Last night had the final TV debate between the leaders of the three largest parties. And what a complete snoozefest it turned into. After the opening statements we had yet another rehashing of banking and fiscal policy for the guts of an hour. Now I know the economy is the bedrock of the country but we've heard it all before. Couldn't the topics for the debates have been better organized? Maybe focus on Health and Welfare in one and Foreign Affairs/EU and Education in another?
The only bit of enjoyment I got out of the whole thing was Enda Kenny's comments about Irish Dancing. I watched the debate in the company of a group of political twonks from across the spectrum over a few pints and this had us all in stitches. It immediately brought out a rash of comments about Comely Maidens and other Dev-like utterings.
Unfortunately, my time has become taken up with another matter this week and it's not looking likely that I'm going to get any further diary entries before election day. Thanks to all of you who have made February my most read month ever (by a long stretch). I'll be in the RDS on Saturday hanging out at the Dublin South East pen if you want to stop over and say hello.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
Campaign Diary Days 18 and 19 - The Final Push
The weekend, the time of rest, recharge the batteries, mow the lawn, do the shopping. Unless you happen to be involved in the general election campaign. With less than a week to go to polling day Saturday and, to a lesser extent, Sunday were the last days to get a large blitz of postering and leafleting done. Volunteers' time is precious and so co-ordination of this mass mobilization is key. Luckily after Friday night's wash out, the weather held off over the weekend which allowed thousands of leaflets to be dropped right across the constituency.
Support for parties has now pretty much solidified. A few weeks ago many people at the doors were declaring themselves as undecided. Now it is rare to find a person who hasn't picked a side. It is unlikely that many voters will be swayed by the final debate on Tuesday unless some major incident occurs. If Kenny gets outed as a member of the IRA, Gilmore starts singing the old Soviet anthem or Martin actually apologizes for his repeated screwups over the last 14 years then all bets are off but I seriously doubt any of the above will happen.
From here on it it is all about shoring up support. The focus for each candidate will be to make sure the core vote goes to the polling station on Friday. While you might pick up an odd preference here and there in other areas, dropping the ball on home turf will cost you dearly when the boxes are opened on Saturday. At this stage my feet will be glad to move away from Rathmines, Ranelagh and Rathgar where every house seems to have 15 granite steps up to the front door.
As an aside here's a photo of a sign I spotted on a door in Dublin South East. The final few words on the long sentence were "get a decent job".
Support for parties has now pretty much solidified. A few weeks ago many people at the doors were declaring themselves as undecided. Now it is rare to find a person who hasn't picked a side. It is unlikely that many voters will be swayed by the final debate on Tuesday unless some major incident occurs. If Kenny gets outed as a member of the IRA, Gilmore starts singing the old Soviet anthem or Martin actually apologizes for his repeated screwups over the last 14 years then all bets are off but I seriously doubt any of the above will happen.
From here on it it is all about shoring up support. The focus for each candidate will be to make sure the core vote goes to the polling station on Friday. While you might pick up an odd preference here and there in other areas, dropping the ball on home turf will cost you dearly when the boxes are opened on Saturday. At this stage my feet will be glad to move away from Rathmines, Ranelagh and Rathgar where every house seems to have 15 granite steps up to the front door.
As an aside here's a photo of a sign I spotted on a door in Dublin South East. The final few words on the long sentence were "get a decent job".
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Campaign Diary Day 17 - Vested Interests
The term vested interest has been flung around over the last few days by all parties in the election. From Labour we get attacks on landlords big business as they seem to move to Fine Gael from Fianna Fáil. From the right we get the attacks on the Trade Unions as vested interests hanging around Labour's neck like an albatross. And everyone is attacking RTE about their biased coverage of the election.
What I don't get is why people are so caught up on the term. There is no other type of interest except a vested one. If you don't have skin in the game then you wouldn't give a hoot about the outcome. The Unions are there to represent their members' interests, IBEC is there to represent the views of business owners. Whether or not they have succeeded in this goal over the last few years is neither here nor there. That is their goal and they should not be attacked for doing what they are designed to do.
I had an interesting conversation with a surveyor the other day in Ranelagh. He was very put off by Labour's policy on outlawing upward only rent reviews and claimed that it would be a distortion in the market. Now to my mind the current setup already massively distorts the market. In the commercial world rents are generally a proportion of the cost price of the premises. In a world of falling property prices, the rents have to come down. Otherwise I will just relocate my business to an adjacent building offering lower rents. The alternative is that with all other costs and prices falling, rent will become too much of a burden and I shut up shop.
If the choice has to be made between protecting property owners' investments and protecting viable businesses providing employment to staff and generating tax revenues I certainly know which side I come down on. The removal of upward only rent reviews is the right thing to do.
Of course the gentleman in Ranelagh saw no irony in then attacking various vested interests of public sector workers and unions after blatantly pushing his own vested interest for the previous five minutes. Maybe I should send him an Alannis Morissette CD before polling day.
What I don't get is why people are so caught up on the term. There is no other type of interest except a vested one. If you don't have skin in the game then you wouldn't give a hoot about the outcome. The Unions are there to represent their members' interests, IBEC is there to represent the views of business owners. Whether or not they have succeeded in this goal over the last few years is neither here nor there. That is their goal and they should not be attacked for doing what they are designed to do.
I had an interesting conversation with a surveyor the other day in Ranelagh. He was very put off by Labour's policy on outlawing upward only rent reviews and claimed that it would be a distortion in the market. Now to my mind the current setup already massively distorts the market. In the commercial world rents are generally a proportion of the cost price of the premises. In a world of falling property prices, the rents have to come down. Otherwise I will just relocate my business to an adjacent building offering lower rents. The alternative is that with all other costs and prices falling, rent will become too much of a burden and I shut up shop.
If the choice has to be made between protecting property owners' investments and protecting viable businesses providing employment to staff and generating tax revenues I certainly know which side I come down on. The removal of upward only rent reviews is the right thing to do.
Of course the gentleman in Ranelagh saw no irony in then attacking various vested interests of public sector workers and unions after blatantly pushing his own vested interest for the previous five minutes. Maybe I should send him an Alannis Morissette CD before polling day.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Campaign Diary Days 15 and 16 - Two more Debates
I have a long standing (16 years at this stage!) commitment on Wednesday evenings and so what is midweek for most is my evening off from the political scene. So it was with some disappointment that I realized I was going to miss the diospóireacht as Gaeilge on TG4 between the three main leaders. By all accounts it was far better than Monday's debate. With the figures showing up to half a million people watched at least part of one of the two broadcasts, it shows that holding a debate in Irish, when all three leaders are able to speak the language, is a good idea.
Last night there was a far more parochial debate held in the Town Hall in Rathmines. Chaired by Aine Lawlor, the event was well attended by both politicians and the public. Due to a meeting in Ringsend about the incinerator, not all candidates were there at the start but by the end only Ruairi Quinn (who had sent apologies) and Chris Andrews were the only representatives of the main parties to not attend.
The format allowed each candidate to give a 5 minute pitch which took about an hour. With so many independents running in Dublin South East this was a great opportunity allow them to differentiate themselves from the rest of the field. Most impressive were Paul Sommerville, Hugh Sheehy and, surprisingly to me, Dylan Haskins. On the other end of the scale I wouldn't have rated James Coyle or Peadar O'Ceallaigh highly on the basis of their performance. Mannix Flynn went off on his usual tirade against the system which having heard it several times before, did nothing for me. Of the party representatives, Annette Mooney did well as did John Gormley despite facing a fairly hostile crowd. Eoghan Murphy talked in endless platitudes and aspirations and won't have won over much from Lucinda Creighton's support base.
The second hour was taken up with questions and statements from the floor with responses from various panel members. The opening twenty minutes or so was taken up with the closure of the cancer care in St Luke's hospital. While obviously an important issue locally, with most of the candidates running on national issues Aine Lawlor had her work cut out moving the debate on to other topics. Once over the first hurdle the questions came thick and fast touching on welfare and disability cuts, the quango cull, Croke Park and political reform.
One man, who I have seen at various meetings before, tried to make a big issue out of immigration but none of the candidates were interested and in fact Sheehy took him on, stating that many of his co-workers, while not Irish, were hard working, tax payers and should be welcomed here. There was also a frank exchange on FG's position on trade unions with Creighton getting in all her talking points on Jack O'Connor and David Begg.
The meeting eventually finished up just after 10:30 by which stage most of the 200 or so in the room were glad to leave and get some fresh air. Overall it was a most enjoyable evening and certainly sorted out the ranking of all the independents in my mind. Well done to the Rathmines Initiative for arranging the event.
Last night there was a far more parochial debate held in the Town Hall in Rathmines. Chaired by Aine Lawlor, the event was well attended by both politicians and the public. Due to a meeting in Ringsend about the incinerator, not all candidates were there at the start but by the end only Ruairi Quinn (who had sent apologies) and Chris Andrews were the only representatives of the main parties to not attend.
The format allowed each candidate to give a 5 minute pitch which took about an hour. With so many independents running in Dublin South East this was a great opportunity allow them to differentiate themselves from the rest of the field. Most impressive were Paul Sommerville, Hugh Sheehy and, surprisingly to me, Dylan Haskins. On the other end of the scale I wouldn't have rated James Coyle or Peadar O'Ceallaigh highly on the basis of their performance. Mannix Flynn went off on his usual tirade against the system which having heard it several times before, did nothing for me. Of the party representatives, Annette Mooney did well as did John Gormley despite facing a fairly hostile crowd. Eoghan Murphy talked in endless platitudes and aspirations and won't have won over much from Lucinda Creighton's support base.
The second hour was taken up with questions and statements from the floor with responses from various panel members. The opening twenty minutes or so was taken up with the closure of the cancer care in St Luke's hospital. While obviously an important issue locally, with most of the candidates running on national issues Aine Lawlor had her work cut out moving the debate on to other topics. Once over the first hurdle the questions came thick and fast touching on welfare and disability cuts, the quango cull, Croke Park and political reform.
One man, who I have seen at various meetings before, tried to make a big issue out of immigration but none of the candidates were interested and in fact Sheehy took him on, stating that many of his co-workers, while not Irish, were hard working, tax payers and should be welcomed here. There was also a frank exchange on FG's position on trade unions with Creighton getting in all her talking points on Jack O'Connor and David Begg.
The meeting eventually finished up just after 10:30 by which stage most of the 200 or so in the room were glad to leave and get some fresh air. Overall it was a most enjoyable evening and certainly sorted out the ranking of all the independents in my mind. Well done to the Rathmines Initiative for arranging the event.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Campaign Diary Day 14 - Abortion again
Previously I mentioned how the abortion issue was cropping up on the doorsteps mainly in a negative light. Well last night we were out in the Mount Pleasant area between Rathmines and Ranelagh. I knocked at a door just after the woman who lives there arrived back from work. After announcing who I was canvassing for her first question was "what's your stance on the X case?" and I thought uh-oh. Having given her the official answer I prepared to be berated again but to my surprise she said that she was glad that some party was giving a straight answer on the topic and was willing to drag Ireland into the 21st Century.
From there we had a wide ranging discussion on all sorts of social and equality issues before being joined by the candidate for the traditional handshake. Her parting words were of encouragement and that there were a lot of people for whom our stance on X is important. They may not be as vocal as Cóir and the like, but they are out there, and do appreciate us taking a stand for progressive legislation.
From there we had a wide ranging discussion on all sorts of social and equality issues before being joined by the candidate for the traditional handshake. Her parting words were of encouragement and that there were a lot of people for whom our stance on X is important. They may not be as vocal as Cóir and the like, but they are out there, and do appreciate us taking a stand for progressive legislation.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Campaign Diary Day 13 - Five Way Debate
RTE held a 5-way debate between the leaders of the main parties on their Frontline programme. After rushing home from canvassing and a quick campaign meeting, I was hoping for some fireworks. Unfortunately the whole thing went off like a damp squib.
Firstly, the format of the entire event was poorly thought out. The audience questions, while a nice touch to give the election a human face, were pretty obvious and so allowed the participants to ream off pre-prepared material, often dodging the one specific that had been asked. Then Pat's restatement of the question to suit his particular slant didn't help much either. Finally having five debaters means that at different times people are going to miss out when there is an open goal just due to not being brought in until the moment has passed. Think of how many times and answer began with something like "before I get to that, I'd just like to return to something Fred said a minute ago"?
As for the leaders' performances, lets work left to right across the stage.
John Gormley actually acquitted himself well when I was expecting a bit of a meltdown. His continued use of electoral reform as the panacea for all Ireland's ills did get a bit boring though. His biggest problem was the lack of interaction with any of the other leaders. They have already written the Greens off and so pretty much ignored Gormley except when absolutely necessary.
Eamon Gilmore did much better than in the TV3 debate. He took off the kid gloves and got stuck into both Kenny and Martin on occasion. He had a chance to floor Kenny on the growth rates but he let the moment pass. For periods of time he did seem to step back and let the other four dominate the discussion but when he was involved it was clear and precise.
Enda Kenny, having landed the middle desk, didn't overly impress but didn't make any major blunders either. Like Gormley, his repeating of the same point, in this case "The Fine Gael party has a five point plan" got a bit tiring. Also his body language towards the end showed someone who as uncomfortable to be there - slouching and hands in pockets is never a good look.
Micheál Ó'Mairtín again displayed his prowess as a debater and points scorer but was leveled a few times by the Rip Van Winkle line. While he thought it was ironic for SF to be giving out about fraud, he happily seemed to forget his own parties murky history in that regard. Solid performance but won't have won any votes.
Gerry Adams, way out on the end, will be happy with his performance. After the 2007 farce he has obviously been well trained and got his points across well. His was the greatest line of the evening: "Sinn Féin will be a ninja for the economy". Well at least it came across that way.
All in all I didn't learn anything I didn't already know. But then again us partisan hacks are not like the general population so maybe there was some merit in the whole event. The depressing thing is that we all seem to be happy to declare Kenny the winner just on the basis of not making a complete fool of himself. I'd like to think I have slightly higher standards for my politicians.
Firstly, the format of the entire event was poorly thought out. The audience questions, while a nice touch to give the election a human face, were pretty obvious and so allowed the participants to ream off pre-prepared material, often dodging the one specific that had been asked. Then Pat's restatement of the question to suit his particular slant didn't help much either. Finally having five debaters means that at different times people are going to miss out when there is an open goal just due to not being brought in until the moment has passed. Think of how many times and answer began with something like "before I get to that, I'd just like to return to something Fred said a minute ago"?
As for the leaders' performances, lets work left to right across the stage.
John Gormley actually acquitted himself well when I was expecting a bit of a meltdown. His continued use of electoral reform as the panacea for all Ireland's ills did get a bit boring though. His biggest problem was the lack of interaction with any of the other leaders. They have already written the Greens off and so pretty much ignored Gormley except when absolutely necessary.
Eamon Gilmore did much better than in the TV3 debate. He took off the kid gloves and got stuck into both Kenny and Martin on occasion. He had a chance to floor Kenny on the growth rates but he let the moment pass. For periods of time he did seem to step back and let the other four dominate the discussion but when he was involved it was clear and precise.
Enda Kenny, having landed the middle desk, didn't overly impress but didn't make any major blunders either. Like Gormley, his repeating of the same point, in this case "The Fine Gael party has a five point plan" got a bit tiring. Also his body language towards the end showed someone who as uncomfortable to be there - slouching and hands in pockets is never a good look.
Micheál Ó'Mairtín again displayed his prowess as a debater and points scorer but was leveled a few times by the Rip Van Winkle line. While he thought it was ironic for SF to be giving out about fraud, he happily seemed to forget his own parties murky history in that regard. Solid performance but won't have won any votes.
Gerry Adams, way out on the end, will be happy with his performance. After the 2007 farce he has obviously been well trained and got his points across well. His was the greatest line of the evening: "Sinn Féin will be a ninja for the economy". Well at least it came across that way.
All in all I didn't learn anything I didn't already know. But then again us partisan hacks are not like the general population so maybe there was some merit in the whole event. The depressing thing is that we all seem to be happy to declare Kenny the winner just on the basis of not making a complete fool of himself. I'd like to think I have slightly higher standards for my politicians.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Campaign Diary Day 12 - Constitution Day
As regular readers will know I am all in favour of changing our current political structures. They have been shown to be not fit for purpose. However, you will also know that I'm not a fan of tinkering around the edges of the constitution. The primary document of the state is forever, not just for Christmas, and so modifications should be well thought out before being put to the people.
So Fine Gael's plan to put a series of amendments to the people within a year of taking power (possibly on the same day as the Presidential election in November) has set off some alarm bells. I'm going to look at each of the proposals in turn.
Of course the proposals don't address any of the fundamental problems in our state. Nothing on equality, nothing on separation of church and state, nothing on freedom of information, nothing on term limits for politicians, nothing on making the executive more accountable to the legislature. This is pretty much a pointless exercise with one exception. I certainly know which way I'll be voting on these proposals if they are put before the people.
So Fine Gael's plan to put a series of amendments to the people within a year of taking power (possibly on the same day as the Presidential election in November) has set off some alarm bells. I'm going to look at each of the proposals in turn.
- Cutting the number of politicians by 35%. This includes abolishing the Seanad and reducing the number of TDs by 20
- I have already outlined my objections to getting rid of the Seanad. Similarly I don't think getting rid of 20 TDs is really going to solve any of the problems in the Oireachtas. There needs to be a major overhaul of the operation of the houses of the Oireachtas but cutting the numbers is just a stunt that has to be followed through on, following Enda Kenny's solo run about 18 months ago.
- Giving Dáil Committees full powers of investigation
- Where does the line between the judiciary and the legislature lie? What sort of investigations will the committees undertake? Would need to see a lot of detail on this before being happy. However, there have been times when compelling witnesses to attend committee meetings would be helpful and enabling this would be a good move.
- Reducing the President’s term from seven to five years
- The only reason I can think of this is to run the Presidential election at the same time as the local and European elections. No reason to do this at all except to allow more people have a go at being President.
- Providing the Oireachtas with the power to cut judges’ pay
- Like item two this is a very slippery slope. The entire point of this provision in the Constitution is to stop the Dáil from threatening Judges with pay cuts in order to keep their decisions in line with the Dáil's point of view. Again it impinges strongly on the separation of powers. With the legislature already completely dominated by the executive removing the current provision would just strengthen further the government's powers. Even if the power was never exercised it would always be left hanging over the judiciary. Not good.
- Putting the Ombudsman on a constitutional footing
- This is the most sensible of the suggestions. The Ombudsman's Office is a key part of open and accountable democracy and so I have no problem in formalizing its existence in the constitution.
Of course the proposals don't address any of the fundamental problems in our state. Nothing on equality, nothing on separation of church and state, nothing on freedom of information, nothing on term limits for politicians, nothing on making the executive more accountable to the legislature. This is pretty much a pointless exercise with one exception. I certainly know which way I'll be voting on these proposals if they are put before the people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)