Archives

OK

Random entry RSS

Loading

  • Posted in:

    Former FF TD, Ben Briscoe, now votes FG

    by

    The Fianna Fáil veteran tells John Gormley why his old party should merge with the enemy I’ve known Ben Briscoe (77), former dynastic Fianna Fáil TD and Lord Mayor of Dublin, for over twenty years. He has remained a keen observer of politics since he retired as a Fianna Fáil deputy in 2002. I visited him recently in his home in Celbridge to interview him. He is a courteous host. As he escorts me into the house, Ben tells me that he is the owner of five Rhodesian Ridgebacks,  large African dogs used to hunt lions. He says their fearsome reputation is undeserved, but asks me not to look them straight in the eye initially, just to be on the safe side. As the dogs circle and sniff me, I’m looking rigidly into the distance. All is well in the end and one of the females sits on the couch opposite for the entire interview. Briscoe doesn’t think much of journalists. He makes an exception for Sam Smyth, but can’t abide Joe Jackson. “If I saw him on the street I’d be tempted to kick him in the bollocks”. He claims that Jackson deliberately misrepresented his views on gay people in a Hot Press article when Briscoe was Lord Mayor. His views on journalism were also coloured by an encounter with a prominent journalist in the 1960s. He claims this now-deceased Irish Times journalist, who got money from Fianna Fáil for ‘consultancy’, once said to him: “I’m an unprincipled bastard and I’ll do anything for money”. It’s the sort of statement that could have come from the lips of certain Fianna Fáil politicians, which perhaps explains his obvious disenchantment with the party. ‘My disenchantment with Fianna Fail also stems from the fact that a lot of people were also using it as a vehicle to get into politics. It wasn’t because they believed in Fianna Fáil or its traditions. There was no idealism. It was just their way of getting their foot in the door.’ He’s critical too of Mount Street for not discouraging the sort of political nepotism that put a block on new blood coming through. He criticises the practice of ‘paper cumainn’ and claims that the “rot” set into Fianna Fail some time back. He then makes a rather astonishing admission: “I voted Fine Gael” in the last election; and was sorry they didn’t get an overall majority. He did vote too for Fianna Fáil’s Áine Brady for personal reasons. He likes Enda Kenny. “I’m very impressed with the way Kenny is coming across, because he’s coming across with strength. I like the way he looks Adams straight in the eye”. He thinks it is now time to end Civil War politics definitively by having a merger of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. ‘The people have called it a day on Fianna Fáil. There is nothing now to inspire idealism. My feeling is that if Sinn Féin was to moderate they could overtake Fianna Fail.’ He also believes that if Fine Gael were to get an overall majority – something that he and many of his friends would like to see – that Labour could become the main opposition party. When it comes to the presidential election, he’s supporting Gay Mitchell. “I’m supporting him because I know him to be a man of the people.’ He shared a constituency with Gay Mitchell and they got on well together. ‘I had more respect from Fine Gael and Labour than I had from Fianna Fail”. He claims some in his own party made his religion an issue on the door step. The anti-Semitism sickened Briscoe, a man who is very proud of his Jewish heritage. His father, Robert Briscoe,  a founder member of Fianna Fail was the first Jewish Lord Mayor of Dublin and a very popular figure in the United States. Briscoe didn’t like the stance of the last government regarding Israel and claims that the current government is “more pro Israel”. He speaks fondly of his late father. Robert Briscoe reported to Collins in the War of Independence but ended up supporting Dev, a man that Briscoe always liked. The principles and values that informed the new Fianna Fáil party are the same ones that shape Briscoe’s view of politics. “My motivation for this come from what’s best for the country. My father was one of the first forty members. He used to pay the rent for the party when they were in O’Connell street. It was ten shillings a week. The party is not the party that my father founded. The country comes first, then the party”. If a man like Ben Briscoe is saying these things ….then maybe Fianna Fáil does have a problem.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    John Gormley: The problem is the system, not just Fianna Fáil (archive, October 2011)

    by

    Seán Gallagher has become the highest-profile victim of a new type of anti-Fianna-Fáil (FF) McCarthyism. Pressed repeatedly by Miriam O’ Callaghan to condemn his erstwhile colleagues in the Soldiers of Destiny, Gallagher hesitated and tried to dodge. It’s perhaps understandable that Seán Gallagher would have some residual loyalty to his old friends, but his equivocation on the issue didn’t look good. And no doubt the feedback following the presidential debate led  Gallagher  to quickly rethink his position. Political expedience and sheer media pressure forced him to recant and condemn Fianna Fáil. Charlie McCreevey: not alone in embracing neo-liberalism In this new post-FF era there can be no acceptable line other than ‘FF destroyed the country’. Even the hint of a deviation from this neat narrative  is enough to arouse suspicion that you might somehow be a closet FFer. The new one true faith explains everything. And that’s the problem. If that is the entire explanation for our economic problems then we’re really not seeing the full picture. Let’s be clear: Fianna Fáil are guilty of embracing the new, de luxe, no-holds-barred version of capitalism from 1989 onwards. Charlie Mc Creevy outdid the PDs in his enthusiasm for neo-liberalism. All of that is true. But were Fianna fail the only ones guilty of this ? Even a cursory examination of the manifestos of the main parties in 2002 and 2007 tells you that they tried to outdo each other in their free-market fervour. The ‘FF are to blame for everything’ version raises further questions, like how d’you explain what’s occurring in Greece, Spain, Portugal. Italy and beyond? Perhaps Fianna Fáil special advisers have been working quietly behind the scenes all over Europe, instructing governments on how best to wreck an econom!  The anti-FF backlash ensures that the public doesn’t ask the bigger questions, like ‘is it possible, even remotely possible, that the system itself is deeply flawed?’ ‘Is a system based on infinite economic growth, the creation of debt, the exploitation of workers and a dependency on fossil fuels in any way sustainable in the medium or long term?’ But let’s not go there: that’s just a bit too complicated and dangerous! It’s much easier to see Fianna Fáil as the root of every problem. So toxic was the Fianna Fáil brand that even the most outlandish conspiracy theory gained credence. There are still many who believe that the bank guarantee was a Fianna Fáil inside job. It had all the ingredients – banks, builders, bailouts (BBB) – just add the initials FF and you have a very plausible explanation. The corruption of Haughey, Burke, Lawlor and the closeness of Fianna Fáil to big business  led many to conclude that Anglo was saved because it was a Fianna Fáil institution. Even the Nyberg report, which stated that the ECB had put pressure on the Irish government to save the banks, is still conveniently ignored. But can we  ignore what has happened since the election? There has been no discernible change in economic or financial policy. People have discovered that it is Frankfurt’s way and not Labour’s way; people know now that no bondholder will be ‘burned’ unless such a move is first sanctioned by Mr Trichet. Not even the unsecured debt – that part not even covered by the guarantee – can be touched. The major difference between this government and the last is that Fine Gael and Labour have an overwhelming majority which enables them to put through the social-welfare cuts and tax-increases they had promised would never happen. They have, however, delivered on one election promise – to give greater powers to Dáil committtees. Of course, that’s provided that the people approve such a measure in the forthcoming referendum. Any bets on what the committee’s first Inquiry under the new rules will be? How about an Inquiry into how Fianna Fáil ruined the country? A star chamber is born. All over the world, through movements like the ‘indignants’ in Spain or ‘Occupy Wall Street’, people are questioning the system that gave rise to the global economic collapse. But not here where there appears to be only one valid question: ‘Are you now or have you ever been a member of Fianna Fail?’

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Niall Crowley: Civil society must demand greater income equality (October 2011)

    by

    This is a difficult time to be involved in organisations that seek a more equal, environmentally sustainable and participative society. Poverty, unemployment and emigration are increasing. Key public services and welfare provisions are being diminished. Funding for ‘civil society’ is being cut with organisations closing or reducing their work. The political system is increasingly unresponsive to organisations that seek to promote alternatives to current responses to the economic crisis. The media space for public debate is virtually closed to such organisations. Claiming our Future (www.claimingourfuture.ie) is a movement that brings together people from the different parts of civil society committed to equality, environmental sustainability and participation. In this way it is hoped that a civil society force, more powerful than it has been possible to mobilise to date, would emerge with a greater capacity to make an impact. It is based on an understanding that a civil society space is needed where people can identify shared values and positions, explore alternatives to current policies, and test out the political choices being made against this shared value base. The need for such a movement is urgent. A recent study (by the Fondazione Rodolfo DeBenedetti in Milan, with Brian Nolan, of UCD’s College of Human Sciences as one of the editors) found that the percentage of people reporting deprivation of two or more items, out a list of eleven defined as ‘deprivation items’ (Being without heating at some stage in the last year/Unable to afford a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight/Unable to afford to replace any worn out furniture etc, rose from 12% in 2007 to 17% in 2009. The study did find a fall in income inequality as a consequence of recession. The Gini coefficient, which measures it, fell from .32 in 2007 to .29 in 2009. Despite this, the share of household income going to the highest ten per cent stood at a significant 23% in 2009. Furthermore the top 1% of earners continued a long-term upward trend in their earnings. The study warned that a new era of sharp distributional conflicts could now emerge between rich and poor people and between older and young people. The forthcoming budget is likely to reflect this danger in prioritising cuts in public spending over increased taxation of the wealthy. Claiming our Future point out that there are alternatives to what is currently on offer and that there are choices open to Government in framing this budget. The choices that will be made are, however, most likely to benefit the wealthy rather than those living in poverty or on low wages. One key choice will be the balance decided on between taxing the wealthy and cutting public expenditure. The priority should be on increased taxation of wealth and removing tax exemptions that reduce the effective tax rate on the wealthy if a more equal society is to emerge out of the crisis. This taxation would free up resources to protect public services and welfare payments and to create jobs. This choice is vital since previous economic crashes have been found to occur at moments of high levels of income inequality. An IMF analysis also found that spells of economic growth last longer in countries with relatively low levels of income inequality. Higher levels of violence, imprisonment and mental health issues and lower levels of life expectancy, educational attainment and social mobility have been found in countries with higher levels of income inequality. In taking this position Claiming our Future is articulating ideas developed at a ‘national discussion’ it hosted in May in Galway on reducing income inequality. Income inequality was identified as being at the heart of economic crisis and as leading to behaviour that damages societal culture and the planet. People on high incomes hold disproportionate influence. The need to level out income gaps was highlighted. It was considered that a maximum income threshold, set at some ratio to social welfare rates or to the minimum wage, was required. The event concluded that not enough is being done about this issue. Civil society needs to take action to demand greater income equality. The absence of political will was identified as a barrier to change. The December budget provides an important opportunity to challenge this.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    All talk: Ireland’s political discussion sites

    by

    Miriam Cotton surveys the political web forums causing a stir Bondwatch Ireland / The Chattering Magpie 14 Editor: Diarmuid O’Flynn Describe your website/what made you decide to set it up? Thechatteringmagpie14 is a blog of short articles explaining/updating our protest in Ballyhea. BondwatchIreland is about the next 12 bonds due for payment, the ‘Dirty Dozen’ – with details of the individual bonds as they arise. Because of the total lack of coverage/exposure in the mainstream media (print, radio, TV), people don’t know that most of the bank bonds have yet to mature. Over €60bn has still to be paid over the coming three years and more. This blog and protest shines a light on those bonds, a place where people can learn the truth of what’s happening. Even as we’re informed on a weekly basis of more cuts in our already suffering public service, more proposed taxes and levies, our banks – with our money – are paying out on those failed bonds, week after week, month after month, with no attendant publicity. Those on-going payments are a scandal, the on-going lack of major media coverage is also a scandal. This site is an effort to inform those who want to be informed. What are your two favourite political/current affairs sites/blogs and why? NamaWinelake – the most up-to-date, the most concise, the most accessible information on what’s going on in the murky world of Irish finance; and David McWilliams (www.davidmcwilliams.ie) – populist, but his articles are an easy read, and for the most part make eminent good sense. Generally speaking, what value do you think sites like yours offer that mainstream media and news reporting do not? The view from the bottom, with no vested interest, no worries about appealing to the lowest common denominator. What type of reader/user does your site attract? No idea, but probably those who are already concerned about the official imbalance between looking after banks/financial institutions and looking after people. How many registered users do you have? I don’t get into that‚ whoever is there is there, I’m not concerned about numbers. How many visitors and page views would you have in a typical month? Again, no idea, and no idea who I could track this‚ wouldn’t be interested in doing so. Have you ever come under pressure to take down valid stories or posts? How did you deal with it, if so? No. Contact Information: Web: http://bondwatchireland.blogspot.com/ Email: Ballyhea@eircom.net Twitter: @ballyhea14 Comment: An essential blog publishing information about the most critical economic activity affecting the country. Putting the national news media to shame. Broadsheet.ie Editor: John Ryan Describe your website/what made you decide to set it up? It’s a rolling news site with jokes uploaded every 15 minutes Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm with sporadic posting through the night and at weekends. It was set up to provide a news source for the bewildered by the bewildered. What information/stories, if any, have first been published on your site, ahead of the mainstream media? There have been a few. Sometimes they even credited us! Which was lovely. What are your two favourite political/current affairs sites/blogs and why? Right at this moment I like NamaWinelake and TheStory.ie. Generally speaking, what value do you think sites like yours offer that mainstream media/news reporting do not? A cynical and jaded worldview. What type of reader/user does your site attract? The urban or rural stoner of all ages. How many registered users do you have? None. How many visitors and page views would you have in a typical month? Visitors: 615,000, page views: 1.5 million Have you ever come under pressure to take down valid stories or posts? How did you deal with it, if so? If it is completely spurious we try when possible to print the solicitors’ letters on the site in an effort to ridicule them and their prose style. Contact Information: Web: http://broadsheet.ie Email: Use contact form on website Twitter: @broadsheet_ie Comment: Ireland’s answer to The Onion? Witty, sharp and exquisitely presented. Priority is entertainment and delectation over heavy politics, which incidentally appear to be broadly libertarian. Could use an ‘About us’ and a ‘Mission Statement’. The Cedar Lounge Revolution Administrator: Dónal Mac an éala Describe your website/what made you decide to set it up? The Cedar Lounge is a left-wing blog with a core group of four regular contributors supplemented by a broader group of up to ten irregular contributors. It deals with politics, culture, political economy and other matters. The decision to establish it was that the original core group (which has changed a bit over the years) having been through the bear-pit that is Politics.ie wanted to establish a space which was neutral, in the sense of not being party-political, but which was overtly left of centre, using the term ‘left’ in its broadest definition (including social-democrat, further left, republican, socialist, feminist, anarchist and so on) in a courteous and welcoming environment for all those interested in politics, particularly those of the left, but embracing those from the centre and right also. We also wanted to be able to discuss issues in greater detail than in the forum context. And we were sick of trolls, negativity, etc, etc. It wasn’t that we were unwilling to hear voices who differed, but we wanted to hear serious voices who would respect difference rather than simply see it as an excuse for attacks. What information/stories, if any, have first been published on your site, ahead of the mainstream media? Only one, where we hinted at the nationalisation of Anglo-Irish which I’d heard about some hours previously through knowing people linked to those making the decision. But that’s it. We’ve never been interested in news-breaking or news-making but rather commentary on news. We’re not journalists so we don’t see our function as supplanting journalism but rather running parallel to (or slightly behind) it. What are your two favourite political/current affairs sites/blogs and why? Michael Taft’s (Economist for the Unite Trade Union) Notes on the Front (notesonthefront.typepad.com) – political

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    The web’s political rainbow (October 2011)

    by

    A vibrant network of websites is publishing information and debating issues that Ireland’s mainstream media should have but did not, writes Miriam Cotton The citadel of mainstream Irish journalism has been disturbed by the arrival of interactive, internet-based news and discussion forums that anyone can participate in. A vibrant network of websites has appeared and while they could be as much criticised as praised, many are a serious challenge to the status quo. And most of them are free. This phenomenon is not generally liked by the Irish media establishment which has had to make concessions to it by putting its own offerings online – albeit with strictly controlled opportunities for interaction with the hoi polloi, if there is any at all. There’s a lot of harrumphing about the need to protect professional journalism which in reality may be as much about a desire to keep control of the news agenda in certain hands as it is about any threat to the quality of journalism. Despite this, the mainstream media have been compelled to acknowledge facts and opinions they would much rather have ignored were it not for the healthy debates taking place on internet forums that frequently expose gaping holes in media coverage. Anyone who doubts this should visit the Ballyhea Bondwatch Ireland site, the NamaWinelake blog or The Story.ie to mention just a few of the sites which have stolen a march on mainstream journalism by researching and publishing information that the mainstream should have, but did not. A survey of some of the main political news and discussion websites follows below but first a few things to be aware of for the uninitiated web-surfer. Most of these sites allow comments or news stories to be published by anyone who thinks they have something to say. The quality of what is published can therefore vary a lot. Keep an open mind and remember that joining the discussion is very often like taking a walk down Main Street – every sort of person is there. Some of it, it must be acknowledged, is just plain dross – and some of it is brilliant and original. Sometimes people make the mistake of thinking the owners or moderators of a website are responsible for or endorse the content of posts and comments when they do not. On PoliticalWorld.org, Politics.ie or Indymedia Ireland, for example, the moderators have no idea what will be on the site until it is posted live by contributing authors, when it can immediately be read by hundreds of visitors. What could be more open or editorially interference-free? Anything defamatory or untrue will typically be deleted as soon as it is spotted – website owners have to be vigilant about this and the good ones have strict guidelines for contributing. The bad ones quickly lose credibility – and visitors. Another feature of the internet news world is that many, if not most, posters use unusual pseudonyms. This lends an anarchic feel to the experience, the virtual equivalent of a masked ball at which people identify themselves by all sorts of weird and wonderful names: ‘Twentymajor’, ‘ComfortablySmug’ and ‘SwearyMary’, for instance. Many people – especially politicians – dislike having comments directed at them by anonymous critics. A tough skin is needed if you are likely to find yourself the butt of general ire. Labour Party supporters are now entering the cold and hostile internet waters (The Straits of Minor Coalition Partners) where the Green Party’s ship recently went down with all hands. On the plus side, the criticism is mostly a reasonable calling-to-account of politicians and others, usually given a much easier ride by mainstream journalists who need to keep political sources on-side if they are to stay on the inside track of the politico-corporate establishment. So what does mainstream journalism make of all this? MIT Media Lab’s Nigel Negroponte has been widely and approvingly quoted by colleagues, criticising what he calls the spectacle of the ‘Daily Me’ – a pejorative directed at users of the internet who seek out the news sources that interest them the most, disobediently rejecting the pre-digested news menu of the mainstream. But what about the ‘Daily Them’ which until the advent of the internet had complete control over what the vast majority got to hear and read? In Ireland this was and still is particularly problematic among purveyors of traditional news media. The small, stifling world of Irish journalism is now so embedded with political and corporate PR power that the resulting slant on its reportage is as unnoticed and uncommented on as breathing to all bar a few of them, regardless of how objective they almost all so earnestly believe they are. As to the quality of internet websites, mainstream journalists need to look to the mote in their own collective eye. Isn’t an awful lot of journalism luridly tabloid and notoriously riddled with mistakes and misinformation? Where broadsheet journalism is concerned, doesn’t the dull agreement that crosses all political boundaries operate in effect – aside altogether from its own inaccuracies and omissions – as a form of censorship against other perspectives? Is it possible to distinguish the observations of Fionnan Sheahan, Matt Cooper, Laura Noonan, Dan O’ Brien, Brendan Keenan, Sean Collins, Sarah McInerney, Ivan Yates, Áine Kerr and screeds of others of our most respected mainstream commentators? They are almost all, essentially, of one view-point. This anodyne consensus is not unique to Irish journalism. As the world-renowned journalist, John Pilger once reported: “During the Cold War a group of Russian journalists toured the United States. On the final day of their visit, they were asked by their hosts for their impressions. ‘I have to tell you’, said their spokesman, ‘that we were astonished to find after reading all the newspapers and watching TV, that all the opinions on all the vital issues were by and large, the same. To get that result in our country, we imprison people, we tear out their fingernails. Here, you don’t have that. What’s

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    NOTICE TO TURF CUTTERS (Tony Lowes’ Blog)

    by

    An appeal from Friends of the Irish Turf Cutters not to take the fall for Government inaction and incompetence and go jail because successive elected officials and civil servants have undermined their way of life. Why should they punish themselves by going to jail when it is the Ministers of the time and the civil servants – many of them still there – who should be suffering for the lose of their traditional rights? False hope was what they have been given – and up the garden path they have been led.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Niall Crowley says merging equality and human rights bodies will add no value

    by

    The minister for Justice, Equality and Defence – Alan Shatter – has announced a working group to advise him on the merging of the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission. There is no evidence that this merger reflects any commitment to the necessary renewal of the equality and human rights infrastructure. It seems to be just another instance of austerity politics. The Minister’s announcement reflects this in referring to the need for a ‘streamlined’ body. The merger is presented as a means to save public money on two bodies deemed to have ‘overlapping functions’. The new Government seems determined to finish out the project initiated by its predecessor to neuter our equality and human rights infrastructure. When this merger was first mooted by the Minister in September, concern was raised that the roles foreseen for the merged body made no ref- erence to providing legal support to those taking cases of discrimination or cases in relation to human rights abuses. The Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission have been remarkably reticent about providing such support in recent times. The Authority reported a 78% reduction in cases supported in 2010 as compared with 2008. The Commission reported only one case supported in 2010, It is nonetheless a vital function for the effectiveness of the infrastructure. The announcement of the working group states that the new merged body will retain the statutory powers and duties of the existing bodies. However this is undermined when the terms of reference ask the working group to offer a view whether greater use of codes of practice or strategic court cases might achieve the best outcome. The terms of ref- erence disturbingly note that ‘court cases tend to involve the State in one way or another’. The composition of the working group is crucial in such a context. It is confined to members of the Boards of the two Bodies and officials from the Department. There are no representatives of civil society such as trade unions who play a key role in implementing equality legislation or the Equality and Rights Alliance which has done detailed work on this issue. The lack of ambition from the Government is evident in the envisaged role for the new body ‘encouraging’ public bodies to put respect for human rights and equality at the heart of their policies and practices. This is a remarkable dilution of the commitment in the Programme for Government to ‘require’ public bodies to have due regard to equality and human rights in carrying out their functions. There are lessons from mergers of equality and human rights bodies in other jurisdictions, such as Britain and Denmark. Mergers that are contrived to facilitate financial savings degenerate into turf wars between two traditions that are significantly different. They result in confusion rather than coherence. Mergers that fail to evolve and make coherent the powers to promote equality and protect human rights result in a loss of focus rather than increased effectiveness. The renewal of the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority, after the depredations of the previous Government, should have been a priority of the new Government. It does not appear to be. Five tests will demonstrate whether renewal or further retrenchment is proposed in this merger proposal. Renewal requires: •Retention of the current powers of both bodies alongside a levelling up of the powers that relate to the promotion of equality and to the protection of human rights. •Broadening of the remit for the bodies such that socio-economic status is a protected ground for discrimination and a focus for promoting equality and human rights. •Introduction of a positive duty on public sector bodies to have due regard to human rights and equality in carrying out their functions. A commitment to independence in Board appointment, staff recruitment and the body’s accountability. •Allocation of adequate resources.

    Loading

    Read more