Green Party wish list.

KyussB

Tell me how wrote: »

It sounds like you think the Greens would have been better off refusing to get in to government until a commitment was made to fund all projects upfront which would achieve the targets set out in the PA.

How do you think that would have worked? Look at the vitriol they are getting for these efforts to do something.

The greens entered into a pledge which arguably will defund all of their green policies in 2-2.5 years, unless they get extraordinarily lucky with how economic conditions develop by then.

You're acting like the Greens should enter into government, even if it involves selling out all of their principles (again), and risking a fresh bout of austerity (which makes zero economic or green-policy sense)...

efanton

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork-1005990.html

Construction on the M20 Cork to Limerick motorway and the Galway bypass will not start in the next five years, according to one of the Green Party government formation negotiators.

Ossian Smyth did not rule out large road projects getting the go-ahead under a Green government.



However, he has said those projects are unlikely to see shovels in the ground during the lifetime of the next government.

He said: "It's an iconic road project in the area, and if we said we are going to cancel your road, I think that we wouldn't be able to bring anyone with us.

Well that's a load of FF/FG party members that will vote NO in the party members vote on whether this FF/FG/Green coalition should be formed.

I dont think the Greens get the importance the people of Cork and Limerick put on this motorway being built.

Any TD or councillor seen voting YES now will have a very hard time the next time they are at doors canvassing.

With the Green's own finance spokesperson declaring she will not support this deal and now this its hard to see how this coalition is going to get the support it needs.

The Green are handling this whole thing extremely badly, they better pray that the coalition goes ahead, if it doesn't they are going to get wiped out in a general election.

Shefwedfan

efanton wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork-1005990.html




Well that's a load of FF/FG party members that will vote NO in the party members vote on whether this FF/FG/Green coalition should be formed.

I dont think the Greens get the importance the people of Cork and Limerick put on this motorway being built.

Any TD or councillor seen voting YES now will have a very hard time the next time they are at doors canvassing.

With the Green's own finance spokesperson declaring she will not support this deal and now this its hard to see how this coalition is going to get the support it needs.

The Green are handling this whole thing extremely badly, they better pray that the coalition goes ahead, if it doesn't they are going to get wiped out in a general election.

Funny because the other thread said the green are not doing anything about stopping this road. TO be honest I wouldnt see breakingnews as a reliable media source

Water John

The M20 wouldn't start in five years anyway. As long as the prelim keeps turning over, it's ok. Having driven it for years, I know it would save lives.
Sometimes to get a Govn't over the line, one has to sacrafice some objective. Ardern had to do that with her signature health policy in NZ.
Interesting time in the Duffy-Martin house.

feargale

KyussB wrote: »

The greens entered into a pledge which arguably will defund all of their green policies in 2-2.5 years, unless they get extraordinarily lucky with how economic conditions develop by then.

You're acting like the Greens should enter into government, even if it involves selling out all of their principles (again), and risking a fresh bout of austerity (which makes zero economic or green-policy sense)...

Given the force majeure that we are all still living through, and that will have to be paid for, I would say that regardless of who is in power more pledges will be broken than were ever taken at a confirmation ceremony.
Parties need to step up and take responsibility now. The present situation is not what people voted for and cannot continue forever. The Greens need to realise that no party in a coalition gets all of what it wants. The alternative to no deal is another election in the middle of the epidemic. Let's see who the electorate blame for that.

P.S. The Cork-Limerick boreen is a deathtrap. If only one car or one bus uses it per day it is still a deathtrap. Only a T.D. living far away from it could oppose upgrading it.

KyussB

So the Green Party should agree to policies which have an extremely high risk of decimating all green policies for 5 years (due to the high risk of austerity taking placing half way through the term) - instead of having an election NOW, which has a far better chance of enabling green policies this half of the decade?

Lets be clear: There is an extremely high chance that the Green Party have excluded proper green policies for half a decade, due to the very high likelihood of their policies getting defunded in as little as 2 years...

That is not a green party! That is a faux green party, that will sell out all of their principles to get into government - screwing all of their voters and the wider population, in the process.

Just like they did a decade ago, which NOBODY learned from...

feargale

KyussB wrote: »

So the Green Party should agree to policies which have an extremely high risk of decimating all green policies for 5 years (due to the high risk of austerity taking placing half way through the term) - instead of having an election NOW, which has a far better chance of enabling green policies this half of the decade?

Lets be clear: There is an extremely high chance that the Green Party have excluded proper green policies for half a decade, due to the very high likelihood of their policies getting defunded in as little as 2 years...

That is not a green party! That is a faux green party, that will sell out all of their principles to get into government - screwing all of their voters and the wider population, in the process.

Just like they did a decade ago, which NOBODY learned from...

You agree we need a government now - right? So what do you suggest should happen?

Tell me how

KyussB wrote: »

So the Green Party should agree to policies which have an extremely high risk of decimating all green policies for 5 years (due to the high risk of austerity taking placing half way through the term) - instead of having an election NOW, which has a far better chance of enabling green policies this half of the decade?

Lets be clear: There is an extremely high chance that the Green Party have excluded proper green policies for half a decade, due to the very high likelihood of their policies getting defunded in as little as 2 years...

That is not a green party! That is a faux green party, that will sell out all of their principles to get into government - screwing all of their voters and the wider population, in the process.

Just like they did a decade ago, which NOBODY learned from...

But the alternative is probably going to be nothing meaningful happening.
I've long been annoyed how the task of delivering on green targets became the responsibility of the Green party alone but I don't see how things will get any better by rejecting this.

In fact, looking at the commentary here and elsewhere online, the Greens are indeed going to be decimated at the next GE with half the people saying they didn't do near enough, and the other half saying they had some cheek talking about anything to do with the environment while there is a pandemic going on.

igCorcaigh

I really hope they don't support a new austerity policy in the guise of progression on Green issues.

I have a lot of support for Green principles, but don't vote for them in GE because of this fear. I think they lack class awareness too.

I did vote Green for Europe though, perhaps that's a better space for progressive regulation.

As an aside, not the most pressing topic, but I hope the GP push for reform of our drug laws too. Their policy isn't as radical as I would want, but they should use their influence to push the issue.

KyussB

feargale wrote: »

You agree we need a government now - right? So what do you suggest should happen?

No I don't - we need a new election.

KyussB

Tell me how wrote: »

But the alternative is probably going to be nothing meaningful happening.
I've long been annoyed how the task of delivering on green targets became the responsibility of the Green party alone but I don't see how things will get any better by rejecting this.

In fact, looking at the commentary here and elsewhere online, the Greens are indeed going to be decimated at the next GE with half the people saying they didn't do near enough, and the other half saying they had some cheek talking about anything to do with the environment while there is a pandemic going on.

I would rather we have no government at all until austerity is dead - because austerity is worse than no government - and austerity is worse for green policies than no government is.

At least with no government, green policies have a fighting chance in an election. A supposed 'green party' agreeing to likely austerity, is agreeing to the likely death of green policies for their term.

feargale

KyussB wrote: »

No I don't - we need a new election.

We do if a coalition can't be formed. And what do you think Tony Holohan would have to say about it?

KyussB

You were asking me what I suggest should happen: I said a new election instead of a likely austerity coalition.

igCorcaigh

People will not accept austerity again. It has to be different this time. Has to be, right?

Water John

Austerity would further limit peoples spending and thus a bigger recession. A stimulus package is what's needed.

igCorcaigh

Water John wrote: »

Austerity would further limit peoples spending and thus a bigger recession. A stimulus package is what's needed.

Yes, but has to be targeted to the right businesses.

Bailing out the big banks and airlines is not the way to go. The wealth just gets sucked up.

feargale

KyussB wrote: »

You were asking me what I suggest should happen: I said a new election instead of a likely austerity coalition.

I've asked you a second question which hasn't been answered. Tony Holohan?

Now suppose we have the new election. My guess is that alot of voters will say we need a government come hell or high water and consequently the smaller parties will regrettably get squeezed. Ok, you don't share that view so let's take it from there. The Greens come back with more or less the same, unless you are predicting that they will be up there with the big three. They again refuse to go into coalition, and refuse again 4-5 years later. So they get nothing instead of the half a loaf that is on offer. Meantime the planet is frying. How much time does the human race have? I thought the issue of the planet's survival was in the minds of environmentalists bigger than the survival of any party, Green or otherwise.
And people should shelf that old shibboleth about politicians wanting a coalition to feather their nests. Pursue that to its conclusion and there would never be a government.

igCorcaigh

A stimulus for the local economy. This is a great opportunity to reverse the flow of wealth.

Leonard Hofstadter

And where is all the magic money going to come from?

The books have got to be balanced, not immediately for sure (belt tightening right now would cause a recession, no doubt about it), but in the next few years we absolutely have to start closing down on the deficit.

One never knows what is around the corner, and we were fortunate that the previous Government was some way financially prudent and had the money to pay out the pandemic payment, get all the PPE, etc.

Money does not grow on trees. People don't spend what they can't afford - and neither should Governments over a sustained period of time.

Geuze

Water John wrote: »

Austerity would further limit peoples spending and thus a bigger recession. A stimulus package is what's needed.

The stimulus package has started already.

https://www.ntma.ie/uploads/general/Investor-Presentation-June-website.pdf

Fiscal stimulus = 13bn, 6.5% of GNI*:

PUP and TWSS = 4.8bn

Health exp = 2bn

Supports for business = 6.5bn

Geuze

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Yes, but has to be targeted to the right businesses.

Bailing out the big banks and airlines is not the way to go. The wealth just gets sucked up.

AFAIK, banks and airlines aren't getting any special extra supports, are they?

They can get TWSS like any business?


https://dbei.gov.ie/en/News-And-Events/Department-News/2020/May/02052020.html

Jinglejangle69

Heard today only 8% of people in Ireland have climate change as top priority post covid.

Was 42%.

Need a new election.

The whole world has changed.

Geuze

igCorcaigh wrote: »

People will not accept austerity again. It has to be different this time. Has to be, right?

Hopefully the rebound/recovery in the economy in Q3 and Q4 will mean no need for any specific tax rate increases, or any cuts to nominal public expenditure.

Mind you, I am not very hopeful that will happen.

igCorcaigh

Geuze wrote: »

Hopefully the rebound/recovery in the economy in Q3 and Q4 will mean no need for any specific tax rate increases, or any cuts to nominal public expenditure.

Mind you, I am not very hopeful that will happen.

Perhaps things may balance. I'm not sure, no expert in it.

But there was a big rise in the wealth gap after 2008, and the same seems to be happening now.

efanton

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork-1005990.html

Construction on the M20 Cork to Limerick motorway and the Galway bypass will not start in the next five years, according to one of the Green Party government formation negotiators.

Ossian Smyth did not rule out large road projects getting the go-ahead under a Green government.



However, he has said those projects are unlikely to see shovels in the ground during the lifetime of the next government.

He said: "It's an iconic road project in the area, and if we said we are going to cancel your road, I think that we wouldn't be able to bring anyone with us.

It seems the Greens are hell bent on destroying any chance they have of joining a coalition.

First we have their own finance spokesperson saying that the agreement simply does not a up and there will be no money for the Greens proposals, and now this.

I dont think the Green Party realise the importance people and businesses from Cork and Limerick put on the constriction of the M20

Any FF/FG/Geen TD or councillor from either county is going to have a very hard time explaining why they have effectively allowed this project to be cancelled (if you are going to delay it for at least 5 years its as good as cancelling it as costs, planning, etc are all going to have to be reworked).
I can see loads of FF/FG/Green party members rejecting the coalition deal just on this one issue.

Tell me how

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Heard today only 8% of people in Ireland have climate change as top priority post covid.

Was 42%.

Need a new election.

The whole world has changed.

Ireland has never had anywhere near 42% of the population with climate change as a 'top' priority.

In fact, I'd say 8% is probably as high as that has gotten across the whole country.

But a large number of the country does have it as 'a' priority and given the implications associated with it and how difficult it is to both change not to mention reverse, action is needed on that front.

efanton

Tell me how wrote: »

Ireland has never had anywhere near 42% of the population with climate change as a 'top' priority.

In fact, I'd say 8% is probably as high as that has gotten across the whole country.

But a large number of the country does have it as 'a' priority and given the implications associated with it and how difficult it is to both change not to mention reverse, action is needed on that front.

What I do not understand at all about the Green Party is their approach.

Do ordinary people have other priorities, of course they do, and generally their priorities are indeed more important.

If the Green party took the approach that we understand there are other priorities but lets take those priorities and do them in an environmentally sensitive way as possible they would get huge support.

Want to build a new road, lets get it done but make sure there is a cycle lane physically separated so that cars cant uses it as a parking bay or put cyclists at risk. Let also make sure that as many vehicles on it at electric and the lighting used is LED.
Want to build new homes, business premises or factories, then lets change the planning laws so that they are fully insulated, use LED lighting only and have system in them to reduce energy usage.
In other words not so much change what we do but change the way that we do it.

Taking that approach might take a little longer to achieve the Greens ultimate goals, but they will be definitely achieved. The approach they take at the moment means its more or less an all or nothing exercise, if they get into government they might get some of what they want, if they dont they will get very little of what they want and most of the change will happen because of the choices made by individual people not because of the Green party.

The greens have effectively cancelled the M20 and are talking about a new rail link between Cork and Limerick instead ignoring two key facts, a rail link is going to cost significantly more, and that significantly less people would use it.
The end result will be a massive debt for the country,no real benefit to the majority of people and eventually the M20 being built anyway.

Tell me how

efanton wrote: »

What I do not understand at all about the Green Party is their approach.

Do ordinary people have other priorities, of course they do, and generally their priorities are indeed more important.

If the Green party took the approach that we understand there are other priorities but lets take those priorities and do them in an environmentally sensitive way as possible they would get huge support.

Want to build a new road, lets get it done but make sure there is a cycle lane physically separated so that cars cant uses it as a parking bay or put cyclists at risk. Let also make sure that as many vehicles on it at electric and the lighting used is LED.
Want to build new homes, business premises or factories, then lets change the planning laws so that they are fully insulated, use LED lighting only and have system in them to reduce energy usage.
In other words not so much change what we do but change the way that we do it.

Taking that approach might take a little longer to achieve the Greens ultimate goals, but they will be definitely achieved. The approach they take at the moment means its more or less an all or nothing exercise, if they get into government they might get some of what they want, if they dont they will get very little of what they want and most of the change will happen because of the choices made by individual people not because of the Green party.

The greens have effectively cancelled the M20 and are talking about a new rail link between Cork and Limerick instead ignoring two key facts, a rail link is going to cost significantly more, and that significantly less people would use it.
The end result will be a massive debt for the country,no real benefit to the majority of people and eventually the M20 being built anyway.

I think at this point, the view they have adopted is that piecemeal efforts will no longer cut it (some would say that that is all they are doing here).
In terms of taking longer to achieve something, all the data is saying that time is running out. We cannot consistently put it on the long finger.

The N20 conversation is interesting because while many have been talking about it for a long time, all the governments to this point haven't built it either.
And when you think of Willie O'Dea who was a central player in FF governments for years, and Simon Coveney in FG currently or Michael Noonan previously, there would have been plenty heavyweights to advocate for it but yet it hasn't happened.

As I have said several times at this point, I am very annoyed at the fact that environmental action is being left purely to the responsibility of the Greens to act on. I don't know why they didn't take a more stoic approach and demand to see solutions from FG/FF and let it be known very vocally that it is their duty to come up with solutions as much as it is the Greens

ronivek

I *want* to like the greens; but I haven't been able to find much to like about them for the most part.

I think the key for me is that even if they gained power and somehow turned Ireland into a carbon consumer it does literally nothing to address the actual problem; which is a global one. We're talking something on the order of 1/1000th of global CO2 equivalent units being due to our country with very little scope for large-scale changes (no significant land-mass, no means for significant capital expenditure, etc.)

So if they now turn around and vote against the chance to be in government and actually implement some of the changes they want to implement; simply because "it's not enough"; I would find that very hard to take in terms of ever voting for them again.

I mean I get the whole "we want to be a global leader on climate change" thing; but I don't think you can do that at the expense (or perceived expense) of your country's economic livelihood. Maybe it is too late right now; but it sure as hell isn't less likely to be too late in 5 years time if they were to get another crack at it.

And to be clear my economic and political acumen is poor to say the least; so I'm likely to be talking out of my hole... just bored and felt like sharing.

Tell me how

ronivek wrote: »

I *want* to like the greens; but I haven't been able to find much to like about them for the most part.

I think the key for me is that even if they gained power and somehow turned Ireland into a carbon consumer it does literally nothing to address the actual problem; which is a global one. We're talking something on the order of 1/1000th of global CO2 equivalent units being due to our country with very little scope for large-scale changes (no significant land-mass, no means for significant capital expenditure, etc.)

So if they now turn around and vote against the chance to be in government and actually implement some of the changes they want to implement; simply because "it's not enough"; I would find that very hard to take in terms of ever voting for them again.

I mean I get the whole "we want to be a global leader on climate change" thing; but I don't think you can do that at the expense (or perceived expense) of your country's economic livelihood. Maybe it is too late right now; but it sure as hell isn't less likely to be too late in 5 years time if they were to get another crack at it.

And to be clear my economic and political acumen is poor to say the least; so I'm likely to be talking out of my hole... just bored and felt like sharing.

Aside from the moral position of doing what we can, if everyone who signed up to the Paris Agreement makes meaningful effort to achieve their goals then that is the greatest chance to see meaningful change.

If some countries shrug their shoulders and say, there's no point, then it's an out for other countries to do the same.

This is literally the principle of every collective agreement that has ever being signed where people/bodies/countries make a commitment to do what they have signed up to doing.