Garret FitzGerald's Career & Political Legacy

K-9

Well judging by hardline Republican views of it now and nearly every Unionists view then that it was a sell out and 100's of 1,000's at mass protests against the Anglo Irish Agreement, I'd say it struck the right balance at the time.

In context he was dealing with Maggie and learned the lessons from Haughey's failures there, sabre rattling Republicanism was futile and self defeating.

The Unionist opposition was futile. Eventually John Hume introduced Adams to the peace process and with good work from Albert Reynolds the Downing Street declaration was signed in 1993. We had a pan Nationalist front against a very divided Unionism.

Garret laid the foundations for this, the Irish Government was now a player in Northern Ireland, the slippery slope had started and Unionists had to accept it.

Wolfe Tone

John Hume? Sure Gerry was talking with the Brits back in the mid 80s, Father Reid the architect.

PatsytheNazi

K-9 wrote: »

Well judging by hardline Republican views of it now and nearly every Unionists view then that it was a sell out and 100's of 1,000's at mass protests against the Anglo Irish Agreement, I'd say it struck the right balance at the time.

In context he was dealing with Maggie and learned the lessons from Haughey's failures there, sabre rattling Republicanism was futile and self defeating.

The Unionist opposition was futile. Eventually John Hume introduced Adams to the peace process and with good work from Albert Reynolds the Downing Street declaration was signed in 1993. We had a pan Nationalist front against a very divided Unionism.

Garret laid the foundations for this, the Irish Government was now a player in Northern Ireland, the slippery slope had started and Unionists had to accept it.

No he didn't. The Anglo Irish Agreement was concieved and developed by the British, he was only brought into it by Thatcher to sell the "OIrish dimension". He only doted the i's and crossed the t's and little else.

( Bit off topic but since you brought it up, as for Hume/Adams, it was SF who for years had requested the Stoopys to meet them for talks - not the other way around. )

later12

beeftotheheels wrote: »

I've struggled with this thread all day.

Do I think, whether we dispute the validity of his actions or not, that we have any reason to question that he was a man of integrity and honesty? No

Do I think that the man deserved or would have wanted a legacy free from intellectual debate? No.

Do I think his legacy will have changed by next week? No

So perhaps this debate could wait a week. Not least to allow feelings cool and to facilitate having the debate on a purely intellectual level (as befits the man).

Yes I see your point.

I would say that these observations - on both sides - have been made throughout FitzGerald's life. Garret FitzGerald himself would have been very familiar with his critics and their criticisms.

Although they are of a professional nature, not of a personal one, it is true that by most accounts, FitzGerald fulfilled a role that was not unlike a Grandfather to the nation.
Personally, I don't pretend to admire FitzGerald's economic policies, but this may be minor to people at this moment, and I may have been a little hasty in opening the thread. Perhaps a more rigorous examination of FitzGerald's tenure is better left alone for now.

Sand

Im divided - on a personal level, he seemed like some sort of kindly grandfather. I cant but smile when I recall him fussing through sheets of statistics live on Primetime during the aftermath of the recent election. I dont dislike him on a personal level, and obviously outside of his role as public figure he was a father, grandfather, husband and that needs to be remembered.

However, on a brutally honest level his term as a public figure in the 1980s is more celebrated for social and foreign policy achievements, whilst continuing to dig a deeper and deeper hole of debt and spending. Ireland in those days needed a Thatcher (who also signed the NI agreement so it wasnt an either/or choice), we got a Kinnock. He may have inherited that mess, but the steel required to solve it wasnt found until he was out of office.

Plus, I feel his more interventions in the debate around Irelands choices in recent times were deeply harmful. Hes got a lot of kudos and respect for his socialist credentials but hes used them to attack people like Karl Whelan and "celebrity economists" who have criticised disastrous government policies. Charlatans like Cowen and Lenihan and the various factions in the DoF used Fitzgerald as a human shield to deflect and negate the well founded and sensible criticism from Whelan and the "celebrity economists", to the diservice of Ireland as a whole, and Fitzgerald seemed a willing participant in this effort.

KeithAFC

RIP.

K-9

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

John Hume? Sure Gerry was talking with the Brits back in the mid 80s, Father Reid the architect.

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

No he didn't. The Anglo Irish Agreement was concieved and developed by the British, he was only brought into it by Thatcher to sell the "OIrish dimension". He only doted the i's and crossed the t's and little else.

( Bit off topic but since you brought it up, as for Hume/Adams, it was SF who for years had requested the Stoopys to meet them for talks - not the other way around. )

Well I did say the hard liner Republicans and Unionists will all have differing views based on whatever propaganda they want to sell. SF had talks with the British from the Hunger Strikes on at official level, one and of.

The Anglo Irish Agreement was the start of a long, slow process that took a long time to change and open minds. Some minds are still closed but it's as tiny minority compared to a majority back then.

Economically I think some give him a bit of a pass because of FF and Haughey. The economy was still in a shocking state despite 5 years of Garret by 87 so arguing over the difference between 192% and 241% is rather pointless, the fact is the debt doubled under his watch.

He preached the right policies but when in coalition, albeit with a Labour party more left wing than SF now, he couldn't get the necessary compromises. Taxes were increased to such an extent people on the average industrial wage paid tax at 65%, on 2/3's that wage, the marginal rate was 55%.

amcalester

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Some of of Fitzgerald's great 'achievements' :rolleyes: -
* Benefitting from 200,000 debts written off by AIB etc Not in Haughey's league, but still not bad all the same for a so called honest ' statesman '.

It just goes to show the absoulute patheticness of this little state when they elevate a bumbling idiot like Fitzgerald ( and for that matter Lynch ) to " statesman ".

Dr FitzGerald sold his family home to pay back AIB. According to the Moriarty Tribunal he did no wrong and paid off his debts as best he could.

In summary it would appear that in compromising his indebtedness with the Bank, Dr. Fitzgerald disposed of his only substantial asset, namely, his family home at Palmerston Road, a property which would now be worth a considerable sum of money. As in Mr. Haughey's case, there was a substantial discounting or forbearance shown in Dr. Fitzgerald's case. However in contrast with Mr. Haughey's case, Dr. Fitzgerald's case involved the effective exhaustion of his assets in order to achieve a settlement whereas Mr. Haughey's assets were retained virtually intact

NSNO

They laughed at him, the corrupt scoundrels. They said he was weak, they said that he lacked the steel to do the necessary.

Why did we ever listen? He was innately kind, honest and decent. He was too good for Irish politics and too good for us.

Rest in peace, Garret the Good.

Cicero

Garret Fitzgerald's advocacy of a pluralistic society was ahead of it's time- RIP.

Amtmann

One of his former colleagues was on the News at One today and spoke of his concern not for the partition of Ireland's territory, but for the partition of its people. I'd never heard it put quite that way before. A noble outlook. RIP, Dr FitzGerald.

KeithAFC

Tremelo wrote: »

One of his former colleagues was on the News at One today and spoke of his concern not for the partition of Ireland's territory, but for the partition of its people. I'd never heard it put quite that way before. A noble outlook. RIP, Dr FitzGerald.

I remember him saying the loyalist people weren't loyal to the crown but to the land of Ulster. I thought it was an odd thing to say to some degree from an Irish PM.

Fraher91

R.I.P Garret, you were a good man who tried to do what he saw in the best interests of the nation. I still consider Lemass to be our greatest Leader, no disrespect intended to Garret.

Fraher91

I know quite a bit about Garret's terms as Taoiseach, would any posters believe he was a better taoiseach than Liam Cosgrave, i wouldn't know much about him to be honest.

K-9

Fraher91 wrote: »

I know quite a bit about Garret's terms as Taoiseach, would any posters believe he was a better taoiseach than Liam Cosgrave, i wouldn't know much about him to be honest.

There's a thread discussing his legacy on the main page if you want to discuss it.

jmayo

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Some of of Fitzgerald's great 'achievements' :rolleyes: -

* 1982, Taoiseach of shortest Govt in the history of the state for about 10/11 months falling on the budget due to the tax on children's shoes

* The badly conceived 1st divorce act which ofcourse failed at the referendum.

So in your eyes he was a failure because he tried to reform and failed.
Some of us would see him as being ahead of his time for actually trying to reform against the majority thinking.

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

* Benefitting from 200,000 debts written off by AIB etc Not in Haughey's league, but still not bad all the same for a so called honest ' statesman '.

Isn't a bit rich of SF supporters complaining about other's financial arrangements when they are part of an organisation that has been joined at the hip to an illegal organisation that has been involved in robbery, protection rackets, money laundering, smuggling and all kinds of illegal financial dealings ?
Almost as laughable as having to get morality and ethical lessons in the Dail from a former gun runner and apologist for Garda killers. :rolleyes:

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

It just goes to show the absoulute patheticness of this little state when they elevate a bumbling idiot like Fitzgerald ( and for that matter Lynch ) to " statesman ".

And you and your colleagues posts goes to show the absolute patheticness of some parties' supporters who can see the splinter in another's eyes all the while missing the 2x4 in their own.

PatsytheNazi

amcalester wrote: »

Dr FitzGerald sold his family home to pay back AIB. According to the Moriarty Tribunal he did no wrong and paid off his debts as best he could.

Yeah, when he got caught out and it was made public !!!!!! So ' honest ' politican pays off debt when he's caught out - what a ' statesman '.

later12

I'm not really getting involved in this debate any further due to a point made by another poster, but just to comment on a pet peeve

jmayo wrote: »

Isn't a bit rich of SF supporters complaining about other's financial arrangements when they are part of....

Almost as laughable as having to get morality and ethical lessons in the Dail from a former gun runner and apologist for Garda killers. :rolleyes:

And you and your colleagues posts goes to show the absolute patheticness of some parties' supporters who can see the splinter in another's eyes all the while missing the 2x4 in their own.

There is a word for this sort of argument which temporarily escapes me. Basically it involves a refusal to refute the opposing argument, but to deflect the issue by pointing out others' shortcomings. But that doesn't make the opposing argument any less true.

If I argue that your political policies are X, it isn't logical for you to refute that by pointing out that my political policies are Y, whether there is a relationship between X and Y or not.

PatsytheNazi

jmayo wrote: »

Isn't a bit rich of SF supporters complaining about other's financial arrangements when they are part of an organisation that has been joined at the hip to an illegal organisation that has been involved in robbery, protection rackets, money laundering, smuggling and all kinds of illegal financial dealings ?
Almost as laughable as having to get morality and ethical lessons in the Dail from a former gun runner and apologist for Garda killers.

later10 wrote: »

There is a word for this sort of argument which temporarily escapes me. Basically it involves a refusal to refute the opposing argument, but to deflect the issue by pointing out others' shortcomings. But that doesn't make the opposing argument any less true.

If I argue that your political policies are X, it isn't logical for you to refute that by pointing out that my political policies are Y, whether there is a relationship between X and Y or not.

Good observation later10. Like what you describe, what jmayois doing is using the Strawman diversion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

He even manages to bring in boards.ie's version of Godwin's law when it comes to Sinn Fein - " What about Jerry McCabe " with the remark about the " apologist for Garda killers "

K-9

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Good observation later10. Like what you describe, what jmayois doing is using the Strawman diversion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

He even manages to bring in boards.ie's version of Godwin's law when it comes to Sinn Fein - " What about Jerry McCabe " with the remark about the " apologist for Garda killers "

In fairness sometimes it can be done innocently but some posters do seem to thrive on it and it isn't helpful to discussion if indulged ad nausea.

anymore

My memory of reading Gemma Hussey's Diary, published after she left politics, is she didnt really paint a very flattering picture of Garret Fitzgerald - endless cabinet meetings dragging on late into the nights but producing little due to Fitzgerald's obsession with details. It left the impression of the slightly eccentric professor type.

walrusgumble

anymore wrote: »

My memory of reading Gemma Hussey's Diary, published after she left politics, is she didnt really paint a very flattering picture of Garret Fitzgerald - endless cabinet meetings dragging on late into the nights but producing little due to Fitzgerald's obsession with details. It left the impression of the slightly eccentric professor type.

it's a pitty our other leaders were not great with the little details of policies themselves, electronic voting anyone? Luas lines not joining up?

anymore

amcalester wrote: »

Dr FitzGerald sold his family home to pay back AIB. According to the Moriarty Tribunal he did no wrong and paid off his debts as best he could.

Given his genrous public sector pensions and his income from writing, I am afraid I dont see why he could not have paid back the money over a long term period. His Taoiseachs pension alone is enermously greater than my income. The fact is that he went out into the commercial world, he failed miserably.