Archives

OK

Random entry RSS

Loading

  • Posted in:

    The dark side of the media

    The British media is aghast at revelations that a man called David Floyd was a Soviet spy. Floyd worked for the Foreign Office in the 1950s and was assigned to a string of Eastern European embassies. He confessed his treachery shortly after the defection of Guy Burgess and Donald McClean to Moscow. Rather than admit to the Americans that yet another British official was a traitor, the British establishment hushed Floyd’s treachery up and MI5 set about finding a job for him. Malcom Muggeridge, the Deputy Editor of the Daily Telegraph, obliged – by providing a post for him at his paper. Muggeridge was an ex-MI6 officer, as was his editor, Sir Colin Coote. Floyd spent three decades at The Daily Telegraph where he reported on communist affairs and became known as ‘Pink’ Floyd. It is likely that having repented, he was obliged to do the bidding of MI5 (home Office) and MI6 (Foreign Office) to keep his post at the Telegraph. As such he joined the ranks of a legion of British journalists and broadcasters who have secretly worked for the various branches of British intelligence. The World is your lobster Lobster, a radical underground British publication, printed a special edition entitled ‘A Who’s Who of the British Secret State’ in the late 1980s pinpointing hundreds of British spies, a huge number of whom had worked at the Dublin Embassy and the Northern Ireland Office. Lobster’s research was based on published materials and can only have brushed against the tip of the intelligence-media iceberg. To its credit, it named about ten Daily Telegraph hacks including David Floyd. Lobster reported that Floyd had disseminated propaganda prepared by the Information Research Department (IRD), which was attached to the Foreign Office, during his time as a specialist on Soviet affairs at the Telegraph and also at the Daily Mail, a fact that the mainstream British media is now ignoring. Overall, the Lobster special edition gave an insight into the disturbing depth of the media iceberg. In particular, it listed more than 30 individuals with strong connections to the British intelligence community who had worked for the BBC. The corruption of the BBC as an independent body stretched from head to toe. One of MI6’s most senior officers, Dame Daphne Park, (the ‘Dragon Lady’) sat on the BBC’s Board of Governors. While in MI6 she had acted as an adviser and ‘sounding board’ to the Chief of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield, on Irish affairs. Her father came from Belfast. At a lower level, MI5 had a team based in room 105 at the BBC’s HQ in London. They vetted journalists seeking entry to the corporation and promotion for those already employed by it. They also monitored the activities of broadcasters and producers. Don’t expect MI5 to divulge the content of the files they accumulated on the likes of Jimmy Savile, Russell Harty or the other paedophiles at the Beeb to the Independent Inquiry Into Child Sex Abuse in London or to anyone else. Did all of this result in the BBC serving as an instrument of the intelligence community? Unfortunately, the answer to that question is an emphatic ‘yes’. The BBC’s now acknowledged role in assisting the CIA and MI6 topple the government of Iran in 1953 has become a severe embarrassment to it. The reverberations of that operation are still being felt in Iran today where no one trusts anyone from the BBC. This fact has been ignored by the British media in its ongoing coverage of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, formerly of the BBC World Service trust who is currently serving a term of imprisonment for allegedly attempting to undermine the present Iranian administration. The BBC’s toxic relationship with MI6 has done a lot more than bring it into disrepute. In 1983 Amnesty International declared that the “government-instigated killings in Indonesia … rank among the most massive violations of Human Rights since the Second World War. A conservative estimate of the number of people killed in Indonesia is 500,000”. The BBC helped create an atmosphere conducive to the slaughter. The British Ambassador to the Republic of Ireland from 1966 to 1970 was Andrew Gilchrist. His last post before Dublin was as Ambassador to Indonesia. At the time the British Government of Harold McMillan was involved in a conspiracy to manipulate events in Indonesia. In 1965 Gilchrist informed the Foreign Office that a “little shooting in Indonesia would be an essential preliminary to effective change”. Gilchrist proceeded to work hand in glove with the IRD. Together they planted stories in the media claiming that communists were planning to slaughter the citizens of Jakarta. There was no truth in the allegation which was beamed into Indonesia by the BBC and helped provide justication for the massacre that followed. Commenting on Gilchrist’s propaganda success via the BBC, Norman Reddaway of the IRD commented: “I wondered whether this was the first time in history that an Ambassador had been able to address the people of his country of work almost at will and virtually instantaneously”. Network television MI5 and MI6 were like two giant octopi with tentacles which reached into every pore of the media. Frank Steele, the former head of MI6’s Belfast Station, became the Chairman of network television after his ‘retirement’ from MI6. Steele was a real charmer. He once told Peter Taylor of the BBC that some good had come of the Bloody Sunday massacre in Derry in 1972. The militant Loyalists, were “cock-a-hoop”, that the “Brits” had finally got “tough”, he opined; also that “it did us quite a lot of good with the more bloody-minded of the Protestant community. The good thing that came out of it was that it enabled Direct Rule to be brought in”. Irish Times The tentacles reached over to Ireland where Major Thomas McDowell, a former officer in the British Army, and Chief executive and Chairman of the Irish Times during much of the troubles was an ex-MI5 officer. Declassified UK files reveal that the Major, born in Belfast in 1923, dubbed his

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Relegate Italy and promote Georgia

    As the 2018 Six Nations enters the final two rounds, the sense of excitement around this year’s tournament gathers pace. It has been a very successful tournament so far, with high-scoring games full of tries, and plenty of drama with the two standout moments being Sexton’s Drop Goal in Paris and the English chariot crashing in Murrayfield. From an Irish perspective, Joe Schmidt’s team is in pole position for a third championship in five years. There is, however, a political elephant in the room when discussing this tournament – and that is the continued discrimination against emerging European Rugby nations by the Six Nations format. The Six Nations promotes itself as European Rugby’s pinnacle, with the best European teams competing – but this claim cannot be taken seriously when it is a closed off tournament that has expanded just twice since 1910. Italy lost convincingly to France in Round 3, consigning them to their fifteenth straight Six Nations defeat. This has left Italy at the bottom of the table and looking very likely to receive a fourth wooden spoon in five years. Italy’s finest ever Rugby player is Sergio Parisse – who has an astonishing 125 international caps for his country but has lost an equally astonishing 92 of these games. Georgia’s Ranking Georgia are ranked the twelfth best international team in the world in the latest World Rankings, two spots better than Italy who are fourteenth. On the other hand, they are streaking ahead in the Rugby Europe Championship, or ‘B Six Nations’. In their first two games, Georgia have won 47-0 and 64-0. They finished third in their Rugby World Cup 215 group: no mean feat considering they were in a group with New Zealand and Argentina. They dominated the previous incarnation of the ‘B Six Nations’, being crowned champions six seasons in a row from up to 2016. In 2016, Georgia once again advanced their reputation when they travelled to the Pacific Islands for the first time and finished unbeaten with a draw against Samoa and wins against Tonga and Fiji. In November 2017, they narrowly lost against Wales in controversial circumstances. Rugby Union is now seen as the national sport in the country and there were 52,000 people in attendance for their game against Russia last year. The general rugby fan in Ireland is probably aware of the Rugby Europe Championship. What many won’t realise is that this competition is not a one-off tournament between the second-best group of six European teams. It is actually the top level of a five-league system – with each level having five or six teams. In each level, the teams play each other during the same international window as the Six Nations. Even more interestingly, they crown an annual champion for each level, and then have a promotion-and-regulation system between the levels. If the Six Nations were to open up their cosy club to a promotion and relegation system, it would create an annual six-tier European league that would be the envy of every non-European Rugby union, and of many non-rugby sports. Reflecting their standing England decided that during one of the rest weeks of this year’s Six Nations that they would train with the Georgian team, partly because of the Georgians ferocious scrummaging skills. Expansion Plans are denied in part due to “Commercial” considerations. There are currently no plans for even a discussion on Georgia’s possible place among the Six Nations elite. While Georgia have been winning consistency in Rugby Europe Championship, they argue that if they were allowed to join the Northern Hemisphere’s premier competition it would help them break into the top echelon of the sport. John Feehan, the Six Nations CEO, has publicly ruled out the possibility on a number of occasions. “This is a subject that crops up after every World Cup but we have no intention of changing the structure of the competition any time soon. This is a closed tournament, by agreement amongst the countries currently competing in it, and we believe we’re in a very strong position, both in sporting and commercial terms”. The Six Nations is a closed competition between six European countries, whose Rugby Unions own and control the tournament. Feehan views the Six Nations as having “the strongest teams in Europe already involved” and that they would not want to “exclude anyone already involved. And if we attempted to increase the number of matches, there would immediately be an issue surrounding fixture congestion. This is not a subject on our agenda and, frankly, it is not the job of the Six Nations to provide solutions for Georgia, Romania or anyone else”. The Georgians argue otherwise and they have a good deal of support among those who fear that, without regular top-class exposure, they will struggle to maintain a signicant presence at international level. England’s RFU CEO Steve Brown last year publicly supported the idea of Georgia’s inclusion in the Six Nations. Brown said: ‘We need to keep an open mind. The world keeps changing, the fan base keeps changing and becoming more sophisticated”.  A historic tournament that has grown stale History drives the character of the Six Nations. Scotland and England faced off in the first ever rugby international in 1871, known as the Calcutta Cup from 1879. For context, the first international soccer game was played in 1872 – also between Scotland and England. The original version of the Six Nations was first played in 1883 as the Home Nations Championship among the four then members of the UK — England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. It expanded to the Five Nations Championship in 1910 with the addition of France. 90 years later, in 2000, the tournament finally expanded to its current format with the addition of Italy. It now risks staleness as a cosy club with no inclusion policy for emerging European countries. The reluctance to consider any expansion is completely at odds with World Rugby’s aim for a global game, but Feehan is adamant that the rugby’s

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Sinn feigns principle

    The Westminster oath declares: “I … swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to Law. So help me God”. British oaths have a troublesome history in Ireland they‘re never insuperable but they always generate a row and a test for the conscience, for a while. In late February Leo Varadkar, Taoiseach, called on Sinn Féin to take the oath and with it their six – soon to be seven – Westminster seats “to make things better for Ireland”. Naturally, like all other voguish red-liners Sinn Féin have ruled it out. A spokesman said: “This is not even a topic of discussion within the party. We are an abstentionist party, and we are mandated to abstain from Westminster by the people who vote for us”. Writing in the Guardian Polly Toynbee noted: “For now, everyone says no. The winners might be those who make the biggest U-turn sacrifice for the sake of their country. If only they could mutter the loyal oath (they could always rescind it later) they would arrive in parliament as a cavalry of saviours of Ireland – and incidentally Britain”. Admittedly the true Brit-hater would prefer to let them stew a little, or lot, longer in their brew of contradictory shibboleths. But what is the pedigree of abstentionism? In 1921 De Valera refused to recognise the Anglo-Irish Treaty, ending the War of Independence, as it involved an oath of allegiance prescribed by the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921. Five years later, after the resultant civil war, he abjured his objections subscribing to an identical formula but claiming that “he had taken no oath of allegiance to the British monarch” on entering Dáil Éireann. The oath in 1921 and 1926 was: “I will be faithful to HM King George V. . . in virtue of the common citizenship of Ireland with Great Britain and her adherence to and membership of. . . the British Commonwealth of Nations”. In power from 1932, de Valera amended the Free State’s constitution to allow him to introduce any constitutional amendments irrespective of whether they clashed with the Anglo-Irish Treaty, and then to remove Article 17 of the constitution which required the taking of the Oath. Certainly the oath for De Valera was of fidelity not allegiance. Less of a lump to swallow than now. The idea of Irish nationalists abstaining from Westminster was in fact first suggested in the 1840s by Thomas Davis and Daniel O’Connell, though ultimately they felt that MPs sitting could not withdraw from Westminster without breaking the oath of office they had taken upon election. It was endlessly debated by Home Rule leader Charles Stewart Parnell in the 1870s. Jeremiah O’Donovan Rossa (in 1869) and John Mitchel (twice in 1875) were returned as independent nationalists at by-elections in Tipperary though O’Donovan Rossa was in prison at his election and Mitchel in exile. The results were invalidated. Michael Davitt set the tone and strategy – he was so fed up with the British system that he withdrew from Parliament in 1899 explaining: “I have for years tried to appeal to the sense of justice in this house of Commons on behalf of Ireland. I leave, convinced that no just cause, no cause of right, will ever find support from this house of Commons unless it is backed up by force”. Arthur Griffith, the original founder of ‘Sinn Féin’ in 1905, advocated withdrawal from the British Parliament as a tactic following the strategies of Hungarian and Czech nationalists in the Austrian Imperial Council in the 1860s. He considered that the Irish Home Rule Party shouldn’t go to Westminster but a council of 300 should meet in Dublin and usurp, by peaceful means, so much of the powers of government as it could. This seemed a good plan. 12 Tory MPs voted against the government to demand a meaningful Commons vote on the final Brexit deal. So things would be tight on Corbyn’s customs-union amendment. [Sinn Féin’s] four or five votes would swing it. Joseph McGuinness was the first ‘Sinn Féin’ abstentionist MP following a by- election in Longford South in May 1917. Even if he had wanted to take his seat, he would not have been able to do so as he was a prisoner in Lewes for his role in the previous year’s Easter Rising. In 1919, the 69 Sinn Féin MPs elected to Westminster in 1918 refused to take their seats there and instead constituted themselves in Dublin as the the first Dáil – the legitimate parliament of the short- lived Irish Republic. At its 1970 Ard Fheis Sinn Féin divided on whether or not to reverse its long-standing policy of refusing to take seats in Dáil Éireann. The split created two parties: ‘Sinn Féin’ and an anti-abstentionist rival to be known as ‘Official Sinn Féin which ultimately split between ‘the Workers’ Party’ and a group that fused with the Labour Party. The abstentionist party was initially referred to as ‘Provisional’ Sinn Féin, but after 1982 it was known simply as ‘Sinn Féin’; it continued to abstain from taking seats won in all institutions. In 1986 ‘Provisional’ Sinn Féin split, as in 1970, over whether to take seats in Dáil Éireann. The larger group led by Gerry Adams abandoned abstentionism, while Republican Sinn Féin (RSF), led by Ruairí Ó Brádaigh retained it. Sinn Féin’s first sitting TD was Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin in Cavan–Monaghan in 1997. It abandoned its abstention from Dáil Éireann and from Stormont in 1998. In the late 1980s Sinn Féin’s abstentionist MPs discovered that under rules to accommodate conscientious objectors and republicans they could avail of facilities at Westminster to represent their constituents, though they do not qualify for a salary. After the 1997 Westminster election the Speaker of Parliament, Betty Boothroyd, banned Sinn Féin from the facilities unless members took the Oath of Allegiance. That was overturned ve years later, although periodically Conservative and Unionist MPs and their allies in the press vituperate about the issue. Sinn Féin

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Lone Woulfe

    The Attorney-General, Séamus Woulfe, failed to disclose a “false” and “misleading” order made by the former Manager of Wicklow County Council (WCC) when he compiled a report for the Government on the controversial compulsory purchase of lands in 2013. Woulfe, who was a senior counsel at the time and a prominent member of Fine Gael, was asked by then environment minister, Phil Hogan, in early 2013 to carry out a review of the proposal by WCC to compulsorily purchase lands at the Three Trout Stream, at Charlesland near Greystones. In the course of his review, Woulfe was provided with substantial documentation by WCC, including a copy of two Manager’s orders setting out the reasons for, and putting into legal effect, the CPO. The Manager’s orders, dated November 2003 and November 2004, stated that the Council required the land for social housing as it only had an “existing land bank of 0.5 hectares in the Greystones area”. The orders were signed by then Wicklow County Manager, Eddie Sheehy. This statement was “false” and “misleading” according to submissions made by a barrister acting for Wicklow Councillor, Tommy Cullen and former Councillor Barry Nevin in their successful High Court defamation action against Sheehy and WCC last year. In her detailed judgment, Justice Marie Baker found that the Councillors had been defamed by Sheehy and the Council in a press release issued on the day the Woulfe report was published in April 2013. She found that the content of the release showed that Sheehy and the Council had acted with malice and improper purpose towards the Councillors. Woulfe had concluded that “almost all of the concerns raised by the Councillors” which led to his review were “not well founded or are misconceived”. This comment was repeated in a statement issued by Hogan and the Department of the Environment and in the press release issued by the Council following publication of the Woulfe report. However, the Council went further and accused the Councillors of wasting up to €200,000 in public monies by raising their “allegations” which prompted the commissioning by Hogan of the Woulfe review. Judge Baker found that the Woulfe report was “not evidence that the Councillors were wrong or acted in bad faith” in raising their concerns. She found that the Councillors had been wrongly accused of being responsible for “wasting money at a time when money was scarce” and awarded them damages of €20,000 each. She also said the claim that there was a €200,000 loss of public monies was an exaggeration on the part of the Council. Woulfe was paid €62,000 in fees for his work. In her judgment, Judge Baker also referred to the extensive documentation available to Woulfe for his review, but withheld from the Councillors, including the two Manager’s orders and various reports which confirmed that the Three Trout Stream lands were prone to flooding and unsuited to social housing. She specifically referenced the documents which proved that the Council owned a site of over 10 hectares (22 acres), zoned residential for housing and adjoining the Three Trout Stream lands. In his report, Woulfe also referred to the existing lands owned by the Council in the Greystones area. However, he did not point out the discrepancy between this fact and the statement in the Manager’s orders that the Council only had a landbank of 0.5 hectares in the area. The November 2004 order formed the legal basis for the CPO and the seizure of lands from the landowner and another local man who used the land to graze horses. Although Woulfe was called as a witness for Sheehy and WCC he was not asked about the incorrect assertion in the Manager’s orders. the plaintiffs only obtained copies of the orders after Woulfe had given his evidence. In his closing submission, Mark Harty SC, acting for the two politicians, said that the Manager’s order stating that the Council had a landbank of just 0.5 hectares in the area was “false” and “misleading”. “This unequivocal statement in an official statutory document was simply false. Certainly, it was misleading”, Harty submitted. “The situation is more serious given the core basis of the decision to confirm the CPO by an Bord Pleanála which is that it satisfied that the Council had established the need for housing and the need to buy land for housing”. It was also the basis for the State’s decision to seize the land from two citizens against their wishes. Judge Baker also raised questions about the conclusions made by Woulfe in his report, in particular in relation to his suggestion that “almost all of the concerns (of the two councillors) are not well founded or are misconceived”. Judge Baker said that “it was not true to say that on the information they had that the plaintiffs raised unnecessary or irresponsible concerns without cause”. The High Court judgment by Judge Baker overturned an earlier decision by the Circuit Court in April 2014 which dismissed the defamation claims. In January, Sinn Féin’s Mary Lou McDonald, asked the Housing and Environment minister, Eoghan Murphy, if he would now remove the Woulfe report and the statement issued by his predecessor Phil Hogan when it was published, from the Department’s website in light of the High Court judgment. The Sinn Féin deputy suggested that Woulfe did not “establish the fact of his statement that ‘almost all of the concerns [raised by the named members of Wicklow County Council] are not well founded or are misconceived’”. McDonald also called for the establishment of a new independent investigation into the CPO of the lands at Charlesland in 2004. Murphy replied: “The public statement of my predecessor and the associated report were not the subject of the High Court judgment…The case in question concerned a statement made in a press release issued by the Council on 23 April 2013. The plaintiffs brought proceedings against the Council claiming that the last paragraph of the press release was defamatory towards them. This paragraph stated that a delay in sanctioning a loan to purchase a

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Fine Male

    Fiona McLoughlin Healy persists, where Catherine Noone left off in drawing specific attention to sexist bullying – in Kildare County Council and the Kildare and Wicklow Educational Training Board By Frank Connolly It must be have been less than reassuring for Fine Gael Senator, Catherine Noone, to know that her complaints of bullying by a male party colleague are were being dealt with by the chairman of the parliamentary party, Martin Heydon. He is among the senior members of Fine Gael who have all but ignored complaints of harassment by another female member and former general-election candidate over the past two years. Noone recently announced she would not pursue a formal complaint. As reported in Village over recent months, Fiona Mc Loughlin Healy, has spent many months trying to get the party to rein in some of those members who have subjected her to misogynistic treatment, harassment and isolation tactics as she performed her role as an elected member of Kildare County Council and as an unsuccessful candidate for Fine Gael in the 2016 general election. Among those who may have felt threatened by the ambitious, media-friendly, young business woman, who was head hunted to stand for the party in Kildare South, was none other than Martin Heydon who is the sitting TD and who is well got with former leader Alan Dukes and his wife, Fionnuala. Party members who did not want her to succeed managed to ensure that McLoughlin Healy was sidelined when it came to meeting and being photographed with senior party figures before and during the election campaign.  These included Simon Coveney, Michael Noonan and Frances Fitzgerald on their high profile visits to the Kildare constituency. Fitzgerald did assist McLoughlin Healy in launching her new constituency office but that was just weeks before the February 2016 election and too late to make much impact. In reality, she did not have the vital support of her local party organisation, with one officer claiming that her imposition on the ticket as a woman candidate was something “North Korea would be proud of”. From the outset, hostile FG members ensured that Heydon’s vote transfers would go to their political opponents in Fianna Fáil or Labour before they went to McLoughlin Healy and that is what transpired on election day. More serious for McLoughlin Healy, though, was the manner in which her complaints of harassment and mistreatment by a senior party figure in the County and former mayor, Brendan Weld, were handled by the Fine Gael disciplinary committee and national executive. McLoughlin Healy has annoyed some of her party colleagues by her persistent queries concerning finance, governance and procurement issues involving KCC and the Kildare and Wicklow Education and Training Board (KWETB), of which Weld is a former chairman. He resigned in late 2017 as a major controversy erupted following an investigation by the Comptroller and Auditor General into procurement issues at the KWETB. After she made a complaint to the party hierarchy in 2015 that Weld had convened a meeting of the leaders of all political groups on the Council where he proposed that they should block motions put forward by McLoughlin Healy, she claims that she was roundly ignored. Worse still, when the whip was removed from her at the instigation of some of her party colleagues on KCC in July 2016, the party failed  properly to investigate her complaints. Instead, she was hauled before the Fine Gael disciplinary committee in November 2016 and had her suspension extended by six months. Among those who presided over this particular indignity was national executive member, Barry Walsh, who has since resigned from his position in the wake of complaints by Dublin Bay South TD, Kate O’Connell, over his misogynistic tweets about her and other female politicians. In July and November last year, McLoughlin Healy wrote to Leo Varadkar to complain about how she had been treated and listed the various complaints she had made and how she had been the person punished rather than her alleged abusers within the party.   During the same month, she met justice minister, Charlie Flanagan, at a conference appropriately entitled “Integrity at Work” where the senior party figure urged those present to speak out about wrongdoing in the workplace and called for support for whistleblowers. When McLoughlin Healy blew the whistle to Flanagan about the mistreatment of her by party members in Kildare and the failure of the national executive to deal with her complaints he promised to look into the matter. She has heard nothing from either of them since. Party general secretary, Tom Curran, did examine some of the issues she raised but, after a promising start, the inquiry sank into the sand. Curran, however, did inform her, some nine months after she first raised her concerns, that the national executive had decided to deal with her complaints against Weld and another Kildare Councillor, Darren Scully, by appointing a group of Councillors from outside the County to devise protocols which could inform party members, including some of her adversaries who have been in politics for decades, as to proper procedures in holding meetings. “Such a protocol would deal with the calling of group meetings, conduct of such meetings, minuting of decisions and communications among members. The said group of Councillors would also devise a protocol covering arrangements with other political groupings including the minuting of arrangements entered into”, Curran wrote. Curran even invited McLoughlin Healy to join the group of party reformers. However, some six months later she has still to hear how the radical proposal to deal with sexist behaviour in the party has progressed. Bullying goes on in Fine Gael in the shiny and modern era of Varadkar.    

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Rugby’s dirty secret

    Come clean, John McClean. John McClean had the power to make or break a schoolboy’s dreams of playing rugby for his country. As a coach in Terenure College for almost 30 years, and then head of the sport at UCD, his role in recruiting future generations of players gave him status and influence. He is credited with spotting Brian O’Driscoll’s talent when he was a teenager, and his elite rugby academy in UCD produced a number of players who went on to have international careers. But behind the glory on the pitch, allegations that McClean had a very dark side are now coming to light. The veteran coach stands accused of a litany of complaints by former pupils at Terenure College who say they were sexually assaulted by him during their time at the private boys’ school. Their harrowing testimonies paint a picture of a predatory paedophile who targeted vulnerable youngsters in his charge, grooming them during class before taking them to his office where he carried out his sordid abuse. Village can also reveal that gardaí have known about the accusations against McClean for almost two decades during which time he continued to have access to children. As more victims start to come forward, the controversy threatens to escalate into one of Ireland’s biggest child-abuse scandals with Leinster rugby bracing itself for a wave of further revelations about a man who was one of its most celebrated coaches. At least five past pupils, now in their 40s and 50s, have made complaints to gardaí in recent months claiming McClean molested them in the 1970s and 1980s. Two say they reported him to gardaí several years ago – one almost 20 years ago – yet neither of their complaints resulted in an arrest or prosecution. The men say they made their original complaints to Detective Garda Tom Stack at Terenure Garda Station. The same officer is handling the numerous allegations coming to light today. The Garda press office has declined to comment on the matter. Now in his 70s and living in south Dublin, McClean, who taught English at the Carmelite school, is alleged to have used his powerful position to indulge in a series of depraved attacks on young boys in his care. Village is aware of at least ten individuals making complaints about John McClean. The former coach was nicknamed ‘The Doc’ due to his enthusiasm for looking after boys’ rugby injuries. It is also claimed he would go into shower rooms after games to talk to players while they were naked. One former pupil describes how he was approached by McClean in the run-up to trials for a sports day in the 1970s. “He used to ask a few of us athletes to stay back after school to check if we had any problems with muscle injury. One day, I was told to meet him at the doors of the concert hall which I did. There was another teacher there. I knew she knew something was wrong when she asked him what he was doing and why. He told her I had a groin problem and that he needed to fix it for sports day. He then took me down to the back room under the stage and interfered with my private parts. He left the room on two occasions only to come back and do it again and again”. The allegations suggest that McClean tended to go for weaker children who were going through difficulties at school or family troubles. Some say he preyed on them during class on the pretence he was concerned for their welfare. They say he would order them to stay back after school and attend his office. It was there the most disturbing assaults are alleged to have taken place, sometimes behind a locked door. Two victims claim they were molested during rehearsals for school plays. One was 13 when he was allegedly assaulted in the college concert hall while changing into a girl’s costume. He claims McClean masturbated himself during the attack. The victim reported the incident to gardaí almost twenty years ago but nothing came of it. He also referred the matter to Terenure College. McClean went on to become Director of Rugby at UCD in the mid 1990s and continued to have unfettered access to youngsters. The university now faces questions as to what background checks, if any, it carried out before he was given the job. Village put the allegations of sexual assault to McClean and asked him if he was willing to confirm or deny them. He said he had no comment to make. Two of his former charges at Terenure say they were so traumatised by what happened to them, they left the school never to return. It is also alleged that the retired coach was capable of severe physical violence. In one case dating back to the mid 1980s, a former pupil at the school said that McClean beat him with a bunch of rulers tied together with an elastic band across his bottom. The boy was 12 at the time. McClean told the boy his mother had given him permission to beat him if he was not behaving. After the beating, the victim says he hugged him and proceeded to sexually assault him. This man also reported McClean to gardaí. A file was sent to the DPP but no charges were brought despite the fact that the authorities were aware of at least one earlier accusation against him.     One victim alleges he was sexually abused at the top of the classroom. He says he was brought to the front of the class to be reprimanded over a poor grade and that McClean assaulted him using his black teaching gown as a shield. Another past pupil describes how he was targeted when his grades started to suffer due to a family illness. On the last week of term, McClean asked him to come to his office one day after class. “He

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Publish Chief Justice’s report on garda’s suicide

    From our March 2018 edition. If a tree falls in an empty forest does it make a sound: if a gun shot is fired in a building can it not be heard, especially when people are in and near that building? This is something that has puzzled me regarding the death of a Garda Sergeant, Michael Galvin, a former captain and manager of Sligo hurling team, and a father of three who lived in Manorhamilton, Co Leitrim. He died on 28 May 2015. I heard on local radio that morning that a man had earlier been found dead at Ballyshannon Garda Station. The first thought I had was it would be Michael Galvin: WHY? Because I always believed he would become a Garda Whistleblower. I could see from dealings I had with him, that he wanted a more open and transparent Garda Síochána. I had met Garda Sergeant Michael Galvin many times over the years. He came across as an honest, compassionate, straightforward and helpful Garda, who would fight any implications of wrongdoing. He appeared tenacious and I recall him saying, “it will be a long time before I retire”. Sergeant Galvin took statements in relation to Councillor Sean McEniff and others’ alleged incitements to hatred in 2013 after a home proposed for a Travelling family was burnt to the ground at Parkhill in the town. Michael Galvin took his own life with a hand gun after being subjected to a Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) investigation. Under Section 102 of the Garda Ombudsman Act, the Garda Commissioner forwards any case of a Garda death to GSOC for investigation. Three gardaí, including Sergeant Galvin, were being investigated after the death of 33-year-old Sheena Stewart on 1 January 2015 after a night out in Bundoran, Co Donegal, when she was struck, while intoxicated, by a taxi. It is understood the sergeant had driven past her before the accident as he responded to another call At his funeral his widow, Colette Galvin, revealed he had been in deep personal turmoil over the investigation. Sergeant Galvin told GSOC the woman had been on the pavement rather than the road when he passed her at the scene.  However, an apparent discrepancy arose between that evidence and the CCTV footage of the incident. A Judicial inquiry under Judge Frank Clarke, now Chief justice, looked into the GSOC investigation. The Inquiry found that GSOC should not have instigated a criminal investigation though it had done so in good faith because it was practice to do so in any case where there had been a death. Sergeant Galvin only found out about the investigation three months after it had been instigated, because of deletion by Garda of a key email. Judge Clarke found that the practice of gardaí imparting the news a colleague was being investigated needed to be changed so that GSOC did it. An email from GSOC’s lawyer to its Investigating Officer the morning of the suicide had confirmed that though there was insufficient evidence of commission of a crime the file should be forwarded to the DPP. Sergeant Galvin never got to hear this news. The spin from the Garda Síochána was that GSOC was responsible for Sergeant Galvin’s untimely death – and the inquiry did express concern about how GSOC informed the press after his death about its investigations into him, before his family was aware of the status of those investigations. However, the inquiry noted that the Garda were confused about, and suspicious of, the role of GSOC, and that they had been confused as to whether GSOC’s investigation was criminal in nature and had therefore inappropriately taken uncautioned statements from their three colleagues in the gardaí. GSOC practices changed after the Clarke inquiry. Its chairperson said that it would improve its communication with gardaí and it prepared a set of information leaflets for gardaí on how such investigations should progress. But where are the Garda Síochána changes? Certainly suspicion of GSOC has been acute since its formation. This was symptomised in the vehemence of suspicions that gardaí bugged GSOC headquarters which led to the inconclusive 2014 Cooke inquiry. After this the Garda Commissioner, Noirin O’Sullivan admitted a more constructive relationship between Garda and GSOC was required. But the problems survive the Clarke inquiry. In 2016 Judge Mary Ellen Ring Chairperson of GSOC berated the time the Garda take to furnish documents to GSOC and the absence of sanctions for reticent gardaí. On 1 March 2018 Judge Ring suggested that the Garda attitude towards GSOC is “we get it, when we get it”. She bemoaned the fact there is no penalty if gardaí do not comply. Government is unenthusiastic about GSOC. This year, 2018, GSOC have sought 37 extra staff but on 25 February the Minister for Justice, Charlie Flanagan, said only five staff will in fact be provided. More generally, the failure to implement the recommendations of the Morris report on the gardai in Donegal, and indeed anecdotes from the streets, suggest that in forty years nothing much has changed in the Donegal Garda. I was in fact reminded of Sergeant Galvin’s death by news of the suicide of Detective Superintendent Colm Fox – lead detective in the Regency murder trial also in a Garda Station, Ballymun, on February 10. Michael Galvin also reminded me of another Garda, Michael Lawless, who made written complaints about the untouchables in Donegal and the close relationship between Senior Garda and Sean McEniff. Garda Lawless specifically complained that gardaí were being hindered by Senior Garda in carrying out their duties. As long ago as 1985 an RTÉ ‘Today Tonight’ focused on Law and Order in South Donegal, particularly Seán McEniff’s gaming. Donegal County Council sued RTÉ for defamation for what it said about the inappropriate relationship between Donegal County Council and the Garda but a legal settlement saw it agree to remove the programme, on the steps of the High Court. In 2014 when Sean McEniff appeared to assault a female Councillor Senior Garda would not prosecute

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Wicklow Manager bouncing Bray demolition

    Village last month reported that Wicklow County Council has agreed to sell a prime town-centre site in Bray to developer Paddy McKillen’s Navybrook Ltd for just €2.6m. The deal is contingent on Navybrook delivering a commercial development by the end of 2019.  It is also a controversial sale that has raised questions about value for money. Most Councillors and most residents of Bray want the site developed. Known as the ‘Florentine’, it has been vacant for 20 years, but has also served meanwhile as a convenient car park with 225 spaces. A Council official in January told Wicklow County Council that the site is actually worth more as a paying car park than as a development site. “There’s not huge value in this for developers”, he claimed. But a related effect of the sale of that site to Navybrook is now proving controversial too. For it transpires that Council officials set aside a sum almost equivalent to the Florentine’s sale price to buy and demolish two large inhabited houses at Herbert Road nearby in order to extend another surface car park by up to 100 spaces.  The proposed new spaces are seen by some residents as an incentive or subsidy to the purchaser of the Florentine site. The original Council budget for the extra spaces appears to have been only about 10% less than what that Navybrook has agreed to pay for the Florentine. Wicklow County Council might have insisted on any purchaser of the Florentine erecting a multi-storey with 356 car spaces, instead of the 256 now planned there. Had Wicklow County Council insisted on 100 more car spaces at the Florentine, it would still have been fewer than had been required as a condition, when planning permission was granted for the Florentine site to an earlier owner.  One previous planning permission for an earlier proposed development on the Florentine site, one that included apartments, had required 417 parking spaces. Wicklow County Council acquired the site at a bargain-basement price during the recent crash. It believes that the Florentine will yield it commercial rates of up to half a million euros annually when completed. The County Council itself sought planning permission for the Florentine before selling the site to Navybrook. The inspector for An Bord Pleanála pointed out that objectors had stated that the Council was not making sufficient allowance for car parking, with provision being promised for just 256 spaces. The inspector’s report included a statement that applying car-parking standards in the, then-current, Wicklow county development plan 2010-2016 would have meant that “504 spaces would be required”. But Wicklow County Council insisted that 256 spaces were enough, and An Bord Pleanála accepted the Council’s assurances. Permission was granted last year. Just one month later the Council was engaged nearby in private negotiations to buy St Paul’s Lodge and another big house, both adjacent to the existing surface car park on Herbert Road which is an area zoned for mixed use. Local residents were not informed, but the prospective purchasers were told that Wicklow County Council wanted to buy their houses, and that the purpose for which the Council wanted them was additional parking.  The owners first sought €1.5m each (as opposed to the €765,000 valuation that the Council’s own surveyor put on one of the houses last year). In the end, only the sale of St Paul’s Lodge went ahead, for €913,000 including the vendor’s legal and other costs (such as furniture removal to Spain). The Council thus acquired an Edwardian home and large garden that officials hope to clear for up to 47 hard-surface car spaces. Bray residents (including myself) oppose the Council’s proposal to destroy St Paul’s Lodge, on architectural and social grounds among others, pointing out that it was reportedly designed by the architect of Farmleigh House, and that destroying family homes during a housing shortage pushes up the cost of new homes for everyone. Hearing rumours of the Council’s wish to destroy part of their neighbourhood, residents tried between June and October last year to elicit information from Wicklow County Council. We were told by the Council simply that, “We are examining all aspects of parking in the town at this time”. In fact Council officials were then intent on closing the purchase of St Paul’s Lodge as quickly as possible.  Council officials concluded the purchase of St Paul’s Lodge unconditionally, despite the fact that it was bought solely “in order to raze it to the ground and build a car park on the site”, as the vendor’s solicitor put it last July. It is an extraordinary fact of current law that Council officials have great freedom to spend public money on acquisitions without the approval of elected representatives. However, approval is required to demolish or dispose of a building, and the process of securing approval in such a case requires public consultation under a provision known as ‘Part 8’. But what kind of consultation? In this case Wicklow County Council ignored expressions of concern by local residents and inserted no provision in the contract of sale contingent on Council approval. The Council closed the sale without first completing the consultation concerning possible demolition. This has put Councillors under pressure to approve demolition. The house could be put back on the market. There is a strong demand for such houses in the immediate vicinity, and at least one older and bigger house nearby (in bad shape) was recently bought and substantially renovated. But the fact that officials paid above what their surveyor considered to be the house’s normal market value could leave the Council out of pocket from any resale. Residents had their request for a meeting ignored by Council management, and have been forced to take an appeal to the Office of the Information Commissioner to get some documents eventually released that reveal details. The first site notices of planned demolition were not clearly visible from the road and none at all was put on the property of St Paul’s itself. A new notice was

    Loading

    Read more