Clare FM Debate

The second Clare FM debate took place today. The participants were Breen FG, Dooley FF, Markham Ind, McCabe Ind, Cronin Ind, MacNamara Lab, Mulcahy FG, Ferrigan Ind

Back L-R: Sarah Ferridan, Timmy Dooley, Michael McNamara, Tony Mulcahy, Clare FM's John cooke, and Pat Breen

Front L-R: Ann Cronin, Jim Connolly, and Brian Markham

The topics covered were;
Social Welfare cuts
Politicians' pay
Abortion
Shannon Airport
College fees

Effectively there was agreement amongst the candidates on all the topics with no real philosphical differences of any substance.
The debate lacked a connection with the critical problems that exist for Ireland ( IMF funding and public finances) and continually generated into anectodal inputs from candidates.


The politicans' salaries  matter is a hardy chestnut engaged in by all parties and was pointed to by many as the first step towards addessing the country's problems. Some numbers may help. The budget deficit is €15,000,000,000 (that's €15 bn)  politicians' pay is €20m. If we paid the politicians 50% less we would reduce  the country's budget deficit by 0.07% = not even scratching the surface! Yet, this topic generates huge emotion.Whilst no doubt politicians' salaries do need to be addressed it's   really a diversion!
Now. How will we tackle the €15 bn  deficit. The debate lacked any credible answers.

Shannon
It is facinating to observe the Clare candidates and how they all reach for 'Shannon' as the solution to the jobs crisis and to support tourism. My junior assistant counted 100 mentions of Shannon in less than 30 mins! It is clear that that more flights will drive tourism and everybody knows this. However, every candidates restates it as if it is an original observation.

  Undoubtedly the airport is inportant for regional development in the following areas;

More flights - to drive tourism but dependent on attracting airlines ( Aer Lingus and Ryanair etc)
Cargo - Establishment of  the airport / region as a cargo / distribution hub - no real proposals forthcoming on how this will come about.
The airport is in decline and the debate lacked concrete proposals to address.

 The politicians demonstrate an amazing grasp of flight timetables and connecting flights but is difficult to see how they can influence the  commercial decision making of independent commercial entities. A long discussion took place on the Aer Lingus / Heathrow exit in 2007. There was also much talk about how candidates would 'cross the floor' if necessary to support Shannon. Macho stuff but not sure of its worthiness.

 My conclusion is that

1. Undoubtedly Shannon airport  is important but the debate lacked precise proposals on how to help it grow.
2. All candidates want to support Shannon with little or no difference between them.
3. There is unhapiness in the region with governance of Shannon Airport  by DAA and common agreement that autonomy is agreed. However, the question of  how to capitalise this entity remains.

 What the debate lacked.
An exploration of how jobs could be created (other than the airport). I'm thinking of small and medium sized businesses. It is quite apparent nationally that the country sets about hindering entrepeneurs. There are things that can be addressed; commercial rates, rent, energy costs, premium wage costs, regulation  etc. The debates I have heard lack an appreciation of how small business can drive economic activity and employment. One wonders are  the local Chambers of Commerce shy about speaking and hollering about their members? They certainly have not got their wishes into the minds of candidates.