Sinn Fein won't increase tax?!!

by Ray Mon Aug 11, 2003 17:24

It seems to be another article in the debate that Justin and others were having in APRN. This guy doesn't want taxes raised, and he thinks it should be party policy, apparently, but its hardly an official statement. (It reads to me like the most recent election manifesto called for an increase in CGT if nothing else)

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Mon Aug 11, 2003 18:03 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Firstly, An Phoblacht is the newspaper of the republican community and articles, letters to the paper etc. which criticise SF policy are accepted within reason. My article which began this debate criticised aspects of SF finance policy. Since then there have been letters and articles debating that point. I've even seen letters from members of other parties appearing in our newspaper to argue this point. This is not to say that we are likely to be seeing Kieran Allen being given a column or Kevin Fulton writing an op-ed piece, it's a republican newspaper which follows the SF line, but it's also a forum for republicans to debate amongst themselves. Not everything in it is the party line, that would stunt political debate and internal democracy.

Secondly, the last election manifesto called for increases in CGT and employers PRSI as well as a major review of the taxation system to be completed within a year and on the basis of that review to redesign the taxation system. In our pre-budget submission we proposed a new top rate of tax of 50% on incomes of over E100,000. In short, current SF policy is to increase personal taxation, Corporation Tax, CGT and Employers PRSI.

Lastly, I think the article above is merely making the point that finance and taxation are complicated issues and should not be reduced to simply calling for increased taxation.

by aunty swm Mon Aug 11, 2003 20:55

While he is somewhat arrogant, he still has a well enough researched position on issues such as globalisation, and he would run rings around Sinn Fein policies on the above and other economic issues. However most ordinary people would run miles away from Professor Allen and the other trotskyist micro groups and are far more likely to listen to parties such as Sinn Fein and the Green party.

Perhaps this is because this is still a conservative country and most people will not support socialist parties who call for increases in corporation and other taxes, or for more public holidays or a Scandanavian model social welfare system. They will listen to non socialist parties such as the Greens or Sinn Fein who wont push the above issues and other economic policies and who even if they do manage to ever get into government they will not do much except for the occasional soundbite or some rhetoric on the envirnment.

by Saoirse Mon Aug 11, 2003 22:38 Derry

I realise that people are probably fed up of me only posting to point out the differences between SF policies North and South of the border but people down there need to know what they DO, as opposed to SAY. Up here, SF is for REDUCING Corporation Tax and this is not [the usual excuse] a policy 'forced' on them by being part of the Executive. It is part of their official economic policy - to reduce corporation tax in North to same levels as South....so which is it, Justin? The Northern policy (pro-Transnational Corporations), or the Southern (anti TNCs)?

by Joe Momma Tue Aug 12, 2003 00:44

In response to Aunty SWM, the Greens election manifesto in 2002 called for an increase in corporation tax.

by Domhnall O'Cobhthaigh - Sinn Fein Member Tue Aug 12, 2003 19:11

Just got the word from someone that something I wrote was being discussed here. Anyway, I'm not going to waste huge bandwidth on this. Just to clarify a few things.

First, Sam, I think that you're falling into precisely what I'm cautioning against, i.e. hugely over simplistic and disproportionate focussing on taxation to the detriment of everything else. Socialism is about a hell of a lot more than whether we increase taxation. For a start, theory and practice are dialectically linked - something that the ideologues of the micro-left have forgotten. I think Lenin wrote something about the requirements for correct theory was that it had to spring from a mass-based, revolutionary movement but be based on factual analysis. Sadly, no one can reassure me that the micro-left are mass-based and neither can they assure me that they base arguments on the real world. Like I think Trotsky himself would be spinning in his grave at the terrible mis-theory of the 'spontaneous revolution' which the Swmies attest to. It owes more to the autonomism than real marxism.

Secondly, although I admit its somewhat convoluted, I'm actually generally making the case for increasing taxation. Just that we have to be careful to avoid ideologically-driven moves which the left self-parodies continually.

Third, Saoirse said that our policy in the North is to lower corporation tax. That is simply not true. Our policy is to harmonise taxation rates across the island - sensible for a Republican party seeking Irish unity - nach bhfuil? You should remember that corporation tax is higher in the North than that in the South. Furthermore, the party advocated increasing the corporation tax rate in the last manifesto in the 26 counties.

Lastly, socialists need to realise that advocating that Ireland follow the Cuban path of economic strategy isn't going to wash. It just would not be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of people living in Ireland. It wouldn't even be sensible.

As far as the theoretical abilities of micro-group spokespersons, I reckon I could sling marxist theory with the best of them and might even enjoy cutting down the ortho-Trots of the British/Irish SWP but what's the point? They are non-entities. Day and daily we're fighting a war (in political terms) with the real enemy - parties like Fianna Fail, the UUP and elements of the British state. Engaging with the ultra-left, is just a pure waste. And as an aside, how far have these cargo cults strayed from the immense practicality of Lenin's 'concrete analysis of concrete circumstance'. They have taken worst of Trotsky's generally sound writings (principally the Theory of the Permanent Revolution) and ignoring his better stuff (principally the stuff he wrote when in leadership/left opposition). If these comments are considered sectarian, then that's fine. I see no place for ultra-lefts in the struggle for the Republic or for socialism generally. None at all. I even think that they are threatening the potential of the ESF with their swinging of the Italian PCR, the British SWP and the French LCR towards the autonomist crap of Negri-Hardt. As such, I'm cutting this short before I get into a rant. Too late.

Is mise
Domhnall Ó Cobhthaigh.

by Saoirse Tue Aug 12, 2003 20:27

Domhnall, Think you better get your facts straight. In the run-up to the Assembly elections, the SF leadership talked A LOT about the need to LOWER corporation tax up here "to attract jobs" to the region. They did sometimes dress it up in talk of an "all-island economy" but not always. They even talk about the need to bring the Celtic Tiger to the North!

Plus, given SF's response to the non-union/anti-union US TNCs that have arrived in Derry in recent years (welcoming them with open arms and complaining only about the need for "Irish managers") plus their refusal to condemn Hume's bringing Raytheon the world's largest missile manufacturer to Derry - "we need the jobs" - I think few people up here would see anything socialist about SF anymore.

I'm sure you will want to deny all of this, but a quick perusal of papers like the Belfast Telegraph and the Derry Journal will confirm it all for you. I have cuttings on some of this and can give you dates etc. so you can check it out for yourself.

by Bertie - Fianna Fail Tue Aug 12, 2003 23:13

I'm not going to waste a whole lot of bandwidth debating with the micro-republicans here. Just to say that the Sinner line here is a most impressive example of the art of spin.

We are not for lower corporatin tax, we're for harmonisation of tax on an all island basis.

This means we implement _lower_ corporation tax in the part of the country where we have an input into power and, well, it means that while we will _call_ for higher tax in the part of the country where we have no power, we know perfectly well that whatever we say will be ignored and indeed we can and will call for pretty much anything that will get us votes without ever having to do anything about it.

Normally I have nothing but derision for the theoretical outlook of micro-republican spokespeople, but Domhnall, I think that we just might have an opening for you in the real republican movement. There are a couple of us soldiers of destiny who could use your skills. For a start you could explain to the people why it is "simply not true" to say that we are for privatisation. We are in fact for harmonisation of privatisation on a pan-European basis. This means that Ireland must now play catch up on the rest of Europe. However, as I'm sure that everybody knows, we are staunchly against privatisation in Germany and Greece, and are even pushing for re-nationalisation of public services in Portugal.

by Jim Monaghan Thu Aug 14, 2003 13:25

Like many I am irritated by the SWP but to say that we will not work with them or others for a Socialist Republic is sectarian.
We do work with them. Sinn Fein did take part in the anti war movement in which the SWP played a major role whether we like it or not.
I retain the hope that the SWP will revert to the constructive group which played a good role in the H-Block campaign and Domhall many of Sinn Feins new friends spit on the street when those marchs passed by. The SWP may be nuiseances at the moment by the "sane" trade union leaders and media types who are "friendly with Sinn Fein now are worse.
Be honest any Left government will have to raise taxes without even a revolutionary upheaval.
We need better schools with a longer school year to end illiteracy. We need more hospitals, etc etc. Even reformists know this.
It is a lie to say we can have Boston taxes and Berlin Social Services.
We need a end to corruption and this means no coalition with either FF or FG for a start.
Sinn Fein stands at a cross roads. One way leads to where Clann na Phoblachta ended up ( The Clann had radical politics for the time and did not exclude raising taxes as far as I can recall.
The other way is to lead an United Front of themselves and the Greens with a genuine alternative policy to the status quo.This would drag in the activist community groups and the little parties compared to the big radical two.
I feel that this would create a tremendous enthusiasm and a real momentum hopefully leading to real change rather than new faces in the Mercs.
Sinn Fein has the bulk to do this.By this I mean a huge resource of committed members with real bases in communities and courage proved again and again. The far left groups do not.

by Janus Thu Aug 14, 2003 15:17

Some of Jim's ideas are very interesting, couple of comments.

Sinn Fein's 'new friends' is not clarified but I presume it means the new voters or something for the party? I don't think there are many people now supporting SF who bitterly opposed it as far back as the 80s, what they are attracting is a new, younger generation which includes for the first time, careerists in a significant number, still an overwhelming minority in the party but it is now possible to join SF and have a political career, something impossible to imagine when I joined, or even when I left. I think that's going to be a problem for them, the kind of people who would have been members of the Labour party in the 70s/80s are joining SF.

I also agree that SF stands at a crossroads but I think a lot depends on the growth of the party. The party now has more members in the 26 Counties than in the Six, and is growing far faster down here than it is in the North. The conservative 'United Ireland and fuck this socialist nonsense' element of the party is predominantly a rural, northern thing. (That said I was one billeted with a small farmer in South Derry who lectured me about Marxism until three in the morning)

In the South, the party is substanially more to the Left and I think this split, this crossroads the party is at, will be decided in large part by the North - South division.

The United Front with the Greens thing isn't a bad notion on paper but there are two fairly big flaws in my opinion.

Firstly, the Greens hate the Shinners. Partly personal, partly political. The Greens came in for a lot of flack from their own members about setting up that Technical Group with the Shinners. Shinners are far more likely to transfer to Greens than the Greens are to return the favour.

Secondly, I'm just not convinced of the long-term viability of the Green Party. I don't think anyone sees the Shinners being stretched to hold the five seats they have at the next election, but two of the Greens seats, Dublin South and Dun Laoghaire, are very vulnerable, Dan Boyle's isn't the safest either and Paul Gogarty is a bit of a pleb. They don't have the members, the activism or the penetration at Council level. I think the six seats they have now may be their limit, I don't think anyone seriously expects the Shinners not to increase at the next election.

The problem as I see it, is that the Shinners are in danger of drifting to the right. They'd be better off in my opinion with the economic policies and attitude of the SP. At the same time the SP is weakened by its internal stalinism and its absolutely terrifyingly ridiculous Northern policy.

If we could somehow combine the best elements of the SP and the best elements of SF into one party organisation, I'd sign on to that.

by John Meehan Thu Aug 14, 2003 15:36

I love this from the SF member above :

"Third, Saoirse said that our policy in the North is to lower corporation tax. That is simply not true. Our policy is to harmonise taxation rates across the island - sensible for a Republican party seeking Irish unity - nach bhfuil?"

I believe that the historic traditional objective of Irish republicanism is to end partition - to end the existing 26 and six county states, and create a new 32 County (Workers') Republic.

In that context, it is not "sensible" to "harmonise" different socio-economic and democratic standards "across the island".

It is a very slippery formula - take for example this possible scenario :

"our policy is to provide a free health service - medical care is a right not a privilege - we are in favour of harmonising health services across the island". The health services in the six counties are bad - in the south they are a lot worse (and are more controlled by private interests). Should we "harmonise" them?

I think not - because that would probably mean dragging the 6 county health service down to the horrible level of the 26 counties.

What about abortion? What about non-jury courts?

Once you examine concrete issues - bear in mind the VI Lenin observation above quoted in SF's favour against various far left parties - the abstract concept of "harmonisation" does not look too good. In fact, it is clearly revealed as deceptive language being used to hide class collaborationist politics - as (enthusiastically)practised by SF ministers in the currently defunct Stormont Executive. Imagine what they would be like in a Dublin government coalition with FF, FG or the PD's. Not a lot different from the Labour Party or - as pointed out by Jim Monaghan - Seán MacBride's Clann na Poblachta in 1948.

SF hostility to the far left should be judged in this context - MacBride's party in 1948 "bit the bullet" and went into coalition with Fine Gael...which had recorded a record low percentage vote (around 20%) in that year's general election.

So, what odds on a Crowe/Kenny/Rabbitte coalition government in 2007?

Very harmonious, and a border in very safe pairs of hands.

by . Thu Aug 14, 2003 23:38

em wee bit of bad news on the harmony of the health service, rumour has it that the ball has already been set rolling on that one.

by angry liberal - labour party Fri Aug 15, 2003 15:35 renrir666 at hotmail dot com

i think you have alot in common with the smaller far left parties.impractical policies(or lack of policies at all).two elections ago sinn fein had no agricultural policy for the south and the current one has more holes in it than an iraqi palace.yet sinn fein canvassed in leitrim,carlow and clare(they do alot of farming in these places).this is just an example and pretty important one as you know people eat food.
someone(i'm sory i forget who said that the exclusively nationalistic wing of sinn fein was rural and northern.i don't know where you got that from.i don't think your victory in kerry had alot to do with socialism as it did with kerry being a republican centre in the south(again they have alot of agriculture in kerry and yet your complete lack of anything to say didn't matter).actually lets look at the election altogether, your gains in the border counties certainly had nothing do with with republicanism,especially since u;ster-connacht has one of the lowest left wing voting averages in europe.inner city dublin was a protest vote and i seem to remember alot of brits out vandalism before you were ever even running there.if its's due to socialism then why not right wing out.
labour and the greens don't want anything to do with you because your self-deluded,your grass root voter is republican or vexed not socialist.i think you have alot in common with the far left,impractical,providing easy answers to difficult questions(no complexity from you on agriculture just the same old it's the established parties fault blah blah)and a protest vote.if you want to be seen as socialist then actually be left wing.

by Killian Forde Fri Aug 15, 2003 19:13

Hello!

Now you have to remember to take a deep breath before striking out. It helps formulate a more cohernet argument and avoids rambling.

Just a couple of minor comments.

1) I was extremely concerned to learn from your piece that Sinn Fein were canvassing in Clare during the last election. We are a party with finite resources and to canvass in an area where we did not run a candidate is bad party management. Thanks for the tip-off.

Lesson 1 Check your facts

2) According to your insight and analysis Sinn Feins victory in Kerry North had nothing to do with socialism and "as it did with kerry being a republican centre in the south", however you then state that "your gains in the border counties certainly had nothing do with with republicanism". Quelle fromage??

Lesson 2 For an argument to be convincing it must be coherent and reasonably consistent.

There were a couple of others bits that seem to have come from the Rabbitte school of sneering and the Kathleen Lynch school of complete nonsense, but I will put that down to your poor training.

Your post, in essence, represent the failure of the Labour party since the formatiion of the state, instead of getting the finger out, doing some work and keeping to your pledges, you instead blame the voters for not having the wisdom to see their own folly.

Bit like Rabbitte "think labour" phrase.

Pat Rabitte, Ruari Quinn, Dick Spring et al are the real Mr Ten Per Cent(s).

I think a great phrase for the Labour party under bunny boy would be "Turning right while indicating left"

by angry liberal - labour Fri Aug 15, 2003 19:25

the first lesson is one more for you than for me.why indeed canvass without a candidate?as for limited resources you are the second best funded party(behind fianna fail)last year-rfer to how ireland voted 2002 by amongst others michael gallagher.
in your second lesson you seem not to have noticed the sarcasm so to make it simple i think you won in kerry not because of a left wing vote(the labour vote went up too and i don't think many old fg voters turned out for you)but because it is a traditionally republican area as are the border counties.
your point about the failure of labour doesn't conflict with mine which was that you are getting a republican vote not a socialist vote that we failed to nurture.
so thank you for the advice that you didn't yourself heed and i was only too glad to point out such difficult areas as sarcasm and you completely missing the point.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Mon Aug 18, 2003 11:51 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Like Killian, I pretty much feel obliged to correct some errors. Indeed he, I, and another Shinner on Indymedia have a league going at this stage.

To begin with angy liberal (Oh the irony), we are not the second best funded party in the State and I am fully aware of Mr gallagher's book. more importantly, I am also aware that Mr Gallagher's opinions is just that, opinion. The facts are available from the Standards in Public Offices Commission and guess what, Sinn Féin, the fourth largest party in the 26 Counties, spent the fourth highest amount of money of any party in the 26 Counties.

Your analysis of Kerry North is also flawed. There was, is and will remain, a republican vote in Kerry North that dates back to the Treaty and community memory of such, but it's not enough to get elected. A box by box analysis of the vote (We did one, I doubt Spring wanted to) showed that our vote in Kerry North came in large parts from urban working class areas of Tralee and from young voters. Neither groups making up the 'traditional' Nationalist vote. If they did, we'd have been electing TDs there a long time ago. The truth is, as the numbers below show, we won some of your votes, and a rake of first-timer voters, typically from working class areas.

The Labour vote did not go up, it went down, which is the opposite of up (A helpful hint is to remember that 'up' is the direction our vote is going). The Labour vote in 1997 in Kerry North was 29.9% of the vote. The Labour vote in 2002 was 22.4%, a drop of over 7%. Sinn Féin's vote went up over 9%. Since the FF vote was up and the FG vote only slightly down, we took the bulk of our increased vote from first-timers and from your party.

Right, your first post.

Entertainingly, you begin by telling us there are holes in our Agriculture policy and then can't be bothered to tell us what they are. I have no doubt this was an oversight and not merely incompetence and I look forward in your response to an analysis of the gaps in our Agriculture policy.

Connacht-Ulster's left wing vote is the failure of your party to impact in any way there. Sinn Fein, a left wing party, polls almost four times as much as you do. You are unable to accept that a party which is to the left of the Labour party and widely accepted as such, could poll higher than you there so you attempt to state we are not a left-wing party. The Labour party is the party of selected elements of the Dublin middle and upper classes who have an interest in the working class either out of genuine concern (Tommy Broughan for example) or our of careerist ambition (The Labour front bench)

Our vote base has been much analysed, by us, and by others and you still don't seem to have grasped it. We took Labour seats in Louth and Kerry North. We took a seat you expected to get in Dublin South Central. Our vote included a tradional republican base that has long been there, disaffected Labour and FF voters, young people and first time voters long disenfrancised from the political system. Indeed according to the RTE Exit Poll, we received more votes from first-time voters than every other party in the state put together. First-time voters, when they're not young people, tend to be predominantly working class in nature. So, excepting your anti-Brit vandalism charge (Typically vague, ill thought out and without evidence) our vote was a combination of those factors and the fact that we received the vote of a great number of people your party has abandoned.

As for Labour and the Greens not wanting anything to do with us, I am curious as to whether you are speaking for Labour or the Greens, or both. People, especially social democrats whose association with the concept of principle is a loose one at best, tend to lose those when they have a chance of power. Remember going into Government with FF and supporting the tax amnesty. Yes indeed angry liberal, I was angry republican at the time, but not surprised republican. Not surprised at all that your party could do something like that.

If you want to be seen as socialist, be so. Argue for higher taxes, argue for increases in Corporation Tax, don't ignore the Unions, don't send Rabbitte to the Chamber of Commerce to tell people that he wants to build alliances with Business. Don't let him make a speech where he implies that Unionised workers don't give a shit about consumers. Don't support the erosion of Irish neutrality, the creation of a European imperialist power and the creeping European privatisation agenda of European integration.

I'll happily admit there are problems in SF, that there are definicienes in some areas, that we're getting used to engaging in a new field of struggle, but it will be a cold, cold, cold day in the very hottest part of Hell before I accept a lecture on socialism from a Labour party supporter, who cannot even bring himself to describe himself as a socialist, prefering to be a liberal. Oh, but he's an _angry_ liberal. And that makes the difference. Rabbitte is an angry Stickie, and that'll make the difference they tell us.

by angry liberal/lord snuff - labour party Tue Aug 19, 2003 21:49

firstly angry liberal just a name,it has nothing to do with me being a bad labour man out to be mean to people.i could call myself lord snuff if you like.
mr.gallagher takes into account all donations,foreign and domestic which didn't fall under the act passed just before the election putting a cap on the amounts and distribution of money.the commisioner does not.
on agriculture,now that you have a policy,you have nothing to say up or down,left or right on CAP,funding for teagasc or the irish farmers produce initiatives,i'm sure you have opinions you just don't share them with the rest of us(lucky you have that republicanism in rural areas).you also voted against nice(valid and no argument from me)but what about the farming concerns which every other party mentioned in their yes/no campaign-i think the treaty had good and bad effects,bigger producers like poland and cuts in CAP,you said nothing.ag isn't you're thing?
as for who voted where.i was saying that the vote wasn't due to you being more left wing than labour(ok by me) or being left wing at all but that it was a mostly republican vote.you're statements on increased young voters are true but are they young socialists or young nationalists?as for the city centre you said exactly what i did,a strong republican tradition plus a comment on the working class.there is such a thing as aworking class republican.we also won in north kerry and louth you said,for a republican you are bad at geography.north kerry is in kerry(included in kerry argument where you gave me some "internal"research figures,thanks i trust them utterly)and louth is a border county,you're seat there not entirely unlinked to a certain tradition in north louth.
i'm not saying more people aren't voting for you,more young and working class people what i'm asking is why?can you honestly say that everyone in louth or the other border counties voted for you because of socialism?
the same northern counties in which you got so many votes also elected dana and fianna fail right wingers to the european parliament.now she hates homosexuals and yet the same people that voted for you voted for you(connacht-ulster has you're highest voter/electorate ratio),a party in favour of gay rights(well done,i'll dip my hat to you on that one and sean crowe)and fianna fail.that makes no sense unless nationalism(not socialism)had a large part to play.nationalism of different shades links you,dana and ff.
you seem to think i'll be hurt that you are more left wing than me.you are but take away all that republicanism and you can join the sp out in the cold.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Wed Aug 20, 2003 18:36 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Right, first of all, you're deeply wrong in everything you say and do. Blunt perhaps, also true. As a supporter of the Labour party you will not be familiar with the fact that sometimes a party can issue press releases, statements and speeches and not be covered.

Bearing in mind agriculture is an area I know nothing about, I know our spokesperson has met with the EU Commissioner, spoken at length on CAP in Leinster House, met with the IFA, ICMSA and other farming groups. They launched a paper on GM foods, came out against decouplingA search on An Phoblacht, despite it being a terrible search engine, found an array of articles on the issue of agriculture through a simple search of the word 'agriculture'.

Bear in mind that Agriculture, coming as I do from an urban background, is something I know little about and have little interest in from a policy basis and even I can find that much information in less than ten minutes. We do have opinions, we do speak on the issue, but we don't get media coverage. Part of it is bias, part of it is that we're only the fourth biggest party in the 26, fifth in terms of Dail seats. Simply because you are not aware of something Sinn Fein is doing, does not mean it is not being done.

I choose to believe you were ignorant of this work, and not aware of it and deliberately misrepresenting the truth.

As for Mr Gallagher, with all due respect, he does not take into account the figures in the thoroughness as you state. The official figures are available from either the Dublin Government or the Northern administration. The notion we are the second wealthiest party in Ireland is nonsense. I wish it were so.


I think your belief that the vote was more nationalist than left-wing is, frankly, nonsense, and proven as such. Repeated exit polls have shown that the North is a low priority in 26 County elections, barely making it into the top ten. For Sinn Fein voters, it's higher, but rarely in the top five. Most people who vote for SF are neither Nationalist nor Socialist, they're working class people who know they're being treated unfairly and see only one party standing up for them. The notion that tens of thousands of people are voting for SF purely because they want a united Ireland is, with all due respect, ludicrous.

I don't need internal figures, nor do I need to get you to trust them. Frankly, I'm not so insecure that I need to make up figures to win an argument on the internet with someone I've never met. I mean, what's the point of that? I need you to show a modicum of sense on the issue. For almost 20 years Sinn Fein has been contesting Southern elections, whenever we have run solely on the North we have got slaughtered, whenever we have argued our policies on a range of issues, we have done well.

The Nationalist vote, the bedrock, core supporter through armed struggle vote has not changed. What is happening is we are attracting tens of thousands of people whose concern for the North is limited, but whose concern about social justice is strong. And I have to say, I have not read, seen or been told of any analysis to back up your claims. You ask me if young people are voting for us because of socialism. They're voting for us because they see a party fighting for their corner, young, working class people. They couldn't care less if the North floated away tomorrow. People vote on local issues, on national issues where they affect someone.

Look at the exit polls figures for fucks sake.

And yes, those counties elected conservatives. We ran in those elections too. The people who voted for us in those elections voted for us in the General. We didn't get many of Dana's votes in the General Election, nor did we put forward policies looking for them.

The vast and rapid growth in Sinn Fein's vote and membership has far more to do with left wing protest politics than with the North. It would be different if I was saying this and everyone else was disagreeing but you're the first person I've come across holding those views. And frankly, I hope they're dominant within the Labour party because it will make our job a lot easier.

Yes, we're a nationalist party, yes, we get a nationalist vote, yes, that is a crucial part of our vote north and south.

No, that vote is not the reason for our increases. No evidence suggests this. No facts, no figures, no numbers. Do you really think 7,500 people in Tallaght voted for Sinn Fein because they want to see a new beginning to policing in the Six COunties? Or might it have had something to do with education, health, housing and our campaigning profile on those issues?

I hope for our sake, that you and the Labour party imagine it's the former. The reality is that it is the latter.

by angry liberal/lord snuff - labour Wed Aug 20, 2003 21:50

as for the agriculture i have in the past looked to find all views on agriculture(and appreciate you bothering)and your gm food and cap statements were actually made 1.after the irish government had already submitted it's approach to the eu(generally not in favour) and 2.afterfischer cut cap to bits and made irish ag worse.i accept that ag isn't your thing but the point was that you can win votes by not addressing these important issues in rural areas,i can't see a party doing wtihout nationalism/protest/winning smile and i sought a rational explaination.

did i not say that sinn fein voting had alot to do with a protest vote?and you ageed that your success had alot to do with the disenfranchised.i don't see anything to suggest that you disagreed with me.
the general idea i'm trying to foster here is that your success has little to do with your socialism(it could be nationalism it could be your winning smile i don't care)and yet again you agree that your gains in tallaght had little to do with socialism.just what i was getting at.now here is the big one......if your party support is not due to socialism but protest and disappointment then where do you get off whinging about labour sell outs etc.is that not like the swp giving out to fg for being so conservative?
you also seem to have your knickers in a twist,all the labour abuse just wastes your time,i'm sure we both have loads of cheap ones eg.selling drugs,selling out,bombs,dermot lacey and on and on and on.i'd rather read what you have to say than be petty.
as for this "making our job easier"i assume you mean you mean the building up of your party,well again i disagree.most of the candidates you had lost their deposit(i'm aware of paper candidates,but still MOST of them?),you are no longer the fastest growing party(fg,i'm crushed)and your transfers from other parties suggest that you get little support in already established non-first choice voters.now this is a question so restrain yourself but where does this optimism come from?no party broadcasts please.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Féin Thu Aug 21, 2003 11:50 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

Our optimism comes from the facts, frankly I'm not sure where you get your political analysis from. The majority of people vote for Sinn Fein because we are a left wing party advocating left wing policies ie higher social spending, redistribution of wealth, more accountability in Government, neutrality etc.

That's the bulk of our vote. Do we check to see whether everyone who votes for us has read Lenin, studied Trotsky and analysed Connolly. Ummm, no. But we do get a far higher vote for our left-wing socialist policies than we do for our Northern policy in the 26 Counties.

You then misrepresent what I said in regard to the Tallaght vote, saying it had nothing to do with socialism. What I actually stated was that it had a lot to do with Sinn Fein's policies in Health, Education and also come to think of it Housing, where we have left wing socialist policies. I would prefer you not to misrepresent my views on this, or as you have repeatedly tried to do, on other areas. Frankly, it makes for boring debate.

You are desperately trying to find some other reason why people vote for SF than our left wing politics. You've come up with, as far as I can see, disenfrancised voters (And? Simply because they're disenfrancised means they're not voting for a left wing party? Surely if they are disenfrancised and voting it's a left wing working class based party that has brought them to do so.)

In a right wing society, protest votes tend to be left wing in nature.

I'm talking about our policies. Sinn Fein, like every party, stands on a set of policies. Our policies are left wing, socialist policies. Labour's were at one time and increasingly are not. That's kind of the basic argument I'm putting forward.

Regarding, to take the first point almost last, your agriculture comments, with all due respect I don't accept that you 'looked to find all the views' on agriculture. I don't think that's possible. Most Agriculture correspondents wouldn't have the time to do that. We had our CAP policy in place pre-Fischclar and while the GM launch was following the 26 Gov

None of our candidates lost their deposits. Not one. And if you had bothered to look it up you would see that deposits weren't required in this election following a Supreme Court judgement. For the record, if they had been, we still wouldn't hve lost the deposits. I've been a member of SF long enough to remember when we used to lose them left, right and centre and I remember how depressing it was. It doesn't happen anymore.

As for Fine Gael being the fastest growing party, I look forward to seeing some evidence of it besides Fine Gael press releases. I'm not saying it's not true, merely that until I see some evidence I'm going to take with a grain of salt the idea that after its worst election result in decades a party's membership booms.

As for transfers, again, look at the numbers. As was pointed out by election analysts post the General Election, the old anti-SF vote on transfers isn't as bad as it was. Some of our candidates did very well on transfers, others didn't. We probably don't get transfers as well as most of the major parties yet, but it's a decided improvement on where we used to be.

Now with all due respect, this debate has been far more about me correcting your errors (lost deposists, paucity of policy on Agriculture, voting analysis, turnout etc.) than actually an exchange of ideas on the issue, which I would have found interesting.

If you wish to continue it further, you hve my email address and I'll get back to you whenever.