Archives

OK

Random entry RSS

Loading

  • Posted in:

    Ireland moving to fetishise the private sector in aid programmes. By Lorna Gold.

    by

    By Lorna Gold. The UK Department for International Development, DfID, received its first ever “red warning” from the UK Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) in May 2014. The Commission concluded that DfID’s programme for “promoting private sector development” failed to yield any benefit for poverty reduction. It slated DfID for its ideological approach based on blind faith in markets to work ‘miracles’. The programme was discontinued as a result. Ireland is still far from anything like this. However, research carried out for Trocaire points to increasing pressure, external and internal, for a private-sector approach to be adopted by Irish Aid. The research concludes that getting both donor and poor communities to benefit from increased trade is difficult, without careful management. Most large-scale donor initiatives of this type have focused on facilitating Africa’s trade with the rest of the world rather than supporting indigenous growth. This “aid­for­trade” typically creates landing strips for expensive imports from the rest of the world, rather than launching pads for African goods and services. Clearly more support needs to be given for manufacturing and value­added activities in African countries. Reliable information about Ireland’s business presence in Africa proved difficult to obtain but is considered that Irish commerce in Africa is limited. Foreign direct investment amounts to just 0.25% of Ireland’s total direct investment overseas. Ireland’s trade with Africa is imbalanced by a ratio of just over two to one in favour of Irish exports. There was a total of €3.2bn exports in 2013, representing 1.5% of Ireland’s total exports of goods and 2.1% of Ireland’s total trade in services. Imports to Ireland of African goods and services amounted to €1.25bn. However, there is an intensification in official efforts to promote Irish trade and direct investment in Africa, from this low base. Irish Aid’s bilateral spend on private-sector and economic development is still relatively small, standing at €5.5m in 2013. Public Private Partnerships accounted for €8m, representing 2% of Irish Aid’s bilateral budget. However, Irish Aid has been involved in another significant trend in private-sector development: leveraging or blending of private sector finance to achieve development goals. This has been pursued via its funding of €5.2m to the Private Infrastructure Development Group over the four years up to the end of 2013. This is a group of six bilateral donors, which, together with the International Finance Corporation, aims to mobilise private-sector investment in developing countries. Ireland has also become more active in exploring business opportunities from these types of funds. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade commissioned a market assessment, ‘Winning Business in Africa Building a Cluster for Infrastructure’, which identified €12bn in projects to be funded by grants, tenders, loans and general procurement notices from the EU, the European Investment Bank, the World Bank, and the African Development Bank. The overriding focus for the private sector is on opening up new markets for multi-national corporations and extending their control over African resources. The consequence is that, in the name of reducing poverty, the food security and land tenure of vulnerable groups, especially women farmers, are being undermined. The G8 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa is one example of a poverty-focused initiative involving private-sector partners. Despite its title, focused on food security, the New Alliance initiative actually promotes the export of agricultural goods such as tobacco, coffee, cocoa, and biofuels, rather than the production of nutritious foods that could be consumed locally. If “aid-for-trade” is to benefit those living in poverty, a better starting point would be a focus on regional and local markets in the first instance. This trend towards private-sector engagement in development co-operation is set to continue. The Irish Government must, at least, mitigate the risk that Irish companies become complicit in human-rights violations by ensuring they adhere to high standards. Human Rights due diligence requirements should be mandatory. It is a concern, for example, that employees of Irish companies are currently being incentivised, via the Foreign Earnings Deduction, to operate in the Democratic Republic of Congo, without any provision for Human Rights due diligence. For this reason, Ireland’s commitment to develop a National Action Plan to implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights must be translated into robust action, soon. • Lorna Gold is Head of Policy and Advocacy with Trócaire

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Expendable artists’ exemption. By John Horgan.

    by

    By John Horgan Is the writers’ and artists’ tax exemption scheme now on life support? Suspicions that this might be the case were first aroused when it was disclosed last year that a review of this scheme instituted by Finance Minister Michael Noonan last year had “abolition on the table”. It has now emerged that this is to be a “desk-based” review (i.e. with apparently no possibility for any input by arts organisations or the public). This will strengthen the hands of those (not least the Revenue Commissioners and the 2009 Commission on Taxation) who believe that is that it now well past its sell-by date. The scheme was first introduced in 1969 by the then Minister for Finance, Charles J. Haughey, who may or may not have hoped that it would have positively influenced a small but high-profile section of the electorate in the lead-up to the following general election. It didn’t, as the outcome of the 1973 election was to make clear. It has since then been subjected to numerous changes, and its effects have been whittled down – often for good, commonsense reasons – while it has also been of modest assistance to at least some of the less spectacularly successful writers and artists The first substantial amendment was in the 1989 Finance Act. This was the creation of an appeals system against refusals to grant exemption. There were more significant changes in the 1994 Finance Act, in which both the Arts Council and the Minister for Arts made their first appearance, exercising co-responsibility for authorship of new Guidelines which were then drawn up to help the Revenue Commissioners and which have remained in force, with some modifications, until the present day. The1994 Guidelines, introduced when Michael D Higgins was the relevant minister, notably increased the number of categories under which exemption could be changed, and included references to both the Heritage Council and the National Archives. A later set of Guidelines introduced in 1997, however, included another innovation: a list of the type of work that would NOT be considered as original and creative (emphasis added). This represented, perhaps, a fight-back by interests that felt that the guidelines were too loose or too liberal. The present set of guidelines dates from 2013. The amount of income for which tax exemption could be claimed, however, has also been subject to the slings and arrows of fortune. It was effectively unlimited until 2006, when a limit of €250,000 was introduced following a review by the Revenue Commissioners a year earlier. At that time almost 1,000 of the beneficiaries were earning less than €6,000 a year, and fewer than a dozen were earning more than €500,000, the latter category largely responsible for a revenue loss to the exchequer of almost €13 million. In 2010 the late Brian Lenihan cut the maximum income allowable for the deduction to €40,000. By 2012 the numbers applying had fallen, and the numbers refused exemption had increased. The number of claimants has also fallen by more than 30% since 2010. However, contrary to expectations that the scheme will be further limited, there are also some straws blowing in the wind in the opposite direction. The scheme was actually relaxed somewhat in the 2014 Finance Act, when the threshold was increased from €40,000 to €50,000. In addition, while the possibility of exemption had previously been extended to artists living in any EU or EEA State, this was further changed so that even writers and artists living outside the EU/EEA could now apply to the Revenue Commissioners for an advance opinion on whether their works would come under the scheme if they become resident in the EU/EEA. There have been rumours that in recent years the Arts Council has been concerned that the guidelines have been interpreted by the Revenue Commissioners too loosely by including celebrity biographies and the like. The latest list available on the web-site of the Commissioners is indeed a fascinating pot-pourri of names, including – along with those of well-established artists and writers of fiction – the present writer (whose biography of Mary Robinson benefited), Bertie and Cecelia Ahern, Charlie Bird, Harry Browne, George Hook, Terry Prone, and Louis Walsh. It repays a browse. If it is to be abolished in the forthcoming 2015 Budget, as seems possible, will the additional tax revenue be spent elsewhere in the arts area, devoted to a different worthy cause, or simply pocketed by the exchequer? One way or the other, change is probably imminent. • Professor John Horgan is a former Press Ombudsman

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Rugby surrendered its social benefit.

    by

    By Jim O’ Callaghan. One of the many social changes that sociologists and social historians of the future will examine is the change associated with participation in competitive sport in Ireland over the past twenty years. Throughout the twentieth century rugby in Ireland was a participation sport centred on clubs throughout the 32 counties, with many clubs fielding at least 8 teams on a weekly basis. It has now become a spectator sport, with most clubs having difficulty fielding more than three teams. Although most public attention in the past centred on the performance of the first teams in those clubs, the purpose of the clubs was to facilitate men – young and not so young – who wished to play rugby for enjoyment and social interaction. In fact, the reason men played rugby was not because they wished to achieve sporting excellence but because they enjoyed the game and the associated social life. That purpose has now vanished from Irish rugby clubs. Rugby clubs in Ireland can now be more accurately assessed when viewed in a pyramid structure. Where clubs are very strong and socially active is at underage, mini-rugby level. Rugby clubs throughout the country are now extremely busy every Sunday morning with young boys and girls learning the game, coached by volunteering parents who enjoy the social engagement generated by their children’s involvement in underage rugby. Once these children reach the age of 12, the attraction and availability of the sport becomes narrower. There are very few options for girls between the ages of 12 and 18 who wish to continue playing rugby. For boys, those who go on to attend rugby-playing schools are set on a path that involves them playing for their schools, while those who don’t attend rugby playing schools and who wish to continue with the game will find it difficult to find a club where they can play rugby at a competitive level between the ages of 12 and 18. At school the level of training and commitment required of young rugby players has become enormous; in some ways suffocating. The objective in schools, unfortunately, is no longer about participation but about winning and the attainment of excellence. By 16 years of age coaches can tell whether a player may achieve excellence. They can also identify for certain those who will never achieve excellence. This marks the first stage of a filtering process that has the effect of discouraging many young players from playing the game. Traditionally, players who left rugby-playing schools continued to play in a club or university. Those clubs also attracted players who didn’t play at school but who wished to pick up the game for the first time at 18. Neither of these circumstances occurs anymore. Those who leave school and who are not destined to play rugby at a high level – even within a club – retire from the game. Those who at 18 have never played will only be treated seriously by coaches if they display unusual ability or physique. The change that has occurred is that no longer do young men want to join a club to play social rugby. The reason for this change appears to be twofold. First, participation in rugby is now achieved, or purportedly achieved, by watching a provincial team. The significant increase in attendances watching professional rugby matches is, in part, explained by the opening up of rugby to a new spectatorship. It is also explained by the fact that people who previously played club rugby at weekends now prefer to watch rather than play. Second, our society now confers much greater respect on, and emphasises, achievement and excellence rather than participation and enjoyment. It is also true to say that parts of our society denigrate participation in a senior sport that does not attain excellence. This also explains the increased interest and participation in tag rugby during summer months. People play this because it is primarily about fun. It does not expose people to the perception of mediocrity that may be associated with a 24-year-old playing junior rugby for a club. The net effect is that the number of men playing rugby after the age of 18 has now decreased considerably. The majority of those who continue playing after the age of 18 are extremely committed and believe that they can attain sporting excellence. However, the avenues are so precarious for talented players in this age group that many of them stop playing in their early and mid-20s. A talented rugby player leaving school who is offered a provincial contract has little opportunity to develop any other career to see him through most of his working life. If contracted to a province and therefore employed to lift weights, watch videos and play matches (which many do not enjoy), it is virtually impossible to train for another career. The effect is that by 23-24, a player will know whether he is destined to make it in professional rugby. Many of those who are not so destined decide at that stage not to revert to club rugby but instead to retire from the game completely. Although they may have attained excellence without recognition, many do not wish to ‘regress’ to playing club rugby. The effect of these changes upon Irish club rugby is that a very small number of men between the ages of 20 and 30 now play rugby in the clubs. Most of them are playing still in the pursuit of excellence and professional recognition. Very few now play club rugby for social interaction or enjoyment. The involvement of parents in mini rugby has grown MEMBERSHIP in many clubs but the absence of players in the 20-30 age group reveals the decreased involvement that rugby clubs have in Irish social life. The decline of adult participation in club rugby is in marked contrast to the high levels of adult participation in the GAA. Unlike the IRFU, the GAA recognises the important social role it played and continues

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Smug EU: Pass the claret (and the deal). By Lynn Boylan MEP.

    by

    By Lynn Boylan, MEP. I’ve never been one to shy away from criticising the democratic deficit at the heart of the European Union. However, even a critic like me was left speechless with the antics recently in the European Parliament. MEPs were due to vote on June 10th on a report that outlined the Parliament’s position on the current Transatlantic Trade and Investment programme (TTIP) negotiations. Then stroke politics on a European scale kicked in. This trade agreement if it comes to fruition will be the largest of its kind and will account for 45% of global GDP. It will potentially impact on every aspect of people’s lives, from further liberalisation of public services, to reduced labour conditions, and to a downgrading of environmental and food regulation. The most controversial part of the deal is the inclusion of an Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. This allows multinational corporations to sue governments if they feel that a government policy interferes with their profits or their future profits. Resistance to ISDS is widespread across the EU, especially in countries that have experienced these secret courts. As a result the level of public lobbying before the vote on June 10th was enormous. I, for one, received thousands of emails from Irish citizens encouraging me to vote No to the report. This clearly spooked many MEPs, particularly members of the two largest groups – the Socialists and Democrats, and the European People’s Party – which usually form a majority coalition on most key votes. There are already many examples of ISDS mechanisms in place and they have led to serious problems. For example there was Veolia’s challenge to the Egyptian government for attempting to raise the minimum wage. Phillip Morris is currently involved in an action against the Australian Government for introducing plain-package tobacco requirements. These cases are settled behind closed doors and there is no right of appeal. In the days leading up to the Parliament vote, it was clear that neither of the two main political groups could guarantee they could bring their members along to support the report, particularly with the inclusion of ISDS. A hastily arranged dinner in Strasbourg was attended by the President of the Parliament, Martin Schulz (Socialist and Democrats group), the President of the Commission, Jean Claude Juncker (the European People’s Party’s man in the Commission), Martin Weber, Chairperson of the European People’s Party, Gianni Pitella, President of the Socialists and Democrats group, and the Vice-President of the Commission, Frans Timmermans (the Socialists and Democrats group’s man in the Commission). Schulz’s promises of the TTIP vote being in the bag could no longer be guaranteed. Time needed to be bought. On the eve of the vote, an email was circulated to advise that the vote would now be postponed due to the volume of amendments (over 200) that had been submitted. This was hardly the most robust excuse for an institution that deals with thousands of amendments on a daily basis. However, when you are the President of the Parliament, it’s easy to find a rule to suit your agenda. Later in the evening, another email circulated, advising MEPs that the debate was to be postponed. Heaven forbid that the interested citizens should know which MEPs were not happy with ISDS, TTIP or, indeed, the suspiciously suspended Parliament vote. Unfortunately this behaviour is not unique and we are set to see more of it. It seems that the cosy dinner between the five movers and shakers of Brussels was not a one off. ‘G5’ as they affectionately refer to themselves meet at least twice a month for dinner to discuss upcoming files and to offset possible difficulties. It is believed that it was at one of these cosy dinners that they managed to wrangle Jean Claude Juncker out of a possible European Parliament censure. The censure was related to his connection to the ‘LuxLeaks’ corporate-tax-evasion scandal, which happened under his watch as Prime Minister of Luxembourg. With increasing numbers of people across the EU feeling disconnected from the EU institutions, the idea that all major decisions will come down to five men sitting around a table in a five-star hostelry will do nothing to reassure them. Democracy in the EU, it seems, remains a nice idea. •

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Gaza again and again. By Barry Walsh.

    by

    By Barry Walsh. One year on, over 100,000 people still remain displaced in Gaza. Some people are living with extended families, others in temporary accommodation and UN schools. The ongoing economic blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt means that reconstruction can’t begin in earnest. Yet for many people in Gaza, the greatest challenges are those of having lost loved ones in the conflict and the difficulty of seeking justice. I visited ruined neighbourhoods in Gaza, in February. The scenes reminded me of images of European cities devastated after World War II. The 50-day Israeli military operation, ‘Protective Edge’, in the summer of 2014 saw whole neighbourhoods in Gaza destroyed. 1,462 Palestinian civilians were killed, a third of them children. Palestinian militant rockets into Israel killed six Israeli civilians including one child. The international community, including states like Ireland, have a role to play in seeking justice and accountability in Gaza. Any potential war crimes need to be adequately investigated by credible and independent investigations. Those in command who may have been responsible for undertaking war crimes must face justice. The UN Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry into the conflict and its report finds evidence that war crimes may have been committed by both Israel and Hamas. I met Rawda Al-Astal, who lost two sons who were watching the World Cup semi-final in a beach-side café on 9th July 2014. Eight people were killed when an Israeli airstrike hit the café. Rawda asked me plaintively, “What do these children have to do with anything? 18 and 16 years old, what did they do to deserve this?” . On the 21st July, heavy shelling provoked Nabil Siyam’s family to flee their house. While on the street an Israeli drone launched a missile which hit the family. Nabil was seriously injured and lost his arm. However, his wife and four of his five children, along with two of his brothers and five other members of his extended family, were killed in the attack. Nabil said, “I am hopeful that an international court can restore our rights and prosecute Israel”. The UN Commission of Inquiry, chaired by Justice Mary Davis, has recommended that both Israeli and Palestinian authorities improve the stringency of their investigations and bring perpetrators to justice. The report highlights that: “questions arise regarding the role of senior officials who set military policy” and that “individual soldiers may have been following agreed military policy, but it may be that the policy itself violates the laws of war”. We have been here before. Operation Pillar of Defence in 2012, Operation Cast Lead in 2009, Operation Warm Winter in 2008 and so on. These cycles of military operations in Gaza happen with alarming regularity. Without accountability for grave breaches of international law, a climate of impunity exists. We see history repeating. One of Trócaire’s Israeli partner organisations, Breaking the Silence, is a movement of veteran Israeli soldiers that collect testimonies about soldiers’ conduct while serving in Israeli military operations. Their most recent report, ‘How we fought in Gaza’, details the permissive rules of engagement used in last summer’s conflict. The report exposes soldiers’ admissions of shooting at civilians and ambulances, and of firing tank shells at buildings in revenge fire. It goes some way towards explaining why 70% of the Palestinian casualties were civilians and not combatants. The UN Commission of Inquiry report paves the way for the further pursuit of justice if domestic investigations continue to lack credibility and teeth. It calls on the international community to “to support actively the work of the International Criminal Court in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has opened a preliminary investigation into Gaza, and could potentially provide an avenue for prosecutions of Israelis and Palestinians responsible for grave breaches of international law. If action is not taken to challenge impunity, another round of conflict in Gaza in the coming years is all but guaranteed. We need meaningful pressure to be put on Israel and the Palestinian Authority. It is time for the international community to galvanise. • Garry Walsh is Trócaire Programme Officer for Israel and occupied Palestinian territory (www.trocaire.org/Palestine)

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    O’ Brien – Desmond Letter (parallel universe)

    by

    As he prepares for the hols, Denis shares his thoughts on life in business, with his fellow billionaire, Dermot.                                                                                 D E N I S  O’  B R I E N Dear Dermot, I woke up in Haiti on the morning of April 29th to a phone message saying that RTÉ had sent me a letter with questions regarding my confidential banking arrangements with Anglo Irish Bank/ IBRC. My immediate reaction was astonishment – astonishment – that RTÉ could be used in such a way, so deliberately, to set out to damage me. Sitting over breakfast in Haiti I knew I had an immediate decision to make. I was obliged to take a stand to protect privacy and confidentiality in relation to my financial affairs. In brief. Court. Morrissey. Denis v RTÉ. Win. Delight. Denis v the People. Shut down Parliamentary reporting. Spineless media collapse. Lose (ring of steel) and experience abuse, venom and hatred. More Morrissey. National ignominy and revulsion. Problem is it has been suggested that my banking affairs are of public interest. Maybe I’m old-fashioned but I refute that. Where does public interest begin or end? I am a private citizen, and an old-fashioned one. Can I presume my medical records will be sought, twisted and turned for public consumption next, just as happened with my wife’s medical records at the Moriarty tribunal in 2002? Deputy Catherine Murphy mysteriously obtained copies of files about my banking arrangements. Since then, she has repeatedly made erroneous and untruthful statements (Morrissey says don’t say lies, and he would know) about my banking relationship. Totally SIPTU. Not for one minute did I ever allow external access to anyone to my private banking files. The only conclusion is that they were taken from Anglo Irish Bank/IBRC without the permission of the liquidator. In other words, they were stolen. Stolen in a different way from how journalists on INM which I nearly control obtain leaks, mind. Miserable Michael McDowell always has something to say about me. But underlying everything you have to look at his agenda, which he always fails to declare. It’s almost like he’s holding something against me from the time of Professor Moriarty’s inquisition. In his Irish Times article he in fact fudged the parliamentary privilege issue, noting: “We are in dangerous territory where the alleged privacy rights of the powerful call into question … seem to cast doubt on the efficacy of Article 15.12 of our Constitution”. Morrissey laughed – it gave us a pass. Doubt on the efficacy of the Constitution? Brilliant. RTÉ, the Irish Times and the Journal.ie removed the material from their websites or were not broadcasting it. It was like taking candy from kids. Nobody seemed to notice the Guardian and New York Times published it without taking breath. Philip Bouchier Hayes tweeted that the constitutional privilege was “qualified” for the media. Morrissey hooted with laughter. Before, that is, Micheal Martin destroyed him. Amazed to see the profile of Morrissey in the Irish Times: ‘Denis O’Brien’s cornerman: He must have been a boxer in his former life’. How about a fucking moron in his former life? Micheal Martin rammed a pitchfork up his overpaid, loyal, thick arse. Now, perhaps the Fianna Fáil leader would like to lead the way elsewhere and encourage all Fianna Fáil TDs to make public their banking files since 1990 to RTÉ and then have them distorted? Over time I do really hope that the anger and nastiness which fuels the current discord will abate and be replaced by a positive and constructive outlook for the country. I don’t mind its outlook on me, it’s the outlook for the country I’m about. Green jersey. Still. Anyway the main thing is we’ll be back in court. And I know you’re with me, Dermot. For years the media have largely spinelessly ignored your affairs – the Glackin report and all that stuff about funding of former Taoiseach Charles Haughey in the Moriarty Tribunal. You’re the gold standard in defamation successes over the years, with bars for Vincent Browne, Matt Cooper and the Sunday Times. That’s all I want. Privacy, confidentiality, fear and silence. Back to the real world and Alex White playing a Rabbittesque blinder on media ownership. Not looking at the existing status quo – just the implications of future acquisitions. Ha. It’s not, he says, a question of being “averse” to questioning the current situation, but “rather that I believe it would be fraught with constitutional risk”. Alex noted that the retrospective nature of the nursing home charges led to the Supreme Court striking down an Act as repugnant to the Constitution. Sounds good to me. According to top man, Nick Webb, in the Sindo, I’m changing the focus of Digicel as it prepares to float in New York in what could be the most valuable IPO of an Irish-linked company ever. Some industry estimates, Webb notes dutifully, have suggested that the company could have an enterprise value of around $13bn, including its $6.5bn in debt. Tom Lyons and Ian Kehoe in the Business Post on the other hand talked of $10bn and only if it can move beyond mere mobile phone to become a rounded high-growth communications company. If I don’t own the Business Post, I should. In the past three full financial years, Digicel has paid me $1.1bn in dividends. I receive a quarterly payment of $10 million each year. Pays Morrissey, legal fees and pints after the match for Macker, Biffer and the Bulldozer. In addition, I was paid special dividends of $650 million in February 2014 and $300 million in June 2012. Digicel is “evaluating” an approach to buy its €90m mobile-phone mast business in Myanmar. We made an unsuccessful bid to land one of the two mobile-phone licences which were put up for auction by the Myanmar authorities in 2013. Groups involving Norway’s Telenor and Qatar’s Ooredoo prevailed. Meanwhile I see you’ve bought a few more diamonds, or is it diamond

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Gaza again and again?

    by

    By Garry Walsh. One year on, over 100,000 people still remain displaced in Gaza. Some people are living with extended families, others in temporary accommodation and UN schools. The ongoing economic blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt means that reconstruction can’t begin in earnest. Yet for many people in Gaza, the greatest challenges are those of having lost loved ones in the conflict and the difficulty of seeking justice. I visited ruined neighbourhoods in Gaza, in February. The scenes reminded me of images of European cities devastated after World War II. The 50-day Israeli military operation, ‘Protective Edge’, in the summer of 2014 saw whole neighbourhoods in Gaza destroyed. 1,462 Palestinian civilians were killed, a third of them children. Palestinian militant rockets into Israel killed six Israeli civilians including one child. The international community, including states like Ireland, have a role to play in seeking justice and accountability in Gaza. Any potential war crimes need to be adequately investigated by credible and independent investigations. Those in command who may have been responsible for undertaking war crimes must face justice. The UN Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry into the conflict and its report finds evidence that war crimes may have been committed by both Israel and Hamas. I met Rawda Al-Astal, who lost two sons who were watching the World Cup semi-final in a beach-side café on 9th July 2014. Eight people were killed when an Israeli airstrike hit the café. Rawda asked me plaintively, “What do these children have to do with anything? 18 and 16 years old, what did they do to deserve this?” . On the 21st July, heavy shelling provoked Nabil Siyam’s family to flee their house. While on the street an Israeli drone launched a missile which hit the family. Nabil was seriously injured and lost his arm. However, his wife and four of his five children, along with two of his brothers and five other members of his extended family, were killed in the attack. Nabil said, “I am hopeful that an international court can restore our rights and prosecute Israel”. The UN Commission of Inquiry, chaired by Justice Mary Davis, has recommended that both Israeli and Palestinian authorities improve the stringency of their investigations and bring perpetrators to justice. The report highlights that: “questions arise regarding the role of senior officials who set military policy” and that “individual soldiers may have been following agreed military policy, but it may be that the policy itself violates the laws of war”. We have been here before. Operation Pillar of Defence in 2012, Operation Cast Lead in 2009, Operation Warm Winter in 2008 and so on. These cycles of military operations in Gaza happen with alarming regularity. Without accountability for grave breaches of international law, a climate of impunity exists. We see history repeating. One of Trócaire’s Israeli partner organisations, Breaking the Silence, is a movement of veteran Israeli soldiers that collect testimonies about soldiers’ conduct while serving in Israeli military operations. Their most recent report, ‘How we fought in Gaza’, details the permissive rules of engagement used in last summer’s conflict. The report exposes soldiers’ admissions of shooting at civilians and ambulances, and of firing tank shells at buildings in revenge fire. It goes some way towards explaining why 70% of the Palestinian casualties were civilians and not combatants. The UN Commission of Inquiry report paves the way for the further pursuit of justice if domestic investigations continue to lack credibility and teeth. It calls on the international community to “to support actively the work of the International Criminal Court in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has opened a preliminary investigation into Gaza, and could potentially provide an avenue for prosecutions of Israelis and Palestinians responsible for grave breaches of international law. If action is not taken to challenge impunity, another round of conflict in Gaza in the coming years is all but guaranteed. We need meaningful pressure to be put on Israel and the Palestinian Authority. It is time for the international community to galvanise. • Garry Walsh is Trócaire Programme Officer for Israel and occupied Palestinian territory (www.trocaire.org/Palestine)

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Villager June 2015

    by

    No interest Villager is always amazed at how some things that cost a lot just aren’t much good. Denis O’Brien’s spokesperson, James Morrissey, didn’t appear to know what he was talking about, still less to believe it, in his debate over parliamentary privilege with an impressive Micheál Martin on RTÉ Radio 1’s ‘This Week’. He did tell us that his master, who lobbied the government not to sell its remaining stake in Aer Lingus “has no aviation interests”. In fact, through Topaz Energy, O’Brien owns 50% of Shell & Topaz Aviation, supplier of fuel to Irish airports and airlines, which might be affected by a regime change. Innocent As the trial of phone-tap bad guy Andy Coulson, former editor of the News of the World, for perjury in the trial of former socialist MP, Tommy Sheridan, collapses, Villager got reflecting about delays to proceedings in the case of O’Brien’s best buddy, Seanie Fitz, who has pleaded not guilty to 21 charges of making a misleading, false or deceptive statement to auditors and six charges of furnishing false information in the years 2002 to 2007. Judge Mary Ellen Ring says the legal issues have now been resolved and a new jury will be sworn in, in October. It appears it has been difficult to keep some of the evidence against FitzPatrick tied down. Casting a cold eye. On life, on death. Prince Charles (or ‘Charles’ as Sinn Féin call him every second time they refer to him) enjoyed his visit to Drumcliffe, where WB Yeats is buried. The graveyard lost all its charm when the car-park was extended to within a yard of the great man’s grave and the Sligo-Bundoran route widened to create a constant background hum. Even the limestone is cut somewhat crassly and the capitalisation of “Life”, “Death” and “Eye” just wrong. Try cod instead A study of the annual inspection records of Irish salmon farms by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries between 2012 and 2014 has shown a complete breakdown of the salmon-farm licensing system. Author of the report, Friends of the Irish Environment Director Tony Lowes, said “We found there were no provisions for ensuring inspections of the critical mooring components that have led to previous breakaway disasters typically in storms in spite of repeated recommendations by the Minister’s officials in accident reports. When licence infringements were identified there was a persistent failure by operators to do anything about them”. No to youth Village’s editorial stance is secure. There are more than 200,000 fewer people in their 20s in Ireland than there were six years ago, according to the Central Statistics Office (CSO) indicate. The Vital Statistics Yearly summary shows the number of people between 20 and 29 fell from 755,000 in 2009 to 549,300 last year – a fall of 205,150, or 27.2 per cent. Most readers of Village were in college with Vincent Browne. Dairy reality makes bad poetry Hero George Monbiot puts his English boot into the mythology of Irish dairy farming in a recent article in the Guardian: “Perhaps the starkest example of this myth-making I’ve come across is a children’s book distributed with Saturday’s Guardian called ‘The Tale of City Sue’. It tells the story of a herd of cows on an Irish farm. ‘This friendly, Friesian family/were free to roam and browse/and eat the freshest, greenest grass/which made them happy cows/They belonged to farmer Finn/Who called them by their names/And when it was their birthday/He brought party hats and games/ He played his violin for them/inside the milking shed,/and sung [sic] them soothing lullabies/when it was time for bed’”. It turned out the book was in fact an extended advertisement for Kerrygold butter and following questions from Monbiot the Guardian made the provenance of the article clearer. He still wasn’t impressed: “From what I can glean, Kerrygold’s marketing seems to rely on the public perception that Irish dairy farms are small and mostly grass-fed. But they are changing fast. According to the former chair of the Irish Farmers’ Association, ‘scale must go up. … The dairy farm of the future is going to have to be bigger’. Could the current Kerrygold marketing blitz be an attempt to embed in our minds a bucolic, superannuated image of an industry that is now changing beyond recognition? If so, it might be an effective way of pre-empting criticism about the changing nature of its suppliers”. Líhypocrisie As France prepares to host the COP21 supposedly charged with solving the climate crisis, the French government has given a worrying insight into the sincerity of its commitment – in unveiling its choice of sponsors. Among the twenty companies on the initial sponsors list are Air France – an airline opposed to emissions reductions in the aviation sector, car manufacturers Renault-Nissan, and Suez Environnement – known for its pro-fracking lobbying. It may be over-compensation for the Anglo-Saxon perception that it’s all orgies and never business in Europe’s most contrarian land. Yes, but why? A low-light of the all-sweeping Yes campaign was a blazing row between Marriage Equality, Yes Equality and Glen on the one hand and Lawyers for Yes, on the other. The forensic ones wanted a focus on the law, in particular to counter the formidably analytical debating of “Dr” Tom Finegan, one-time parliamentary assistant to Ronan Mullen, the caped baron of ‘No’. Indeed the furious thwarted lawyers consider that continuance with the strategy of promoting the human reality of gay marriages and anti-gay discrimination, rather than focusing on adoption, surrogacy and those tiring differences between marriage and civil partnership etc led to the loss of 8% of the vote. The non-lawyers, led ironically by barrister, Noel Whelan, prevailed by sheer numbers. Doing no harm, everywhere only in private now At a recent launch of a barrage of new features, including ‘Google Expeditions’, ‘Google Next on Tap’ and a ‘revamped Google Cardboard’, products that didn’t come up much amid the razzmatazz were Google Plus, its moribund Facebook-following foray – “a social layer across

    Loading

    Read more