# What's so wrong with Enda?



## Ceist Beag (4 Oct 2006)

I've heard numerous people say over the past few days, regarding the Bertie episode, that even though they think Bertie did wrong by taking the money and they don't believe the stories about it being a loan and so on, they would still rather Bertie than Enda when the next election comes around.
So why is it that Enda gets such a bad rap? Is it purely a popularity contest between the leaders? Enda might not be the most charismatic person around but to me he seems like a decent fella and I think he deserves a chance. Also, there are arguments put out about a lack of policies from Fine Gael and Labour. But how about the poor policies put in place already by the current government?  BTW I should point out that I am not affiliated to either Fine Gael or Labour, just mystified as to why people seem to tolerate once thing after another with the current government, be it health care scandals or politicians in hot water, and as far as I can see it's all because they just like Bertie as our leader!


----------



## dontaskme (4 Oct 2006)

he's probably a nice guy but he's very wooden.


----------



## lemeister (4 Oct 2006)

For me, he just doesn't inspire any conviction in what he says and his stance most issues is to just take the opposing view to the government.  This really goads me as while the government certainly don't get it right in a lot of areas, not everything they do is wrong but Enda and Co. will still voice an alternate opinion.


----------



## Ceist Beag (4 Oct 2006)

lemeister I think you'll find that's the nature of being the opposition. I think that if Fianna Fail were the opposition they would do exactly the same thing - it's just that Fine Gael have been the opposition for so long it looks like it's just something they do! As for Enda being wooden - I agree he does come across this way a bit but that's back to my point - is it just a popularity contest? In that regard Bertie's arrogance certainly gets on my goat!


----------



## Sunny (4 Oct 2006)

Personally speaking, I would love if there was an strong opposition to the current government. Make politics more interesting and gives the public a real choice come election time. I would just wish that Enda and Pat could show leadership. As mentioned above, there is an awful lot of negative politics going on. The government announces something and Enda cries out. And you are correct when you say that is the nature of being in opposition but I want my opposition to be ramming their ideas down my throat. I want to be told how they are going make my nightmare commute in Dublin easier, how they are going to fix the health service. (And for me to think they are good ideas). I don't just want to be told that the government ideas are rubbish. 

Another thing that I don't like about the opposition is the seemingly lack of depth in the parties. Apart from Enda, Pat and Richard Bruton, I would struggle to name the transport or health spokesperson.

Also I would much rather go a pint with Bertie and Michael than Enda and Pat!!


----------



## Glenbhoy (4 Oct 2006)

Sunny said:


> Also I would much rather go a pint with Bertie and Michael than Enda and Pat!!


So long as you know that you'll be the one paying for Bertie's pint


----------



## Humpback (4 Oct 2006)

As was mentioned on the radio this morning, the fact that Enda and Pat asked multi-layered questions was enough to totally screw up the way they appeared, and to let Bertie off the hook.

Asking such questions let Bertie answer only the ones he wanted, and ignore the ones he didn't like or want to answer.

All either of them had to do to show they were a proper opposition was to stand up and ask one question each.

1. Do you think what you did was wrong? (Seeing as they were intent on asking this question)

2. Where did you get the €50,000 savings that you keep talking about?

Pushing for answers of only those two questions would have done a lot more than they achieved yesterday.

You really gotta wonder about the advisors that are behind these people that they can't work out such simplicities. Then again, remember Enda's drunk tank speech. Couldn't expect any better really.


----------



## Calina (4 Oct 2006)

ronan_d_john said:


> You really gotta wonder about the advisors that are behind these people that they can't work out such simplicities. Then again, remember Enda's drunk tank speech. Couldn't expect any better really.



Well having seen the FG poster campaign, I'm not wondering about their advisors at all. It sounds like their current campaign is coming from Posters R Us with their sombre looking Endas telling us he "will lead a government that works as hard as you do" and "it's time for a new team". Terribly convincing all the same...

I like my opposition to come up with ideas of their own. Somehow, FG and Labour don't appear to be able to do anything other than whinge about the current incumbants. It's not all that inspiring.


----------



## Bamhan (4 Oct 2006)

ronan_d_john said:


> As was mentioned on the radio this morning, the fact that Enda and Pat asked multi-layered questions was enough to totally screw up the way they appeared, and to let Bertie off the hook.
> 
> Asking such questions let Bertie answer only the ones he wanted, and ignore the ones he didn't like or want to answer.
> 
> ...




Could not agree more when Enda got his chance he droned on and on and on like the bore he appears to be, all high moral ground.
He had a chance to actually ask a direct question and demand an answer yet he chose to waffle on and on until he was force to shut up in the end.


----------



## ubiquitous (4 Oct 2006)

Calina said:


> I like my opposition to come up with ideas of their own.



Not much point in doing this, at least until an election is imminent, as the Govt would simply steal all the good ideas, implement them and claim the credit. This problem dogs the main opposition parties in all countries and helps to explain why the Democrats in the US, and the Tories in the UK, have tended to struggle while in opposition over the past decade or so.


----------



## ubiquitous (4 Oct 2006)

ronan_d_john said:


> All either of them had to do to show they were a proper opposition was to stand up and ask one question each.
> 
> 1. Do you think what you did was wrong?



I thought I saw Pat Rabitte asking this precise question in the Dail on the 9pm news last night?


----------



## HotdogsFolks (4 Oct 2006)

When I look at him I sense "coward". He is not leader material.

I actually went for a job interview with Fine Gael a few years back. They were an unbelievably close minded bunch* so I'm not surprised they elected someone like him as leader. 

*We were talking politics. They could not comprehend I had sympathy for the Palestinian cause. All they could do was drop their mouths and say "but the bombs!!". Scary stuff...


----------



## Humpback (4 Oct 2006)

HotdogsFolks said:


> They could not comprehend I had sympathy for the Palestinian cause.


 
Cause that's a great topic to bring up at any sort of interview


----------



## Purple (4 Oct 2006)

A vote for Enda is a vote for Pat and Bertie is better than Pat, no matter how bad Bertie gets. If Labour had not been taken over by DL a few years ago I would like to see Enda in office. Bring back Ruairi Quinn...


----------



## HotdogsFolks (4 Oct 2006)

ronan_d_john said:


> Cause that's a great topic to bring up at any sort of interview


 
We were talking about world politics


----------



## TarfHead (4 Oct 2006)

He's more of a chaplain than a general - a charisma-free zone.


----------



## daltonr (4 Oct 2006)

> For me, he just doesn't inspire any conviction in what he says and his stance most issues is to just take the opposing view to the government. This really goads me as while the government certainly don't get it right in a lot of areas, not everything they do is wrong but Enda and Co. will still voice an alternate opinion.


 

*Ahern 1996 to the Dail (While in Opposition)*
We would regard any attempt to push Partnership for Peace or participation in Western European Union tasks by resolution in this House without reference to the people who under our Constitution have the right ‘in final appeal to decide all questions of national policy’ as a serious breach of faith and fundamentally undemocratic.

*1997 Fianna Fail Manifesto (While in Opposition)*
We will oppose any moves to edge Ireland closer to membership of an alliance still committed to the deployment and use of nuclear weapons. We oppose Irish participation in N.A.T.O. itself, [and] in N.A.T.O.-led organisations such as the Partnership for Peace

*January 1999 (Having been elected to government)*
I would envisage, all going well that Ireland will join the Partnership for Peace on a mutually agreed basis in the second half of this year, and the Government will be working towards that timetable.

*May 1999*
The Government is to publish an information paper on its plan for Ireland’s membership of the NATO-linked Partnership for Peace organisation. But the Taoiseach told a news conference it remained the Coalition’s firm position that the issue did not require a referendum.


Pick your favourites if you must, and for whatever reasons you see fit. But make sure your reasons are valid.

-Rd


----------



## TarfHead (4 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> *Ahern 1996 to the Dail (While in Opposition)*
> We would regard any attempt to push Partnership for Peace or participation in Western European Union tasks by resolution in this House without reference to the people who under our Constitution have the right ‘in final appeal to decide all questions of national policy’ as a serious breach of faith and fundamentally undemocratic.
> 
> *1997 Fianna Fail Manifesto (While in Opposition)*
> ...


 
"_A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. _"
Ralph Waldo Emerson


----------



## ClubMan (4 Oct 2006)

Or:

_"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
_
-- Groucho Marx


----------



## Purple (4 Oct 2006)

ClubMan said:


> Or:
> 
> _"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
> _
> -- Groucho Marx



 He also said "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted."


----------



## ninsaga (4 Oct 2006)

No disrespect to Enda..but is this the best that FG (or any opposition party) can come up with? I think that they are depending on FF/PD screw ups to sway the electorate rather than having clear strong leadership who can show that they mean business.


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> He also said "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted."


OK - how about this instead...

_"In the choice between changing one's mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof."
_
-- JK Galbraith


----------



## Glenbhoy (5 Oct 2006)

Or my own favourite from Shaw:



> Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.


----------



## bacchus (5 Oct 2006)

He spends his time and energy criticising everything that has been done and is being done in this country for the sake of "opposition".

If he was to be elected and was to fail at delivering his "promises", I bet you he will blame the Irish citizens for having electing him...
That what 's wrong with this man!!


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

Replace "he/him" with any politician's name and you have probably summed up most politics in most coutries.


----------



## Purple (5 Oct 2006)

He reminds me of someone from an RTE documentary from the 1950's. His demeanour and use of language seems to be from a bygone era. He may well be a great guy but he does not come across very well.
The fact that he's joined at the hip with a party run by former republican Sinn Fein members it also a turn off.


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

_Enda Kenny _is a ringer for those line drawings of men who looked like the they were stuck in the 1950s that were contained in the [broken link removed] series of books!


----------



## Purple (5 Oct 2006)

ClubMan said:


> _Enda Kenny _is a ringer for those line drawings of men who looked like the they were stuck in the 1950s that were contained in the [broken link removed] series of books!



I knew I recognised him!


----------



## Glenbhoy (5 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> The fact that he's joined at the hip with a party run by former republican Sinn Fein members it also a turn off.


Who?  Presumably you are referring to Deputy Rabbitte with that paisleyite style deliberately inaccurate description, throw some mud and sure some will always stick eh?


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> The fact that he's joined at the hip with a party run by former republican Sinn Fein members it also a turn off.


What former _RSF _members runs the _Labour Party_? I think you are completely wrong on this and it's a very dodgy comment to make. Are you confusing _RSF _with _Democratic Left _(and their precursors)?


----------



## daltonr (5 Oct 2006)

It's interesting that the week could start out with revelations about payments to the guy currently running the country.  
That led to revelations of Tax evasion by the guy currently running the country.  
That led to tearful spinning of stories about his family, and his life as a homeless person in Dublin to try and get sympathy, when the facts weren't on his side.
That led to a dail debate in which he basically says he did nothing wrong, but he wouldn't do it again.

And at the end of that week, you've all moved on to discussing why the leader of the opposition shouldn't be Taoiseach, because his hair isn't right, or his style of speech sounds like something from the 50s.

It seems a little corruption can be excused as long as the leader looks good, and talks properly.   That's presumably why Bertie Ahern is Taoiseach.  Is it his diction or his stunning good looks that turns you on?

This is precisely what Fianna Fail and the PD's bank on when they dig their heels in after a scandal.   Doesn't matter what it is, the Irish people have the attention span of a goldfish with alzheimer's.  The media don't bother sticking with the real story because the public have already moved on to talking about which party leader has the nicest finger nails.

I've often heard the phrase "you get the government you deserve".  I've even used it myself from time to time.  But I've never truly understood it until this week.

-Rd


----------



## Purple (5 Oct 2006)

ClubMan said:


> What former _RSF _members runs the _Labour Party_? I think you are completely wrong on this and it's a very dodgy comment to make. Are you confusing _RSF _with _Democratic Left _(and their precursors)?


I stand corrected, I meant Official Sinn Fein. Apologies for any offence caused. 
Pat Rabbitte and Proinsias De Rossa (and other back-room staff) who are key figures in the Labour party were members of Democratic Left. They can trace their roots to the Workers Party and official Sinn Fein.
My point was meant in the context of their economic policies. I did not mean to imply that they have any provisional links/ leanings. Proinsias De Rossa is one of the most outspoken critics of the IRA in Ireland and I agree with his views on the matter.
What I find hard to square is how FG ,and Enda Kenny in particular, and the current Labour party could formulate or implement economic policy. Enda is from the old school right of centre wing of FG and Pat is an old school socialist: chalk and cheese.


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> It seems a little corruption can be excused


By whom? Somebody here? Or elsewhere? What corruption has been established as fact?


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> Enda is from the old school right of centre wing of FG and Pat is an old school socialist: chalk and cheese.


Actually I reckon that like most politicians these days they sit in or around the centre regardless of the historical policies of their parties.


----------



## Purple (5 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> It's interesting that the week could start out with revelations about payments to the guy currently running the country.
> That led to revelations of Tax evasion by the guy currently running the country.
> That led to tearful spinning of stories about his family, and his life as a homeless person in Dublin to try and get sympathy, when the facts weren't on his side.
> That led to a dail debate in which he basically says he did nothing wrong, but he wouldn't do it again.
> ...




I just fear that Enda and Pat will screw things up even more than the current lot. If it was Enda and Ruairi Quinn (or one of the old Labour party guys) I would probably vote for them.


----------



## daltonr (5 Oct 2006)

> I just fear that Enda and Pat will screw things up even more than the current lot.


 
That's a fair concern, but surprisingly not the concern most people seem to have, based on this thread.

Even so, If things are going to be screwed up one way or the other then isn't it better that it be done by someone why might be honest, rather than by someone who definitely isn't?

At least then you could focus debate on mistakes made by government, rather than getting side tracked into discussions about whether their screw ups were done on purpose to enrich some or other friend of theirs.

*Deal with the Catholic Church - Incompetence or deliberate?

*Social Housing Scheme - Incompetence or deliberate?

*Purchase of farm for prison at twice market rate - Incompetence or deliberate?

*One of, if not the most badly planned capital cities in Europe - Incompetence or deliberate?

*Purchase of properties to hold immigrants, over priced, never used - Incompetence or deliberate?

*Incentives on property investment in a housing boom - Incompetence or deliberate?

You get the picture.

If you believe Fianna Fail are basically more capable and competent, then doesn't it make sense to keep them in opposition long enough to realise that they won't be getting back into government until they actually clean up their act, rather than pretending to, as Bertie has done. 

-Richard


----------



## Glenbhoy (5 Oct 2006)

ClubMan said:


> By whom? Somebody here? Or elsewhere? What corruption has been established as fact?


Maybe no corruption has yet been established, it is quite clear however that there has been tax evasion, whilst this has presumably been forgotten by many, one imagines that the revenue will have no choice but to follow up on this (probably when Mr. Ahern is no longer the incumbent taoiseach) for fear of setting a very dangerous precedent.



Purple said:


> I just fear that Enda and Pat will screw things up even more than the current lot. If it was Enda and Ruairi Quinn (or one of the old Labour party guys) I would probably vote for them.


I also think it's a bit off for 2 parties purportedly from totally divergent ends of the political spectrum to align pre-election, it's also about time they came out with some policies, however, I don't think it's possible to screw things up more than the current lot, what could they possibly do worse??


----------



## daltonr (5 Oct 2006)

> Maybe no corruption has yet been established, it is quite clear however that there has been tax evasion,


 
I consider tax evasion by the people who make the laws, and lead the country to be corruption. I don't limit the definition to favours in returns for bribes.

-Rd


----------



## sherib (5 Oct 2006)

> Originally quoted by *Glenbhoy*
> ...it is quite clear however that there has been tax evasion, whilst this has presumably been forgotten by many,...


Could you please expand on this - I'd very much like to know since I can't remember it either.


----------



## daltonr (5 Oct 2006)

> Could you please expand on this - I'd very much like to know since I can't remember it either.


 
Mr Ahern received 39000 punts from a group of "friends". He claimed this was a loan and as such was not subject to tax as a gift.

However did didn't repay this loan or any interest on it until he was caught. After 7 years the "loan" would have become a gift, and as such was liable for tax. Tax Evasion 1.

Even if we accept that Mr Ahern didn't know this, ignorance is no defence. But let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say that instead of deliberately evading tax, he just accidently evaded tax. Of course he did wrongly claim to be an accountant, so ignorance does seem to be a distinct possibility. He not only doesn't know what an accountant should know, he doesn't even know whether he is one or not.

However he also received 8000 punts from a group of people in Manchester. He admits that he can't name the people who gave him this money, so there is no way it was a loan. So this was a gift, which he did not declare or pay tax on. Tax Evasion 2.

But apparently under new rules Tax evasion is OK if you're having a hard time at home. It's the "Tax Evasion for Decent Sods Act 2006" I believe.

-Rd


----------



## sherib (5 Oct 2006)

> Originally quoted by *daltonr*
> After 7 years the "loan" would have become a gift, and as such was liable for tax. Tax Evasion 1.


My understanding is that there is no tax on loans. If daltonr is correct in saying that a loan becomes "a gift" after seven years then it will be up to Revenue to decide whether or not tax is due; to say these loans constituted "tax evasion" has yet to be determined. 

With regard to the Manchester collection of ~ £8,000 Stg, according to reports so far, since the contributors did not live in this jurisdiction no tax is due on that amount either. 

Revenue (and Accountants) would know whether or not these amounts constitute _tax evasion _so I would prefer to await that confirmation.


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

sherib said:


> to say these loans constituted "tax evasion" has yet to be determined.
> 
> ...
> 
> Revenue (and Accountants) would know whether or not these amounts constitute _tax evasion _so I would prefer to await that confirmation.


This tallies with my understanding of these issues to date too. For people to assert, on the basis of information currently available, that corruption or tax evasion has been established as fact is quite dodgy in my opinion.


----------



## Humpback (5 Oct 2006)

sherib said:


> With regard to the Manchester collection of ~ £8,000 Stg, according to reports so far, since the contributors did not live in this jurisdiction no tax is due on that amount either.


 
We've already been told that 3 or 4 of the people at this meeting (out of 25) were actually Irish residents. If these and more were Irish, and more made donations, then there'd definitely be tax considerations.

However, on a more specific and dubious note, the withholding of the listing of people there by Bertie is becoming more and more suspicious.

He says he didn't know who exactly was there, yet immediately when confronted about the fact that Michael Wall was present, he's instantaneously able to say that while he was there, he didn't give any money to the collection.

So, he's gone from a position of not knowing to who was there, to knowing who was there and who did or didn't give money.

This is unreal!!!


----------



## daltonr (5 Oct 2006)

My understanding was that at least some of the people on the Trip came from Ireland. But even if they were all resident in the UK, my reading of the rules is that Gift tax would still have been owed because Bertie was himself a resident of Ireland. Unless the law was changed after this particular trip.



> *What property is liable to Gift/Inheritance Tax?*
> All property in the State is liable to gift/inheritance tax.
> Assets outside of the State are subject to gift/inheritance tax if:​
> 
> ...





Regardless, you have the then Finance Minister, the current Taoiseach, receiving money and not declaring it. Don't you think if he had told revenue all about this money and it was all above board, those would have been the first words out of his mouth in the Dail when confronted with it?​ 
Some of you may be content to leave him has Taoiseach and wait until he has retired before Revenue get a chance to look into it. Keep the other guys out of government until they come up with a leader that doesn't look like a charater from a kids book.​ 
I'd like to think that a political leader who can't explain himself and only "remembers" new details when confronted with them would be subject to a little more scrutiny. I'd have thought the stench of financial irregularities would trump someones haircut when deciding the next Taoiseach.​ 
Innocent until proven guilty is one thing. Above questioning until proven guilty is entirely different. A political leader who can't answer legitiamte questions is not fit to hold office.​ 
There is something rotten at the heart of this whole affair, and it shouldn't be allowed to drop off the radar of either the media or the public. If we know anything about these issues from past experience, it's that the truth will come out as slowly as those involved can manage. When you stop asking the questions that's the limit of how much truth you'll get.​ 
Not to drag this into conspiracy theory land, but I can't help wondering if Mary Harney's sudden departure is in anyway connected to all of this.
How much and when she knew has yet to be fully explored.​ 
If it turns out she evacuated the PD leadership rather than lead the PD's in support of Ahern then McDowell's stunt up the lamp post becomes all the more laughable, and her otherwise good record ends with a big black mark, or at least a big black question mark.​ 
-Rd​
​


----------



## ClubMan (5 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> Some of you may be content to leave him has Taoiseach and wait until he has retired before Revenue get a chance to look into it. Keep the other guys out of government until they come up with a leader that doesn't look like a charater from a kids book.


Who said that?


----------



## liteweight (5 Oct 2006)

dalton said:
			
		

> Not to drag this into conspiracy theory land, but I can't help wondering if Mary Harney's sudden departure is in anyway connected to all of this.
> How much and when she knew has yet to be fully explored.




See "Poisoned Chalice" in Shooting the Breeze!!


----------



## liteweight (5 Oct 2006)

> I'd like to think that a political leader who can't explain himself and only "remembers" new details when confronted with them would be subject to a little more scrutiny. I'd have thought the stench of financial irregularities would trump someones haircut when deciding the next Taoiseach.




Remember Brian Lenehan's....."upon mature reflection......"


----------



## Glenbhoy (6 Oct 2006)

ClubMan said:


> This tallies with my understanding of these issues to date too. For people to assert, on the basis of information currently available, that corruption or tax evasion has been established as fact is quite dodgy in my opinion.


Agreed, i was a little premature in my assertion that what has happened is undeniably tax evasion, however, in my opinion, there is no way that the revenue can leave this unchallenged - why would anyone bother paying any tax anymore?  I can see situations especially re gift tax and cgt (but also income tax) where this could be abused on a massive scale.


----------



## daltonr (6 Oct 2006)

>however, in my opinion, there is no way that the revenue can leave this >unchallenged

If you or I are accused by Revenue of evading tax, the onus of proof is on us to show that we didn't.
I didn't make that rule, but I'm as bound by it as the next guy.  If anyone deserves to be bound by the rules 
it's the guys that make them up. 

When there is as much evidence of evasion as there is in the case of Ahern, then I think it's only fair that 
the burden of proof fall on him.  It is not for the voters to prove he is guilty, it is for him to prove he is innocent.   Until then I consider him guilty of tax evasion.

I haven't even questioned the other 50K that appeared out of nowhere.   I think I'm being generous in focusing only on the money that we actually know the source of.   I doubt the revenue would be as generous if they Audited me.

Remember it was Ahern himself who stated that he received the 8000 FOR A SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT. He corrected himself later, presumably when someone who understood the implications of the truth managed to convince him that a small lie might be more prudent.

Are we now to have the Dail turned into a Who Wants to Be A Millionaire show, where the opposition must keep asking 'Is that your Final Answer?'

50 to 100K is off the wall, is that your final answer Mr Ahern?
The guy who sold you your house just drove the bus, is that your final answer?
You were paid for speaking, is that your final answer?
Oh! No, you want to change to it was a gift, because of your family troubles.
What was the topic of your speech, that motivated such a gift. "Being Homeless In Dublin"

Isn't it funny that after that spell as a hobo you never felt compelled to do more for the people who actually 
are on the streets in Dublin. Did you assume they all had friends to donate 50 to 100K as well?

Oh I'm sorry, you were sitting on a long and successful political record and could have taken up a nice European Post, or an all expenses paid holiday at the Aras, but I'm afraid you've lost it all. If only your final answer had been the right one.

-Rd


----------



## Purple (6 Oct 2006)

What's all this got to do with Enda?


----------



## daltonr (6 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> What's all this got to do with Enda?


 
Nothing. That's the point.
Don't let the debate switch to what's wrong with the opposition, until the current questions have been answered. Whether it's a chat in a pub, or online, or media coverage, or government soundbites.

I understand why the original poster asked the question, it was probably the best thing to do considering that even the thread about Ahern turned into questions about Kenny and Rabbitte. But it's important to keep the focus where it really needs to be.

These guys get off the hook too easily by digging their heels in until the media and the public get bored and move on. There are serious questions and this one isn't the first, about the goins on with this government and those questions need to be asked and answered.

There are questions about what Michael McDowell was doing up a lamp post promising to be the watchdog of the government.

The opposition can't score a goal with an open net in front of them, and that is indeed worrying. But there will be pleanty of time to worry about that AFTER Mr Ahern has answered the questions that remain over him.

-Rd


----------



## ClubMan (6 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> The opposition can't score a goal with an open net in front of them, and that is indeed worrying.


Perhaps *that's *what's wrong with _Enda _(et. al.)?


----------



## RainyDay (6 Oct 2006)

Purple said:


> Bring back Ruairi Quinn...


While I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, it is worth pointing out that Pat is not a one-man show. He is the leader, no more, no less. He does not make policy off his own bat. And (I presume) the same applies for each of the other leaders.

Maybe it's time to start voting on policies, not personalities.


----------



## ClubMan (7 Oct 2006)

RainyDay said:


> While I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, it is worth pointing out that Pat is not a one-man show.


Some might argue that he's not *even *that.


----------



## daltonr (7 Oct 2006)

When Ruairi brought out his autobio, "Straight Left", it was a sad day.
Here was a man who was presumably putting the full stop on a long period of what he hoped was good honest Socialist politics,  and he needed a title that blunt to make sure people remembered he was a Socialist.

Straight from the Bertie Ahern school of Book titles....
"Bertie Ahern Taoiseach and Peacemaker."
OK Bertie didn't write his book.   But I can feel the hand of his
advisers resting on the shoulders of the authors.

-Rd


----------



## RainyDay (7 Oct 2006)

daltonr said:


> When Ruairi brought out his autobio, "Straight Left", it was a sad day.
> Here was a man who was presumably putting the full stop on a long period of what he hoped was good honest Socialist politics,  and he needed a title that blunt to make sure people remembered he was a Socialist.


Wow - the glass really is *completely *empty for you, isn't it? I don't know Ruairi well, but I did manage to wangle an invitation to his book launch. I don't recall much sadness in the room, funnily enough. I got the feeling that he was quite happy with the book, title and all.

Coincidentally, I just got the book from the library last week, so I'm looking forward to getting stuck into it.


----------



## contemporary (7 Oct 2006)

I couldnt vote for FG after they got into bed with Labour, people accuse FF (rightly too) of doing anything to get into/ stay in power, FG arent much better with the mullingar accord. One big difference i have noted between them is foregin policy, Gay Mitchell and others have been very pro NATO, EU battlegroups and scrapping the triple lock, labour are very much against these. I recently asked a chap who was canvesing for labour at the door how they could agree with that, he told me with wasnt important. I told him  that where young irish men and women are sent and if put in harms way is important and ran his stealth taxing ar$e behind from the door....


----------



## RainyDay (7 Oct 2006)

Hi Contemporary - All coalitions involve compromises. Which party will you supporting?


----------



## contemporary (8 Oct 2006)

can tell you the truth to be honest, i voted independent last time, I'd vote PD's to kepp the shinners out but i dont honestly know yet


----------



## RainyDay (8 Oct 2006)

What are the PD positions on foreign policy, NATO, EU, triple-lock etc?


----------



## contemporary (8 Oct 2006)

to maintain the current governments policy, it wasnt so much the getting rid of the triple lock or join nato that i was tackling the labour man on it was that it was that it was that the 2 parties had a differing policy and i was interested to see how they would cope with different policies, it was his off the cuff it doesnt matter really what we do with the soliders that annoyed me


----------



## RainyDay (8 Oct 2006)

I can understand your annoyance, and it doesn't sound like he handled the situation very well. However, in practical terms, there is just no way that every canvasser is going to be up to date on every aspect of party policy. It's just too much information for those who are not full-time politicians. Usually when I get asked something that I'm not sure about, I'll just let them know straight off, and (if possible) get the candidate onto the doorstep quickly. 

I would suggest that you don't base your vote on what happened on your doorstep either way.


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2006)

RainyDay said:


> While I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, it is worth pointing out that Pat is not a one-man show. He is the leader, no more, no less. He does not make policy off his own bat. And (I presume) the same applies for each of the other leaders.


 I take your point but he is the leader and it does look like there was a reverse take over of the Labour party by Democratic Left. I have a great deal of respect for some of the Labour party front bench but I don't like the way that the former DL members seem to have a strangle hold on the party. I also disagree with what Labour see as the root cause of so-called rip off's. For example their web site emphasises the dividend that the government takes from the ESB and Bord Gais as a major cause of high energy prices. They do not mention that the average wage in the ESB is over €75'000 a year. They do not suggest that these companies should be better run. Instead they suggest that the shareholder (the people of Ireland) should not take a dividend from their own company! To me this is indicative of their wrong headed view of how the economic problems we face should be sorted out.


RainyDay said:


> Maybe it's time to start voting on policies, not personalities.


I agree 100% but I can't find any substantive policies on their web site. Their entire policy statement on primary care is _ Transforming our health service into a fair, efficient and responsive service is a major objective for the Labour Party. 
The daily litany of overcrowded accident and emergency departments, dirty hospital wards, overworked staff, waiting lists for patients, inequity in treatment, queues for orthodontic treatment; deficiencies in community services and shortages of specialists in different regions of the country is not acceptable.
We are determined to bring about real change. _ Not a lot of meat on those bones. So with an absence of any real detail I am forced to base by opinions on the utterances of party leaders and spokespersons.


----------



## daltonr (9 Oct 2006)

There is more on that page

[broken link removed]

-Rd


----------



## contemporary (9 Oct 2006)

RainyDay said:


> I can understand your annoyance, and it doesn't sound like he handled the situation very well. However, in practical terms, there is just no way that every canvasser is going to be up to date on every aspect of party policy. It's just too much information for those who are not full-time politicians. Usually when I get asked something that I'm not sure about, I'll just let them know straight off, and (if possible) get the candidate onto the doorstep quickly.
> 
> I would suggest that you don't base your vote on what happened on your doorstep either way.


 
Who do you canvass for? He didnt seem to care, if candidates surround themselves with people who are disinterested or just want to talk about the latest increase in house prices/pints/petrol etc then they arent worth voting for


----------



## RainyDay (10 Oct 2006)

I'm with Labour.


----------

