at least that it is peculiar to FF. They can scan the opposition and comment that many of them were happy to take ministerial positions in a Government that wasn't elected at all, merely formed when Labour crossed the floor rather than face the electorate in 1994. The system permits for such changes, in the whole make up of the Government then, in the identity of the Taoiseach now, without the need for ana election.

Justifying no need for a general election, in the face of what just happened. My God, what an immeasurably arrogant and conceited lot FF are. Why bother with any elections at all? They are obviously entitled to eternal corrupt government of this state, in the face of anything that might suggest otherwise, so the rest of us might as well pack our bags and go, as we are obviously all upsetting their cosy little empire.

paddyland

paddyland wrote: »

Bloody Cowen can't wait to get us right back into that self destructive mode as soon as he can. It's totally, totally, wrong, and McCreevy is an arch enemy of this country because of it.

I completely disagree.

paddyland wrote: »

Justifying no need for a general election, in the face of what just happened. My God, what an immeasurably arrogant and conceited lot FF are. Why bother with any elections at all? They are obviously entitled to eternal corrupt government of this state, in the face of anything that might suggest otherwise, so the rest of us might as well pack our bags and go, as we are obviously all upsetting their cosy little empire.

I'm not sure anyone made that point. If I may go behind your hysteria and just deal with the point about elections, FF are not entitled to 'eternal corrupt government'. For starters, our Constitution prohibits it! So you can drop the woe is me, let's all leave, cosy little empire routine. If you specify what law or even what code of conduct they broke in the lifetime of the current Government on the issue of maintaining power, perhaps we can deal with it. I'm making the point that changing a leader is pretty routine, it's a lot more routine than forming a new Government with new parties without dissolving the Dail. That is exactly why figures in the Opposition can hardly lecture FF on whether simply changing the party leader is much of a deceit...changing the whole Government patently wasn't...