Gerry Adams's Blog, page 65

Violence against Women: A cause and consequence of women’s inequality

The recent conviction of Adrian Bayley in Australia for the brutal rape and murder of Jill Meagher, the savage murder of Jolanta Lubiene and her eight year old daughter Enrika in county Kerry and the media furore around the photos of celebrity cook Nigella Lawson being assaulted by her husband, have all brought into sharp focus the issue of violence against women.Co-incidentally two weeks ago the annual report for 2012 from Women’s Aid was published. Its facts were equally shocking.

·       One in five women in the Irish state will experience violence and abuse from an intimate partner
·       3,230 disclosures of direct child Abuse to the Women’s Aid Helpline – a 55% increase on the previous year
·       11,729 calls to the Freephone Helpline
·       32 calls per day
·       49% of the women supported in One to One service were experiencing abuse from a former husband, partner or boyfriend
·       30% of first time one to one support visits were with women from migrant communities
·       The most dangerous time can be when a woman is planning or making her exit and in the period afterwards.The facts are equally stark in the north. The Making the Grade report in 2007 revealed that:

·       In 2006/7 the PSNI responded to a domestic incident every 22 minutes of every day of the year.
·       In 2006/7 there were more domestic violence related crimes (10,115) than the combined total for sexual offences against children, indecent exposure, robbery, armed robbery, hijacking, fraud and counterfeiting, shoplifting, dangerous driving, offences and firearms offences
·       20% of all attempted murders in 2006/7 had a domestic motivation
·       The rate of conviction for rape decreased from 28.2% in 1994 to 19% in 2005.
·       The number of recorded rapes increased from 292 in 2001 to 457 in 2006.
·       84% of victims of sexual offences were women.But as with any statistics it is essential that you look beyond the bullet points and focus on the human experience that they reflect.

The Women’s Aid report records harrowing accounts of this experience. Women have described being locked in and prevented from leaving their houses, being drugged, assaulted and hospitalised, being beaten while pregnant or breast-feeding, being gagged to stop screaming, being raped and sexually abused, including being pinned down and assaulted, and being forced to have sex in return for money to feed their children.For women violence includes but is not limited to domestic violence, forced marriage, rape and sexual assault, crimes in the name of honour, murder, trafficking and sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, sexual harassment and stalking. It causes physical damage ranging from death to miscarriages to broken limbs. Sexual offences can also result in sexually transmitted diseases and forced pregnancies, as well as leaving long term psychological damage.

Kofi Annan, the former head of the United Nations said: “Violence against women is perhaps the most shameful human rights violation and it is perhaps the most pervasive. It knows no boundaries of geography, culture or wealth. As long as it continues we cannot claim to be making real progress towards equality, development and peace.”

Safe Ireland also published the results of a one day survey which revealed that almost 850 women and children received support and protection from domestic violence over a single 24-hour period on November 6th last year.

The survey found that more than 500 women and over 300 children sought domestic violence services on that day. Almost 270 women and children were accommodated in refuge, with 21 women being turned away due to lack of space. The census also found that more than 20 pregnant women looked for safety from violence.
At its core violence against women is a cause and a consequence of women’s inequality. It cannot be challenged and defeated without a recognition of this. So how do we end it? Coherent, integrated and properly economic, social, cultural and political strategies are needed. Such strategies do work.

Regrettably, in the south the promised consolidated domestic violence legislation contained in the Programme for Government has yet to be delivered. This week I again asked about this in the Dáil. The Minister for Justice wrote me a letter saying that it will be ‘progressed as soon as possible having regard to the need for consultations and other legislative priorities in the Department of Justice and Equality.’Other legislative priorities? What greater priority should there be than protecting the lives and human rights of women and girls.

The bottom line is that there is no underlying strategic approach or priority being given to this issue. The Minister also told my comrade Mary Lou McDonald that the government has still not signed the European Convention on Preventing and Combatting Violence against Women and Domestic Violence.  It apparently supports the aims and terms in principle but he claims there is a ‘particular difficulty reconciling property rights under the Irish constitution with the requirement under Article 52 of the European Convention and the availability of barring orders.’

This is also the rationale presented by the Minister for rejecting Woman’s Aid recommendation for an on call system for accessing emergency barring orders to give women and children protection. And yet when the government rushed through legislation in the Dáil earlier this year on the Irish Bank Resolution Company it included a provision requiring the ‘permanent or temporary interference with property rights for the common good.’ So, we can have rushed legislation on property rights to aid banks but no legislation on property rights to help women victims of violence. And all the while violence against women continues.

 

Equality proofing is Labour Party policy – yet they vote against it!

This week Sinn Féin introduced into the Dáil an Equality Proofing Bill. The purpose of the Bill was to amend existing legislation and to provide equality proofing of government policy and budget and public bodies through impact assessments. If passed into law the Bill would have ensured that both government and public bodies  in exercising their functions would so in a way that would reduce the inequalities of outcome which result from socio-economic disadvantage. As it was the Labour party voted with Fine Gael against the Bill. Government Minister and Labour TD Kathleen Lynch spoke against equality and ultimately against Labour party policy which supports equality proofing.Essentially the Minister said that we cannot afford equality! From a Fine Gael Minister this would have been understandable – Fine Gael doesn’t believe in equality.But Labour’s stated policy is for the equality proofing. By opposing this equality proofing Bill Labour TDs are voting against their party’s own policy position!What is the value of Labour in government if its only role is to bolster the conservative economic and social politics of Fine Gael?Labour’s founding father James Connolly is accepted as the principal author of that part of the Proclamation which guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens. It contains a commitment to cherish all the children of the nation equally .Sadly, equality does not exist in this society. It is a republic in name only and the policies of this government and of successive governments are contributing directly to a growing inequality – particularly between the rich and the poor.I’m an Irish republican. I believe in a republican system of governance. A real republic in which the people are sovereign and equal, and have all–encompassing rights, including economic rights, the right to a home; to a job; to access to education; to a health service from the cradle to the grave; the right to a safe and clean environment; and to civil and religious liberties.This is what republicanism is about. It is what genuine democracy is about. It’s about embedding equality into the daily life and experience of citizens.The imposition of equality duties, and the equality proofing of government policies and budgets, and of public bodies through impact assessments, are a means of achieving this and of dictating outcomes. Without this equality will remain little more than a pipe dream. It is a fact that inequality is all around us in this part of the island. It exists also in the north but there it has the added dimension of generational sectarian and political discrimination.Interestingly the other parties in the Dáil reference the continued existence of inequalities in the north as a pretext for attacking Sinn Féin. There is no logic to this position. Or truth. Or rational. They quote poverty levels in west Belfast for example to justify their own position.They refuse to acknowledge that the citizens of west Belfast in common with other communities in the north are tackling these issues on a daily basis and succeeding against the odds. And because they took a stand – and they would be waiting a long time for Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael or Labour to help them – because these citizens took a stand generational sectarianism and political discrimination is being tackled.There are now equality duties and the equality proofing of government policies and budgets, and of public bodies. If this is good enough for the north why can’t citizens here have these rights?Equality is cited 21 times in the Good Friday Agreement, including in the Pledge of Office for Ministers. It has a complete section given over to it and is included in legislation designed to ensure equality in employment. We are living in post Good Friday Agreement Ireland. That is obvious in the north.So it is catch-up time in this state and legislating for equality here must be a key part of this. This should include the Charter of Rights which the Irish government signed up to 15 years ago. Apart from being ethically wrong – no person or community should be treated as second class or as non-citizens.The refusal to recognise the Traveller community as an ethnic group is unacceptable. Inequality is also expensive and uneconomic for society. A healthy, more equal, prosperous society is in everyone’s interest. Sinn Féin’s Equality Bill is about achieving this. And the need for this approach is all the more obvious if we consider the record of the current Government. Budget 2012 was found by the ESRI to have had a disproportionate impact on the least well off in society. Budget 2013 repeated this.Everyday sees the removal of citizen’s rights and the reinforcement of privilege for the elites in society. Sinn Féin’s Equality Bill would require an equality impact assessment to prevent the implementation of such blatantly unfair policies.  That is why the government voted against this Bill.Sinn Féin is for a new Republic – an all island Republic – a real republic which will deliver the highest standards of services and protections to all citizens equally, guaranteeing parity of esteem and equality of treatment, opportunity and outcome.This also means equality for the Irish language and for rural Ireland.While Labour abandoned Connolly and sided with Fine Gael and the elites in voting down the Sinn Féin Equality Bill the Equality Budgeting campaign which represents over 30 civil society organisations welcomed the Bill. While this round was lost the campaign to achieve equality will continue.

There are more tapes!

The Anglo tapes continue to be a source of great annoyance and outrage for citizens.

They provide the most direct evidence yet of the appalling, sneering and arrogant attitude of the banking sector to the banking crisis that crashed the Irish economy five years ago.

Last week I asked the Taoiseach during Leaders Questions in the Dáil if he knew if any other tapes from any of the other banks existed. It is common practise for phone conversations between bankers/brokers to be taped to ensure accuracy over agreements reached.
Last week the Taoiseach said that he didn’t know.
Today I asked the Taoiseach once more about the existence of additional tapes. He admitted that other tapes of conversations in other banks do exist.
He also revealed that the Minister for Finance is writing tomorrow to the banks asking that they ensure that any tapes in their possession are held safe.
I was surprised by this. The fact is that it is five years since the banking crisis and several years since the Gardaí took possession of the Anglo tapes. The first of these tapes was published almost two weeks ago.
But only now is the Minister for Finance taking action. This is evidence of the dismal way in which the government has handled this crisis from the outset.
Much of the focus around the tapes has been on who within the previous Fianna Fáil government knew what was going on and who met with the bankers and what can they tell us of the events of September 2008.
Last week I asked Deputy Martin, who was then a senior figure in the Cabinet to make a statement to the Dáil setting out which Fianna Fáil government Ministers met the bankers. There has been no response to that from the Fianna Fáil leadership.
It would also be important to find out of Fianna Fáil representatives other than ministers had contact with the bankers.
Instead of facing up to these issues the Fianna Fáil leadership has tried hard to distract attention away from its role in the debacle. But the questions won’t go away.
Last week the Taoiseach also said that there were no files of any value in the Department of the Taoiseach. Today I asked him about the files in the Department of Finance and the Central Bank and can these files shed more light on what happened?
He declined to answer.
There is real and understandable public cynicism about the ability of the government to get to the truth. This is inevitable given the close relationship between the golden circles of bankers, some politicians, and developers and speculators.
It was reinforced by the Government rewarding so many senior banking executives with well-placed and highly paid jobs.
As hundreds of thousands of households pay their property tax bills under threat of legal action and families try to pay other bills and put food on the table, they believe there is one law for the rich and well-connected and another for everyone else. There certainly appears to have been no law for the bankers.
The Anglo tapes have revealed that they knew what they wanted– they wanted the ‘moolah’ and were convinced from their relationship with the government that it would be handed over. And they were right. They got it.
The decision to bail out Anglo Irish Bank and the other Irish banks has cost the Irish state almost €100 billion - €64 billion in bank recapitalisation and €32 billion for NAMA.
It helped to collapse our economy and ended up in us losing our economic sovereignty. The Fianna Fáil leadership created this policy
Fine Gael and Labour continue to pay bankers big bucks. In October 2011, Michael Noonan admitted to Sinn Fein’s Pearse Doherty that 22 of the top 50 Anglo bosses at the time of the crisis, still worked in Anglo, and 19 of them were paid salaries over €175,000 each year. One of the men speaking on the Anglo tapes worked in the bank up to February this year.
Fine Gael and Labour paid out all the bank bondholders and inflicted austerity budgets every year to pay for it.
But Fianna Fáil has the most questions to answer.
1.       What role did Micheál Martin, now leader of Fianna Fáil and senior Minister at the time, play in the lead-up to the issuing of the bank guarantee and after?
2.       Why, when even senior Anglo bosses were saying bondholders would have to be burned, did Fianna Fáil insist on paying out to all the bondholders?
3.       Why did Fianna Fáil not ask to see Anglo’s books when the bank first showed signs of financial difficulty – why did it trust what the bank was saying and trust a regulator who’d shown himself to be inept?
4.       Why did Fianna Fáil issue a blank cheque to Anglo in October 2008 but not nationalise the bank until January 2009?
5.       Did Fianna Fáil’s leader and the Taoiseach of the day think it was appropriate to be playing golf with the head of Anglo Irish in July 2008 and what did they talk about?
6.       Which Fianna Fáil representatives talked to Anglo bosses at the time of the guarantee, what did they talk about and will they tell the people what was said? Which of them are still on Fianna Fail’s front bench?
7.       Were Fianna Fáil given a report by international bank Merrill Lynch that said Anglo was a basket case and did they ignore that report?
These are just some of the questions that need answers.


 

Sinn Féin will support Bill

Yesterday I contributed to the second stage on the debate of the Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill 2013. The first Dáil vote on the Bill is now expected after Order of Business on Tuesday after 5pm.

For those interested in the progress of this important legislation below are my remarks.

“Minister, I am personally not in favour of abortion.

That is my strongly held view.

But I am not here to legislate for me.

Especially not on this issue.

I have a duty and responsibility to legislate for citizens – in this case pregnant women whose lives are at risk.

So, I and Sinn Fein will support the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Bill.

Sinn Féin believes that Irish society has a responsibility to not only address the issue of abortion but also to address the fact that thousands of Irish women travel to Britain each year for abortions.

We also believe that all possible means of education and support services should be put in place to prevent crisis pregnancies.

Sinn Féin believes that the way to tackle the issue of abortion is by way of comprehensive education, full access to child-care and comprehensive support services, including financial support for single mothers.

And that full information and non-directive pregnancy counselling should be freely available.

I am very strongly opposed to any attempt to criminalise or to be judgmental of women who have had abortions.

Who here in this chamber or indeed outside this chamber has the right to judge these women?

I am concerned that this Bill could potentially lead to a woman, in whatever circumstances, being sentenced to up to 14 years in prison.

The fact is that the lives of some women are placed at a real and substantial risk due to their pregnancy.

In these casesonly a termination of the pregnancy, as distinct from the termination of the life of the unborn, though that can be a consequence of the intervention, is going to save their lives.

This is already accepted practice in this state.

It is also the current legal position, as is an intervention where the woman's life is at real and substantial risk due to the threat of suicide.

If passed into law this Bill will legalise a termination only where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother, including suicide.

This legislation has been a long time coming and the issue which gives rise to it has been at the centre of considerable debate and controversy for many years.

The tragic death last year of Savita Halappanavar, and the evidence emerging out of the inquest, refocused attention on this issue.

It also underlined the urgent need for legal clarity for doctors and protection for pregnant women.

The HSE report on Savita’sdeath was published in the last few weeks and on the same day as this Bill and because of its direct relevance to the legislation I wish to comment on it.

I take the opportunity to again extend deepest sympathy to Praveen Halappanavar and all the relatives and friends of Savita.

Like the outcome of the inquest, the report has far-reaching implications.

It is extremely serious and distressing that the report found that Savita’s death resulted from inadequate assessment and monitoring of her condition and a failure to offer all management options to her.

University College Hospital Galway’s non-adherence to clinical guidelines relating to the prompt and effective management of sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock from when it was first diagnosed, significantly contributed to her death.

We may never be able to say definitively that this Bill, if enacted at the time of Savita’s hospitalisation, would have saved her life.

However, there are good grounds, based on expert evidence, for believing that this would indeed have been the case, as a termination would have been regarded as a life-saving option to which Savita should have had timely access.

The background to this debate goes back further than the death of Savitato 1992 when a 14 year old girl became pregnant as a result of rape and was suicidal.

The then Attorney General sought an injunction preventing the girl travelling with her parents to have an abortion abroad.

This case – known as the X-case - went to court and the Supreme Court ruled that ‘a termination of pregnancy is lawful if it can be shown that there is a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of the mother.

In 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Irish State violates the rights of pregnant women by refusing to allow them to receive a lawful termination in the event that a pregnancy could threaten their lives.

The decision by the European Court of Human Rights made it clear that there is an onus on the State to legislate under the terms of the 1937 Constitution and the decision in the X case.

Regrettably, previous governments failed to face up to this issue.

It has taken 21 years for this legislation to be produced.

It is also a fact that there are sharply divided opinions on this issue.

This was clearly evident during the recent Health Committee hearings.

Most of the focus in those hearings was on the issue of suicide with a number of medical people and politicians giving evidence that abortion is not a ‘treatment’ for suicide.

But nobody is contending that it is.

They also claimed that this could open up the possibility of large numbers of women using the threat of suicide to secure a legal abortion.

I believe that these arguments are disrespectful to women and impossible in the light of the legislation that is proposed.

I share former Supreme Court Judge Catherine McGuinness’s view that the proposals are ‘sufficiently rigorous’ to ensure that very few cases will in fact be dealt with in respect of the threat of suicide.

For our part Sinn Féin has set out our clear position on abortion.

Our policy, which is not in favour of abortion, has been settled policy for us for some time.

In the Assembly we opposed and voted against the proposed extension of the 1967 British Act to the North.

We believe that all possible means of education and support services for women should be put in place.

The legislation being proposed by the government is about addressing the issue of a pregnant woman whose life is at risk and who requires a medical termination, and the need for legal clarity for doctors involved in such a procedure.

It does this in the context of existing constitutional law as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the X case.

Sinn Fein has stated consistently that legislation in line with the X case judgement and in compliance with the ABC case judgement and the Expert Group recommendations is required.

In fact it is long overdue.

There is now a very widely held view in Irish society that legislation along the lines originally set out in the Heads of the Bill, and now in this legislation, is necessary.

This is not perfect legislation.

But notwithstanding this and judged in the round and taking into account the pressing need for long overdue legislative certainty, Sinn Féin will support this legislation.

MindMindR – A Mental health directory

 Mise with Mayor Cathal King
 
  M indMindR – A Mental health directory 
Further to my tweets from Tallaght about Mayor Cathal King’s launch of a unique and ground-breaking initiative on Mental Health.
Last year Cathal proposed that the Council develop an app for the Iphone and android phones providing a directory of mental health services for the area. The idea was to provide easy access to services by location, type, age group, useful links and emergency services.

After a lot of hard work by the council’s IT department and with the support of a variety of other organisations, including Comhairle na nÓg, South Dublin County’s Youth Council, this morning the app - Mind MindR - was launched.

The iPhone version is up and running and the android version will be out within days.

It would be brilliant if this idea could be replicated across the state and across the island. Niall Ó Donnghaile has tweeted to say he is investigating developing this app for Belfast and Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin raised the issue in the Dáil and has secured a meeting with the junior Health Minister Kathleen Lynch to explore how Cathal’s initiative can be brought to other areas.
Teachta Sean Crowe, mise, Mayor Cathal King and Councillor Maire Devine
 MindMindR is a comprehensive directory of Mental Health services and resources for South Dublin County. Using the latest smartphone technology, the MindMindR app will enable users to quickly gain access to information on a range of mental health services available in their local area, concentrating mainly on Tallaght, Clondalkin, Lucan and Rathfarnham.
Emergency contact and service details for national services are also listed for information purposes, and services within the South Dublin County map boundary are mapped to enable the user to navigate to the address of the service they require.  Accessibility information has also been added where available and will be updated going forward. In all a great idea and one that I have no doubt will help those in need and will save lives.    
With  Comhairle na nÓg

Cycling in Dublin

As those who follow twitter or my blog know I like to walk and to cycle. My schedule doesn’t allow for me to do these as often as I would like but when the opportunity presents itself I jump in with both feet.
This is bike week. It’s an annual event organised here and elsewhere around the world to promote cycling and through it encourage a healthier life style for citizens. Wednesday was the third annual Dublin City Lunchtime Cycle event for workers who spend their days in and around the centre of the city.
Along with a half dozen comrades from the Dáil I joined thousands of others in bright beautiful sunshine to take the 5k cycle from Grand canal Square.
The craic was good and it was a thoroughly enjoyable half hour. A great way to see Dublin and stay healthy.

Dundalk Gateway Report sounds alarm – Adams

The Dundalk Gateway Report is one of a series of nine such reports covering the performance of the Gateways that exist across the state.

Gateways were established to provide a strategically placed centre of economic growth and to facilitate these areas to grow to their full potential.
The Dundalk Gateway region which covers Dundalk Town and north Louth faces a number of unique challenges including the fact that is exists along a border area. This has played a key role in how Dundalk has evolved and has heavily influenced the local economy. It is especially important in the time ahead that there is greater co-operation across the border and that initiatives like the Memorandum of Understanding between Louth County Council and Newry and Mourne District Council are expanded.
The fact that Dundalk is located almost mid-way between the two largest urban centres and economic zones on the island – Dublin and Belfast – is an advantage that must be exploited more..
The Dundalk Gateway which includes a substantial part of north Louth is one of the primary urban centres in the state and is the seventh largest population centre.
The presence of the Dundalk Institute of Technology is a significant influence within the region and has helped increase the number of citizens with third level education – an important factor in assisting economic growth. However at 25.97% of the labour force it is substantially less than the 31.07% average of other Gateways. Dundalk has the third lowest third level attainment of all the Gateways.
Latterly Dundalk has successfully attracted significant foreign direct investment, including eBay and PayPal and Prometric.
However, the Dundalk Gateway Report raises a number of issues of concern.
The deferral of the Gateway Innovation Fund five years ago removed an important funding mechanism for infrastructure. The report states that: ‘The decline in development and infrastructure funding has impacted upon the realisation of a number of the goals of the Dundalk Gateway. There has been a notable decline in the overall amount of economic activity taking place within the Gateway. This has directly impacted upon the financial resources of the Local Authorities as the rates base within the county has contracted significantly. The amount of development which is taking place within the Gateway has declined substantially and this has further eroded the potential income streams which could have been used to fund Gateway objectives.’
At the same time as there has been a decline in economic activity there has been an increase in population, mainly in the urban area around Dundalk town. More people, especially young people needing jobs.
The Dundalk Gateway report also records that the region has been less successful than other Gateways ‘in attracting or retaining people from the core working age cohorts’ necessary for economic expansion.
The number of new firms created in 2011 within the Gateway is slightly less than the average for Gateways across the state and shows a decline when compared with the report in 2006.
The Gateway report shows a substantial increase in unemployment in the region between 2006 and 2011. The rate for Dundalk was 24.19% almost five points more than the Gateway average. It is the second highest of any of the designated Gateway regions.
In addition there is also a concern at the failure to provide broadband across the Gateway. Broadband is essential for economic growth and to encourage investment. Currently the percentage of households with private broadband stands at 61.9%. This is below the 63.52% Gateway average and the EU average which is 67%. As the Gateway report concludes on this issue; ‘Poor broadband access is a restrictive factor in attracting new business to the region.’
On health and wellness the Gateway report concludes that access to primary health care is below the average of all Gateways and it warns that the rise in the number of dependents living within the Gateway has ‘important implications for health care services and could place additional pressure on health services.’
The report also reveals that the Dundalk Gateway region suffers from the highest levels of deprivation across all of the nine Gateway areas.
The Gateways structure is a useful device for channelling investment and infrastructure to specific regions but it is only as good as the investment government puts into it. This report clearly identifies failures in government policy and gaps in investment that must be closed. The onus is on the government to do this.
 

 

The Future of the Seanad

The debate on the future of the Seanad continued this week in the Dáil. Last Thursday the Taoiseach moved the 32nd Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill 2013. It contains 40 amendments to the Constitution which will remove all references to the Seanad.
It is thought that the amendment will be put to the vote in a referendum in October. If passed the amendment will abolish the Seanad after the next general election and before the first sitting of new Dáil.
It will allow for some 75 deletions of the constitution dealing with the composition of the Seanad, and which cover relations between the Dáil and the Seanad in respect of legislation. 
The government intends pushing the Bill through its second and remaining stages by the end of the week.
In my contribution to the government’s plan to abolish the Seanad I said:
“The real starting point of this discussion should have been about how best we can organise our democracy and governmental system, and about how this could best be done in the context of creating an inclusive society on this island while reaching out to the diaspora.
The Ceann Comhairle will be pleased to learn I do not intend to set out a full critique of Irish society at this time; suffice it to say we live in a partitioned island.  Members present forget that.  That reality shapes society in all parts of the island.  
The institutions of this State are deeply partitionist.  They are also corrupt, as evidenced in the range of tribunal reports over recent years.  It goes deeper than that, however.  Partition created two conservative states, ruled by two conservative elites.  
The political culture was weighted against citizens' rights and both states have been characterised by economic failure, emigration, inequality and the failure to protect the most vulnerable citizens.  If we are to tackle these issues effectively then we need to have an all-Ireland view.
The most significant political reform since partition has been the Good Friday Agreement.  The impact of this is most obvious in the North but not so obvious in this part of the island.  None of the reforms, safeguards or checks and balances of the Agreement has been inculcated into our institutions here.  Why not?
The Government should be actively pressing ahead with the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, including those aspects that impinge on us here.  I refer to the creation of more areas of co-operation and implementation and greater harmonisation; the strengthening of the protection of human rights, including through a charter of rights for the island; and a forum for consideration of human rights issues in the island, as included in the Agreement.
The centenary of the 1916 Rising and Proclamation is approaching.  It is often cited by establishment parties in this Oireachtas as the foundation of the State.  The 1916 leaders are frequently described as the founders of this State.  The Proclamation was not the foundation of this State.  The leaders were not the founders of this State.  This State is the product of the counter-revolution that followed the Rising.  
The Proclamation, which sets out the ethos and principles that underpinned the objectives of the 1916 leaders is as relevant today as it was when it was written.  It guarantees religious and civil liberty and equal rights and equal opportunities to all citizens, and it contains a commitment to cherish all the children of the nation equally.  These words are a solemn pledge to every Irish citizen that she or he can share in the dignity of humankind, as an equal with equal opportunity, and that we can enjoy freedom, educate our children, provide for our families and live together with tolerance and respect for each other.  
That should be our starting point, and the process of political reform should be grounded on these core values and be about measures, structures and protocols that empower citizens and create a fully functioning, democratic, transparent, republican system of government that is accountable, citizen centred and rooted in equality, human rights and communal solidarity.  
It should also have at its core the imperative of actively seeking to fulfil the constitutional obligation of bringing about the reunification of this island and of its people, as outlined in the Good FridayAgreement.
Instead of this, however, the Government has decided to opt for cuts and greater centralisation of power.  Instead of creating a more effective, transparent accountable democracy, the Government wants to abolish the Seanad, cut the number of elected representatives in the Dáil and in local government, and centralise even more power and authority into its hands.  
That is not real reform; it is power grabbing.  It may be a very democratic coup but it is a coup none the less.  There is more power for government, less accountability and democracy and fewer checks and balances against political abuse and patronage.
The cuts agenda that dominates this Government's thinking do not bring efficiency, as we have seen from the austerity policies.  They lead to hardship, inefficiency and more inequality.
The Constitutional Convention has been considering the reform of aspects of the political system.  However, the Government chose not to include the future of the Seanad in its considerations, despite the commitment in the Labour Party's pre-election manifesto.  This is another broken promise to add to its growing list of broken pledges.   The Constitutional Convention could have played a very constructive role in reforming the political process.  Instead, this has been stymied by the Government, which has significantly restricted the convention's remit.  
Over the past two weekends, the convention discussed the Dáil electoral system.   I attended last week's deliberations.  The citizen delegates were enthused and focused but limited in what they could discuss.  They could consider only the very narrow agenda of Dáil electoral reform?  Why did the Government not trust the Constitutional Convention to discuss political reform?  Was the Government afraid to allow citizens to have their say on these matters?  Was it afraid they would advocate substantial reform of the Oireachtas, including the Seanad?  
It would have made sense to address the issues of how we do our business and govern ourselves and what is wrong from the citizens' perspective with these institutions, and to ventilate all the ideas of reforming the Dáil, Seanad and local government.  
Instead, the Government, which promised a democratic revolution and claimed to be committed to the radical reform of an outdated system, has failed yet again.  Its approach to political reform has been piecemeal, minimalist and all about reducing the number of elected representatives.  It has been more about spin than substance. In addition to getting rid of 60 Seanadóirí, the Taoiseach plans to reduce the numbers of councils, councillors and Deputies.  He has cut numbers but brought forward no real, positive, progressive change.  He has done nothing to rebalance power between central and local government, nor has he done anything to rebalance power within the Oireachtas or between the Executive and Legislature.  
He risks missing an opportunity to create historic political reform and leaving behind a mess for a future Government to clear up.  
This State has one of the most centralised systems of government in Europe, based entirely on the British system, and a weak system of local government that has been hollowed out by successive Governments.  This concentrates too much power in hands of the Executive and the two Houses of the Oireachtas, which are not fit for purpose in 21st-century Ireland.
The flaws evident in the Seanad are reflective of a broader malaise at the heart of our democracy and this institution.  The Seanad has not been reformed because successive Governments refused to reform it.  On 12 successive occasions, reports have been produced proposing reform of the Seanad.  Not one has been implemented.   In 1979, the people voted in a referendum to broaden the franchise to all graduates of institutes of higher education.  This was never implemented.  No Government was prepared to allow further scrutiny of its work.  As a consequence today, we have a Government that is increasingly unaccountable, arrogant and apparently oblivious to the impact of its policies on low- and middle-income households and disadvantaged and vulnerable citizens.  This is a Government that is abusing its massive majority to force through legislation.
In the words of the Chief Whip, the Government's record on Dáil reform has been deplorable.  More than half of the Bills introduced to the Dáil since the coalition came into office in March 2011 have been rushed through or guillotined.  Do Members remember the promise that this practice would occur only in the most exceptional circumstances?  
Up to mid-March, 52 out of 90 Bills were guillotined.  Rushed legislation will invariably end up with flaws that will be challenged in the courts.  
The legislation to provide for the family home tax was rushed though the Dáil before Christmas and had to be amended in the new year.
Another pledge, and one of the major planks of the reform programme, was that senior Ministers would make themselves available to deal with Topical Issue debates.  Instead, they have failed to appear in the Dáil three times out of four, on average, to respond to Topical Issues.  In addition, the system of ordering Dáil business is not agreed through a system that is fair, inclusive and transparent for all parties.
The Friday sitting was presented as a means for the Dáil to pass more legislation and to be more efficient.  It has failed on both counts.  There are no votes or questions to Ministers.  It is a farce.  Leaders' Questions, as the Taoiseach has acknowledged, has become a source of huge frustration for Opposition parties.  It serves no real purpose in its current format and is in no way holding the Taoiseach to account.
The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission is not inclusive of all the parties in the Oireachtas and its decisions frequently exclude Sinn Féin and others.  There is no access to media facilities for Opposition parties, unlike Government parties.  If they want to do a press conference, Opposition parties can chose between the plinth or, if the weather is inclement, huddle under the portico.  How is that indicative of an efficient political system at work?
The Government also lauds its decision to allow Dáil committees to question newly appointed chairs of State boards, but these committees have no power to do anything about these appointments.  Sinn Féin believes a case can be made for a second chamber that is democratic, relevant and fit for purpose, and is part of a wider reform of the political system.   Any reform of the Seanad must be underpinned by clear principles of democracy, accountability and efficiency in its role, and has to be on the basis of the universal franchise and direct election by the people.
Sinn Féin rejects a Seanad whose Members are hand-picked by county councillors, university graduates or nominated by a Taoiseach.  Those who serve in any part of the Oireachtas should be elected by the people.  A radically reformed Seanad should also give a voice to citizens in the North.  It should be a genuinely national institution.  There is currently no provision for the participation of those citizens who live in the North in the political life of the State.
The Seanad should be elected by universal suffrage of the 32 counties of Ireland by citizens over the age of 16.  Citizens in the Six Counties should cast their ballot by postal vote.  The diaspora also should be represented.  It is astonishing that a Government which so regularly looks to the Irish diaspora to help with the economic crisis then denies the very same people the right to have a voice in the Oireachtas.
Sinn Féin believes that it is possible to have a Seanad that is an elected forum for civic society, particularly for those sectors not adequately represented in the Dáil and the more marginalised sections of our community.  This is the kind of real reform we should be debating.  Let us look around the Chamber.  It is mostly male, all white and mainly middle aged, Catholic and heterosexual.  A reformed Seanad should address this imbalance.
There is no voice in the Dáil for ethnic minorities, whether they are Irish Travellers or the myriad other ethnic minorities who have come to this country in recent years.  A reformed Seanad could change this.  A reformed, democratically elected and accountable Seanad could serve our democracy well and act as an important counter-balance to the political party dominated Dáil.  
A reformed Seanad could, for example, further scrutinise domestic and, in particular, European legislation.  We have seen in recent years the results of the failure to properly implement or interpret European legislation.  Waterford Crystal workers had to take their fight for pension rights to the European Court of Justice due to the failure of the system here to properly implement the insolvency directive.   The sugar beet industry was decimated by the closure of the Carlow and Mallow sugar plants which, it later emerged, should never have been closed.  A second chamber, elected in a different manner, and with a less constituency focused membership, would be better placed than the Dáil to discuss technical and complex policy issues at length, perhaps along the lines of the hearings on the X case.
The Taoiseach has spoken about comparisons with other EU states which function with a single chamber.  In EU states with unicameral or single chamber systems there are much stronger systems of local government.  There is also a very clear separation of the executive from the legislature and sufficient checks and balances within the system to hold the executive to account.  
This is clearly not the case in this State and the Government seems to have set its face against any real rebalancing of power between local and central government or between the Legislature and the Executive.
When I heard the Taoiseach recently criticise the Seanad for failing to hold the excesses of the last Fianna Fáil Government to account and blaming it for the economic crash, I was amazed.  The reality is that the Taoiseach and his party were as much a cheerleader for the Celtic tiger and its excesses and lack of regulation as the Fianna Fáil politicians who ran the State into the ground.
Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fáil were part of a cosy consensus in this State for decades.  It was Sinn Féin who argued during those years for the wealth of the Celtic tiger to be redistributed and invested in public services, infrastructure and sustainable jobs.  
It is the establishment parties which failed to act as a brake on the Celtic tiger and to ensure that the economy was properly managed and invested, and the corrupt activities of the golden circles confronted and exposed.  That continues under the Taoiseach's watch.  The cosy consensus is still there.
To point the finger at the Seanad for the mess that all the other parties made of the situation would be laughable if it were not so serious.  They collectively failed to legislate for the banks, developers and speculators, and when it all went disastrously wrong they still could not hold them accountable but chose to make ordinary citizens pay for the greed of the golden circles.  The Taoiseach now seems intent on proceeding with a decision taken on a whim at a Fine Gael annual dinner, without proper discussion, analysis or scrutiny.
Citizens should not be rushed into further curtailing the Oireachtas without looking at the consequences or without any serious consideration of the alternatives.  A referendum should not be limited to abolition or retention.  Why does the Taoiseach not give citizens the option of voting for root branch and reform?  Would that not be the decent and democratic thing, and part of what he promised in the election?
One of the reasons offered for the abolition of the Seanad is its cost.  Sinn Féin has consistently argued for the need to reduce high salaries in the public sector, including for politicians, Ministers and their special advisors.  If the Government wants to reduce costs in the Oireachtas it should cut the salaries of Ministers, Deputies and Senators, reduce allowances, cut the salaries of special advisors and stop breaching its pay caps.
The Taoiseach proposes to reduce two dysfunctional Chambers to one dysfunctional Chamber without giving the people the option of voting for an alternative.  
Successive Governments had the opportunity to reform the system and all failed to do so.   The Government is now papering over the cracks and presenting this abolition Bill as reform.  It is not.
Sinn Féin put forward a reasonable proposal that the Constitutional Convention should look at reform of the Oireachtas.  There is still the potential to do so.  It could properly tease out all these issues with the aim of achieving the best checks and balances and the most democratic outcome for our system of government.  Why rush things?  
Why not give people a number of choices and put in place a reform package which is meaningful, sustainable, democratic and effective?  Sinn Féin would support the Government in such an approach.  We will not support this amendment.

G8 must do more

This morning I was among almost two thousand, mainly young people, who attended President Obama’s visit and speech in the Waterfront in Belfast. It was a good speech which recognised some of the challenges and issues still outstanding from the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent agreements.
The President is here as part of the G8 summit. Over the next 48 hours he and the other leaders of some of the world’s richest states will meet in the Lough Erne Hotel resort in County Fermanaghto discuss matters of pressing concern.
According to the organisers the agenda for the two day conference ‘will focus on economic issues, specifically trade, tax avoidance matters, transparency on how gas, mining and oil companies function, as well as international violence, and political reform that will allow citizens to hold their governments to account’.
There will also, they say, be a concentration on the civil war that is tearing Syria apart.’  Almost 100,000 people have been killed there in the last two years.
The G8 is a hugely influential meeting of world leaders. It brings together 8 nations which hold a huge proportion of the world’s wealth. The policy agreements that emerge over the next two days will significantly shape the worlds economy. Thus far the G8 and the wider meeting of the G20 have failed to effectively tackle the global economic crisis and the range of other issues, like world hunger and poverty; climate change and investment in disadvantaged regions of the world. Truth is that’s not what these summits are about.
It is a sad fact that every night one billion people go to bed hungry. Three million children die from malnutrition and hunger and many more from preventable diseases. Millions more suffer from stunting – a physical condition that limits physical and cognitive development that is caused by chronic malnutrition. In a world which has the resources to feed everyone and to provide health care for everyone – this is a scandal. One estimate by the World Bank concluded that $10 billion dollars a year – a tiny amount in comparison to the trillions available to the G8 - could provide sufficient nutrition for the 36 countries which together contain about 90% of those affected by lack of proper nutrition.
An end to world hunger is not some pie in the sky, unrealisable goal. It can be done. If governments apply themselves it is possible to achieve an end to world hunger over the next decade.  The ‘Enough Food for Everyone IF’ campaign group has said that an additional investment of $42 billion annually in world agriculture would allow us to reach that goal. It seems like a large amount of money but it pales into insignificance when set against the money government’s globally spent on weapons.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute world military expenditure last year totalled $1753 billion - which is around 2.5% of the world’s GDP. Allocating $42 billion each year to save three million lives and to end world hunger would appear to me to be a small price to pay. So,the leaders of the G8 need to re-evaluate their priorities. There needs to be a significant increase in aid specifically targeted at agriculture. In the last 20 years of the last century international aid to agriculture collapsed from 17% of all aid in 1980 to 3.4% in 2006. Decisions by the G8 at its most recent summits have failed in this.
The G8 has also failed, along with other governmental structures to adequately address the issue of climate change which each year impacts on 325 million people and kills more than 300,000.
According to the United Nations Committee on World Food Security’s High Level Panel of Experts:
‘Food insecurity and climate change are, more than ever, the two major global challenges humanity is facing and climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the greatest challenges for food security.’
The recent controversy about the huge amounts of tax that multi-national companies like Apple and Starbucks and others do not pay to governments has also raised serious concern around tax avoidance, tax havens and transparency in respect of government budgets.
The fact that Apple CEO Tim Cook could tell the US Senate Investigation that for the last ten years Apple Sales Ireland paid an average corporate tax rate of just 2 percent and in 2011 paid just 0.5% tax, is evidence of the scale of the problem and the loss of revenue to governments.

The hundreds of millions of lost tax revenue could have been used to get people back to work but it also affects the developing world where Christian Aid estimate that the lives of 350,000 children could be saved each year if this kind of corporate tax avoidance was ended.

The ‘Enough Food for Everyone IF’ campaign group has produced an excellent briefing paper on the G8 summit providing information on all of these issues. IF represents over 200 organisations, including Concern, Trócaire, Oxfam, Christian Aid, Muslim Charity and Muslim Aid and Children in Crossfire.
They have come together to mobilise public and political opinion on the four big issues affecting people. These are Aid, Tax, Land, and Transparency. In its G8 Summit Briefing, IF provides background information on all of these matters but most importantly it sets targets and makes recommendations for the G8 on tax transparency, nutrition, biofuels, agricultural investment, money laundering, tax evasion and much more.
Specifically it calls for the G8 to publish a comprehensive accountability report which tracks progress on all development commitments; ensure that all new G8 2013 commitments and initiatives have an accompanying accountability framework that is transparent and accessible to stakeholders, including developing country governments and civil society, and invite developing countries to participate and contribute to all G8 working groups and summits/events that impact them.
If you are interested in and concerned about these international issues I would suggest going online and looking at www.enoughfoodif.org or any of the many other organisations working in these areas.
 
 

Opposing the Family Home Tax

This week the Sinn Féin Dáil team introduced a Private Members Bill to repeal the Irish government’s family home tax – property tax which takes effect in July.
Fine Gael and Labour combined to vote it down in the Dáil on Wednesday evening. Notwithstanding this Sinn Féin is committed in government to repeal this tax.

Our Finance (Local Property Tax Repeal) Bill was about lifting the burden of the government’s unfair property tax from families and households and replacing it with alternative measures to raise taxes, including a wealth tax. It was about undoing one of many bad policy decisions taken by Fine Gael and the Labour Party in the past two years.

Fine Gael and the Labour Party were elected to undo the damage caused by Fianna Fáil, but they have instead chosen to implement Fianna Fáil policies. This has led to greater inequality, poverty and disadvantage. This week the cuts to the respite care grant take effect and will hit 77,000 of our most vulnerable citizens. Emigration and unemployment are at record levels, especially among young people. Public services, particularly health, are in crisis, with further cuts to be imposed this year.

I listened on Tuesday and Wednesday night during the Dáil debate to a succession of Fine Gael and Labour Deputies trying to defend the government’s tax on the family home. They sought to do it, if we could believe this, and I do not believe that they believe this, by comparing
They must know - and if they don’t

Of course there are inefficiencies in the services but the rationale the Minister for Finance in his defence of the tax gave as his justification of it that the big boys – the Troika of the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the European Commission – made them do it
“Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by 2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair” (P59)
Indeed the Taoiseach himself in a campaign against a previous FF Property Tax said “It is morally unjust and unfair to tax a person's home”
The property tax that this government has introduced takes no account of ability to pay or of those in negative equity; and it ignores the fact that one in four mortgage holders is in mortgage distress or the many others stuck in homes whose value has dropped and on which they have paid huge stamp duty.



This is despicable - going after
There are alternative measures that the Government could have taken, including the introduction of a wealth tax on all property, liquid and assets, above a certain net wealth.

Why could they not do that?
Why could it not levy a 1% wealth tax on all net wealth over €1 million with certain exclusions?
And because it is aimed at high net worth individuals, it is dealt with by people used to engaging with the revenue system, who very often have tax accountants dealing with the system on their behalf.

So Fine Gael and Labour had a choice. There are alternatives.

They could have opted to take more from those who can afford it.

Instead, Labour and Fine Gael chose to inflict more pain on struggling families.