Well, I glanced at today's Indo to see that Dep. Lucinda Creighton TD has upset the dear leader Enda Kenny as FG took bribes - sorry - "donations" from NAMA backed developers
These are the same unscrupulous people who bent the rules, paid off unaccountable officials and due to their greed - and that of the banks - have led this country to the verge of collapse with NAMA, empty hotels and ghost estates.
As we saw in the Watson/Reingling report, the crisis was home grown - due to overly light regulation and political mismanagement rather than the credit crunch.
The only phrase that springs to mind is Avé! Duci novo, similis duci seneci! - or in modern terminology, same crap, different day
One feels rather than Allons it is actually Allors! enfants de la Patrie, and we see the constant infighting and divisions within FG still, despite the brave face and the unified front after the last headless chicken act.
Lets face facts.
1) Despite what they say about clearing house and unity FG is in disarray, fragmented and disjointed, with a built in self destruct function due to infighting
2) Despite what they say about honesty and integrity, they are accepting funds from the same crooked shower as FF. FG director of elections Phil Hogan has already said the party would oppose plans by the Government to introduce legislation banning corporate donations.
3) Despite what they say about New Era FG (most ideas lifted from Amhran Nua) is as dynastic, gombeen and post civil war as FF - and there will be little or no change.
We saw after the heav"heave" against Dep. Kenny in FG, most of the rebels were dropped from the front bench - other than those with dynastic ties.
We saw the stalwarts from FGs Old Guard like Dep. Noonan called up to the front, the Praetorians replaced the progressives, and those who have remained on the front bench are there for cynical political reasons.
In a future, probable FG government, those token few will end up on the back benches making up the votes.
In a way it is our own fault, both FF and FG depend on us, the voters, to return them to office because we look at local politics first, and party politics second. Our local TD will agree with us on our problems with the party, but have no doubt that other than an extreme case of political survival, they will tow the party line.
The so called 'rebels' who lose or drop the party whip, will in 99% of cases still vote with the Government.
They are less maverick than John McCain FFS!!!
If there is any people in FG it is Dep. Creighton - who did not cow-tow to Kenny after the failure of the so called heave, and has maintained her integrity at least.
"It is not a good image for any political party to be in receipt of donations from developers who are associated with NAMA, full stop," She insisted that there could be no room in Fine Gael for "cute-hoor" politics, which she said had "defined and tainted Irish public life like an incurable cancer".
Where I would disagree with Dep. Creighton is that it is not the cute hoor that is the worst part of Irish politics, it is what causes cute hoorism - that is the dynastic constituency driven system that we ave, perhaps suitable for the 19th century - but not the 21st
Dep. Creighton, like Dep Varadkar are a new wave for FG, they are young, non-dynastic and have been elected on their own merits.
However, by joining a party so deeply steeped in the dynastic post civil war traditions of the first 60 years of independence, she should perhaps consider - as should Dep Varadkar - looking at another way.
They need to consider their political futures, and as I have said before, they have little to loose.
This is because given the probability of an FG led government after the next election, there is no way I can see them anywhere other than the back benches.
After the heave, we have seen FG leadership go back to the Christian Democrat stalwarts.
It is for that reason, rather than accept the status quo people of their calibre should drop the party whip, leave FG and help real change by joining Amhran Nua.
As readers well know, Ireland is a small country.
As readers will know, and as I have written about here, we have a political and business caste, with dynastic politics.
We need a full, public and open investigation into the banking crisis.
It was this crisis that has created NAMA and put our National Debt at levels that are almost incomprehensible.
It also needs to be set up in a way that does not allow political interests to be catered to, and it must be limited in terms of time and cost - not to be milked by the legal eagles as the Tribunals have been.
Iceland has taken steps towards this with the appointment of Eva Joly, a Norwegian born French judge with an outstanding history investigating corruption by politicians and vested business interests.
Her work investigating corruption is impressive, taking on, among others, former minister Bernard Tapie and the bank Crédit Lyonnais.
Her most famous case was that of France’s leading oil company – Elf Aquitaine. Despite death threats, she carried on the case to uncover several cases of fraud.
With that CV she seems ideally suited to investigatig the banks scandal.
We have seen the results of the Tribunals arranged by the Irish Government, little truth, little accountability, few prosecutions and all of this done in a protracted and costly manner.
Our systems are not working, so it is time to take a fresh approach - but will any Government have the courage of their convictions to actually really try to find the truth?
Props to http://celticmeltdown.webs.com/corruption.htm, which details her work in Iceland well
People who see certainties where others see nuances and shades of meaning are either prophets or a quacks, and our politicians are not prophets.
Our Minister of Finance cannot even accurately predict profits, or lack thereof, from the biggest gamble that Ireland has ever undertaken.
We have seen years of mismanagement and poor decision making of which NAMA is the most recent example, and with the Lisbon treaty we have chosen to say No, to dissent.
Dissent and disagreement with Government is the lifeblood of democracy, it is also essential because every once and a while it is right, and the powers to whom we try to speak are wrong.
One very important lesson came from America, from a courageous commentator Edward R Murrow - but more about him later.
The elected, transitional, holders of power in our state, our employees, continue to impugn the intelligence and the loyalty of the people of the state of Ireland in relation to the European Union.
Some media pundits credit our politicos with a knowledge and understanding of the challenges facing Ireland and Europe which neither common sense nor their track record suggests they deserve.
If our politicians had proven their self declared knowledge, foresight and planning, about finance, the economy, health services etc. we might be able to accept the premise that they knew what the hell they were talking about.
But to date this Government has proven little except their own arrogance and hubris in spite of its failure.
With bank bailouts, NAMA, toxic debts, rising unemployment and a real sense of insecurity and uncertainty their failures have enveloped the country in a fog of fear.
This fog, fear and confusion in addition to the BCI ruling on referendum coverage may yet be used to push through the Lisbon treaty on a second attempt.
THE GREATEST LESSON IN DISSENT
One of, if not the greatest American journalist of the modern era was Edward R Murrow. Never in a thousand years could my writing even come close to how he phrased a warning about Governments who felt they - and they alone - knew everything, dismissed accountability and marginalized dissent. In 1954, in a challenge to the McCarthyite witch hunts he said:
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men -- not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular"
These words are utterly appropriate to our challenges today.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty or allow the refusal to accept the Lisbon Treaty to be confused with our commitment to a European Union. Dissent is said to be the highest form of patriotism.
A No vote in a referendum is just that, we do not accept the proposition put before us by our elected legislators, and want a better deal.
We simply want a Union for the benefit of the people and communities, not for the politicians and corporations.
Our country was not created by people who achieved great things with courage, reason and conviction, not fear - and we must "not be driven by fear into an age of unreason based on illusory guarantees and clever editing.
When we dig into Irish history we see despite censure, public ridicule and the real danger of death we have had the incredible fortune to have had leaders who never allowed themselves to be subdued or cowed, and who supported just causes despite their unpopularity.
Our greatest leaders came from hugely diverse backgrounds. Jim Larkin overcame media vilification for Union organization.
James Connolly died for his belief in workers rights. Griffith’s commitment to self determination, O Connell’s belief in the right to vote, Parnell’s belief in fairness, Tone and Emmett’s belief in secular democracy and women’s rights fought for by people like Winifred Carney now buried in an unmarked grave in Milltown cemetary and Constance Markiewicz have all shaped our sense of nationhood.
We must remember that accusation is not proof, the cheap innuendos by Dick Roche and his ilk about funding of the No campaign mean nothing, particularly when dual standards exist in relation to the funding of the Yes groupings.
If the Government had accepted the recommendations of the Standards in public office, this issue would be more transparent and more in the interest of the democratic process but perhaps not in the interests of the Government.
DEALING WITH DISSENT
With other EU states going for parliamentary ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, without plebiscite, the attempt to force through the second Lisbon vote is an appeasement of sorts.
Again, we can learn from history. Dealing with dissent at home so as not to upset Europe was a policy followed in the 1930's by the Chamberlain Government who appeased an unaccountable system in Germany.
Chamberlain knew most of all that the staunchest critics of his European policy had to be marginalized and isolated - his supporters in the media portrayed the foremost critic as, if not totally senile, at best morally or intellectually confused - he was called Winston Churchill. History has taught us that all Chamberlains' certainties were in fact miscalculation and confusion.
That suggests that the office can not only make the man, the office can make the facts. The solemn guarantee Mr. Chamberlain held in his hand after the Munich conference were about as believeable as those Mr. Cowen has shown us.
But by unremittingly repeating these pointless garuantees (about what is not in the treaty) the illusion is created that the context of the treaty rejected by the Irish, as well as the constitution rejected by the French and Dutch, has fundamentally changed.
FIANNA FAIL FIXATION
At the launch of the Fianna Fail Yes campaign on September 2nd 2009 Mr. Cowen aptly demonstrated this arrogance by stating he did not even contemplate the rejection of the Lisbon treaty on a second attempt.
This is possibly the last chance FF have to 'win' an electorial victory before 2012. As the major party in power it is FF who, along with the greens and indies, have the power to put the referendum to the people, again, and have decided to do so, so it is primarily their referendum.
I for one do not want to see a triumphful FF telling us how they assured we won Lisbon. Its their only chance to win anything at this point, with the support of the opposition, corporations and even the church.
If Lisbon goes through they will use it as a further justification to go full term even with a 17% approval rating (i.e. family and friends) and as their are no more local or EU elections in that period, this is almost certainly the last chance people have to voice their dissent at the ballot box until 2012
CONCLUSION
We cannot allow a failing, self serving and corrupt Government, hardly worthy of the legacy of nationhood that they have inherited, or their corporate supporters to use control of the media and the fear of a deeper financial crisis that they themselves precipitated to force us to vote against our own best interests, and the interests of our fellow European citizens.
This country faces a great challenge. With the clear and present danger of financial ruin and longterm hardship, the confusion we as citizens must now address is stark and forbidding.
But note with hope in your heart we have made it through in the past.
The confusion and debate about Lisbon is really about if the Irish Government actually know what they are talking about - and their track record of the management of our country in health, education, financial regulation or economic planning does not engender any belief in their abilities to have made the correct judgement on the Lisbon treaty.
The chance to pause and reflect after democratic rejection has not been used to build the kind agreement that We the People really want, a desire that really exists
We want our leaders to give us a treaty that is accessable, that gives greater democratic accountability and transparency, and if they deliver that we will work with them to develop a better future for all.
Again, as always – thanks for reading. Even if you don’t agree with me – I hope you give some thoughts to the points made
