We have all been massively wronged and should protest

csirl said:

The moral hazard needs to apply to politics in Ireland - you mess up, you lose power.

Click to expand...

That's a good point.

The question, 'does the opposition want to be in Government at the moment' needs to be asked as well. I think the answer is no.

FF is a dead man walking no matter what happens between now and the general election. FG and Labour know this and are prepared to wait.

There has to be a minimum of one TD for every 30,000 people. If the opposition want an election so badly, could they not easily all resign their seats and force an election?

csirl said:

Am I the only person who regards cronyism, gombeenism and corruption as being wrong?

.

Click to expand...

No, but you dont seem to understand that its not limited simply just to FF. . To suggest that getting rid of FF means we will have none of that is simply naive at best. Look across the water and you will see other parties (OMG - Non FF parties screwing Joe Public .. How so?) taking liberties with their positions, in fairness some British MP's took the complete **** . . Its political culture that has to be tackled, not one party.

Why are you so convinced that FG/Labour government will be so different ? You didnt reply to my comments on Gilemore and a few other FG'rs rolling back on their paycuts so I assumed you were simply an FG supporter looking to throw spanners anywhere people question the oppositions credibility.

Also, you wouldnt actually comment properly on why you felt things would of been different had things been under labour/FG (despite the fact they spent more time demanding that the government actually spend more money in the good years, as opposed to question how they were raking in so much revenue). There is nothing to disproove the theory that this country would be even further in a hole, had the opposition been in power. . Nothing, yet you presume this to be fact . .

Basically you speak of the way most of us would like politics to be, but you dont seem to actually think of how it can be done, making the very large assumption that anybody but FF will be more accountable and honest . . I would hazzard a guess that "we are not FF" will be a majority of the marketing done by opposition for the next election and that should be enough for you and a large amount of people which is really a bad incitement of our society and how its failed to learn anything at all from this crisis. .

I want more from my TD, I want more accountability, I want more honesty, I want more transparency, long term national planning and most of all I want confidence in them. . . We have received neither off our government or opposition (pander to the crowd, PR stunts etc). . We dont need new parties, we need new politicians, leaders and people who inspire . . Not many of the current crop do much for me . . . I will follow a politician who can lead the lines with integrity and make the tough calls when its needed . . I dont want 2nd last ("well its better then FF"), I want the best of the best leading our country and while many many people have the attitude that you appear to be displaying , it will never happen . .

Sunny said:

There has to be a minimum of one TD for every 30,000 people. If the opposition want an election so badly, could they not easily all resign their seats and force an election?

Click to expand...

Tell that to the people of Dublin South who have been down one TD for much of the current Dail term. It is not possible to force an election through resignations.

Complainer said:

Tell that to the people of Dublin South who have been down one TD for much of the current Dail term. It is not possible to force an election through resignations.

Click to expand...

Why not? The constitution says there must be at least one TD for every 30,000 people in the Country. If every opposition TD resigned their seat, there wouldn't be enough TD's, the Dail would not be able to sit and there would have to be an election.

Would be maddness but if Gilmore and Kenny want power and think they could a better job, then why not? They claim the Government has lost it's mandate anyway.

Funny enough, if there was election tomorrow the person it could suit the most is Brian Lenihan. FF would be removed from office, he could get the treatment he requires and have time to recover. Let someone else take over FF until close to the next election in 2015, and be back in as leader just in time for the centinary celebrations for the Easter rising in 2016.
Maybe I'm making it sound too simple.

Sunny said:

Why not? The constitution says there must be at least one TD for every 30,000 people in the Country. If every opposition TD resigned their seat, there wouldn't be enough TD's, the Dail would not be able to sit and there would have to be an election.

Click to expand...

The constitution has nothing in it about a Govt being forced into an election. The requirement for one TD per 30k applies to the planning and allocation of TDs. The Govt have left Dublin South and half of Donegal down one TD for long periods without any problem. At various times due to population changes, the one TD per 30k limit was way out.

There is nothing in the constitution that can force an election in this way.

I didn't say there was a Constitutional requirement for an election. However, the Dail could not function with only roughly 80 TD's. I have it on good authority that any attempt to pass new laws would be unconstitutional in that situation. No different to half the Dail been wiped out in a plane crash. The Dail could not function and would have to be dissolved and elections held.

When was the requirement for one TD per 20,000 to 30,000 of the population broken?

Also, you wouldnt actually comment properly on why you felt things would of been different had things been under labour/FG

Click to expand...

Anglo would have been wound down if FF werent in power.

Basically you speak of the way most of us would like politics to be, but you dont seem to actually think of how it can be done, making the very large assumption that anybody but FF will be more accountable and honest . . I would hazzard a guess that "we are not FF" will be a majority of the marketing done by opposition for the next election and that should be enough for you and a large amount of people which is really a bad incitement of our society and how its failed to learn anything at all from this crisis. .

Click to expand...

Your whole argument is essentially....."you might as well vote FF because the opposition are just as corrupt". We know with 100% certainty what FF is like. You cannot say with 100% certainty that an alternative government would be as bad as FF - you cannot even say with 100% certainty what alternative government may be elected. Even if there is only a 1% chance that an alternative will be better, then this is better than 0% chance. FF will not change unless they are voted out - why would they?

Sunny said:

However, the Dail could not function with only roughly 80 TD's. I have it on good authority that any attempt to pass new laws would be unconstitutional in that situation.

Click to expand...

Any chance you would ask your 'good authority' specifically which article(s) of the constitution would be breached in such a case?

Sunny said:

When was the requirement for one TD per 20,000 to 30,000 of the population broken?

Click to expand...

[broken link removed]

csirl said:

Anglo would have been wound down if FF werent in power.

Your whole argument is essentially....."you might as well vote FF because the opposition are just as corrupt". We know with 100% certainty what FF is like. You cannot say with 100% certainty that an alternative government would be as bad as FF - you cannot even say with 100% certainty what alternative government may be elected. Even if there is only a 1% chance that an alternative will be better, then this is better than 0% chance. FF will not change unless they are voted out - why would they?

Click to expand...

Anglo winding down would cost us exactly how much ? Im not sure what that would cost, but how much do you think it would of cost us to wind it down ? Are you sure it would be cheaper (including the knock on effects) to the country or are you just presuming it would because it was an unpopular decision to save them?

Secondly, I never said vote for FF . . I said vote for the right candidate and demand more from your politicians. . You assume its anybody but FF which is plain silly no matter what fictitious stats you write down. .

Lastly, you still refuse to accept that there were plenty of things that could of been done to make things worse, including spending more money during the good years which is what the opposition demanded. You dont seem to want to acknowledge this FACT or the fact that FG tried a PR stunt to appear to be with the little man and then rolled back on it a year later or that there were councellors from your beloved Non FF party who also had a huge part to play in the property bubble . . .

You just assume that any other party will be better or that it couldnt be made worse by a populist party . . . I dont know why I even reply, these kind of debates remind me why I have no confidence in the electorate and why we will probably always be stuck with sub standard politicians . .

One could argue that NAMA legislation should have triggered an election based on Article 27 of the constitution:

"Article 27
A majority of the members of Seanad Éireann and not less than one-third of the members of Dáil Éireann may by a joint petition addressed to the President by them under this Article request the President to decline to sign and promulgate as a law any Bill to which this article applies on the ground that the Bill contains a proposal of such national importance that the will of the people thereon ought to be ascertained."

I want an election becuase after all that has happened, the following comments were made in the Dáil this afternoon:

On RTE

"Fianna Fáil backbencher Ned O'Keeffe has criticised the decision to give Financial Regulator Matthew Elderfield extra resources and has praised his predecessor Patrick Neary.

Speaking in the Dáil this afternoon, Deputy O'Keeffe said there was nothing worse than financial over-regulation, which he claimed brought about mischief and blackguarding.

He asked what Mr Elderfield would do with the proposed complement of 700 staff in his office claiming there were not that many bank branches in Ireland.

The Cork East TD said Mr Neary was a decent and honourable man who initially had to operate without staff or legislation.

Mr O'Keefe defended AIB, which he claimed had served the agricultural sector better than any other bank.

He told TDs that he held shares in a number of institutions including AIB and he wanted to see it owned by the people and not the State."

I don't want 2 more years of this muppetry - with apologies to Kermit The Frog.

Complainer said:

Any chance you would ask your 'good authority' specifically which article(s) of the constitution would be breached in such a case?

[broken link removed]

Click to expand...

why don't you read the constitution? It doesn't say that there has to be one td per 30000 in one area. It's based on the national population. Therefore you can't have 80 Tds serving a population of 4m people. So again when was this breached?

D8Lady said:

... in the Dáil this afternoon:

On RTE

"Fianna Fáil backbencher Ned O'Keeffe has criticised the decision to give Financial Regulator Matthew Elderfield extra resources and has praised his predecessor Patrick Neary.

Speaking in the Dáil this afternoon, Deputy O'Keeffe said there was nothing worse than financial over-regulation, which he claimed brought about mischief and blackguarding.

He asked what Mr Elderfield would do with the proposed complement of 700 staff in his office claiming there were not that many bank branches in Ireland.

The Cork East TD said Mr Neary was a decent and honourable man who initially had to operate without staff or legislation.

Mr O'Keefe defended AIB, which he claimed had served the agricultural sector better than any other bank.

He told TDs that he held shares in a number of institutions including AIB and he wanted to see it owned by the people and not the State."

I don't want 2 more years of this muppetry - with apologies to Kermit The Frog.

Click to expand...

Beam me up, Scotty!!!

Sunny said:

Therefore you can't have 80 Tds serving a population of 4m people.

Click to expand...

The constitution doesn't say that you can't have 80 TDs. There is no obligation on Govt to call bye-elections. I wish there was, but there isn't.

You're going down a rathole.

Complainer said:

The constitution doesn't say that you can't have 80 TDs. There is no obligation on Govt to call bye-elections. I wish there was, but there isn't.

You're going down a rathole.

Click to expand...

Yes it does....If we have a population of 4m people, we can't have only 80 TD's. Thats one TD per 50,000. I am sure they could get away with a small margin caused by changing population but I would like to see the Judge who said that a law passed by 80 TD's was consitutional. If not, FF could arrange accidents for every opposition TD and never call a by-election. Make life easier.

The Constitution provides for the number of seats in Dail Eireann. It does not have any obligation on having TDs physically present in these seats - otherwise a lot of our laws would be invalid as the Dail chamber is rarely full. If all the opposition TDs resign, their seats still exist, so it would not invalidate the Dail. And there wouldnt be a general election - the vacant seats would be filled by by-elections.

Anglo winding down would cost us exactly how much ? Im not sure what that would cost, but how much do you think it would of cost us to wind it down ? Are you sure it would be cheaper (including the knock on effects) to the country or are you just presuming it would because it was an unpopular decision to save them?

Click to expand...

It would have been let go bust as its not systemic. Cost = zero.

Secondly, I never said vote for FF . . I said vote for the right candidate and demand more from your politicians. . You assume its anybody but FF which is plain silly no matter what fictitious stats you write down. .

Click to expand...

I dont think its silly. TDs of all parties follow the party line. We have one of the most "whipped" parliaments in the world. All TDs will vote for the parties policies, so it doesnt matter which individuals members of any party get elected.

You just assume that any other party will be better or that it couldnt be made worse by a populist party . . . I dont know why I even reply, these kind of debates remind me why I have no confidence in the electorate and why we will probably always be stuck with sub standard politicians . .

Click to expand...

To be honest, people who will blindly vote sub standard candidates or a particular party no matter how big a mess they make are a sad reflection on the electorate. As are people who vote for populist parish pump parties rather than those who put forward policies. I'm tired of populist parish pump politics and tired of this blind loyalty to certain parties "because my grandfather fought with them in the civil war".

As I said earlier, where's the moral hazard? If you mess up, you deserve to get the boot full stop. I'm tired of excuses.

P.S. Where's the personal responsibilty? Your core argument is still that the opposition would have done just as bad a job, so you might as well vote for the current government. You know the old say...."If my granny had etc........she'd be my grandfather". The facts are that the opposition werent in power and didnt make a mess of things - It was the Government and each and every individual member needs to take personal responsibilty for their part. If I were a Government TD, I'd be ashamed to stand again for election - it just wouldnt be the right do to after the failures. Irish politicians have no moral backbone.

csirl said:

It would have been let go bust as its not systemic. Cost = zero.

Click to expand...

Everyone with deposits with Anglo would lose them. Alternatively, under the banking guarantee, the Government (aka taxpayer) would have to stump this amount