Eamon Gilmore - hypocritical or just politics?

Freddie59

hondasam wrote: »

When did he say this? Things change, what any of us thought a few years ago could have changed now. It's not as simple as it looks. He is in government now but he just cannot go against everything either for the sake of it.

Erm, actually it is Sam. Given what they were promising before taking power.

Freddie59

oddman2 wrote: »

How old is that leaflet? :eek: Considering the situation the country is in maybe this is the least worst option, i.e. they'd rather do this than cut say the social welfare budget further.

So keep taxing the hard-pressed worker instead? Wonderful "socialist" plan. FFS.:rolleyes:

Freddie59

hondasam wrote: »

I might agree with most of that but he cannot object to everything. You know I'm not in favour of the HHC and the water charge is not a fav of mine either but I accept we have to pay something.

People don't have a problem with paying Sam. As long as its fair and equitable. And as long as the Government realises - and admits - that they have to slash PS/CS wages/"entitlements" and the SW bill.

That would be a good starting point.

hondasam

Freddie59 wrote: »

Erm, actually it is Sam. Given what they were promising before taking power.

I can't remember if he said there would be no HHC or water charges before the election. What would happen if he said no to these charges? I was under the impression FF had already agreed this deal with the IMF, open to correction on all the above.

Edit. PS/CS wages, you must make it clear you are not meaning those at the bottom.

Born to Die

Where To wrote: »

Politicians tell people what they want to hear when they are not in power.

Every single last one of them, including some of the wannabes on here.

I thought I was noticing this trend but doubted myself.

As for Eamon, sadly he has just turned into another "Yes Man", a bitch for the EU confirming that in fact it was Frankfurt's way after all.

Politics in Ireland is not a profession to make this great country, (it still is a great country imo), better for all it's citizens but a means to untethered power and nest feathering. Government or opposition, they are all the same.

tayto lover

Freddie59 wrote: »

People don't have a problem with paying Sam. As long as its fair and equitable. And as long as the Government realises - and admits - that they have to slash PS/CS wages/"entitlements" and the SW bill.

That would be a good starting point.

I do not want the wages of nurses, garda, fireman etc cut anymore Freddie. They are at the bottom of the pile already. I know some of them and they are seriously struggling with the cuts they have already. When prices are continuing to rise i.e. petrol, gas, doctors and mortgages how can workers continue to pay? Now you have extra taxes mounted on top of taxes.
They should be hitting the people at the top as well as the solicitors, accountants, doctors etc who are continuing to charge an arm and a leg. I would also cut out the Free Legal Aid for those found guilty.

ninebeanrows

Elected Politicians reflect the choice of the Electorate.

We are the problem, human behavior is such that this will happen again and again, Politicians lie for a good reason, because the electorate lap it up.

Of course there are mature voters, but the immature easily manipulated voters outnumber them.

Unfortunately this is life and that's why i really stray away from Politics these days as nothing will change, people are people just like fools are fools.

seamus

This and the Enda flyer are beyond pathetic now. The socialists grasping at straws.

I would be deeply concerned if the politicians running our country held the same opinions that they held 10 years ago, never mind 20 or 30.

Dyr

seamus wrote: »

I would be deeply concerned if the politicians running our country held the same opinions that they held 10 years ago, never mind 20 or 30.

Or before they got into government :pac:

Chucky the tree

Does this mean that I still have to believe in Santa Clause or else I become a liar/turncost/sellout merchant etc etc?

MadYaker

Anyone who believes what they say in the first place is a fool anyway.

seamus

Bambi wrote: »

Or before they got into government :pac:

Well to a certain extent, yes. I would rather a politician who changes their opinion to suit the facts rather than one who doggedly sticks with their agenda even when it's clear that it's not compatible with the reality.

As much as people give out about going back on promises, it's impossible for any election candidate to know the exact reality of the office when they set out their stall. I would rather that they just make an effort to do the best with what they find rather than make an ill-advised attempt to shoehorn some lofty promises into a situation which doesn't support them.

Biggins

As posted in another thread but still relevant here also...

Irish Examiner:

Oh Eamon, how power changed you...
By Shaun Connolly

How many U-turns does it take to make a hypocrite?

That is the awkward question tormenting Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore after a thundering leaflet from his Democratic Left days emerged denouncing those twin evils — water charges and property taxes.

"How Many Councillors Does It Take To Turn Off The Water Tax?" the 1994 missive demanded to know before helpfully providing the answer that it just took Outraged Eamon and 14 others to sink the tap tax.

And who could argue with Gilmore’s logic that "water charges are another tax on workers on top of PAYE, PRSI and levies".

Indeed, if you substitute Fine Gael for Fianna Fáil this denunciation from Mr Gilmore could easily have come from any of his United Left Alliance/Sinn Féin opponents in the current Dáil: "This year the Fianna Fáil/Labour government is demanding more tax from the PAYE taxpayer. They have imposed residential property tax and now they are making us pay for water."

Gilmore was clearly the Che Guevara of Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown council at the time and insisted the authority should put it up to the big man in the environment department and even risk being abolished for a point of principle.

"The PAYE taxpayer has already paid enough for local services and should not have to pay again," the leaflet rails as his face beams from it.

But how times change — and power changes you. Now Mr Gilmore is happy to lead a merged, and supposedly still socialist, DL/Labour party which sees nothing wrong with not only imposing water charges, but doing so on the back of bringing in a property tax which is so crudely unfair it comes in the form of a flat rate levy which sees the obscenely wealthy and the welfare dependent pay exactly the same rate.

Not quite the sort of equality long since departed St Eamon the Tax Terminator would have approved of.

Source: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/oh-eamon-how-power-changed-you-190933.html#ixzz1sTPFrebp

Raiser

tayto lover wrote: »

The man has turned his back on many Labour principles already. He is power-hungry and wallowing in self-importance since getting into Govt. I really believe he would sell his mother to stay in power.

Someone should bring Eamon Gilmore down to McDonalds to buy a cheese burger and fries from his equally morally compromised and subsequently ejected predecessor John Gormley - Poor Eamon got drunk from his new-found prestige, wealth and power and on a moral scale has obviously changed from earnest animal conservationist to baby seal clubber in the process.....

- As for Enda Kenny, nobody should ever forget that its only a few months back when most of his own party came out and said they thought he was useless, he was only ever electable once FF brought us all to the edge of the abyss and now we are stuck with a strutting, wittering, clueless Hobsons choice of a Taoiseach.

Zebra3

Shryke wrote: »

Enda Kenny should have stayed teaching primary school. What a lacky. Bosco has more spine than that man.

Quality. :pac::pac::pac:

Mellio

All politicians are hypocritical.

They rant all day in the dail and come up with nothing constructive.

They pay consultants and experts a sh*t load of money to come up with new policies.

what are polititicains paid for to represent the country of Ireland however they only represent themsleves.

They will promise you the earth prior to elections and once voted in they will forget everything they said.

the whole lot of them should be flogged especilly 'Happy Gilmore'

Biggins

Mellio wrote: »

All politicians are hypocritical.

They pay consultants and experts a sh*t load of money to come up with new policies.

Yep!

Reilly hires another €164k expert
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/reilly-hires-another-164k-expert-191059.html

James Reilly, the health minister, has been accused of hypocrisy after appointing yet another expert on a €164,000-a-year contract to tackle the waiting list and trolley count crisis.

Jaysoose

_Gawd_ wrote: »

I've given up on caring to be honest. There doesn't exist another Republic or Democracy with this lack of accountability, principle, honesty and integrity in the Western World.

The people always get the government they deserve.

This is the biggest load of crap spouted on this board..people trot it out time and again as if its a fact when it actually doesnt even mean anything..its like something joe higgins would spout on vinny brown..

The goverment was elected based on a set of election promises and has decided to u-turn on most everything how in fooks name do the people of ireland deserve this?

seamus

Jaysoose wrote: »

The goverment was elected based on a set of election promises and has decided to u-turn on most everything how in fooks name do the people of ireland deserve this?

And this is the kind of nonsense that SF would spout on vinny brown.

Care to provide a list of these promises, and which ones they've u-turned on?

Jaysoose

seamus wrote: »

And this is the kind of nonsense that SF would spout on vinny brown.

Care to provide a list of these promises, and which ones they've u-turned on?

All of them...

"NOT ONE MORE RED CENT WILL GO INTO THE BANKS"

Stick that up yer hole.

seamus

That's some fine debatin' there, you must go on Joe Duffy a lot.

Jaysoose

seamus wrote: »

That's some fine debatin' there, you must go on Joe Duffy a lot.

STICK THESE up yer HOLE then, i bow to your debating skills..or complete lack thereof.


Just A Small Few U-turns By Kenny & Gilmore, FG & Labour
Since Gaining Power In Just Over A Year!


Bondholders
•
“Is it Labour’s way or Frankfurt way” – Eamon Gilmore; “Fine Gael in
Government will force certain classes of bondholders to share in the cost of
recapitalising troubled financial institutions” – Manifesto.
•
In government, they refuse to impose losses on the €3.5 billion of unsecured,
unguaranteed senior bondholders at Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide
Building Society (INBS).
They are still refusing to burn them! Amazing!


Third Level Fees
•
“Labour is opposed to third-level fees by either the front or back doors” –
Gilmore.
•
Now Quinn refuses to rule out increased student fees in the future.
Student Services Charge.
NOW FEES HAVE GONE UP!

•
Quinn signed a USI election pledge to reverse the €500 increase in the
Student Services Charge in Budget 2011.
•
Refused to do so once in Government, and won’t rule out increases to it in the
future.


Recapitalisation
•
Varadkar said that not another “red cent” would be put into the banks.
•
The Central Bank announced in March 2011 that the banks would require
€24bn. €19bn of this met by the taxpayer July 2011.
Another 1.25 BILLION going to the banks in bailout in January 2012!


Bank Directors
•
Pledged to “re-structure boards and replace and directors who presided over
failed lending practices.”
•
BOI appointed 4 pre-2008 directors; AIB has 3 non-exec directors still in
place; Irish Life and Permanent still has one.
Force Banks to Cut their Interest Rates

•
The Programme for Government promised that banks in receipt of state
support would be forced to forego a 25 basis point increase on their variable
rate mortgage.
•
Despite cuts by the ECB to interest rates, NIB is pressing ahead with raising
rates, and other banks are refusing to lower theirs.


Sell the EBS
•
During the election Fine Gael pledged to sell EBS.
•
EBS has now been merged with AIB.


Medium Term Loans to Irish Banks
•
Michael Noonan “We need medium-term facilities from the ECB so that the
liquidity problems in the Irish banks are not addressed on a fortnightly basis
with a rollover of the liquidity funding every two weeks.”
•
It now appears this is not going to happen – The ECB rejected it.


The EU-IMF Deal
•
The EU/IMF deal was a “bad deal for Ireland.” ( Eamon Gilmore), “a disaster
and an obscenity” (Micheal Noonan)
•
After election: Eamon Gilmore said: “It was never going to be the case that
the renegotiation of the agreement was something that was going to be done
in one great big bang.”


Income Tax
•
FG 5 point plan: No new taxes including no income tax increases
•
Minister Noonan: “I am not going to rule out any tax initiative, or any tax
increase or any tax reduction.”
Universal Social Charge NOW INCREASED TO €132 A MONTH

•
The PfG states: “We will review the Universal Social Charge”.
•
No review now forthcoming; Noonan robustly defends the levy in the Dail
saying the “universal social charge is progressive.” He added: “It is hard to
argue that is regressive; that is one of the more progressive taxes one will
find.”


Budget 2011
•
FG & Lab voted against Budget 2011.
•
Now it seems they’re only too happy to take ownership of the budget and
boast about the adjustments that have been achieved to date.


More Pay Cuts to Public Servants
•
They opposed the public sector pension levy – “It is a crude and unfair
system.” (Brendan Howlin)
•
Now they won’t rule out more cuts to public service pay.


Jobs Budget
•
FG promised a Jobs Budget within 100 days.
•
The jobs budget then became a mere revenue neutral “jobs initiative”, with no
jobs target.


Getting People Back to Work
•
FG Election Slogan: Let’s Get Ireland Working
•
Latest Live Register figures show unemployment stagnant – the jobs initiative
failed, the New Era jobs didn’t materialise, and the Medium Term Fiscal
Statement acknowledges unemployment will rise next year.


New Era Jobs
•
Enda Kenny boasted that “New Era plan will create over 105,000 jobs.”
•
At its launch in Sept, there was no mention of jobs it would create, and no
mention of cost.


New Era Funding
•
The Programme for Government and the Fine Gael manifesto state that it
would funded through the sale of state assets.
•
However, the EU/IMF agreement clearly states -“It is important to make
effective use of our state assets and, where appropriate, dispose of them to
help reduce our government debt.”


State Assets
•
Programme for Government: “We will target up to €2 billion in sales of nonstrategic
state assets.”
•
It now looks like up to €5bn of assets, strategic or otherwise, will be sold.


Strategic Investment Bank
•
The Programme for Government states “we will establish a Strategic
Investment Bank”.
•
Kenny, September 2011: “A Strategic Investment Bank would be difficult to
implement in current market conditions.”


Upward Only Rent Reviews
•
The Programme for Govt states: “We will legislate to end upward only rent
reviews for existing leases.”
•
Each time the Justice Minister has been asked about it, he’s fudged the issue.
Protecting the Low Paid

•
Labour Manifesto pledged to reform JLCs in a way that protects the most
vulnerable workers.
•
Jobs Minister Richard Bruton is dragging his feet on introducing a reformed
JLC system, leaving workers vulnerable since July.


Competition & Consumer Protection
•
FG Manifesto: Promised a new “powerful consumer champion”, giving it
“additional powers – by constitutional change if necessary – to break up
public and private sector monopolies and cartels.”
•
No mention of this in Competition Bill 2011, and no commitment to
constitutional change.


Ban on Corporate Donations
•
The Programme for Government clearly states “we will introduce the
necessary legal and constitutional provisions to ban corporate donations to
political parties.”
•
The Bill allows corporate donations to continue and Enda Kenny has
confirmed that there will be no constitutional ban put to the people.


Severance Pay for Senior Civil Servants
•
There will be no more “golden handshakes” for public servants that have
failed to deliver.
•
Big payoffs for senior civil servants continue.


Reducing the number of TDs
•
FG had previously promised to reduce the number of TDs by 20
•
The Electoral Act proposes a cut of as little as 6 TDs.


Constitution Day
•
Enda Kenny, April 2011: “We will set out a programme to allow for a series of
constitutional amendments to be decided on what we called “Constitution
day”, to be held within 12 months of the new Government being formed.”
•
Little mention of it since


The Seanad
•
Both parties pledged to abolish the Seanad.
•
There was no mention in the legislative agenda of legislation to scrap the
Seanad.


Child Benefit
•
During the election campaign Eamon Gilmore identified child benefit as a red
line issue. Labour’s “Every Little Hurts" advertising campaign lambasted Fine
Gael for their proposed cuts in the child benefit rates
•
Joan Burton has since refused to give an explicit commitment on child benefit
rates.
NOW BEING CUT.

Social Welfare Rates
•
The Programme for Government clearly states “We will maintain social
welfare rates”
•
Joan Burton has continuously refused to give an explicit commitment on
headline rates.
National Educational Psychological Service

•
Ruairi Quinn promised to provide “€3m to reverse the cut in the National
Educational Psychological Service.”
•
He has made no mention of this commitment since then
Water Charges & Utility Charges

•
Labour previously said they would be opposed to the introduction of flat rate
water charges “A flat water charge is not something that we’re going to
introduce.”
•
The government has now admitted that two charges are on the way by 2013,
a flat rate household utility charge (by 2012) and water charges.


Household Charge
•
“We’re not in favour of a tax on the family home” – Gilmore
•
July 2011: Phil Hogan announced the introduction of a €100 flat rate
household charge which is to be applied to the 1.6 million households in the
country.


Irish Water
•
Fine Gael’s plans for the setting up of a new water company introducing water
charges featured heavily in its New Politics policy document published in
March 2010.
•
However, FG has now admitted that they have no plan for the setting up of
this company, no idea of the timeline involved and have also admitted that
there are significant legal and administrative changes involved in transferring
water services from local authorities to the new water company.


Stag Hunting
•
FG Manifesto p27: “Fine Gael will reverse the ban on stag hunting”; Junior
Minister Shane McEntee (Meath East) told the Seanad on 25th Oct that
legislation reversing the ban was forthcoming.
•
8th Nov – Kenny spokesperson: McEntee was “expressing an opinion” and
there was “no commitment” to reverse the ban.


Turf Cutting
•
Fine Gael Manifesto: “It is premature to cease the cutting of turf for domestic
purposes in 2011”; Roscommon TD Frank Feighan said he would “sign in his
own blood” the future of turf-cutting.
•
27th Sept: Deenihan signs regulations making turf cutting on Special Areas of
Conservation a criminal offence, and allows for the confiscation of turf cutting machinery.


Climate Change
•
Programme for Government: “We will publish a Climate Change Bill.”
•
This was dropped by Phil Hogan in November 2011.


Garda Numbers
•
Shatter said in December 2010 that a reduction in Garda numbers would
“obstruct the battle against crime”
•
“The job of this Government is to reduce public expenditure, not to increase it.
That is as applicable across the justice sector as it is in other sectors.”


Triple Lock
•
FG manifesto: “We believe that the Triple Lock must be modified to allow
Ireland participate in peacekeeping missions. The failure of the UN Security
Council to pass a resolution should not prevent us from taking part in
overseas missions.”
•
Shatter: “As matters stand the triple lock remains part and parcel of Govt.
policy”.


Government Jet
•
FG Manifesto: “We will introduce a new code of practice for the use of the
government jet ensuring cost effective and transparent travel. To stamp out
any abuse, cheaper commercial alternatives must be taken when possible.”
Transport spokesperson Simon Coveney said last year: Jets were “being
abused” by Ministers.
•
Oct 2011: Jet had been used 24 times at a total cost to the taxpayer of almost
€14m, including a trip to Cork for the Taoiseach and a trip to Algeria for
Coveney.


Junior Ministers
•
FG pledged they would cut the number of junior Ministers to 12.
•
Once elected they appointed 15 Junior Ministers.


Quangos
•
Fine Gael pledged to abolish 145 quangos in their document Reinventing
Government.
•
By end Oct 2011, they had abolished 5, but had created 8.
Guillotining of Legislation

•
Enda Kenny, July 2010: “I do not accept the Government’s guillotining of Bills
in any shape or form.”
•
By November 2011 they had guillotined almost a dozen Bills.
Staff in Constituency Offices

•
FG pledged to reduce ministerial staff allocated to work on constituency
matters to two per Minister
•
In March 2011 it was announced that ministers will keep 4 staff each in their
constituency office.


Constituency Work
•
Enda Kenny promised to direct all Ministers to focus entirely on their new
portfolios in the first 100 days and completely avoid constituency work.
•
However, Kenny himself repeatedly broke this promise with dozens of
appointments in Mayo every week.


Ministers’ Advisors
•
Ministerial advisors will be subject to salary caps
•
Most Ministers’ advisors have breached the cap.


Cronyism
•
They promised an end to cronyism and transparency in board appointments.
•
FG & Labour members and donors have been appointed as Judges and to
the boards of Quangos.


Transparency in Appointments
•
FG and Lab Manifestos: They promised vetting of appointments to state
boards by the Oireachtas.
•
Party political appointments have been made, without any oversight or
transparency. In October 2011, they appointed the former head of AIB
Investment Management as head of the New Era quango, without revealing
her pay or conditions.


Freedom of Information
•
Programme for Government promised to legislate to restore the Freedom of
Information Act.
•
No commitment for when legislation will be published on this.

Some are indeed debatable and can be argued with by opposition (only to be expected) but the point is that they have reversed more than they have actually stood by!

seamus

Most of that is pretty weak. Maybe have a read of thing before you copy and paste from some propaganda site.

The vast majority of them are anecdotes, things which they just haven't done yet, or were slightly differently done than planned (such as merging EBS with AIB rather than selling it).

They've u-turned on a couple of promises, but claiming that they've reneged on everything is nothing more than sightless rhetoric. Maybe try reading up on stuff for yourself instead of taking the socialists' word for it.

Jaysoose

seamus wrote: »

Most of that is pretty weak. Maybe have a read of thing before you copy and paste from some propaganda site.

The vast majority of them are anecdotes, things which they just haven't done yet, or were slightly differently done than planned (such as merging EBS with AIB rather than selling it).

They've u-turned on a couple of promises, but claiming that they've reneged on everything is nothing more than sightless rhetoric. Maybe try reading up on stuff for yourself instead of taking the socialists' word for it.

lol you asked for the u-turns and you got them..its all easily verifiable information.

tipptom

The annoying thing about it is they keep on spouting "dont you know we are in liquidation",well we all knew that a long time before they came in to power and they knew it but they still went ahead with their promises.I think the most embarresing one for Labour is Quinn standing in front of a massive sign poster with "I PLEDGE" on it.I think Labour and FG are playing a long game here where they cede anything and everything to Europe no matter what the cost with a view that before the next general election they can shunt us back in to the markets and they can play the petriotic card and wave the green white and gold and try to fool the people during the election that they freed the country and won us back our sovereignty.Most of these ministers in labour are in the twilight of their careers and will do anything to hold in there.The decisions that political partys in Ireland (be they FF FG or Labour) have always been made for the future election success of their respective partys trumping what is the right decisions for the good of Ireland.By the way,I would be supportive of a water charge if it was done in the right way and money was invested back in to upgrading our pipe system.

Freddie59

seamus wrote: »

That's some fine debatin' there, you must go on Joe Duffy a lot.

In fairness Seamus you walked straight into that one.....and didn't FG promise to abolish the Seanad?

xflyer

Yes he is a hypocrite along with the rest of them from Kenny down. But that isn't surprising. It's almost expected.

The one big disappointment from them all is their promise to be honest with us. As in war, truth it seems is the first casualty. They lied to us about the household charge, the EU treaty, water charges and almost everytime one or other of them open their mouths. It's so blatant at times it take your breath away.

That only points to one thing. They are way out of their depth and are simply spoofing most of the time because frankly they really haven't a clue how to solve our problems.

Watch their body language next time you see any of them on TV. Most of them are stiff, their faces are rigid. They know they're lying, know they're not up to the job. They're scared. This government will end as badly as the last FF government.

Watch Gilmore on TV, there's a man who has betrayed his principles and he knows it.

seamus

Freddie59 wrote: »

In fairness Seamus you walked straight into that one.....and didn't FG promise to abolish the Seanad?

Doesn't that require a massive change to the constitution?

What's laughable is the amount of people saying, "You haven't done this yet, you haven't done that yet". It's like the fncking Irish soccer team again - one bad performance and suddenly everyone reckons it's time for you to go, that the next guy will do a better job.

The poster declared that FG had u-turned on "almost everything". Then failed to demonstrate how this is true.

I'm not any kind of fervent supporter of the government and I don't agree with everything they've done, but fnck it I'm going to give them a bit of a chance to make a serious difference before I start foaming at the mouth about election promises and u-turns. The other guys spent 14 years fncking up the economy and now people expect the new guys to fix it in 14 months?

Jaysoose

seamus wrote: »

Doesn't that require a massive change to the constitution?

What's laughable is the amount of people saying, "You haven't done this yet, you haven't done that yet". It's like the fncking Irish soccer team again - one bad performance and suddenly everyone reckons it's time for you to go, that the next guy will do a better job.

The poster declared that FG had u-turned on "almost everything". Then failed to demonstrate how this is true.

I'm not any kind of fervent supporter of the government and I don't agree with everything they've done, but fnck it I'm going to give them a bit of a chance to make a serious difference before I start foaming at the mouth about election promises and u-turns. The other guys spent 14 years fncking up the economy and now people expect the new guys to fix it in 14 months?

You did see my post where i outlined the various u-turns? Comparing them to the irish football team and one bad performance..What? this isnt a game seamus its the running of the country and isnt even remotely comparable.

Nobody honestly expected them to fix the country in 14 months but to perform the u-turns and out and out lie about other issues is a spectacular failure to deliver on the promises they themseleves made.

seamus

Jaysoose wrote: »

You did see my post where i outlined the various u-turns?

Yes, I saw the copy-and-paste job, but I wasn't going to waste my time verifying if each "promise" was correctly interpreted and quoted in context, and the resulting outcome was correctly interpreted.

Even taking it all at face value, there are still very few out-and-out u-turns in the list you posted.

It's rhetorical bull like this in the list:

The EU-IMF Deal
•
The EU/IMF deal was a “bad deal for Ireland.” ( Eamon Gilmore), “a disaster
and an obscenity” (Micheal Noonan)
•
After election: Eamon Gilmore said: “It was never going to be the case that
the renegotiation of the agreement was something that was going to be done
in one great big bang.”

That's not a U-turn. That's someone having a rant that Labour didn't go and tell the EU/IMF to shove their deal overnight even though they never said they would.

Sorry, I can't accept your copy-and-paste list without a little more coherence and factual presentation.

Like I said, I don't agree with everything they've done, but I'm not going to go mad that they haven't stuck to their manifesto to the letter and haven't enacted every change possible in 14 months.

Freddie59

seamus wrote: »

Doesn't that require a massive change to the constitution?

What's laughable is the amount of people saying, "You haven't done this yet, you haven't done that yet". It's like the fncking Irish soccer team again - one bad performance and suddenly everyone reckons it's time for you to go, that the next guy will do a better job.

The poster declared that FG had u-turned on "almost everything". Then failed to demonstrate how this is true.

I'm not any kind of fervent supporter of the government and I don't agree with everything they've done, but fnck it I'm going to give them a bit of a chance to make a serious difference before I start foaming at the mouth about election promises and u-turns. The other guys spent 14 years fncking up the economy and now people expect the new guys to fix it in 14 months?

In fairness Seamus that list above is pretty damning!

ArmaniJeanss

Freddie59 wrote: »

In fairness Seamus that list above is pretty damning!

I think its a generally weak list to be honest, like something you'd read in Viz or student newsletter. I see it came from biggins on Page1 of the thread, not surprised.

example of bizarre 'not actually a u-tun at all' from the list.
Social Welfare Rates
•
The Programme for Government clearly states “We will maintain social
welfare rates”
•
Joan Burton has continuously refused to give an explicit commitment on
headline rates.

seamus

Freddie59 wrote: »

In fairness Seamus that list above is pretty damning!

It all depends on context.

Where's the list of things which they have done? Any list which contains nothing but negative statements is always going to be damning. Take the nicest guy in the world and make a list of all his faults without his good traits and that'll be "damning" too.

That's really my point here.

The list pasted above is a piece of propaganda. If that's someone's primary reason for being against the current government, then they've been well and truely sucked in by whatever political machine created it.

Last February, someone did create a website to try and track Fine Gael for the first 100 days, but sadly this website seems to have disappeared. At least I can remember that was an attempt to honestly evaluate how they were keeping up with their promises for those 100 days, rather than just giving a biased list of "broken" promises (using that phrase very loosely) as above.

Chucky the tree

Biggins, were you not a member of Fianna Fail?

Biggins

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Biggins, were you not a member of Fianna Fail?

As I have rightly explained many times before - indeed I was.
I was a member many years ago.
Started out at the ground level of a ordinary cumman member who believed in that the higher ups were saying to me.
I rose to chairperson of that cumman, then on to Financial treasurer of a certain county branch.
AT THAT STAGE it became within hours, VERY apparent of very bad things going on given my then new access.
I resigned completely within 24 hours.

Chucky the tree

Biggins wrote: »

As I have rightly explained many times before - indeed I was.
I was a member many years ago.
Started out at the ground level of a ordinary cumman member who believed in that the higher ups were saying to me.
I rose to chairperson of that cumman, then on to Financial treasurer of a certain county branch.
AT THAT STAGE it became within hours, VERY apparent of very bad things going on given my then new access.
I resigned completely within 24 hours.

If Eamon Gilmore isn't allowed U-turn on an opinion held nearly 20 years ago then I don't see why you should be when the time frame is considerable less. You clearly liked fianna Fail alot, and thought they were brilliant which also must be your current opinion since U-turns aren't allowed no?

Biggins

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If Eamon Gilmore isn't allowed U-turn on an opinion held nearly 20 years ago then I don't see why you should be when the time frame is considerable less. You clearly liked fianna Fail alot, and thought they were brilliant which also must be your current opinion since U-turns aren't allowed no?

As soon as I learned the party was doing things wrong and were saying one thing and actually doing another - I left.
I cannot stand liars and two-faced people.
I wanted nothing to do with them.
I will take to my grave my name and known local reputation, all (thankfully) still good so far.

Edit:
...And to add, if I was in ANY party and my positions reversed and/or I didn't stick to the original party espousing line, I should leave it and go join one that DID agree with my changed ideology.
As this was not the case, in my case, your argument on this principle is non-applicable.
Quite simply, I left fast because of what was going on inside, for a different reason. It had nothing to do with a person in particular (me or anyone else) following or not following the founders possible ideology as such.

tayto lover

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If Eamon Gilmore isn't allowed U-turn on an opinion held nearly 20 years ago then I don't see why you should be when the time frame is considerable less. You clearly liked fianna Fail alot, and thought they were brilliant which also must be your current opinion since U-turns aren't allowed no?

Biggins had the decency to leave when the party were not living up to the ethics he believed in.
Gilmour obviously has no such problems dealing with U-turns which is hypocritical.

Jaysoose

seamus wrote: »

Yes, I saw the copy-and-paste job, but I wasn't going to waste my time verifying if each "promise" was correctly interpreted and quoted in context, and the resulting outcome was correctly interpreted.

Even taking it all at face value, there are still very few out-and-out u-turns in the list you posted.

It's rhetorical bull like this in the list:

That's not a U-turn. That's someone having a rant that Labour didn't go and tell the EU/IMF to shove their deal overnight even though they never said they would.

Sorry, I can't accept your copy-and-paste list without a little more coherence and factual presentation.

Like I said, I don't agree with everything they've done, but I'm not going to go mad that they haven't stuck to their manifesto to the letter and haven't enacted every change possible in 14 months.

So you ask for a list which I provided, wether its a cut and paste job is irrelevant and to be fair unless your prepared to go through each point and discredit or prove them wrong it's a bit rich to be taking the high ground. You ask for people to justify their comments and when they do you discount it and refuse to waste your time as if your an authority on the subject. In fairness you might want to get off that high horse of yours before asking for posters to justify their stance in future.

seamus

Jaysoose wrote: »

So you ask for a list which I provided, wether its a cut and paste job is irrelevant and to be fair unless your prepared to go through each point and discredit or prove them wrong it's a bit rich to be taking the high ground.

At least 2 of them have already been discredited or at least legitimately questioned by myself and ArmaniJeans. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time going through the rest of them to do the same thing since I've already shown that the list contains a reasonable amount of biase and inaccuracy.

At this stage the onus is on you to justify each item in the list and show that the list you've provided is valid.

Raiser

seamus wrote: »

That's some fine debatin' there, you must go on Joe Duffy a lot.

In all fairness Seamus you were owned and owned badly, and in terms of picking your battles you'd have had a better chance with pro-Fritlz stance over on the humanities forum.

The fact you lost from such a condescending and smug platform made it enjoyable for passers by.

- Also some points, I copied and pasted the below, does it make it any less true/accurate/salient/relevant (in context) in your eyes?

Pi is defined to be the ratio of the circumference c of any circle divided by its diameter, d.

Finally I couldn't allow you or anyone else to argue semantics and intepret that list in its minutiae in the hope of somehow desperately trying to explain it all away somehow - The fact is that even if only 10% of it were valid and just accusations then the point is already well proven.

- If it looks like dog, walks like a dog, wags its tail and barks like a dog then I don't have to stand around waiting for it to hump my leg before deciding its a fcuking dog and furthermore won't allow the likes of you to tell me its a burmese cat

seamus

Raiser wrote: »

In all fairness Seamus you were owned and owned badly

Clearly you've been reading a different thread.

Of course if all you have is an anti-government biase, then you're going to look at the list and nod your head vigorously without even reading most of it, while mentally high-fiving the poster.

The fact is that even if only 10% of it were valid and just accusations then the point is already well proven.

If only 10% of it is valid, then my point is well proven. He claimed that the government had u-turned on "almost everything" they promised. I asked for evidence of this. He presented evidence, which I drew reasonable question marks beside and asked for further clarification.

Of course, you can continue to just nod your head vigorously and slap your fins together, but that's not going to make the points in the list any more valid or factual.

Present me with evidence that the government have u-turned on "almost everything" they've promised, and I'll happily say, "Thank you, that confirms your assertion adequately".

Raiser

Slap my fins together?

Seamus after hours is brim-full of people such as yourself who once their argument is well and truly lost, clumsily try to condescend to others while still all the while bleating their dull opinions and arguing vainly against the the tides of common sense and truth.

- Its really very self important of you to assume that I'd want to subscribe to your particular brand of such.......

Its early, if I were you I'd leave now quietly before the very people you deign to look down upon see what you've been up to at which time you may really get educated on some lacking basics.

seamus

Raiser wrote: »

Its early, if I were you I'd leave now quietly before the very people you deign to look down upon see what you've been up to at which time you may really get educated on some lacking basics.

What? Is this some new way of trying to make someone's argument invalid. Claim that they're trying to "look down" upon people. I'm not sure what you think "I've been up to" that will have any effect on my argument.

Because so many people seem to have accepted this list as fact and proof without even reading it, and that represents the kind of empty rhetoric which has made politics something I despise, I've gone and done it. I've gone through the list and pointed out which are valid, invalid or lacking in information. I got into work insanely early this morning, so I had some time. Rather than dump it all in here, I've pasted it up;

http://pastebin.com/bYkQppuP

Of 48 statements made above, I found that:

12 are valid criticisms detailing policy or promise "u-turns".
3 are "tenative", meaning things which haven't specifically been u-turned on, but are likely to end up so
4 require more information to make any kind of conclusion on
29 are invalid because they aren't promises or because no u-turn has been done.

Now, tell me again how the government has u-turned on "almost everything"?

On a fun note, one of the things I noticed while going through the list is that when attempting to confirm statements or promises, this list pops up on all sorts of messageboards and comments. Simply spamming a list around the web doesn't make it any truer

Chucky the tree

tayto lover wrote: »

Biggins had the decency to leave when the party were not living up to the ethics he believed in.
Gilmour obviously has no such problems dealing with U-turns which is hypocritical.

Biggins supported and agreed with the Fianna Fails policies though, and did so for a long time and obviously continues to support all of their policies as well. As for the ethics issues, he joined a party who had Charlie Haughey as their Taoiseach and who was still considered a Hero amongst the FF faithful, he can hardly claim he had no idea what FF were like.

Biggins

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Biggins supported and agreed with the Fianna Fails policies though, and did so for a long time and obviously continues to support all of their policies as well.

I supported part of their policies that they had over two decades ago and hoped from working inside, to change ones I thought needed changing further.

I have NEVER stated or further espoused that I continue to support all their policies as well - if I had, I wouldn't have spent the last ten years collecting data for this page alone - never mind spending hundreds if not thousands, trying to evoke change in many ways politically and socially!!

http://unitedpeople.ie/fail.html

Please do your homework before you try and paint me as something I am not or as something I do - which I don't.

As for the ethics issues, he joined a party who had Charlie Haughey as their Taoiseach and who was still considered a Hero amongst the FF faithful, he can hardly claim he had no idea what FF were like.

Indeed I did join a party when I was young - firstly, is that a crime?
Secondly, by your words, I'm assuming that your assuming, everyone that joins any organisation is supposed to know as soon as they do or soon after, that which their upper heads are supposed to be up to, automatically just because the newbies now have a membership card?

As SOON as I found out that the hell was going on - as SOON as I had the higher assess to find out some truths - I did some things, one of those was to get the hell out.
I make no apologies for at one stage as a teen, placing faith in what I thought was a right party for me, I am sorry that I didn't know everything my then party leader was up to - had I then known, I would NOT have touched FF with a barge pole.

I'm damned by some people for doing what I still feel is the right thing.
Damned it seems by people that even just don't bother to do their research and actually check facts but instead post stuff on forums that is TOTALLY wrong and so way off base, it borders on complete stupidity!

---

It gives me great delight to see FF now failing even further in the polls.
Their day is done, their inner corruption is systemic and in-bedded.
They should frankly be disbanded.

When someone says that I "...obviously continues to support all of their policies as well."
They clearly don't have a fcukling clue about what they are talking about!

Chucky the tree

Biggins wrote: »

I supported part of their policies that they had over two decades ago and hoped from working inside, to change ones I though needed changing further.

I have NEVER stated or further espoused that I continue to support all their policies as well - if I had, I wouldn't have spent the last ten years collecting data for this page alone - never mind spending hundreds if not thousands, trying to evoke change in many ways politically and socially!!

http://unitedpeople.ie/fail.html

Please do your homework before you try and paint me as something I am not or as something I do - which I don't.



Indeed I did join a party when I was young - firstly, is that a crime?
Secondly, by your words, I'm assuming that everyone that joins any organisation is supposed to know as soon as they do or soon after, that which their upper heads are supposed to be up to, automatically just because the newbies now have a membership card?

As SOON as I found out that the hell was going on - as SOON as I had the higher assess to find out some truths - I did some things, one of those was to get the hell out.
I make no apologies for at one stage as a teen, placing faith in what I thought was a right party for me, I am sorry that I didn't know everything my then party leader was up to - had I then known, I would NOT have touched FF with a barge pole.

I'm damned by some people for doing what I still feel is the right thing.
Damned it seems by people that even just don't bother to do their research and actually check facts but instead post stuff on forums that is TOTALLY wrong and so way off base, it borders on complete stupidity!

My whole point is that according to you Eamon Gilmore has to stick with all the polices/principles he believed in when he was young and even in a completely different political party but you are allowed to pick and choose whatever ones you like. It's incredibly hypocritical tbh. When did you join/leave FF?

Raiser

seamus wrote: »

What? Is this some new way of trying to make someone's argument invalid. Claim that they're trying to "look down" upon people. I'm not sure what you think "I've been up to" that will have any effect on my argument.

Because so many people seem to have accepted this list as fact and proof without even reading it, and that represents the kind of empty rhetoric which has made politics something I despise, I've gone and done it. I've gone through the list and pointed out which are valid, invalid or lacking in information. I got into work insanely early this morning, so I had some time. Rather than dump it all in here, I've pasted it up;

http://pastebin.com/bYkQppuP

Of 48 statements made above, I found that:

12 are valid criticisms detailing policy or promise "u-turns".
3 are "tenative", meaning things which haven't specifically been u-turned on, but are likely to end up so
4 require more information to make any kind of conclusion on
29 are invalid because they aren't promises or because no u-turn has been done.

Now, tell me again how the government has u-turned on "almost everything"?

On a fun note, one of the things I noticed while going through the list is that when attempting to confirm statements or promises, this list pops up on all sorts of messageboards and comments. Simply spamming a list around the web doesn't make it any truer

So you are only happy to deal in absolute terms then? All or nothing? Completely right or completely wrong? Some convenient form of an arbitrary binary morality then? If the Defendant is not guilty on all 50 counts of aggravated GBH they're a halo-toting Saint?

Well if one was to accept your undoubtedly unbiased assessment in good faith...... using your figures, generously, let me ask you this, if a person lied to your face in a calculated manner 25% of the time in order to further their own agenda, line their own pockets and ultimately deceive you would you be happy to call them a friend? Happy to have them represent you, speak for you, legislate for you, plan for your childrens future? Have people judge you personally in light of your support for them and their corruption?

I don't necessarily expect you to demand for our Politicians to have basic minimum standards but I'll never understand why you might argue in favour of their hypocritical and morally vacuous actions.

Biggins

Chucky the tree wrote: »

My whole point is that according to you Eamon Gilmore has to stick with all the polices/principles he believed in when he was young and even in a completely different political party but you are allowed to pick and choose whatever ones you like. It's incredibly hypocritical tbh. When did you join/leave FF?

I not going to even debate further with you.
You can't be bothered to check out all or anything that I have done - but incredibly not only accuse me of still supporting FF but their present policies too!
Absolutely fcuking unbelievable!

Why the fcuk should I give you more bloody answers, you CLEARLY only want to see (or not NOT see as I can make out), what you want to!

You don't read whats out there, what I have done (for all to see that bothered their arse!), what I have protested about on the streets of Dublin AGAINST FF - and wrote about this on this forum, appeared on TV in opposition to them numerous times, wrote reports in the national press, talked repeatedly on radio against them, created not one but THREE sites protesting against their (and now other political stupidity).

Why the fcuk should I give someone answers further when they so so blatantly blind that they slander me with something I am so fcuking far off, its unreal!

Get the hell out of here!
You haven't got a fcuking clue!

I'm right bloody pissed off right now!

If you can't see the difference in situation between Gilmore and my past, your clearly blind.
Someone else - please educate this person.
If I say any more myself, I will get myself banned - so I'm outa here for now!

Raiser

FWIW I'd concur that Biggins has never struck me as being explicitly pro-FF in any light or capacity on here...... Thats all.......