Green with Ministerial Envy

by Colm Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:12

I think the Greens will be destroyed by this. They are not a left formation but have drawn a large portion of their votes from the liberal/social democrat pool that Labour have alientated with their serial opportunism. The Greens will lose this element of their vote in the next election ad they will also lose the universal tranfer attraction that has benefitted them up to now. They face extinction.

Roger Garland, their first TD, has been on radio this morning crying "betrayal". I hope he won't be the only of their members thinking this way. Perhaps one of them would be good enough to publish the lowlights of the draft programme for Government (the one the GP leadership have been so eager to conceal from the citizens) on Indymedia as soon as they get their hands on it this afternoon? I think I have a right to know what is proposed for me by Government for the next 5 years.

by PhilJo Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:44

While I agree that this will alienate a lot of people who vote green I do see their position. They have policies that they can get implemented at the cost of going along with policies the membership disagree with. This is politics. If they had been given an overall majority by the electorate they could implement all their policy platform, however they aren't in that position.
The choice is to mirror Joe Higgins and make valid intelligent criticism from outside or to participate in the process and make what change they can.
As to growing to like the individuals they were negotiating with, while FF as an organization may be evil incarnate, it is made up of quite personanable individuals with whom I disagree on almost all political issues.

by Black Guard Detachment Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:09

People should get real about the Greens. This was always going to happen. Okay, so the haste with which they have jumped in with the FF/PD operation is upsetting, but the Greens have always been about 'managing capitlalism' in a better way than others. Fundamentally they are capitalist in outlook. I know a few of them in the Cork area and they are business people - are we ever surprised what with business justifies in the name of profit and economics. In reality the Greens just wish all the exploitation that goes on could be made more pleasant and less harmful to the 'the planet'. A waste of space. (Am a tad annoyed I ever wasted anyttime arguing with any of them.)

by bj Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:17

For a brief monent the Greens had the high moral ground - when they said,
after negotiations, that they could not enter govt. with FF. They gave the impression that
FF were too corrupt to share power with.
When the next election is called FF will blame all of the administration mistakes on
the hair-brained influence of the Greens.
Gormley, Sargent and co. are being set up.

by LeftWatch Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:22

Philjo says
"They have policies that they can get implemented at the cost of going along with policies the membership disagree with."

The problem is, based on the Irish Time article this morning, NONE of the greens policies are being implemented or any of their opposition stances given any credence.

This thing reads like a giant 'Fuck You' to the Greens from FF and and even bigger 'Fuck You' from the greens to their supporters.

Astonishing opportunism at work here.

by Green Day Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:32

Understand they are capitalists etc but what about Anti War position?
Why won't those candidates who signed the Anti War pledge, agreeing not to support any govt facilitating US Troops and Rendition Flights breakaway now..

Patricia Mc Kenna for e.g is far more radical I think but she won't leave? It is this component of Greens that need to stand firm today.

Is this kind of confusion pervasive in the Greens?
Well we won't have too long to wait to find out.

Interested in Green party Members' comments please.

by PhilJo Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:48

it would appear from this that they are getting nothing at all bar the one Merc and the possibility of a carbon tax at an unspecified rate in an unspecified timeframe.
No way will they get 66% of the party membership to go along with this.

by Des Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:57

This “programme” will mean nothing for people who have to depend on the public health service, especially if Harney is allowed to go ahead with co-location and her private hospitals on public sites, it will mean nothing to people on long public housing lists. I am familiar with politicians ditching their pre-election promises but for speed in doing so, Trevor really does deserve an award! It is giving the two fingers to the people of Iraq, the Rossport five and other courageous people in Mayo, but then principles can always be removed when large salaries and ministerial mercs are available. Ahern must be privately bursting his sides! The whole farce at least makes me understand (if not agree) why large numbers of people don’t vote.

by observer Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:57

Would wager big money that the conference will reject the deal. Rumour that at least one TD will oppose.

by iosaf Wed Jun 13, 2007 13:39

& in Barcelona have held onto party in a minority coalition astounding many with their pathetic apologies for increased repression and the now clear end to what was once an inspiring alternative and okupe scene. Thus I wouldn't be surprised if comhaontas glás or whatever the Irish greenies are called go exactly the same way.

by Black Guard Detachment Wed Jun 13, 2007 13:43

As the Greens and Gormless head for Planet Bertie you have to admit they have made a laughting stock of themselves.

by John Boy Wed Jun 13, 2007 13:56

...but in power they will be better placed to actually make a difference rather than have their voices poo-pooed every time. There's always going to be a compromise to get into power where they might actually do something. Sitting on the sidelines means they were never going to do anything. There will always have to be a certain amount of cosying up to FF to get where they want to go.

Call them power-hungry if you will but aren't they better placed to make a difference in power than out?

Besides, despite their supposed support based on anti-war etc etc, they didn't manage to increase their number of seats. They might as well amplify their voice as much as possible.

by leftie Wed Jun 13, 2007 14:41

Details of the deal are now available and there's definitely no good news on shannon or co-location. Here's a beauty courtesy of the Irish Examiner:

"The [Green] party has admitted that it has been disappointed on some issues, including the controversial plan to allow private health facilities on the grounds of public hospitals.
That project will go ahead under the FF-Green deal, but will be restricted to the six projects already being planned pending a review of the scheme in five years' time. "

In five years time? Err...you mean pending the outcome of next election. Gee...what a gain for the greens.

by Colm Wed Jun 13, 2007 14:50

I've been reading the details of the programme on the RTE website and on the breaking news section of the Irish Times website. It's a very weak deal and I'm sure it will be appeciated as such by the GP members.

The leadership caught a dose of Stockholm syndrome over the past fortnight but I genuinely can't see 66% of GP members swollowing this nonsense. I will be very surprised if the deal gets even a simple majority tonight. Still, the Greens have damaged themselves by even proposing to accept this programme.

by Ascent Wed Jun 13, 2007 14:57

The Green Party wants to agree to the Shannon stop-over with the paltry proviso that the Irish Military 'can carry out inspections when seen fit into the practice of so-called extraordinary rendition'.
This is, in effect, no change. The Green Party can now enjoy the ignomony of being complicit in an illegal invasion and the mass murder of innocent Iraqis.

So consider that a complete sell-out on Shannon!

Regarding Harneys plans to continue the privitization of hospitals, i.e. co-location: no change! It is to get the approval of the Green Party.

'A national transport regulator is to be set up and a Dublin transport authority will be formed'. So what, it will be FF established, run and regulated.

A Climate Change Commission is to be set up. Again by a FF government! Populated by cronies and hacks of FF, no doubt.

Other cosmetic changes are also mentioned but I am too sick to the guts to even list them.

Hopefully the majority of Green Party members will feel the same as me and reject this sell-out. It will see the top boys get nice jobs, but it will sell out everything the Greens have campaigned on. But I suppose we shouldn't be surprised at politicians looking out for themselves.

Tara is also being abandoned to the mercy of the FF appointed National Transport Regulator.

The Blood of the Iraqi people will sign this agreement

by Moonbat Wed Jun 13, 2007 15:12

The greens were never going to fight FF on Shannon. Don't forget Dan Boyle and Ciaran Cuffe are Americans.

by Green Day Wed Jun 13, 2007 15:40

Sure what does that have to do with anything?

The majority(at least 65% last time I checked) of the American nation is disgusted by Bush et al's war wageing...

Strange logic to me but I guess there is no answer to this sell out..Fingers crossed it is denounced and rubbished vehemently at today's conference.

& to top it off now Mc Kenna is "surprised" at the media's response to the proposal.

by man in laois Wed Jun 13, 2007 16:05

I sincerely hope that the rank and file of the Green Party hold the high moral ground!

To give way on such vital isues as Shannon and the M3 shows no more than that the Green TD's are greedy for power at any price.

Which is totally despicable.

by Jim O'Sullivan Wed Jun 13, 2007 16:59

The call of the Merc won out.

Image the Greens and a so called socialist, supporting and sustaining a government that contains Mary Harney. And if that is not bad enough, they have agreed to the growing of the private sector in health thereby copperfastening the two tier health system and creating greater division in the community. While the less well off wait their turn for treatment on trolley's they will be breathing "fresh" air of course.

The leaders of the Greens tell us they are living in the "real world". Do those that are about to be disadvantaged even further when it comes to health care not too live in the real world?
What a sham, what a deal, what a sell out.

Enjoy the perks lads and lassies, five years is not a long time.

by Joeyjoejoe Wed Jun 13, 2007 18:39

Never mind how many Green party members will reject the deal, How many Fianna Fáil people rejected it? None! the parliamentary party voted unanomously for the deal today, a good sign that basically the Greens rolled over.

I'd vote Green and I reckon if they got 41.6% of the vote instead of FF they'd make a real positive difference, I could live with them ‘selling out’ by going in with FF now if they got a good deal but what they've ‘got‘ from FF is a joke, did they even mention Tara to them at all?

by Des Wed Jun 13, 2007 21:52

And the good news (for some) is that the GP are in 'government' by a vote of 86%,

by greenie - personal capacity Wed Jun 13, 2007 23:57

and feel let down by my representatives on this.
I began to feel suspicious when the negotiations "broke down" but then FF came out and said all those nice things about the negotiators. then they returned, then suddenly everything was resolved. It all seemed so staged. Then strategically moving the meeting to midweek, (ensuring less attendance from more radical members elsewhere in the country) and keeping the documents until the last minute so there was little time for members to critically analyse the proposals. It all stinks to me. Turning in my card.

by John Boy Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:23

Moving the meeting to midweek would hardly deter the more radical members if it was something they cared enough about. What about those that drop evrything to go to Tara or Rossport at the drop of a hat? Surely they could have made it to the meeting.

The Greens weren't needed in the government with the support of the PDs and the Independents already pretty much guaranteed. FF just wanted a veneer of eco-friendliness and the Greens wanted a chance to see if they could get their foot in the door to try and actually make a difference rather than be on the outside, whining fromn the sidelines but making absolutely no difference when it comes to the crunch.

They're more impotent on the sidelines than they are in government, regardless of their apparent capitulation.

by Jonno Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:46

If the Greens weren't needed, FF wouldn't have been talking to them at all. FF were able to get a bare majority with the PDs and independents (one of whom is getting on a bit and one of whom may well be leaving the Dail pending the outcome of her court case). By no means a stable goverment and they'd have to give up the CC (don't kid yourself on that either, it's been a definite advantage to them to have O'Hanlon there) of take Gregory in to their little Rainbow (and he'd twist a lot more out of them than the Greens (and no doubt they remember what happened the last time)).
The Greens were very definitely needed. The negotiations were the equivelant of a lecherous middle aged man telling a nineteen year old girl that she was unnattractive and, 'Sure nobody would ever be interested in you but me so you might as well just come on home with me now'. I'm fairly sure most nineteen year old girls would have more cop on and more self respect than to fall for it, though.

by Green voter Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:53

All politics is compromise, not dictation. In a state with 70% voting for FF & FG & PD, it's an overdue and welcome start. That's all it is for now, and 'If you don't chance your arm, you'll never break your neck'. This is Ireland, not Sweden.

by Jonno Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:57

Cause if you're a green voter, I'm the Pope. People, like myself, who are angry about this deal would have had little problem with compromise. This is CAPITULATION! They got precisely nothing from this deal other than vague promises that won't be fulfilled.

by JOhn Boy Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:07

"If the Greens weren't needed, FF wouldn't have been talking to them at all. FF were able to get a bare majority with the PDs and independents (one of whom is getting on a bit and one of whom may well be leaving the Dail pending the outcome of her court case). By no means a stable goverment and they'd have to give up the CC (don't kid yourself on that either, it's been a definite advantage to them to have O'Hanlon there) of take Gregory in to their little Rainbow (and he'd twist a lot more out of them than the Greens (and no doubt they remember what happened the last time)).
The Greens were very definitely needed. The negotiations were the equivelant of a lecherous middle aged man telling a nineteen year old girl that she was unnattractive and, 'Sure nobody would ever be interested in you but me so you might as well just come on home with me now'. I'm fairly sure most nineteen year old girls would have more cop on and more self respect than to fall for it, though."

You're not giving Bertie enough credit for slyness. It strengthens his hand, alright but only because it means he can lose the Greens or the PDs or Independents and still have the majority. As for C-F, I doubt they would have gone for her if it was as likely that she'd be bankrupt. If you think Bertie's that naive, good luck to you.

The Greens give Bertie the veneer of eco-friendliness that he wants. Gormley will get the Environment and Ryan might get into DCMNR which I wouldn't mind seeing.

Just don't overstate FF's need to have the Greens there.

by Green voter Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:27

Fair enough, Jonno, but that 70% first preference to FF-FG-PD is a fact of Irish democracy in 2007, just as global warming is a fact. Neither can be wished or reasoned away.

by Jonno Thu Jun 14, 2007 13:10

Green voter, thanks for both the standard response (usually from FF voters) and completely ignoring what I said. I'm not wishing away the votes for the main parties, I'm saying that as the Greens got absolutely nothing but non-binding vagueness, there was no reason for them help prop up a party that the people who voted for them are mostly appalled by.
I accept, for instance, that FF were never going to budge over Shannon but at the very least they should have been able to get the M3 rerouted.

John Boy, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Bev is facing a bill that runs to millions which I don't believe she can pay (that said some sort of FF dig out, you know the kind of thing, debts of honour from our friends in the building community, might well be done). However, many people would not consider a bare majority with four independents to be a stable government (just look at the last time independents were needed to prop one up). Bertie is well aware of this, he was in governemet the that last time a coalition like this was in.
So, does he need the Greens to form the government? No. Does he need the Greens for stable government? Yes. They could have played a much stronger hand. As it is, they negotiated nothing but the anger of their voter base.

by John Boy Thu Jun 14, 2007 13:22

"John Boy, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Bev is facing a bill that runs to millions which I don't believe she can pay (that said some sort of FF dig out, you know the kind of thing, debts of honour from our friends in the building community, might well be done). However, many people would not consider a bare majority with four independents to be a stable government (just look at the last time independents were needed to prop one up). Bertie is well aware of this, he was in governemet the that last time a coalition like this was in.
So, does he need the Greens to form the government? No. Does he need the Greens for stable government? Yes. They could have played a much stronger hand. As it is, they negotiated nothing but the anger of their voter base."

A bare majority with 4 Independents may not be a stable government but that's not what Bertie has. He also has the PDs on board. I'm sure Bev will come up trumps in the end....

So maybe they could have gone for more and not jeopardised their chances but maybe they played it conservatively and hoped that once they got their foot in the door, they could up the ante then.

by Green voter Thu Jun 14, 2007 13:44

Im not a party member but voted Green the last 3 elections.

The environment is a bigger issue to me than the M3 or Shannon. Don't know why the Iraqi tragedy is an Irish issue - fair enough you have your own strong views on that. Don't know for a fact if the M3 is better for the environment if it is rerouted. Less friction on a new road means less fuel used and less accidents. I'm not fussed about Tara being bypassed. Sorry if you don't like that, I'm not perfect. It's a long haul.

by Rural Voter Fri Jun 15, 2007 15:46

Many people fear the Green Party and while some of this was stoked up by Fianna Fail McCartyism and scaremongering by telling people things such as the Greens would ban cars etc. While my own preference would have been for a coalition between FF and Sinn Fein as I believe it would be a more natural coalition. After all it must be remmembered that the vast majority of Irish people are conservative and will never vote for the Labour Party or the Greens but they will vote for FF and when Sinn Fein moderates its policies a little further they will get a lot of support especially in rural counties.

by John Boy Fri Jun 15, 2007 16:15

Does SF even hhave policies to moderate?

Other than 'working towards a united Ireland', I mean.

by Jonno Mon Jun 18, 2007 14:10

"A bare majority with 4 Independents may not be a stable government but that's not what Bertie has. He also has the PDs on board. I'm sure Bev will come up trumps in the end...."

Sorry, I took the PDs as a given. It still only gives them 84 seats (and that's assuming the give up the CC advantage (impartial me ar*e)). That's a pretty bare majority (one over the absolute minimum) considering the question mark over Beverly Flynn (though from some of the things I've been reading, she has no intention of going down without wasting a whole load of tax payers money on a constitutional challenge) and the age of JHR. He's also left with multiple points of failure (relying on independents for you majority can be a risky business, hence the no Tony Gregory in government).
I hope you're not seriously suggesting that the configuration I've described above (which is what it would have been without the Greens) represents a stable government.

Seems to me that the only people happy about this are the green party members (not supporters) and all shades of FFers. Of course, the FFer's have good reason to be happy. They now have a party they can dump all over (which they've already done in negotiation) and shunt blame to. They now have a configuration of government where any component will be unable to tople it even assuming they lose BF or JHR. And they get to keep the CC in FF fold.
I must admit that I'm no fan of FF but when I see something like this I have to admire the stroke pulling ability.
The Greens on the other hand should remember Dante. The lowest circle of hell is reserved for the betrayers.

Green Voter, whether or not your fussed about the issues doesn't alter the fact that it was part of the platform on which the Greens campaigned. They could have gotten the M3 rerouted if they'd negotiated harder. There is no hard and fast reason for its current route (other than some benefit to certain FF supporters) and no real reason why the relevant section couldn't be rerouted. I seriously hope we're not expected to believe that cost was a consideration of the administration that brought us the far from cheap e-voting and PPARS fiascos.
They went in, they rolled over and they spat in the face of the people who had voted for them based on their stated campaign platform. And before anybody comes out with an 'all politicians lie' comment, the Greens have always promoted themselves as a party of integrity.

by Dalytimlin Tue Jun 19, 2007 16:50

This is a very biased article, it seems to me that you have a hidden agenda in your opinionated waffle.
Would you not fancy a merc? Would it not be an upgrade to say.... maybe a nuns VW.

Bring Beverly back, she really is a "class act"!

by Jonno Thu Jun 21, 2007 14:18

Imagine opinion being displayed in an opinion piece.

by Dorothy Gale Thu Jun 21, 2007 14:38

The Greens sold themselves cheaply, they only got 1 junior minister. If they had any negotiating skills at all, Bertie would have conceded another minister of state.

Maybe Trevor will put some manners on the farmers, force them to stop mistreating animals. Guarantee us safer food. Thats the only good thing I can see coming out of this affair.

by Jim O'Sullivan Thu Jun 21, 2007 20:20

Dorothy Gale suggests, "Maybe Trevor will put some manners on the farmers, force them to stop mistreating animals. Guarantee us safer food. Thats the only good thing I can see coming out of this affair."

Sorry Dorothy, but the scale of the Greens sell-out was such that they are totally powerless to make any changes. The Greens agreed to be bound by a Programme for Government which is just the FF manifesto re-written. Any changes that the Greens would wish to introduce that fall outside that agreement will require the agreement of the cabinet and obviously FF will control all such votes. What we have in effect is an FF administration with a couple of non-FF members making up the numbers.
The Green leadership hocked the soul of the party.