Printable View
The UK Budget is on this week. Usually a blot on the Irish political map, it will be interesting to see their response to the economic crisis, and whether they will go down the FF mega-tax route, or try to stimulate their economy. I suspect it will be primarily the latter, as the fact they have an election in 12 months time, may well influence it.
The UK have a bit more wriggle room as their tax revenue is a lot stickier, particularly because they have more people in the tax net. Whilst they have lost a lot of manufacturing over the last 20 years their economy is still more diversified than our one trick property pony.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
I see the "social partners" (SIPTU, ICTU etc...) were claiming at the weekend that they would strike unless the government agreed to their demands on economic discussions.
How did we get to a situation where unelected lobby groups threaten the government to accept their demands. Cowan should eject them from talks for such threats.
I agree, disband IBEC!Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
The unions withdrawing from the talks would be the worst thing that could happen to the government as it could lead to the development of a genuine labour movement. However, the unions will back down as they always do. The collective nest-feathering of social partnership suits their leaders as much as it does the employers.
TBH I don't care who the lobby groups represent. IBEC can't threaten to strike though... To my mind employee groups strike for more pay, better conditions or less redundencies. I can't understand how they can basically tell the government they don't agree with their economic policies on tax or whatever & if they don't agree to their plan they will strike? Don't we elect politicians to implement policy? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheridan
Great comeback. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheridan
Social partnership only works if all parties share a fairly homogenous long-term goal.
I'm more convinced than ever that the unions are acting in a short-termist manner (primarily to maintain their own strength rather than necessarily act in the best interests of their members).
As for IBEC and the rest of the "partners" (read hangers on) I don't think they have much more of a clue.
One of the by-products of modern society is the speed of change. The economy has been no exception and the decline in Ireland has been particularly speedy.
At a time when quick, decisive decision making was required, FF decided to play happy families and ask the audience what they should do.
Now we're paying the price.
That's democracy. By it's nature, it is slow, but it's the only way to have a settled political life in the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
The problem is, FF only realised there was a recession last Autumn, whereas it was already 2 years old by then.
It's actually the opposite of democracy!Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
The social partners aren't elected by the country. I can't vote for them. They represent their own narrow special interest groups.
In a democracy an accountable government governs through the parliamentary process.
They aren't elected by the country, but they represent thousands of people and businesses, and if they can't agree deals with the government, they have the power to bring the country to it's knees with strikes, protests and other disputes. Bertie Ahern was a great negotiator with them, taking as long as necessary to come to an agreement with them, thus ensuring industrial peace.
Cowen on the other hand, imposes deadlines, can't agree with them, and imposes his own policies. As he said himself, he'll run it as he sees fit. :rolleyes: Cue the industrial chaos we're having right now. It was the second attempt before he and the Greens could even negotiate a potential coalition after the last election.
The idea of solidarity is not something that sits with our culture in my opinion. Unfortunately we have an unhealthy respect for the state and its laws Some of this is justified and some of it is a legacy of being a post colonial society. However we have never really had a strong solidarity movement in this country. Putting the benefits of the state before personal benefits is not a concept that sits well within this country for some reason. I have a personal theory that a combination of post coloniasm and a catholic society has caused this to happen and corruption is also a trait of these sort of countries.
Northern European countries dont seem to have this issue. People see the benefits in Germany and Scandanavia of buying their bus ticket.
A "prolonged industrial campaign" was what O'Connor used - it doesn't necessarily mean strikes.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Unelected? All the heads of the unions are elected. One member one vote. You could always organise, and then be represented at the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
It was the Unions that were insisting on a long term plan from the very start of the Governments & IBECs chickens coming home to roost at the start of the banking debacle, looking for a swedish style social solidarity model to be introduced. That model was hardly painless for workers.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Whats the business communities & Government solution? Cut wages and reduce terms and conditions, and effectively down skill the workforce to try and compete purely on wages. That's the totally unsustainable, since we'll never be able to compete on wages, short term view that will have the country fooked for generations...
I believe the "social partnership model" if finished but if it is to continue there is a big difference between consultation with the government & demanding to have their policies implemented by the elected government.
I am guess IBEC have thousands of members but I would be surprised if they had any say in the their policies. They are just as bad as the Unions & look like they are just run for the benfit of the leaders.
The whole process is what they call lobbying in Washington.
For once I agree with you on a CA topic pete, I think social partnership is on it's last legs. The only thing that could possibly right it is a change of government, and I'd be lax to say that's guaranteed. Unfortunately. The Irish are a fickle lot.
And a bit thick when it comes to politics...
Now is exactly the time for social partnership, the problem is that this is the first time it's been really applicable this century, and a lack of committment from Government and Employers for genuine social partnership and social change. However, I would agree what is needed is a general election where whoever wins would have a mandate to govern in these conditions.
Pete, I've no idea how the employers body operates (well under 10k company bosses I'd imagine), but the union side represents over 830,000 members. Union leaders are directly elected - if members don't feel represented, they can vote them out.
"genuine social partnership and social change"... It goes back to what I said about a shared vision.
Employers bodies and unions exist to maximize the benefit to their members. I struggle see how this isn't an inherent unresolvable conflict?
Obviously, the Euro elections will be a protest vote against FF, but so was the last one, and they still got reelected 2 years ago, on the myth that they could manage the economy. They could manage only a boom.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
The fear I have is that if FG/Labour win it, and start to clean up FF's mess without visible improvement on the ground, they'll be given 12 months before voters want FF back in. :rolleyes:
The cycle is longer than that, but yes, that's what'll happen. And unfortunately it looks like we're stuck with weetabix-head, unless he screws up in a big way in the interim. Gilmore'd make a far better Taoiseach in these times. I don't like him, but he'd run rings around Kenny.
Because ultimately union members need jobs and ibec members need customers with an ability to spend? It has worked before, in this country, never mind in places like Sweden.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
UK Budget at a glance
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8011882.stm
From the outside looking in, it seems to be a policy of stimulation rather than taxation, with a limited amount of tax hikes.