Monday, September 03, 2007

Gilmore after the Greens

I got a feeling that Labour are going to focus all their energies on the Green party. If they are to get the 30 seats that he wants they will need to destroy the other parties of the left and take their seats. One of the first steps to this is talking about the Iraq war.

He stated, “There is something twisted about a Government policy that allows Shannon to be used to wage an immoral and illegal war while what used to be our national airline will no longer accommodate the people of the Mid-West region in taking flights to London.”

Now aside from the fact that he is ignoring UN resolution 1511 which supports the presents of the coalition forces in Iraq and makes what he wants to do is go against the UN (heck why let the truth get in the way of a good pull quote) and that the Greens were not part of the government when it was without an UN resolution. It certainly is aimed at taking the Green anti-Iraq base. Things is outside of politico circles. Is shannon an issue for anyone anymore? Is their a large part of the electorate who will vote on this issue. Looking at the last election where the “Anti-Shannon warport ” block lost seats. I think not.

No one cares about Iraq it is all terrible and stuf but no one is going to vote on it. For 2 reasons 1. Don’t care. 2. Shannon airport loses money and the flights land in Germany instead and go on to Iraq anyway achieving nothing. If this is how Labour are trying to revive themselves they need to think harder. How did they let the greens get in, in the late 90’s early 00’s that is what they have to think about.

The Greens got in on a rising tide of environmental awareness (environmental fashion in some cases as well) . They had the brand name people associated them with the environment and they did well. Labour floundered stuck back in the brand of unions. In a time of record employment, big spending and authenticity being fashionable brand environment works brand union does not. Preaching on the high moral ground about Iraq and going I told you so on Shannon while it might gain you plaudits from politicos on web just annoys people and makes you appear smug to people who don’t care and know what you said before privatisation.

This is not the way to win 30 seats. It is not even the way to win Green seats.

1 comment:

CiarĂ¡n said...

Now aside from the fact that he is ignoring UN resolution 1511 which supports the presents [sic] of the coalition forces in Iraq and makes what he wants to do is go against the UN

I think you mean resolution 1723. The mandate in 1511 expired a couple of years ago when the Iraqi constitution was ratified.

1723 was supposed to be reviewed by the security council June this year (its limited mandate expires at the end of December) but I haven't been able to find any trace of that review.

Also, the US asked India to contribute troops and they said they would only do so under a specific UN resolution authorising a multinational UN force (which 1723 and all the others most certainly are not), but the US preferred not to have the UN involved to an extent that would bind them to UN rule.