Anne Marie McNally (top second left) during secondary school and (above) today.

 When Third Level is what ‘others’ do and getting to the junior cert is an achievement.

Anne-Marie McNally writes:

It was Ben Franklin who said “an investment in education always pays the best interest.” That enlightened comment came somewhere in the 1700s but as is true of most words of wisdom, they are more relevant today than ever.

Growing up in inner city Dublin, in what remains one of the most disadvantaged communities in the country, I weaved my way through an education system where my schools, both at primary and second level, were labelled as ‘disadvantaged’ or ‘underperforming’ -before the days of what would now be called DEIS schools.

I had some great teachers along the way but they were struggling in a system where the overriding attitude was that we, the student population, were not really destined for any form of educational greatness so delivering the curriculum and getting us to Leaving Cert would be considered real success though junior cert would be likely more realistic. Ambition was not nurtured – pragmatic stereotyping was more the order of the day.

Most kids I worked my way through the system with came from strong families who were hamstrung by economic disadvantage – my own included. Many of them had parents who themselves had never had access to any education beyond early second level.

Third level seemed like something ‘others’ did. Personally I was lucky to have parents at home who prioritised education and that, combined with my natural indignation at being told by the system that I ‘couldn’t’, ensured I broke the cycle and pushed through. But I was very much the exception rather than the rule and that’s just not acceptable.

I sat in classes where we were encouraged to look to the local VEC at best or the local sewing factory at worst. To aspire to university was highly unusual and really not something that happened very often. When it did it was miraculous – I still get asked back to speak to students by way of the ‘girl done good’ narrative!

Unfortunately not much has changed in the intervening decade or so since I left school. Data published last year following an Irish Times analysis showed that progression rates from affluent areas were almost double those of socio-economically disadvantaged areas.

The analysis also found that those progressing from more affluent areas were more likely to have attended a fee-paying school and/or availed of private grinds. So, as in most things in life, the balance of opportunity is weighted heavily in favour of those who have at the expense of those who have not.

Interestingly, another key indicator that emerges in relation to educational progression is the level of educational attainment of the mother in the family. In other words, there’s a cycle – a vicious cycle- of generational inequality that is perpetuated and solidified by educational inequality.

Education should be seen as a public good – the more society puts in the more society gets out. But rather than families recognising this, it is the State that needs to appreciate the sentiment. It is perfectly acceptable for families to avail of the best education they can afford – indeed they should.

However, it is society’s responsibility to ensure every family has access to the same quality of education regardless of what they can afford. It is not enough to simply invest bricks and mortar into school building projects if you don’t have a symbiotic investment in teacher training and ensure teaching is recognised as a valuable and vital component of a healthy society.

Teachers should be recognised as crucial elements of a vibrant successful society and economy and the respect and remuneration afforded to teachers should reflect that value.

Tomorrow, my Social Democrats colleague in Dublin Central – one of the areas with the lowest third level progression rates in the country – Councillor Gary Gannon will host a public meeting in the Sherriff YC hall [Sheriff Street in Dublin 1] to discuss access to education.

This week is college awareness week. Awareness of college is one thing but awareness that college is a viable option for all –no matter your background – is a whole different thing and that is where we need to get to. If you’re around at 11am in the morning then join Gary in a discussion about how we achieve educational equality.

After all, when Mandela said “education is the most powerful weapon you can use to change the world” I’m pretty sure he was also referring to those outside the affluent suburbs.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

From top: Michael Lowry and Denis O’Brien in 1997; Anne-Marie McNally

 As the IBRC commission of inquiry falters Michael Lowry seeks his legal costs for the Moriarty Tribunal.

Business as usual so.

Anne Marie McNally writes:

Where to begin? Another week another Siteserv/O’Brien/IBRC drama unfolds across our courts or our parliament-it’s almost becoming unusual for there to be a week without something connected to one of these issues rearing its opaque and shrouded head.

So apparently it has taken a Judge; and an Attorney General; and a Minister for Finance; and a stable of financial brains in the Department of Finance, the best part of five months to discover that there are significant, nay fatal, legal impediments to the Commission of inquiry that was established to inquire into the inner workings of IBRC and 37 transactions which attracted write-offs exceeding €10million.

Among those 37 transactions is the sale of Siteserv to Denis O’Brien which involved a write-off of €119million. It’s worth noting that at the time of the sale, O’Brien was also a significant debtor of IBRC, owing them amounts in the hundreds of millions. It’s also worth noting that following its sale to O’Brien, Siteserv went on to win several of the lucrative Irish Water metering contracts.

That sale was not without its controversies – including the payment of €5million in cash to the shareholders of the beleaguered Siteserv and claims by other bidders that they had bid higher amounts for the company but had lost out to O’Brien’s acquisition vehicle, Millington Ltd.

But the sale may well have represented the best value for the Irish Citizen – the problem is we just don’t know if that’s the case or not. That was or is the point of the Commission but here we stand, five months after its establishment, with no answers but yet more questions.

The singular remit of the IBRC was to ensure the maximum return possible to Irish citizens for the distressed assets of the borrowers that had been bailed out with €35 billion of Irish citizen’s money. The remit of the Commission of Inquiry was to satisfy the public that the IBRC had delivered on the mandate given to it.

As it stands now, the public are unsure if the IBRC delivered on that mandate and they know the Commission didn’t deliver on its task.

Meanwhile, as the IBRC debacle raged in the media and on the floor of the Dáil on Tuesday, Michael Lowry TD took himself into the High Court to challenge the decision of the Moriarty Tribunal to only award him one third of his legal costs.

The same Michael Lowry TD which the Moriarty Tribunal said in its findings had failed to cooperate fully with it. It must be said that both Mr Lowry and Mr O’Brien reject the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal – and in fact O’Brien rejects even the notion that it was a judicial process despite having been presided over by Justice Moriarty.

So yesterday Mr Lowry took himself into the High Court and argued that the Moriarty Tribunal was discriminating against him because it had only awarded him one third of his costs while it had awarded Charles Haughey 100% of his costs.

That same tribunal which found that payments made from Denis O’Brien to Michael Lowry were “Demonstrably referable to the acts and conduct of Mr Lowry.” (Those acts included the awarding of the 2nd mobile phone licence when Michael Lowry was Communications Minister to EsatTelecom, founded by Denis O’Brien).

Mr Lowry’s argument in the High Court seems to be that Haughey gave the tribunal even more of a run around than he himself did so it’s unfair that he should have fewer costs awarded to him than were awarded to Haughey. I trust his legal costs have left him some cash to invest in some decent moisturiser for his neck which appears to resemble the nether regions of a jockey.

It’s ironic – I’d use another word but for that infamous chill – that two of the main protagonists in one of the most controversial episodes in recent Irish memory, the Moriarty Tribunal, are front and centre in these latest episodes of mystery and brazenness.

Ireland is the best little country in the world in which to do business. No doubt.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

From top: taoiseach Enda Kenny; Anne Marie McNally

Nothing can spoil the ‘recovery’ party.

Except a few home truths.

Anne Marie McNally writes:

This week we were declared the 10th most prosperous country in the world in the Legatum Prosperity Global index. We ranked higher than ever before in terms of safety, security and personal freedoms.

– That’s grand so eh? Pat on the back there lads we’re doing great.

– But hasn’t the child poverty rate doubled over the past 5 years?

– Yeah but don’t mention that.

– What about the 130,000 families on the housing waiting lists?

– Yeah, let’s not talk about that eh?

– Aren’t there over a thousand children in hostels and homeless shelters right now? Don’t we have Labour Minister’s smiling as they open food-banks to feed families who can’t afford basic meals?

– ah will you shurrup you’re ruining the nice sparkly story we’re trying to tell here about the greatest little country in the world in which to be rich. We’ve got stability don’t you know? Sta-bil-i-ty.

The script of Roddy’ Doyle’s latest Barrytown instalment or a current snapshot of political dialogue in the Irish public sphere? Unfortunately, it’s the latter.

We’re all supposed to sit back and listen to Enda’s tall tales about recovery and fellas with two pints being happy with their water charges and homeless men being only too delighted that the man from del-mayo has deigned to lean over and say good morning to them on his daily walk to work – the walk that makes him ‘normal’ apparently.

Actually, being able to walk to work in the city centre makes him anything but normal because at the moment you’d have to be earning about 10 grand a month to be able to live in a dog box within walking distance of Merrion Square such is the state of our housing crisis.

But it’s not OK anymore to mention the housing crisis, or the homeless families, or the children living in deprivation, or the people lying on trolleys, or the two year waiting lists for basic childhood medical procedures, or the overcrowded classrooms, or the teenage suicide rate that’s double the EU average or anything else that casts a negative light on the claims of recovery and stability. To do so apparently makes you a ‘leftie whinger’ or someone ‘always pointing to the problems’.

Well be that as it may but if someone doesn’t call ‘bull’ to all this talk of stability versus chaos then we will continue to spiral on this path of make-believe led by king of the fairy-tale himself. We’re in the emperor’s new clothes territory and someone has to let it be known that he’s in the nip on this one.

Prosperity indices are all well and good but how many children sleeping in a hostel tonight feel that they have ‘security’, ‘safety’ and ‘personal freedom’? Do they know they’re in the 10th most prosperous country in the world?

Those who claim to speak for ‘Middle Ireland’ tend to bemoan ‘leftie whingers’ with talk of social ‘welfare scroungers’ etc. but they very rarely think to look up at who above them is hoarding the wealth. Who is really scrounging?

Why is there such a significant wealth divide and what are the knock-on effects for society? Study after study shows that rich countries (& given our top 10 placing on the prosperity list, we count as one of those) with significant inequality fare far worse at all levels of society in terms of health and social indicators. The jury went out and the results are in – fostering a more equal society benefits those at every level of society and in almost every way from reduced crime levels to longer life-spans.

So it is not ‘whinging’ to point out that one section of society having an extra few bob in their pocket is of little use to society as a whole if we are leaving a pile of people behind and pushing forth with the ever widening wealth divide.

The problems are not just for today – we are storing up a whole Pandora’s box of problems when the children of today’s skewed policies mature into the disadvantaged and disenfranchised youth and adults of the future.

It’s a vicious circle and the only way to break it is to prioritise investment in key social services with universal access and an end to the two-tier system where your health and education, for example, are directly related to how much you have in your bank account. Campaigning for Marriage Equality united the whole country (well, apart from David Quinn & a few lads!) Now let’s start campaigning just as fervently for equality, full stop.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

(RollingNews.ie)

From top: Last week’s comments; Anne-Marie McNally

Gender quotas, self-policing and the beauty of light-touch moderation.

Anne-Marie McNally writes:

Is positive discrimination ever ok? Are gender quotas the balm to all our misogynistic woes? Will we suddenly have a Dáil that is representative of the general population and will women finally have an equal voice in national politics?

As a woman and a woman in politics I’ve been through more than my fair share of debate on this topic over the years. I’ve never personally been a fan of the quota system, finding it a too crude instrument which automatically opens quality female candidates up to accusations of having only been chosen based on their gender.

But then I moved into front-line politics and witnessed first-hand just how much of an old boys club our political system is. Nothing about the current system is conducive to female involvement and that includes the selection processes of traditional parties.

I spent years involved in all-male amateur soccer clubs in this country where I held every position up to and including club chairperson. My gender was never an issue and I rarely experienced misogyny and on the rare occasions I did, it was self-policing – the lads simply would not tolerate it and the offender would be told in no uncertain terms that it was not acceptable. It was based on respect. There was an admiration of my willingness to be involved and that generated respect.

The same is simply not true of the current political system and the older men who see their bastion being infiltrated by women prepared to put their head above the political parapet.

But – and it’s an important but – my experience of the younger self-confident guys who are involved in politics because they feel passionately about things and not just because it’s their father’s seat or some other legacy issue, is that they are delighted to be working alongside strong females who couldn’t be further from ‘token candidates.’

These are the guys whose only interest is in getting things done and working with the best people to make that happen – gender doesn’t come into the equation. That’s when you’ve reached true equality – when your sex is simply not an issue.

Last week, in reply to my column, a commentator suggested that I was merely a ‘pretty paid for mouthpiece’ and to be fair to the person, judging by follow up comments, I don’t even think s/he meant it as a misogynistic comment, it was more just that go-to put down for a woman; ‘ah she’s just a pretty face’ – the very same argument used by those who feel hard done-by in selection conventions.

I was then assured that it was OK because it was a ‘genuine compliment’. So that’s grand then, no problem completely dismissing my work on an issue because you meant it when you called me pretty! I need to get over myself right?

Actually no, do you realise that when a person decides to make themselves public one of the major concerns is ‘what will people say about me?’ As a woman that is amplified a hundred-fold – and don’t get me wrong – I’m only too well aware that women’s harshest critics are most often other women – but when it comes from a male it is almost always with the intention of undermining your contribution to the debate by dismissing you as window dressing.

But here’s the positive – the self-policing I’d experienced in soccer kicked into action on the comment thread last week and people said ‘nope, not acceptable. The guys I am lucky enough to work with in the Social Democrats don’t even stop to consider my gender when we get together to work through an issue and are only too happy to be part of a party with two strong women at the helm. It does not dent their masculinity in any way and why would it?

Given that our political system wasn’t changing by itself I now recognise that gender quotas are a necessary evil to force change but my experience of working with people who are the future of Irish politics assures me that they won’t need to be around for very long because true gender equality is on its way – we just need to lose the deadwood from the system.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

Meanwhile…

Behind you!

Anne-Marie discussing Himself on Tonight with Vincent Browne last night with the host (left) and a nice-looking young lad.

Via Cornelius Markey

From top: Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin (left) and Michael Noonan, Minister for Finance, yesterday; Anne-Marie McNally

Budget 2016 had everything.

Except fairness and vision.

Anne-Marie McNally writes:

I would really have preferred to focus on a pretty big international finance story this week but my column drops the morning after the night before and so ignoring the Budget is not a luxury I have.

For the past few weeks my time has been taken up with detailed discussions about very specific budgetary measures and teasing out where the dominoes will fall if one provision is included and another excluded.

Those kinds of discussions that put your head into spaces you really hope you never have to occupy – the headspace of a single parent wondering how he or she will feed the children; the stress of a parent trying to get a couple of kids back to school each September; the person struggling with mental health issues and considering the ultimate action; or the elderly person lying on a trolley and wondering if or when they will be treated with dignity.

What does not, and should not, cross your mind during those discussions is how many votes is this provision going to buy me? It seems however that the discussions that took place amongst Government parties were dominated by the latter concerns and unburdened by the former.

If a ‘Messaging Group’ came together and helped frame this budget it is very clear that the message agreed upon was thus: “We’re here to entice a vote out of you.” There was no ambiguity, no shame in the game, and a very clear stance that here was a budget with a sprinkling of something for everyone – on the face of it at least.

I could start going into the specifics here about zero funding for mental health services despite our youth suicide rate being 2.5 times the EU average; only €18million allocated to health spending in the middle of an emergency department crisis yet not one cent of that €18m is set aside for Emergency Department measures and so on and so on.

But it all comes back to one basic tenet – phrased by Catherine Murphy TD yesterday evening – this budget is a budget for the next general election rather than the next generation.

That old adage ‘You live and Learn’ seems to be notably absent from Irish politics. In 2002, pre-election,we had a giveaway budget. In 2007, pre-election, we had a giveaway budget. Well that worked out well didn’t it?

Why is it so difficult for a Government to say, ‘You know what, yes, things are looking ever so slightly more positive, so if we map out a plan for the next decade or so we can start to now put in place measures to ensure that we don’t end up back where we started in 2008.”

But alas, the lure of a cheap election stunt takes over and before you know it we’ve Minister [Brendan] Howlin telling us this budget will create “certainty for the future”’ – it will indeed, an absolute certainty of a repeat of the past.

The usual refrain of ‘sure what would you do differently?’ will ring out and I can answer that one easily. I certainly wouldn’t have made the decision to prioritise commemoration ceremonies over homelessness services and I wouldn’t have forsaken the next 20 years of Irish society for a cheap shot at emulating Fianna Fáil of days gone by.

If politics doesn’t have a vision then what’s left is a depressing vista of individual ambitions where decisions are made based on keeping seats rather than promises. That’s not my vision and I’m willing to bet it’s not yours.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

From top: Claire Byrne Live; Anne-Marie McNally

Have we not learned?

It’s the society, stupid.

Anne-Marie McNally writes:

On Monday evening I took myself out to the glamorous (!) surrounds of the Claire Byrne show with our Dublin Central candidate Gary Gannon. The topic for discussion was budget and the debate took place between economist Dan O’Brien, Minister of State Simon Harris, Sinn Féin Finance Spokesperson Pearse Doherty TD and UCC Sociologist Dr Niamh Hourigan with each panellist having the chance to open with a one minute statement.

I was struck during Minister Harris’ one minute statement by just how many times he mentioned the economy. We are ‘growing the economy’; we are ‘the fastest growing economy in Europe’; we are ‘building a thriving economy’ – all laudable statements but totally irrelevant without equal focus on society. Who wants to live in an economy? Right now the economy is rebuilding but it is very much at the expense of society.

During the debate Minister Harris spoke about how Ireland has a skills shortage – yes we do Minister and that problem will continue to worsen given that we currently have the second largest class sizes in Europe with a pupil-teacher ratio that would make your eyes water.

When we talk about the importance of the economy in attracting Foreign Direct Investment we shouldn’t forget the importance too of a well-educated and skilled workforce. Catherine Murphy TD recalls Intel sending reps to observe classes in the local primary schools of Leixlip before making the decision to locate there.

In the USA, for example, there is a very specific emphasis on STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) with extra hours allocated specifically for these subjects whereas here many of our children are sitting in overcrowded classes and sitting through hours of religious education during the week – not an ideal basis for a very competitive future workforce.

And to those who argue that education should be far more rounded and include cultural pursuits to the same level as academic pursuits – yes great, but it’d be nice if parents didn’t have to hand over extortionate ‘voluntary contributions’ and registration fees to help the school heat itself never mind provide musical instruments or science lab equipment.

Then the Minister went onto the issue of health and acknowledged some of the harrowing stories coming from members of the audience’s personal experiences within the chaotic health system. Yet in the pursuit of ‘growing the economy’ and prioritising that economy, successive Governments have stood by and watched as the trolleys grew and the sickness at the heart of our health system turned terminal.

Next week Minister Harris, as the consigliere for Minister Noonan, will go forth and tell us that we should jump for joy because ”wuhoo..look, there’s an extra tenner in your wage packet, and sure throw us a number 1 vote by way of saying thanks.” Basically the same thing that has happened for years – vote, elect, bargain, boom, buy votes, bust, election again. And round and round we go.

We can’t keep talking about having a vibrant economy without matching that level of priority to building a vibrant society. For that to happen significant investment is needed – investment that will rebuild our public services with solidarity and longevity in mind. If we accept that the fiscal space available is €1.5billion then we have got to be looking at investing the vast majority of that into our public services.

The surest way to put real money back into people’s pockets is not with a random measly tax cut that will result in an extra 5 or 10 quid a fortnight, but rather to reduce the cost of living for all citizens.

Investment in a decent childcare model, investment in our education & health systems, a decent transport system, a housing strategy – all of these require spending now but it is spending that will ensure that people in all sections of society are not shovelling out ‘disposable’ income on vital services that are running to standstill.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

From top: Brendan Howlin, Enda Kenny, Joan Burton and Paschal Donohue announcing capital expenditure proposals at Hueston Station yesterday; Anne Marie McNally

Too much of our vital infrastructure is left to the electoral whims of politicians trying to secure themselves another term in office.

Anne-Maire McNally writes:

Yesterday saw the announcement of the Government’s capital expenditure plan. It’s not at all a coincidence that it comes during the run up to a General Election. Don’t be so cynical.

Usually these things run for 5 years – so the 2011 one was due to run to 2016 at which point the 2016 -2021 one could have been expected. Instead of that we’ve gotten it this year and we’ve gotten a 6 year plan instead of a 5 year plan. But again, don’t be so cynical. They wouldn’t be that obvious, would they? Or have they finally stopped pretending that they take Joe public for anything more than a disinterested fool?

Have a look in detail at the expenditure announced yesterday and you will find once you peel back the very loud and glossy headline notes that actually there is very little in the way of real investment for a country that’s trying to scrape its way back from the edge while its public services crumble around it.

A close examination of the plan will show you that next year’s capital spending will actually only increase by €200million while 2017 will only see a €250 million increase on what has already been committed.

To put those figures into context – this year alone the Minister for Health had to request an additional €600 million for the Health service as a supplementary budget on top of what had already been committed – yet still our health service lies in tatters. So €200 million extra for 2016 total capital expenditure is nothing to write home – or favourable headlines – about.

One of the most talked about elements of the plan is the construction of Metro North – a project first promised back in 2005 and due to be completed in 2012 – now lauded as a beacon of transport hope that will supposedly be completed by 2026 or 2027 with a cost of roughly €2.5 billion or thereabouts.

This comes in pretty much the same week they decided to scrap the real infrastructural game-changer – the DART Underground – having already spent €45 million on that particular project.

The DART Underground – with some reworking to take account of local concerns in the North Inner City-had the potential to truly transform Dublin into the international capital city that it deserves to be and the Metro North, while welcome, is only a poor cousin in terms of its ability to overhaul our transport system.

Therein lies the problem – far too much of our vital infrastructure is left to the electoral whims of politicians trying to secure themselves another term in office. There is an inherent lack of strategic vision that goes beyond auction politics and all we continue to do is kick the can down the road in a never–ending cycle.

So how do you do things differently? Well, for a start, you stop thinking in 5 year cycles, you stop thinking about what’s going to be popular or unpopular and what’s likely to get you a vote. As unlikely as it sounds coming from an aspiring politician, we have to start looking at decisions and assessing their 10/20/50 year impact.

We have to start with a vision of the type of society we would like to see in twenty years’ time and decide what decisions we can take now to help us get there. If, for example, we know we want Dublin and surrounding counties to be a core hub for international business and travel then we look at the DART Underground and recognise the value of the investment in the long-term.

Most mistakes are made when you react rather than plan. Auction politics is a series of reactions that have for decades resulted in mistake after mistake (e-voting anyone?) –and each mistake represents millions, nay billions, wasted while our public service infrastructure deteriorates year after year. Stop it, plan it, and avoid the mistakes. Simples.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

From top: Denis O’Brien, Anne Marie McNally

The Dáil’s Committee on Procedures and Privileges meets today to discuss the legal challenge initiated against every one of its members by Denis O’Brien.

Remember. Don’t lose the head.

Anne-Marie McNally writes:

In the spring of 1642, Charles I began assembling a pack of armed men to march towards London and seize Parliament. His stupidity cost him his head and forever enshrined the pre-eminence of Parliament.

Fast forward several centuries and cross the sea to Ireland. We don’t have a pack of blood-thirsty warriors marching towards Kildare Street – this is not Game of Thrones – but we do have what appears to be a modern version of the same tale.

This time the pack wear expensive suits and they’re armed with threatening letters. They are the army of legal eagles assembled by the wealthy commander determined to challenge the power that resides in the democratically elected Parliament. The roles may differ from 1642 but the premise really doesn’t.

In medieval times, the nobility was considered as one of the three estates of the realm (clergy & commons being the other two); things have since moved on and the media is now considered as the 4th estate because of its vital importance to a functioning democracy.

Control the 4th estate and you, in effect, become a Kingmaker – if not the king. Combine such power with extreme wealth (at least on paper), a disdain for Parliament, and a propensity to assemble an army of legal eagles at the drop of a hat and you can see how one individual becomes an intimidating force capable of mounting a siege on democracy.

It may sound dramatic but recent events have shown us just how vulnerable our democracy is to such intimidation. When Catherine Murphy made that speech in the Dáil the outlets that had run it initially immediately pulled it down (present company excepted) at the behest of the aforementioned powerful individual – he who shall not be named.

What followed was an almost comedic interlude of media organisations spinning themselves into a tizzy while legal teams effectively wielded control of our newsrooms. Things got so ludicrous that some individuals took to printing out copies of Catherine Murphy’s speech and handing them out on street corners.

They took this step because they were aware that while most of us take social media and web based news for granted there is still a huge majority who rely on RTÉ et al for their news. When that news is stifled, their knowledge is stifled, their ability to know what has happened in their national parliament is stifled, and thus Democracy is stifled.

This week the Dáil Committee on Procedure and Privileges (CPP) will meet to discuss a legal threat against it, and the TDs who serve on it, from the same powerful individual who previously threatened the media outlets which ran Catherine Murphy’s speech.

This is separate to the legal action the same powerful individual will soon commence against the entire State for allowing an elected parliamentarian to make a speech in the Dáil Chamber. Imagine!

Funnily enough, the same powerful individual is also the founder and current Chairman of international telecommunications company, Digicel – a heavily indebted company which will shortly seek to raise billions with an IPO on the NYSE.

It’d almost make you wonder why such emphasis is being placed on trying to stymie anything that may reflect negatively on Digicel or anyone associated with it.

Interestingly, the NYSE comes under the remit of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission). The SEC has a five year statute for criminal prosecutions of companies or company officials involved in corrupt payments.

In 2016 it will be five years since the final report of the Moriarty Tribunal. Perhaps someone should send the SEC a copy, particularly the excerpt which reads that payments from Digicel’s founder to Michael Lowry TD were “demonstrably referable to the acts and conduct of Mr Lowry” and that Lowry “secured the winning” of the 2nd mobile phone licence for that Digicel founder. Perhaps someone already has….

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the forthcoming General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally

(RollingNews.ie)

Minister for Finance Michael Noonan at Budget 2015; Anne Marie McNally

As election looms, the kites are flying high but be wary of what’s to follow.

Carrots and knobbly sticks.

Anne Marie McNally writes:

Look up; all around you, from here on in, you will see the colourful wings of the various kites being flown from Leinster House in advance of the upcoming budget and election. Good news stories, danger stories, warning signals – these kites come in many guises but all with the same purpose – to cajole Joe Soap into believing that the status-quo is the only show in town.

At the moment most of those kites have big juicy carrots dangling from them, ripe for the taking. What you can’t see however, is the big knobbly stick hiding behind that carrot, and it is that stick that’s going to be the undoing of you, and the next generation of you and yours, if you fall for the tempting carrot.

The carrot in this case is the promise of an extra fiver or tenner in your wage packet. Lots of ‘look how great we are, we’re now in a position to give you back a few bob’ is already invading the airwaves and the printed word.  And that’s tempting. Believe me; I understand the lure – who doesn’t need a few extra quid these days? But… and it’s a big but… allowing yourself to be bought off by that small amount in the short-term means we are forsaking the long-term.

Our public services are crumbling around us; we have a healthcare system unfit for purpose with a sink-hole in the middle that simply hoovers up funds; we have an education system with the second highest primary class numbers in Europe; and a childcare model that… well actually, we simply don’t have a childcare model.

Now before the naysayers start screaming about increased taxes, etc., let me stop you right there.  ‘High tax’ is not a pre-requisite for quality public services. What is a requisite is an open, transparent, straightforward tax system that does exactly what it says on the tin.

At the moment we have a piecemeal system of ‘charges’ and indirect taxes to accompany our relatively average direct tax rate.  Our ‘free’ education system almost bankrupts the average family every September just on book costs alone and that’s before the ‘voluntary’ contribution request arrives.

Our health service requires the average person to have €50 minimum to see a doctor or €110 to be admitted to an Accident & Emergency unit before you even see a nurse. Those families with young children who have no choice but to have both parents working, or working single parents, are paying out the equivalent of a second mortgage on an inadequate and undervalued early childcare service. That’s before we even get into a conversation about housing or social work services.

Speak to anybody with any experience of living in the northern European countries and they will talk to you about the emphasis on childcare; the value placed on universality in healthcare, the fact that their average life-span is greater because there is such equality of access to a readily available healthcare system with a priority placed on primary healthcare.

They’ll tell you lots of good things but they’ll also tell you that yes, they pay taxes to fund these quality services. What they’ll also tell you is that once they pay those taxes at source, they are rarely requested to put their hand into their pocket again in order to avail of the services. They don’t pay PRSI, and then go along to the hospital to discover they have to pay to set foot in the door. They don’t pay USC, and then discover that it effectively funds nothing but the black hole of Government debt.

We need to recognise that we pay significant amounts of our incomes in order to access basic public services and then, when we need to use those services, they are rarely, if ever, fit for purpose.  So it is dishonest in the extreme to say that quality public services can only result from increased taxes. What is required is  adequate taxation within a redesigned, transparent system whereby you pay your taxes and you get your services and you don’t pay again when you have cause to access those services.

In the upcoming budget the carrot will dangle large but keep in mind the stick. How have giveaway budgets served us in the past? Let’s be brave. Let’s not do the wheel of fortune giveaway with our future. Let’s think about the next generation rather than the next election.

Anne-Marie McNally is a political and media strategist working with Catherine Murphy TD and will be a candidate for the Social Democrats in the next General Election. Follow Anne-Marie on Twitter: @amomcnally