People of Dún Laoghaire Boycott Boyd-Barrett Protest

by Chekov Mon Sep 06, 2004 21:37

I somebody impersonating the Labour councillor, or is he really such a low-down nasty fool?

If not, this press release speaks volumes about his mentality. He calls RBB a 'fascist' on the basis of him advocating that the baths be kept in community hands. Also, the idea that the people of Dun Laoghaire 'boycotted' the protest is ridiculous. Not deciding to go to a protest on a sunny sunday afternoon is far from a boycott - 150 people is quite respectable. I wonder when was the last time that Chris got 150 people out to support a cause?

Looking through his website, we can see that he is for the development of the baths as a 'public attraction' but these weasel words are obviously nothing to do with retaining it in public ownership. He talks about his success in opening up the competition for tendering for the site - which implies that it will be given to a private company for for-profit use.

Amusingly enough, if you read his copious lists of local issues that he has worked on, his acheivements all amount to empty words. His one 'concrete' achievement is a 'promise' from the countty manager to 'put forward proposals' for affordable housing targets - brilliant Chris, the days of social injustice are numbered with you at the helm.

Finally, there is the question of why this buffoon decides to have a go at RBB as a priority? Is RBB really the biggest obstacle to social justice in Dun Laoighaire? What about the right wingers and the property developers? Where are the press releases about them.

by Libero Mon Sep 06, 2004 21:57

Well, 150 protesters isn't bad. At least not in apathetic Dun Laoghaire.

But I agree that Boyd Barrett is an utter gobshite. And a dangerous, dishonest one too.
As with Blackrock Baths, the position of the SWP front organisations is clear: no development unless 100% public.

An admirable sentiment you might think - but everyone, including the SWP, know that the Council cannot afford the running costs of a public bath minus an accompanying profit-generating apartments/shops/offices, especially with the way insurance costs have gone. Indeed it is likely that the massive capital and current spending that such a project would require would divert spending from areas like housing and youth sport facilities. It just isn't going to happen.

So the SWP are not deluded, romantic or utopian, they're just stupendously dishonest and nihilist. They would rather have these seafront sites stagnate than be developed in a way that would undoubtedly benefit Dun Laoghaire. They are true prostitutes: putting the demands of their mad ideology before the common good. Rant over.

by Saint Michael Mon Sep 06, 2004 22:02 sMicks2004 at yahoo dot ie

Why is the poster a buffoon? B-B represents no-one but himself and a tiny clique of unelectable bootboys. I LIVE in the Dun Laoghaire area, within viewing distance of the baths. I also know all about B-B and his background. The man is a nasty, belligerent, spoilt little thug. His behaviour over the years and his fascist views represent no-one and that's why he is ignored. He's not the main problem, but he's definitely not part of the solution. He should say selling his rag on Grafton Street and away from Dun Laoghaire.
Go on, remove this post, like the others you don't like.

by t - sp (personal capacity) Mon Sep 06, 2004 23:26

I am no fan of the swp but these attacks are not on.
ALL socialists should fight to keep services public dont fall in to the (new) labour trap.

by Chekov Mon Sep 06, 2004 23:40

Because he calls RBB a fascist and a bullyboy, with no other basis other than the fact that he is associated with public protests against the privatisation of the baths.

Because he writes a story attacking RBB personally when there is no evidence that he has anything to say against individuals of the right or property developers.

Because he claims that a decent attendance at a local protest means that the people of Dun Laoghaire boycotted it. Using similar logic, we can say that every single meeting the counciller has ever addressed or attended has been massively boycotted by the population.

As well as being a buffoon, he is a neo-liberal slimeball, like libero above. The idea that such services simply can't be afforded by the public sector is false. We know well that the exchequer is awash with cash at the moment. The fact that central government has decided to starve local government of cash, while pushing extra responsibilities and costs onto them (such as refuse collection), does not mean that there is a lack of cash. It is simply a means of fudging the books to create an impression of financial crisis and impose austerity measures.

Local councils are in no way independent from central government. They are merely bodies which have a small amount of administrative power over certain peripheral areas that are in government ownership. Their budgets, or lack of same, are purely arbitrary and have no reflection on what the government can afford. It speaks volumes for the disappearance of social democracy that the labour party are such champions of these neo-liberal measures and are even at the forefront of championing them against any pesky old-style ideas of services that are run for the public good without anybody making a profit off them.

by Spoof, no? Mon Sep 06, 2004 23:50

I had the misfortune to meet some rotten Labour councillors, but this sounds more like a spoof than anything. Calling RBB fascist? C'mon, it's a spoof.

by Terry Tue Sep 07, 2004 14:23

Considering people are so reluctant to get involved with anything remotely political these days, I think the turnout of 150 people was actually very good. Because 50,000 didn't turnout is just a totally illogical argument.

This troll on top seems to think that readers of Indymedia fall for the kind of rubbish that passes for news and comment in the corporate (and broadcast mode only) press. Anyone who reads Indymedia for any length of time, soon finds when they go back to the 'normal' press how bad it really is, particularly because there's no mechanism to respond to the rubbish produced in a open publishing and uncensored manner.

by Alan - SWP Tue Sep 07, 2004 15:30

I was on the demo on sunday and i'd say between 150 to 200 is about right, have to agree with Chekov about the labour person ranting. To call RBB a fascist is out of order regardless of what other people think of him or the SWP. At least RBB is involved in doing something about the baths not like the labour person.

by Curious Tue Sep 07, 2004 15:32

After the last post, it now looks like a SWP stunt to me. Something to rally their troops. Get it off.

by Chekov Tue Sep 07, 2004 15:41

It could well be a spoof, but until there is some evidence that it is, it stays up. We can't remove material without concrete evidence of its phoni-ness.

There is also the fact that the text is probably a fairly accurate account of the LP line on the baths. The opinion of RBB is also probably a reasonably accurate account of what they think of him. It is unusual to see such honesty from these weasel politicians though and that is what leads me to believe that it could well be a spoof.

However, perhaps the poster thought that the site's users were such sectarians that they'd just join in and have a go at RBB. I'd also say that it is much too sophisticated to come from the SWP. They presumably believe their own rhetoric about indymedia being a 'poisoned reflection of the right' and would have assumed that we all would have joined in with the SWP bashing.

Anyway, until there is some evidence to confirm that it's a spoof, it'll remain.

by Fergal Tue Sep 07, 2004 16:29

Fair play to Chris O Malley, he's spot on. RBB, CHekov, the yaps in the SP, all a bunch of eejits who represent nobody but themselves. There is no socialist or anarchist revolution on the way, the only way forward is to strengthen the social democratic project which gives genuine hope to the marginalised in our society.

This doesn't mean hitching your wagon to FG by the way, but then we lost that argument down by the Riverside, when we ditched FF over an incident that no one can now remember, and put John Unionist Bruton into the Taoiseach's office when FG were on the ropes. Now FG, having won the local elections, not Sinn Fein, are putting together an arrangement that will see labour propping them up in power again - when will we ever learn? I didn't join Labour to get FG into power but then i suppose when you get to Pat Rabbitte and Liz McDonells age you settle for an oul cabinet seat, and soon! By the way, this serves Labour right for electing two carpetbaggers to lead the party. At least Brendan Howlin and Willie Penrose have a bit of selfrespect and ambition for the party left in their hearts.

by Flabbergasted Tue Sep 07, 2004 17:10

"..the only way forward is to strengthen the social democratic project"

Strenghten? Are you mad the whole project has been dismantled since the mid 70's. The Washington Consensus saw to end of the Keynesian way of doing things.
Take the blinkers off! This is basic stuff.
The only socialist probably left in the Labour party is Mick O'Reilly.

by DLR Tue Sep 07, 2004 17:11

If this is article is genuine it is a disgrace on behalf of Labour. It is a sad reflection on the Labour Party that they seem to be content to take the side of millionaire property developers over those in the community that wish development in that area under the control and ownership of the local people.

If this article is true it is yet another indication that the Labour Party have completely sold out and are now indistinguishable from FG, FF, PDs etc.

by Fergal (the other one) Tue Sep 07, 2004 17:28

Contrary to the views of my newly-arrived namesake, I do think the statement is a load of crap. I don't think it reflects exclusively badly on the Labour Party though - since time immemorial, no statement from a county counciller of any party has been anything but publicity seeking guff. Those who call for devolution of power to the local level should remember that it's buffoons like this guy who'd be put in charge. Worse, the Healy-Rae clan would rule Kerry.

by Kingstown Kid Tue Sep 07, 2004 18:38

Some info on the bufoon:

Was a member of Fine Gael before joining Labour. Coopted onto DLRCC when Eamon Gilmore gave up his seat due to dual mandate legislation.

Stood in the central or Dun Laoghaire town ward and got 1420 votes (as opposed to RBBs 1439 votes) but failed to get elected cos bypassed in later counts by Labour's Jane Dillon Byrne.

Kingstown Kid who is an old Dunleary native has come across O Mealy Mouth before, in a nutshell hes an arrogant, pompous upper middle class who went down like a lead baloon with traditional working class Labour voters in Sallynoggin, Monkstown Farm etc.

by iosaf with his trouser bottoms rolled and hanky on his head Tue Sep 07, 2004 20:15

(years since I was in Dun Laoghaire)

Do these baths use Sea Water?
Is the Water safe for bathing in the Dun Laoghaire area?
Are there any links to look at proposed designs for new baths?
Will they use Sea Water? And if not where will the treated fresh water drain to?
Are there links to look at typical contamination in dublin bay?
Are there any indications of how many people use this area for bathing now, and how many would consider using it for bathing in the future?
Have there been any studies on enviromental impact of chlorine (or other agent) treated water draining into that part of the Bay?
Do men still bare it all in a single sex environment the 40 foot?
Are there still pale yet comely thighs and hocks to be seen paddling the strand or does that only happen on Bloomsday?
any chance of a showdown between RBB and this Labour type shaking their bollox at each other in the 40 foot?

by eoin Tue Sep 07, 2004 20:37

The original poster above (is it really Chris O'Malley?) invokes the expression "sustainable development" and has filed his article under "environment". Hmmm... iosaf's got a point about chlorine, cause I guess with the pools so close to the sea they'd be tempted to just empty them over the wall and down the rocks. Cheaper than hooking up to the waste water treatment facilities, though they're only a stones throw away (it's a cultural thing, see Shannon Airport article in current Limerick Leader for similar behaviour). That's whether the facility is "developed" by DLRCC for the public, or in partnership with developers for their profit.

But of course politicians use terms like "sustainable development" to mean anything and nothing.

by jeff Tue Sep 14, 2004 14:13

These days RBB and the SWP are urging the government to retain public services in areas like Dun Laoighre and Blackrock- the sort of places where people like privatisation, because they can afford it.

Public services should be retained in poorer areas, until they even tually prosper and thus can encourage the encroachment of privitisation. Then there is an incentive to improve things, because there is a profit margin.

Public sector services need to work with and evolve with the private sector. Otherwise, things will just be crap.

In the meantime, RBB should go off and set up one of those self sufficent communes, like the eco villiage in the Netherlands, a project set up by professional, high wage earners, but devoted to the idea of a communal, self sufficent society of the future. It is not exactly my idea of fun, but it is better than standing on ( uypper middle class) Grafton street selling leftist rags in the rain.

by DLR Tue Sep 14, 2004 14:24

Do you know anything at all about Dun Laoghaire? Other than what you have read in tourist brochures. Dun Laoghaire is a rather poor area.

by Joker Tue Sep 14, 2004 14:29

Cop yourself on. It may have a couple of working Class estate but the DL Ward probably has the highest per capita income in Ireland.

by DLR Tue Sep 14, 2004 14:36

It only takes about two high earners to skew the figures.

by Joker Tue Sep 14, 2004 14:41

You really need to learn some basic arithmetic. DL has a population of 50,000 it'd take a lot more than 2 people to skew the figures. Richie Rich should have found himself a more proletarian ward.

by Cyril Willoughby the Third Tue Sep 14, 2004 15:54

Like most large urban wards, Dun Laoghaire has working class residents as well as some very wealthy ones. The Workers Party used to have support there if I recall correctly and Boyd Barrett got the best vote ever achieved by an SWP candidate.

Some of Boyd Barrett's support will have been on the basis of his anti-war profile and like the anti-war movement itself that means it will have been mixed in class terms. The core of his vote was an anti-bin tax one though, and like everywhere else that means largely working class. Privatisation in Dun Laoghaire will impact most heavily on its poorer residents. Why shouldn't a socialist oppose that?

There are lots of good reasons to have a go at Boyd Barrett. The fact that he is active in Dun Laoghaire isn't one of them.

by Joker Tue Sep 14, 2004 15:59

I doubt very much that RBBs core vote was Working Class. If that is the case then it would be a simple task for the SWP to produce the figures to back this up. These figures, breakdown per box, are supplied to all candidates and their agents.

The SWP havent done this because embarrassingly for them, RBB attracted more of an upper middle class liberal vote.

by ex-stick Tue Sep 14, 2004 16:25

Joker and some others display the type of factual ignorance all to often seen in less well informed postings on indymedia.

All candidates are NOT entitled to the detailed breakdown of electoral information known as tallies (ie box by box analysis which would for example allow a candidate to pinpoint the exact estates/areas of a ward where they do best etc.). These are compilied by party members watching the boxes been opened and votes counted. It can only be done if a few parties cooperate and usually the larger parties do so, to the exclusion of smaller parties who can then only get the tallies by cadging them from friends inside the big parties. While it is possible that the SWP have the tallies for the DL ward, its unlikely since the big parties would probably wish to exclude them.

As for the composition of RBBs vote, while undoubtedly he got some middle class vote for his anti-war role there is no doubt whatsoever that he got a substantial working class vote. To those ignorant of the social structure of the area: the central DL and immediate suburbs have had a subtantial working class community since the early 19th century. There are hundreds of old artisans dwelllings still owned by the council in the Cross Ave./Dominick St area just south of the town centre (though hidden from those whose knowledge of DL is confined to a walk on the pier or a drink in its fashionable watering holes). There are substantial working class communities in Sallynoggin, Glasthule, Mounttown and despite some gentrification in Monkstown Farm. Even Dalkey has an old working class community! Anyway the point is that Joker etc are clearly entirely ignorant of the social composition of the area.

This strong, albeit minority, working class element has always been reflected politically: The famous left wing Labour cllr. Jack Fitzgerald, represented this ward in the 1970s and in the 1990s the area had a WP cllr elected almost exclusively on votes from these working class enclaves. During the 1970s and later in the 1980s there were strong Housing Action Campaigns led by local Officila Sinn Fein/WP activists.

Im no fan of the SWP but facts are facts. Of course it makes it more difficult to challenge their centralist and oppurtunist politics if they win support in working class communities but you can't challenge them by denying the facts or worse still backing up an exceptionally obnoxious Labourite who attacks them from the right.

by Joker Tue Sep 14, 2004 16:55

The Council keep a record of the votes which came out of each box. This is not made available until after the final count is declared. That is why tallies are conducted. This information can also be gained from the Council by the public but it may be necessary to use FOI legislation.

In my posts above I made it quite clear that there are working class areas in DL. As usual the leninists have to distort my comments.


The fact remains that RBB is a member of the (double-barrelled surname) Ruling Class and most of his votes came from the wealthy. If RBB is such a great socialist then why doesnt he sign his inheritance over to the SWP?

by Non-Leninist Tue Sep 14, 2004 17:07

Compare and contrast
1) "I doubt very much that RBBs core vote was Working Class. If that is the case then it would be a simple task for the SWP to produce the figures to back this up. These figures, breakdown per box, are supplied to all candidates and their agents."

2) "The Council keep a record of the votes which came out of each box. This is not made available until after the final count is declared. That is why tallies are conducted. This information can also be gained from the Council by the public but it may be necessary to use FOI legislation."

First of all it was supplied and then it was it may be necessary to use FOI legislation.
And he blames his stupidity on a leninist distortion. Joker by name and nature alright.

by Another ex-stick (p.c.) Tue Sep 14, 2004 17:11

I was suprised at the amount of middle class acquaintainces from DL who voted for RBB, people who'd generally vote Green, Labour or SF.

Some are now quite astonished at the amount of abuse the trots are getting from the libertarian left (they are, after all bourgeois sympathisers who would know Ciaron (CWG)'s name and perhaps something of his principles). Some were even in Shannon for Ambush (err.. 1 actually). But most though were trots themselves in their far distant pasts and are slowly wakening up to the shit that's going on around them. And in walks RBB, who's talking the language they want to talk.

These are the large fish RBB's landing down at the Coal Quay. I reckon though that a few winter Saturdays selling the rag down outside that American homeware store on the corner, will soon make them see the error of their ways.

But anyway, enough of that, has anyone checked Labour HQ to see if the first post is a (rather amusing) troll?

by Joker Tue Sep 14, 2004 17:13

Wow! A non-leninist SWP member!

I made it clear that the candidate and agent are entitled to get this information from the Council. This information is hardly secret and would also be available to the public.

What I was pointing out was that the Council might be obstructive and demand that members of the public use the FOI process and pay at least €15.

Now how about some answers:

RBB comes from a family of multi-millionaires. If RBB is such a great socialist and has such belief in the SWP then why doesnt he sign his inheritance over to the SWP?

by vote counter Tue Sep 14, 2004 19:56

I saw the tallies. RBB got a very respectable vote in working class areas such as Sallynoggin and Monkstown Farm. RBB of course picked up some votes in more middle class areas but these were a minority of his votes. There is a traditional 'hard' left votes in these areas, previously these areas would have voted Workers Party and Democratic Left. The SWP have picked up this vote, any attempt to label the SWP vote in Dun Laoghaire as middle class is simply not talking sense.

Maybe if someone has the details of the tally could they post it here.