Is Ireland becoming ungovernable ?

AlekSmart

With over 8,000 posts since it's inception the Irish Water thread has of late become largely unstable.

However,one recent post caught my eye,causing me to ponder upon whether our Nation is desending into ungovernable chaos (I fully accept that many will say it has been so for quite a while now).

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93346650&postcount=8118

Dave Ireland: Water charge protest next Wednesday (10th) Thousands are expected from all over Ireland, please note that these protests are not arranged by politicians or unions, but by a unite of Neighbours who refuse to obey a corrupt dictatorship.

All are welcome and are ask to get as near to Leinster house as possibly. Millions of your hard earned tax-cash is been transferred through the hands of gangsters into the pockets of bigger gangsters, and they are laughing at us.

Protest is at 1pm

"A unite of Neighbours who refuse to obey a corrupt dictatorship".....quite a nifty turn of phrase,but my concern is about just how many people have bought-into the scenario outlined by Dave Ireland.

The use of Social Media,particularly u-tube,has allowed this portrayal of the current government as oppressive,corrupt,dictatorial and much else,all without any meaningful challenge from the Government itself.

It has to be acknowledged that the Coalition appears to lumber along like a wounded deer caught in a set of headlights,bounding from ditch to ditch before collapsing breathlessly in a heap.

What alternative options to our traditional Democracy do posters reckon are available ?

I'm of the suspicion that what we are currently witnessing,is an ascendency of wild-eyed,malcontents who will soon be as disgusted and repressed by the policies of those Politicians they appear to value as the ones they currently demonize...Have we lost the Plot ?

oscarBravo

AlekSmart wrote: »

"A unite of Neighbours who refuse to obey a corrupt dictatorship".....quite a nifty turn of phrase,but my concern is about just how many people have bought-into the scenario outlined by Dave Ireland.

The use of Social Media,particularly u-tube,has allowed this portrayal of the current government as oppressive,corrupt,dictatorial and much else,all without any meaningful challenge from the Government itself.

I remember reading more than a decade ago that the Internet was lending an unprecedented veneer of respectability to uninformed opinion. If anything, social media has made this worse.

I get tired of rebutting utter nonsense that people repost on Facebook without troubling to fact-check it. People seem to be awfully quick to anger, but not nearly so quick to rational thought. It's depressing.

As for Ireland being a corrupt dictatorship: anyone who thinks that should be required to spend a few years in an actual corrupt dictatorship, then tell us what a terrible country we live in.

walshb

The amount of goons and ignoramuses out there who simply love to stir up sh1t and love to be anti any kind of authority is worrying.

Banjo String

walshb wrote: »

The amount of goons and ignoramuses out there who simply love to stir up sh1t and love to be anti any kind of authority is worrying.

This statement is true, but it applies to party loyalists also.

I'm almost certain that if the current Govt legislated that it was mandatory that all citizens must be naked, bar a cowboy hat on the head, on Thursdays, there would be some on these threads defending it.

tayto lover

The amount of goons and ignoramuses who are involved in politics is more worrying.

Banjo String

AlekSmart wrote:

The use of Social Media,particularly u-tube,has allowed this portrayal of the current government as oppressive,corrupt,dictatorial and much else,all without any meaningful challenge from the Government itself.

That pesky youtube and Facebook, hell roast the people for seeking alternative news and information sources than the state controlled RTÉ. :mad:

porsche boy

Let's acknowledge some of the keyboard warriors stirring up political crap are lower end representatives of other parties. Can't find the details now but wasn't one of UKIPs lads booted out for posting under a sudanim on a forum... something to do with inciting racial hatred.

RadharcAilainn

The Irish are incapable of governing themselves.

Since we left the Commonwealth in 1949, this country has been a joke.

1950s: need I say more
1960s: ok, but off the back of a global baby boom. Troubles started.
1970s: troubles. A great time to get rid of buildings that represented "imperialism".
1980s: troubles + terrible economy (yet, the average working man could still afford to buy his own house)
1990s: our best times as an independent republic
2000s: tiger boom, ran away with ourselves + bust
2010s: austerity + economic dependency
2020s: please take us back

tomwaterford

walshb wrote: »

The amount of goons and ignoramuses out there who simply love to stir up sh1t and love to be anti any kind of authority is worrying.

It is a good thing imo...the day of bendingthe knee/not qquestioning authority belongs in the past

How can anyone in all honesty people engaging with political/protest movement is bad... It's what Ireland needed with decades

RandomName2

AlekSmart wrote: »

What alternative options to our traditional Democracy do posters reckon are available ?

TDs should be compelled to adhere to election promises. Failure to do so should be considered breach of contract with their electorate.

Lose party whip structure (either partially, or wholly).

Ideally spin and hypocritical soundbites from parties should be stopped, but I don't see any legislative means to go about doing this.

There should be a method by which seriously contentious issues like Irish Water be put to public plebiscite. That would give a good indication of actual support or opposition for the measure. If there is a majority of the population against the measure, there are few coherent arguments for it not to be vetoed and to just have the government deal with those consequences. If this could be done quickly and cleanly it may in fact limit damage to a government.

A more transparent spending structure be put in place. We get occasional "revelations" about crazy spending policies. These should not be revelations - it should be crystal clear from the start. I personally find it hard to find any coherent breakdown of public spending in online documentation.

Ummm... think that's plenty for now.

dynamited

add unrestricted mass immigration into the mix and just imagine what this country will be like in less than 20 years time...


It will be over run with Roma gangs , Welfare tourists, Eastern European criminals , Islamic Maniacs etc



If you think we have it bad now just imagine how bad our grandchildren will have it, they will never forgive us

tomwaterford

RadharcAilainn wrote: »

The Irish are incapable of governing themselves.

Since we left the Commonwealth in 1949, this country has been a joke.

1950s: need I say more
1960s: ok, but off the back of a global baby boom. Troubles started.
1970s: troubles. A great time to get rid of buildings that represented "imperialism".
1980s: troubles + terrible economy (yet, the average working man could still afford to buy his own house)
1990s: our best times as an independent republic
2000s: tiger boom, ran away with ourselves + bust
2010s: austerity + economic dependency
2020s: please take us back

Come 2020 the Irish economy will be stronger than British economy...it is built on shaky ground imo...outside London it's not exactly tearing up trees

NIMAN

dynamited wrote: »

add unrestricted mass immigration into the mix and just imagine what this country will be like in less than 20 years time...


It will be over run with Roma gangs , Welfare tourists, Eastern European criminals , Islamic Maniacs etc



If you think we have it bad now just imagine how bad our grandchildren will have it, they will never forgive us

So are you advocating closing the borders and keeping Irish white:rolleyes:

RadharcAilainn

I honestly believe that the Irish are incapable of governing themselves.

I also sense that there's a law and order problem in Ireland. I sometimes wonder if the low level crime (drugs, drunkenness, poor road manners, robberies, etc.) are a symptom or a cause of the white collar crimes.

Seems to me that you can borrow millions and walk away without any repercussions. You can put dozens of small businesses out of business because of your reckless actions, yet still live in your big gaff and drive a big new car without anyone thinking something is wrong.

RadharcAilainn

tomwaterford wrote: »

Come 2020 the Irish economy will be stronger than British economy...it is built on shaky ground imo...outside London it's not exactly tearing up trees

What planet are you living on?

The greater Manchester area is a far bigger economy than that of the 26 counties. Plus, house prices are about a third of the price of houses of the greater Dublin area.

London is a global capital. There are about 10 regional cities to London. Dublin would struggle to be a member of the "regional city" class.

Good loser

AlekSmart wrote: »

With over 8,000 posts since it's inception the Irish Water thread has of late become largely unstable.

However,one recent post caught my eye,causing me to ponder upon whether our Nation is desending into ungovernable chaos (I fully accept that many will say it has been so for quite a while now).

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93346650&postcount=8118



"A unite of Neighbours who refuse to obey a corrupt dictatorship".....quite a nifty turn of phrase,but my concern is about just how many people have bought-into the scenario outlined by Dave Ireland.

The use of Social Media,particularly u-tube,has allowed this portrayal of the current government as oppressive,corrupt,dictatorial and much else,all without any meaningful challenge from the Government itself.

It has to be acknowledged that the Coalition appears to lumber along like a wounded deer caught in a set of headlights,bounding from ditch to ditch before collapsing breathlessly in a heap.

What alternative options to our traditional Democracy do posters reckon are available ?

I'm of the suspicion that what we are currently witnessing,is an ascendency of wild-eyed,malcontents who will soon be as disgusted and repressed by the policies of those Politicians they appear to value as the ones they currently demonize...Have we lost the Plot ?

I would largely agree with your 'thesis'.

As to 'ungovernable' that's a matter of arithmetic - specifically after the next election. Things may settle before then and commonsense may prevail.

I don't expect so and foresee a lot of independents after the next election with major problems in forming a stable government. There could well then be a succession of elections with the number of independents declining at each one.

Of course the independents will be getting more and more windy at having to fight a succession of elections so they will become election averse while striving to conceal the fact.

As always, including the FF years, ultimately the people will get the Govt they deserve.

What I've noticed during the IW controversy is how timid the commentariat are in the face of mob tactics by the activists. Their humming/hawing/hedging and arse licking of the unwashed fully matches that of the politicians.

Also unlike the early days of the Coalition the big beasts of the Govt seem to duck and dive from the media. Thay should get into every scrap and fight tooth and nail through every debate. It's up to them to make their case and be well prepared each time.

dynamited

No I never mentioned keeping Ireland " White "


What this country needs is to introduce strict immigration policy like the US, Canada and OZ etc



If you have a required skill and are willing to work, pay tax, integrate into. Our way of life by all means you're more than welcome to move to Ireland.


If you only want to come here to claim social welfare ,child benefit, social hosuing ,have no effort to learn the language , commit crime or try push your obsessive religious beliefs onto us then please stay at home

hmmm

There tends to be an awful lot of noise in between elections, but I predict that if SF or SWP are within an asses roar of power that the electorate will flee back to FF/FG when it comes to actually voting.

The Internet does allow a few loudmouths with very little to do all day get exposure, and it doesn't help when certain political parties mobilise their supporters online - we'll end up like the US with separate FF, FG & SF "news" sites.

Manach

Thinking on the OP's question, perhaps we are capturing up to Europe in having a divided society.

In that this civil division has part of most civic societies as the trends of greater government control of material life (hence a push to garner advantage from state funds), immigration, income inequality (as mentioned by economist such as Pinkerly a growing concern in democratic states) and new societal groups have impacted on Ireland more than any point over the past 100 years. Whilst there numerous critics of the static nature of pre-Celtic tiger Ireland, there was a greater amount of homogeneity in expectations and outlook. Now there is a more fractured landscape between those wishing to more fully align with more progressive Western nations, the more conservative groupings who are reacting against such with a somewhat beleaguered government seeking to meet an expanding pool of exceptions with only a limited resource base.

So Ireland's governable will depend on how trust will remain in the institutions of the state to deliver on their promises of a stable economy.

oscarBravo

RandomName2 wrote: »

There should be a method by which seriously contentious issues like Irish Water be put to public plebiscite.

...because (a) the only measure of whether or not something should be done is that it's popular, and (b) the Irish electorate have a track record of putting a great deal of careful and informed consideration into their votes in a plebiscite.

As for forcing politicians to deliver on election promises, how's Paul Murphy doing on those real jobs and decent wages? That wouldn't have been a vacuous bull****-filled slogan or anything, would it?

If the Irish electorate vote for a party they know can only be a junior partner in a coalition, and then foam at the mouth in anger that that party didn't implement every single policy platform in full... well, that's an electorate that I'd rather not see entrusted with important policy decisions, frankly.

hatrickpatrick

AlekSmart wrote: »

The use of Social Media,particularly u-tube,has allowed this portrayal of the current government as oppressive,corrupt,dictatorial and much else,all without any meaningful challenge from the Government itself.

You talk as if this portrayal is somehow inaccurate?

What alternative options to our traditional Democracy do posters reckon are available ?

Well I would favour one of two options, either a Swiss-style direct democracy model or an unwhipped parliament of independent TDs who will hold the cabinet to account on behalf of the people rather than rubber stamping them.

At the end of the day, in my view the result would be broadly similar. I'd prefer the Swiss model but baby steps - a Dail of independents is far more bound to popular opinion within each TDs constituency than the current system.

RandomName2

oscarBravo wrote: »

...because (a) the only measure of whether or not something should be done is that it's popular,

Well you are a bit on a losing wicket here - because if that's the argument then you'd have to get rid of democratic elections altogether as auction politics often comes down to getting rid of unpopular legislation. Having said that, there is a reasonable correlation between popularity and something being right (and by popularity I don't mean fist-pumping, merely tacit support).

oscarBravo wrote: »

and (b) the Irish electorate have a track record of putting a great deal of careful and informed consideration into their votes in a plebiscite.

More-so than Dáil party members who, by definition, are able to put no thought into their vote whatsoever.

I think the public may make stupid decisions in public plebiscite - but if you have them live with the consequences of these actions, there is the hope that they may learn from mistakes and improve their decision making. At the moment there is no consequences for bad political decisions taken, other than the fact that politicians may not be reelected several years down the line. These politicians still get their pensions (and sometimes already have a guaranteed job lined up if they lose their seat). Occasionally politicians may not be seeking reelection anyway (there a number in the current Dáil in this position) meaning that the entire thing is moot.

oscarBravo wrote: »

As for forcing politicians to deliver on election promises, how's Paul Murphy doing on those real jobs and decent wages? That wouldn't have been a vacuous bull****-filled slogan or anything, would it?

A tad bit unfair on an opposition TD... who has been relatively recently elected... who is virtually an independent. Not saying that he would do anything in relation to his electioneering promises if he had the capacity to do so, just saying.

oscarBravo wrote: »

If the Irish electorate vote for a party they know can only be a junior partner in a coalition, and then foam at the mouth in anger that that party didn't implement every single policy platform in full... well, that's an electorate that I'd rather not see entrusted with important policy decisions, frankly.

No, I think that that is legitimate. You may not expect junior coalition partners to initiate legislation that they hoped that they could enact - but it is fair enough to consider them to be going back on their word if they vote FOR legislation that is entirely the opposite of what they had advocated. Could this make some potential coalitions nonviable? I'd hope so.... I'd really hope so.

seamus

RandomName2 wrote: »

TDs should be compelled to adhere to election promises. Failure to do so should be considered breach of contract with their electorate.

Contract? You're not one of those people are you?

I've seen this come up so many times, and the last thing I want is a politician who is legally required to deliver on their election promises.

"WHAT? Madness!", you say.

Possibly. But let's say party of Party A's manifesto is the increase of corporation tax to 25%. And they get in. And they quickly realise that in fact raising it to 25% will decimate the economy and propose 20% instead.

But, Oh no, they are legally required to deliver on their 25%.

Now, you can argue this would force politicians to make reasonable promises, but you are forgetting that only the current party in power are privy to the full details of what's going on. It happened to FG/Labour this time. When they got elected, they got their hands on the books and realised that things were even worse than FF had let on.

So you'd be requiring politicians to be legally bound to deliver on promises about things for which they cannot possibly have the full information for.

In the end, the result would be politicians who make no real promises beyond bland, "Things will be better" claims without any plan on how to get there - like Sinn Fein do.

Politicians are already accountable for their promises - at the polling booth.

RandomName2

seamus wrote: »

Contract? You're not one of those people are you?

Fraid so.

seamus wrote: »

But let's say party of Party A's manifesto is the increase of corporation tax to 25%. And they get in. And they quickly realise that in fact raising it to 25% will decimate the economy and propose 20% instead.

But, Oh no, they are legally required to deliver on their 25%.

Conceptually it is quite clear that Party A is in breach of contract in this instance. If they have been elected on the grounds that they increase corporation, specifically to 25%, and they do increase it, but only to 20%; this surely is a minor breach. Not entirely sure what consequences should be exacted in this circumstance. However, if the party were to leave corporation tax unchanged, or worse, decrease it, then the electorate should be given an opportunity to decide whether the government should be dissolved. This is quite important: as there is a substantial argument that said party has elected on a lie.

seamus wrote: »

but you are forgetting that only the current party in power are privy to the full details of what's going on. It happened to FG/Labour this time. When they got elected, they got their hands on the books and realised that things were even worse than FF had let on.

This brings me to my other point: why are these books so secret, that even opposition TDs don't see them? What benefit does this pose to the state? Very often the government in power doesn't seem to be entirely aware of where its money is being spent. How can this be an ideal situation?

seamus wrote: »

So you'd be requiring politicians to be legally bound to deliver on promises about things for which they cannot possibly have the full information for.

Perhaps they should be more careful in the promises they make, then.

seamus wrote: »

In the end, the result would be politicians who make no real promises beyond bland, "Things will be better" claims without any plan on how to get there - like Sinn Fein do.

Oh no, Sinn Fein makes promises; promises galore. Outrageous promises. Specific promises. Promises that they almost certainly wouldn't enact either wholly or at all. And why shouldn't they? They want to get into power: they may as well promise €1million to every man woman and child for all the consequences there are.

seamus wrote: »

Politicians are already accountable for their promises - at the polling booth.

And that's what makes this a democracy. However, experience has shown that this is not necessarily enough of a deterrent to those who merely want to get in, and damn the next election!

_Kaiser_

RadharcAilainn wrote: »

I honestly believe that the Irish are incapable of governing themselves.

I also sense that there's a law and order problem in Ireland. I sometimes wonder if the low level crime (drugs, drunkenness, poor road manners, robberies, etc.) are a symptom or a cause of the white collar crimes.

Seems to me that you can borrow millions and walk away without any repercussions. You can put dozens of small businesses out of business because of your reckless actions, yet still live in your big gaff and drive a big new car without anyone thinking something is wrong.

I have to say I completely agree with this - unpopular as it may be to the Nationalists/Republicans around here.

As I've said before, Ireland has failed as a State in not even 100 years. We finally got our much desired Independence - and then promptly gave it away again to the Church who held the social and cultural development of the State back by decades (to say nothing of the abuse of generations of kids).

Then that iron grip started to loosen in the late 80s/90s with the dawn of satellite TV and the increased cultural influence from America and the UK to people who previously had the local priest, RTE, and the Irish press as their primary sources of information, coupled with increased immigration - and what did we do a decade later? We joined up with the EU and gave away that hard won freedom once again, this time to unaccountable unelected bureaucrats rather than clergy.

In between we've lurched from poverty/recession to bust with the one constant being the gombeen parochial politics and "cute hoorism" leading to a never-ending stream of scandal that is the hallmark of life in the Dail. But this isn't just limited to the Dail.. EVERY State institution is run on the same lines leading to the infamous "it depends who you get" and "it'll be grand" style of governance that is typical of this country.

We're effectively a one party State as the only time FG get in is when FF need a spanking - and when they do get their turn at the top we've seen that they're just as willing to engage in the same cronyism, corruption and incompetence as "the alternative". I'm not counting the minor parties (who are usually just FF/FG rejects or unelectable due to their far left-leaning stance) or the Independents (who are one-trick ponies or cast-offs in disguise).

To be fair though, it's not entirely the fault of the politicians as we are the ones who vote for them and on an individual level there are far too many who privately admit to themselves that they'd do exactly the same things if they had the chance/balls/neck that the rest of us get so outraged about, and have gone from trying to outdo each other to worrying about what their neighbours are getting/getting away with that they're not - still, it provides endless opportunity for those in power to play one side against the other which only perpetuates the cycle.

We have a serious chip on our shoulder culturally and inflated sense of our own importance. We like to think that our small little country on the edge of Europe with a population that is about the same as a large UK/European city is in fact the equal of those nations and that we too are entitled to the same level of influence, services and investment as a result.

Parallel to this we like to show everyone just how forward-thinking and grown up we are with things like Smoking bans and adopting rules and laws purely because "that's what they do in other (grown-up) countries" - though usually with enough of an Irish twist to completely mess up the original intent/purpose.

The reality is that we weren't ready for Independence and we've consistently screwed things up any time we've been let at the controls. These days of course the stakes are higher as a member of the EU superstate so our ability to wreck things is limited solely to our own working/middle class - and the last three governments in particular have certainly excelled at that while (again like good big boys and girls) accepting responsibility for actions and debts that were never ours to begin with.

No doubt of course there'll be a flood of posts throwing in words like "self-loathing" but as unacceptable as it may be in today's politically correct world, I have no problem with calling it as I see it and indeed Radharc's posts read as a breath of fresh air compared to the group-think hive-mind mentality that usually surfaces in response to topics like immigration, self-determination and governance.

We have a real problem in this country when it comes to political alternatives, but until the general population itself grows up and realises that there's more to running a country than "what can I get out of it?" I won't be holding my breath for the reform and change that is so badly needed.

golfwallah

The fault, I feel, lies as much with our multi-seat PR electoral system as with the politicians.

Apart from the political and social motivations driving politicians to seek office, the need for income and security are no less important to them than to the rest us. Realistically, the desire to gain and retain office is a very important factor in the political decision making process.

Unfortunately, we in Ireland expect our politicians to become totally idealistic, deliverers of their “electoral promises”, regardless of the political system they have to operate in. In other words we expect god like figures who would behave totally differently to ourselves, if we were in the same situation.

And our system has become so “promise” driven, that we won’t re-elect TDs who don’t:
• make unrealistic promises to make us all better off
• deliver the goods in their own local constituencies

So, when push comes to shove, the national good gets thrown out the window in favour of populist short-term promises and local issues. The result is diversion of government focus from more important strategic national issues and sub-optimal allocation of scarce resources to suit local rather than national priorities.

Of late, I have heard and read of suggested better alternative systems. For example, let half the TDs be elected on national issues and half on constituency issues. Another example would be the separation of executive and legislative responsibility from government ministers (as put forward by Eddie Hobbs). This could take the form of the minister being responsible for getting laws passed, with a separate individual taking responsibility for service delivery.

It would be good to hear someone in power or in the opposition parties making more noise along these lines to give us a political system that is more suited for purpose, i.e. to prioritise national issues (even when they conflict with powerful local and national bodies) above local and populist matters.

We don’t have to look too far to find a working example, as in Germany: http://www.bundestag.de/htdocs_e/bundestag/elections/elections/

Dannyboy83

seamus wrote: »

Contract? You're not one of those people are you?

I've seen this come up so many times, and the last thing I want is a politician who is legally required to deliver on their election promises.

"WHAT? Madness!", you say.

Possibly. But let's say party of Party A's manifesto is the increase of corporation tax to 25%. And they get in. And they quickly realise that in fact raising it to 25% will decimate the economy and propose 20% instead.

But, Oh no, they are legally required to deliver on their 25%.

You're being slightly hysterical.....

Positions change all the time - in life and in business, it's an expectation, all it requires is honesty and clear reasoning.

Here is Leo Varadkar doing it, and he has been roundly praised for his honesty:
"We can't achieve a Cork-Limerick motorway before 2023, unless we could increase funding"

"We can't achieve a debt free Cork Airport before the DAA has resolved it's pension issues, unless we could massively increase inward flights"

"We can't achieve UHI before 2019, due to the financial burden it would place on families"

If something cannot be done, and it's honestly communicated with genuine reasoning, that
A) improves confidence/trust in the Minister/Manager/whoever
alleviates cynicism

When politicians conduct themselves in this fashion, they convey themselves as servants of the state.

Now, you can argue this would force politicians to make reasonable promises, but you are forgetting that only the current party in power are privy to the full details of what's going on. It happened to FG/Labour this time. When they got elected, they got their hands on the books and realised that things were even worse than FF had let on.

Bingo!
But aren't you contradicting yourself?

Enda Kenny/FG promised an end to magic trick budgets in 2011.
The budgetary process was to become utterly transparent.

In Oct 2011, the Taoiseach promised a “new departure” in budget transparency. Outlining how the coalition would publish a series of documents in the run-up to budget day, he told the opposition: “You’ll drown in debates and information about this budget.”

Humiliated Varadkar gets second dressing down from Taoiseach
At a private meeting with Fine Gael ministers before yesterday's Cabinet meeting, the Taoiseach repeated his warning to Mr Varadkar that Budget business should not be discussed in public.

Read it and weep...

So you'd be requiring politicians to be legally bound to deliver on promises about things for which they cannot possibly have the full information for.

In the end, the result would be politicians who make no real promises beyond bland, "Things will be better" claims without any plan on how to get there - like Sinn Fein do.

You mean like Germany?
Yes please!
Slow and steady beats boom and bust!

Politicians are already accountable for their promises - at the polling booth.

Evidently not accountable enough, given
i) the title of the thread &
ii) unprecedented cynicism!

Kermit.de.frog

The is real danger that we will end up in the situation Sweden is in now where populists are preventing any government being formed because their ideas and policies are so ludicrous.

I have some hope that the Irish electorate will see a bit of sense and understand that we can not be relying on a big number of independents (most of which are populist) who would not agree amongst themselves on whether a fly is walking up or down a window and would be incapable of taking any tough decision.

_Kaiser_

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The is real danger that we will end up in the situation Sweden is in now where populists are preventing any government being formed because their ideas and policies are so ludicrous.

I have some hope that the Irish electorate will see a bit of sense and understand that we can not be relying on a big number of independents (most of which are populist) who would not agree amongst themselves on whether a fly is walking up or down a window and would be incapable of taking any tough decision.

I agree with you - particularly on the Independents who are usually one-local-issue candidates, but the problem is where do we go next?

- There's no real difference between FF & FG and one is as bad as the other
- LAB have shown, just like the Greens, that power is far more important than principles
- SF will never be elected because of their history, unrealistic proposals or "just cause"
- "New" parties are usually cast-offs from the above or left extremists

But above all that, Paddy and Mary Voter doesn't LIKE change and anything different is something to be ridiculed and rejected. You need to change that mindset first.

Dannyboy83

RandomName2 wrote: »

oscarBravo wrote:

and (b) the Irish electorate have a track record of putting a great deal of careful and informed consideration into their votes in a plebiscite.

More-so than Dáil party members who, by definition, are able to put no thought into their vote whatsoever.

Don't mind the vote....The Dail frequently don't even seem to be allowed to discuss the issues anymore

http://www.thejournal.ie/fine-gael-chairman-dail-reform-958484-Jun2013/
FINE GAEL’S RECORD of reforming the Dáil in government has come in for stinging criticism – by the chairman of the party.
Charlie Flanagan said a programme of meaningful Dáil reform was “like a snowstorm in a desert” – and that the government had done virtually nothing to try and end the adversarial system of politics in the Oireachtas.
Speaking on the proposal to abolish the Seanad – which he supported, on the basis that few could agree on exactly how the Seanad might be reformed – Flanagan condemned the use of ‘guillotine’ motions to kill off any debate from the opposition.
“Since the change of government, we’ve had 118 guillotine motions,” Flanagan said, including 50 in the nine months after the government took office, and 52 throughout the 2012 calendar year.

http://www.irishpressreleases.ie/2012/04/25/technical-group-tds-call-government-to-account-on-abuse-of-power-%E2%80%93-68-of-all-bills-enacted-since-governments%E2%80%99-coming-to-power-have-been-subject-to-guillotine/pdf/
49% of all Acts enacted by the current government were guillotined at all stages of their progression through the Dáil.
Of the 47 Bills enacted at the direction of the current government, 37 were introduced by it and 10 were restored from the previous session.
Of the 10 Bills restored from the previous session 4, or 40%, were subject to legislative guillotine.
Of the 37 Bills introduced and enacted by the current government 28, or 76%, were subject to legislative guillotine.
All three proposals to amend the Constitution since the current government has come to power have been subject to a legislative guillotine at all stages of their progression through the Houses of the Oireachtas.

SpaceTime

RadharcAilainn wrote: »

The Irish are incapable of governing themselves.

Since we left the Commonwealth in 1949, this country has been a joke.

1950s: need I say more
1960s: ok, but off the back of a global baby boom. Troubles started.
1970s: troubles. A great time to get rid of buildings that represented "imperialism".
1980s: troubles + terrible economy (yet, the average working man could still afford to buy his own house)
1990s: our best times as an independent republic
2000s: tiger boom, ran away with ourselves + bust
2010s: austerity + economic dependency
2020s: please take us back

The troubles largely occurred in the United Kingdom, not the self-governed part of Ireland.

Rest of Europe : WWII, dictatorships in many countries in the 1970s and even 1980s... Various chaotic strikes and near revolutions etc. Massive eras of stagflation etc etc

The UK had the IMF in during the 1970s...

Take us back where exactly? The larger badly run, tax haven / giant hedge fund debt pile next door that's bogged down in every expensive US led war you can think of?

As for Ireland becoming 'ungovernable' ?
I see no evidence of that.

Have you looked at anywhere else in the world? We're basically having a very slightly boystrois debate about water charges.

Take the UK : looks like some kind of mess of rightwing somewhat xenophobic parties setting the agenda. France : even worse with a prospect of Marine Le Pen in power !?

The US : GOP / Tea Party going as far as causing the federal government to actually cease functioning on several occasions. Riots over racism and totally purile nonsense levels of political debate that are about as grown up as a school yard fight.

Ireland's pretty boringly, stable and highly governable albeit only with consensus on issues.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

seamus

RandomName2 wrote: »

Conceptually it is quite clear that Party A is in breach of contract in this instance. If they have been elected on the grounds that they increase corporation, specifically to 25%, and they do increase it, but only to 20%; this surely is a minor breach. Not entirely sure what consequences should be exacted in this circumstance. However, if the party were to leave corporation tax unchanged, or worse, decrease it, then the electorate should be given an opportunity to decide whether the government should be dissolved. This is quite important: as there is a substantial argument that said party has elected on a lie.

That's all very subjective though. Who decides what constitutes a major or minor breach? Couldn't you say that any failure to increase the rate to 25% constitutes a major breach? It's a simple agreement, failure to meet it is a simple breach.

This brings me to my other point: why are these books so secret, that even opposition TDs don't see them? What benefit does this pose to the state? Very often the government in power doesn't seem to be entirely aware of where its money is being spent. How can this be an ideal situation?

Agreed it's not, but at the same time the books can't necessarily be open to all and sundry.
There are privacy issues not only for the companies with whom the state deals, but also for the state too. The state is in competition with the rest of the world. Completely transparent and accessible public finances run the risk of finding ourselves destroyed by those competitors. But I do agree that transparency in public documents should be sought wherever possible; unless there is a good reason for something to be private, it should be public.

Perhaps they should be more careful in the promises they make, then.

Which is exactly my point. The only logical conclusion is that the promises made would be practically worthless.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

You're being slightly hysterical.....

Positions change all the time - in life and in business, it's an expectation, all it requires is honesty and clear reasoning.

Here is Leo Varadkar doing it, and he has been roundly praised for his honesty:
"We can't achieve a Cork-Limerick motorway before 2023, unless we could increase funding"

"We can't achieve a debt free Cork Airport before the DAA has resolved it's pension issues, unless we could massively increase inward flights"

"We can't achieve UHI before 2019, due to the financial burden it would place on families"

If something cannot be done, and it's honestly communicated with genuine reasoning, that
A) improves confidence/trust in the Minister/Manager/whoever
alleviates cynicism

When politicians conduct themselves in this fashion, they convey themselves as servants of the state.

Yeah, grand, but that's nothing to do with his post. His post suggested that failure to deliver promises was a breach of contract and presumably carries financial, if not civil penalties for failure to deliver. All the honesty in the world can't save you from a contractual breach.

Making promises a binding contract would in fact make politics more corrupt and dishonest and politicians go to greater lengths to deliver on their legally binding promises and cover up their indiscretions.

Like you say, things change, all the time. A politician who rigidly sticks to his guns and refuses to change his position regardless of the social, economic or global circumstances, is a dangerous person who should never be allowed sit in power.
Lots of people talk about principle being a virtue. I don't. People of principle can't be trusted to do the right thing.

But aren't you contradicting yourself?

Enda Kenny/FG promised an end to magic trick budgets in 2011.
The budgetary process was to become utterly transparent.

How am I contradicting myself?

SpaceTime

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think realistically, it's just that the Irish Water issue was the straw that broke the camel's back. There's a lot more than just extreme left wing protest around that and I think FG (certainly the back benchers) and Labour (more so) suddenly realised they were getting a lot of angry feedback from constituents who are pretty centrist.

We've all been hit with a heap of new charges and taxes over the last few years. It's far from a hard left thing, I don't really think there's THAT much of a hard-left vote in Ireland. It's extremely centrist in outlook in general.

However, I just think there's been a simmering discontent there which Irish Water really crystallised and FG, Labour and FF will have to address that or they'll be facing a heap of independents in the Dail and a rise of SF on pure populism rather than hard left voting.

I'm not sure that you could really describe SF as "extreme left" they seem to be more "centre left/confused populists with legacy issues"

Reekwind

OscarBravo wrote:

This post had been deleted.

If the Irish electorate rarely makes informed decisions is that because a) we are all idiots, several degrees less intelligent than our European neighbours or b) the unwillingness of politicians to devolve such responsibility to the electorate has severely crippled the emergence of a democratic culture in Ireland?

I don't know how people can expect plebiscites to work in Ireland when we don't even have a properly functioning parliamentary framework.

Permabear wrote: »

To some extent, this is a consequence of successful rabble rousing by Sinn Fein and a plethora of other far-left parties and groups, who take advantage of the economic illiteracy of their target audience.

Whereas those who have spent decades voting in successive FF and FG governments have a firm grasp of economic theory and are sophisticated political thinkers? I mean, really, the deep malaise at the heart of Irish politics is the fault of a party that was the fourth largest in the state at the last election?

_Kaiser_ wrote:

I have to say I completely agree with this - unpopular as it may be to the Nationalists/Republicans around here.

It should be unpopular to anyone with even the most basic grasp of history.

I have said this before and will say it again: we do not need to run hypothetical exercises to wonder what Ireland would be like if it were run by a foreign power. We don't have to do a 'what if'. Instead, if one cares to ignore Radharc and look beyond the 1950s, we've got centuries of experience with which to answer the question of 'What would Ireland be like if she were ruled by England'.

And if there's one lesson that should be clear it's this: anything (positive) England ever gave us had to be wrenched from them. We had no vote until O'Connell, no land until the Land Wars, no autonomy until 1916 and, in the North, no end to an apartheid until the Civil Rights and Republican movements. Yet the myth persists that the English - who left this island a divided economic basket case - were somehow fantastic administrators who would have turned things around and started (!) treating the Paddies fairly.

Nonsense. I will tell you this: for all Ireland's (many) self-inflicted woes, the past century of Irish self-governance has been immeasurably better than the previous century of English governance.

And that's why the 'self-loathing' label tends to be applied to people who hold some fatalistic lack of confidence in Irish abilities (as if there were something inherently wrong with us as a nation). It leads you to ignore all above; to believe that the very best that we have produced over the past century is no better than the poor governance inflicted on us in the previous one. That is deliberate historical blindness.

steveone

Ungovernable? Id say no, we're waking up, becoming more aware of the responsibilities of the government. Present govt was elected to get mv. Ireland off the rocks and though there were grumbles of dissatisfaction austerity was tolerated-not exactly carte blanche but not the hallmark of an unruly population either. IMO Its the lying, conniving and railroading that has caused the unrest. We're happy to get on if theres a bit of a moan on, good weather and a few quid in the pocket. Its a facet of irish life that is in danger of dissappearing. Im hoping the dissatisfied response that put the current dail in wont reappear and put a mixed bag of everything into the house. Id prefer to see the current govt brought to task, listen and act on behalf of the people and not europe and have this tenure set a precedent for future governments...the jolly's over.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dannyboy83

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, grand, but that's nothing to do with his post. His post suggested that failure to deliver promises was a breach of contract and presumably carries financial, if not civil penalties for failure to deliver. All the honesty in the world can't save you from a contractual breach.

Making promises a binding contract would in fact make politics more corrupt and dishonest and politicians go to greater lengths to deliver on their legally binding promises and cover up their indiscretions.

I'm not saying you don't have a point, because in certain scenarios you most certainly do, but that really depends on the implementation.*
I think you were just making too broad a generalisation previously that the current method of accountability is sufficient, that the current implementation of our parliamentary democracy is sufficient, but evidently it's not, hence the theme of this thread.

(*For example, here is one of the better proposals of a contractual system, which Scofflaw proposed several years ago:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056589784)


And RandomName2 is also being too extreme in their implementation of the solution to the problem, but that's a perfectly understandable reaction to the
volte face of this government and it's reform promises. Scepticism is at unprecedented levels.

I'm pretty sure, both of you would be in favour of some reforms.

Like you say, things change, all the time. A politician who rigidly sticks to his guns and refuses to change his position regardless of the social, economic or global circumstances, is a dangerous person who should never be allowed sit in power.
Lots of people talk about principle being a virtue. I don't. People of principle can't be trusted to do the right thing.

I would agree with you, that sounds like Eamon De Valera to me.

I would equally argue that someone who has compromised so greatly on all their principles, such that they no longer have any discernible principles, is also an extremist.

Extreme actions provoke extreme reactions.
Extremism sucks.

How am I contradicting myself?

Because you stated that politicians were already fully accountable at the polling booth....but then argued that the current government (and therefore, electorate) only found out how about the true depth of the previous administrations dishonesty, post-election.

I think there are so many cases of politicians not being held accountable in this country on criminal grounds, that reform would have to start there before progressing to parliamentary matters, but at least this new legislation appears to be a good start:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/corrupt-tds-to-be-banned-from-office-for-a-decade-30604809.html
The Irish Independent has learned new legislation will hand extra powers to the courts and strengthen the ability of the Director of Public Prosecutions to bring criminal charges against those suspected of corruption.

Prison sentences up to a maximum of 10 years as well as unlimited fines can be imposed on those convicted in the Circuit Criminal Court for bribery or corruption.

The new legislation will introduce a ban of up to 10 years on people with criminal convictions for corruption running for political office. There is currently no such prohibition.

Dan_Solo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You'd wonder how this mantra of yours would function if there weren't obviously so many unemployed and McJob poverty level workers in Ireland for the left to appeal to!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dan_Solo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Bit of a circular argument you've got going on there.
You just said the left appeals to the unemployed and work-slaves... now how could there be enough of them around to give SF and the other lefty candidates so much support unless FG and Labour put them there in the first place?

RandomName2

seamus wrote: »

That's all very subjective though. Who decides what constitutes a major or minor breach? Couldn't you say that any failure to increase the rate to 25% constitutes a major breach? It's a simple agreement, failure to meet it is a simple breach.

I could think of a couple of possible solutions - but arguably this is merely a matter of semantics?

seamus wrote: »

Agreed it's not, but at the same time the books can't necessarily be open to all and sundry. [...]

Admittedly true. It might be useful for the state to work out the extent to which to which this could be realistically made a reality.

seamus wrote: »

The only logical conclusion is that the promises made would be practically worthless.

Worthless is what they currently are. We have many words, many figures, many definitive statement,s none of which have any worth, whatsoever. What you would have, were promises binding, would be fewer words, less definitive statements, and more guarded language. This would make a large number of political statements so watered down as to be entirely empty. The better for it. When a politician is willing to put his neck on the line by making a definitive promise he should be rewarded for it.

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, grand, but that's nothing to do with his post. His post suggested that failure to deliver promises was a breach of contract and presumably carries financial, if not civil penalties for failure to deliver. All the honesty in the world can't save you from a contractual breach.

... not necessarily. Many contracts have the clause of "all information being correct, to your knowledge, at time of writing." Honest ignorance is generally catered for, to a certain extent, in the economic landscape.

seamus wrote: »

Lots of people talk about principle being a virtue. I don't. People of principle can't be trusted to do the right thing.

Well I don't know about that. They can be trusted. Some can be trusted to do the wrong thing, some may be trusted to do the right thing. Point is: even if they are entirely incorrect in their philosophy, you probably know where you stand with them.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Don't mind the vote....The Dail frequently don't even seem to be allowed to discuss the issues anymore

That is becoming disturbingly prevalent.

Incidentally I personally find it difficult to get any list of legislature that goes through the Dáil or who votes on it (if anyone). Surely we should be able to make this clear enough for the public?

SpaceTime

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They're also in a serious minority. Bear in mind just a handful of years ago we had one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe. The lack of employment opportunities is not down to a sudden shift to laziness! There was a really dramatic economic shock here in case you didn't notice.

Things are definitely and noticeably improving, especially in Dublin and Cork etc. It'll take longer for increases in spending to trickle into rural areas but it is happening.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

For Reals

Most people want a quiet life as regards politics on the whole, (including those who never vote). Our governments have been small time chancers with small minds put in charge of a country size sweet shop, in my view. Little greasy back handers down the pub and jobs for the boys. I don't think people actively seek incompetence or fraudulent behaviours in government but they sure expect it. That's where the negative view comes from and that's the fault of successive generations of politicians. Why would the public think any other way? They feel shafted and disrespected. Kenny blew it. He was the great white hope (pre-election) to clean up our political system, and he did the usual, FF screw us and wreck the place, FG screw us trying to fix it. People quickly tire of FG, we've a shaky coalition and or return to FF and so the cycle continues....
Once the majority are placated it'll be business as usual. I wonder if any of these politicians actually care that their only contribution to Ireland was to keep the mechanics of the off kilter merry-go-round greased?

hatrickpatrick

seamus wrote: »

Contract? You're not one of those people are you?

I've seen this come up so many times, and the last thing I want is a politician who is legally required to deliver on their election promises.

"WHAT? Madness!", you say.

Possibly. But let's say party of Party A's manifesto is the increase of corporation tax to 25%. And they get in. And they quickly realise that in fact raising it to 25% will decimate the economy and propose 20% instead.

But, Oh no, they are legally required to deliver on their 25%.

Now, you can argue this would force politicians to make reasonable promises, but you are forgetting that only the current party in power are privy to the full details of what's going on. It happened to FG/Labour this time. When they got elected, they got their hands on the books and realised that things were even worse than FF had let on.

So you'd be requiring politicians to be legally bound to deliver on promises about things for which they cannot possibly have the full information for.

In the end, the result would be politicians who make no real promises beyond bland, "Things will be better" claims without any plan on how to get there - like Sinn Fein do.

If politicians do not have the full information about a particular issue, they shouldn't make any promises regarding how to deal with that issue. Having them contract-bound to election manifestos would ensure that they were far more careful and promised far less.

To take your example: "Possibly. But let's say party of Party A's manifesto is the increase of corporation tax to 25%. And they get in. And they quickly realise that in fact raising it to 25% will decimate the economy and propose 20% instead. " -- if they were legally bound to their manifesto, they might not do something as stupid or dishonest as misrepresenting the facts to begin with.

Politicians are already accountable for their promises - at the polling booth.

Which means that they can be in power for five years even if they do something massively unpopular and opposite of what they promised to do in their first week in office.
Without a system of recall between elections if enough citizens want a TD out, representative democracy is a very toothless form of accountability.

Silentcorner

I am not sure if this point is relevant to this argument, it is something I heard from a TD recently.

Michael McNamara (Labour, Clare) and Billy Kellegher (FF,Cork) were on Vincent Brown about two months ago. Vinny was having a hop of the Government TD because a Government Minister was unable to answer what seemed a straight forward question in the Dail that day, Michael McNamara went on to say, and Billy Kellegher agreed that the Ministers do not always get the relevant info from the Heads of their respective Departments, in fact Kellegher said it is often very difficult to get relevant information from the Departments, naturally enough Vinny was enraged (moreso) and in what was an off the cuff remark that no one picked up on MM, the Government TD said the following..."This really is a shambles of a Democracy"....but was never called up on it due to the fact the conversation moved quickly on...

I can't stop thinking about that, I have suspected for some time that he is right, when you consider that we cannot provide for our citizens a working efficient health service, we cannot provide for our citizens stable employment to the point where we lose generations in emigration, we have a real problem providing a stable property/rental market, we cannot reform Social Welfare, the Legal Profession, the Political System...it would also explain the anger that voters seem to be expressing if the polls mean anything...

We do not get the Government we deserve, it is what you would want a population to believe if you had no interest in reforming.

Dan_Solo

Silentcorner wrote: »

I can't stop thinking about that, I have suspected for some time that he is right, when you consider that we cannot provide for our citizens a working efficient health service, we cannot provide for our citizens stable employment to the point where we lose generations in emigration, we have a real problem providing a stable property/rental market, we cannot reform Social Welfare, the Legal Profession, the Political System...it would also explain the anger that voters seem to be expressing if the polls mean anything...

Makes you wonder what McNamara is doing with that crowd of power hungry lapdogs wasters then if he wants to change anything.