Can we have peaceful, national protests yet?

renegademaster

comongethappy wrote: »

And for all your & Renegademaster's anger neither have offered us an alternative?

Will you not accept that many are OK with things, whether you like it or not.

the fact that as many are "ok with things" is the problem ffs.

Silentcorner wrote: »

That is not what the polls are saying

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/support-for-government-parties-drop-in-new-poll-1.1743471

Just a reminder, FF suffered a catastrophic collapse at the last GE, Labour are facing the same obliteration...so it would seem that no, many are not ok with our government.

In a democracy, the people only have two weapons, protest or the ballot box. When you consider that support for the 3 main parties is literally tumbling it is perplexing how this is not manifesting itself on the streets. Personally, I believe that there are only a few organisations with the infrastructure needed to actually pull off a successful protest, I have witnessed two mass protests in Limerick since the crash, Farmers and School teachers.

siptu pulled off the largest protest the last few years, 150,000 people on a snowy sat midday in nov 2010, men women and children, kids in buggies despite the freezing cold, snow, ice, soaking feet and wet trousers, the spirits were high but also seriously pi$$ed off with fianna fail, the crowds were enormous, fianna fail called elections within a few days and they were out on their fcuking ears!! it baffles me how such unity hasn't been seen since

bumper234 wrote: »

How do we do this? How do you ENSURE that the politicians you vote in tomorrow will be honest next year?

by calling a halt to this one now and voting in a new government on a new mandate, they have 18 months to make serious ground or they're out to fcuk!! maybe even sooner if it looks like a crock of $hit has been sold to us, again!! eventually, and it could take a few years but we'll never get there unless we try, eventually we might see a decent government being formed, the way it's going now though it's only going to get worse, look at the fcuking polls!! this $hit is going to get real if the polls stay moving the way they going right now!!

bumper234 wrote: »

Let them eat cake!

Jonny7

renegademaster wrote: »

siptu pulled off the largest protest the last few years, 150,000 people on a snowy sat midday in nov 2010, men women and children, kids in buggies despite the freezing cold, snow, ice, soaking feet and wet trousers, the spirits were high but also seriously pi$$ed off with fianna fail, the crowds were enormous, fianna fail called elections within a few days and they were out on their fcuking ears!! it baffles me how such unity hasn't been seen since

Because Fianna Fail were voted out and replaced - replaced by a government that has dealt with the crisis and recovery relatively well

comongethappy

renegademaster wrote: »

by calling a halt to this one now and voting in a new government on a new mandate, they have 18 months to make serious ground or they're out to fcuk!! maybe even sooner if it looks like a crock of $hit has been sold to us, again!! eventually, and it could take a few years but we'll never get there unless we try, eventually we might see a decent government being formed, the way it's going now though it's only going to get worse, look at the fcuking polls!! this $hit is going to get real if the polls stay moving the way they going right now!!

Christ mate..... That is your solution??

A government gets 18 months to placate your anger or forcibly removed!

No rational metrics.... Just your anger as the only measuring stick.

Frankly, a juvenile idea.

yosserhughes

What we want is a change to the policies that are being imposed on us by the present government...IE, a change to the policies that are placing savage financial hardships on the ordinary people of the country(home tax,water tax,carbon tax etc),policies that have turned our health service into a total mess,policies that have nearly every second shop in every town in rural Ireland closed down,policies that have destroyed the lives of every vulnerable citizen in Ireland...and I could go on and on and on...

comongethappy

yosserhughes wrote: »

What we want is a change to the policies that are being imposed on us by the present government...IE, a change to the policies that are placing savage financial hardships on the ordinary people of the country(home tax,water tax,carbon tax etc),policies that have turned our health service into a total mess,policies that have nearly every second shop in every town in rural Ireland closed down,policies that have destroyed the lives of every vulnerable citizen in Ireland...and I could go on and on and on...

Please do!

You want to reduce taxes.... Great me too.
Are you going to accept the subsequent spending reduction to offset that??

As it stands Ireland is just above OECD average for tax take..... We are still taxed much less than the nations at the top of that table (& thank god IMO).

Health care costs rise.... Funding doesn't match . Its sh*t but its reality.
Again.... Do you want the greater tax burden to keep health spending ever rising?
When by most metrics, public health in Ireland rates very well.


We can't have it all folks..... Money is not infinite & it has to come from somewhere.

zoomaway

RichardAnd wrote: »

Protests in Ireland will never go down well. I can't comment on the social phenomena or phenomenon that allows this to be so, but if someone tries to question the power that be, they will probably run into some of all of the following groups of individuals.

The "sheeple": I don't need to explain this portmanteau. Anyone who falls into this group will invariable be someone who may well know that they are being screwed, but they are too meek to do anything about it. Governments love sheeple. In Ireland, they just need to tell them that protesting and the like will upset their credit rating and the good little boys and girls will fall into line.

The lazy: I would say that this is the largest group I will attempt to describe. These guys know well that the system is rigged, but they won't do anything about it. After all, why protest when Fair City and Facebook are calling...

The begrudgers: Everyone know what I mean by "begrudger." People in this group don't care how badly they get f**ked. Their only concern is that everyone else gets screwed with them. This group is very easily herded by any government.

The smug. The smug professional. We all know someone like this, and we probably all want to smack him. This type of person will gladly go along with any edict the government hands down. When anyone else attempts to question the said action, the smug individual will immediately lambast the inquisitive soul because the smug and effete professional has convinced himself that accepting everything the state throws at him makes him some kind of intellectual.

I have a particular loathing for this group. This board is swimming with such people, but you’ll rarely find them in real life. The reason is very simple; these people are cowards. They only taut their supercilious crap on a board because they can do so anonymously.

Most of these people are probably upper middle class “professionals.” It’s likely that they are in a position where they will (or believe they will) be insulated from economic hardship. You won’t find many of these guys on the dole.

So true!
Don't think Irish people are really that united when you look beneath the surface. Huge issues. Maybe because we were colonised and pushed off the land.In any case until we figure out ' who we are ' as a nation and cut through the crap we are at nothing. I dislike the last group you mentioned too some of them are complete gob *hites.

hatrickpatrick

marienbad wrote: »

When your house is on fire you don't care about the ethics of the firemen. That is for a later day.

You do if they pilfer all your belongings and shoot your dog whilst putting the fire out...

twowheelsgood

renegademaster wrote: »

the fact that as many are "ok with things" is the problem ffs.

The electorate, or at least a substantial number of them are “ok with things”, not because they see no shortcomings or failures of the government but because they believe that their performance in managing the economy is better than any alternative government that has a realistic chance of coming to power after a general election. (Their current dip in the opinion polls almost certainly follows the fallout from the Garda controversies. But rightly or wrongly, this and issues like this will have close to zero impact on the results of the next general election. It really is about the economy)

Even if you could mobilise the sort of protest that your are hoping for, even if you could force the government to call a general election would you have any expectation that a new government would perform any better?

Many of us have been quite surprised at the speed of our recovery (how much you credit the government for this is another matter) and do not think it reasonable to expect it to have gone much better.

You are entitled of course to have unreasonable expectations, to imagine that there is a political / economic mastermind out there who could eliminate our deficit / debt / unemployment/… problems but many of us are a bit too realistic for that.

marienbad

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You do if they pilfer all your belongings and shoot your dog whilst putting the fire out...

Well with the state this place was in when they came to power it was best to shoot the dog as we couldn't afford him/her

hatrickpatrick

Jonny7 wrote: »

Because Fianna Fail were voted out and replaced - replaced by a government that has dealt with the crisis and recovery relatively well

And yet on a different issue has tolerated an utterly unacceptable level of scandal and shenanigans without ever breaking ranks for the public good. This is toxic to a functioning democracy.

marienbad wrote: »

Well with the state this place was in when they came to power it was best to shoot the dog as we couldn't afford him/her

So just to clarify, are you saying you're ok with the breaching of pay caps by senior ministers to award old friends, the primary care centre controversy, the charities scandal, the government's response to the GSOC bugging, and the ongoigng saga of the Garda scandals?
Or are you saying that you simply don't care about them because they're irrelevant to the economy (apart from the pay cap issue which is being repeatedly overlooked)?

marienbad

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And yet on a different issue has tolerated an utterly unacceptable level of scandal and shenanigans without ever breaking ranks for the public good. This is toxic to a functioning democracy.



So just to clarify, are you saying you're ok with the breaching of pay caps by senior ministers to award old friends, the primary care centre controversy, the charities scandal, the government's response to the GSOC bugging, and the ongoigng saga of the Garda scandals?
Or are you saying that you simply don't care about them because they're irrelevant to the economy (apart from the pay cap issue which is being repeatedly overlooked)?

No I am not saying that at all. It is not an either or situation as you seem to think it is .

When this lot came to power the had no choice as to what issues to face , the ship was sinking and seemed beyond saving. The speed of the recovery has been so remarkable that if anything I have trouble believing it . But turned it around they have . Do you accept that ?

As to the scandals , some of these have been going on for years but I do have concerns as to how they are handled from here on in.

But you seemed to be ignoring the bigger picture . What are the alternatives ? What of the electorate ?

It is easy to berate the health minister but this is a country that elected Lowry , topping the poll year after year because he could bring a casino to his constituency or the bould Bertie despite his 'dig outs.

So who do you suggest we put in power or should we just go straight to the revolution ?

renegademaster

comongethappy wrote: »

Christ mate..... That is your solution??

A government gets 18 months to placate your anger or forcibly removed!

No rational metrics.... Just your anger as the only measuring stick.

Frankly, a juvenile idea.

christ mate yourself, i was only making a suggestion, it's not like i tried to rush it through the dail or something, chill, maybe they need a whole 2 years, if they concentrated on running the country and not feathering their own nests and dodging the truth we could see things being done a lot quicker around here

bumper234

renegademaster wrote: »

christ mate yourself, i was only making a suggestion, it's not like i tried to rush it through the dail or something, chill, maybe they need a whole 2 years, if they concentrated on running the country and not feathering their own nests and dodging the truth we could see things being done a lot quicker around here

The thing is though that you may be unsatisfied while others maybe quite happy. You give them 2 years but who decides after 2 years weather they are doing a good/bad job?

comongethappy

bumper234 wrote: »

The thing is though that you may be unsatisfied while others maybe quite happy. You give them 2 years but who decides after 2 years weather they are doing a good/bad job?

Does it matter?

These guys are angry.
Apparently that's all that matters when forcing bi-annual changes of parliament.

Rationality be damned.

renegademaster

bumper234 wrote: »

The thing is though that you may be unsatisfied while others maybe quite happy. You give them 2 years but who decides after 2 years weather they are doing a good/bad job?

i give up, let every corrupt government have 5 years no matter what happens in the course of those years!!

yosserhughes

zoomaway wrote: »

So true!
Don't think Irish people are really that united when you look beneath the surface. Huge issues. Maybe because we were colonised and pushed off the land.In any case until we figure out ' who we are ' as a nation and cut through the crap we are at nothing. I dislike the last group you mentioned too some of them are complete gob *hites.

Maggie Thatcher once commented that the Irish were a spineless race,with the abuse people in the country are putting up with from the government I fear the Iron Lady may have been correct.

bumper234

renegademaster wrote: »

i give up, let every corrupt government have 5 years no matter what happens in the course of those years!!

So you want a new election every 18 months or 2 years?

renegademaster

bumper234 wrote: »

So you want a new election every 18 months or 2 years?

no no, just leave it as is, 5 years for everyone no matter how currupt or appaling the government of the day turns out to be!!

hatrickpatrick

bumper234 wrote: »

So you want a new election every 18 months or 2 years?

When an overwhelming majority of the people demand one.

For Forks Sake

renegademaster wrote: »

no no, just leave it as is, 5 years for everyone no matter how currupt or appaling the government of the day turns out to be!!

You have started threads on this topic both here and over in AH with stunning regularity. Each time, you've been found to be in the minority and not once have you ever proposed what your alternative to the current setup would be....and yet you wonder why you're being ridiculed?

Phoebas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When an overwhelming majority of the people demand one.

The overwhelming majority of the people aren't demanding an election now, are they?

alastair

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When an overwhelming majority of the people demand one.

I'd hold off on your protest within the fortnight then.

alastair

Silentcorner wrote: »

In a democracy, the people only have two weapons, protest or the ballot box. When you consider that support for the 3 main parties is literally tumbling it is perplexing how this is not manifesting itself on the streets.

Those three parties would (if that poll is accurate) currently garner the support of 61% of the electorate, with fairly serious divisions amongst the ideology and desires of the remaining 39% rather muddying the potential for mass protest. And all that following a fairly awful few weeks for the FG team's rep, the inevitable flop in Lab support on the back of coalition compromises, and the slow return to some degree of legitimacy for FF. This is not a nation that feels comfortable outside the middle ground politically, and as long as that remains the case, mass protest will only really be effective on single issues, not broad political change.

comongethappy

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When an overwhelming majority of the people demand one.

The only way of determining that is through the ballot box.

So you & Renegade want a ballot to determine if we should have a bi-annual genearal election..... based on the only performance metric you've mentioned: "anger".

This thread is great!

hatrickpatrick

comongethappy wrote: »

The only way of determining that is through the ballot box.

So you & Renegade want a ballot to determine if we should have a bi-annual genearal election..... based on the only performance metric you've mentioned: "anger".

This thread is great!

I fear you're being deliberately ridiculous,
The EU parliament has a plebiscite mechanism through which a certain number of signatures mandates a discussion on a particular issue in parliament.
The Obama administration has a Whitehouse petition system whereby 100,000 signatures mandates a response or explanation on the topic in question from the administration.

You act as if it would be technically impossible to implement such a mechanism for impeaching politicians? Of course it wouldn't. Whatever about it being scary, or too democratic, or undesirable - it certainly wouldn't be technically difficult or complicated.

Also: neither myself or anyone else is calling for a different timeline of elections. We're not talking about changing it to anything regular like "bi annual" as so many of ye are suggesting, we're talking about allowing the general public some mechanism to force an "out of season" election on grounds of widespread dissatisfaction either with a TD, minister or entire government.
And I have a sneaking suspicion that you already understand this perfectly and are, as I say, just being deliberately condescending about it.

Finally: "anger" is a simplification. Public dissatisfaction with our employees is a better way of putting it. If a business can fire people on the spot for royally f*cking up, why should the public not be able to?

zoomaway

renegademaster wrote: »

It's beyond time to be out on the streets demanding true change here.

before anyone suggests these things get hijacked can I just suggest we go and outnumber the 20 or 50 nutters that will undoubtably show up, even last week at spains massive protests there were reports of some nutters showing up but they were in a minority of compared to the 1,000,000 honest and decent people who just want change.

until there's some unity here in Ireland the corrupt are just going to keep walking all over us

On the subject of protests wonder will the water charges irk people enough to get them to protest.
I mean as far as I know we don't know how much the charges wil be yet and it's another dip into the pocket for people.

twowheelsgood

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

we're talking about allowing the general public some mechanism to force an "out of season" election on grounds of widespread dissatisfaction either with a TD, minister or entire government.

Are you going to address my point about the distinction between good governance and popular governance? Or do you in fact believe they are one and the same?

comongethappy

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I fear you're being deliberately ridiculous,
The EU parliament has a plebiscite mechanism through which a certain number of signatures mandates a discussion on a particular issue in parliament.
The Obama administration has a Whitehouse petition system whereby 100,000 signatures mandates a response or explanation on the topic in question from the administration.

You act as if it would be technically impossible to implement such a mechanism for impeaching politicians? Of course it wouldn't. Whatever about it being scary, or too democratic, or undesirable - it certainly wouldn't be technically difficult or complicated.

A petition on answering a particular question is not the same as impeachment of a holder of office.

Can you cite an example of where plebecite resulted directly in an impeachment?

Our parliament already has a mechanism to impeach.
It cannot be done by plebecite.
Im eager for you to tell us the country that this can be done.
(Hint: there is none).

What would it achieve is this fantasy world?
The mob impeaching anyone for doing something unpopular?

Really guys...... This is silly.

jmayo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I couldn't care less if the most dishonest people in the country were running the show as long as my quality of life was improving. Most people wouldn't.

Exhibit one:
an average member of the Irish electorate.

I know you said you are young, but you would have loved bertie and his gang.

But just remember if it is the most dishonest people in the country running the show, then unelss you are one of the gang you are going to get screwed over eventually.


I think the time for protests is long gone.
The protests should have happened around the likes of NAMA when basically the debts of the well connected trough feeders were being foisted onto the taxpayers.
In most democracies if the government had presided over such a meltdown, cowen et all would haven't had the luxury of eventually resigning, they would be fleeing Kildare St being chased by a mob.

I love how some posters here are saying they are surprised at the speed of recovery.
We haven't recovered, we have survived.
Personal debt is massive and there are huge tranches of people sitting in property that should be evicted, but it now looks like they will be receiving taxpayers money thanks to debt writeoffs through state owned banks.
We still have non functioning banks, with maybe one that can truly be considered to be survivable without the taxpayer.
We have massive soverign debt that we need massive growth to make somewhat sustainable.
We have massive SME debt that hasn't been touched ala Morgan Kellys remarks.
We have still massive numbers out of work and it aint really dropping due to big sustainable job creation.

We have recovered shag all, we are treading water hoping there aint a storm coming over the horizon.

I was in Dun Laoghaire over the weekend.
The same scene of empty shops with for let signs that is visible in every town throughout the country was visible there.
And this is an old established suburb of our capital city, and more particularly in or near the region of South County Dublin where we hear incessant reports of increasing property prices.

I think the ones that are back slapping each other about how great our recovery is are the ones that fall into that smug class of Irish citizen.

Iwasfrozen

jmayo wrote: »

Exhibit one:
an average member of the Irish electorate.

I know you said you are young, but you would have loved bertie and his gang.

But just remember if it is the most dishonest people in the country running the show, then unelss you are one of the gang you are going to get screwed over eventually.


I think the time for protests is long gone.
The protests should have happened around the likes of NAMA when basically the debts of the well connected trough feeders were being foisted onto the taxpayers.
In most democracies if the government had presided over such a meltdown, cowen et all would haven't had the luxury of eventually resigning, they would be fleeing Kildare St being chased by a mob.

I love how some posters here are saying they are surprised at the speed of recovery.
We haven't recovered, we have survived.
Personal debt is massive and there are huge tranches of people sitting in property that should be evicted, but it now looks like they will be receiving taxpayers money thanks to debt writeoffs through state owned banks.
We still have non functioning banks, with maybe one that can truly be considered to be survivable without the taxpayer.
We have massive soverign debt that we need massive growth to make somewhat sustainable.
We have massive SME debt that hasn't been touched ala Morgan Kellys remarks.
We have still massive numbers out of work and it aint really dropping due to big sustainable job creation.

We have recovered shag all, we are treading water hoping there aint a storm coming over the horizon.

I was in Dun Laoghaire over the weekend.
The same scene of empty shops with for let signs that is visible in every town throughout the country was visible there.
And this is an old established suburb of our capital city, and more particularly in or near the region of South County Dublin where we hear incessant reports of increasing property prices.

I think the ones that are back slapping each other about how great our recovery is are the ones that fall into that smug class of Irish citizen.

Off you go and protest so. See what that does for the economy.

jmayo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Off you go and protest so. See what that does for the economy.

As I said the time for protest is long gone.

After all I did write the following ...

I think the time for protests is long gone.
The protests should have happened around the likes of NAMA when basically the debts of the well connected trough feeders were being foisted onto the taxpayers.

Sometimes I wonder if people actually read through posts before replying. :rolleyes:

Us protesting now is about as useful as a bunch of Ukrainians protesting in Simferopol or Sevastopol about the annexation of Crimea by the Russians.

Iwasfrozen

jmayo wrote: »

As I said the time for protest is long gone.

After all I did write the following ...


Sometimes I wonder if people actually read through posts before replying. :rolleyes:

Us protesting now is about as useful as a bunch of Ukrainians protesting in Simferopol or Sevastopol about the annexation of Crimea by the Russians.

Well you have two options, protest until your throat is sore or sit down and wait for the next election.

Phoebas

There was one protest today. Not what you'd call a national protest, but 6 anti-austerity protesters caused a Revenue office to be closed and disrupted members of the public going about their business.

The government survived.

Iwasfrozen

Phoebas wrote: »

There was one protest today. Not what you'd call a national protest, but 6 anti-austerity protesters caused a Revenue office to be closed and disrupted members of the public going about their business.

The government survived.

Protesters shouldn't be allowed to disrupt civil servants at work! The Gards should have been brought in to drag them out. With batons if necessary.

hatrickpatrick

twowheelsgood wrote: »

Are you going to address my point about the distinction between good governance and popular governance? Or do you in fact believe they are one and the same?

I'm an advocate of a lot more direct democracy than we currently have, so go figure We're supposed to be a country run by the people, ergo government policy should match the will of the people as closely as possible - particularly when we have a system whereby they effectively get elected based on an advertised manifesto. The standards of false advertising should apply as much to politicians as they do to anyone else offering a service.

"Good" governance is one in which as many people as possible can say they're pleased with the policies being implemented by government.
I would also note once again that policy is somewhat distinct from standards. What I'm mainly arguing for in this thread is not a change in policy, but a change in the standards expected of people in public office before they're given the boot. In my ideal regime, Shatter would have been gone as soon as he smeared Wallace using private info, and Callinan wouldn't have survived through the end of February.

How do YOU define a government doing a good job? If we don't use public satisfaction as a barometer in a democracy then is it really a democracy at all?

A lot of people on this forum don't actually think democracy is a good thing - fair enough if that's your point of view of course, but you'll find an awful lot of people fundamentally disagree. How do YOU think the country should be run? Are you ok with the fact that people like Reilly and Shatter are allowed to continue in office despite quite frankly obscene behavior by both of them?

comongethappy wrote: »

A petition on answering a particular question is not the same as impeachment of a holder of office.

So...?

Can you cite an example of where plebecite resulted directly in an impeachment?

Not off the top of my head, but I'll look into that. Does it matter? Or are you following a Yes Minister - esque philosophy of "Many things must be done, but nothing must be done for the first time"? Why not be pioneers? Most Western democracies seem to have a sizable mismatch between government policies and what the people actually want, so I don't really see why comparing ourselves to other countries is useful.

Our parliament already has a mechanism to impeach.
It cannot be done by plebecite.

Well then it's irrelevant to what I'm proposing, isn't it?

Im eager for you to tell us the country that this can be done.
(Hint: there is none).

Again: So what? There's a first time for everything.

What would it achieve is this fantasy world?
The mob impeaching anyone for doing something unpopular?

Governments would be more directly accountable to the people than they are now - less room for them to f*ck around once they know they're safe for X number of years.

Really guys...... This is silly.

"This" is indeed silly, but by "this" I'm referring to our current system of government accountability - I somehow doubt you're doing the same >_>

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Well you have two options, protest until your throat is sore or sit down and wait for the next election.

That's a very defeatist attitude. Are you one of those who doesn't believe we should be forcing reform, or are you one of those who simply believes that we won't succeed in it?

Iwasfrozen

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That's a very defeatist attitude. Are you one of those who doesn't believe we should be forcing reform, or are you one of those who simply believes that we won't succeed in it?

I'm the person who says unless the majority suddenly agrees to go out protesting then you have two options, go to ineffectual protests and shout until your throat is sore or sit down shut up and wait for the next election. And while you're at it don't be disrupting ordinary people trying to do their work.

alastair

jmayo wrote: »

I was in Dun Laoghaire over the weekend.
The same scene of empty shops with for let signs that is visible in every town throughout the country was visible there.
And this is an old established suburb of our capital city, and more particularly in or near the region of South County Dublin where we hear incessant reports of increasing property prices.

I think the ones that are back slapping each other about how great our recovery is are the ones that fall into that smug class of Irish citizen.

Dun Laoghaires shops were struggling during the boom years too. It's particular problems don't have that much to do with the current recovery or lack thereof. It's stymied by too much competition from other suburban shopping malls, limited free car parking, an anchor mall with awkward retail spaces, and the momentum of literally generations of local retail decline. It was far more vibrant in the middle of the last serious recession of the 80's.

twowheelsgood

jmayo wrote: »

I love how some posters here are saying they are surprised at the speed of recovery.
We haven't recovered, we have survived.

Well perhaps we are satisfied (ish) compared to what we expected might have happened. Personally I had expected massive cuts in social welfare and compulsory redundancies in the public sector with the knock-on effect of widespread industrial action and even civil unrest. Even withdrawal of IMF / EU support was a possibility.

I remember some of us seriously considering acquiring a home safe 5-6 years ago (I did!) and half-seriously considering acquiring a firearm (nope!). That is what I was expecting and I am under no illusion that all of this might still happen.

But the question here relates to protests, with the purpose of putting paid to this corrupt (!) government and replacing them or at least forcing some policy changes. So the question then is : would the government that would replace them (prob FF + SF) be likely to do anything that would address the problems you mentioned? Most of us think they simply would not be any better and could be substantially worse.

Phoebas

We had another protest yesterday. This one at the department of justice wasn't either national or peaceful, with a Garda injured and five protesters arrested.

The government appears to have survived.

constance tench

Phoebas wrote: »

We had another protest yesterday. This one at the department of justice wasn't either national or peaceful, with a Garda injured and five protesters arrested.

The government appears to have survived.

...you nearly got me there...

jmayo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Well you have two options, protest until your throat is sore or sit down and wait for the next election.

Do you have a problem reading ?
I said the time for protests was in the past when the decisions were actually there to be made not after the fooking horse is galloping 10 fields away so to speak.

And since you are so anti protests, are you also saying that we shouldn't have bothered protesting back when the then government was saddling us and the future generations with the their supporters debts ?

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Protesters shouldn't be allowed to disrupt civil servants at work! The Gards should have been brought in to drag them out. With batons if necessary.

You would have loved Yanukovych.

twowheelsgood wrote: »

Well perhaps we are satisfied (ish) compared to what we expected might have happened. Personally I had expected massive cuts in social welfare and compulsory redundancies in the public sector with the knock-on effect of widespread industrial action and even civil unrest. Even withdrawal of IMF / EU support was a possibility.

And that is what should have happened to a bigger degree.
Instead we still have massive numbers employed in some sectors whereas it is the really necessary staff that have been let go and not replaced.
All that has happened is the middle income earners are screwed with more taxes to keep the expensive show on the road.

twowheelsgood wrote: »

But the question here relates to protests, with the purpose of putting paid to this corrupt (!) government and replacing them or at least forcing some policy changes. So the question then is : would the government that would replace them (prob FF + SF) be likely to do anything that would address the problems you mentioned? Most of us think they simply would not be any better and could be substantially worse.

I don't think this government is corrupt or totally inept, especially when compared to the last couple.
But saying that there are some serious pointers to show that government and indeed the system of governance hasn't changed all that much.

1. the way Irish water has been setup shows the politicans haven't changed or learnt the lessons from past mistakes and the insiders still have their snouts in the trough. There still isn't the real transparency about the use of public funds and a underlying principle based on value for money.
This also highlighted in a certain taxpayer bank affectively dishing out public funds to certain mortgage holders and the running of NAMA.

2. the current government are still protecting "the system" at the expense of the greater good as has been highlighted in the whole Garda controversy.
The commissioner and the justice minister savaged the whistleblowers for rocking the boat rather than thank and embrace them for highlighting the wrongs in the system.
There is no way that the commissioner, and probably the minister or indeed most politicans for that matter, didn't already know that there were flagrant abuses of the penalty points system.
And the taoiseach should have fired the minister for his handling of the whistleblowers.

3. the government, as highlighted by the lack of removal of additional allowance payment schemes for public servants, are not going to take on the public service/sector and really reform it.
Out of 80 odd allowances reviewed the minister initially chose to remove only a few.
Add in then the lack of real movement on quangoes and you see that they are not going to really tackle the issue.

4. Outside of the actual government, the whole wallace non payment of taxes and the o'snodaigh printer expenses shows that all politicans have their snouts in the trough to some degree and none of them really want to totally clean house if it is one of their own doing the dirt.
Thick as theives comes to mind.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm the person who says unless the majority suddenly agrees to go out protesting then you have two options, go to ineffectual protests and shout until your throat is sore or sit down shut up and wait for the next election.

You're not actually answering the question - do you agree with the aims of the protest and simply see it as a lost cause and a waste of time, or do you disagree fundamentally with what we want to achieve?

And while you're at it don't be disrupting ordinary people trying to do their work.

100% agreed on this. I have absolutely no time for the kind of eejits who blockaded O'Connell St bridge a couple of months ago, for instance.

hatrickpatrick

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And do you feel we should just put up with it, and resign ourselves to living in a country that's just that corrupt, always will be, nothing anyone can do about it?

twowheelsgood

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And do you feel we should just put up with it, and resign ourselves to living in a country that's just that corrupt, always will be, nothing anyone can do about it?

That supposes that we don't want to put up with it and do want to do something about it.

Given that we have never punished a corrupt politician at the ballot box suggests that we do and we don't.

hatrickpatrick

marienbad wrote: »

No I am not saying that at all. It is not an either or situation as you seem to think it is .

When this lot came to power the had no choice as to what issues to face , the ship was sinking and seemed beyond saving. The speed of the recovery has been so remarkable that if anything I have trouble believing it . But turned it around they have . Do you accept that ?

I don't, but that's irrelevant to the current debate IMO. This isn't about the economy, it's about ethics, standards in public office, corruption, cronyism, and generally dodgy behavior by those in high places.

As to the scandals , some of these have been going on for years but I do have concerns as to how they are handled from here on in.

So how do you propose we, the ordinary people of Ireland, should attempt to force the government to deal with them, when their default policy is to not have a policy?

But you seemed to be ignoring the bigger picture . What are the alternatives ? What of the electorate ?

It is easy to berate the health minister but this is a country that elected Lowry , topping the poll year after year because he could bring a casino to his constituency or the bould Bertie despite his 'dig outs.

As I've said before, if we reform the balance between national and local government, a parish pump from the Dail would become an impossibility.

So who do you suggest we put in power or should we just go straight to the revolution ?

I suggest that we have a complete overhaul of rules, standards, Dail standing orders, standards in public office etc etc etc - so that there would be some degree of statutory automation involved instead of leaving everything to cabinet whim. In other words, if you behave in X manner, you are legally obliged to resign from Y post. No exceptions, no matter how much you donated to the Taeoiseach's campaign or how well the pair of ye got on in school. :rolleyes:

Would you agree that there are some scenarios in business in which being fired is pretty much a given, not subject to managerial discretion?
If not, maybe it should be. Giving politicians leeway sounds sensible, but it's what has caused Ireland's corrosive culture of "push the envelope and get away with as much dirt as you can".

As I've said time and time again, Shatter using private Garda information to smear a political opponent should be a breach of the data protection act, if it isn't already. And it should be enshrined somewhere in law that if a serving politician behaves in such a manner, they must immediately resign.

Do you regard that as unreasonable?

alastair

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

As I've said time and time again, Shatter using private Garda information to smear a political opponent should be a breach of the data protection act, if it isn't already. And it should be enshrined somewhere in law that if a serving politician behaves in such a manner, they must immediately resign.

Do you regard that as unreasonable?

Shatter obviously was acting the dick in bringing up this issue in public, but he had both Dail Privilege, and the complete lack of certainty that he breached the data protection act stacked up against your demand that he 'must' do anything. Garda tittle-tattle has a much healthier life outside the realm of data-protected files and databases, and the context of Wallace's caution suggests it came to Shatter's attention on the grapevine - which isn't subject to anyone's rules.

hatrickpatrick

alastair wrote: »

Shatter obviously was acting the dick in bringing up this issue in public, but he had both Dail Privilege, and the complete lack of certainty that he breached the data protection act stacked up against your demand that he 'must' do anything.

Well then if he is found to have not breached the rules, then the rules must be change to cover any future similar incidents.
It's exactly like I've been saying with regard to the banks - worst case scenario if it turns out that the shenanigans didn't break any actual laws, then an acceptable response would be for the government to say "fair enough, but we're going to draft new laws immeiately to cover everything which we agree didn't break the law but on which there's a national consensus that they were completely unethical."

Same applies here what Shatter did should be against the rules. If it wasn't, let him away with it on condition that a new law is drafted ASAP to close that loophole.
Make sense?

Also, if memory serves me correctly he actually made the remark initially on Prime Time, which isn't covered by any kind of privilege at all.

Garda tittle-tattle has a much healthier life outside the realm of data-protected files and databases, and the context of Wallace's caution suggests it came to Shatter's attention on the grapevine - which isn't subject to anyone's rules.

And why shouldn't it be subject to data protection rules exactly?

marienbad

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't, but that's irrelevant to the current debate IMO. This isn't about the economy, it's about ethics, standards in public office, corruption, cronyism, and generally dodgy behavior by those in high places.



So how do you propose we, the ordinary people of Ireland, should attempt to force the government to deal with them, when their default policy is to not have a policy?



As I've said before, if we reform the balance between national and local government, a parish pump from the Dail would become an impossibility.



I suggest that we have a complete overhaul of rules, standards, Dail standing orders, standards in public office etc etc etc - so that there would be some degree of statutory automation involved instead of leaving everything to cabinet whim. In other words, if you behave in X manner, you are legally obliged to resign from Y post. No exceptions, no matter how much you donated to the Taeoiseach's campaign or how well the pair of ye got on in school. :rolleyes:

Would you agree that there are some scenarios in business in which being fired is pretty much a given, not subject to managerial discretion?
If not, maybe it should be. Giving politicians leeway sounds sensible, but it's what has caused Ireland's corrosive culture of "push the envelope and get away with as much dirt as you can".

As I've said time and time again, Shatter using private Garda information to smear a political opponent should be a breach of the data protection act, if it isn't already. And it should be enshrined somewhere in law that if a serving politician behaves in such a manner, they must immediately resign.

Do you regard that as unreasonable?

No I don't agree the economic issues are irrelevant to the current debate , but there is no reason we can't tackle the two issues - the economy and ethics .

I agree that the best way to do this is fundamental change but so far the electorate talks a good game but acts otherwise. They voted down the removal of the senate and increasing powers to the dail committees. SO what to you say to that ? If every time they try to bring in change it is voted down ?

You seem to have a particular bugbear about Shatter , may I ask why that is ? As for abusing Dail privilege,if he did he should go. But I would disagree with removing Dail Privilege itself.

To be honest I have a bigger problem with someone like Wallace being elected and there in a nutshell is the problem with irish governance.

Phoebas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And why shouldn't it be subject to data protection rules exactly?

If it was just gossip and not something actually recorded in some kind of data repository then it wouldn't necessarily be covered by data protection.

Maybe every single interaction between a garda and a member of the public should be recorded and every single communication within the justice system, but that seems like overkill.