Complainer
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,949
So you reckon they would be better off staying in opposition (from their POV I mean)?
So you reckon they would be better off staying in opposition (from their POV I mean)?csirl I'm surprised you think this. Do you honestly think FF would go into government with Gilmore as Taoiseach? That would be political suicide!
So you reckon they would be better off staying in opposition (from their POV I mean)?
ffthey being labour or ff?
We get it. You are a labour supporter. I did look at their policy listing. Maybe I am stupid as you imply so maybe you can give me a link to a major policy document on health, justice or education published in the past three years.
Because being in Government means being in power. Being out of Government means having no power. FF have no value system - the only think they can offer their followers is the fruits of being in power. If they are out of power, that is political suicide for them.Obviously they would be Complainer. Why on earth would they want to go into government with the Taoiseach coming from the smaller party in the coalition? That would be madness.
The point was answered. There are 50 substantial policy documents produced over the last three years, covering a broad range of areas. Some of the policies do cover the areas requested, i.e.Still no link received on this...
You're right there - if the outcome is indeed that FF is the larger party. That is by no means certain or even likely at the moment.FF would never in a million years go into a coalition where the smaller party's leader became Taoiseach. The most Gilmore could expect would be to be made Tanaiste.
Because being in Government means being in power. Being out of Government means having no power. FF have no value system - the only think they can offer their followers is the fruits of being in power. If they are out of power, that is political suicide for them.
The point was answered. There are 50 substantial policy documents produced over the last three years, covering a broad range of areas. Some of the policies do cover the areas requested, i.e.
Guardianship of children - Health & Justice
Labour's priorities in Education - Education
Broad consensus now gathering behind health insurance - Health
Institutional child abuse bill - Health, Justice and education
Youth attitude - education
Safer towns and cities - Justice
Never again - Justice
Commuter belt living - Justice, Education
Cherishing Children - Justice, health, education
But hey, let's not let little facts around policy get in the way of a good slanging match.
Don't really want to get into this but...
Labour's priorities in Education is a 2 page glossy document that says nothing.
Broad consensus now gathering behind helath insurance is a speach by Eamonn Gilmore
Youth Attitude is not a policy document. It's a survey of young people. Labour don't even specify how they are going to deal with the findings of the survey
Safer towns and cities is laudable but where do they stand on sentencing, prison spaces, bail laws, anti social behaviour etc.
Never Again is not a justice policy. There are some decent ideas in there about whistleblowing and FOI but any document that mentions 'Galway Tent' Economics is a political statement rather than a policy document.
Cherishing Children is not an education, health of justice policy document. It's a light and fluffy piece. They criticise rising class sizes but don't make a committment to reduce them. Where do they stand on that? Where do they stand on third level funding?
Like most parties, there is good and bad in all these publications. I don't make claims of infallibility for Labour. Great to see that we've moved on from your earlier post of 'They say nothing' to 'I don't like what Labour says'.
Like most parties, there is good and bad in all these publications. I don't make claims of infallibility for Labour. Great to see that we've moved on from your earlier post of 'They say nothing' to 'I don't like what Labour says'.
Because being in Government means being in power. Being out of Government means having no power. FF have no value system - the only think they can offer their followers is the fruits of being in power. If they are out of power, that is political suicide for them.
FF may promise the earth to Labour in order to stay in power but that would not include offering a smaller party the Taoiseach's job as you stated might happen earlier.
Seems unlikely that Labour and SF would have the numbers, even with a few stray independents thrown into the mix. Certainly there is nothing in it for Labour now to create a 'left alliance' with SF/SP/SWP. This would just lose votes for Labour on the left.I wonder will FF and Labour show the same resolve? I doubt FF will get the opportunity to make up a government but I wonder about Labour. Afterall, Labour and Sinn Fein come from the same stock.
The result is going to be Labour auctioning their support to the highest bidder (FF or FG).
For me Sunny's post appeared to be an expansion of the many ways in which labour has sat on the fence and said nothing rather than any criticism of their (non-existant) policies which you seem to have inexplicably taken from the post.
I really don't think that is a fair assessment. Labour have a solid track record of giving clear and alternative options. They were the only party to oppose and question the bank guarantee, and the Honahan report backs up the Labour concerns in this area in relation to guaranteeing the bond holders. They have put alternative policies out in Health - Universal Health Insurance has been Labour policy since 2002, and FG jumped on that bandwagon recently. They have clear alternative policies in Education, to keep universal access to all levels of education. The policies are all there.I didn't say I didn't like what Labour say. How could I not like making public places safer for women and cherishing children. I just don't know where they stand on the issues that matter to me.
I stand my assertion that Eamonn Gilmore and Labour are playing populist politics and taking the easy road by criticising Government policies but being vague on their own ideas. I admired him for handling John O' Donaghue the way he did but that was an easy vote getter. His reluctance to committ on items like water charges is more telling in my opinion.
Dream on Complainer, that poll was flawed and surely you know it is nothing but a pipe dream that Labour could even come close to being the largest party!I never said that this might happen, that Gilmore would be Taoiseach as leader of the smaller party. As I pointed out to you earlier, Gilmore will be Taoiseach if Labour are the largest party, i.e. if the results of the Irish Times poll hold good until the election.
Nonsense, Labour are still and will remain the 3rd party for the foreseeable future. You don't go from 21 seats to 60+ seats just because you have a popular leader! You're completely blinkered by meaningless polls Complainer.Not true. The Irish Times poll blows away the idea that Labour will be the 3rd party, who's best hope is to be a junior coalition partner. This could go any direction, including the direction of a Labour-led coalition.
I really don't think that is a fair assessment. Labour have a solid track record of giving clear and alternative options. They were the only party to oppose and question the bank guarantee, and the Honahan report backs up the Labour concerns in this area in relation to guaranteeing the bond holders. They have put alternative policies out in Health - Universal Health Insurance has been Labour policy since 2002, and FG jumped on that bandwagon recently. They have clear alternative policies in Education, to keep universal access to all levels of education. The policies are all there.
To highlight 'water charges' as a substantive issue is just nitpicking. Given the current mess that we are in, really, who cares about water charges.