The National Party

weldoninhio

tipptom wrote: »

OP seems to just be a cheerleader for the NP but one thing is for sure they will never get a fair hearing in the Irish media even if it is just to make fools of themselves simply because they are not FF/FG.

There is no media in ireland except to cheerlead FF and FG.

They have subverted elections in ireland and there is no doubt that they played a massive part in getting FF over the line in this election to get them in the unbelievable position that the most corrupt part in the history of this state is back in power, its leader who was one of the architects of making this country a world wide laughing stopck of corruption and is now taosaigh from 11 per cent in the polls.

If a country does not have a fully functioning and fair fouth estate then it does not have a fuctioning democracy.

100%, doesnt' have to be the National Party. You could have a centerist, pro-choice, pro-law and order, anti-fake migrant, Irish party, which is what we need, and the media would absolutely ignore it and not give it the time of day.

The Nal

weldoninhio wrote: »

100%, doesnt' have to be the National Party. You could have a centerist, pro-choice, pro-law and order, anti-fake migrant, Irish party, which is what we need, and the media would absolutely ignore it and not give it the time of day.

This isn't true. In the 80s the PDs got a real fair crack of the whip and did very well for a time.

Renua were given a platform from day one and were on the Late Late. Loads of media time. Too much I thought for a new party.

Other parties, when set up correctly, are given exposure.

The reason the National Party aren't taken seriously or given any air time is because they're an amateur set up, their leader used to pal about with Nazis (real Nazis) hang around with crazies Gemma O'Doherty and they are basically anti everything. We're past that as a country and despite what they want to happen, we're never going back.

Their performance in the last election doesn't warrant anymore time than the afterthought filler piece they got on RTE a few weeks back.

weldoninhio

The Nal wrote: »

This isn't true. In the 80s the PDs got a real fair crack of the whip and did very well for a time.

Renua were given a platform from day one and were on the Late Late. Loads of media time. Too much I thought for a new party.

Other parties, when set up correctly, are given exposure.

The reason the National Party aren't taken seriously or given any air time is because they're an amateur set up, their leader used to pal about with Nazis (real Nazis) hang around with crazies Gemma O'Doherty and they are basically anti everything. We're past that as a country and despite what they want to happen, we're never going back.

Their performance in the last election doesn't warrant anymore time than the afterthought filler piece they got on RTE a few weeks back.

Renua had bat-**** crazy religious policies. I've no idea why there isn't a centrist Irish party, pro-choice, pro-law and order, pro-infrastructure, pro-fair taxation party in Ireland. They'd clean up. Defund the NGO's. Have Irish working people working towards Irish projects. Not giving billions out of the country year on year.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

Renua had bat-**** crazy religious policies. I've no idea why there isn't a centrist Irish party, pro-choice, pro-law and order, pro-infrastructure, pro-fair taxation party in Ireland. They'd clean up. Defund the NGO's. Have Irish working people working towards Irish projects. Not giving billions out of the country year on year.

"Irish people towards Irish projects", ya that wouldn't clean up... Basically you've described a party that's centrist party until you get to lines like "Pro law and order" which is not a centrist position. The defund ngos line is like something from Viktor Orban who is far from a moderate candidate. So claiming such a party is centrist isn't realistic, some policies might be centrist but then other simply swing the party to the far right.

jmayo

Deleted User wrote: »

"Irish people towards Irish projects", ya that wouldn't clean up... Basically you've described a party that's centrist party until you get to lines like "Pro law and order" which is not a centrist position. The defund ngos line is like something from Viktor Orban who is far from a moderate candidate. So claiming such a party is centrist isn't realistic, some policies might be centrist but then other simply swing the party to the far right.

I didn't know defunding NGOs was a far right tenant?
Is asking how taxpayer funds are given to organisations with no real public accountability now a right wing philosophy ?

You do know that NGOs and charities in Ireland have proven to be a great way for some to earn a very good standard of living.
In other words for every euro that goes to helping the people they are meant to help more euros goes to the ones running the operation.

Oh and why do we need so many NGOs ?
It is not as if our state spends nothing on public services.

And is Law and Order now a right wing thing.
Perhaps we should tell all those socialist states that clamp down on protestors, hell even criminals is just a right wing thing.

jmayo

jmayo wrote: »

I didn't know defunding NGOs was a far right tenant?
Is asking how taxpayer funds are given to organisations with no real public accountability now a right wing philosophy ?

You do know that NGOs and charities in Ireland have proven to be a great way for some to earn a very good standard of living.
In other words for every euro that goes to helping the people they are meant to help more euros goes to the ones running the operation.

Oh and why do we need so many NGOs ?
It is not as if our state spends nothing on public services.

And is Law and Order now a right wing thing.
Perhaps we should tell all those socialist states that clamp down on protestors, hell even criminals is just a right wing thing.

Targeting of NGOs when firstly they actually provide services in Ireland that the state fails to. Eg mental health services, homeless charities Also the conspiracies around Soros etc tend to be targeted at ngos.

Law and order does tend to be a right wing line, when that line is expounded it tends to be around more authoritarianism, harsher prison sentences, less focus on rehabilitation and more on sending people to prison for the wrong reasons. Zero tolerance policies etc. Expand on what you mean by it if isn't like what I described.

Annasopra

Mayorga wrote: »

lol at Mark Malone being put forward as some kind of source.

No vested interests there at all.

Another ngo swine bleeding us dry. I reckon he checks under his bed at night for fascists.

Mark Malone wasn't the source. Justin Barrett was. It's Justin Barretts words.

weldoninhio

[Deleted User] wrote: »

"Irish people towards Irish projects", ya that wouldn't clean up... Basically you've described a party that's centrist party until you get to lines like "Pro law and order" which is not a centrist position. The defund ngos line is like something from Viktor Orban who is far from a moderate candidate. So claiming such a party is centrist isn't realistic, some policies might be centrist but then other simply swing the party to the far right.

Pro law and order isn’t centrist? It’s far right according to you? I must have missed all the loony lefties campaigning for more crime. We have an absolutely ridiculous amount of NGOs for a tiny country. Multiple, multiple overlaps. Literally sucking money out of the country. I believe the average worker would prefer their money (5.5 billion) going towards things that would improve their lives and are seen to be doing that, like childcare, mental health services, public housing. I know I would.

Annasopra

weldoninhio wrote: »

Pro law and order isn’t centrist? It’s far right according to you? I must have missed all the loony lefties campaigning for more crime. We have an absolutely ridiculous amount of NGOs for a tiny country. Multiple, multiple overlaps. Literally sucking money out of the country. I believe the average worker would prefer their money (5.5 billion) going towards things that would improve their lives and are seen to be doing that, like childcare, mental health services, public housing. I know I would.

You do realise a lot of NGOs provide childcare, mental health services, housing...

jmayo

Deleted User wrote: »

Targeting of NGOs when firstly they actually provide services in Ireland that the state fails to. Eg mental health services, homeless charities Also the conspiracies around Soros etc tend to be targeted at ngos.

Yes some do provide services, but at what cost.
And speaking of mental health services do you remember Console ???

Yes there are some very good organisations, but there are also a heck of a lot of ones just really jobs for the boys and girls.

Ireland's exchequer spends 5.5 billion on NGOs.
There are something like 19,500 NGOs registered in Ireland.
Taking a population of roughly 4.9 million, that is an NGO for every 250 people.
It is a fooking joke and only someone involved in the "industry" would think there is nothing wrong with it.

No wonder the lady at the UN laughed at us.
Anyone with an ounce of cop on would see the fooking sham.

in 2017, Dóchas the organisation that represents 60 (yes fooking 60) NGOs that are involved in overseas development, wanted the government to up spending on overseas development aid from €723.7 million (even though originally committed to 2016 commitment of €641 million) by another €128 million.

Are you freaking telling me we need all these NGOs sucking at the teat of the taxpayer, providing absolutely no service in return to the citizens of this state ??

There is now a raft NGOs springing up now representing the rights of immigrants.
Oh and it's isn't just any immigrants, it is the ones who don't come here as legal visa applicants.

Deleted User wrote: »

Law and order does tend to be a right wing line, when that line is expounded it tends to be around more authoritarianism, harsher prison sentences, less focus on rehabilitation and more on sending people to prison for the wrong reasons. Zero tolerance policies etc. Expand on what you mean by it if isn't like what I described.

So what is wrong with harsher prison sentences for major crimes.
I can point to numerous murders carried out by people that should never ever be released from prison, should never have been given bail or out on remand.
Why should gerard barry get out after his life sentence for raping and murdering Manuela Reido ?

Why is mickey "the monster" murphy allowed out of prison, even on visits, after raping and murdering two women over a space of twenty years ?

Why should the triple murderer Hennessy just have to serve one life sentence which is really about 18 years even though he murdered 2 children and their mother after raping her?


How many court reports do we hear about the long lifelong list of convictions and yet here we are on the merry-go-round called out justice system.

What are the wrong reasons people are being sent to jail ?

How much has our population grown over the last 40 years, how many schools have we added, how many hospitals have we added or revamped, how many sports clubs have we created, how many shopping centres have we created and then compare how many new prisons we have built.

And then look at how many killings we have in comparison to 40 years ago.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

Pro law and order isn’t centrist? It’s far right according to you? I must have missed all the loony lefties campaigning for more crime. We have an absolutely ridiculous amount of NGOs for a tiny country. Multiple, multiple overlaps. Literally sucking money out of the country. I believe the average worker would prefer their money (5.5 billion) going towards things that would improve their lives and are seen to be doing that, like childcare, mental health services, public housing. I know I would.

Best of luck trying to get elected with the platform! You overestimate how clever it is.

weldoninhio

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

You do realise a lot of NGOs provide childcare, mental health services, housing...

Some do, but as I said, there are multiple upon multiple overlaps. Same with the charity industry in Ireland. Massive reform needed. And if the political will was there the savings to be made would free up money for other things like improved infrastructure, improved transport etc.

weldoninhio

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Best of luck trying to get elected with the platform! You overestimate how clever it is.

Yeah, the public hate value for money.

Realt Dearg Sec

jmayo wrote: »

I didn't know defunding NGOs was a far right tenant?

Yeah it is.

And is Law and Order now a right wing thing.

Yeah it is.

The rest of your post is arguing for these things but whether they are correct or not doesn't affect whether they're right wing or not. Targeting government waste is generally a right wing preoccuptation. It doesn't make it wrong (although I think it tends to lead to pretty indiscriminate throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as evidenced by the idea of "defunding NGOs" as a blanket statement.

weldoninhio

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Yeah it is.


Yeah it is.

The rest of your post is arguing for these things but whether they are correct or not doesn't affect whether they're right wing or not. Targeting government waste is generally a right wing preoccuptation. It doesn't make it wrong (although I think it tends to lead to pretty indiscriminate throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as evidenced by the idea of "defunding NGOs" as a blanket statement.

We have around 1 NGO per every 250 Irish people. That’s not waste, that’s corruption.

James Brown

Many years ago I saw a few Nazi pamphlets posted. I think it was the Irish Nazi party or something.
Anyhoo that was it, never seen nor heard of them since. We've social media now. Every voice is amplified. We still have much of the same kind of things it's just amplified.
The biggest gimmick is right wingers pretending to support the average worker.

ThunbergsAreGo

weldoninhio wrote: »

We have around 1 NGO per every 250 Irish people. That’s not waste, that’s corruption.

Yeah it's the ultimate quango area, with very little if any accountability.

Of course some provide very important services, and by consolidating them they could spend less on admin and more on helping people.

This left vs right stuff is getting ridiculous - anything bad = right wing. A supposed right wing outlook has seen Ireland move from a back water into a very prosperous first world country
No idea what's right wing about that, or wanting to prevent people from being able to commit 1000 crimes and getting a slap on the wrist

Bonniedog

There is no proper conservative voice here. Unlike in rest of Europe where they have done extremely well. My take on that is that as anglophone country we look at things through the eyes of British and American news, politics and popular "culture" - God help us.

There is nothing like the self flagellation over racism and slavery in France or Italy or Poland or other European states as there is here. Because their mass media isn't dominated by clones. Look at the endless cr@p that appears every day in Times and on RTE pretending that we need to be part of the BLM racket.

The entire political system is dominated by parties which agree on every main issue - the EU, abortion, immigration, multi nationals and their low tax take, transgenderism. No difference between FF and FG and SF on any of these. They hate one another, but that's personal and competition driven. As SF have proven in north they are exactly the same as the parties who have dominated politics in south since 1922.

Aontú partly stands out in being opposed to abortion, but has only one TD and seems to sing from same song sheet on all of the rest of the above.

So there is a need for a proper "right." NP might form part of that but it really needs to come from a more grounded place - the huge numbers of people who dissent from the liberal agenda but still vote for the established parties, or worse think they are kicking over the traaces by voting for the shinners under the illusion that SF is a nationalist party.

CarPark2

Bonniedog wrote: »

There is no proper conservative voice here. Unlike in rest of Europe where they have done extremely well. My take on that is that as anglophone country we look at things through the eyes of British and American news, politics and popular "culture" - God help us.

There is nothing like the self flagellation over racism and slavery in France or Italy or Poland or other European states as there is here. Because their mass media isn't dominated by clones. Look at the endless cr@p that appears every day in Times and on RTE pretending that we need to be part of the BLM racket.

The entire political system is dominated by parties which agree on every main issue - the EU, abortion, immigration, multi nationals and their low tax take, transgenderism. No difference between FF and FG and SF on any of these. They hate one another, but that's personal and competition driven. As SF have proven in north they are exactly the same as the parties who have dominated politics in south since 1922.

Aontú partly stands out in being opposed to abortion, but has only one TD and seems to sing from same song sheet on all of the rest of the above.

So there is a need for a proper "right." NP might form part of that but it really needs to come from a more grounded place - the huge numbers of people who dissent from the liberal agenda but still vote for the established parties, or worse think they are kicking over the traaces by voting for the shinners under the illusion that SF is a nationalist party.

What you call right wing seems to be focused on social conservatism. Traditionally, right wing has also encompassed pro-industry, low spend, low tax, economic policy. We had the PDs who were on the right in terms of economic policy, but very liberal on social policy. We had FF who, for years, were socially conservative and varied wildly on their economic policies.
The PDs disappeared due to not attracting enough voters and FF have changed their social policy (in order to continue to attract voters).

True enough, there is very little, if any, dissent from liberal social policy in the Dail. Renua tried, but didn't get elected. Aontu's one seat is probably more reflective of Peadar Toibin's personal popularity in his constituency than a strong regard for their policies. It seems that, at the moment, there isn't a big appetite for that.

The danger is that, with no mainstream party giving an outlet to a reasonably framed social conservatism, the role will be filled by crackpots who drive division, racism etc.
FF have always been the great catch-all party. I am not a fan of theirs, but by giving a voice to so many different groups, they have probably stopped crazies getting a foothold in Ireland.

Bonniedog

The new European conservative parties are largely traditionally left wing in economic terms as well as being conservative on what have come to be called "social issues" but are really to do with morality.

Law and Justice in Poland has policies that are welfarist for want of a better word, and they have slowed down radically the privitization of former state companies.

FF was historically not unlike PiS - up until the late 80s anyway, in combining basically social democratic economics with a traditional attitude towards abortion and other issues.

It is noteworthy too that the Danish social democrats have adopted far more sensible policies on immigration after their working class support base began to be eroded by the radical conservatives.

Here. they all parrot the same happy clappy nonsense with no account taken of the experience of other countries.

uptherebels

Bonniedog wrote: »

The entire political system is dominated by parties which agree on every main issue - the EU, abortion, immigration, multi nationals and their low tax take, transgenderism. No difference between FF and FG and SF on any of these. They hate one another, but that's personal and competition driven. As SF have proven in north they are exactly the same as the parties who have dominated politics in south since 1922.

Aontú partly stands out in being opposed to abortion, but has only one TD and seems to sing from same song sheet on all of the rest of the above.

And did you ever stop to ask yourself why?
The main parties agree on these, because that's what their voters want, or at least don't care enough to change their vote.
There is no point in contrarianism just for the sake of it. If you are against something, you need to come up with alternatives.
So what alternatives do you think parties should run on for the above issues?

CarPark2

jmayo wrote: »

Ireland's exchequer spends 5.5 billion on NGOs.
There are something like 19,500 NGOs registered in Ireland.

Do you have a source for those figures?

CarPark2

Bonniedog wrote: »

The new European conservative parties are largely traditionally left wing in economic terms as well as being conservative on what have come to be called "social issues" but are really to do with morality.

Law and Justice in Poland has policies that are welfarist for want of a better word, and they have slowed down radically the privitization of former state companies.

FF was historically not unlike PiS - up until the late 80s anyway, in combining basically social democratic economics with a traditional attitude towards abortion and other issues.

It is noteworthy too that the Danish social democrats have adopted far more sensible policies on immigration after their working class support base began to be eroded by the radical conservatives.

Here. they all parrot the same happy clappy nonsense with no account taken of the experience of other countries.

FF, despite their many wrongs didn't have a policy to break the separation of powers between executive and judiciary. I am very grateful that we don't have a party like PiS. But then i am probably not your target market!

Quin_Dub

If you look at any of the "successful" right wing leaders/parties around the world , the common theme is that they hark back to a supposed "golden age" or talk of winning back respect etc.

Trump - Make America Great Again - The White Picket fence 1950's view
UK Tories - Brexit to bring back the Empire
Putin - Restore Russian pride after the fall of the USSR
Orban - Hungarian Pride , Ottoman empire stuff.

And so on and so on..

In Ireland , we are living in our Golden Age , right now.

Despite current Covid Set-backs and even the 2008/2011 financial collapse it is an inarguable fact that everyone in Ireland today is immeasurably better off than they were 30 years ago.

We do not have a pair of Rose tinted glasses to put on - Until we joined the EEC/EU Ireland was a utter kip.

It's hard for anyone to get a significant majority of people in Ireland to agree with "Leave the EU" , "Take back control" and the like , because no one can look back and say "Oh yeah , remember how great it was before the EU??"

Whilst I don't disagree that there is room for a Party a little further to the right in terms of Economic policies there has yet to be one that manages to remain purely aligned to that aim - They pick up the Anti-EU , Anti Abortion/Gay Marriage type as well.

Renua is a classic example , they were ticking a lot of boxes for a lot of people on their economic polices and so on and then basically shot themselves in the head with 99% of those people by picking up the Anti-Abortion banner.

Reminds me of a house I went to visit with a view to buying it - The Price was excellent , good size , photos looked great , it was in the right part of town. I thought I was on to a winner.

When I got there though , it was next door to an abattoir and the stench was horrific and permeated everything about the place. I could smell it on me for a few days afterwards.

It was almost perfect , except for that one thing that utterly and completely ruined it.

Bonniedog

33% voted against abortion and two EU enlargement treaties were defeated.

Apart from a tiny number of TDs, that is a section of the electorate that is unrepresented.

It is a niche market apart from anything else!

CrankyHaus

weldoninhio wrote: »

Some do, but as I said, there are multiple upon multiple overlaps. Same with the charity industry in Ireland. Massive reform needed. And if the political will was there the savings to be made would free up money for other things like improved infrastructure, improved transport etc.

There will never be political will to reform the Quango/NGO sector as the politicians benefit too much from it.


By diverting taxpayers money to these private organisations they can purchase influence without having to put their hand in their own pocket. The payback comes at the end of their career when they lose their seat and get parachuted into a cushy position (or several) on the Board of NGOs without having any apparent expertise in the area; deferred bribery essentially. It's basically the standard political endgame at this stage. And it's all paid for by us.


The debate on the NGO/Quango sector is similarly distorted, or rather silenced, within the media for the same reason. Even here on Boards it's painfully apparent that those shouting down any discussion of this issue have connections to the Quango/NGO sector.

CarPark2

CrankyHaus wrote: »

There will never be political will to reform the Quango/NGO sector as the politicians benefit too much from it.


By diverting taxpayers money to these private organisations they can purchase influence without having to put their hand in their own pocket. The payback comes at the end of their career when they lose their seat and get parachuted into a cushy position (or several) on the Board of NGOs without having any apparent expertise in the area; deferred bribery essentially. It's basically the standard political endgame at this stage. And it's all paid for by us.


The debate on the NGO/Quango sector is similarly distorted, or rather silenced, within the media for the same reason. Even here on Boards it's painfully apparent that those shouting down any discussion of this issue have connections to the Quango/NGO sector.

This QUANGO/NGO talk mixes up two completely separate things. QUANGOs are state agencies (quasi-NGO - not actually NGO) and NGO are non-governmental organisations.
QUANGOs were much maligned around the time of the crash, and in a typically simplistic search for targets were viewed as the source of all our budgetary problems. The truth is that the state agencies tend to be more nimble and flexible than the civil service and, in the main, provide very good service for the state.
NGOs range from campaigning organisations to organisations such as Barnardos that provide services for citizens. In the latter case, the taxpayer also gets a good deal. The service is provided, but the state doesn't have to employ public servants, accumulate pension liability, permanency rights etc.

Doubtless there are are overlaps between NGOs. That isn't a reflection of malign intent, it is usually somebody who wants to make a contribution and, with good intentions, they set up an organisation to do something. The government's funding should try to minimise the number that they fund, in order to drive consolidation and efficiency, but it is not as simple as it is portrayed here.

CarPark2

Bonniedog wrote: »

33% voted against abortion and two EU enlargement treaties were defeated.

Apart from a tiny number of TDs, that is a section of the electorate that is unrepresented.

It is a niche market apart from anything else!

On those issues, there might be a niche market, but Renua and Aontu would seem to show that people elect their TDs based on other issues.

CrankyHaus

CarPark2 wrote: »

This QUANGO/NGO talk mixes up two completely separate things. QUANGOs are state agencies (quasi-NGO - not actually NGO) and NGO are non-governmental organisations.
QUANGOs were much maligned around the time of the crash, and in a typically simplistic search for targets were viewed as the source of all our budgetary problems. The truth is that the state agencies tend to be more nimble and flexible than the civil service and, in the main, provide very good service for the state.
NGOs range from campaigning organisations to organisations such as Barnardos that provide services for citizens. In the latter case, the taxpayer also gets a good deal. The service is provided, but the state doesn't have to employ public servants, accumulate pension liability, permanency rights etc.

Doubtless there are are overlaps between NGOs. That isn't a reflection of malign intent, it is usually somebody who wants to make a contribution and, with good intentions, they set up an organisation to do something. The government's funding should try to minimise the number that they fund, in order to drive consolidation and efficiency, but it is not as simple as it is portrayed here.

The distinction is blurred when both receive state funding and as a result are under its influence.

Citation needed for the assertion that both provide a good deal to the taxpayer.

I agree that consolidation and effuciency are desirable but the lack of these is baked in to the sector.

Ultimately what you have us a complex web of duplicated functions, resulting waste and a lack of transparency and accountability that enables cronyism.

I do some work with charities and am always impressed by the people I deal with. But the overall structure of the sector is deeply flawed.

rossie1977

coinop wrote: »

Is it not in the interest of democracy to have alternatives? FF/FG/SF/Labour/Greens are all singing from the same hymn sheet. They're all pro-EU, pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion.

Vast majority of Irish people are pro those things. No party is pro mass immigration.

There is a very strong party on this island that is anti all of those things, their name, the DUP!!

ArmaniJeanss

Bonniedog wrote: »

33% voted against abortion and two EU enlargement treaties were defeated.

Apart from a tiny number of TDs, that is a section of the electorate that is unrepresented.

It is a niche market apart from anything else!

I'm at the age group where the vote was starting to split 50/50 so about half the people that I'd call 'close friends' voted No. Generally they now consider the issue closed and not something they want revisited (and politics would often come up in our pub discussions). There's one vocal exception amongst my friends who is hardcore Gemma/Renua/NP, goes on the Life marches etc.

So whilst 33% voted No, I think it's a mistake to think there's anything close to that level of potential support for a party who put the issue front and centre.

Loafing Oaf

Bonniedog wrote: »

33% voted against abortion and two EU enlargement treaties were defeated.

Apart from a tiny number of TDs, that is a section of the electorate that is unrepresented.

It is a niche market apart from anything else!

Well 40% voted no to same-sex marriage. So there must be a market out there for a party that seeks to revisit that issue.

Right?

rossie1977

Walter Mondale got approximately 41% of the vote in the 1984 US election..

CarPark2

CrankyHaus wrote: »

The distinction is blurred when both receive state funding and as a result are under its influence.

Citation needed for the assertion that both provide a good deal to the taxpayer.

I agree that consolidation and effuciency are desirable but the lack of these is baked in to the sector.

Ultimately what you have us a complex web of duplicated functions, resulting waste and a lack of transparency and accountability that enables cronyism.

I do some work with charities and am always impressed by the people I deal with. But the overall structure of the sector is deeply flawed.

The distinction is very clear. State Agencies are under the control of the government. NGOs may be influenced by the government to a greater or lesser extent, but they are regularly critical of government policy. Lumping them all together means that you cannot tease out any of the issues with either group.

Regarding value to the citizen, that is obviously a matter of opinion. But NGOs that provide services that the state wants provided, in my opinion, offer good value for money. Pension and permanency are huge costs to the state providing a service. Getting that service provided by NGOs removes those liabilities from the state, saving a lot of money and giving great flexibility (when they no longer want the service, they simply stop providing the grant and don't have to worry about pensions, redundancy etc.).

jmayo

CarPark2 wrote: »

Do you have a source for those figures?

Ah yes when figures are very inconvenient to ones argument demand sources.

https://www.thejournal.ie/money-nonprofits-ireland-3964879-Apr2018/

Unsurprisingly, the government is the biggest source of funding for nonprofits, accounting for €5.5 billion.

At about €103 million donations are from Irish and international philanthropic institutions, and represents a tiny fraction of the sector’s €12.1 billion turnover.

The nonprofit sector employs 158,000, and receives 8% of the Exchequer spend.

At about €103 million donations are from Irish and international philanthropic institutions, and represents a tiny fraction of the sector’s €12.1 billion turnover.

The nonprofit sector employs 158,000, and receives 8% of the Exchequer spend.

Who are these nonprofits?

The breakdown of Ireland’s 29,000 nonprofits per sector/genre, is as follows:...

Now not sure if voluntary hospitals and universities are it seems lumped in with NGOs as they are in the not for profit sector?

BTW here is link to UNHCR website listing all the NGOs in Ireland in any way linked to refugees.

Makes for interesting reading :rolleyes:
You have the following listed:

• Irish Refugee Council
• Legal Aid Board
• Immigrant Council of Ireland
• Free Legal Advice Centres (FLAC)
• NASC
• IOM Ireland
• Irish Red Cross
• Spirasi
• Crosscare Refugee Service
• Doras Luimni
• Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
• Mayo Intercultural Action (WTF WTF)
• Migrant Rights Centre Ireland
• New Communities Partnership
• Clare Immigrant Support Centre (CISC)
• Immigrant Support Clinic, Kilkenny
• Tralee International Resource Centre (TIRC)
• The Killarney Asylum Seekers Initiative (KASI)

Well well well, we have quite the little industry going to cater for refugees, don't we.
And then add in all the others like yer man with all the DP centres and hotels.
It is quite the earner for some.


And here is even better one ... here is Irish state aid to Palestinian NGOs.
Oh wait it also lists Israeli ones as well.
But don't worry they are Israeli ones that monitor the Israeli authorities for not being nice.
So it's all ok. :rolleyes:

Direct Funding from the Irish Government

Beginning in 2017, Irish Aid’s annual reports only includes grants over €100,000. Direct funding to Palestinian and Israeli NGOs in 2017-2018 was obtained via a Freedom of Information request to the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Irish Aid Funding to NGOs Active in the Arab-Israeli Conflict (amounts in €)
Search:
NGO 2018 2017 2016
Addameer 75,000 75,000 75,000
Al-Haq 80,000 80,000 80,000
BADIL 4,000
Bimkom 85,000 85,000 85,000
Comet-ME 75,000 75,000 75,000
Geneva Initiative 50,000
Gisha 90,000 90,000 90,000
Haqel 4,000
Ir Amim 4,000
Jerusalem Legal Aid & Human Rights Centre (JLAC)
75,000 75,000 75,000
MIFTAH 70,000 70,000 70,000
Palestinian Center for Human Rights
80,000 80,000 80,000
Yesh Din 90,000 90,000 90,000
Women Wage Peace 20,000

https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/ireland/

Bonniedog

Employment in 2020 in NGO sector is now 173,000 and budget increased to €5.9 billion this year, with added funding since to help them during pandemic.

I'm sure a minority are genuinely helping people but the bigger ones spend two-thirds of their (our) money on wages!

(All stats from Benefacts which is also an NGO that gets €1.13 billion and employs 16 people to gather statistics on other NGOs!)

So basically the sector is haven for liberals and lefties who get paid by the taxpayer to lecture them on how they could be more progressive.

"Asylum" sector is big earner for these parasites, and of course the legal profession massively wets its beak helping those fleeing oppression. Except most of them are not.

Quin_Dub

Bonniedog wrote: »

Employment in 2020 in NGO sector is now 173,000 and budget increased to €5.9 billion this year, with added funding since to help them during pandemic.

I'm sure a minority are genuinely helping people but the bigger ones spend two-thirds of their (our) money on wages!

(All stats from Benefacts which is also an NGO that gets €1.13 billion and employs 16 people to gather statistics on other NGOs!)

So basically the sector is haven for liberals and lefties who get paid by the taxpayer to lecture them on how they could be more progressive.

"Asylum" sector is big earner for these parasites, and of course the legal profession massively wets its beak helping those fleeing oppression. Except most of them are not.

That's not necessarily a bad thing , if those employees are actually delivering a needed Service.

The split of funds between Admin and Actual Service delivery is the important measure - Plenty fall short in this regard , but equally a lot do not and a large proportion of the money is spent on actual delivery of services/benefit to the target audience.

Bonniedog

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That's not necessarily a bad thing , if those employees are actually delivering a needed Service.

.

But they are not. Age Action for example is an advocacy group that employs around 100 people which absorbs over two thirds of their budget.

Their only function is to lobby the state on marginal budgetary changes and issue press statements.

They are not out shopping for the elderly, mowing their grass, or wiping their bottoms.

Same can be said for most NGOs in my experience.

They are incoprporated into the state. They are in no position to be oppositional even if they wanted to. The most vocal ones such as those on asylum and gender and abortion are singing from the same song sheet as the political elite anyway. And what is more the abortion side in referendum were directly funded by the state.

jmayo

Bonniedog wrote: »

Employment in 2020 in NGO sector is now 173,000 and budget increased to €5.9 billion this year, with added funding since to help them during pandemic.

I'm sure a minority are genuinely helping people but the bigger ones spend two-thirds of their (our) money on wages!

(All stats from Benefacts which is also an NGO that gets €1.13 billion and employs 16 people to gather statistics on other NGOs!)

So basically the sector is haven for liberals and lefties who get paid by the taxpayer to lecture them on how they could be more progressive.

"Asylum" sector is big earner for these parasites, and of course the legal profession massively wets its beak helping those fleeing oppression. Except most of them are not.

From looking at the journal figures I listed above, it looks like a huge hunk of the money being spent and the numbers employed are in likes of voluntary hospitals, universities since they are deemed not for profit.

Maybe someone can confirm that.

But even if you do take those out you have thousands upon thousands of charities and not for profit organisations that all have full time employees and are primarily funded by the state.

For instance big one is the much beloved media star Fr Peter McVerry and his trust.

Now yes we know he doesn't take a salary, expenses or anything else, but that's where it stops.
They are quick to plaster it all over their governance web page.


Yes we know they operate 11 homeless hostels, over 390 residential units, hundreds of apartments, a residential drug detox centre and two drug stabilisation services.
In 2018 they had over 500 staff.

They had 14 staff that earned more than 60k.

But did you know they fund employees to go to college ?

In 2018 they had revenue of nearly 39 million of which 24 million came from the state.
They actually had a surplus of over 10 million, which was used to fund property acquisitions.
They also had reserves of over 20 million.

Their staff costs in raising funds was nearly 500k.
Their compute and IT costs were over 190k.
Their Staff costs for their charitable activities were over 19million

Yes they provide often much needed services but they are also a business in all but name.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That's not necessarily a bad thing , if those employees are actually delivering a needed Service.

The split of funds between Admin and Actual Service delivery is the important measure - Plenty fall short in this regard , but equally a lot do not and a large proportion of the money is spent on actual delivery of services/benefit to the target audience.

Yeah call me callous but I don't find funding services to Palestinians to be my preferable target audience.
There are a lot of target audiences in Ireland, such as carers, physically disabled, intellectually disabled who could well do with those funds.

Bonniedog

You should check Benefacts. They have a search option which gives total breakdown of funding and staffing.

Also gives directors and trustees and it is amazing the number of these who pop up in different NGOs.

It is incestuous little world peopled especially at the high end by small circle who get one another handy numbers and who move from one to the other. Chap I know has worked in four different NGOs since leaving university. Jobs are advertised but that's just for show.

NovemberWren

@ Quin_Dub. So, you became a vegetarian?

NovemberWren

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Any evidence that we're being replaced?

[ahem, let me preface this with, a best pal on mine in London was, refugee, non-national].

dail eireann, Nov.2018, simon coveney, @c.48 mins.

Loafing Oaf

At some award ceremony back in the day, Bono declared U2's intention to "f**k up the mainstream". Well, Justin Barrett's mob are about as likely to "enter the mainstream" in any serious way as U2 ever were to f**k it up...

Realt Dearg Sec

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

At some award ceremony back in the day, Bono declared U2's intention to "f**k up the mainstream". Well, Justin Barrett's mob are about as likely to "enter the mainstream" in any serious way as U2 ever were to f**k it up...

Like untreated sewage sluicing into the Liffey, the national party are entering the mainstream.

circadian

coinop wrote: »

Let's have a thread about Ireland rather than America for a change. Founded in November 2016, the National Party was founded by Justin Barrett and his old friend James Reynolds. The two men had been involved in pro-life activism as teenagers and Barrett got a taste of the media spotlight during his No campaign to the Nice Treaty referendum in the early 2000s.

The National Party revolves around 9 core principles which makes it unique among Irish political parties in that it is ideologically based rather than following the populist trend of the day. The main points of NP ideology are: support for a 32 county Ireland, against mass immigration and against abortion.

The NP tested the waters by running candidates in the 2020 general election but none of their candidates were elected with only a few hundred votes each. The party blamed the media's determination to ignore them for their poor performance with most voters claiming to have never heard of the NP. Newspapers had incorrectly listed NP candidates as Independents if they even listed them at all. It seemed like there was a concerted effort by the mainstream media to pretend the NP did not exist and hope that they would fade away.

That all changed last night with RTE's hatchet job on Justin Barrett and the Nationalist movement in Ireland. RTE have realised that the NP are not going away so have decided they must take Barrett down. The public discovered the NP after the last general election and now the cat is out of the bag. They will build upon their name recognition for a more successful election run next time around. How do the esteemed posters of Boards feel about the NP?

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Eric Cartman

CarPark2 wrote: »

What you call right wing seems to be focused on social conservatism. Traditionally, right wing has also encompassed pro-industry, low spend, low tax, economic policy. We had the PDs who were on the right in terms of economic policy, but very liberal on social policy. We had FF who, for years, were socially conservative and varied wildly on their economic policies.
The PDs disappeared due to not attracting enough voters and FF have changed their social policy (in order to continue to attract voters).

True enough, there is very little, if any, dissent from liberal social policy in the Dail. Renua tried, but didn't get elected. Aontu's one seat is probably more reflective of Peadar Toibin's personal popularity in his constituency than a strong regard for their policies. It seems that, at the moment, there isn't a big appetite for that.

The danger is that, with no mainstream party giving an outlet to a reasonably framed social conservatism, the role will be filled by crackpots who drive division, racism etc.
FF have always been the great catch-all party. I am not a fan of theirs, but by giving a voice to so many different groups, they have probably stopped crazies getting a foothold in Ireland.

Weneed to seperate fiscal conservative parties (the PD’s) and anti abortion parties (aontu/renua)

Theres a huge market for a fiscal conservative and anti immigration etc.. party in Ireland. They just need to keep as far out of the abortion / anything else catholic debate

The Nal

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Theres a huge market for a fiscal conservative and anti immigration etc.. party in Ireland. They just need to keep as far out of the abortion / anything else catholic debate

Nope. See the pathetic numbers the anti immigration lot got in the election. None got over 2%.

It may be a big thing i you're on twitter too much but not in the real world.

Eric Cartman

The Nal wrote: »

Nope. See the pathetic numbers the anti immigration lot got in the election. None got over 2%.

It may be a big thing i you're on twitter too much but not in the real world.

We dont have any anti immigration parties who dont fall into the same catholic sand traps.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

We dont have any anti immigration parties who dont fall into the same catholic sand traps.

They're the issues for the public that mattered to them... Not a question about parties.

JohnnyFlash

Things must be desperate in that party when an absolute fruit and nut bar like Justin Barrett is leader.