Eamon Ryan is new leader of the Green Party

Macha

later10 wrote: »

A broadly rural constituency with one city and a reasonably important commuter town - and do you know where her ballots came from?

Is that a trick question?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Same here in Mayo. They're detested amongst small farmers.

Macha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sorry but I don't go by anecdotes no one ever wins that one. I know plenty of farmers who like the Greens and who see themselves as stewards of the land. They know you can't take the environment for granted and keep taking, taking taking. That's something a lot of urban dwellers don't have the first clue about.

flutered

not only do i detest them i actually despise them as well, they propped up f.f. while my country was raped, and believe it or not the smirkers first statement after becoming leader is having a go at the goverment for not continueing with green policies, this people shows what and how they think.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

goat2

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

i am rural, i live in ireland,
the greens are green, and they live on another planet,
i think they said a bus pass every ones doors, well the door i live behind is four miles from nearest bus

Macha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I was demonstrating the pointlessness of it with that anecdote. You have an anecdote that proves A, I have an anecdote that disproves A.

Well, you totally missed the point I was making.

View

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I doubt that either Donegal constituency would be high on the Green's target list of possible seats. I'd say Labour would be surprised if they won a seat there and they are a considerably bigger party than the Greens.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I won't argue with people's perception but I doubt that many, if any, of those petty regulations and carbon taxes will be repealed now they are in place. In fact, I'd say we'd almost certainly have had them introduced even if the Greens had spent their time in opposition.

later12

Macha wrote: »

Sorry but I don't go by anecdotes no one ever wins that one.

Apart from the fact that you went on to give an anecdote, that's a welcome approach.

So lets base it on what we do know.

Although she is a Carlow resident, Mary White's support at parliamentary level has traditionally come from a green base in Kilkenny city (one of only three councils where the party still holds a seat) and Carlow town. Furthermore, her transfers are significantly urban related - coming from SF and Labour or candidates with very urban bases.

It is frequently Dubliners mentioning Mary White who forget the significant fact that Kilkenny is a city, Carlow is a significant satellite town (or was in the boom) and is a major reason for the White success.

There is another factor to Mary White's success and that is her personality. She has a great local presence as a businesswoman and was well liked - but tellingly, when she dropped out of the council, her vote was annihilated. The greens went from topping the poll to second last. This suggests that much of the green vote in Borris was actually a Mary White vote, and that there was no fundamental green support.

Even if we were to ignore this, what does the fact that Mary White has been the only non Cork/ Dublin TD in the history of of the Green party tell you?

I like the Green party, and I hope that they will return to the Dail, at least for the sake of challenging and demanding effective environmental legislation if nothing else.

But trying to dress up their support base as rural in any real way is just blatantly false. You are right to ignore the anecdotes, the election data is perfectly clear.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Pride Fighter

Where the recovery will come with the Green Party are quite rural constituencies, so I dont buy that they are a urban party, I'd say the Greens are strongest in Louth, largely rural apart from Drogheda/Dundalk, Dublin North, large swathes are rural, Dublin South, about 70% suburbs 30% rural, Carlow Kilkenny, mostly rural with some medium sized towns.

I think Eamon Ryan's goals are easily achievable apart from an MEP seat. Currently the Green's have 16 council seats, 3 county council seats, 10 town council seats and 3 Northern Irish county council seats. They also have an MLA. I know town council seats are minor, but I'd be sure Eamon Ryan is including them. So all the Greens have to do is make 4 gains in 3 years time for his leadership to be dubbed a success. I'd say Seargeant and Ryan would be odds on to claim council seats and added with a surprise here or there 20 is achievable.

I wish the Greens well, the electorate should have returned 20 green TD's not 20 FF crooks. Although I disagreed with a lot of what the Irish Green Party did, we need them, and need them badly, not the same old cronies from FF and FG.

Macha

later10 wrote: »

Apart from the fact that you went on to give an anecdote, that's a welcome approach.

*sigh*, I explained above that I used the anecdote to demonstrate the pointlessness of anecdotes in making a point.

Do you really think my intellect is so poor that I would contradict myself in the same post?

Sponge Bob

The same Rural Ireland who had to listen to years of waffle by Ryan on Broadband only to get 3rd world satellite instead of broadband in the end.

Rural Ireland is not yet aware that Ryan allowed RTE to abandon around 120 television transmitters next year meaning they cannot pick up terrestrial tv any more. In the southern two thirds of the country you can either pick up Digital TV today or you will never be able to get it...except from his old favourite, the satellite.

The Ryan who went to meet the community in Bellinaboy and promised them a bicycle lane around Glengad and the bay...and never even delivered that much.

As for urban areas, all Ryan did was build bicycle lanes and 24 hour bus lanes with no buses in them 95% of the time.

He will finish off the greens as a political for good, thank God.

later12

Macha wrote: »

*sigh*, I explained above that I used the anecdote to demonstrate the pointlessness of anecdotes in making a point.

Do you really think my intellect is so poor that I would contradict myself in the same post?

Straightforward answer is I don't know, I'm not familiar with you. But maybe you would address the point with facts, what factual evidence are you using for suggesting that the party has a lot of rural supporters?

Since you later criticised anecdotal evidence, I presume this was not based on anecdotal evidence.

johnnyskeleton

It was very important that they be seen to make a break from the past and elect a new leader that has no association with the last government. Instead we have probably the most visible Green member of the last government taking over the reigns.

I think that the Fis Nua / Patricia McKenna type of green party has a chance to emerge now and fill the gap. The current Green party has no future that I can see.

johnnyskeleton

beeftotheheels wrote: »

Oh no, that honor belongs solely to the PDs! The Greens may not have helped with the ending, they are due blame in that.

But the bubble was inflated by FF while the PDs were keeping them in power, 2000 to 2004 was when our income as opposed to transactional tax take was cut while public expenditure went through the roof and property tax incentives were supported while capital gains tax was halved. This is when FF were at their most destructive.

I like the way history has absolved the PDs for their part in that, but will not absolve the Greens. Perhaps it is the difference between not disrepecting the dead.

In any event, the PDs are just as culpable than FF because they were hypocrits who said they stood for one thing but then did another. They ballooned public spending in particular the HSE, they spearheaded extreme anti-immigrant policies and they were just as happy, if not more happy, to engage in parish pump politics and let their mercs and perks build up. Des O'Mally came from FF and brought with him all the ideals of that party.

It truly astonishes me that people believe the PDs were actually a modern liberal party and that their only fault was to go into power with FF. At best, they took credit for some of the good decisions implemented by other parties and claimed them as their own e.g. low corporation tax.

Het-Field

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I like the way history has absolved the PDs for their part in that, but will not absolve the Greens. Perhaps it is the difference between not disrepecting the dead.

In any event, the PDs are just as culpable than FF because they were hypocrits who said they stood for one thing but then did another. They ballooned public spending in particular the HSE, they spearheaded extreme anti-immigrant policies and they were just as happy, if not more happy, to engage in parish pump politics and let their mercs and perks build up. Des O'Mally came from FF and brought with him all the ideals of that party.

It truly astonishes me that people believe the PDs were actually a modern liberal party and that their only fault was to go into power with FF. At best, they took credit for some of the good decisions implemented by other parties and claimed them as their own e.g. low corporation tax.

1) The PDs, while complicit in the establishment of the Health Services Executive, were not ministerially responsible for its establishment. Michael Martin was the Minister in charge at the time of the amalagamation of the Health Boards. History was revised in an attempt to heap more blame at the door of Mary Harney.

2) "Spearheaded anti immigrant policies" ? What policies did they proffer which were anti-immigrant ? If you are talking about the 2004 referendum, then I suggest you consider the context of the referendum in the light of the definition of citizenship enshrined in 1998, and the Lobe v Osyande decision of 2003. I cannot imagine how anybody could consider the 2004 referendum "racist".

FWIW, I dont believe a new leader will be enough to revive the Green Party's fortunes. There is a lot more to a party than a leader. Where is the funding going to come from ? How will they operate without any state funding ? Why would private donors invest money in an entity which will wield no executive power for the lifetime of this Government, and enjoys a Workers Party size mandate on the County Councils ? Are they currently employing full time staff ? Has there been a major drop-off in the involvement of interested members ?

They need more than a change of leader.

beeftotheheels

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I like the way history has absolved the PDs for their part in that, but will not absolve the Greens. Perhaps it is the difference between not disrepecting the dead.

I think a lot of people in this country really blame the whole thing on the bank guarantee and think that had we not given that then everything would be okay, in part because to acknowledge that the additional wealth they saw in the years post 2000 was part of the problem, and that every man woman and child of us benefited to a greater or lesser degree from the bubble.

I mean by 2007 the writing was on the wall internationally, Bertie's shenanigans were in the public domain and yet FF were still returned to power albeit with a different coalition partner.

But I'm sure I will be shot down for this in jig time.

MadsL

http://www.shelltosea.com/content/hysterical-attitudes-reflect-unresolved-relationship-power

Double standards like this are not forgotten.

The Greens had their opportunity to 'cross the floor' and choked in the face of standing up for some integrity in politics. Dierdre de Burca threw herself on her sword to try and get them to see that, but the party leaders (and Ryan) were too blinded by their supposed 'power' to see it.

I hope Green politics is not dead, but the Green Party needs radical change. Ryan is not the man to do it.

Mr.Micro

MadsL wrote: »

The Greens need to develop some integrity and individuality. I cannot see them getting anywhere for years to come. The first thing they need to do is change the name of their Party. Maybe to " Not so Green Party" or "Green but Yellow as well Party". or "Forever Green but dead Party".

goat2

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I like the way history has absolved the PDs for their part in that, but will not absolve the Greens. Perhaps it is the difference between not disrepecting the dead.

In any event, the PDs are just as culpable than FF because they were hypocrits who said they stood for one thing but then did another. They ballooned public spending in particular the HSE, they spearheaded extreme anti-immigrant policies and they were just as happy, if not more happy, to engage in parish pump politics and let their mercs and perks build up. Des O'Mally came from FF and brought with him all the ideals of that party.

It truly astonishes me that people believe the PDs were actually a modern liberal party and that their only fault was to go into power with FF. At best, they took credit for some of the good decisions implemented by other parties and claimed them as their own e.g. low corporation tax.

we never absolved the pd,s
they just disappeared and did us all a favour. when a thing is gone its gone,
but the greens are trying to reappear,

MadsL

goat2 wrote: »

greens are trying to reappear,

Green shoots?

/I'll get me coat

thebman

Considering he was in charge of Broadband and introduced the electoral district based NBS (as opposed to actual black spot broadband areas) which he awarded to a mobile phone carrier who was lying about their subscriber statistics so we basically subsidized 3 in expanding coverage of their mobile phone network coverage to help them catch up to their competitors.

And the consequences for submitting false statistics to win this contract:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0928/1224279827709.html

A 1,500 euro fine. Wow fanstatic. Bet they learned their lesson.

Wonder how much the NBS contract was actually worth:

How much will the NBS cost?

The total value of the investment required to implement the National Broadband Scheme is estimate at circa €223m, of which the Government is contributing €79.8m.


The project is eligible for EU co-funding under the ERDF 2007-2013.

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Communications/Communications+Development/National+Broadband+Scheme/NBS+FAQs.htm

Yeah he is a great leader and I'm sure he will turn round the Green party just like he completely changed broadband in Ireland :pac:

charlemont

goat2 wrote: »

i thought i would never again hear of them, and was hoping to never hear of them

Same here an absolute useless party if there ever was one, They were nothing like the Greens on the continent anyway.

digme

Greens are nothing more than swindlers.

raymon

The greens squandered their one and only chance.
Good riddance

hellboy99

Greens should quit altogether, think of how much we would lower CO2 emissions if we didn't have to listen to them spouting out nonsense

Biggest double standard/waste of party ever.

Son Of A Vidic

Ryan's hands are well soiled with plenty of shít from the last government. The message they were given from the people at the last election was - "Please just go away". The sooner this irrelevant party disappears completely, the better for us all.

View

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Rural Ireland is not yet aware that Ryan allowed RTE to abandon around 120 television transmitters next year meaning they cannot pick up terrestrial tv any more. In the southern two thirds of the country you can either pick up Digital TV today or you will never be able to get it...except from his old favourite, the satellite.

The decision to move to digital television was made circa 2005 or so if memory serves me correctly. It is also happening in all other EU member states and was intially supposed to be completed by Jan 1 2012. As such, the decision predates Ryan's tenure as a Minister.

Indeed, if you want to fault him, you can criticise him for failing to set a date to switch off the analogue TV system. Ireland hasn't done so despite having one of the smallest percentage of the population who receive analogue TV (this being mainly due to the large numbers who receive either Sky or UPC/NTL). As such, we are one of the laggards at making the switch over.