SDLP and Sinn Fein. Surely an electoral pact would make sense

[Nally Stand]

Firstly, you still you fail to discuss SDLP expenses strangely. Secondly, you haven't been totally factual, you took two flats and decided it sounded more shocking as a house and apartment. Or maybe i'm being unfair saying that and you just didn't know the facts? Finally, you haven't given me good reason to think twice re anything I've said. I base my arguments on facts. Not tired groundless accusations like those people saying SF lie about industrial wage as Adams has a holiday home. There are real issues.

[longrunsthefox]

Nally- How can you defend everything Sinn Fein does? There is like a sheep mentality with political parties here, that their membership just trundles along with every decision or move they make and defends them against every criticism. It ain't healthy. Either that or you're out it seems.

[Nally Stand]

If i'm misled on that Maguire then fair enough. But don't forget how much wages the SF MPs have been denied despite working full time just because they don't sit in the debating chamber. Even despite this, these properties were still staffed offices with workers being paid a wage. And as for my costing the taxpayer remark, The fact that the expenses were not granted was not for the want of McGrady trying.

[Maguire01]

Firstly, you still you fail to discuss SDLP expenses strangely. Secondly, you haven't been totally factual, you took two flats and decided it sounded more shocking as a house and apartment. Or maybe i'm being unfair saying that and you just didn't know the facts?

I know you're not responding to me, and maybe you know more about the facts, but SF's accommodation expenses were widely reported as an apartment and a townhouse. See here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5301510/MPs-expenses-Sinn-Fein-claimed-500000-for-second-homes.html

Either way, given that we know how much they were paying in rent, I don't know why anyone would need to exaggerate the precise type of property.

[Nally Stand]

Fox I don't defend everything they do or say however it seems hard to have a discussion on the wider topic of the thread without having to argue back with people who have no better arguments related to the thread than to attack SF over wages etc. I've tried numerous times to keep this discussion on track re discussing a merger but certain people just have an aye to grind with SF and rather than discuss the thread topic, just indulge in SF bashing over obscure details. For example i discussed with ardmhaca..

[longrunsthefox]

So is their anything they have done or decison they have taken regarding the talks, expenses, policing, Liam Adams... that you disagreed with      

[Nally Stand]

...about inconsistencies in the SDLP policy beliefs which I suggested would make a merge untenable. I provided an example of this by way of the SDLP's inconsistent voting on the same council proposal in 13 councils. Ardmhaca's belated reply was to complain about Gerry Adams having a holiday home.

[gallsman]

I'm talking about SF and your, in my opinion, blinkered views of that party, not the SDLP. So why would I start commenting on the SDLP? What they did or did not do with regard to expenses is in no way related to what SF did.

This is getting simpler and simpler yet still you go on about SDLP expenses! Ffs like!

[Maguire01]

If i'm misled on that Maguire then fair enough. But don't forget how much wages the SF MPs have been denied despite working full time just because they don't sit in the debating chamber.

But let's be honest, they're not working full time as MPs.
All are also MLAs; and three are Ministers (including the dFM), which should be a full-time job in itself.

I know this isn't unique to SF, but they're not working full-time as MPs. And surely sitting in the chamber is an important part of working full time as an MP, otherwise the TDs in the Dail wouldn't see the value of sitting there either. I fully understand why SF don't take their seats, but they don't work full-time as MPs.

[Nally Stand]

I disagree with plenty, and have often felt that until this round of negotiations, they have not stood up to the DUP on certain issues, like loyalist decommissioning. However that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to want to sensibly discuss why I don't feel the SDLP are a suitable partner. I still feel that SF best represent nationalism/republicanism.

[Nally Stand]

Maguire, you know what I mean. SF MPs do the work of MPs but do not get paid. The SDLP have the lowest attendance record of any party in westminster and get paid. And galls, for the last time you said you were talking about SF because I was talking about them. Why does the same not apply for when I talk about the SDLP?

[Maguire01]

Maguire, you know what I mean. SF MPs do the work of MPs but do not get paid.

But read my post as to the reasons why they don't work full-time as MPs; why they can't.

[Nally Stand]

They still do the same workload as every other party's MPs yet don't get paid unlike everyone else.

[Nally Stand]

Anyway it's tiresome discussing pedantic points like holiday homes, pay checks etc. Any chance we could get this thread back onto it's topic and away from such petty cheap shots over pay and holiday homes?

[Maguire01]

They still do the same workload as every other party's MPs yet don't get paid unlike everyone else.

This might be taking it off-track, but whilst they might do a big workload, if the average MP does even a paltry 8 hour day as an MP, how do the SF Ministers manage to do the same - as an MP - on top of running their department. They're already paid as MLAs/Ministers. Double-jobbing isn't an issue for nothing - and again, I know this isn't unique to SF (you also have the DUP, and if you go down to Councillor level, even more parties).