New Irish Political Party, Amhran Nua

ei.sdraob

i was doing more thinking

theres definitely a space for another party or more in Irish politics and yee might end up doing quite well as alternatives are sorely lacking


just look at Libertas few month back they came fairly close to winning

and they had no policies published

honesty101

ei.sdraob wrote: »

i was doing more thinking

theres definitely a space for another party or more in Irish politics and yee might end up doing quite well as alternatives are sorely lacking


just look at Libertas few month back they came fairly close to winning

and they had no policies published

Thanks for the vote of confidence! Will you help us out and be one of the 300 signatures required to get us registered as a party?

Lockstep

kickoutthejams wrote: »

I'll say this for ye; that's probabaly a much better website than the other political partys I've seen.



Query; where do ye see yourselves on the old left/right divide? (Or Nolan Chart if you prefer)
I'm always interested as to what political partys see themselves as.

Think this got mixed up in the posts seeing as it was at the bottom of the page.

honesty101

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Think this got mixed up in the posts seeing as it was at the bottom of the page.

Leave the dogma at the door - Amhrán Nua is not left nor right nor
centrist, but practical and realistic, representing the first real
political party in Ireland that is by and for the Irish people, or at
least thats what we're aiming for.

jmayo

honesty101 wrote: »

Leave the dogma at the door - Amhrán Nua is not left nor right nor
centrist, but practical and realistic, representing the first real
political party in Ireland that is by and for the Irish people, or at
least thats what we're aiming for.

Realistic and practical NOT.
Continuous bus lanes between major cities and commutter towns ?
Have you driven Limerick to Cork or Limerick to Galway ?
There isn't as we speak any of the cities of the Republic connected by complete motorway or dual carriageway system.
Then when they are you want to turn one lane into a bus lane :mad:

Yeah you are so for the Irish people you want to tax people that live in the countryside.

Maybe you might win a former green party seat in D4 land that will become vacant at next election.

I have found some other glaring policy statements.
"The setting up of ten key third level educational institutions is outlined in the growth section of the policy documents"

We already have how many third level institutions and you want 10 more ?
Why not just set up new add on specialist departments within a few of the universities rather than complete new institutions with yet more paper pushers employed ?
Get universities to specialise in a particular area and fund that.

The weird thing is your party does have some pretty good ideas such as the health and housing policies, but you have too many daft ones in there that will immediately drag you down.

sliabh

honesty101 wrote: »

Please see response from my colleague:
Our energy policy was in place considerably before the Spirit of Ireland
initiative was ever heard from, the only thing that changed in the
interim was one line indicating our support for Spirit of Ireland. So
when two seperate groups come up with the same idea seperately, is it
not possible that the idea might have some merit beyond whatever
objections you seem to have?

Not really. There is a saying that "great minds think alike" but there is another that "fools seldom differ". I am a qualified Mechanical Engineer so I have been able to run the numbers on much of this myself. And I have friends who work in the wind industry. They all tell me that this idea is not viable. The informed expert comment (which you can find elsewhere on the Internet and boards) says the same thing. Technically it "might" be possible, but economically it does't make any sense. It is wishful thinking.

BTW if you wanted me to specifcally nit pick I could point out that:

• We are not exactly "in a unique position globally with regard to renewable energy resources" - there are a lot of other countries with as good a position especially when you go beyond wind to solar, geothermal, hydro, etc.
  
• "the warming Gulf Stream wind which blows across the Atlantic and keeps Europe warm" - the Gulf stream is an ocean current not a wind.
• "These strong and steady winds, which can be found nowhere else on earth" - They aren't that steady. Ireland has regular periods of no wind (see the data from Eirgrid in Prof David MacKay's "Without Hot Air"), and there are loads of other places around the world with similar or better winds - Newfoundland, Norway, and Scotland spring to mind in the nearest few thousand km.
• "offers the potential for complete energy independence, a position we could move towards over the next ten years" - Wind will not provide independence and not in that timeframe either. Don't take my word for it, take Prof. Dr. Richard Tol's word. BTW you can see his CV here. I think he has pretty good credentials in this area.
  

And those four points were just what I found in the first paragraph of your "Energy Policy".

honesty101 wrote: »

(Re school project) So you have no substantive objections, and in fairness have given no evidence whatsoever that you have actually read any of the policies?

At this stage I have read about half of them and the problem is that I have found so many holes I don't know where to begin. Hence my statement that you guys don't seem to be ready for the public stage.

Lockstep

honesty101 wrote: »

Leave the dogma at the door - Amhrán Nua is not left nor right nor
centrist, but practical and realistic, representing the first real
political party in Ireland that is by and for the Irish people, or at
least thats what we're aiming for.

I'm sorry; but I'm always extremely sceptical when a party refuses to achknowledge the left-right spectrum/Nolan chart and claims to only do what is pragmatic; every party claims that it's politics are the ones that work (no party will say; We are right wing becaue of ideology; we know our economic policy is unpractical.

honesty101

jmayo wrote: »

Realistic and practical NOT.
Continuous bus lanes between major cities and commutter towns ?
Have you driven Limerick to Cork or Limerick to Galway ?
There isn't as we speak any of the cities of the Republic connected by complete motorway or dual carriageway system.
Then when they are you want to turn one lane into a bus lane :mad:

Response:
And this is the end result of ten years of misspending and mismanagement from the government. The ludicrous infrastructural situation we find
ourselves in, whereby clean drinking water is a problem for a major
city, despite funds being in place to deal with the problem before it
became a problem, highlight that these are procedural issues, not
practical issues.

Response to latter:
If you have a quick read over that particular section, you will see that
these are to be custom built to focus on certain economic growth areas,
energy, marine, media and marketing, and so on. There can be little
question that existing universities do not provide the most efficient
educational environment or the kind of bedrock we need to found our own
domestic export based industries. A clean slate would be a desireable
state of affairs, without detracting from the value of existing
instititutions. Not to mention the value that these institutions would
bring to any locality in which they are situated - there is no
particular requirement to site them in or near major metropolitan areas.

honesty101

sliabh wrote: »

Not really. There is a saying that "great minds think alike" but there is another that "fools seldom differ". I am a qualified Mechanical Engineer so I have been able to run the numbers on much of this myself. And I have friends who work in the wind industry. They all tell me that this idea is not viable. The informed expert comment (which you can find elsewhere on the Internet and boards) says the same thing. Technically it "might" be possible, but economically it does't make any sense. It is wishful thinking.

BTW if you wanted me to specifcally nit pick I could point out that:

• We are not exactly "in a unique position globally with regard to renewable energy resources" - there are a lot of other countries with as good a position especially when you go beyond wind to solar, geothermal, hydro, etc.
  
• "the warming Gulf Stream wind which blows across the Atlantic and keeps Europe warm" - the Gulf stream is an ocean current not a wind.
• "These strong and steady winds, which can be found nowhere else on earth" - They aren't that steady. Ireland has regular periods of no wind (see the data from Eirgrid in Prof David MacKay's "Without Hot Air"), and there are loads of other places around the world with similar or better winds - Newfoundland, Norway, and Scotland spring to mind in the nearest few thousand km.
• "offers the potential for complete energy independence, a position we could move towards over the next ten years" - Wind will not provide independence and not in that timeframe either. Don't take my word for it, take Prof. Dr. Richard Tol's word. BTW you can see his CV here. I think he has pretty good credentials in this area.
  

And those four points were just what I found in the first paragraph of your "Energy Policy".




At this stage I have read about half of them and the problem is that I have found so many holes I don't know where to begin. Hence my statement that you guys don't seem to be ready for the public stage.

Response:
I'm afraid those engineers and people involved in the Spirit of Ireland
initiative would disagree with that. Before passing judgement, we have
been reliably informed that they will be releasing a full report and
costing for their proposals in a couple of weeks, so a little
forbearance until then would be appreciated. Should they fail to come up
with the full figures, we can deal with it on that basis.

Response to latter:
.. We are not exactly "in a unique position globally with regard to
> renewable energy resources" - there are a lot of other countries with
> as good a position especially when you go beyond wind to solar,
> geothermal, hydro, etc.
Actually we are, according to wikipedia anyway. Which while not the most
reliable of sources can be trusted to an extent.

>
> b.. "the warming Gulf Stream wind which blows across the Atlantic and
> keeps Europe warm" - the Gulf stream is an ocean current not a wind.
Its a western-intensified current, largely driven by wind stress.
Correlation?

> c.. "These strong and steady winds, which can be found nowhere else
> on earth" - They aren't that steady. Ireland has regular periods of no
> wind (see the data from Eirgrid in Prof David MacKay's "Without Hot
> Air"), and there are loads of other places around the world with
> similar or better winds - Newfoundland, Norway, and Scotland spring to
> mind in the nearest few thousand km.
Eirgrid reports periods when it purchased electricity from wind sources,
not when there was no electricity produced by wind sources. The more
turbines there are the more reliable it is, the less it costs and the
more it is used. SoI comes in here too by storing the energy, improving
reliability. Its a common misconception. Here is a map of wind sources
from met.ie

http://www.met.ie/climate/images/climate_windmap01.gif

circled number represents calm periods. Keep in mind that you don't need
to site turbines in every scrap of land, just the better places.

> d.. "offers the potential for complete energy independence, a
> position we could move towards over the next ten years" - Wind will
> not provide independence and not in that timeframe either. Don't take
> my word for it, take Prof. Dr. Richard Tol's word. BTW you can see his
> CV here. I think he has pretty good credentials in this area.
I think the word of Graham Brennan, head of SEI, will do nicely as far
as credibility goes. He is on record as having stated that Ireland could
achieve electrical independence from wind based sources alone, and he
would know. Have a quick look at this:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9888020-54.html

> At this stage I have read about half of them and the problem is that I
> have found so many holes I don't know where to begin. Hence my
> statement that you guys don't seem to be ready for the public stage.
You seem to have made a good start however. Unfortunately your
objections are not really substantiated by reality, but do continue sure.

Time Magazine

I appreciate that it's a little bit disengenous of me to do this because I don't want to get into a debate on this, but your economics is a load of nonsense.

Rob67

honesty101 wrote: »

> Honestly (accidental semi-pun, sorry!), this is load of aspirational,
> childish claptrap dreamt up by some 6 year old. I wouldn't trust your
> 'party' to run a kids paddling pool never mind a country with thinking
> like that. Your party is either very naive or very idealistic. In an
> ideal world we wouldn't need a Defence Forces, but this isn't an ideal
> world. The DF is a necessary part of society in the event of extreme
> events to safeguard the population, to assist the civil power in it's
> work to keep this country secure and free from the potential upheaval
> that extremists like to exploit in a 'soft society' that you extol.
As a former member of the defence forces, you are perfectly entitled to
your opinion, and no harm at all, but throwing abuse isn't something
that would be viewed as constructive, although it may feel great at the
time. What would be constructive would be if you want to put your
questions over on the party forum here,

http://amhrannua.com/public-forum/

we'd be delighted to deal with them in more depth, and change the
policies if that seems the best course of action.

I have already e-mailed to the above address, my reply. However, seeing as it was said here I should reply here. If you felt I was abusive to your party, I apologise, it was not my intention. I wanted to point out the potential trap of immaturity being a by-word for your party, with what could be perceived as 'under-thought' policies. I have to say that I was being the typical soldier, that being; 'attack is the best form of defence'. I still hold true to my opinion of your policy on defence though.

sliabh

honesty101 wrote: »

Response:
Actually we are, according to wikipedia anyway. Which while not the most
reliable of sources can be trusted to an extent.

I rest my case.

ChocolateSauce

Well I've just read through the key policies, and I'm not inclined to vote for this party. It is very soft touch. That is, it doesn't specifically address the issues which would attract me.

For example, Nuclear energy is not mentioned in the energy section; a strong stance for secularism is not taken in education; a statement supporting equal rights for homosexuals is not made in partnership rights; an indefinite postponement of Lisbon is advocated with no specific reason given.

Some things I outright oppose, such as greater emphasis on Irish in schools.

And most importantly of all, I get the overwhelming impression that this party seeks to expand the size of the government, something I am deeply opposed to. A clear stance on individual liberty is not taken.

It seems centrist, populist and statist to me, not unlike FF or FG.

Grudaire

I agree on the Defence questions - I'm still confused about those drones - I mean come on why?!

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

For example, Nuclear energy is not mentioned in the energy section; a strong stance for secularism is not taken in education; a statement supporting equal rights for homosexuals is not made in partnership rights; an indefinite postponement of Lisbon is advocated with no specific reason given.

Why would Nuclear be mentioned - it's not a suitable energy source for the country (yet) I suppose it should be mentioned.
There is a lack of explainations overall, a lack of meat on flimsy bones. The answers to questions cause far far more questions..

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Some things I outright oppose, such as greater emphasis on Irish in schools.

It's an issue that really polarises people. Although I do wonder why people thing a potential political party which has NO Gaeilge on it's website is a threat to their anglo-linguistic-sensibilities:rolleyes:

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

And most importantly of all, I get the overwhelming impression that this party seeks to expand the size of the government, something I am deeply opposed to. A clear stance on individual liberty is not taken.

It seems centrist, populist and statist to me, not unlike FF or FG.

Well put actually... it's not the kind of party that'll rock the boat!

ChocolateSauce

Cliste wrote: »

Why would Nuclear be mentioned - it's not a suitable energy source for the country (yet) I suppose it should be mentioned.
There is a lack of explainations overall, a lack of meat on flimsy bones. The answers to questions cause far far more questions..

It's an issue that really polarises people. Although I do wonder why people thing a potential political party which has NO Gaeilge on it's website is a threat to their anglo-linguistic-sensibilities:rolleyes:

Well I admit these mightn't be popular issues, but they'd certainly attract me if they stated a view which conformed to my own.

Not the kind of party that'll rock the boat!

I think that summarises it perfectly!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

patgill

sliabh wrote: »

Not really. There is a saying that "great minds think alike" but there is another that "fools seldom differ". I am a qualified Mechanical Engineer so I have been able to run the numbers on much of this myself. And I have friends who work in the wind industry. They all tell me that this idea is not viable. The informed expert comment (which you can find elsewhere on the Internet and boards) says the same thing. Technically it "might" be possible, but economically it does't make any sense. It is wishful thinking.

Sliabh, I would like you to iterate what exactly your friends say about Spirit of Ireland, I believe that they may be misinformed and I would love to clear up any misconceptions.

BTW if you wanted me to specifcally nit pick I could point out that:

• We are not exactly "in a unique position globally with regard to renewable energy resources" - there are a lot of other countries with as good a position especially when you go beyond wind to solar, geothermal, hydro, etc.
  
• "the warming Gulf Stream wind which blows across the Atlantic and keeps Europe warm" - the Gulf stream is an ocean current not a wind.
• "These strong and steady winds, which can be found nowhere else on earth" - They aren't that steady. Ireland has regular periods of no wind (see the data from Eirgrid in Prof David MacKay's "Without Hot Air"), and there are loads of other places around the world with similar or better winds - Newfoundland, Norway, and Scotland spring to mind in the nearest few thousand km.
• "offers the potential for complete energy independence, a position we could move towards over the next ten years" - Wind will not provide independence and not in that timeframe either. Don't take my word for it, take Prof. Dr. Richard Tol's word. BTW you can see his CV here. I think he has pretty good credentials in this area.

In no particular order, I have had the pleasure of having a debate with Prof Tol, I think a fair assessment would be that the debate was prematurely stopped before we discussed the merits of stochastic versus deterministic generation models and I was looking forward to that.
http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2009/05/22/the-spirit-of-ireland/

Over the last two years of data from Met Eireann stations in the area of Ireland likely to host the first part of the S of I project, the longest period without wind has been 13 hours.

The Gulf stream is indeed an ocean current, which generates wind.

We are very fortunate in Ireland to have a huge wind and wave resource, coupled with our very low domestic demand and relatively unique geology, Ireland is in prime position to host the worlds biggest natural power station.

And those four points were just what I found in the first paragraph of your "Energy Policy".




At this stage I have read about half of them and the problem is that I have found so many holes I don't know where to begin. Hence my statement that you guys don't seem to be ready for the public stage.

Amhran Nua were smart enough to endorse S of I early in the project and in my opinion displayed good judgement, I look forward to watching them blossom as a political party.

sliabh

patgill wrote: »

sliabh wrote: »

Amhran Nua were smart enough to endorse S of I early in the project and in my opinion displayed good judgement, I look forward to watching them blossom as a political party.

As an old boss of mine used to say - "Would you bet a month's salary on it?"

patgill

Sliabh

my gran always said, "Life is what you make it" and as she was not wrong about a lot of other stuff I have also followed her advice on this also.

Amhran Nua are a very young party with the right motives and as I have found with Spirit of Ireland, when your good intentions meet a sceptical public, you either improve your offering to soar above the naysayers or you go to bed and cover your head.

I will encourage them to let go of their fear of heights and start to soar, and speaking of soaring, looking forward to your friends assessments of the S of I project.

Pat

jmayo

honesty101 wrote: »

jmayo wrote: »

Realistic and practical NOT.
Continuous bus lanes between major cities and commutter towns ?
Have you driven Limerick to Cork or Limerick to Galway ?
There isn't as we speak any of the cities of the Republic connected by complete motorway or dual carriageway system.
Then when they are you want to turn one lane into a bus lane :mad:

Response:
And this is the end result of ten years of misspending and mismanagement from the government. The ludicrous infrastructural situation we find
ourselves in, whereby clean drinking water is a problem for a major
city, despite funds being in place to deal with the problem before it
became a problem, highlight that these are procedural issues, not
practical issues.

It is a fecking pratical issue and what are you waffling about.
We all bloody well know that the infrastructure projects in ireland have been pathetically planned and implemented.
That still does not answer my questions.

I am taking issue with the fact you claim your party are realistic and practical, yet you are waffling about clean drinking water when my questions are about your policy of having continous bus lanes throughout the country.

Did I ever ask about clean bloody drinking water ? :rolleyes:

Your party proposes to have continous bus lanes betwen major urban areas, commutter towns and cities where there isn't even a multilane road as of today.
Does your party intend to turn the dual carriageways/motorways into single lane roads for normal traffic and have the other lane as a bus lane ?

honesty101 wrote: »

Response to latter:
If you have a quick read over that particular section, you will see that
these are to be custom built to focus on certain economic growth areas,
energy, marine, media and marketing, and so on. There can be little
question that existing universities do not provide the most efficient
educational environment or the kind of bedrock we need to found our own
domestic export based industries. A clean slate would be a desireable
state of affairs, without detracting from the value of existing
instititutions. Not to mention the value that these institutions would
bring to any locality in which they are situated - there is no
particular requirement to site them in or near major metropolitan areas.

Again waffle waffle.
You also state these institutions will bring value to localities.
Is that not another form of decentralisation ?

You refuse to address the point that the creation of more third level institutions will just create another tranch of administrative jobs to run the new institutions, adding even more public sector jobs when we can't even afford the ones we already have.
We already have research departments in Marine Science in a couple of colleges AFAIK. NUIG being one example.
Yet you want to create a new college to handle it ? :rolleyes:

What are you on, marketing as a growth area. :rolleyes:
Marketing what exactly ? :eek: