John Mcguinness- future FF Leader?

road_high

Have to say he has impressed a lot of late. We need somebody to hold Fg to account and he has credibility at least as he opposed Bertie et al.

catbear

FF holding FG to account? But don't you see they've always shared the middle ground and both have buried fringe parties to absolve themselves of blame.

They both rely on a clientelistic electorate and are equally financially illiterate, always blaming outsiders for the internal failures both past and present.

Don't forget John McGuinness sang "the cheapest bailout in history" in Lenahens choir.

The only force that can bring accountability to public office is a revolting electorate and so far all I've seen is the smart one emigrating leaving the complacent to their fate.

I'm be glad to be proven wrong, that reform is possible but I stopped planning my life in that hope a long time ago.

holidays365

mmm leader of FF...he's certainly ruthless enough, my worry would be where would he find the time to get to all those funerals? bless him

Davidian_ie

catbear wrote: »

FF holding FG to account? But don't you see they've always shared the middle ground and both have buried fringe parties to absolve themselves of blame.

They both rely on a clientelistic electorate and are equally financially illiterate, always blaming outsiders for the internal failures both past and present.

Don't forget John McGuinness sang "the cheapest bailout in history" in Lenahens choir.

The only force that can bring accountability to public office is a revolting electorate and so far all I've seen is the smart one emigrating leaving the complacent to their fate.

I'm be glad to be proven wrong, that reform is possible but I stopped planning my life in that hope a long time ago.

Slight problem, members of his own party despise him. Past decisions and actions are on record, they highlight a lot of deficiencies.

redtelephone

mfitzy wrote: »

Have to say he has impressed a lot of late. We need somebody to hold Fg to account and he has credibility at least as he opposed Bertie et al.

For me he has zilch credibility. He pretended to oppose them, which served to deflect the heat away from himself, but when the chips were down he supported Ahern and Cowen every time in the lobby. It's called having your cake and eating it, and McGuinness is an expert at it.

Threadhead

He's a careerist and maneouvres as it suits him (eg. how the Fianna Fail logo was used on his election posters). He has a lot of loyal followers for sure but I'd agree with the above, absolutely zero credibility.

S28382

They are all corrupt self serving f**kers, FG duped people into thinking they were going to clean up the political system in Ireland and they aint doing a thing. FG are like the previous government they will go do what they please no matter what the people say - we are living in a hidden dictatorship. FF are the same they are all a bunch of muppets that ask all of us to take puy cuts so the country can get back on its feet but yet they wont cut their own salaries enough, i mean what the f**k does Enda kenny do that warrants him earning more than the US president.

hi5

I can't stand the man.

catbear

I was really got sick of him saying "I'm not happy with FF" yet voting every time with them. All he was doing was appeasing his core followers, keeping them close so he would survive the wipe out. He'll coast for the rest of his career, retire to Spain on a fat pension and pass on the seat to his progeny who'll have their turn at screwing over the nation again.

Deathwish4

mfitzy wrote: »

and he has credibility at least

That's where you're going WRONG.

Mankbag

mfitzy wrote: »

Have to say he has impressed a lot of late. We need somebody to hold Fg to account and he has credibility at least as he opposed Bertie et al.

Nice try, Mfitzy! You had me going there for a minute! Then I saw your "at least he opposed Bertie et al" - which of course he didn't, far from it - and knew you had to be stirring it. Well done on stirring it though!

Fenrar31

He's my mothers cousin and even I don't like FF. I'm a FG man myself.

thorn in the side

mfitzy wrote: »

Have to say he has impressed a lot of late. We need somebody to hold FG to account and he has credibility at least as he opposed Bertie et al.

The following extract comes from the speech, which John McGuinness, T.D. and Chairman of the Dáil Public Accounts Committee, gave at the McGill Summer School on 26th July 2012, http://johnmcguinness.ie/speech-at-the-mcgill-summer-school

”It wasn’t Lehman Brothers, the public sector, trade unions and greedy bankers that brought this country to its knees, other, better run, countries avoided that.

It was bad governance, weak leadership, lack of rigour and the absence of a strong desire to make a difference, which should be at the heart of politics, from all parties in the Dail, to a greater or lesser extent, that brought us to our knees. If governments didn’t govern, somnolent oppositions did not hold them to account.”

So if I am interpreting this correctly then it was:

1. ”bad governance”,
   ... by Fianna Fáil-led governments
2. ”weak leadership”,
   ... by Fianna Fáil-led governments
3. ”lack of rigour”
   ... by Fianna Fáil-led governments
   and
4. ”the absence of a strong desire to make a difference, which should be at the heart of politics, from all parties in the Dail, to a greater or lesser extent”,

that brought us to our knees.”

And worse, “If [Fianna Fáil-led] governments didn’t govern, [it must have been the fault of] somnolent [Fine Gael-led] oppositions [who] did not hold them [i.e. Fianna Fáil-led governments] to account.”

So, according to John McGuinness, it was actually both Fine Gael's and Labour’s fault all along. John McGuinness would now appear to be asking Fine Gael and Labour to account for why they "brought us to our knees" because they were "somnolent".

Let’s hope that the Fianna Fáil political party, of which John McGuinness is currently a member, and which is now in opposition, is not somnolent.

road_high

Mankbag wrote: »

Nice try, Mfitzy! You had me going there for a minute! Then I saw your "at least he opposed Bertie et al" - which of course he didn't, far from it - and knew you had to be stirring it. Well done on stirring it though!

Yea I was/am just trying to gauge people's reactions really. And they are wholly negative if this thread is anything to go by.
I have no real bias either way but was unfortunate when he was in power he did not do more. Then again, he was between a rock and a hard place as we would have been bypassed completely (which we really were) by the Ahern govt. Only since the reccession kicked in has Kilkenny been benefitting from decent infrastructure.
Not defending him but I do think the new govt and particularly our own great minister is astonishingly arrogant and out of touch.

Mankbag

mfitzy wrote: »

Yea I was/am just trying to gauge people's reactions really. And they are wholly negative if this thread is anything to go by.
I have no real bias either way but was unfortunate when he was in power he did not do more. Then again, he was between a rock and a hard place as we would have been bypassed completely (which we really were) by the Ahern govt. Only since the reccession kicked in has Kilkenny been benefitting from decent infrastructure.
Not defending him but I do think the new govt and particularly our own great minister is astonishingly arrogant and out of touch.

This thread seems to have died a death! Two quick observations that may or may not revive it:

a) John McGuinness was never "in power" but was just a mouthy, publicity-crazed backbencher in a disastrous government. Someone claimed to me last year that every time he shot his mouth off he actually hindered Kilkenny's chances of getting jobs.

b) "Our own great minister", as you call him, may be a disaster of a minister, for the reasons you mentioned, but Kilkenny has at least got a few crumbs from the table from the present government.

Discuss!

Formosa

Mankbag wrote: »

This thread seems to have died a death! Two quick observations that may or may not revive it:

a) John McGuinness was never "in power" but was just a mouthy, publicity-crazed backbencher in a disastrous government. Someone claimed to me last year that every time he shot his mouth off he actually hindered Kilkenny's chances of getting jobs.

b) "Our own great minister", as you call him, may be a disaster of a minister, for the reasons you mentioned, but Kilkenny has at least got a few crumbs from the table from the present government.

Discuss!

Agree with both points. McGuinness is an empty vessel that ultimately was always out to look after number 1.

On Hogan, his unpopularity levels are colossal, but the way I see it, whoever was landed with the household tax gig was going to be vilified, and Hogan's influence locally as a minister appears to be positive.

In other words, the household charge was being brought no matter what, but having a local minister isn't something we've had and it is a good thing.

I don't think I'm explaining myself greatly but hopefully ye get my drift.

I also realise that politicians aren't supposed to focus on their own local issues ahead of national ones but that's the way it is at the moment.

foxcoverteddy

I have kept out of this thread on the grounds that in my opinion the gentleman in question has no moral standing as a politician he like most of the Dial as the Indians put it speak with forked tongue.
All of you appear to miss Catbear's comments, which is a great shame, we need radical thinker's yet all we seem to be doing is kicking the same old crap around in circles, Hogan, McGuiness, Kenny, Noonan.
We will never see anyone having to pay for the dire state they managed to get the country in, you can see that by the Quinn farce.