Filed under Eacnamaíocht (Economics) …

Apr 05 2012
4 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

In Europe No One Can Hear You Scream…

Great article over on the Cedar Lounge Revolution on the autocratic instincts of the European Union elites now being played out in Greece:

“One has to wonder at the logic of an EU approach which argues for austerity as a path to growth. But one has to wonder further at an EU approach which seems to push past austerity into something close to an imposed penury as a path to growth. One can accept the need for certain changes in the Greek economy from the status quo ante while simultaneously considering that what is being imposed is profoundly negative, and not simply for Greece but also for the contemporary European project.

On almost every metric, the democratic – given the imposition of a technocratic administration in Athens, the social – given the abysmal levels of austerity being imposed, the logical – given the deeply counter-productive nature of that austerity, the EU and ECB have failed that state.

When the potential outcomes of these failures are so significant as to fundamentally weaken a modern Europe advanced democracy and perhaps with worse ahead, then the sense that there’s something fundamentally wrong with the direction European leaders have taken is impossible to evade.”

Meanwhile Dole TV brings this all-to accurate satire of the upcoming referendum on the so-called Fiscal Compact Treaty:

Related articles
Tagged , ,
Mar 22 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

The Mahon Report – A Plague On All Your Houses

The Mahon Tribunal has finally published its long-awaited report and like the lifting of the proverbial rock all sorts of nastiness has been uncovered lurking underneath. While the media focus will be on rump Fianna Fáil and An Taoiseach na Chófra, Bertie Ahern, don’t let this distract you from the other main conclusions of Mahon and co. It suits much of our still intact Post-Colonial Ascendancy, the members of the political establishment and their many willing helpers in the national media, to blur the truth by throwing up all sorts of drama to hide their own culpability in the “mafiaization” of the Irish state from the 1970s onward.

But look at the facts and figures, the long list of politicians investigated by the Tribunal in its search for the truth behind the repeated allegations of corrupt or suspect practices in local government in the 1980s and ’90s, specifically in the rezoning of land in Quarryvale, in west Dublin. In some ways the report is almost a who’s-who guide to notable people in Irish local and national politics at that time. Some of the names are startling. More so as it quickly becomes clear that this is not simply a tale of just one political party’s malfeasance but a tangled web of petty corruption that dragged in all the major political parties in Ireland – and in just one small region of the country.

One has to ask: if just one local authority in the media-cockpit that is Dublin was that bad, what was the rest of the country like? And what is it like now?

TheJournal.ie carries a list of local councillors named in the report, many of whom are well known figures, with details of their activities. It makes for sober reading:

“SEAN ARDAGH (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that, Ardagh had been considered an “important and valued supporter of the Quarryvale project from 1992 onwards”, and had received relatively modest political contributions from Frank Dunlop and developer Owen O’Callaghan.

It also noted that Ardagh had been “less than frank with the Tribunal as to the extent of his contact” with Dunlop and O’Callaghan…

CLLR MICK BILLANE (DL)

The Tribunal reported that – as a matter of probability – Cllr Billane had at some point met with and was lobbied by Dunlop and/or O’Callaghan.

Following a meeting in October 1997, O’Callaghan provided a charitable donation of IR£10,000 to Citywise, a registered charity which provided services to city centre youth.  The Tribunal was satisfied that Billane had secured this contribution at the meeting, despite his testimony that he had no recollection of the meeting itself and only “vaguely” recalled his involvement in securing the charitable donation

CLLR CATHAL BLAND (FG)

Cllr Boland told the Tribunal that he had received a sum of IR£4,000 in cash from Dunlop by way of an election contribution from anonymous donors on 11 November 1992.

Boland said was not lobbied by Dunlop in relation to the Quarryvale project and had had no concerns about taking the money from him, even though he knew he was a lobbyist, because he had always found Dunlop to be upright and had considered him “a pillar of society.”

Boland said that he absented himself from the 17 December vote because he had been approached by another party asking him to vote against the plan and offered £500 for doing so. He said that did not accept the money, but still he felt he had been compromised by the incident…

CLLR PETER BRADY (FG)

On 30 March 1998, the Tribunal Counsel noted an interview with Alan Dukes TD, in which Dukes alleged that Cllr Peter Brady, had told him that Cllr Brian Fleming had been offered £100,000 if he (Fleming) could ‘deliver’ the Fine Gael vote to secure the rezoning of the Quarryvale lands”.

On the issue of the conflict between Cllr Brady and Alan Dukes, the Tribunal found in favour of Dukes evidence. As such, it concluded that at some point between 1995 and 1998, Brady did relay to Dukes that Fleming had been offered IR£100,000 to deliver the Fine Gael vote in support of Quarryvale.

LIAM T COSGRAVE (FG)

The Tribunal was satisfied that Dunlop gave IR£2,000 to Cllr Cosgrave around May or June 1991, and concluded that the payment was “in all probability” solicited by Cosgave in the course of being lobbied by Mr Dunlop in the period leading up to the Quarryvale rezoning vote.

The Tribunal said that it believed that at the time at which Cosgrave was solicited and accepted the election contribution, he was aware of Dunlop’s ongoing role in relation to Quarryvale – and described his conduct as “improper”.

The Tribunal accepted Dunlop’s account of having met Cosgrave at Newtownpark Avenue in Blackrock on 11 November 1992, and that on this date he had given cash donations of IR£2,000 (later returned) and IR£4,000 respectively to Cllrs Pat Rabbitte and Cathal Boland.

MICHAEL J COSGRAVE (FG)

Tribunal satisfied that M J Cosgrave solicited and received payment of IR£1,000 during the time of his January 1993 Seanad Election campaign…

The Tribunal described Cosgrave’s request for money and his acceptance of it “compromised his required disinterested performance of his duties as an elected representative, and was improper”.

LIAM CREAVEN (FF)

Creaven acknowledged having been lobbied by Dunlop, stating that he had been lobbied both for and against rezoning.

In response to the Tribunal’s inquiries as to whether or not he had received any payments in relation to Quarryvale, he said that he had received a “hamper” from the parties involved in the Quarryvale Shopping Centre.

JIM DALY (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that Cllr Daly was lobbied by Dunlop in relation to Quarryvale and that it was “probable” that Daly requested an election contribution, given the imminence of the local election. However, it noted that – whether or not Daly had solicited the contribution – he had accepted it in the knowledge that Dunlop was a lobbyist for Quarryvale.

PAT DUNNE (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that Dunne solicited money from Dunlop for the 1991 local election campaign…

It accepted Dunlop’s evidence that he had given Dunne a sum of IR£15,000, and was satisfied that this payment was corrupt.

MARY ELLIOTT (FG)

Elliott said she had not attended any public meetings in connection with the re-zoning of Quarryvale other than Council meetings, but acknowledged that she had been “lobbied by local organisations”…

She said that she never received any payment or donations from parties involved in the project and, while admitting that she had dined in the company of Dunlop and O’Callaghan…

JIM FAHEY (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that Fahey solicited a payment of IR£2,000, and that such solicitation and acceptance of funds had been improper.

TONY FOX (FF)

Cllr Tony Fox was identified by Dunlop as a recipient of £2,000 in cash during the local election campaign.

CYRIL GALLAGHER (FF)

Despite Dunlop’s testimony that there had been no express link between a IR£1,000 payment to Cllr Cyril Gallagher and Quarryvale, the Tribunal was satisfied that Gallagher had been ware of Dunlop’s role as a lobbyist for the project.

SEAN GILBRIDE (FF)

The Tribunal said it was satisfied that the “primary purpose” of Cllr Sean Gilbride’s decision to take a leave of absence from his teacher’s post and place himself on O’Callaghan’s payroll was “to enable Gilbride devote himself on a near full time basis to promoting the Quarryvale project for Mr O’Callaghan”.

It described as “incredible” the suggestion that the political ambitions of an elected councillor could be properly served by that councillor placing himself on the payroll of a developer at a time when that same developer was promoting the rezoning of lands…

RICHARD GREENE (IND)

The Tribunal was satisfied that a cash donation of IR£500 received by Greene had been given to him by O’Callaghan via Dunlop, and the developer’s “generosity to Cllr Greene was not unconnected to his zoning ambitions for Quarryvale”.

TOM HAND (FG)

The Tribunal was satisfied that Dunlop paid Cllr Hand IR£20,000 in cash in two tranches of £10,000 each specifically in return for his support on Quarryvale, and that the payment was corrupt.

FINBARR HANRAHAN (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that, during the course of the 1992 general election, Dunlop in all probability paid Cllr Fibarr Hanrahan either IR£2,000 or IR£2,500, with the principle reason for the payment being to secure his support for Quarryvale. It concluded that such a payment was “improper”.

JACK LARKIN (FF)

The Tribunal concluded that a payment of IR£1,000 to Cllr Jim Larkin during a period around the 1991 Local Elections had been made. It was satisfied that a request for the money had probably been made by Larkin after he had been lobbied to support Quarryvale…

DONAL LYDON (FF)

The Tribunal rejected Cllr Donal Lydon’s evidence that he did not solicit a payment of IR£1,000 in or about May 1991, and concluded that such a payment had indeed been made between 16 May 1991 and 6 June 1991.

MARIAN MCGEENIS (FF)

The Tribunal noted Cllr Marian McGennis’ “significant role” in relation to the Quarryvale rezoning proposal over the course of 1991 to 1993, and also noted that – in her initial dealings with the Tribunal – she had not been forthcoming about the extent of her involvement with Dunlop and O’Callaghan.

The report was satisfied that McGeenis solicited a IR£1,400 cheque from Dunlop in July 1991, and that over a period of two months had been the recipient of a total of IR£6,500 from individuals closely associated with the Quarryvale issue.

COLM MCGRATH (FF)

The Tribunal was satisfied that McGrath solicited a payment of IR£10,000 that was “in all probability” requested on the basis of the assistance he was giving O’Callaghan.

It added that further payments of IR£10,700 and IR£20,000 could neither be described as political donations or “loans”, as had been suggested, and that such payments were corrupt.

OLIVIA MITCHELL (FG)

The Tribunal said it was satisfied that Cllr Mitchell received a sum of IR£500 in cash from Dunlop at the time of the 1992 General Election.

TOM MORRISSEY (FG)

The Tribunal confirmed that Cllr Tom Morrissey had remained “staunchly opposed” to the rezoning of Quarryvale as a town centre at all times.

The Tribunal was also satisfied that there had been no improper motivation from any party in relation to Morrissey’s firm producing diaries for Dunlop’s firm at a cost of IR£377.52…

ANN ORMONDE (FF)

According to the report, Cllr Ann Ormonde received in total at least IR£1,650 from Dunlop between the period January 1993 to 1998 – in the knowledge that he was a lobbyist in circumstances in which she herself was involved.

GUSS O’CONNELL (IND)

The report noted that the absence of Cllr Guss O’Connell’s from the County Council on 17 December 1992, the date on which votes on a motion relating to Quarryvale were cast, had been beneficial to O’Callaghan.

However, it was not satisfied that this situation had been “orchestrated”…

JOHN O’HALLORAN (LAB/IND)

The Tribunal’s report noted that Cllr John OHalloran “had not been, in general, frank with the Tribunal” in the manner in which he responded to requests for information in relation to payments made by Dunlop and O’Callaghan.

In 1993, O’Halloran received an IR£5,000 cheque from O’Callaghan/Riga – and the Tribunal pointed out that, just weeks later, he was one of five signatories to a letter to the Minister for Finance in which tax designation was sought for Quarryvale.

O’Halloran also received a payment of IR£250 in or around the time that he signed a motion on Quarryvale, and that he did on occasion receive small payments of IR£500 over the course of the making of the Development Plan 1991 – 1993.

The Tribunal was satisfied that O’Halloran solicited a payment of IR£2,500 in 1996 from Dunlop…

PAT RABBITTE (DL)

The Tribunal accepted Dunlop’s evidence that Cllr Pat Rabbitte had been listed as a recipient of IR£3,000 in cash in 1992, and that that sum had later been returned to him by means of a cheque.

THERESE RIDGE (FG)

The report described Cllr Therese Ridge as not merely a staunch supporter of the Quarryvale campaign but also a person who “actively engaged” in providing advice in relation to the strategy generally, and specifically in relation to motions relevant to Quarryvale”.

The report added that she was “handsomely rewarded”  for her efforts – both in the form of cash donations totalling IR£1,000 and by Dunlop taking care of printing and other costs associated with her election campaigns.

COLM TYNDALL (PD)

The Tribunal was satisfied Tyndal had been lobbied by O’Callghan in relation to the Quarryvale rezoning proposal – and that Tyndal (on behalf of his company Marine & General Insurance Ltd) had likewise lobbied O’Callaghan for his company to be appointed insurance broker to companies associated with O’Callaghan.

The report concluded that Tyndal had exploited his position as an elected councillor in circumstances which benefited a company with which he was closely associated…

Tyndal testified that he could not confirm whether he received a donation of IR£500 from O’Callaghan in 1999…

GV WRIGHT  (FF)

In relation to a payment of IR£10,000 by Dunlop and O’Callaghan to Cllr GV Wright in November 1992, the Tribunal said it was satisfied that the motivation for such a payment was to “ensure Wright’s ongoing support for the Quarryvale project.”

Reading through the report, the all too familiar names, businesses and organisations that crop up again and again and again, one is reminded of a variation of that old curse: a plague on all your houses.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , , , ,
Jan 27 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Enda “My Oirish Brings All The Paddies To The Yard” Kenny Strikes Yet Again!

An Taoiseach na nOirish, Enda “Paddy Wants To Know” Kenny, strikes again. A man who personifies everything that is “Oirland”, a pathetic Anglo-American wannabe nation. So stick your Ireland, I’ll take Éire.

Tagged , , , ,
Jan 20 2012
5 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Troika Bagman Gets A Grilling!

Veteran Irish journalist Vincent Brown takes on the Troika bagman, Klaus Masuch, at the EU-ECB-IMF Press Conference in Dublin with some questions the Frankfurt Eurocrat would clearly prefer not to answer (like, why are the people of Ireland paying for the financial chicanery of German, French and British banks and lending houses?). Apparently Barbara Nolan, Director of the European Commission Representation in Ireland (god, they love their fancy titles don’t they?), would prefer if those questions weren’t asked either and judging from the reactions around Brown it would seem that much of the so-called Irish media would agree.

Irish journalists challenging the establishment consensus? Don’t be silly. They are the establishment!

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Jan 10 2012
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

EU And IMF Policy In Ireland – To Hell Or To Canada!

Though the figures are still being compiled it seems that 2010-2011 saw around 150,000 people emigrate from Ireland, roughly 80,000 of who were Irish citizens. 2012 is expected to see a further 75,000 go of whom at least 40,000 or more are expected be Irish (in fact, given recent revelations and claims, the figures are probably going to be far higher). Britain, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are the main destinations for our new Diaspora. And the reasons for this flood of people from Ireland? Mass unemployment, social welfare cuts, economic stagnation (or rather, depression), and EU and IMF dictated austerity programs.

So, with no work at home (and what little work there is only available overseas) what is the EU-IMF’s latest plan for the good citizens of Ireland? Well according to the Irish Times it is this:

“Two separate analyses by the EU Commission and the International Monetary Fund published before Christmas have disclosed details of proposed measures for the 2013 budget, which is unprecedented for Ireland. A total of €3.5 billion in savings are planned; €1.25 billion in new taxes and €2.25 billion in cuts.

The analysis has also criticised aspects of Government policy, including its decision to make larger than expected reductions in the capital budget as well as the lack of punitive sanctions for unemployed people who refuse to seek work.

The EU Commission, in an implicit criticism, stressed that “financial sanctions for unco-operative unemployed” was still very rare in Ireland.”

If it is all but impossible to find employment at home and social welfare payments are to be soon subject to punitive reductions or termination, what choice will there be but for even greater numbers of Irish citizens to leave the country to seek employment elsewhere? And what will we call this new policy of the supranational European state? Economic ethnic cleansing? Or will we simply become a trading colony for others, with Irish people reduced to the role of house-servants, waiters and cleaners?

Meanwhile, in Germany, the side-benefits of the citizens of Ireland paying off the debts of German banks and finance houses continue:

“German unemployment fell more than forecast in December as exports of cars and machinery boomed and one of the mildest winters on record helped support jobs in construction.

The number of people out of work fell a seasonally adjusted 22,000 to 2.89 million, the Federal Labour Agency said today.

With the exception of a 6,000 drop in October, German unemployment has now fallen in every month since June 2009. The average jobless total in unadjusted terms for 2011 squeezed below the 3 million mark at 2.97 million, the lowest since 1991…”

Which makes one wonder, at what point will the people of Ireland make a stand and say enough is enough? Or have we, like the citizens of some petty Third World dictatorship, been reduced to the level of sycophants and thralls, our thinking made infantile by the political and media elites which rule over us?

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
Jan 04 2012
4 Comments
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

RTÉ Should Be TG4 – And Here’s Why

Lecturer and author Niamh Hourigan discusses TG4, the Irish language television channel, in the Irish Times with some interesting, if debatable, points:

“Although fully independent of RTÉ since 2007, the national broadcaster continues to play a significant role in TG4 through the provision of news and other programming. When my book Escaping the Global Village , which dealt with the campaign to establish the broadcaster was published in 2003, it was already clear it had become a force for innovation on the Irish media landscape. The service had transformed the image of Irish television and introduced new programme formats and work practices which were quickly copied by other broadcasters.

A critical point was reached in 1999 when the station changed its name from TnaG to TG4, positioning itself as the fourth major television service in Ireland. The schedule was also revamped, with more primetime slots devoted to English-language programming, and with less popular Irish language programmes being positioned around these sure-fire audience winners. Sixteen years on from its initial launch, it was inevitable the pace of innovation would slow as the service moved to maturity. Yet the resoundingly positive public response to the TG4 general election debate between the three party leaders last February illustrated how firmly the station has established itself as a player.”

Most of this is true and Hourigan later examines the station’s positive impact on children’s’ programming in Ireland (despite facing tough competition from English language rivals, principally of course the cheap British and American imports broadcast on RTÉ). However her claim that it would be difficult for TG4 to compete in the area of current affairs programming with RTÉ’s Primtime or TV3’s Vincent Brown Tonight is less convincing. What difficulties exist in this area are largely due to budgetary restraints more than anything else and it is arguable that a Dublin-based news studio for TG4 would have a positive impact on its overall news and current affairs output. Dublin is the nation’s capital and the de facto centre for most national politics (and most news stories); the lack of a Dublin-based centre for TG4 is a severe handicap to its growth and development. Another liability is its reliance on RTÉ for its news programming. Contracting out to RTÉ has detracted from the station’s independence and the plurality of views in the national media and this can only be rectified by the network establishing a completely separate news and current affairs division.

Niamh Hourigan then tackles the thorny, and frequently misunderstood, issue of bilingualism.

“Fulfilling its public service remit to broadcast programmes in the Irish language will always be a hugely complex task for TG4 because attitudes to the language are so complex.

The tensions were very evident during the recent controversy about the exclusive broadcasting of a Leinster-Munster Pro 12 League rugby game on TG4. Former Irish rugby international Neil Francis was publicly critical, saying: “I have no idea what commentators or the analysts are saying, and I have no idea whether they are any good or not – and I suspect 99.5 per cent of the people who had to watch the match on the channel didn’t either.”

The key source of the tension here was the exclusive rights of TG4 to the game. Here in another form was compulsion – Irish citizens being forced to grapple with the Irish language – and it was clear a considerable proportion of them didn’t like it.”

This is a highly tendentious and somewhat partisan argument (and it is by no means clear that the proportion who objected was “considerable” – vocal maybe, and with ready access to the English language media establishment in the country but by no means a majority). TG4 is an Irish language television network in Ireland, the same way that TV3 is an English language network in Ireland (and in this case, a British owned one to boot). Indeed, with the creation of TG4 we have seen RTÉ, Ireland’s national public service broadcaster, all but abandon Irish language programming on its TV channels. Yet no arguments are made that the 42% of the population that identify themselves as fluent or partial Irish speakers should be catered for on these TV stations through bilingual programming. Are RTÉ and TV3 suddenly going to be “forced” to provide 42% of their output in Irish? Hardly.

Yet it is seen as quiet acceptable that an Irish language channel – the only Irish language channel – should be pressurised into accommodating English speaking viewers – who are already catered for with three English language TV channels (not to mention dozens of international English language broadcasters freely available on a wide range of platforms). This is yet another argument for positive discrimination in favour of English speakers when negative discrimination against Irish speakers is widespread and institutionalised throughout the state.

TG4 is an Irish speaking TV station for an Irish speaking audience, the exact same way that RTÉ and TV3 are English speaking TV stations for an English speaking audience. To argue that it must also become (as it has to some extent) a bilingual channel, when no such restrictions are placed on those channels which broadcast exclusively in English, is simply unfair and unbalanced. Or worse.

If anything TG4, nearly two decades on, should be moving away from bilingualism and the broadcasting of English language programming. It should be concentrating on producing indigenous programming (which its rivals have largely abandoned except for a steady diet of cheap, trash television) and the use of subtitling and dubbing for non-Irish language shows and movies. It should make standard the use of dual language audio channels (as is common in many bilingual nations) and expand its online presence. The separation from RTÉ should be completed by ending the supply of programming from the “national” broadcaster and instead the production of all domestic programming should be in-house or from the independent sector (a very positive and productive source as it is. In fact, as has been frequently stated, there would be no viable independent television production in Ireland without TG4!).

Though it is regarded as sacrosanct by many, the present headquarters of TG4 in Baile na hAbhann, in the west of Ireland should be reviewed. At the very least a studio complex, even a relatively modest one, should be created in Dublin and the news and current affairs department must be located there. In the area of public service radio broadcasting in Irish TG4 is surely the logical organisation to turn to. Raidió na Gaeltachta (RnaG), for reasons which mystify most people, remains under the control of RTÉ. As an Irish language radio station its treatment in the RTÉ structure is simply abysmal. Underfunded, undersourced, poorly ran and structured, it is the (deliberately) forgotten arm of the network.

RnaG must be liberated from the dead hand of Montrose and this can only come through an amalgamation with TG4. A single Irish language television and radio network, with a unified corporate structure and image, would provide the greatest value for money and service to viewers and listeners. What we have now is a mess, a national broadcaster that broadcasts almost exclusively in English controlling an Irish speaking radio station, when an Irish speaking TV station could do the job, and probably double the return in terms of investment and resources. The uniting of TG4 with RnaG would create a mutually supportive, symbiotic organisation with a cross-fertilization of audiences and programming.

It is time we faced up to the facts of where we really are in terms of Ireland’s media organisations. RTÉ is Ireland’s national English language public service broadcaster on television and radio. TG4, with RnaG, must become Ireland’s national Irish language public service broadcaster on television and radio. This is the only way forward that makes sound financial, organisational and broadcasting sense.

Of course, if we were really sensible, and really concerned about more bang for our tax-paying buck, we would leave English language broadcasting in Ireland entirely to the private sector (with suitable regulations to ensure Irish ownership of the media and guaranteed levels of quality and news, documentary and drama output). Pubic service broadcasting would then be entirely through the Irish language and RTÉ would be a monolingual Irish broadcaster. The freeing up of advertising revenue in English would create a secure income stream for the independent English language broadcasters who would no longer have to appeal to the lowest common denominator in terms of TV output in order to ensure their survival (an especially sensible move as broadcasters outside of Ireland have now come to dominate our domestic market through services on cable, satellite and the internet). Such a move might well spell a renaissance for English language broadcasting, on TV and radio, in Ireland.

Likewise, for Irish language broadcasting the full weight, depth of experience and resources of RTÉ would transform its fortunes. With two television channels (RTÉ 1 and 2) and three radio channels (Radio 1, 2FM and RnaG) the scope for growth and development would be enormous (the current, entirely wasteful provision of half-hearted digital TV and radio channels could be dropped). The revenue lost by broadcasting in Irish alone, including restrictions on carrying only Irish language advertising, would be partially replaced by rolling the budget and assets of TG4 back into the RTÉ structure.

Other reforms could include the dropping of the ineffective and increasingly irrelevant TV licence fee (for which An Post charges an astonishing 20 million euros a year to administer yet which fails to collect millions of euros each year from people or businesses that refuse to pay or otherwise dodge payment). Like some other nations, in the age of multiplatform devices, where a licence for a “television set” is simply an anachronism, direct state funding, overseen by a fully independent body, is the only sensible way forward. A budget of 170 million euros a year would provide an entirely adequate public service broadcasting network for Ireland. And all through the medium of the Irish language.

That is the logical, cost-effective way forward. So don’t expect it to happen. Ever.

Related articles
Tagged , , , , , ,
Dec 30 2011
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Rising Boats, Trickle Down Economics And The Politics Of Regression

Another entry for my “Only In Ireland” series, this time thanks to Fine Gael’s Brian Hayes TD, with an entirely delusional piece given pride of place in the equally delusional FG Sunday Independent under the headline of the year, “A rising tide will lift all our boats!”:

“In 1959, on taking power at a bleak time in Irish history, Fianna Fail Taoiseach Sean Lemass noted that he believed “national progress of any kind depends largely on an upsurge of patriotism. . . diverted towards constructive purposes”.

We live, in terms of national morale at least, in a similarly dark age.

But similar challenges can sometimes require slightly different responses. In our case whilst the giddy optimism of the final years of the Celtic Tiger may have turned out to be a mirage, the antidote to that exaggerated optimism will not be provided by the current overdose of pessimism.

This Government faces many challenges but one of the most critical ones of all is to generate an upsurge of spontaneous optimism, or what John Maynard Keynes famously called ‘animal spirits’, which was the most positive feature of the Tiger.”

Surely most rational people now believe that the main features that formed the “animal spirits” of the Celtic Tiger era were greed, selfishness, corruption and vice? Are these the qualities a senior politician in this state should express admiration for? And the irony of a Fine Gael minister quoting a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach? How meaningless the so-called “Civil War” divisions of our two-party system, and ever more so since the latter decades of the 20th century. The Fine Fáil establishment remains the same, whatever representative of it is in power. However, Hayes in not finished in his homily to cliché just yet.

“…now that we have had our period of mourning and denial, it is time to begin the process of national resurgence by embracing a new policy of what I would call realistic optimism.

For realistic optimism to work, the first thing this Government must do is to actually fulfil the promises made to the electorate.”

Hmmm. Really? Like, say, the promises in the Fine Gael election manifesto to oppose any iniquitous forms of taxation such as a “flat rate” charge?

“Honesty requires us to admit that in areas such as banking reform and the debt crisis we continue to depend on what happens in Europe. But the mandate for widespread political and public sector reform is entirely within our control.

After eight months in government we have already come up with more than 200 concrete proposals in our public sector reform plan with specific timelines. And from procurement to reducing the size of the public service by 12 per cent over five years, much of what the Government wants to do goes well beyond the Croke Park agreement.

It has to if we are going to get out of this mess.”

So banking reform, reform of the institutions that contributed in the most direct manner to the moral bankruptcy of Irish society and ultimately the loss of Ireland’s national sovereignty, is dependent on “what happens in Europe”? What on earth does that mean? Who in “Europe” would gainsay the reform of Irish domestic laws and regulations governing the operation of financial and banking organisations? Or by “Europe” does Brian Hayes actually mean “the Markets”? Read on:

“A recent IBM survey showed Ireland is still the top location in the world for Foreign Direct Investment in terms of value whilst when it comes to the critical Information Technology sector, expansion in this area is so rapid that many companies are finding it difficult to fill their vacancies.

Earlier this year the World Bank ranked Ireland as the No 1 location in the eurozone for ease of doing business while the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom also ranked Ireland as No 1 in Europe for economic freedom.”

Ahh. So the Heritage Foundation gives Ireland its seal of approval for “economic freedom”? And who are they, you might ask, these lovers of Ireland (indeed, theselovers of the Celtic Tiger when it was at its most rampant)? The Heritage Foundation is a right-wing, American thinktank (motto “Leadership for America”) whose notable past adherents included one President Ronald Reagan (yes, that’s right, “Trickle Down” Ron!) and George Bush Jr. The organisation claims the dubious credit for the tax and revenue “reforms” that were implemented by Reagan, Bush Sr and Clinton in the 1980s and ‘90s (you know, the ones that all but destroyed the public services in the US, gutted the middle classes, and created a huge, impoverished underclass) as well as the ideology of the 21st century “War on Terror”. It most recent notable activities include the creation of the “Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom” (I kid you not), to mark the former British Prime Minister’s status as a patron of the organisation, as well as a new lobby group in Washington to push for even further cuts in taxes, and budgets for federal agencies (what Conservative America calls “big government” and what we in Ireland call public services like health, education, social welfare, et al).

So, an entirely suitable body for the Minister of State at the Department of Finance and the Department of Public Sector Reform to wag his tail over. Ah… “Finance”? “Public Sector Reform”? Now we get it. Good one, Brian.

Related articles

Tagged , , , , , ,
Dec 08 2011
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

His Master’s Voice

Ah, elitism, ‘tis the bane of Irish society. Ever since the days of the Liberator there have always been those who thought they were the natural masters of the Irish people. No, not the nasty ol’ Brits but rather those who did well under the Brits, thank you very much. That’s the same ones who hijacked the Irish Revolution in 1921. The same ones who turned Ireland red with blood in order to establish their puppet Free State. The same ones who sacrificed our children to feed their position and status. And it seems things haven’t changed. From the Irish Times:

“HERMAN VAN Rompuy’s idea to use provisions already in the Lisbon Treaty to amend and toughen the treaty’s budget supervision protocol has immediate appeal. And not least for Ireland where treaty change has been, well, awkward. Faced at tomorrow’s summit with Franco-German demands for treaty changes to lay the basis for fiscal union, the European council’s president has reminded leaders of legal mechanisms in Lisbon that allow the amendment by the Council, acting unanimously, of the treaty’s budget control implementation procedures.

Using this procedure should in theory both achieve his and their purpose, while obviating the need for cumbersome ratifications in 27 capitals, dramatically shortening the process, and, crucially, reassuring markets.

From an Irish perspective, however, the Van Rompuy approach has clear advantages. But there is an unseemly quality to repeated declarations by Irish ministers that this State does not want to be forced into another referendum. Badly burned over Nice and Lisbon by an electorate that would not be taken for granted, the repetition of the “no referendum” mantra sounds rather too like determination to avoid democratic accountability and, once again, defeat.

Yet, the fear of rejection notwithstanding, the legal requirement to hold a referendum on changes in our relationship with the EU is by no means absolute. In signing up to the Treaty of Rome we incorporated in our Constitution a provision (article 29) recognising the constitutionality of future “laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities”. Those words, the Supreme Court recognised in the Crotty case (1987), “must be construed as an authorisation . . . not only to join the Communities as they stood in 1973, but also to join in amendments of the Treaties so long as such amendments do not alter the essential scope or objectives of the Communities”. In such circumstances – and a consolidation of monetary union discipline would certainly seem to be covered – a referendum is not legally required as such changes would be deemed consistent with the Constitution…

In reality, the commitment to hold referendums on EU treaties is now as much a political as a legal obligation, a hook politicians have impaled themselves on, and are understandably keen to get off. Whatever one’s views on “plebiscitary” democracy, and there are strong arguments against, an overzealous resort to referendums is clearly neither a constitutional necessity nor consistent with efficient management of the State’s affairs.”

On the other hand an overzealous resort to referenda is clearly a democratic necessity. One that has served the peoples of Iceland, Norway and Switzerland rather well, in good times and bad. But hey, this is the same newspaper that was calling for Irish democrats to be put up against a wall and shot in 1916. And 1919. 1920. 1921. 1922. 1923.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!

Related articles
Tagged , , ,
Dec 05 2011
5 Comments
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Scotland Calling

Despite the intensity of the British establishment’s campaign against the proposed independence referendum in Scotland, with it’s focus on First Minster Alex Salmond in particular, the numbers are slowly slipping away for the British Unionist cause. According to the Scotsman newspaper:

“SUPPORT for Scottish independence has risen to its highest level for six years, with almost a third of Scots now backing separation from the rest of the UK, according to a new survey.

The results of the annual Scottish Social Attitudes Survey (SSA), presented today, show 32 per cent are now in favour of independence, up from 23 per cent last year to a level of support not seen since 2005.

The poll also found support for all decisions being made in Scotland has leaped 15 points to 43 per cent, while 29 per cent backed control over everything apart from defence and foreign affairs being passed to Scotland – the option often referred to as “devolution max”.

Meanwhile, the survey found the price of independence is just £500 – with 65 per cent in favour if everyone was a few hundred pounds better off as a result.

The results of the survey appear to be a major show of confidence in the SNP since the party was returned to power with an historic majority this year.

While the survey shows more Scots still oppose independence than support it, it also provided a blow to the unionist parties by suggesting that the Calman reforms for more devolution, including boosting income tax powers, currently in the Scotland Bill, are not enough for most Scots.”

Meanwhile the London-based British Nationalist parties are attempting to spin the unwelcome news, news that has clearly taken them by surprise given the ferocity of the orchestrated anti-SNP drive in the British press. This is not the agreed narrative. Yet the modern SNP have repeatedly proved themselves adept at writing their own narrative. Something they are doing again, as reported in the Independent:

“An independent Scotland would shift much of its attention away from the UK to become a member of the Scandinavian circle of countries, with its own army, navy and air force modelled on its Nordic neighbours, according to detailed plans being drawn up by the SNP.

Senior SNP strategists are compiling a “prospectus for independence” which they hope to use to sell the idea of separation to Scots ahead of the referendum in 2014 or 2015.

The document is not due to be published in full for another year but SNP insiders have disclosed key extracts.

They reveal that SNP leaders want an independent Scotland to look north and east in Europe for partnerships, trade and key defence relationships, rather than continuing to focus on western Europe and the Commonwealth, as the UK does now.

Senior Nationalists, including Alex Salmond, have made several trips to Scandinavia over the last couple of years, meeting ministers and officials in an attempt to pave the way for greater co-operation if Scotland becomes independent, particularly on energy. Indeed, initial plans have already been drawn up for an electricity super-grid between Scotland and Norway.”

With British nationalist politicians and journalists promoting the opinion of a handful of tame “constitutional experts” that an independent Scotland would need to apply for membership of the European Union as a “successor state”, the SNP’s policy of an alliance with the Scandinavian block of nations (and the non-EU Norway) is an interesting – and perhaps particularly astute – one. Which raises an interesting question for those of us here: where is Ireland in all this?

If the arguments for joining a Scandinavian arc of prosperity are great, the economic, environmental, security, cultural and historic reasons for closer ties between the two surviving Gaelic nations at the edge of north-western Europe are surely even greater. Maybe Enda Kenny, instead of kowtowing in the halls of Brussels, Berlin and Paris would be better employed reaching out the hand of friendship and co-operation in Edinburgh? Perhaps a “Celtic” and “Scandinavian” block of nations, working closely together, would do more to off-set the powers of Middle Europe and the former “Great Powers” than any amount of glad-handing and treaty tinkering?

And one final point. If an independent Scotland was required to apply (reapply?) for membership of the European Union where does that leave the former, so-called “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”? What are the international implications for the new sovereign national entity to be known as the “United Kingdom of England and Wales, and Northern Ireland”? Will it, per force, have to reapply for EU membership too? One cannot imagine so, or Berlin and Paris running the risk of losing the “UK” from the European fold altogether (simply think about the opportunity given to the Euro-sceptic cries for a referendum created by the scenario above). Similarly would a Reunited Ireland, in essence a new state, need to reapply for European Union membership? Did a Reunited Germany?

The claims that a pro-independence Scotland would find itself cast out from the EU are dubious to say the least. The reality is simply this: in the European Union it is the bureaucrats and politicians who decide what the rules are, not lawyers and academics.

Tagged , , , , ,
Nov 28 2011
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics)

180 New IT Jobs Announced In Ireland. But Who Are They Going To?

Good news on the jobs front from RTÉ:

“180 new jobs have been announced by Version 1, an IT consulting and outsourced managed services company. Most of the jobs will be in Dublin.

The firm is hiring graduates and senior technology consultants with Microsoft, Oracle and Java qualifications. The jobs will be filled over the next three years, with 45 jobs to be filled over the next three months.

The company created another 100 jobs last year and already employs 265 staff in Dublin, Cork and Belfast.”

Ireland’s true levels of unemployment have been masked for the last two years by the thousands of Irish citizens being forced out of the country every month in search of employment overseas (who in turn, of course, are sometimes accused of displacing local people from jobs in the nations they are emigrating to – this is called a free market, apparently). So even the smallest of crumbs are welcome. Only problem is, these particular crumbs may be going, um, elsewhere. The full story from BreakingNews:

“However, Version 1 is looking abroad to fill vacancies in its expansion plan, because it says it cannot get enough graduates here.

Managing director Justin Keatinge said the Government should make it easier to recruit from abroad.

“We’re trying to bring people from all over the world…to fill these vacancies, and it’s very difficult,” he said.

“We would encourage the Government to come up with a fast-track, hi-tech work permit system where within a week you could get a work permit for a person coming from Argentina, for example.”"

There are not enough Irish graduates with the required IT knowledge or skills to fulfil these jobs? With 450,000 people on the dole? 450,000 people seeking employment? They can’t find 180 qualified people over the next three years? I know at least three Irish citizens currently rotting away on the dole or in low-paid, non-specialist employment who could wallpaper the inside of their houses with the amount of IT qualifications they have.

Perhaps instead of defaulting to overseas recruitment Irish-based companies should be reinvesting back into the Irish education system, in co-operation with the many public bodies out there who specialise in these areas, to create the types of graduates they want or need? Or is it just simpler to buy off-the-shelf staff from anywhere but Ireland?

Business with a social conscience? Bah!

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Nov 18 2011
1 Comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

We’re All Speaking German Now – Apparently

So who’s in charge? That’s the big question on everyone’s lips as the latest demonstration of the emasculation of Ireland’s nationhood plays out in the media. The revelation that members of the German parliament have been privy to Ireland’s upcoming budget has led to claims and counter-claims in abundance. It seems humiliation on an international stage is to become our national sack cloth and ashes for the next decade or so no matter what spin Irish government and European Union PR folk put on it.

According to the Herald:

“DETAILS of December’s Budget were leaked to several EU countries, it was claimed today.

The EU/IMF Troika was today blaming the European Commission for “mistakenly forwarding” the sensitive budget document to Germany and other EU countries.

The gaffe has caused major embarrassment for the Government who have lodged a complaint with the Commission.

The details emerged in the German Bundestag yesterday but sources now say that the EC sent the document to all member states on the EU’s Economic and Financial Committee.”

Well, that’s ok then. The Journal has the details and they make for grim reading:

“The package of documents also includes:

  • a firm commitment that domestic water charges will be introduced by the end of 2013
  • plans to broaden the income tax base in 2013, along with increases in excise duty and other indirect taxes
  • plans to cut social welfare spending and the public payroll even further in 2013
  • a government agreement to prepare a draft programme for selling state assets, to be discussed with the Troika by the end of this year
  • a request from Michael Noonan and Patrick Honohan to ‘frontload’ the bailout loans for 2012 – with deductions from the second, third and fourth instalments to make up for an extra-large first instalment
  • an update to the EU-IMF deal outlining that ”any unplanned revenues must be allocated to debt reduction“
  • a commitment to “initial resolution funding” of €250m for Ireland’s credit unions
  • further commitments to open up ‘sheltered sectors’ like pharmacies, GPs and legal services

Next month’s Budget proposes to make €670m through the VAT increase, €160m through the new €100-per-house ‘household charge’, and €100m through the reform of capital gains tax.”

Which begs the question: how much pain can one nation, or society, take before it breaks? I would suggest that we are closer now than most people will admit – or perhaps even suspect. However some see the writing on the wall, as The Journal reports again:

“THE DETAILS DISCLOSED in draft documents which outline Ireland’s proposals to meet the terms of its EU-IMF agreement have been heavily criticised by Dáil opposition this evening.

Speaking to TheJournal.ie this evening Independent TD and Oireachtas Public Accounts Committee member Shane Ross said while the detail was “pretty predictable” the measures were “tyrannical” and “in keeping with the craven attitude of this government to the EU-IMF deal”.

“It’s a humiliating document because the measures which are in there are at the whim of are European masters,” Ross said.”

Additionally,

“Sinn Féin’s finance spokesperson Pearse Doherty was also critical of the documents’ disclosure to the other 26 EU member states before the Irish people, saying it was  ”quite outrageous”.

Doherty was also angered by the disclosure in the documents that all unplanned revenues such as those that come from the sell-off of State assets must go towards servicing the debt burden.

This disclosure contradicts the government’s public statements that it hopes to use the money from the sell-off of State assets to fund job initiatives. Doherty said the sale of State assets is “a disgrace”.”

Meanwhile, amongst the citizenry:

“THE mortgage crisis has hit a new high with 100,000 homeowners now struggling to meet their repayments.

Figures released by the Central Bank today show that the number of borrowers who are now in arrears of more than three months is 62,000.

And another almost 40,000 have already restructured their mortgage repayments.”

But hey, we all know who are really to blame.

“Banks are blaming rumours of a debt forgiveness scheme for the fact that many people have stopped meeting their repayments.

They say there has been a spike in arrears because some people thought there would be a scheme put in place to help people in debt.”

Selfish “people”. Expecting help. We help banks in debt. Not “people”.

Just ask the Germans. Oh, hold on. We have to ask the Germans.

Related articles
Tagged , , , ,
Nov 17 2011
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Don’t Worry, Be Happy

Eurozone map in 2009 Category:Maps of the Eurozone

You thought things were bad? Think again. Things are really bad. Michael Taft cuts through the (admittedly half-hearted) government spin to present our economic situation as it really is:

“If one were to look at the headline rate – GDP – you’d say, well, it’s not great in Ireland but we’re doing better than the Eurozone.

However, when one looks below the headline rates, another picture emerges – of an Irish economy falling further behind Eurozone averages.  When we remove the froth of the multi-national driven export sector (an ‘enclave’ as the IMF described it), we see our economy for what it is: a sluggard.”

Or dead in the water. Taft then lists the true indicators of where we are at and where we may be heading  with a final telling point:

“Where does Ireland stand in the Eurozone tables regarding domestic growth?

Ireland is well down the table.  Irish GNI/GNP is expected to ‘grow’ by 0.1 percent over the next two years. The average growth for other EU-15 countries is 1.4 percent.  But the average growth for those countries not in bail-out (excluding Ireland, Greece and Portugal), the average growth rate is projected to be 2.1 percent.  2.1 percent to 0.1 percent:  that is the comparative measurement that should alarm and depress us.”

Indeed.

Related articles
Tagged , ,
Sep 07 2011
Leave a comment
Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics), Polaitíocht (Politics)

Sinn Féin And The Labour Party, Head-To-Head

The Cedar Lounge Revolution carries news on a Sunday Times poll that places Sinn Féin a percentage point ahead of the Labour Party (though, it should be said, still within the statistical margin of error):

‘What an interesting poll the Sunday Times brought us this weekend. A poll which decisively points to Fine Gael dominance, potentially for quite some time to come. Isn’t it a sign of how things have changed that polls now come but rarely and that in some respects we have much less sense of the temperature of the polity than even six months ago. And that too is – perhaps a sign of FG dominance.

Most intriguing aspects? A Labour Party which has crashed not just below Fianna Fáil but also Sinn Féin.

I should stop right here and say this is but a single poll and it doesn’t appear to have a continuity with previous ones taken earlier in the Summer, but we can only work with what we get.

So granted this could be a rogue, and yet there are reasons that any consideration of the political environment as it now is suggests for a weakening of Labour Party support.

Think about the most high-profile issues other than the relationship with the IMF/EU, the subsidiary ones. JLCs, welfare cuts and so on. Hardly the stuff of dreams for a Labour Party which even still must look to its left flanks in order to shore up its support.

This site has argued long and hard that there’s a terrible misconception at the heart of much of political activity in this state, a misconception willfully or otherwise generated in part by the media. It’s the idea that if ‘hard’ decisions taken, a shaken but eventually grateful electorate will ‘reward’ those taking them.

There’s not much to support this viewpoint. Quite the opposite in fact. One can critique the Rainbow Coalition of the mid-1990s for many things, not least its less than full-blooded enthusiasm for the peace process [and strange how antique that term suddenly sounds] but in matters economic it was, compared and contrasted with its successor both moderately progressive and fiscally cautious. Yet for all that stability it takes but a second to remember the ‘It’s payback time…’ headlines in the Independent. No great reward there. No great reward for Fianna Fáil or the Green Party following their implementation of the ‘hard’ decisions, even if some of that lack of reward was due to the sense that there was no end to the ‘hard’ decisions. Two political formations that had solid histories in this state both in the contemporary period and longer, much longer in the case of FF, broken and broken badly by impact with the electorate. So where is this chimerical reward?’

The full article is well worth reading for the type of refreshingly honest views on Ireland’s political and socio-economic woes, and the farcical solutions offered, that rarely make it into the pages of the establishment press. Which of course raises the question, what is Ireland’s news media for if they have simply abdicated all responsibility both for contributing to the dire straits we are in or giving any real critique of the continued use of the same failed voodoo economics that got us here in the first place? If Ireland’s journalists and media folk are not part of the solution then surely they are just another part of the problem? Unfortunately we can’t vote in editors (or proprietors) as we can politicians but we can vote with our euros and simply stop supplying these economic terrorists with the oxygen of publicity.

 

Related articles
Tagged , , , , ,
Jun 15 2011
1 Comment
An Ghaeilge (Irish Language), Cúrsaí Reatha (Current Affairs), Eacnamaíocht (Economics)

Fáilte Ireland – But Where Is Fáilte Éireann?

News that in Doire (Derry) the Irish language culture centre, Cultúrlann Uí Chanáin, has won a prestigious award for promoting tourism in the region. As the Derry Journal reports:

‘The state of the art Irish language centre, which opened in 2009, was singled out for enhancing the visitor experience and integrating with other tourism products. The judges were particularly impressed with An Chultúrlann’s efforts at complimenting the tourism offer in the city and improving the image of the city as a whole.’

The article points out that:

‘the Irish language was becoming a key tourism driver: “The Irish language and culture is something that makes our region unique and that is what tourists are looking for when they plan a visit. Cultúrlann Uí Chanáin has developed a tourist package “Fáilte Dhoire” which is aimed at these type of cultural tourists to the city.

Through this package we have been able to tie all the elements of Irish culture that we offer into a single product for visitors to the city and work with other tourist providers to diffuse interest in the excellent tourist product available throughout the city. Our goal is to provide the ‘wow factor’ for visitors so that they leave excited, engaged and hungry for more information.’

Indeed. Tourists coming to Ireland want to experience something different from what they left behind at home (as I pointed out before). If you are an English-speaking tourist from England, Wales, Scotland, the United States, Canada, Australia or New Zealand you don’t want to visit a country where the people pretty much speak the same language as you do and with pretty much the same culture too.

You want different. So what does Fáilte Ireland offer these people? More of the same!

And what if you come from a non-English speaking country (like 94.5% of the planet!)? Do you really want to visit a pale imitation of Britain or the United States? If you want Cool Britannia or Americana then you can easily visit the real thing. They come to Ireland to experience something different from that.

Language tourism, Irish language tourism, is the great unrealised ‘wow factor’ of Irish tourism. By emphasising what we are (not what we are sort of like) we have the potential to open up and explore new and unexpected areas of tourist growth and development – while simultaneously contributing to the growth of our own native language and culture.

We want repeat visitors, the regular tourists that are the bedrock of any self-sustaining tourism industry, not the occasional fly-by-night, here-today-gone-tomorrow never-to-be-seen-again visitors of yesteryear. We want tourists who come to Ireland and then come back again – many times over. It is only by offering something unique that we will win the hearts and minds of these people and lure tourists here from the sunnier, technicolour delights of the Mediterranean, or Caribbean or beyond. Let us be honest. We don’t do glorious sunshine (really) or 24-hour bars and clubs. We’re not some North Atlantic Ibiza (thank God) or off-shore Los Vegas (yet).

We do a unique culture, ancient history, unspoiled nature and all the elusive stuff that tourists can’t quite get elsewhere (call it craic if you wish, old done-to-death cliché that it is). We appeal to the late teens and early twenties, and then jump to the middle aged. We appeal to the tens of millions of people around the globe of Irish descent. They want to visit something different, something not quite like anywhere else in the world, an Ireland of the myth as much as the reality. They want Irish and Gaelic and Celtic. All the things some here disdain but which make us unique, make us stand out from the crowd.

That is what Cultúrlann Uí Chanáin serves up, a cultural experience that tourists coming to Ireland clearly want, and expect. If we want to promote ourselves as the place to visit, and more than that, to experience, then let’s have a little less Ireland and a little more Éire.

Tagged , , , ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 356 other followers