View Full Version : Robbed again
Actually, Labour said they'd bring it forward again in 6 months when it fell the last time. Any embarrassment for the Greens is their own making.
monutdfc
05/11/2007, 12:59 PM
I am not suggesting that Labour do not care about this issue but I am sure the fact the Green Party voted with this issue the last time it raised has a lot to do with it being raised so early in the current Dail. The Green Party better get used to this as I am sure the opposition have a number of other issues like this to embarrass them into explaining u-turns.
Correct Pete. The Green party did, and still do, support the issue. However, now they will have to support the FF (oops, sorry, Government) version of the Bill. Indeed, there is a theory that the Labour Party proposal was deliberately poorly worded to embarass the Greens into not supporting it (in favour of a promised bill from FF which will inevitably be watered down to bring the conservative wing on board).
At least Labour have something to gain from attacking the Greens. FG's attack of the Greens at every opportunity is getting so tiresome. There are (imo) very few Green voters who would switch to FG.
It is a win-win for Labour. If the Greens don't support gives Labour ammunition to attack with & if the Greens back it Labour get kudos for implementing legislation from the opposition benches.
bennocelt
06/11/2007, 7:55 AM
For the last time, stop assuming everybody is like you, and stop assuming they only made one statement last week. Seriously, can you not ****ing read or are you just plain ignorent?
showing your true colours here, typical
everybody is into same sex marriages, yeah you are right we all are, its the number one talking point in the whole country.................never mind people trying to get on the property ladder, health, the state of the roads, and corruption in FF..............but no you are right :rolleyes:
one statement................maybe they made lots of statements, but the only one that they came onto TV was over same sex marriages, and the 6one news is the one the average joe public looks at......not crawling the internet to see what labour said this week or that
by the way isnt it interesting that the only real criticism (apart from FG's leo vad) about the pay rises came from within FF itself
As i have been saying the opposition have let the people down
but yeah you are right labour have got it spot on with same sex marriages, will def get my vote in the next election:(
mypost
06/11/2007, 12:09 PM
Happily admit i voted FF & the reason the i and so many others did, is that there was and is still not a strong alternative, its a simple as that. What will be the alternative the next time?
You're not supposed to concentrate on the opposition. Of course, there's not a strong enough alternative, because they haven't ruled for 10 years. That's why we have elections.
In an election, you're supposed to judge the current government's performance over the last term. If you think they didn't perform, then don't put an x beside their candidate in the election.
We don't have elections for the electorate to simply ratify FF for another 5 years. We have elections to either keep 'em in, or kick 'em out.
osarusan
06/11/2007, 12:26 PM
In an election, you're supposed to judge the current government's performance over the last term. If you think they didn't perform, then don't put an x beside their candidate in the election.
Are you not supposed to vote for the party you feel would do the best job in government?
Judging the current government's performance over the last term would only be part of the process.
jebus
06/11/2007, 12:43 PM
Regards the same sex marriage question - Personally I think ensuring all people on this island are treated equally should be top of all parties agendas
Regards the same sex marriage question - Personally I think ensuring all people on this island are treated equally should be top of all parties agendas
Sounds like The SF slogan ;)
Mr 14% and Biffo now calling for wage restraint by the social partners. :rolleyes:
Mr 14% and Biffo now calling for wage restraint by the social partners. :rolleyes:
Yep, got a chuckle out of me
I love to see Bertie rattled as he can get easily frustrated when he does not like the questions being asked. Good piece in the IT today basically implying that Bertie saying Consultants get well paid (more than Bertie) so quality performance expected... What do we get for Berties 40k pay rise? :confused:
I love to see Bertie rattled as he can get easily frustrated when he does not like the questions being asked. Good piece in the IT today basically implying that Bertie saying Consultants get well paid (more than Bertie) so quality performance expected... What do we get for Berties 40k pay rise? :confused:
Saw that in the mornings news alright. Love the way he constantly turns FF criticism onto someone else, and their pay, and then refuses to answer questions on his own pay packet.
I've thought this over and honestly I now consider anyone who voted for Fianna Fail as a disgrace to this country and the last 100 year's of it's history in particular. I've come to this conclusion as I realise more and more that I couldn't be a voter for this present government, who have gone back to the British rule way of robbing the majority Irish worker to pay for the minority in power and their friend's lifestyle, and look my grandfather, who fought in the Irish war of independence, square in the eye. This government, and the people who voted for them are a disgrace to his and his fellow fighter's name in my book
Saw that in the mornings news alright. Love the way he constantly turns FF criticism onto someone else, and their pay, and then refuses to answer questions on his own pay packet.
The government has now also become the opposition, created everything that is good & responsible for nothing that is bad. :o
As the IT summed Bertie up - Health workers paid to do a job, HSE paid to manage the Health workers & the government provides the funding. :rolleyes:
Of course the tax payer provides the funds so what does the government do? ::confused:
kingdom hoop
08/11/2007, 6:06 PM
Kind of off topic, but there was a funny little Freudian slip in the Dáil yesterday when Bertie was getting defensive about the personal vitriol aimed at him over the HSE. He said words to the effect 'but how can you expect me to be responsible for every HSE worker in the 22, 26, counties?' I laughed anyway. :o
mypost
12/11/2007, 3:43 AM
Loved Gilmore's reply. :D
Meanwhile, the next Taoiseach is busy warning (http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1111/budget.html) us again.
Any chance we can have that 25k back, mate?? :confused::rolleyes:
How the Christ does Harney still have a job? Can anyone answer me that? The level of achievement she has brought to her post is the equivalent of me dragging my boss' 5 year old daughter into work, cutting her throat on his desk, and setting fire to the building, whilst running naked around the office singing Cotton Eye Joe
How the Christ does Harney still have a job? Can anyone answer me that? The level of achievement she has brought to her post is the equivalent of me dragging my boss' 5 year old daughter into work, cutting her throat on his desk, and setting fire to the building, whilst running naked around the office singing Cotton Eye Joe
No one else wanted it or wants it now. In fairness to her she's trying to change things for the better. The problem is the system, too many managers and waste. no matter how much money is thrown at the problem, it doesn't make a difference to the people on trollies at ground level.
In fairness to her she's trying to change things for the better.
Privatisation is what she's about, not changing things for the better. Give land to private companies for co located hospitals, give them tax breaks to build them, provide consultants to carry out operations, run down existing public services to provide private patients via the ntpf.
The problem is the system, too many managers and waste. no matter how much money is thrown at the problem, it doesn't make a difference to the people on trollies at ground level.
She put in place the system that has multiplied the numbers of managers in the system. She put in place the HSE with all it's levels of management, whilst failing to deal with the management around the country in the health boards. The current system that is worse than previous one, yet she seems to get credit!?! All she's done is attempt to wash her hands of any responsibility.
Lionel Ritchie
13/11/2007, 11:40 AM
How the Christ does Harney still have a job? Can anyone answer me that?
Because it allows FF outsource a no-win portfolio and allows them and their supporters "plausable deniability" when it comes to accepting responsibility for the ramifications. We've seen it demonstrated earlier in this very thread.
Similarily, if and when the Greens do something remotely dynamic with their Environment portfolio, FF can blame the Greens when the hauliers, farmers, IBEC and whoever else come clamouring ...and FFs supporters will swallow it whole.
On Mary Harney again, I happen to disagree with her vision but I do think she's a visionary and I don't think she's taking the path she's taken because 1. she likes to see public patients on trolleys or 2. because she's on the make as I suspect some of her colleagues in Government are.
GavinZac
13/11/2007, 11:45 AM
Still though it is hilarious that they vote themselves whether they get a pay rise or not!!! Imagine coming into work one day to vote on giving yourself a pay-rise, picture the face on the boss!
Its probably been said, but the decision was based on an independent review, not simply voting themselves more money. for the effects of people voting themselves more money, see boardrooms across the country where people are voting themselves to have twice the salary of the taoiseach.
GavinZac
13/11/2007, 11:48 AM
Saw that in the mornings news alright. Love the way he constantly turns FF criticism onto someone else, and their pay, and then refuses to answer questions on his own pay packet.
I've thought this over and honestly I now consider anyone who voted for Fianna Fail as a disgrace to this country and the last 100 year's of it's history in particular. I've come to this conclusion as I realise more and more that I couldn't be a voter for this present government, who have gone back to the British rule way of robbing the majority Irish worker to pay for the minority in power and their friend's lifestyle, and look my grandfather, who fought in the Irish war of independence, square in the eye. This government, and the people who voted for them are a disgrace to his and his fellow fighter's name in my book
ffs arent you a right hero. do you seriously think things would be any different if fine gael were in power? they would have turned down this pay rise en masse would they?
GavinZac
13/11/2007, 11:50 AM
Of course the tax payer provides the funds so what does the government do? ::confused:Im almost certain that there are other things for the government to do than simply to collect taxes and give them to the HSE.
at this point its getting silly, i cant tell if you're joking or if you're advocating anarchy
1. she likes to see public patients on trolleys or 2. because she's on the make as I suspect some of her colleagues in Government are.
Disagree...
1) it suits her "vision" of Private healthcare to run down the public health system and make people desperate for an(y) alternative.
2) We'll wait and see where she goes after she leaves office. Afterall she's already quite literally in bed with IBEC, and look at where their chairperson ended up after booted out of the OPW. The Party against vested interests indeed...
Im almost certain that there are other things for the government to do than simply to collect taxes and give them to the HSE.
In relation to health I would really like to know what they are as the Taoiseach himself has said the HSE runs the service & not the government.
In Transport the government seem to have passed the buck to the RSA so no responsibility either.
With regards the pay rises - the government set up this "Independent" Body & gave it the terms of reference.
is there anything left that the government sees itself as responsible for? :confused:
In relation to health I would really like to know what they are as the Taoiseach himself has said the HSE runs the service & not the government.
In Transport the government seem to have passed the buck to the RSA so no responsibility either.
With regards the pay rises - the government set up this "Independent" Body & gave it the terms of reference.
is there anything left that the government sees itself as responsible for? :confused:
Governments/ministers come & go. You have to have organisations with experts in their field running it. No minister really runs his department, the civil servants do. Mary Harney choose the health ministry, no one forced her to take it. likewise, the green choose their ministries. The greens are finding out, its easy to be in oppisition & snipe, but its much harder to have to make real decisions, in the real world.
No minister really runs his department...
So we pay them 250k+ to do what exactly...? I accept the HSE runs the service on day to day basis but the Minister has to make executive decisions.
BTW FF have been in government for 10 consecutive years - if the Taoiseach chooses to keep changing Ministers thats his problem.
Its probably been said, but the decision was based on an independent review, not simply voting themselves more money
They have to vote to accept or refuse it. Ridiculous for them to tell other pubic servants to curb wage demands if they vote to accept their 12-15% rise.
And boardrooms raising their own wages are usually performance related (as are lower level civil servants). Their is no performance indicators for governement (in terms of wages)
They have to vote to accept or refuse it. Ridiculous for them to tell other pubic sevants to gurb wage demands if they vote to accept their 12-15% rise
And to repeat with no clauses. Even cost of living national wage agreement increases for the rest of the Public Service come with caveats about modernisation and change in work practices*.
*whether that's been properly followed through or not is a different argument - if it hasn't it doesn't exactly add to the case for increases for their bosses - i.e. the Ministers in charge!
Student Mullet
13/11/2007, 4:30 PM
Privatisation is what she's about, not changing things for the better. Give land to private companies for co located hospitals, give them tax breaks to build them, provide consultants to carry out operations, run down existing public services to provide private patients via the ntpf.I don't agree with this at all. She's trying to build a lot of public services like the cancer centres and a new children's hospital and she's facing just as much opposition there as anywhere else.
ffs arent you a right hero. do you seriously think things would be any different if fine gael were in power? they would have turned down this pay rise en masse would they?
Ah this little chestnut of a point. We don't know if they would or they wouldn't have. When voting you are essentially voting as to whether the outgoing government have done their job well and to the nation's satisfaction. It was obvious they hadn't and so should have been shown the door, but then again Irish people tend not to see the obvious do they? I mean you still think you're right most of the time don't you?
When voting you are essentially voting as to whether the outgoing government have done their job well and to the nation's satisfaction.
This is where Id disagree. When voting I think your voting as to who you think will do the best job out of the candidates available. Obviously you would factor in previous performance but if I felt the 'other option' would do an even worse job then I would vote in the not so satisfactory outgoing government.
This is where Id disagree. When voting I think your voting as to who you think will do the best job out of the candidates available. Obviously you would factor in previous performance but if I felt the 'other option' would do an even worse job then I would vote in the not so satisfactory outgoing government.
But won't there always be doubts about the opposition? No matter where it is, or how badly a job the current government has done there will always remain the doubt that the opposition just wouldn't be able to cut it in government, it's what kept the friggin Tories in power for so long, and Fianna Fail voters are doing the exact same thing to us. Point is though, that if you are voting based on your doubts then we may as well do away with elections and just keep Fianna Fail there all the time, because there will always be doubts about Fine Gael. At least we know Fianna Fail can't govern a country ffs
But won't there always be doubts about the opposition? No matter where it is, or how badly a job the current government has done there will always remain the doubt that the opposition just wouldn't be able to cut it in government, it's what kept the friggin Tories in power for so long, and Fianna Fail voters are doing the exact same thing to us. Point is though, that if you are voting based on your doubts then we may as well do away with elections and just keep Fianna Fail there all the time, because there will always be doubts about Fine Gael. At least we know Fianna Fail can't govern a country ffs
There will always be slight doubts based on them not having governed in a while on whether they can implement what they are saying they will and its not on that basis I wouldnt vote for them. It would be on the basis that I don't agree(think their any good) with what their trying to implement i.e. their policies.
I didnt vote Fine Gael as I had no confidence in some of their policies and as a leader Enda doesnt convince me in the slightest. Now I didnt vote Fianna Fáil either but if Fine Gael can be more convincing of their abilities then they might swing the votes of those who vote outside the big 2.
I still wouldnt vote for one major partly solely based on the inadequacy of another. They would still have to win my vote themselves
I don't agree with this at all. She's trying to build a lot of public services like the cancer centres and a new children's hospital and she's facing just as much opposition there as anywhere else.
Could you point me to the plan that gives the timescale for these new cancer centres rather than aspirations? She and Drumm certainly can't yet they're quite happy to run down the existing services in the mean time. Put in place the new centres, then close the existing ones, not close the existing ones with only bloody pipedreams as to when the centres of excellence will be open. While this is all going on, it gives the for profit private facilities a chance to get going, and sure then they'll be no need for public ones...
Frankly, I'm astounded that anyone would hold up the Children's Hospital as an example of Harney doing good and trying to do the right thing!
Lionel Ritchie
14/11/2007, 7:48 AM
Disagree...
1) it suits her "vision" of Private healthcare to run down the public health system and make people desperate for an(y) alternative.
2) We'll wait and see where she goes after she leaves office. Afterall she's already quite literally in bed with IBEC, and look at where their chairperson ended up after booted out of the OPW. The Party against vested interests indeed...
I suspect we agree on more than we disagree on in the broader issue. Mary Harney has a "default setting" that private and privatised in general means slicker, faster, more efficient, more cost effective delivery of service to consumers.
It's not a view I roundly concur with as the primary responsibility of private and privatised is the generation of profit and dividend for shareholders. All else is froth and side-effect. This frequently leads to curtailment, degrading and termination of services as part of cost cutting/profit maximisation.
As for where she'll end up afterwards ...there's scarcely a former cabinet member who won't end up in a "consultancy" role for someone or other when their day in the sun ends.
Clifford
14/11/2007, 8:18 AM
I don't agree with this at all. She's trying to build a lot of public services like the cancer centres and a new children's hospital and she's facing just as much opposition there as anywhere else.
She's not facing opposition to the Cancer centres, they are 10 years overdue. It's the fact they are closing 13 centres currently operating well in the main, on a promise that in 4/5 years these excellence places will be open. It beggars belief to be honest.
Edit, sorry only just saw Macy's much better destruction of this invalid point.
It's not a view I roundly concur with as the primary responsibility of private and privatised is the generation of profit and dividend for shareholders. All else is froth and side-effect. This frequently leads to curtailment, degrading and termination of services as part of cost cutting/profit maximisation.
We already have private hospitals in this country & no evidence that their services so bad that you claim. Any chance of facts to back that up? I am not familiar with the full details of the current private hospital plans but it does seem strange to give large tax breaks for their construction but I suppose it no different than privatising the roads...
We already have private hospitals in this country & no evidence that their services so bad that you claim.
We don't have "for profit" private hospitals. Well I think the Beacon is, but hardly around long enough to judge (and btw who opened that?). The likes of the Mater and Blackrock etc are not for profit private hospitals - i.e. they're not driven by the bottom line.
I am not familiar with the full details of the current private hospital plans but it does seem strange to give large tax breaks for their construction but I suppose it no different than privatising the roads
Plus the land to build them on, plus public patients via the national treatment purchase fund. We also get the roads back after a fixed period of time.
monutdfc
14/11/2007, 10:53 AM
Heard a good suggestion on the radio last week: if all members of the Oireachtas were barred from holding private health insurance the public hosptials would soon be in order!
That's why there is always such a fuss over A&E - it is one of the only parts of the hospital system where there is no differentiation between public and private and the middle class are shocked when they see how bad the public hospital service is.
GavinZac
14/11/2007, 1:07 PM
Ah this little chestnut of a point. We don't know if they would or they wouldn't have. When voting you are essentially voting as to whether the outgoing government have done their job well and to the nation's satisfaction. It was obvious they hadn't and so should have been shown the door
No, that is not how you vote. You vote for who you think will best serve the nation for the future term. You're advocating a premiership-manager "someone else has to do better" style rotation of governments that would ruin this country.
but then again Irish people tend not to see the obvious do they? I mean you still think you're right most of the time don't you?
gah, not worth it.
mypost
14/11/2007, 7:14 PM
Every election is a referendum on those in power, be it a President, or a Parliament. Looking at the waste of (our) money, time, resources and promises made by the last government, you have to ask, is it right for that government to continue doing the same to us for another 5 years?? If you think no, then you have an alternative to vote for. Then at the end of the next term, you analyse their performance again. That's the way elections work. They're not there to simply ratify the status quo. That's what happens in places like Zimbabwe. We haven't quite got that far.....yet!!
GavinZac
14/11/2007, 7:31 PM
Every election is a referendum on those in power, be it a President, or a Parliament. Looking at the waste of (our) money, time, resources and promises made by the last government, you have to ask, is it right for that government to continue doing the same to us for another 5 years?? If you think no, then you have an alternative to vote for. And you have to analyse the alternative. If the alternative is no better, or worse, simply voting the opposition because of the imperfect performance of the incumbants is idiocy.
A face
14/11/2007, 8:13 PM
Honestly lads i think they deserve figures like this for their jobs. They are charged with running the country yet they earn less than directors of large companies, they are constantly in the public eye, work 15 hours a day 7 days a week, lead a relatively short life at the top of their profession and even an Taoiseach earns less than Stan was on!
Right, what you need to be asking yourself here is "Who is paying for it?"
And deserve doesn't come into the equation when you are under achieving.
We (collectively) get the government we deserve. The fact that a few months after a general election 25% of FF voters responded to a poll saying they would not vote for them shows how we have a fickle & stupid electorate. You vote for someone to put into government for 5 years but change your mind a few months later - Health & Transport have not got any worse since the election. :rolleyes:
John83
15/11/2007, 11:35 AM
And you have to analyse the alternative. If the alternative is no better, or worse, simply voting the opposition because of the imperfect performance of the incumbants is idiocy.
And insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting something different to occur.
See, I can label too.
osarusan
15/11/2007, 12:32 PM
If the alternative is no better, or worse, simply voting the opposition because of the imperfect performance of the incumbants is idiocy.
No it isn't. If Fianna Fail were voted out, it would tell them that while the electorate doesn't really have much faith in the opposition, they (the voters) will not tolerate such contempt for the electorate that Fianna Fail has shown.
By voting them back in, using the argument that the opposition would be just the same, the electorate is condoning the behaviour of the government, which means the government will be under little pressure to rectify their errors.
oh, and seeing as you're such a crusader on spelling issues, I'm sure you won't mind me correcting you about the word "incumbent.";)
mypost
15/11/2007, 12:46 PM
We (collectively) get the government we deserve. The fact that a few months after a general election 25% of FF voters responded to a poll saying they would not vote for them shows how we have a fickle & stupid electorate. You vote for someone to put into government for 5 years but change your mind a few months later - Health & Transport have not got any worse since the election. :rolleyes:
People don't care about Health & Transport. What they do care about is cash. They were told that by voting FF again, Santa Cowen would come calling with a big bag of money for them in the first Wednesday of December. FG were seen to be not capable of it you see. :rolleyes: Instead he's turned out to be Scrooge Cowen, warning us not to expect a giveaway budget, while awarding himself a hefty pay rise. So it's only now that people won't vote FF, when it's too late to do anything about it. :rolleyes:
Why don't we hold elections in October/November next time, and people might actually make the correct X mark on the paper??
GavinZac
15/11/2007, 1:01 PM
No it isn't. If Fianna Fail were voted out, it would tell them that while the electorate doesn't really have much faith in the opposition, they (the voters) will not tolerate such contempt for the electorate that Fianna Fail has shown.Contempt? You want to know what contempt for the voters is?
By voting them back in, using the argument that the opposition would be just the same, the electorate is condoning the behaviour of the government, which means the government will be under little pressure to rectify their errors.
if my estimation of the opposition is that they will do no better, and can do worse, than the government in power, why would i vote them in? Fine Gael/Labour did not convince voters otherwise, and they should stop trying to blame their inadequacies on "dumb voters not doing whats best for them". That is contempt and a crushing show of weakness that will taint their party further.
oh, and seeing as you're such a crusader on spelling issues, I'm sure you won't mind me correcting you about the word "incumbent.";)i am? :confused:
osarusan
15/11/2007, 1:11 PM
Your original post-
And you have to analyse the alternative. If the alternative is no better, or worse, simply voting the opposition because of the imperfect performance of the incumbants is idiocy.
I take this to mean that if the opposition presents offers more of the same - "no better, or worse", you see no reason.
it would tell them that while the electorate doesn't really have much faith in the opposition, they (the voters) will not tolerate such contempt for the electorate that Fianna Fail has shown.
My post says that if the opposition, who offer "no better, no worse" were voted in, we would be no worse off in terms of government, but the party voted out would be forced to realise that they have to clean up their act, and not take electorate support for granted. Such an election result would show hem they will be held accountable for their actions.
if my estimation of the opposition is that they will do no better, and can do worse, than the government in power, why would i vote them in?
i am? :confused:
good effort, you just changed a few words, but the meaning is entirely different, as it allows for concerns based on opposition policy that were absent in your original post.
i am? :confused:
You are, "apparantly."
GavinZac
15/11/2007, 1:54 PM
Your original post-
I take this to mean that if the opposition presents offers more of the same - "no better, or worse", you see no reason.That would be "no better nor worse".
My post says that if the opposition, who offer "no better, no worse" were voted in, we would be no worse off in terms of government, but the party voted out would be forced to realise that they have to clean up their act, and not take electorate support for granted. Such an election result would show hem they will be held accountable for their actions.Well, apart from that not being what I meant, why would change necessarily be good? I mean, if they're capable of doing the same job, that doesnt mean that they'd immediately be ready. There is something to be said for continuity and stability.
good effort, you just changed a few words, but the meaning is entirely different, as it allows for concerns based on opposition policy that were absent in your original post.Its not my fault if you read the initial statement wrong. Its probably not yours either, right? Blame the education system or something...
You are, "apparantly."You don't get irony either it seems.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.