Labour - really serious contenders?

[culloty82]

Tonight's Millward Brown poll for TV3 suggests that the Labour surge of recent months is real, registering as the party with largest support.

Labour 35% +16
FG 30% -4
FF 22% -5
Ind. 8% -2
SF 4% -4
Greens 2% NC

Somewhat sceptical that Gilmore can translate that support into seats, they've virtually zero support in Connacht, Ulster and rural Munster, and no evidence that they can win back traditional touchstone constituencies like Kerry North and South among others. Kenny must be vulnerable to another coup after further losses even in the midst of FF's woes, while the fact that a fifth of voters are still prepared to back the Soldiers of Destiny defies all logic.

[Mr A]

Interesting that SF support has halved, and judging by those particular numbers it seems like Labour are taking support from pretty much everyone.

It still remains questionable whether Labour can translate its poll figures into seats of course, incumbents have a major advantage. But a hell of a lot of them will be sweating.

[mypost]

Don't know where Labour got 16 points from. It wasn't from anything they did anyway.

[dahamsta]

You always get this during a recession, support goes to the left. Unfortunately we're too dumb (collectively) to realise that Labour are likely to be led around by the nose by FG in a coalition, and happily so too.

Even if they did get in with a majority - and I don't think they will when push comes to shove, because of the dumb b*stards that'll continue voting FF because mammy and daddy did - the Irish public also doesn't get that when you get right down to it, "modern" Labour is about this much -> <- more left wing than everyone else.

Perhaps if they put down the Star and the "Irish" Mail for a minute and actually educated themselves about what's going on, we might make some progress. They could learn why Cowen encouraging us all to go out and spend more is quite possibly even dumber than the statements he slurred at Morning Ireland last week. Or that they might not actually need a 2010 car...

[Real ale Madrid]

Enda for Táiniste after that poll.

[dahamsta]

I have to say, although I dislike Gilmore, I'd get a small amount of joy in seeing Kenny relegated to second-in-command.

[Spudulika]

Is this not something similiar to what we just witnessed in the UK, with the Liberal Democrats looking like grabbing massive gains then status quo returning? The Irish public do not have the guts to get rid of FF, no matter what happens we'll always get the government we deserve, and it'll be a madcap coalition again. SF will get 4-6 seats, the Greens maybe will get 1, Labour will gain but still be minor partners in a coalition with FG or FF. And gombeens like the Healy Raes will get back in.

[Macy]

It still remains questionable whether Labour can translate its poll figures into seats of course, incumbents have a major advantage. But a hell of a lot of them will be sweating.
On Vincent Brown last night, they said that Labour are on 40% in Dublin - that's pretty much 2 seats a consituency, and in the running for a 3rd in many. Also, they're getting named candidates in the West, for example Crowley - they have a name and on the Labour ticket, but on those figures just getting names on the ballot may be enough.


Unfortunately we're too dumb (collectively) to realise that Labour are likely to be led around by the nose by FG in a coalition, and happily so too
Maybe people are copping on and that's why Labour are ahead of FG. On those figures the only FG led coalition will be a FG-FF one!


Is this not something similiar to what we just witnessed in the UK, with the Liberal Democrats looking like grabbing massive gains then status quo returning?
Were the Lib Dems ever ahead? Also, you can't discount the difference in electoral system as to how the Lib Dems ended up actually down in seats on a higher vote.


Don't know where Labour got 16 points from. It wasn't from anything they did anyway.
I don't think keeping their head down last week whilst Biffo went on radio "under the weather", and Coveney tweeted did them any harm. There's a couple of times that Labour have come out looking the better by not getting involved in petty arguments.

As a general comment, I think the Sunday Business Post have a poll out on Sunday, which has consistently stated Labour support down on the other polling companies. It'll be interesting to see how that one goes, but as a Labour supporter my feeling since the results were out last night is "Yes we Feckin Can"! :)

[OneRedArmy]

You always get this during a recession, support goes to the left. Unfortunately we're too dumb (collectively) to realise that Labour are likely to be led around by the nose by FG in a coalition, and happily so too.

Even if they did get in with a majority - and I don't think they will when push comes to shove, because of the dumb b*stards that'll continue voting FF because mammy and daddy did - the Irish public also doesn't get that when you get right down to it, "modern" Labour is about this much -> <- more left wing than everyone else.

Perhaps if they put down the Star and the "Irish" Mail for a minute and actually educated themselves about what's going on, we might make some progress. They could learn why Cowen encouraging us all to go out and spend more is quite possibly even dumber than the statements he slurred at Morning Ireland last week. Or that they might not actually need a 2010 car...This pretty much sums up my view.

I've no confidence that when people actually have the ballot in their hand they can stop the unconscious tick in the civil war box.

Also, short of FG appoint Seanie Fitz as party leader, I'm not sure they could do any worse given the circumstances.

It would all be hilarious, if only the circumstances weren't crying out for good Government and even moreso for strong opposition.

[Macy]

Also, short of FG appoint Seanie Fitz as party leader, I'm not sure they could do any worse given the circumstances.
However, another failed coup and they'd be pretty fooked imo.

[dahamsta]

I've no confidence that when people actually have the ballot in their hand they can stop the unconscious tick in the civil war box.

What he said Macy. The only polls that have any value these days are exit polls, and tbh I think they should be banned anyway, I think they bias the ballot.

[centre mid]

I see Tony Grealish has withdrawn support for FF, might be tough to get the budget legislation through the Dail. Christmas election anyone?

[Real ale Madrid]

Does anyone know what exactly is the story at the moment. How many votes do the government actually have ? I thought FF were down to 70 with 2 PD and 6 Green and 5 IND - that makes 83 + the CC that makes 84. Is Grealish's decision likely to make any difference ?

[Mr A]

Fair play to Grealish. Vote for them on every decision that landed the country in a mess, then bolt late on in a transparent attempt to safe your seat. Never mind that Harney is/was a PD too.

The worst thing is that people will probably buy it and re-elect him.

There will be FF backbenchers eyeing the same route mind you.

[Macy]

Can't remember the maths, but I think David McCullough on the News at One said with Grealish gone the Government have 81. That also takes into account the FF TD's that lost the whip, and Behan who vote for the Government the whole time anyway. O'Sullivan has also voted with the Government on a number of occassions that would seem (to me at least) contrary to her/ Gregory's base irrc.

I personally see most of the Government Supporting TD's as showboating when losing or handing back the whip. Even if there was a vote on the issue's they're supposedly are taking a stand on, at best they'll abstain rather than vote against Government.

[Real ale Madrid]

If they only have 81 votes then I can't think of a better reason to have a general election.

[culloty82]

Mr A's right in that Grealish can be put down with McDaid, Devins and Behan in the "Will never actually vote against the Government" independents' club. Gilmore is like Clegg in that the bounce will quickly burst unless/until he actually comments on policies regarding jobs and the economy, likewise putting distance between his party and the unions to attract FF/FG voters, but not so much as to scare off civil servants could also prove fatal. On Fine Gael, many people made redundant by the recession are middle-class professionals, who you'd imagine would be natural party supporters, so that's an issue the Dublin wing needs to address.

[Macy]

If they only have 81 votes then I can't think of a better reason to have a general election.
That's only whipped votes. They can count on another 4 at least in a confidence/ finance motion. Losing other votes are an embarrassment not necessarily cause for an election.

Labour have plenty of policy documents - it's amazing how easily the media and the public buy FF (and FG) spin about this (2 clicks from their homepage ffs for the list). There was some FF goon on Newstalk with the same craic, and then later wanting a "National Government" including Labour who 5 minutes previously had no policies and nothing to add! Thankfully it wasn't RTE, so he was pulled up on it.

[centre mid]

Gilmore is like Clegg in that the bounce will quickly burst unless/until he actually comments on policies regarding jobs and the economy,

http://www.labour.ie/policy/

It does seem like it may begin to have a snowball effect, after two bad weeks domesitcaly, economicaly and internationaly.

[dahamsta]

Grealish's "withdrawal" is pure guff, he's essentially withdrawing his support on a single issue as a pressure point. He needs to withdraw his support unconditionally or STFU and stop talking out his the side of his mouth.

[mypost]

I don't think keeping their head down last week whilst Biffo went on radio "under the weather", and Coveney tweeted did them any harm. There's a couple of times that Labour have come out looking the better by not getting involved in petty arguments.

So what row was Shortall involved in?

It's hard to see Labour suddenly grab 16 points as a result of someone else's problems alone.

[Poor Student]

We are running a gargantuan budget deficit which is becoming increasingly impossible to fund. We require budget cuts are more incisive than FF are willing to deliver. What exactly do Labour offer other than they're not Fianna Fail?

[Eminence Grise]

They offer very little, I think,and being partly funded by the unions means that they're vulnerable to a very powerful lobby group that hasn'talways acted with the country's best interests at heart. It's also never a good long-term strategy to position yourself as "not the other crowd." Meantime, what they're doing is exactly what FF do in opposition: carp, criticise and cavil, but never, ever get caught committing to a policy.

[Mr A]

Labour (or indeed anybody else) are nowhere remotely near as negative or vicious as FF in opposition.

[Eminence Grise]

True, FF have a much nastier streak in them. There's a saying that FG are gentlemen trying to be politicians, and FF are politicians trying to be gentlemen. But the level of Labour's criticism for its own sake, bereft of any policy to substantiate it, is politicking of the highest order, which FF pioneered in this country. Kinda nice to see somebody use their own shallow tactics against them. It's just a pity that those tactics are good for campaigns, but bad for discourse.

[Mr A]

As Macy pointed out- Labour have lots of policies.

And I think a major factor in their favour is that they were the party that smelled a rat with the bank guarantee. They were slated at the time but they were probably closer to being right than everyone else.

[Eminence Grise]

I’ve had a quick look at Labour’s policy page on their website (http://www.labour.ie/policy/). Now, while I accept that any party will have many policies and what will appear will be only a selection, I was surprised by Labour’s offering. Just a few at random:



Sport: aspirational, no figures given on how much policies will cost, or how various agencies will be reconfigured. Still, I’m glad to see it top of the list.
Universal health insurance: a copy of a six-page speech by Gilmore. Very light on detail.
Post-Lisbon role of the Oireachtas: worthy, and I’m all for increasing the relevance and efficiency of the Oireachtas but is it really a pressing issue?
Tourism: Again, no detail; lots of use of the conditional tense, and a reliance on existing state agencies without any change from their current role as parastatals.
Education: a 2-page flyer for Ruari Quinn.

Other policies areas include reforming tax on betting (race horse and greyhound fund specifically), a 4-page document on the party’s intention to reinstate powers of investigation to Oireachtas committees (an idea that is long overdue, but will have to wait until the FFers are kicked into opposition) and a bill on child guardianship that, on a quick read, appears to attempt to redress issues of access for fathers. These are important, in their own way, but missing were what I would consider critical policies: jobs creation, re-training and upskilling for the unemployed, measures to end the recession – taxation, public service issues etc etc. Hell, anything vaguely socialist, in fact!

Now, some people may believe that Labour have policies. Well, from what I can see, they do a pretty good job of hiding them.

I’m not criticising Labour for their tactics: it is excellent politicking. FF hammer FG on their policies, because FG are more active in presenting a policy alternative to FF. Labour aren’t giving FF that ammunition. Their default setting is to criticise, then claim to have a policy. It works in the permanent campaign – look at the polls – but will it work when people are actually looking for a party to lead them out of the doldrums?

[osarusan]

I’ve had a quick look at Labour’s policy page on their website (http://www.labour.ie/policy/). Now, while I accept that any party will have many policies and what will appear will be only a selection, I was surprised by Labour’s offering. Just a few at random:



Sport: aspirational, no figures given on how much policies will cost, or how various agencies will be reconfigured. Still, I’m glad to see it top of the list.
Universal health insurance: a copy of a six-page speech by Gilmore. Very light on detail.
Post-Lisbon role of the Oireachtas: worthy, and I’m all for increasing the relevance and efficiency of the Oireachtas but is it really a pressing issue?
Tourism: Again, no detail; lots of use of the conditional tense, and a reliance on existing state agencies without any change from their current role as parastatals.
Education: a 2-page flyer for Ruari Quinn.

Other policies areas include reforming tax on betting (race horse and greyhound fund specifically), a 4-page document on the party’s intention to reinstate powers of investigation to Oireachtas committees (an idea that is long overdue, but will have to wait until the FFers are kicked into opposition) and a bill on child guardianship that, on a quick read, appears to attempt to redress issues of access for fathers. These are important, in their own way, but missing were what I would consider critical policies: jobs creation, re-training and upskilling for the unemployed, measures to end the recession – taxation, public service issues etc etc. Hell, anything vaguely socialist, in fact!

Now, some people may believe that Labour have policies. Well, from what I can see, they do a pretty good job of hiding them.

I’m not criticising Labour for their tactics: it is excellent politicking. FF hammer FG on their policies, because FG are more active in presenting a policy alternative to FF. Labour aren’t giving FF that ammunition. Their default setting is to criticise, then claim to have a policy. It works in the permanent campaign – look at the polls – but will it work when people are actually looking for a party to lead them out of the doldrums?
Did you miss the 10-page pdf file titled 'investinginfuture' which outlines their poilcy of establishing a Strategic Investment Bank to provide investment support to companies which will build our export, transport, energy and communications?

[Eminence Grise]

No, I got bored reading the kind of guff that passes for policies these days. That document is pretty short on specifics, and I would question whether we need another “jobs for the boys, answerable to nobody, model of inefficiency” semi-state to hand out funding. Given that a major portion of the banking sector will already be state owned, at least one bank should be reconfigured and made responsible for funding SMEs. Using the pension fund is a good idea, but it’s not unique to Labour.

If people are satisfied that Labour’s major contribution to the economic crisis can be encapsulated in ten pages (three of them appendices), then we really looking at end of discourse, and the start of a Lippmann-style ideology of communication by symbols because the masses are incapable of independent thought. (His theory, not mine; I like his work, but I think some of his ideas are anti-democratic).

Meanwhile, FG have woken up at last: Alan Shatter was just on Radio 1 slating Labour as policy light political deviants who will hop into bed with FF at the merest fluttering of an eyelash. It will be interesting to see how the Labour figures hold up now that their most obvious coalition partner has started firing broadsides at them, though greater subtlety than shouting “like ye did in’92” might be required. The right’s favourite economist, Moore McDowell, has also questioned whether their projected seat gains can add up. He predicted a generous 40 to FGs 65.

I’ve voted Labour in the past, and will probably do in the future, because I believe that we need to see the emergence of a strong left of centre party to counter the near century of right-wing politics we’ve had. But I don’t like the current set-up of Labour, or its leadership, or its hypocrisy (remember all the animal-loving Labour TDs hanging their heads in shame and voting against the stag hunting bill, despite banning stag hunting being one of their former policies?) or its adoption of smoked salmon socialism, or its two-faced desire to end corporate donations as long as trade union funding can be maintained.

While I respect the views of many here who feel that Labour is a worthwhile party, and I know that I’m not going to change your opinion, I feel that Labour have betrayed their socialist origins and electorate, and offer nothing beyond carping and self-centred politicking. I won’t be voting for them in the next election.

[osarusan]

No, I got bored reading the kind of guff that passes for policies these days. That document is pretty short on specifics
No argument with that, but it isn't what you originally said, which was this:

missing were what I would consider critical policies: jobs creation, re-training and upskilling for the unemployed, measures to end the recession

The policies are there, but you're not convinced by them. Like the other policies you chose to mention. I don't see why you saw fit to describe them as missing when you listed other policies which you criticised in much the same way.

[Eminence Grise]

Not quite an accurate interpretation of my position: it's axiomatic that you cannot write a detailed economic policy for government in ten pages. What is there is an outline, very sketchy, that addresses the issue of credit to SMEs, through the creation of yet another semi-state. That facilitates loans to businesses. It doesn't translate as jobs creation (a government function which would address incentives, tax breaks etc) unless Labour intend that the private sector alone will solve the unemployment problem - and that would be highly unusual for a socialist party. Nor does it address funding for re-training/upskilling (access to sectoral/private sector training, higher or further education), or measures to end the recession (though I probably should have been clearer and written fiscal measures).

Any plan, to work, has to be SMART - specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timebound - to work. So those ten pages do not measure up as a policy - an aspiration, a good start, yes, but not a policy. And that is what my criticism is based on. For that document and the others.

Labour have chosen to attack FF on the basis that the government's policies have failed. If Labour are to be a credible party of government, they have to iterate their own policies so that the public can measure their worth. Based on my reading of their material, they have a lot of work to do to get actual policies together to persuade voters to vote for them for reasons other than Gilmore's soundbites, or the nice pamphlets with nice ideas on their website. And now that FG are gunning for them, I think their bluff is going to be called more frequently.

[culloty82]

Gilmore out! :rolleyes:

FG 31 (-2)
FF24,(nc)
LAB 23 (-4)
SF 10 (+2)
GR 3 (+1)
Oths 9 (+3)

Clearly, there's no consistency between opinion polls - SF seem as artificially high in this poll, as they were low in the last, the truth for all parties is probably an average of both.

EDIT - Mattie McGrath has withdrawn his support, so the Government's majority is now 2.

[mypost]

Labour have chosen to attack FF on the basis that the government's policies have failed. If Labour are to be a credible party of government, they have to iterate their own policies so that the public can measure their worth. Based on my reading of their material, they have a lot of work to do to get actual policies together to persuade voters to vote for them for reasons other than Gilmore's soundbites, or the nice pamphlets with nice ideas on their website. And now that FG are gunning for them, I think their bluff is going to be called more frequently.

Gilmore and co are strong when it comes to soundbites, but weak on policy. With FG, it's the other way around. The public are confused, but because the soundbites sound good, back Labour on that basis.

[Macy]

And what do you reckon would happen if Labour put the detail to the policies in writting? FF would attack them over that rather than have to defend their own policies (as they've been doing with FG). FF and FG criticise the lack of Labour policy, but then also attack Labour over their policies. They want to have it both ways.

Much as FF don't get it's because they caused the mess as to why they're in trouble (not the "taking tough decisions"), FG don't get that the righteous attitude as displayed by Shatter on Saturday is the reason they're not making the hay they should. There's plenty of FF voters up for grabs, and the type of garbage that Shatter was saying (such as the '92 comments) is one of the reasons Labour are doing better than FG in gaining support.

On the polls - at least one of them was wrong. I'm expect that the next Times poll splits the difference - no basis for that other than I think both polls look flawed when taken together given they were taken on the same days, both over the phone etc. Still all to play for in terms of it being a 3 way fight.

[Macy]

Labour playing a blinder on FG removing pairings - they've just offered to pair Coughlan, if they're satisfied of the merits of the trip in creating jobs.

[dahamsta]

And what do you reckon would happen if Labour put the detail to the policies in writting?

Not really a valid argument for not having properly detailed and budgeted policies. But the idea that FG's policies are detailed and budgeted is equally laughable. Sadly, there's isn't a party in Ireland with a valid policy document.

[Dodge]

The public are confused. With FG, it's the other way around.

In my experience most people have a far better understanding of the situation that they're given credit for.

This early campaiogning has really hit FG hard as the public see that their policies, particularly in financial and economic matters, don't differ too much from the, clearly proved, failed FF policies. If they don't clearly win the next election, they should fold. Ideally FG and FF would merge and we can get on with real politics and not this pre partition ****e we have now

[dahamsta]

In my experience most people have a far better understanding of the situation that they're given credit for.

I'd have zero hesitation in stating the complete opposite.

[Dodge]

Guess we mix in different circles then.

[Mr A]

Why the feck was this trip planned for when the Dail was sitting? They've just been out for three months FFS! While it's probably better that MC be allowed to attend it rather than cancel at short notice, the important point of ministers being accountable to the Dail remains. Basic respect for parliament is something that all parties could do a lot better on.

[Spudulika]

Not really a valid argument for not having properly detailed and budgeted policies. But the idea that FG's policies are detailed and budgeted is equally laughable. Sadly, there's isn't a party in Ireland with a valid policy document.

No party will readily reveal it's plans and policies fully in opposition, and would be extremely stupid to do so. It would be like asking Sean Connor to publish his tactics and team selection in depth before the fixture list is known. The party who readily throws out it's policies when they don't know if they'll have a chance to carry them to fruition will never get into government. How many times have we seen FF steal FG plans or suggestions and wrap them in a green flag and fly it as their own? So being vague (yes we can etc) and putting on absolutely non-sensical "leader debates" just won't work, the charade that is the US debates show this.

[dahamsta]

Well, if you want to put your trust in vague policies, that's your lookout. Don't come crying to Foot.ie when they crystallise later though, because we'll point you back here and that'll be an end to the discussion for you.

TBH, I think if that's your accepted view of politics, you shouldn't be here in the first place. Your local newsstand will have a handy copy of the Star to occupy you.

[mypost]

Why the feck was this trip planned for when the Dail was sitting? They've just been out for three months FFS! While it's probably better that MC be allowed to attend it rather than cancel at short notice, the important point of ministers being accountable to the Dail remains. Basic respect for parliament is something that all parties could do a lot better on.

Accountable to the Dail and respect for parliament haven't existed for years. We must be one of the last parliaments in Europe to start it's new term, the shortest working week, and the one with the longest holidays. The committees have been back since September 1st ffs.

On today's developments though, it seems to me that Labour are keen to keep FF in power a bit longer. We need an election and a new government, and whatever helps to bring that about can't come soon enough.

[Dodge]

On today's developments though, it seems to me that Labour are keen to keep FF in power a bit longer

Thats a fairly simplistic reading of it. Labour aren't just anti FF. There are other thigns in play, and tbh they've pulled a masterstroke

[Macy]

Accountable to the Dail and respect for parliament haven't existed for years. We must be one of the last parliaments in Europe to start it's new term, the shortest working week, and the one with the longest holidays. The committees have been back since September 1st ffs.
Don't disagree, and FF are the kings of launching policy in press conferences not in the Dail. This year was the longest summer recess ever!


On today's developments though, it seems to me that Labour are keen to keep FF in power a bit longer. We need an election and a new government, and whatever helps to bring that about can't come soon enough.
But today wasn't going to bring the Government down - she just wasn't going to go. FG have long been too easy on pairing (particularly letting Ahern swan around making thousands on speaking engagements) - typical of them to score an own goal though. FF also seem to be screwing up by making excuses for not taking up Labours offer.

[Mr A]

At this stage, you really have to wonder whether there is any situation that FG couldn't make a balls of. They took a perfectly good idea and made themselves look stupid by their implementation of it, and are already backing down today.

And coming immediately after they accused Labour of only attacking and adding nothing of substance, to set them up to be the party who puts country before petty squabbles was just terrible, terrible politics.

[bennocelt]

In my experience most people have a far better understanding of the situation that they're given credit for.



By voting in a clearly bent FF 3 times!!!!

[Dodge]

Most people have not voted in FF.

[OneRedArmy]

If you understand the situation clearly, chose not to vote, then you really don't deserve the chance to complain about the Government as much as those who voted against the status quo IMO.

[Dodge]

If you understand the situation clearly, chose not to vote, then you really don't deserve the chance to complain about the Government as much as those who voted against the status quo IMO.

Agreed. However the majority of people who voted, did not vote for FF.

Personally, although I'd love to see FF fall, I couldn't have voted for FG solely to see that happen. My vote went elsewhere.