No Government Mandate?

L

Latrade

Registered User
Messages
578
In all press statements and discussion, FG and Labour (and SF) trot out the line that the Government has no mandate to govern in the current situation and therefore there should be a general election. It is stated whatever the actual topic of debate and goes unchallenged by any media outlet.

I presume the intention is that it becomes accepted as fact by mere repetition (see "race to the bottom").

Maybe I'm wrong and have an overly innocent knowledge of democracy, but when a government is elected/formed, doesn't that mean they're the government for the full term? It doesn't matter what happens, whether it be disease, war, nuclear annihilation or dodgy economics, they're the Government.

Based on FG’s logic, if we agree there is no mandate, because times were better during the last election and FG get in following a new general election, does that not mean if the economy gets better under FG we have to have another election because FG now have no mandate to operate under a good economy?
 
We elect our parliament, they elect the government so the statement is factually incorrect.
 
The governments electoral mandate to govern this country came from the last general election - irrespective of the changed economic environment or results in local elections. Unless there is a pull-out of government and support the Greens, Independents or FF backbenchers - or a vote of no confidence we're stuck...
 
I think what they are getting at is that, in their view, the public were "sold a pup"/FF got re-elected under false pretences, and the public would not re-elect the current "government" (to use a loose term) if given a chance (which is probably fair enough... if not self-evident).

If FG were to get into power and the economy took a turn they'd probably blame past FF decisions, FF are a bit of victim of their own success because they'd have to delve back into the mists of time to find another party who were at the wheel. So FF choose the international blame game - tis them American bankers done us in. But to stick to your question, FG would not interpret such a setback as a loss of mandate.

The more pressing problem for FF is their dwindling majority and if the Greens back out of NAMA then government defeated on a matter of crucial national importance. I think its only if you are defeated on the Finance Bill/Act that you are technically obliged to call a general election, so what happens if defeated on the NAMA legislation? Ok your position is pretty much untenable but in brass neck FF land will someone else be entitled/obliged to pull the plug?
 
Purple said:
We elect our parliament, they elect the government so the statement is factually incorrect.
Click to expand...

Conceded, though I'm not sure FG/Labour meant such a literal translation and more along the generality of the other replies: i"t wuz different back the innit" says the public.

While I accept the point that it currently doesn't bode well for the government, it does appear to be a tactic to get public support of an election, but on the basis of a false statement.

This is the biggest frustration for me. I'm sick of the soundbites and attempts at gaining political ground. The opposition smell blood and want the seats of power for themselves, while some in government are more concerned about being reelected than stopping an economic freefall.

But absolutely no media response to the statement? No issue of "hang on a minute, that's not how democracy works"?
 
I don't believe that they have a mandate to continue. Their mandate was based on their, long since abandoned, manifesto. The EU and Local elections show that the people have withdrawn support for the Government. There should be an election. The current Government, technically and legally, has the authority to govern, but it has no moral authority. Mr. Cowan should follow the [broken link removed] of the Japanese Prime Minister who called a general election following poor local election results.
 
Complainer said:
Any contract based on fraud and lies is not valid. They have no mandate.
Click to expand...

What was the fraud and lies?

No party in the past has promised certain things as part of a manifesto and then failed to actually introduce them when in power? I'd say every single party has and will continue to.
 
We elected 166 TDs in 2007 and will have another chance to do the same in 2012 at the latest. Those guys have been entrusted by us to run the country by organising themselves into a majority government and a minority opposition.

Economic downturns, opinion polls and elections to other authorities do not change the reality that the country is being run by the TDs (not MEPs or Local Councillors) we vote for at regular intervals
 
They have a mandate.

FG and Labour are living in dreamland.

What mandate had John Bruton?

Facts are without an overall majority - what mandate has any party to implement their manisfesto?

Brian Cowen is the Taoiseach of this country,


IF FG or the Labour party believe the government has no mandate - let them challange it in the courts and get over their meaningless waffle.
 
Complainer said:
The [broken link removed]. Have a read of it just for a laugh. It was based on entirely false premises (and promises). It is null and void.
Click to expand...

Yes, because all other parties always keep the promises made in their election manifestos.
 
Complainer said:
The [broken link removed]. Have a read of it just for a laugh. It was based on entirely false premises (and promises). It is null and void.
Click to expand...

You really expect them to have stuck to that given the sudden collapse of the economy? You don't think that there is some flexibility on what is within a manifesto depending on the state of the country?

"Well sure you got us out of economic collapse and held off an invading army, but you never increased the number of creche places as you promised. This whole government is a fraud!"

Please.


And as Purple and I said, what government has ever stuck 100% to their pre-election manifesto? Since when does a manifesto become a binding contract between them and the electorate?
 
Classic:

-Joining the Green and Red Luas lines.


Maybe that should have been done at the time?
 
This "mandate" issue is entirely different from a credivility issue - that's what this govt. lacks & opposition throwing this "bo manadate" line out is very disingenuous methinks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register