Do posters think that a FG/Labour government would have taken such (any?) decisive action last year?
One thing that FF have done, considerably better, than FG/LAB is to be an effective opposition.
When FG/LAB were last in power together, FF battered them from the Opposition benches, specifically the then Minister for Justice Nora Owen. Compare then to now, when the Opposition have much more ammunition, and the contrast is stark.
Do posters think that a FG/Labour government would have taken such (any?) decisive action last year?
Were FG/Lab in power I would imagine we would have got at the very least:
1. Higher income earners in the public sector taking a bigger hit than the lower income earners.
2. Anglo wound up.
3. People like Neary/Molloy getting the sack instead of a pay off.
My sentiments exactly.FG = FF.
At best I would call FG, 'FF lite'
FG = FF.
At best I would call FG, 'FF lite'
I think there may be a mind set in the parties. FF view themselves as the natural party of power and any time in opposition is a failure and nothing must be spared in the effort to return to power. FG/Lab I feel view themselves as the natural parties of opposition who come to power occasionally when FF slip up but don't really seem that pushed about it.
FG = FF.
At best I would call FG, 'FF lite'
Why?
My personal views...
1. Higher income earners in the public sector taking a bigger hit than the lower income earners =
2. Anglo wound up = again we seem to have a 'special' relationship with FF.
3. People like Neary/Molloy getting the sack instead of a pay off.
Very true. I spoke to one Labour minister of the 92-97 who found that FF were pussycats to deal with on any policy issue, because they basically had none of their own. They were quite happy to let Labour get on with the policy stuff while they looked after their constituents. Dealing with FG ministers was another matter, though they did manage to work together successfully.I'm not sure I would agree with this. FG are clearly a conservative centre right party and their policies consistently sit in this area. FF are just a populist party. They have no consistency in their policies. FF promotes a gombeenman mentality which is bad for the country.
So referring to it as a 'sweetheart deal' is now considered to be a defence?As for 1, I think Gilmore's statements last week defending the higher paid Civil Servants and their salaries show that Labour aren't exactly the voice of the lower paid.
As for 1, I think Gilmore's statements last week defending the higher paid Civil Servants and their salaries show that Labour aren't exactly the voice of the lower paid.
.
So referring to it as a 'sweetheart deal' is now considered to be a defence?
[broken link removed]
What do politicians have to fear from higher paid civil servants? What power or knowledge do the civil servants have?
Were FG/Lab in power I would imagine we would have got at the very least:
1. Higher income earners in the public sector taking a bigger hit than the lower income earners.
2. Anglo wound up.
3. People like Neary/Molloy getting the sack instead of a pay off.
Now that's a really great question - I guess you are implying that it would have cost the State more to let Anglo go bust? If so, perhaps you can clarify what costs would have arisen for the State in letting it fail, by comparison to the €4 billion to date pumped in to keep it alive?How much would it have cost the state if Anglo was wound up?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?