Gerry Adams's Blog, page 69

“The Magdalene Women are an inspiration”

This evening the Dáil has been debating the McAleese report on the Magdalene Laundries. In my contribution to the debate I praised the Magdalene women:
“Despite their experiences all those I have met have remained feisty, and strong and resilient and good humoured and some of them have relentlessly campaigned for justice over many years.
They are more than victims and survivors they have become campaigners and role models for others in this state and beyond who seek justice and equality and freedom.
The Magdalene women are an inspiration and this Dáil and the people of this island owes theme a debt of gratitude for their endeavours on behalf of each other and of all those who were victims of abuse.”
I also acknowledged and thanked the Taoiseach for his “fulsome and comprehensive apology on behalf of the state to the Magdalene women and to commend your remarks.”
The full text of my remarks: 
“Taoiseach I want to welcome the survivors of the Magdalene Laundries who are with us today in the public gallery and the hundreds more who will be following this evenings debate very intently. 
I especially want to commend the women themselves and those groups and individuals who advocated on their behalf.
You shone the light so that the rest of us could see. 
I also Taoiseach want to acknowledge and to thank you for your fulsome and comprehensive apology on behalf of the state to the Magdalene women and to commend your remarks. 
Taoiseach the Proclamation of 1916 – a Proclamation which has yet to become a reality – at a time when women did not have the vote, addresses itself to Irishmen and Irishwomen. 
Giving recognition of that reality. 
It was the mission of statement of Irish republicanism at the start of the 20th century and it remains as vital and relevant today as it was then.
It is a charter of rights for citizens. 
It guarantees religious and civil liberty, and equal rights and equal opportunities. 
It is a charter of rights for equality and solidarity and freedom for all the people of this island. 
But that is not what emerged in our partitioned island post 1916. 
Taoiseach the women and girls in the Magdalene Laundries had no rights. 
They were objects in a conservative dispensation governed by conservative elites in the Church and the political establishment. 
In the manner of their incarceration and in their treatment in the Magdalene Laundries – these women were slaves – these girls were slaves - slaves of a brutal and inhuman regime which Irish governments turned a blind eye to. 
Indeed, successive governments endorsed and used these institutions. 
The ‘Anti-Slavery International’ defines slavery; and I quote: “People are sold like objects, forced to work for little or no pay and are at the mercy of their ‘employers’.” 
There are common characteristics that distinguish slavery from other human rights violations. 
These include when a person is “forced to work – dehumanised – treated as a commodity – physically constrained or have restrictions placed on his/her freedom of movement.”
Last September I listened to President Obama describe slavery as; “when a woman is locked in a sweatshop, or trapped in a home as a domestic servant, alone, abused and incapable of leaving – that’s slavery.”
These are descriptions which I am sure the Magdalene women – the survivors - listening to this debate will immediately identify with. 
It was an essential part of their life experience in the Magdalene Laundries.
James M Smith in a recent article gives one graphic example of this. 
He describes how two sisters were put to work in the Magdalene Laundries.
One of the two, aged 14 was placed in the Good Shepherd convent in New Ross.  
He recounts the horror of her existence.
He says: “For the next five years she washed society’s dirty laundry and received no pay. When she refused to work the nuns cut her hair as punishment. The hair grew back but to this day the loss of her education angers her. To her, it was a prison in all but name. There was no inspector, no child welfare officer. She was abandoned and no one cared.Sixty years later this woman lives with the stigma and shame attached to these institutions. These are the indelible stains on her life.”Taoiseach this was slavery and as you have said, the state failed to challenge it; to end it; or to provide for its victims.On the contrary as we now know the state employed this system for decades.In July 1960 James Connolly’s daughter Nora Connolly O Brien addressed the Seanad on the then Criminal Justice Bill.
That piece of government legislation, according to Nora Connolly O Brien’s contribution to the debate, would permit young women on remand to be “legally committed to St. Mary Magdalene's Asylum”.

Nora warned that any girl held there would, as she said;“suffer for the rest of her life the stigma of having at one time been an inmate of that asylum.”

The Bill provided – that’s the Bill in this Oireachtas - that girls would have a choice - to go to St. Mary’s or to prison.

Nora Connolly O Brien’s objection to the Magdalene system were so great that she said that if asked for her advice she would tell girls
Taoiseach, much of what went on in the laundries, the ill-treatment inflicted on women and young girls, some as young as 9, has also been described in previous reports. 
The Ryan Report (2009) details the women’s forced unpaid labour in the Laundries and states that their working conditions were harsh, they were completely deprived of their liberty and they suffered both physical and emotional abuse.
Those who tried to escape and who were caught were returned to these institutions.  
As far back as November 2010 an assessment report on the Magdalene Laundries by the Irish Human Rights Commission called on the government to establish a statutory inquiry and to provide redress for the survivors.  
The following May the United Nations Convention against Torture commended that the Irish state should ensure that survivors from the Laundries obtain redress.  
It also expressed its grave concern at the failure by the State to institute prompt, independent and thorough investigations into the allegations of ill-treatment of the women.  
The government, and it’s to be commended for this, set up the Inter-departmental Committee in June 2012 to clarify whether the state had any interaction with the Laundries. 
Taoiseach I welcome the publication of Martin McAleese’s report and thank him and his team for their report but the government’s strictly limited terms of reference mean that some of the Magdalene Laundries and the stories of some of the women, are not included in the report. 
According to Amnesty International today this also includes previously unknown Laundries in the north. 
Nor does the report cover the scandalous and equally harsh conditions in Bethany Home. 
These significant gaps have to be addressed if a comprehensive and effective resolution of the treatment of girls and women by the state in institutions is to be achieved. 
Taoiseach, I also welcome the meetings you had with the Minister for Justice, in the last week with some of the survivors, and with the Tánaiste before that. 
I also have had the honour of meeting some of these women myself. 
They are remarkable women and living witnesses of a terrible injustice. 
They will have told you of their personal experience and of the horrendous and brutal conditions endured by over ten thousand women in the Magdalene laundries.
I know some of the survivors feel that the 1000 page report by Senator Martin McAleese does not accurately reflect the abuse and the suffering that all of the women endured in these institutions.  
For example, the Report states that only a minority experienced physical abuse and none suffered sexual abuse.  
Many will take issue with this statement.  
Taoiseach, your apology this evening for occurred will be warmly welcomed. 
But what is now needed is a process of redress by the state that treats all of the Magdalene survivors on the basis of equality and provides for their future in a comprehensive fashion. 
As you have acknowledged clearly the starting point must be that their incarceration was wrong; that they were treated as slaves;that their basic rights as citizens and human beings were trampled on, and that the state must bear the burden of putting this right. 
Time is of the essence for these women.  
Many of them are elderly and unwell.  
They have lived with the stigma of Magdalene Laundries and the brutality they experienced during their incarceration for their entire lives.  
The government has a responsibility to act quickly.  
It must not compound the women’s trauma by failing to respond promptly and in a satisfactory way. 
And the Dáil may have concerns about the redress scheme that has been announced and that you have put in place.
That you have commissioned a report to be supplied by Justice John Quirke.  
We will want to hear more of the detail of that.  
But the state has a responsibility to care; to protect citizens from abuse, and in our acknowledgement that it failed; that it failed all of the girls and women – without any exception – it requires that we put forward a non-adversarial redress scheme. 
The women must be compensated for lost wages and pensions.  
Any of their immediate health, housing and counselling needs must also be promptly catered for. 
A package needs to be prepared for these women to compensate for the effects of the abuse that they suffered in the laundries.  And that requires a transparent compensation package.  
That will be the mark against which the government’s proposals will be judged. 
As Martin McAleese himself records in his report women endured unspeakable horror;  
“None of us can begin to imagine the confusion and fear experienced by these young girls, in many cases little more than children, on entering the Laundries – not knowing why they were there, feeling abandoned, wondering whether they had done something wrong, and not knowing when – if ever – they would get out, and see their families again.” 
So, we are all agreed the Magdalene women have suffered long enough, they now need justice.  
Despite their experiences all those I have met have remained feisty, and strong and resilient and good humoured and some of them have relentlessly campaigned for justice over many years.  
They are more than victims and survivors they have become campaigners and role models for others in this state and beyond who seek justice and equality and freedom.
The Magdalene women are an inspiration and this Dáil and the people of this island owes theme a debt of gratitude for their endeavours on behalf of each other and of all those who were victims of abuse.
 
 
 

Vote 1 for King Oak

                                                                     King Oak

I am called many things. One of the least offensive is tree-hugger! As anyone who really knows me will tell you I love trees. I even grow trees although this year has been busier than usual and hasn’t left a lot of space to gather up the seeds and plant and pot them.
In my travels I have picked up seeds here and there. I have Holly trees from Hillsborough Castle and Rowans I picked up at Chequers once upon a time while visiting Tony Blair.
Most of my trees are local. Not surprising when you realise how much a part of Irish history and culture and sport and mythology are our trees. Many of our place names and towns and town lands and some of our counties derive their name from local trees. My home county of Antrim is associated with Aon Trim or Elder. Derry or Doire is connected to the Oak. Mayo or Maigh Eo is the plain of the yews and so on. Indigenous trees also encourage our native wildlife, whether birds or insects.
So, in the interest of promoting Irish trees I am asking readers everywhere to take a few minutes and log on to www.treeoftheyear.org and vote in the European Tree of the Year competition for Ireland’s entry - ‘King Oak’.
This is a huge Oak tree – a pendunculate Oak (quercus robar) - from the Charleville Forest estate at Tullamore in County Offaly. It is estimated to be aged between 400 and 800 years old. Locally it is well known and it is said that generations of Tullamore inhabitants have climbed its branches. It stretches 50 meters from the tip of one branch to the tip of another.
I heard about the Charleville Oak and the competition while listening to Derek Mooney’s excellent show on RTE 1. The person speaking about it claimed that romances began and some ended in the shadow of that great oak.
The European Tree of the Year is not about finding the biggest tree or the smallest or the oldest or most beautiful – however interesting these facts may be. The organisers say they are searching “for the tree closest to your heart, a tree with a story that can hold the community together.”
It’s about the connection between a tree and the community it lives in. According to Hana Rambousková of the Czech Republic who is one of the organisers of the competition; “these trees, many of them hundreds of years old, have witnessed important history in their community. They are tightly bound to a group of people, sometimes even the whole village.”
The closing date for the competition is February 28thand the results will be announced on March 1st. King Oak is currently lying in third place so let’s make an effort and help it win the competition.

The Magdalene Laundries – A shameful record

The Taoiseach’s refusal to apologise last week for the treatment of the women and girls, who were held in the Magdalene laundries over the six decades after the state was established, was met with almost universal anger and frustration.

The publication of the Inter-departmental Committee report, Chaired by Senator Martin McAleese, into the Magdalene Laundries last Tuesday February 5thprovided the government with at least two opportunities in the Dáil for the Taoiseach to apologiseon behalf of the state to the survivors of the Magdalene laundries. Mary Lou who has worked closely with the survivors and their support groups in recent years repeatedly asked him to apologise. To address the needs of the women.

The Taoiseach dissembled. He prevaricated. He acknowledged the conditions under which thousands of women were held. But ultimately he refused to apologise.

Some of the victims accused him of ‘cruelty and ineptitude.’ There was widespread public disbelief at his attitude.

This week he has another opportunity. Today he met some of the survivors. They will have told him again of the horrendous and brutal conditions endured by over ten thousand women in ten Magdalene laundries.  They will also have told him that the 1000 page report by Senator Martin McAleese does not accurately reflect the abuse and suffering that the women endured in these institutions.

Much of what went on in the laundries, the ill-treatment inflicted on women and young girls, some as young as 9, has been described in previous reports. The Ryan Report (2009) details the women’s forced unpaid labour in the Laundries and states that their working conditions were harsh, they were completely deprived of their liberty and suffered both physical and emotional abuse. Those who tried to escape and were caught by the Garda were returned to the institutions.Despite this several months later, in September 09, the then Fianna Fáil Minister for Education, Bat O Keefe rejected a proposal that the state should apologise for what occurred in the laundries. He also refused to establish a redress scheme to help women who worked as slaves in these institutions.Crucially, and against all of the available evidence available at that time Minister sought to distance the state from the laundries. The Minister said that “the situation … is quite different to persons who were resident in State-run institutions. The Magdalene Laundries were privately owned and operated establishments and did not come within the responsibility of the state. The State did not refer individuals to Magdalene Laundries, nor was it complicit in referring individuals to them.”

His comments caused outrage.

In November 2010 an assessment report on the Magdalene Laundries by the Irish Human Rights Commission called on the government to establish a statutory inquiry and to provide redress for the survivors.The following May the United Nations Convention against Torturerecommended that the Irish state should ensure that survivors from the Laundries obtain redress. It also expressed its grave concern at the failure by the State to institute prompt, independent and thorough investigations into the allegations of ill-treatment of the women.

The government then set up the Inter-departmental Committee in June to clarify whether the state had any interaction with the Laundries.The McAleese report examined five possible areas of involvement with the state: the routes by which girls and women entered the Laundries; the regulation of the workplace and state inspections of the Laundries; state funding of and financial assistance to the Laundries (including contracts for laundry services); the routes by which girls and women left the Laundries; and death registration, burials and exhumations.

It concluded that “in each of these areas, the committee found evidence of direct State involvement.”So, the report conclusively answers the question posed by the government. The state was involved at every level of sending girls and women to the Laundries and it funded the existence of the Laundries and was fully aware of the conditions within them.

What should its response now be? There should be a clear and unequivocal apology from the Taoiseach on behalf of the state for its actions and the issue of pensions and a redress scheme for the survivors of this harsh system should be processed speedily.

As Martin McAleese himself records in his report; “None of us can begin to imagine the confusion and fear experienced by these young girls, in many cases little more than children, on entering the Laundries – not knowing why they were there, feeling abandoned, wondering whether they had done something wrong, and not knowing when – if ever – they would get out, and see their families again.”Those women who survive and have spoken of their experiences have given an insight into the brutal regime they lived under.

Last September the government voted against a Sinn Féin Private members motion on the Magdalene Laundries. Labour Minister Kathleen Lynch said she did not doubt the sincerity of the women or ‘have sympathy with them for the hardships they faced and endured’ but she claimed that the ‘the facts remain undetermined’.Well the facts have now been well and truly established – again. There can be no more excuses. The government has a responsibility to act. The Magdalene women endured slavery and successive Irish governments colluded in this. The McAleese report has confirmed this.

It is unacceptable that the government has compounded the women’s trauma by failing to respond promptly and satisfactorily to the report and to issue the apology that the survivors deserve. The onus is now on the Taoiseach and Tánaiste to right the wrongs of past governments.

Adams urges ‘dissidents’ to ‘reflect on their position’

Today I am in Dundalk for our weekly constituency meeting which alternates with Drogheda and Mid Louth. We are also holding a local launch of Sinn Fein's border poll campaign. Conor Murphy, and MLAs and Councillors from both sides of the border will be here.

It is an opportunity to talk about the disastrous impact of partition in the border corridor.

It is also an opportunity to address those who are usually described as dissident. In my remarks I said.
‘I would urge all republicans and nationalists, whatever their opinion of the peace process, and irrespective of which political party or tendency they support, to seize this opportunity to advance republican and nationalist objectives.

I would especially ask those who are usually described as ‘dissident’ to recognise the potential that this initiative holds.

There is now a democratic and peaceful way to bring about Irish unity. There is no reason whatever for any group to engage in or promote or support violent actions.

The challenge for thinking republicans is to find ways to engage with and to listen to the concerns and ambitions of our unionist neighbours.

As the anniversary of the Easter Rising approaches I want to appeal directly to groups which claim to follow in that tradition to reflect on their position.

Now is the time for them to show courage and in the spirit of the 1916 Proclamation to embrace a peaceful way forward…

This is a phase of political activity that is about persuasion; it’s about democratic conversations and winning support for Irish unity.

Violent actions will not assist this process. Violent actions will make the task of achieving a YES vote more difficult. So, consider the options. Examine the possibilities. And don’t miss this opportunity.

I believe Irish unity makes sense. I believe it makes political and economic sense and that it is in the best interests of the people of these islands.

The Good Friday Agreement provides a legislative, peaceful and democratic route to Irish unity. A Border Poll is the means.

So, let the people decide!’

The full text of my remarks.

“The Memorandum of Understanding between Newry and Mourne Council and Louth County Council, and the cross border support for the construction of a bridge at Narrow Water are just two examples of local communities grasping the challenging of breaking down the barriers created by partition.

Ending partition would be good for communities and business along the border.

Partition inhibits trade, investment, co-operation and creates a cycle of boom and bust for towns straddling the border.

There will be times when economic and political circumstances and differences between the euro and sterling will favour one side of the border over the other.

This is bad for business, bad for the communities that depend upon those small towns and bad for the economy of the island.

It also encourages criminality, particularly in respect of fuel smuggling which costs each state money in revenue as well as leaving behind a toxic sludge that is an environmental danger and threat to citizens and which costs huge amounts of money to clean up.

It’s time for partition to go.”

The Sinn Féin leader also urged those republicans who do not support Sinn Féin to “consider carefully the implications and possibilities presented by a border poll.

The Good Friday Agreement allows for the people of the island of Ireland to determine the future shape of this island, including the right to opt for a united Ireland.

It provides for a peaceful and democratic means by which the Irish republican and nationalist objective of Irish independence and freedom can be achieved.

This has been the core political objective since Wolfe Tone and the Society of United Irishmen.

It has been the goal of Irish people since England first involved itself in Irish affairs.

The Good Friday Agreement has created the means by which this can be achieved.

Sinn Féin has called for the British and Irish governments to set a date for a border poll and for that referendum to be held in the next term of the Assembly and Oireachtas.

Already this initiative has seen a significant increase in debate around the issue of possibility of Irish unity and the ending of the union.

Dialogue and conversation and persuasion is an important part of this process.

Sinn Féin wants to encourage the widest possible debate of all of the issues involved whether it’s the economy, political allegiance, the protection of traditions, the shape of the new Ireland and reconciliation.

These are just some of the matters which will need to be discussed in the time ahead.

I would urge all republicans and nationalists, whatever their opinion of the peace process, and irrespective of which political party or tendency they support, to seize this opportunity to advance republican and nationalist objectives.

I would especially ask those who are usually described as ‘dissident’ to recognise the potential that this initiative holds.

There is now a democratic and peaceful way to bring about Irish unity. There is no reason whatever for any group to engage in or promote or support violent actions.

The challenge for thinking republicans is to find ways to engage with and to listen to the concerns and ambitions of our unionist neighbours.

As the anniversary of the Easter Rising approaches I want to appeal directly to groups which claim to follow in that tradition to reflect on their position.

Now is the time for them to show courage and in the spirit of the 1916 Proclamation to embrace a peaceful way forward.

Sinn Féin wants a date for a border poll to be set and held within the lifetime of the next Assembly and Oireachtas. During this time we will be actively seeking to persuade unionists and non-unionists and all those who may at this time be opposed to Irish unity, or ambivalent on it, to join with us in making it happen.

That is a significant challenge but one I believe we are up to and can succeed in.

This is a phase of political activity that is about persuasion; it’s about democratic conversations and winning support for Irish unity.

Violent actions will not assist this process. Violent actions will make the task of achieving a YES vote more difficult. So, consider the options. Examine the possibilities. And don’t miss this opportunity.

I believe Irish unity makes sense. I believe it makes political and economic sense and that it is in the best interests of the people of these islands.

The Good Friday Agreement provides a legislative, peaceful and democratic route to Irish unity. A Border Poll is the means.

So, let the people decide!

The IBRC Bill turns bad banking debt into soveriegn debt

Late on Wednesday evening February 6th the Irish government rushed to introduce emergency legislation into the Oireachtas to liquidate Anglo-Irish Bank, now called the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation.
This was part of a package of moves by the government which it claims will allow it to avoid paying the annual €3.1 billion Promissory Note.
Sinn Féin voted against the Bill.
In my contribution to the debate I said:
This Bill will turn bad banking debt into sovereign debt - Adams
Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams TD speaking in the debate on February 6th on the liquidation of Anglo-Irish Bank said:
Here we are at 1.30 a.m. and we have not been told anything by the Government about this issue. The most revealing part of the Minister's contribution was the following statement:
‘I would have preferred to be introducing this Bill in tandem with a finalised agreement with the European Central Bank. However, I understand the European Central Bank will continue to consider the proposals made by the Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland, with the agreement of the Government, tomorrow.’
 Why can the Dáil and the people not be told what these proposals are?
Why can this Bill not be brought forward in tandem with that finalised agreement tomorrow?
Instead, we are presented with legislation in a vacuum. We did not even receive it until 10.30 p.m., our finance spokespersons did not receive proper briefings and the European Central Bank has made no statement.
The Bill is but one half of a package and the Dáil is being denied the right to see the other half.
We cannot even table amendments to the Bill.
This is the Government that promised to operate in a different way. Deputies are denied the right to speak on this issue. This is not the way in which the Dáil should be doing business. It smacks of the type of stroke politics that Fianna Fáil pulled in its time and that Fine Gael and Labour rightly condemned.
That is what Sinn Féin argued for.
Instead of closing the bank down, Fianna Fáil bailed it out and poured billions of euro in taxpayers' money into it.
Labour came along with Fine Gael and did exactly the same.
Instead of liquidating the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation the Government wants to compound this mistake by turning bad banking debt into sovereign Government bonds, in effect, a Government promissory note.
It wants to wind the bank down, but it does not want to wind down its debt.
The Government wants the citizens to fall for this and for the Bill to be passed in two hours.
This comes after nearly two years of negotiations that the Taoiseach continuously claimed were too intense, detailed and technical for ordinary mortals and decent Deputies to understand.
Suddenly, the Bill now has to be rushed through. This is a mark of the Government.
The Dáil has never seen the fabled technical paper on the promissory note that, according to the Taoiseach, the Minister has been working on for 18 months. Where is it?
What of the Government's claim in June that there would be a deal on legacy debt by October? Where is it?
This is no way to deal with the Dáil.
 There is a certain benign arrogance about the way the Government treats the Oireachtas and the State's citizens, including the workers of IBRC.
No amount of crocodile tears will undo the fact that, without notice and through the media, the workers were informed that their jobs were finished.
This is no way to deal with any kind of legislation, certainly not legislation as important as the Bill before us.
To our cost, the State's citizens have learned that rushed legislation is bad legislation.

Let us remind ourselves that the Government's proposal is a U-turn on the claims following the European Council meeting in June that there would be a deal on legacy debt by October.
That month has come and gone, as has 2012, yet there is still no deal on legacy debt.

Neither is there a separation, an idea to which the Government was converted after rubbishing Sinn Féin's championing of the need to separate banking debt from sovereign debt.
On the contrary and even on a cursory reading, the Bill will turn bad banking debt into sovereign debt.
The Bill reads: "And whereas the winding up of the IBRC is necessary to resolve the debt of the IBRC to the Central Bank of Ireland".
No one should be surprised. This Government promised that it would not give another red cent to bad banks.
Then, in one of its first acts as a Government, it paid €3.1 billion to Anglo Irish Bank. Despite our best wishes and us willing the Government to do well, this is no game-changer or seismic shift.
The critical issue was never whether there would be a deal; it was what type of deal would be done.
Sinn Féin has long advocated a deal that would remove the toxic banking debt from the shoulders of Irish citizens.
That is not what is being proposed. This is not a write-down.
The Government never asked for a write-down.
 It never negotiated for one and it did not seek one.
The overall stock of the debt remains the same.
 With interest, it might be larger.
 The Government might be winding up Anglo Irish Bank as an institution but not its debt.
Sinn Féin does not accept that restructuring or paying the debt over a longer timeframe is a credible deal for the taxpayer.
The fact is, as the Minister said in opposition, the promissory note should not be paid. It should not be paid for the simple reason we cannot afford to pay it.
It is not our debt.
The Government’s approach will tie this bad debt to citizens for decades to come – our children and grandchildren will have to pay billions.
We are handing a legacy debt to them and we have no idea what the economic and political circumstances will be when the bonds mature.
That is wrong.
We should not place on the shoulders of children not yet born a legacy which might well damage their future.
That is not good government. It is not good strategic, visionary government.
It is short-term, short-sighted opportunism.
It is matched only by the Government’s flawed negotiating approach.
The Government needed to tell the ECB and the EU that enough is enough.
Instead, it told the ECB and the EU that it would honour the debt, that the Government would not have the word “defaulter” written on our foreheads, and it gave up its best negotiating hand at the outset.
The Government finds it easier to be tougher on citizens than it does on our partners in the European Union.
It has cut respite care and child benefit, the back to work clothing and footwear allowance and it has taxed maternity benefit.
A family home tax is being introduced and septic tank charges have been imposed. It is easy for the Government to be tough on the small people.
There will be no relief in what the Government is doing because it is tied to austerity.
There will be no relief from the relentless austerity citizens have endured to bail out bankers.
Every billion of the bad debt that is paid is a cut to the health budget, an increase in PRSI, a new property tax, more over-crowded classrooms, more workers out of jobs, more families struggling to make ends meet, more Garda stations being closed and more nurses emigrating.
A credible deal is one that will bring relief to citizens.
There have been six austerity budgets, which have taken €28 billion out of the economy.
Sinn Féin has long argued for the end of the IBRC. What we simply cannot support is turning the bad debts of this bankrupt bank into sovereign debt.
It is not our debt.
It does not belong to the people of this State and it never was.
Fianna Fáil saddled us with it in the first place.
Sinn Féin cannot and will not support the Government in doing this.
The Government should not proceed with the Bill. It should bring forward the entire package, finish its deal with the ECB.
The Minister should not miss the point I make.
We can all be smart alecs but Members should listen to what I say.
The Minister should introduce the entire package and deal with people as mature citizens who should be empowered by Government, not denied their rights.

Acknowledging grief and trauma

 
The killing of Adrian Donohoe on Friday January 25th sent a shock wave across the island. The young Garda Detective was shot dead only a short distance from his home when a criminal gang carried out an armed robbery of the Credit Union at Lordship.
The Jenkinstown area is a close knit community in the Colley peninsula. Adrian Donohoe was a valued member of that community. He was a keen GAA player both in his home town in Kilnaleck in Cavan and with the local St Patricks GAA club in the Cooleys, where he was both a coach to young kids and a player.
I didn’t know Garda Donohoe personally but many of those I know in the Cooleys liked and respected him. They all spoke of his courage and dedication, his work as a mentor to the youngsters in St. Pat’s GAC and his commitment to his family and community.
The men and women of An Garda Siochána do extraordinarily dangerous work in very difficult circumstances in defence of citizens. They risk their lives and wellbeing to protect society.
The shooting dead of Adrian Donohoe also and understandably evoked memories of the killing of Garda Jerry McCabe and the wounding of Garda Ben O Sullivan in Adare in June 1996. In my remarks in the Dáil I apologised on my own behalf and that of Sinn Féin to those families and to the families of other members of the state forces who were killed by republicans.
I had previously apologised to the McCabe family in May 2007 and again two years later in August 2009 when I described the apology by the men involved in the killing of Garda McCabe as genuine. I said it echoed the sentiments of republicans everywhere. I also expressed my deep regret for the “great loss and hurt suffered by the McCabe and O’Sullivan families.”
Republicans were not involved in the killing of Garda Adrian Donohoe. That much is clear. But there is a need to address the fact that other Gardaí were. That is what I tried to do in a genuine and sincere way.
All of these families, like so many others who were bereaved as a consequence of the conflict, have suffered great pain and loss. Sinn Féin is absolutely determined, as are the vast majority of Irish citizens, to ensure that the recent decades of conflict and the centuries of injustice and violence that preceded it, never ever occur again.
We are equally determined to stand with An Garda Siochána and the PSNI against those who would seek to turn the clock back to the bad days of conflict and in the battle against criminals and criminal gangs.
Regrettably, there have been some who have seen these events as an opportunity to point score against Sinn Féin and to make personalised attacks on me. The Independent Group of newspapers has been especially vitriolic. Every and any pretext is used to write disparaging articles or make offensive comments.
On Monday January 28th the Irish Independent published a particularly bitter and unedifying tirade by columnist Paul Williams. Among other allegations in it he accused me of having worked to “undermine the Gardaí’s work in every way possible.”
I wrote to the Independent. They carried my response although they left out a paragraph which said:  “On the contrary I have been very clear in my support for the Gardaí. Since my election as TD I have met with senior Garda officers on a number of occasions as part of my role in supporting their work and on other occasions to report criminal activity. Indeed myself and Conor Murphy, MP for Newry & Armagh met both the PSNI and the Gardaí separately as part of our efforts to tackle cross-border crime.”

Sinn Féin representatives along the border corridor continue this work as our contribution to public safety and community justice. I am very proud to have been elected by the people of Louth to represent them in the Dáil and to lead the Sinn Féin party, whose representatives on both sides of the border work day and daily with both the Gardaí and PSNI for the good of the entire community.

The Independent Group of newspapers have a different agenda. The political bias of the editorial stance is matched only by the vitriol of Indo journalists like Fionnan Sheehan. My apology for the killing of Garda McCabe by republicans also drew the ire of some unionists who in their desire to heap all responsibility for the conflict in the north onto republicans have demanded an apology for the deaths of members of the RUC and British Army.

They make this demand while they reject any suggestion that there should be apologies for the policies of Unionist governments over 50 years; or from the British government, or from unionist leaders, or from those who led the British Army or RUC or UDR or any of the other armed groups associated with the British system; all of whom used or supported the use of violence in furtherance of their own political agenda.
I do not believe the fact that citizens took up arms against oppression in the North, and against those forces that inflicted violence on behalf of the British state, is a matter of apology.


Members of armed groups such as the British Army and the RUC and UDR were active and willing participants in the conflict. So too were the volunteers of the IRA.
 
Members of An Garda Siochána and the Defence Forces were not combatants.
However, it is important that we should not lose sight of or ignore the hurt and pain of the families of all those who died fighting the war. 
No more than we can ignore the deaths and the injuries inflicted on civilians by the British, RUC, UDR, unionist and republican forces.
It is a sad fact of our history that many fell in action. That should give pause for thought to the political elites. It is a shocking indictment of the failure of politics.I take no satisfaction from the killings by the IRA of British soldiers and RUC officers. Whether it is the family of an IRA volunteer, or RUC officer, or the family of a member of the British forces, or of a civilian, or of a victim of sectarianism, or of collusion, they all deserve acknowledgement of the grief and trauma they have suffered.

A one-sided focus on the past takes us nowhere. Addressing complex and painful legacy issues is an enormous challenge.

The conflict is now over. This island and especially the north has been transformed by the Peace Process. There are now power sharing political institutions and a policing service to serve the needs of all citizens.

The priority for all political leaders at this time must be to commit ourselves fully and unequivocally to the Peace Process and ensure that there is never a recurrence of conflict. That is my focus and my commitment.

Reconciliation is an enormous challenge for all of us. There are still significant political differences. None of this will be resolved overnight. It is a process of dialogue, engagement, compromise. There is an onus on the Sinn Féin leadership to promote such a process.
But this is not just a matter for people in the north.  There is a particular responsibility also on leaders in this state, in the government and in Fianna Fáil, as well as in the media to deal with legacy issues directly effecting citizens in this state in a way which takes us all beyond invective.

Young Scientists of the Future

Young Scientist Exhibition

Two weeks ago I spent a very enjoyable couple of hours visiting this yearsYoung Scientist and Technology Exhibition which was being held as usual in the RDS in Dublin. The halls were packed full of thousands of young people, from all parts of the island, who were there proudly showing off their projects and hoping to win the coveted Young Scientist for 2013 award or one of the other awards that are presented.

This year the event celebrated its 49th birthday. When it first began all those years ago only 230 young people took part. This year over 4,000 students submitted 1800 projects. Less than one in three of the projects submitted made it to the RDS. Despite that over 2,000 young people were there and 79 judges had the difficult task of assessing each of the 550 projects on display.

Louth was well represented with 26 projects from schools across the constituency. I wasn’t able to visit them all but I did get round quite a few, as well as taking the time to meet students from Donegal, Cork, Meath, Dublin and all points of the compass.

The standard of the projects was amazing.

Among those I met were Deirdre Ruane-McAteer and Emma Shields from Bush Post Primary School in Louth. Bush is a DEIS school. These schools exist in areas of social or economic disadvantage and are part of an educational strategy that is about ‘Delivering Equality of Opportunity In Schools (DEIS)’.

Emma Shields and Deirdre Ruane-McAteer

Deirdre Ruane-McAteer and Emma Shields are two exceptional students who decided to investigate whether the ‘views and opinions of young people living in border counties would differ on the social issue of abortion.’
Their project was entitled: ‘Abortion and Religion: a statistical analysis of views and opinions in border counties.’
This is one of the most difficult issues facing Irish society at this time. The statistical analysis carried out by the two students is a timely social science project into a current and major social issue. The fact that their project was also cross border is an insightful recognition of the need to treat this issue like so many others on an all-island basis.
The two students identified this in the introduction to their project in which they said that: ‘The reason we decided to focus our study on abortion is because we believe that the voice of young people aged between 16, 17 and 18 year olds should be heard and were curious to find out where they stood on the topic. Recent events highlighted in the media such as the case of Savita Halappanavar and the opening of the Marie Stopes Clinic in Belfast reignited the debate and garnered in Ireland negative media attention on an international level.’
The two Bush students succeeded in capturing the runner up group prize in the Young Scientist competition.
Other students from Louth also succeeded in winning praise from the judges.
Among them Áine Grennan and Eimear Shine from St. Louis Secondary School who were Highly Commended in the Biological and Ecological section for their ‘investigation of the impact of human activity on water quality in various coastal locations around Dundalk’.



Áine Grennan and Eimear Shine

They had decided as enthusiastic swimmers to carry out an assessment of the water quality of some of the local beaches on Dundalk Bay. Their main aim was to “find out if we swam off any of these beaches would we endanger our health in any way as 20 years ago raw sewage was discharged from an old sewage plant in Dundalk Bay. We wanted to see if there was any raw sewage still left in the bay or has the condition improved since the new Waste Water Treatment Plant was built.”

They discovered that Templetown Beach has a very high water quality while Blackrock had slightly over the Coliform limit but was still acceptable for swimmers provided they exercise caution after bad weather.

Blue Anchor beach however exceeded EU bathing water quality standards “spectacularly” and they warned swimmers that “there are still large quantities of sewage in the sand and high levels of Total Coliforms.”

They have raised the issue with the County Council.

Shane McQuillan, Alex Cahill, and Philip McGuinness, from De La Salle College who were Highly Commended in the Social and Behavioural Sciences for their investigation into ‘the prevalence of racism and sectarianism among teenagers in Dundalk’;

Conor Begley from ColáisteRís who was Highly Recommended in the Technology section for his development of equipment to alert farmers and others to toxic gas in slurry – ‘E.W.O.C.H2: early warning of concentrated hydrogen sulphide’.



Conor Begley

Last week the importance of Conor’s work was underlined at the inquest into the deaths in September of Noel Spence and his two sons Nevin and Graham who were overcome with fumes on their farm outside of Hillsborough, in County Down. Pathologist Prof Jack Crane said that the levels of hydrogen sulphide along with other toxic gases were high enough to render the men unconscious.

Helen Cunningham and Anna McEvoy from Our Lady’s College, Drogheda, were category winners in the Biological and Ecological Sciences for their investigation into ‘Horse chestnut trees under attack’.

Everyone who attended the event was hugely impressed by the enthusiasm, diligence and professionalism that all of the young people from all parts of the island of Ireland brought to their projects. The standard was exceptional.

The organisers of the Young Scientist and Technology exhibition and everyone who has made this event such a success are also to be commended. They deserve our thanks for their contribution and commitment to the education and advancement of our young people.

Inez McCormack: A Champion for Equality

I have known Inez McCormack for many years. She has been an activist since her days with the People’s Democracy and the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960’s. She took part in the Peoples Democracy march from Belfast to Derry at the beginning of January 1969 which was ambushed by unionists at Burntollet. It was an experience which helped shape the young Inez into the committed activist for equality and justice we all came to know.
Inez described herself as a young Protestant girl who up to that point didn’t realise the depth of injustice and inequality in the north and the extent of structured discrimination confronting Catholics.
Growing consciousness of this injustice spurred Inez to embark on the long march for justice and equality, and in defence of the rights of citizens. Inez was still on that march when she died earlier this week. She remained steadfast and as committed and unswerving to her personal vision throughout those 50 years of activism as she was in 1969.
Inez was a hero – a champion of the oppressed and disadvantaged wherever they were to be found. She never gave up. She never wavered in her absolute belief in the right of women to equality; of workers to parity and fairness, and freedom from exploitation; and of communities to live free from sectarian harassment.
As a young social worker in west Belfast she was suspended from her job because she spoke out against the way in which disadvantaged people were being treated by the system.
It was that courage to take a stand that marked her out throughout her years of tireless campaigning – a willingness to step up, provide leadership and speak out against prejudice.
Inez was also an internationalist from her time marching against the Vietnam War to her opposition of apartheid in South Africa.
She was also a key player in advocating and winning support for the MacBride Principles campaign in the United States which sought to ensure that U.S. investment in the north bolstered fair employment. She was also a very significant lobbyist in the USA on the issue of jobs provision especially in the use of pension funds.
As a woman she broke new ground by rising to the top in her role as a trade union leader and the first woman President of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. She was a founding member of the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Fair Employment Agency and she helped establish the Equality Coalition.
In 1993 Inez played a pivotal role in persuading the then Irish President Mary Robinson to visit west Belfast. This was a moment of singular importance in breaking through the wall of exclusion that had been built around Sinn Féin and the people of west Belfast. The British policy was to marginalise and disenfranchise republicans and the community within which we lived and from which we drew our support. One British Secretary of State had described west Belfast as the ‘terrorist community’.
The British didn’t want Mary Robinson to visit west Belfast and the Irish government wasn’t much better. But she did and it was one of several key moments in those years which helped create the context for the peace process. Inez helped make it happen. She was the main conduit between the west Belfast community and the office of the President.
Equality was her watchword. It was also centre stage during the Good Friday negotiations in which Inez’s advice and support for anti-discrimination language, human rights and equality came to the fore. A measure of this can be gleaned from the fact that there is no mention of equality in the Sunningdale Agreement in 1973.
It is included 21 times in the Good Friday Agreement.
Post the Good Friday Agreement Inez worked energetically to make its commitment to equality a reality. Her life of activism is marked by the inspirational effect she had on low paid women workers. From her organising work with domestic and cleaning staff in the Royal in the 70’s and 80’s Inez continued to find practical ways to advance the cause of women workers.
One project she and her trade union colleague Patricia McKeown were central to was the Health Employers Initiative which was part of the West Belfast and Greater Shankill Task Force. It facilitated domestic workers in the Royal to train up for higher paid skilled work while creating job opportunities for others.
This time last year Inez chaired one of Sinn Féin’s Uniting Ireland conferences. Over a thousand people turned out at the Millennium Forum to listen to Martin McGuinness and Basil McCrea UUP MLA, and economist George Quigley. Inez chaired the event with her customary good humour and common sense.
Inez was a passionate and articulate campaigner. She had a deserved international reputation as a human rights activist and was widely respected. She believed in people and in their goodness and decency. She will be greatly missed.
But while Inez may be gone the legacy of her decades of hard work is all around us in the progress that has been made over recent years.
Whenever I met Inez in recent times she always spoke with great delight about her grandchildren. Her face would light up as she recounted tales of her latest visit to Scotland to visit them.
That is how I will remember Inez. Her wide enthusiastic, indomitable smile and her great joy with life and living. And her family.
On behalf of Sinn Féin I want to extend my sincerest condolences to her husband Vincent, her daughter Anne, son-in-law Mark and grandchildren Maisie and Jamie.
 

A Border Poll – Let the people decide

Who would have believed it? Sinn Féin holds a conference in Dublin on Saturday and calls for a border poll in the next term of the Assembly and Oireachtas, and by Tuesday the DUP are supporting it!!!
Of course Arlene Foster backs the idea because she’s convinced that it will deliver the answer she wants. According to the DUP Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment its ‘fantasy politics’. Peter Robinson thought I was ‘on medication’ when I did an interview last week arguing for such a poll.
The DUP believe that there couldn’t be a worse time for republicans to call for a border poll. Arlene told Mitchel McLaughlin on the Nolan show, “if you look at all of the polling, indeed the census that has recently been carried out, there is nowhere near a united Ireland coming in the future”.
That’s not quite accurate and I’ll come back to that shortly. However one of the major problems facing the unionists is that their economic argument in support of the union is so full of holes!
So, let’s look at some of the maths; although before we begin a health warning! These are figures produced by the British system which refuses to release all of the financial figures involved.
According to the British Treasury the north costs the British government £23.2 billion a year. Figures from the Department of Finance and Personnel show that the north produces £12.7 billion.
The gap therefore between the British Treasury figure of £23.2 billion and the DFP figure of £12.7 billion is £10.5 billion.
That is the figure the unionists and the British claim is the subvention that is needed to keep the north functioning.
The problem is that if you look closely you discover that over half of that alleged subvention - £5.7 billion - never comes to the north. It is spent by the British government on the British military and wars in Afghanistan; British Debt; and the British Civil list, War Pensions, Royal Travel and palaces, Military Museums and much more. They claim they do it on behalf of the north but in reality the Executive nor citizens here see a penny of it.
That means that on the figures provided by the British themselves the subvention is £4.8 billion. But remember they refuse to provide figures for corporation tax or VAT paid by British and international companies trading here but whose headquarters are in Britain. So, that £4.8 billion is considerably less.
Arlene in her contribution to the Nolan Show exposed her lack of knowledge on this when she denied that the £10 billion British subvention does not include the billions spent of wars and the military and the civil list and so on. She said that this money “has absolutely nothing to do with the subvention that we receive from Westminster.”
Sorry Arlene you are wrong. These figures are direct from the British Treasury.
And now back to the census. For too long there has been a presumption that Protestants are unionist and Catholics are nationalist or republican. It was never that simple. Now, for the first time, statisticians have been able to ask a question about identity. The results are very interesting.
Less than half the population (48%) designated themselves as British and northern Irish or Irish.  40% stated that they had a British only identity.
A quarter (25%) stated that they had an Irish only identity and just over a fifth (21%) had a Northern Irish only identity. That’s 46% with some form of Irish only identity.
Statisticians and politicians will argue over the significance of this.  But what is certain is that the north is in transition. It is no longer an orange state.
So where do we go from here? Sinn Féin is an Irish republican party. It isn’t just that we want Irish unity – however important that is – we also want a different kind of Ireland – a genuine Republic based on citizens rights which is inclusive and based on equality.
But this republic has to be genuinely inclusive of those who define themselves as unionist and British. That means we have to have to listen to what unionists have to say. Sinn Féin also needs to spell out in an explicit and unambiguous fashion the core values that will shape our vision of that Republic. These must protect all citizens, including rigorously and unequivocally seeking to protect all identities and traditions.
The Good Friday Agreement is quite explicit on this. It sets out: “principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of both communities …”
The Agreement also guarantees in the event of a united Ireland that the right of those who define themselves as British will not be affected.
At the end of Sinn Féin’s conference in Dublin on Saturday I said that it is time for a debate; it’s time for a date; it’s time for a border poll.
Well the debate has well and truly begun. One enterprising media outlet, Journal.ie, organised a poll on Saturday on whether or not there should be a border poll. 51% said Yes, 32% said no and 15% didn’t know. But they all thought about it before voting and the comments were flying thick and fast.
The debate must continue. Out of this an informed citizenry will ultimately determine the future shape of this island. That’s democracy. So, let the people decide; let’s have that border poll.

No Going Back

Belfast 2013 is not the City I grew up in. In my youth and for much of my adult life Belfast was a place in which nationalists had no rights; a place where sectarianism and discrimination, injustice and inequality were commonplace and exercised as a matter of institutional and political practice.

Tens of thousands of nationalists were denied the vote in local and Stormont elections. They were denied jobs and housing. Any sense of Irishness was prohibited or frowned upon. The Irish language, music and culture were marginalised and the political representatives of northern nationalists had no influence and no power.

Elsewhere in the north the gerrymandering or manipulation of electoral boundaries ensured that local councils, even in those areas like Derry which had clear nationalist majorities, were run in unionist interests by unionist controlled councils. And Belfast was among the worst.

The northern state was an orange state. The Orange Order was the cement that held the political, economic and institutional structures of the state together. Most business people were members of the Order. If you were a unionist and wanted to be a senior RUC officer – you had to be an Orangeman. A judge? You had to be an Orangeman. A successful politician? You had to be an Orangeman.

The legacy of those decades still haunts the north. Sectarianism remains a scourge. The scars of discrimination can be found in the disproportionate numbers of citizens on the housing waiting lists in nationalist areas; in the employment patterns across the six counties where nationalist areas experience the highest levels of unemployment; and in the depth of deprivation. 36 out of the 40 most deprived wards in the north are nationalist.

For unionism the northern state was their state. It didn't matter that some unionists also lived in appalling housing or worked in terrible conditions. The northern state – the Orange state – belonged to them. It gave them a sense of belonging, of cohesion and superiority.

The Peace Process and the Good Friday Agreement have changed all of that.It is a process which has been good for everyone on this island. It is also a process which is irreversible.

The underlying ethos of the Good Friday Agreement is parity of esteem, mutual respect and equality.It is also about change. Any process of change present big challenges. There are those who fear change.They see equality for all citizens as a threat.

Equality is not about one side dominating the other – nor is it about anyone attacking what some describe as unionist culture - it is about all citizens – unionist and nationalist - for the first time since partition being treated with mutual respect and on the basis of equality.

It is about nationalists and unionists, and others, living in a society in which decisions are taken democratically and peacefully.It is about tolerance and inclusivity- not hatred and bitterness.

Symbols, including flags, can be divisive but only if the debate is seen in its narrowest context.

So, Belfast is no longer a unionist city. It is a shared city.It wants to be a modern city. The vast majority of citizens don’t want the old Belfast – they want a new Belfast.

The decision taken by Belfast City Council is part of this. It was a compromise position democratically arrived at. Sinn Féin wanted either no flags, or equality of symbols with both the Union flag and Tricolour flying side by side. Sinn Féin Councillors supported the compromise position of the union flag being flown on a set number of designated days a year.

This compromise position was based on Flags legislation brought forward by the British government and which unionist leaders at the time recommended

This April the Good Friday Agreement will be 15 years old.It too was a compromise between conflicting political positions.

It’s success is to be found in the lives saved; the peace that has been achieved; the power sharing arrangements that are working; and the numbers of young people, who unlike their parents or grandparents, have had no experience of conflict.

So, where do we go from here?

It is clear that there are some among unionism who want to turn the clock back. Who believe that mutual respect means nationalists accepting that the unionist ethos must dominate.

That’s not mutual respect or equality. Nor does it reflect the political and demographic realities of today. 90 years ago the northern state was carved out of the rest of the island on the basis that it provided unionists with what was then believed to be a permanent in-built two thirds majority

In the most recent census figures published just before Christmas less than half of the population designated themselves as being British. 40% said they had a British only identity.

A quarter of citizens stated that they had an Irish only identity while 21% said they had a northern Irish only identity. That’s 46% of the population rejecting a British identity and seeing themselves as Irish.

So, the north is not as British as Finchley – as Margaret Thatcher once claimed – and unionists have to accept that almost half of citizens in the north have a different identity.

Could this gradual change in demographics and in peoples’ opinions be part of the motivation of those who seek to stoke the sectarian fires?

Could the decline in the unionist vote be part of the rational for the response of some unionists to the changes that are taking place?

Playing the orange card – fuelling sectarian divisions - is an old unionist and British tactic used to mobilise unionist opinion and put nationalists in their place.

It is a dangerous tactic which in the past brought pogroms and partition and decades of violence.

The vast majority of the protests taking place around the flag issue are illegal. Most are being organised by BNP, UVF and criminal elements, some of whom are well known drug pushers. They are seeking to exploit this situation for their own ends.

There is an expectation across the community that those who are organising these protests will be subjected to due process and that the protests will be policed in a fair way.

As political leaders on this island reflect on the events of recent weeks it is important to understand that the Good Friday Agreement must not be taken for granted. It requires constant attention and work.

There are important parts of the Agreement still not implemented – for example a Bill of Rights and legacy issues. These matters must be addressed.

After the Massereene attack in 2009 in which two British soldiers were killed Martin McGuinness and Peter Robinson brought together all of the political leaders, church and civic leaders to map out a way forward and to ensure that the tiny minority of voices who want to undermine the progress that has been made do not succeed.

That approach is needed again. The Unionist Forum established by the DUP and UUP may have a role to play but it is limited. Stability and inclusivity and progress are not in the gift of one section of people. Everyone has to be involved.

We need an all-party, cross community response to the flag protests and the violence which has accompanied them. It also needs to address all of the other outstanding issues.

This will be a huge challenge. Republicans do not underestimate the problems involved and in particular the difficulties facing unionism. But there can be no going back. The tiny minorities who want to cling to the past must be rejected. Sectarianism must be tackled and ended. The promise of the Good Friday Agreement for a new society in which all citizens are respected, and where fairness and justice and equality are the guiding principles, has to be advanced.