Leo is the new king of Ireland.

Idbatterim

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I wonder how many of SF's central policies they'd be willing to soften/scrap in return for ministerial seats. Coalition requires compromise.

The FF/FG confidence and supply agreement depended on the "no surprises" clause.

Are SF squeeky clean? Have they any skeletons left to come out of the closest? What about bullying?

SF stepping up to the plate and governing would be admirable. I'd love to see them prove me and FF/FG wrong that they are not fit.

Are they ready?

they should insist on a return to state house building, that should be a red line issue!

James Brown

Idbatterim wrote: »

they should insist on a return to state house building, that should be a red line issue!

I would vote for any party who put that as a priority, (maybe not FF).

brabantje

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It doesn't matter. If SF go in with either of them the responsibility and eyes will be on SF. Will SF out do Labour and hold them to account? It would be quiet amusing to see SF calling out crony dodgy deals of either partner considering the spin from them about SF not being fit.
FG/FF are in a great position. If either goes in with SF, SF will be held to a higher standard as we seem to have a 'boys will be boys' attitude towards FF/FG. So it'll be calling them out and a short run government, or pulling a Green/Labour and sitting on their hands to be lost in the wilderness come the following election.
Any FG talk of selling out because of a partnership with SF, is not credible or believable considering their association with FF, the most toxic of parties, IMO.

I quite suspect you've hit the real nail on the head in your first sentence. I imagine hte great fear of FF and FG with respect to SF, is that if they brought them into govt, SF would have absolutely no qualms about walking away if were messed about in the way Labour allowed themselves to be walked over.

brabantje

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I would assume any SF/FF coalition would be with Martin NOT at the helm.

I heard whispers of O'Cuiv coming back into the fold. Could he lead such a coalition?

Possibly - O'Cuiv has always been on the "green" wing of FF. But I doubt he commands much support within FF. Hard to know really who in FF could lead such a coalition.

Colonel Claptrap

brabantje wrote: »

I quite suspect you've hit the real nail on the head in your first sentence. I imagine hte great fear of FF and FG with respect to SF, is that if they brought them into govt, SF would have absolutely no qualms about walking away if were messed about in the way Labour allowed themselves to be walked over.

You've touched on something I hadn't considered.

The senior partner rarely hangs the junior partner out to dry. They speak of collective government decisions. Look at how FG have defended a lot of the independent alliance's cock ups. Similarly with Labour.

However, we can all agree that a SF coalition would ruffle a lot of feathers. Would the senior partner be as quick to defend SF minister's involved in controversies? I doubt it.

Idbatterim

I imagine hte great fear of FF and FG with respect to SF, is that if they brought them into govt, SF would have absolutely no qualms about walking away if were messed about in the way Labour allowed themselves to be walked over.

I absolutely do not buy or agree with , that Labour allowed themselves to be walked over. FG nearly had a majority...

James Brown

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

You've touched on something I hadn't considered.

The senior partner rarely hangs the junior partner out to dry. They speak of collective government decisions. Look at how FG have defended a lot of the independent alliance's cock ups. Similarly with Labour.

However, we can all agree that a SF coalition would ruffle a lot of feathers. Would the senior partner be as quick to defend SF minister's involved in controversies? I doubt it.

That's a pretty poor view of FG. Why bother going into actual partnership with SF if they might undermine them, not give them even the level of courtesy they currently give FF?

Idbatterim wrote: »

I absolutely do not buy or agree with , that Labour allowed themselves to be walked over. FG nearly had a majority...

They should have backed Shortall as regards Reilly's clinic allocations. That was the first big let down.

Idbatterim

If its FF and FG comedy duo. Nothing will change. I think it could be interesting to see SF in there...

brabantje

Idbatterim wrote: »

I absolutely do not buy or agree with , that Labour allowed themselves to be walked over. FG nearly had a majority...

But crucially they did not have a majority, and therefore relied on Labour, who were either unable to make good on their pre election promises because FG wouldn't let them, or because they never had any real intention of trying. The treatment of Roisin Shorthall in Health leads me to believe the former.

James Brown

brabantje wrote: »

But crucially they did not have a majority, and therefore relied on Labour, who were either unable to make good on their pre election promises because FG wouldn't let them, or because they never had any real intention of trying. The treatment of Roisin Shorthall in Health leads me to believe the former.

The talk was, better to be in trying to get policy passed than in opposition. I believed opposition was the best move for Labour. They would have had a strong standing in the last election, which saw FG sell themselves to FF to hold on.
The junior party generally gets hung when playing with FF/FG.

Idbatterim

brabantje wrote: »

But crucially they did not have a majority, and therefore relied on Labour, who were either unable to make good on their pre election promises because FG wouldn't let them, or because they never had any real intention of trying. The treatment of Roisin Shorthall in Health leads me to believe the former.

I would never vote Labour, but I think they got way too much of a hiding... Its one thing saying "we will do all this" it would be hard to a lot of stuff, even if you had a majority, you will be fighting multiple vested interests on nearly every front...

Id be interested to see what would happen with a SF "wildcard" put in government... Tweedle dumb and dumber are a joke...

brabantje

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would never vote Labour, but I think they got way too much of a hiding... Its one thing saying "we will do all this" it would be hard to a lot of stuff, even if you had a majority, you will be fighting multiple vested interests on nearly every front...

i have in the past given them my vote. never again. It's not so much the "not doing what we promised" bit because that's all politicians, really. It's more the "we won't protect the most vulnerable like we promised in the mouth of the biggest financial crisis to hit the country ever and it's resultant austerity requirements" bit that did it for me.

blanch152

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I would assume any SF/FF coalition would be with Martin NOT at the helm.

I heard whispers of O'Cuiv coming back into the fold. Could he lead such a coalition?

Yes is the short answer, and he would be delighted to do so.

Idbatterim

brabantje wrote: »

i have in the past given them my vote. never again. It's not so much the "not doing what we promised" bit because that's all politicians, really. It's more the "we won't protect the most vulnerable like we promised in the mouth of the biggest financial crisis to hit the country ever and it's resultant austerity requirements" bit that did it for me.

See I wouldnt agree with that, nobody was turfed out of their home, welfare rates kept very high... As you say, during the "crisis"

Topgear on Dave

brabantje wrote: »

i have in the past given them my vote. never again.

If Labour had actually gotten a vote for every time Iv seen this written on the internet then they would have had an overall majority in every election since about 1987 :pac:

James Brown

Idbatterim wrote: »

See I wouldnt agree with that, nobody was turfed out of their home, welfare rates kept very high... As you say, during the "crisis"

Here is a little from their 2011 manifesto:

REFORM

Change politics. Labour’s job in government is to serve the best interests of the Irish people. Labour will abolish the Seanad, end cronyism on State boards, and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions.

A new Constitution. Labour will ask a people’s convention to draw up a new Constitution setting out the aspirations,the values and the rules that Irish people want to live by now.

Open up government. Labour will extend the right to Freedom of Information, require political lobbyists to be publicly registered, and introduce legal protection for whistleblowers.

Reform public service. Labour has a plan to make the public service more flexible, work better, and to get better value for money.

They failed miserably. Granted they were a junior partner, but as I recall Fine Gael were peddling much the same thing at the time, so it was a case of one or both parties being full of it and the other being complicit.

The "...end cronyism on State boards, and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions." is my personal favourite considering FG's 'looking after our own' policy.

charlie14

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

To borrow an analogy from the thread title, Sinn Fein are kingmaker.

They have spent 7+ years spitting bile about FG. Their members have spent significant resources convincing people that FG are the cause of all of Ireland's problems.

SF's recent change of heart - showing willingness to be a junior coalition partner -always meant only one thing. SF want to put FF back in power.

Actualy I would be of the opinion that of late SF have been spitting bile more FFs way than FGs.

They are hand in glove with FG as far as I can see on the border/Brexit issue, and It is not in SFs interest to put FF back in power.

They are both drawing from the same gene poll more or less, so it would be more in SFs interest, with the next government possibly having more tax revenue to spend to go into government with FG.

brabantje

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

If Labour had actually gotten a vote for every time Iv seen this written on the internet then they would have had an overall majority in every election since about 1987 :pac:

You must spend an inordinate amount of time on the internet.

brabantje

Idbatterim wrote: »

See I wouldnt agree with that, nobody was turfed out of their home, welfare rates kept very high... As you say, during the "crisis"

Nobody was turfed out of their homes?

Idbatterim

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Here is a little from their 2011 manifesto:



They failed miserably. Granted they were a junior partner, but as I recall Fine Gael were peddling much the same thing at the time, so it was a case of one or both parties being full of it and the other being complicit.

The "...end cronyism on State boards, and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions." is my personal favourite considering FG's 'looking after our own' policy.

Nail on the head with that one. Fg claimed the same bull**** ...

For Forks Sake

Idbatterim wrote: »

II think it could be interesting to see SF in there...

Careful what you wish for - I'm sure there were Greeks saying same about Syriza, or Americans about Trump.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Here is a little from their 2011 manifesto:



They failed miserably. Granted they were a junior partner, but as I recall Fine Gael were peddling much the same thing at the time, so it was a case of one or both parties being full of it and the other being complicit.

The "...end cronyism on State boards, and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions." is my personal favourite considering FG's 'looking after our own' policy.

Let us look a little more carefully at those promises made by Labour:

Change politics. Labour’s job in government is to serve the best interests of the Irish people. Labour will abolish the Seanad,


This was put to the people in a referendum and the people decided against it, can hardly blame Labour

end cronyism on State boards,

The Fine Gael/Labour government saw the establishment of stateboards.ie which since November 2014 the primary portal through which appointments to vacancies on State Boards will be advertised.

http://stateboards.ie/stateboards/

and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions


http://reformplan.per.gov.ie/2014/downloads/files/Progress%20Report%202014.pdf

"There have been improvements in the management of performance, and underperformance, as well as developing and empowering staff to lead the delivery of change at all levels and in all sectors. Performance Management and
Development System (PMDS) changes for the Civil Service have been agreed. The changes are designed to improve the effectiveness of performance management by strengthening fairness and consistency in how performance is evaluated across the Civil Service. Changes include a new Competency Framework, setting out the qualities and behaviours required for job performance and a revised system of ratings with improved descriptions of performance levels"

A new Constitution. Labour will ask a people’s convention to draw up a new Constitution setting out the aspirations,the values and the rules that Irish people want to live by now.

We have had the same-sex marriage referendum coming from the Citizens Assembly and we are getting the abortion referendum from it too.

Open up government. Labour will extend the right to Freedom of Information, require political lobbyists to be publicly registered, and introduce legal protection for whistleblowers.

All three enacted.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/30/enacted/en/html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/14/enacted/en/html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/5/enacted/en/html


Reform public service. Labour has a plan to make the public service more flexible, work better, and to get better value for money.

Take your pick from the numerous reforms set out in the Reform Plan Report 2014 linked to above.

All in all, apart perhaps from more accountability for Ministers (I haven't been able to track down a document on Dail reform which sets this out), the links I have provided above demonstrate quite clearly that by and large Labour implemented the promises set out by you. A claim that they "failed miserably" as you put it, does not stand up to any scrutiny.

There is always something that could be done better, and there is always something that is only 90% successful rather than 100% successful, so if one wants to find something to complain and whinge about, one will. Ireland is full of people who fail to give credit where it is due and we are expert begrudgers. The attitude to Labour's performance in the last government is a clear example of this.

Idbatterim

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Careful what you wish for - I'm sure there were Greeks saying same about Syriza, or Americans about Trump.

See I think there is a lot of scaremongering on this front. They would be a junior party... they might put policy in some areas, in the right direction ...

Wheeliebin30

Idbatterim wrote: »

See I think there is a lot of scaremongering on this front. They would be a junior party... they might put policy in some areas, in the right direction ...

Like?

Any examples?

brabantje

blanch152 wrote: »

Let us look a little more carefully at those promises made by Labour:

Change politics. Labour’s job in government is to serve the best interests of the Irish people. Labour will abolish the Seanad,


This was put to the people in a referendum and the people decided against it, can hardly blame Labour

end cronyism on State boards,

The Fine Gael/Labour government saw the establishment of stateboards.ie which since November 2014 the primary portal through which appointments to vacancies on State Boards will be advertised.

http://stateboards.ie/stateboards/

and make Ministers and public servants accountable for their decisions


http://reformplan.per.gov.ie/2014/downloads/files/Progress%20Report%202014.pdf

"There have been improvements in the management of performance, and underperformance, as well as developing and empowering staff to lead the delivery of change at all levels and in all sectors. Performance Management and
Development System (PMDS) changes for the Civil Service have been agreed. The changes are designed to improve the effectiveness of performance management by strengthening fairness and consistency in how performance is evaluated across the Civil Service. Changes include a new Competency Framework, setting out the qualities and behaviours required for job performance and a revised system of ratings with improved descriptions of performance levels"

A new Constitution. Labour will ask a people’s convention to draw up a new Constitution setting out the aspirations,the values and the rules that Irish people want to live by now.

We have had the same-sex marriage referendum coming from the Citizens Assembly and we are getting the abortion referendum from it too.

Open up government. Labour will extend the right to Freedom of Information, require political lobbyists to be publicly registered, and introduce legal protection for whistleblowers.

All three enacted.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/30/enacted/en/html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/14/enacted/en/html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/5/enacted/en/html


Reform public service. Labour has a plan to make the public service more flexible, work better, and to get better value for money.

Take your pick from the numerous reforms set out in the Reform Plan Report 2014 linked to above.

All in all, apart perhaps from more accountability for Ministers (I haven't been able to track down a document on Dail reform which sets this out), the links I have provided above demonstrate quite clearly that by and large Labour implemented the promises set out by you. A claim that they "failed miserably" as you put it, does not stand up to any scrutiny.

There is always something that could be done better, and there is always something that is only 90% successful rather than 100% successful, so if one wants to find something to complain and whinge about, one will. Ireland is full of people who fail to give credit where it is due and we are expert begrudgers. The attitude to Labour's performance in the last government is a clear example of this.

They made a lot more in the way of promises than those you have outlined. They weren't enacted.

Labour's way or Frankfurt's way...

Idbatterim

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Like?

Any examples?

State built housing ...

Idbatterim

brabantje wrote: »

They made a lot more in the way of promises than those you have outlined. They weren't enacted.

Labour's way or Frankfurt's way...

Anyone who was naive or stupid enough to believe it was going to be Labours way or Frankfurt’s way. Qualify for the beyond delusional status ...

Zubeneschamali

Idbatterim wrote: »

See I think there is a lot of scaremongering on this front. They would be a junior party... they might put policy in some areas, in the right direction ...

Seriously, have a read of their manifestoes.

They will do their best to tax you into outright poverty and hand the cash to their voters.

Idbatterim

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Seriously, have a read of their manifestoes.

They will do their best to tax you into outright poverty and hand the cash to their voters.

on. You see years ago I voted fg twice. Now let’s look at the reality. This “taxing to death” which wouldn’t happen as part of a junior party. Fg killing me with rent and property purchase and the hikes in property, dwarf anything their tax hike proposals might do. There wouldn’t be a big change in taxation policy. Also don’t forget aren’t fg the ones already taxing low incomes at over 50%?! They wouldn’t effect taxation much, but if they changed housing policy, it could save people hundreds of thousands over their lifetime ...

Colonel Claptrap

The Taoiseach appears in Time magazine's 100 most influential people.

A more important headline which caught my eye. The number of rough sleepers are down 40% on last year.

Hopefully this continues to trend downwards.