Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General Irish politics discussion thread

Options
15253555758154

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Any political party of that size will leave a for better or worse mark.

    What it has to do with the points made, I don't know. Seems to me, if involving yourself in unsuitable coalitions leads to your demise, you are doing something wrong.

    You will have people here demeaning and dimminishing the work and influence of opposition...I reject that totally, opposition is vital in a democracy.

    Would the PD's have been ultimately better off taking opposition seriously and surviving as a political force? Absolutely IMO



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,911 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    The PDs brought change to this country, they achieved some of their goals.

    The likes of PBP and Solidarity have achieved none of their goals. There is no legacy of PBP. Ditto SF, nothing achieved.

    If you put survival above achieving change, then you are correct.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,906 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Talking of bandwagon jumping, SF jumping on the pro-choice bandwagon in 2018 was something else.

    The way they went on it was as if they'd been behind the campaign all along. Actual pro-choice campaigners found their hypocrisy sickening but welcomed the belated support all the same.

    It's an interesting sort of political party where the policy completely about-faces and then the membership endorse that policy change after the fact.

    The Dublin Airport cap is damaging the economy of Ireland as a whole, and must be scrapped forthwith.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    This is just taunting from a position of arrogance. As I said earlier, when you are too long in power arrogance is endemic.

    Anyone who rejects the idea of opposition in democratic politics or who claims that it 'achieves nothing' is not a democrat.

    I can look at what FG and FF did in their terms as opposition and give credence to their existence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You must have confused me with someone who was making comparisons.

    Political parties are ultimately political parties, they will be under pressure from public opinion all the time. SF are no different in that regard to any other political party here. I have not claimed they are.

    The point I made was the 'opposition' (I don't mean SF specifically here BTW) forced the government to take account of that public shift. In the illustrated case, FG most definitely shifted as a result of opposition and activist pressure.

    If you could stop the persistent whataboutry and debate the point, that would be good.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yes, having an opposition is vital for effective democracy. Poor opposition parties can lead to completely unchecked power so they have a role to play.

    Parties not in government can also have a significant effect on policies - of late the Green "movement" in Europe would be one good such example.

    However, significantly more often than not you will achieve far more in power than anyone in opposition can hope to achieve. The PDs would have been an irrelevance as an opposition party.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    We have different definitions of ‘achievement’ so.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,809 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    The SSM referendum came about as a result of Labour being part of a coalition government, and working with their allies on the socially liberal wing within FG (Shatter being prominent amongst them).

    You've given an example that directly contradicts the point you thought you were making



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,911 ✭✭✭✭blanch152




  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady



    It was the massive vote in favour (approx 80%) at the Constitutional Convention that changed the lead party's mind IMO, they rejected Labour's call for a referendum initially, treating them as I said most if not all smaller parties have.

    They simply couldn't ignore it anymore after that convention. Labour certainly and to their credit, held FG's feet to the fire, but that does not mean that a 'coalition' party was solely responsible.

    Even though they deserve credit, what happened Labour at the next election is more proof of my point. They lost 30 seats in 2016, another one in 2020 and now have 6 seats.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,911 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Again, it proves the opposite.

    Labour delivered the SSM referendum, achieving one of their political aims, only by being in the Government.

    The Greens are another good example, getting wiped out every second election, but getting into government every other election and achieving their political objectives. Meanwhile the permanent parties of opposition like PBP and SF, sit and wail and cry on the sidelines like the typical hurler on the ditch.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Peter Flynt


    Surprise surprise as many FG TDs and others are a bit pissed off that those conspiring against Varadkar last week were overwhelming in their praise and hypocrisy at a parliamentary party meeting on Wednesday. The following day, yesterday, FG received their worst ever poll result from an IT/Ipsos Poll, leaving them at 18%. LV's own personal rating fell by 6%. I have to say that's peak Fine Gael - not the sharpest tools in the box.

    For the first time though it makes me think that a possible leadership election within FG could happen this year. Another bad poll would probably bring it about so watch out for announcements in public investment from LV out of sheer desperation in due course (as the same poll describes the public's desire for increased public investment in health and education ahead of tax cuts and just behind house building).

    We are a year away from effectively what will be 6 months of campaigning and electioneering. The 2024 European Elections and Council Elections are 11 months away with the General Election around 6 months after that. Too many people in FG are nervous now about either losing their seats or not getting elected at all. Some have seen the wood from the trees and announced they're going anyway.

    For LV the writing is probably on the wall. He's been an appalling leader.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I haven't claimed that smaller coalition parties have 'not achieved' some things.

    I am looking at the wider picture and the cost (substantial IMO) of involving yourself in coalitions where in the main you will be destroyed.

    The evidence is in the size and continued existence of these party's after they come out of coalition.

    *Again with the anti democratic taunting. Predictable tbh. IMO staying in opposition forever is legitimate as long as you fulfill the duties of proper opposition, holding government to account and scrutinising/questioning their legislative activity etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,444 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Considering the apology by the Gardai to Pat Carey, will Fionnan Sheehan do the same?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,219 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Nobody runs on a platform of staying in opposition and holding the government to account and nobody gets into politics to do likewise. People get into politics because they want to implement policies that they feel are best for their country. The best way to do that is part of a government and in this country that's nearly always going to be a coalition government.

    Being the minority party doesn't necessarily lead to evisceration at the next election either.

    People forget that the PDs were part of a couple of coalition governments where they didn't suffer any electoral consequences:

    • In 1992 they gained 4 seats having being in coalition with FF after the 1989 election
    • In 2002 they again gained 4 seats having entered into coalition with FF in 1997

    They then elected Michael McDowell as leader and the rest is history



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Exception that proves the rule maybe?

    I agree with you, nobody gets into politics to be in opposition. But that is the derisory insult I responded to. Many people don’t get into it to sell out either.

    There is honest benefitial work that can be done in opposition too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Spilly123


    POLL: ST/B&A


    (June 1-13, MoE 3.3%)


    Sinn Féin - 34 (-1 in a month) 

    Fine Gael - 20 (+3)

    Fianna Fáil - 21 (-1)

    Labour - 6 (+2)

    Green Party - 6 (+1)

    Social Democrats - 2 (-1)

    Solidarity/PBP - 2 (+1)

    Independents - 9 (-3)

    Renua - 1 (+1)

    Aontú - 0 (-1)



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,219 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    Decent poll for Labour and the Greens. Big difference between the recent Ipsos poll and this one for the Soc Dems (5% vs 2%). With a MoE of 3.3% though it's hard to know how much to read into any of the above.

    Kinda shocked that Renua is still an option. They haven't had any national level representatives since 2016. I don't believe they have any elected representatives, at any level, anywhere in the country.......Just checked and yup, not only have they no representatives but they're not even called Renua anymore. They rebranded to the Centre Party of Ireland (ha!) 2 months ago. Their old website no longer works and their Renua twitter account hasn't tweeted since March. I can't find any website or social media accounts for that new name.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,219 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    While looking at the current register of political parties (dated 26th April 2023) I found the following parties that I had either never heard of or did not realise still existed:

    • Communist Party of Ireland (for people who crave the original)
    • Kerry Independent Alliance (surprisingly, not a Healy-Rae vehicle)
    • Fís Nua (I remember these guys from 2011. Presumed they had been wound up long ago)
    • United People (no idea - headquarters in Louth though)
    • Human Dignity Alliance (Ronan Mullen named as one of the officers)
    • Reform Alliance (Cork crank Diarmaid O Cadhla named as one of the officers)
    • Party for Animal Welfare (Parties like this have done well in the Netherlands - probably a tougher order to get elected in a country without a list system)
    • The Right To Change Party (Joan Collin's latest rebrand)
    • Ireland First (the newest fash party on the block)


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    There is an argument that referring to minority parties in coalitions as "selling out" is part of the problem that results in their downfall at subsequent elections.

    For a country that relies on coalitions, we are terrible at honestly appraising those involved in them against realistic expectations. While you can (and should) have red lines, you are fundamentally going to have to support significant policies that you don't agree with. That is compromise, not selling out.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,080 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Theres no way Labour and the Greens are both on 6. No way in hell. That's so off the other polls that B&A would want to take a hard look at what they're at.

    Sure Jesus, if the coalition honestly believed they were on 47%, we'd have a general election in a fortnight.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    This smacks of patronising.

    The voter is well able to know the difference in my opinion.

    There is compromising and then there is selling out the basic principles that saw you exist in the first place.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    The voter is well able to know the difference in my opinion.

    Fair enough. I disagree.

    And yes, it could be argued as patronising. Though politics engenders a lot of that in general. The small parties are not without fault and messaging to convey what they are achieving is important and not always done well. But I fundamentally think that we are bad at judging coalition governments.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    President coming under fire for his comments on NATO.

    The government need to spell out to the baying hounds that there is nothing unconstitutional about what the President did. There is no bar on what a President can say or give an opinion on unless he is addressing the Dáil, or making a formal Address to the Nation. Constitutionally he needs permission from the government on those occaisions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,219 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    Given the stated MoE they could both be on less than 3% each



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,444 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Don't think a President can make comments that contradict Govn't policy.

    NATO and our interaction with it is up for discussion. I think though the thinking is, a wide selection of people as possible contribute, not to be led by the President. BTW I probably wouldn't be in favour of joining NATO but I do see some defence type obligations with the EU.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,906 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    United People (no idea - headquarters in Louth though)

    A one-man band - Jeff Rudd - he used to be a very prolific poster on Boards.

    The Dublin Airport cap is damaging the economy of Ireland as a whole, and must be scrapped forthwith.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,208 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    Shedquarter not headquarters if I remember correctly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,199 ✭✭✭Good loser


    Crticised quite correctly in my opinion. He should butt out of political isssues i.e. those matters which are seriously contested along party lines. AS is currently the case with neutrality/NATO etc. The requirements for this rule are well established, settled and sensible. No way, of course, would SF, PBP etc not make a major row of it if he advocated the opposite e,g, if he said our EU membership, the war in Ukraine, the decisions of Finland and Sweden made it imperative that we look anew at our obligations for EU joint defence and re-examine our neutrality.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Criticise away, he is perfectly correct to give his view.

    Protocol is only protocol until somebody is brave enough to break it.



Advertisement