Fine Gael overall majority: our best hope

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Liam Byrne

I agree with a lot of what you say, but.....

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

1) FF are to blame
2) Non-wealthy people can't afford to pay any more tax

dan_d

I agree with the essence of what you're saying. But really, what it comes down to, is that we have no other choice!FG have to be our best option right now, simply because they're not FF. Which is a completely rubbish way to have to do business.

My view, however, would be that no matter what any of them say, none of them are committed to anything other than their own political careers. And that's it.I don't believe for a second that any of them mean half of what they say.I don't believe they will actually carry out any of these reforms. But you're right, in that I don't want to see SF anywhere near being in charge, and that we've had more than enough of unions for the last few years...which is the essence of Labour....and also, that power for the Greens and FF is a non-runner. So...we're left with FG. Like it or lump it.

Still don't trust any of them.Never did.

Einhard

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you say, but.....



1) FF are to blame

True. To an extent.

2) Non-wealthy people can't afford to pay any more tax

False. or rather, depends on how you define "wealthy". Ireland does not, by any means, have a high individual tax burden. It is not as low as some might believe, but there is still significant scope for increases in personal taxation, without resulting in overly onerous burden on people. DIRT tax might be one area to look at. i was reading recently that average savings have shot through the roof over the bast few years. Increasing tax on the interest would target income already saved, and at the same time provide an incentive to invest the savings, whether on the high street or elsewhere.

As the level of savings indicate, Ireland is still a wealthy nation. The average industrial wage is still one of the highest in Europe, and once the unemployed are removed, average Irish disposable income is in the same category.

This leads me to the conclusion that there is reasonable scope for a general increase in taxes. However, it has to be carefully managed. One has to strive to find a balance between further damaging growth, imposing too great a burden on those on lower and middle incomes, and raising enough money to meet our obligations. Stating from the start that only the "wealthy" should be the focus of extra or increased taxation will not achieve this balance.

fifth

+1 While FG are the only option, they're more than that and are actually quite a good option (the more I think about it).

People want reform of the political system, health system and state bodies and FG are offering this.

Denerick

As much as I despise Labour in their present cowardly, populist, snifflingly vote grabbing absurdity (The site of Pat Rabbite eating Pat Carey alive in order to pander to idiots would turn me off that party for good) I don't believe Fine Gael are proposing anything radically different. The public service will be slimmed by around 10% whoever gets into power at this stage, and abolishing FAS and the HSE is just stupid - they are just going to give those bodies a name change. Similarily I'm not particulary worried about the number of TDs at present, its their personal qualities and character I worry about - something that would not change if there was 35% fewer of them.

Einhard

Denerick wrote: »

As much as I despise Labour in their present cowardly, populist, snifflingly vote grabbing absurdity (The site of Pat Rabbite eating Pat Carey alive in order to pander to idiots would turn me off that party for good) I don't believe Fine Gael are proposing anything radically different. The public service will be slimmed by around 10% whoever gets into power at this stage, and abolishing FAS and the HSE is just stupid - they are just going to give those bodies a name change. Similarily I'm not particulary worried about the number of TDs at present, its their personal qualities and character I worry about - something that would not change if there was 35% fewer of them.

TBH, I look at the personnel that FG have, and I'm impressed by them. That would be one of the reasons why I'll support them. They appear competent which, at the moment, and in comparison to FF and the Greens, that's quite an achievement in itself. I think it's a pity that Enda Kenny is still at the helm, but I think his relative absence over the past few days is significent, and points to the more collegiate style that FG are embracing.

PS: I'm really beginning to dislike Paul Gogarthy. What on earth was he thinking bringing his child to the press conference yesterday?

whatawaster

As much as i'd like a FG overall majority, it's not going to happen. It's going to be FG-Lab, so hopefully it will be something like a 70-30 split rather than closer to 50:50.

Labour aren't all bad, I think someone like Ruari Quinn would be a good addition to any cabinet for instance.

I hope for 3 things:
1) FG led government
2) FG Finance Minister (it has to be Richard Bruton - his punishment period is over)
3) FG Health Minister

bijapos

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This will solve very little. The Seanad abolition will go to a referendum. Apart from that they will reduce the number of TDs by 20 or so. What the system needs is a complete overhaul, **** the old system of counties and voting for TDs because they are local. The country needs a list system, and maybe 8 constituencies with their own regional administration. This is my main gripe with FG. The people want change, they will give FG a mandate for change but FG dont want full and proper change. The system is broke, we need a new system, not a couple of plasters to keep it going for another few years.

Reduce the size of the public service by 10 percent, and tackle waste, duplication, and inefficiency in public bodies

Interesting stuff, as are a lot of their documents but they regrettably lack specifics.

Abolish 145 state bodies and companies, including the HSE and FÁS, replacing them where necessary with more efficient, responsive alternatives

As Denerik said, its a name change, we need more specifics as to how Fas will change, what will make it different next time out. Again the documents FG have issued are lacking in more detail.

Ensure that at least one third of all senior public service appointments will be made from outside the current system

All senior positions should be advertised on an Ireland/Europe wide basis to ensure the best possible chance to get the best candidate.

In short, Fine Gael is committed to reducing the size of government, increasing transparency and accountability to the Irish people, and breaking up the cosy cabal of insiders that exists at the higher echelons of Irish public life.

Could you expand a bit more on this highlighted bit please.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Denerick

DF; Surely you'd take a tax hike of 2-3% for the good of the country? I hear what you're saying about tax evasion but for Gods sake, if you can afford it?

Old_-_School

I reckon if FG form an overall majority after the 2011 (2010?) election, their vote will be down below 15% by the time of the following election as they would be in charge over what is sure to be a period of immense hurt for the electorate and while I can't see FG doing much wrong, I can't see them doing anything inspirational enough to get us out of this mess and as a result all the swing voters will desert them.
With Labour in with them the blame will get shared. However I think FF could be in power again in 2015 with Labour. It might seem unthinkable now but history has shown that the Irish electorate have very short memories and that Labour will sleep with anyone to gain power.

dsmythy

Donegalfella pins his colours so I hope for the same although I won't be casting my vote with glee. They are merely the best of a bad lot.

danbohan

Denerick wrote: »

DF; Surely you'd take a tax hike of 2-3% for the good of the country? I hear what you're saying about tax evasion but for Gods sake, if you can afford it?

i have no problem paying some extra tax if its for good of the country , i have serious problems paying extra tax if it funneled into the black holes that are public sector , sw , banks as labour would seem to want , not to mention what my socialist friends in sinn fein would like to do to .

oscarBravo

dsmythy wrote: »

They are merely the best of a bad lot.

True - so they'll have to do until we start putting better candidates up for election.

I disagree with the "name change" argument: the Fine Gael health proposals have been modelled on the Dutch system, and they've made it clear for some time that the HSE will have to go.

Of course, the unions will fight them tooth and nail every step of the way, which is why I agree with DF that a Fine Gael majority would be desirable right now.

cleremy jarkson

FG majority is definitely the outcome I'd most prefer but at 40/1 on paddypower, it doesn't look like it could ever happen.

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/irish-government?ev_oc_grp_ids=46674

droidus

So our best hope after more than a decade of centre right neo-liberal economic policies which have completely destroyed this country, is an even more economically right wing party which has explicitly identified itself with Thatcher and the tories?

What we need is a genuine alternative and a complete change in approach, not a change in management to a marginally 'more efficient' party which has roughly the same priorities as FF and pursues the same general policies.

Strange that 'high net worth individuals' would rather see minor changes in management rather than the radical changes in structure that we actually need. Anything to avoid those tax increases eh?

Einhard

droidus wrote: »

So our best hope after more than a decade of centre right neo-liberal economic policies which have completely destroyed this country, is an even more economically right wing party which has explicitly identified itself with Thatcher and the tories?

Socialising bank losses wasn't a "centre right neo-liberal economic policy". Neither was hiking SW payments to unsustainable levels. Neither was benchmarking. Etc, etc, etc...

whatawaster

droidus wrote: »

So our best hope after more than a decade of centre right neo-liberal economic policies which have completely destroyed this country, is an even more economically right wing party which has explicitly identified itself with Thatcher and the tories?

What we need is a genuine alternative and a complete change in approach, not a change in management to a marginally 'more efficient' party which has roughly the same priorities as FF and pursues the same general policies.

Strange that 'high net worth individuals' would rather see minor changes in management rather than the radical changes in structure that we actually need. Anything to avoid those tax increases eh?

I don’t think running up a 20billion deficit is a neo-liberal right-wing policy
I don’t think pumping tens of billions into banks and nationalizing them is a neo-liberal right-wing policy.

jank

Yes, yes, yes!

Would like to see it happen but its doubtful!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

droidus

Einhard wrote: »

Socialising bank losses wasn't a "centre right neo-liberal economic policy". Neither was hiking SW payments to unsustainable levels. Neither was benchmarking. Etc, etc, etc...

Low tax, 'open' economy, non existent regulation, low corporation tax, privatisation, bailing out the rich - all text book right wing economic policies.

They increase in SW and PS pay were minor scraps thrown to the electorate, you only have to look at the inequality index to see how little was actually gained by the poorest sectors, and benchmarking, or course, benefited the highest paid the most, TD's, ministers, heads of universities, senior civil servants... some of the top paid are still receiving benefits from benchmarking.

droidus

whatawaster wrote: »

I don’t think running up a 20billion deficit is a neo-liberal right-wing policy
I don’t think pumping tens of billions into banks and nationalizing them is a neo-liberal right-wing policy.

Protecting the interests of capital are a fundamental tenet of right economic systems. Of course there is a contradiction between that and the idea of a 'free market', just as there was a contradiction between the ideas of open markets and globalisation during the years of the Washington consensus when developing countries were forced to open their economies whilst developed countries protected theirs.

Its almost as if its all about adopting policies which protect the interests of business - regardless of self-professed ideology... but that couldn't be true now could it? :rolleyes:

whatawaster

droidus wrote: »

Low tax, 'open' economy, non existent regulation, low corporation tax, privatisation, bailing out the rich - all text book right wing economic policies.

They increase in SW and PS pay were minor scraps thrown to the electorate, you only have to look at the inequality index to see how little was actually gained by the poorest sectors, and benchmarking, or course, benefited the highest paid the most, TD's, ministers, heads of universities, senior civil servants... some of the top paid are still receiving benefits form benchmarking.

We don’t have an “open” economy. Our electricity, telecommunications, legal, audit/accountancy and transport sectors all are/were heavily regulated or closed industries.

murphaph

bijapos wrote: »

This will solve very little. The Seanad abolition will go to a referendum. Apart from that they will reduce the number of TDs by 20 or so. What the system needs is a complete overhaul, **** the old system of counties and voting for TDs because they are local. The country needs a list system, and maybe 8 constituencies with their own regional administration. This is my main gripe with FG. The people want change, they will give FG a mandate for change but FG dont want full and proper change. The system is broke, we need a new system, not a couple of plasters to keep it going for another few years.

I agree, however FG are at least heading down the right path. The have said they will get their new "citizens committee" or whatever it's called to investigate the replacement of STV with lists. It's the closest any party has offered. I think we should take it and if we get say, 20 TDs elected by list at the start, it will snowball. We are not going to get rid of poxy PRSTV in one go, worse luck. We need to be realistic and see that the proposals FG are offering are real change to Irish politics and will have a meaningful result.

droidus

whatawaster wrote: »

We don’t have an “open” economy. Our electricity, telecommunications, legal, audit/accountancy and transport sectors all are/were heavily regulated or closed industries.

Im sorry? What? :rolleyes: Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

Until 2008, Ireland boasted one of the most vibrant, open economies in the world. The "Celtic Tiger" period of the mid- to late 1990s saw several years of double-digit GDP growth, driven by a progressive industrial policy that boosted large-scale foreign direct investment and exports. GDP growth dipped during the immediate post-September 11, 2001 global economic slowdown, but averaged roughly 5% yearly between 2004 and 2007, the best performance for this period among the original EU 15 member states. During that period, the Irish economy generated roughly 90,000 new jobs annually and attracted over 200,000 foreign workers, mostly from the new EU member states, in an unprecedented immigration influx. The construction sector accounted for approximately one-quarter of these jobs. However, the Irish economy began to experience a slowdown in 2008. The Irish property market collapsed, putting pressure on the Irish banks, which had a significant portion of their loan books in real estate. This, in turn, caused a collapse in the government’s finances because of a large dip in the amount of revenue raised from value-added tax and tax on property transactions.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3180.htm

Singapore slipped two notches to third place in a ranking of the world's most open economies in 2000, with Ireland and Switzerland ahead of it among the 62 nations surveyed.

The globalisation index, assembled by Washington-based Foreign Policy magazine and Electronic Data System's global consultancy, AT Kearney, measures economic integration, cross-border personal contact, transnational political engagement and technology usage to reach its conclusions.

While Singapore remained the world's top trading nation, it struggled to take full advantage of global portfolio capital flows, said the report on the magazine's website.

'A reorganisation of its main stock exchange helped to pull in some additional capital and position the country as a future financial centre, but the country evidently proved less attractive than others with larger or more dynamic economic hinterlands, including the combined euro-zone.'

Thus, while portfolio inflows to Ireland grew by some US$26 billion (S$48 billion) between 1998 and 2000, Singapore saw only US$1.3 billion in additional inflows.

The United States ranks 12th on the list, scoring high in the technology and political engagement measures, but low on economic integration.

It also scored low on the personal contact measure as most of its citizens do not travel abroad or have foreign contact via telephone or e-mail.

Countries such as Ireland, Singapore and Switzerland, which depend on trade, foreign investment and tourism scored highly.

The top 10 most globalised countries in 2000 by rank were: Ireland, Switzerland, Singapore, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Canada, Denmark, Austria and Britain.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200201/11/eng20020111_88454.shtml

List for the last 3 years here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_Index

kev9100

Absoloute BS. People love to portray the Labour party as radical leftists and that is simply not the case. Ruairi Quinn was the one who introduced the 12.5 corp tax rate and never gets any credit for it. Why is that?

Einhard

droidus wrote: »

Low tax, 'open' economy, non existent regulation, low corporation tax, privatisation, bailing out the rich - all text book right wing economic policies.

We have a balance of payments at the moment, and any growth in the next few years will be export lead, and highly dependent on multinationals based here. As such, our corporation tax and open economy are not right wing policies, they're the most logical policies to pursue. As Labour and the Unions have acknowledged. Bailing out the right is not a right wong economic policy either. Letting the banks fall and the investors (many of which, incidentally, were pension funds investing for people who would not describe themselves as wealthy) would have been a right wing economic policy. That didn't happen. instead what we had was state intervention in the private sector, which is most definitely not right wing.

They increase in SW and PS pay were minor scraps thrown to the electorate, you only have to look at the inequality index to see how little was actually gained by the poorest sectors, and benchmarking, or course, benefited the highest paid the most, TD's, ministers, heads of universities, senior civil servants... some of the top paid are still receiving benefits from benchmarking.

I only need to look at my own position on the dole to see how much SW claimants have benefited over the past decade. As for inequality indices, I don't really see their purpose. As long as a person is making or gaining enough money to meet their own needs, why does it matter what someone else is earning or gaining over and above them? Inequality indices are really indices of petty jealousy and envy.

As for benchmarking which you mention, how could that be described as right wing?

dicknorris

FG to get a overall majority

Get real for god sake it won't happen, has anyone on this thread looked at the opinion polls

senordingdong

Agree with OP, but I really don't see FG getting the overall majority. Which is what I want btw.

Labour are ahead in the opinion polls and I fear that FG have been out of Govt. so long that they may jump on any chance they get to take power...including entering a coalition...which could have serious effect on the reforms.

Badabing

It'll be near impossible for Fine Gael to get a overall majority as they would need to clean up in Dublin and meath kildare etc.. taking 2/3 seats there. AS i see it now Fine Gael will get 60 seats Labour 45 FF 48 rest 13.