THE IRISH REFERENDUM 4th OCTOBER 2013

When I learned we were at last to have a vote on whether we should keep the Seanad I knew instinctively I wanted to keep it and was discussing it with my husband.  He brought up many points I had never even thought of about why we should keep it.  So as he doesn't yet blog (despite my constantly trying to get him to), I asked him to write an article that I could put on my blog on why we should vote NO on the 4th of October to the question "Should we abolish the Seanad".

Here is what he wrote (yes, it is lengthy but a very worthy read):

Save Our Seanad

Enda Kenny wants to abolish our Seanad.  Put an end to it.  It was after all one of his pre-election promises, along with helping to protect and create jobs, keeping taxes low while fixing the deficit, creating a new, fairer, more efficient health system and overhauling the way our political system works to stamp out cronyism and low standards (his own words, he put his name to it, Enda Kenny Leader Fine Gael).

We have to ask ourselves why does Enda Kenny want to put an end to our Seanad and more importantly what are the consequences of no more Seanad?

If the Seanad is abolished then unless there is a change in the operation of the Dail (which I sincerely doubt) then we shall be governed by one hundred and sixty six TDs (unless Enda keeps his promise to reduce this to one hundred and forty six) who shall have free reign by majority vote to govern and make rules and laws affecting us all.  Currently our coalition partners Fine Gael and Labour have a large majority over the other parties and independents and consequently what they say (collectively) goes.  Obviously if the Seanad is abolished it will not expire until 2016 after the next election and at that stage who knows what the composition of the Dail will be.  Given the dissatisfaction with all major parties my guess is that there will be another coalition ruling the Dail in 2016.  Who might they be?  Fine Gael and Fianna Fail?  Fine Gael and Labour?  Fianna Fail and Labour?  Fine Gael and Sinn Fein?  Finna Fail and Sinn Fein?  Labour and Sinn Fein? 

Regardless of who is in power because of the party whip system (which is unlikely to change) the majority party or coalition can and will rule without check or balance.  What good are the opposition parties in the circumstances?  The answer is obvious.  What have the opposition achieved since 2011?  What can they achieve?  Being a minority (including all opposition parties and independents counted together) they cannot possibly, without a rebellion within the ruling party or parties, make any difference.  For instance therefore if the majority decide to pass or amend the law to introduce whatever draconian measure they wish (such as a tax on using the internet – oops I hope they don’t copy that) there is nothing anyone can do to prevent it.

So what difference would it make if we retain the Seanad?  Currently every bill introduced through the Dail and passed by the Dail has to go to the Seanad for debate and a vote.  It can either by passed by the Seanad, amended by the Seanad or rejected by the Seanad.  If passed it becomes law.  If amended it is sent back to the Dail for further debate.  If it is rejected the Dail can eventually override the Seanad and it will be passed in due course.  However even in this instance the flaws in the law will be highlighted and it’s implementation delayed.  This is important given the fact that the majority of us do not know what laws are being contemplated or implemented by the Dail.  The Seanad therefore does act as a watchdog for us all.  Remember also that the media keep tabs on what is going on in the Seanad and especially if there is something contentious.  Senators do take their role seriously and they may be more accessible for the ordinary person than our TDs and Ministers.  Especially so, as our TDs are confined to their own constituency.  Our Senators have no such restrictions.

Much has been made of the fact that our Senators are an “elite” bunch.  Why?  Because they are elected by university graduates (6), panels (43) and nominated by the Taoiseach (11). 

Does that make them elitist?  Do they or society consider them to be superior?  I for one don’t.  They are there for a purpose and although not elected by the populous as a whole they are elected, or most of them are, not like our Ministers, Junior Ministers and their advisers who are the chosen few.  Who then are the elite?

Included in the promise to abolish the Seanad (same paragraph of the Fine Gael 2011 manifesto headed “Change must start at the top”) we were led to believe that our saviours, Fine Gael would reduce the number of sitting TDs by 20 (yes twenty).  This can be done without a referendum but then if this a serious consideration why then not pass this law or make this amendment before we are asked to vote for the abolition of the Seanad?  Are we guaranteed to have 20 less members of the Oireachtas if we abolish the Seanad?  Of course not.  In fact there is nothing to stop our government (government without Senators) increasing the number of TDs or indeed Ministers, Junior Ministers, Deputy Junior Ministers, committees, sub-committees, sub-committees to sub-committees or whatever other positions or political or quasi-political bodies they care to create. 

Furthermore following the paragraph “Change must start at the top” in their 2011 Manifesto Fine Gael state under the heading “Change must be fundamental and comprehensive” that “Modern Ireland cannot be governed by a system of government originally designed for 19^th Century Britain.  Ireland needs more than piecemeal reform.  It needs radical root and branch change.”

Think for a minute……….OK time’s up.  The abolition of the Seanad.  Is it fundamental and comprehensive or is it piecemeal?  How will it improve the lot of the ordinary person?  Do you think that the proposed savings on the abolition of the Seanad will relieve the burden on the taxpayer, that our Health Service will improve and life will become easier?  Who will benefit?  “Not I” said the fly.

Mr Kenny and his party in 2011 went on to say under the heading “Change must involve the citizens” that “the people must be consulted on and involved in the process of political reform.  That is why we will establish a Citizens Assembley (highlighted as per Manifesto), along the lines of that used in the Netherlands to make recommendations on political reform.  It will be composed of 100 members who will be chosen from the public to reflect the demographic make-up of the country.”  Instead we got The Constitutional Convention made up of a Chairman, thirty three politicians (North and South) the majority of which are Fine Gael and Labour and sixty six citizens.

“Constitution Day” what is it or rather when is it?  According to Fine Gael (Manifesto 2011) this is a day within twelve months of their taking office (9^th March 2011) on which the people will be asked to approve the abolition of the Seanad and other changes to the articles of the Constitution covering the institutions of the state – principally the Executive, the Dail, the Presidency and the Judiciary.”  Firstly it seems that Constitution Day has had to wait, almost nineteen months.  Secondly apart from the abolition of the Seanad, Oh, and a new Appeal Court (will this be costing us more?) where are the amendments to the Executive, the Dail and the Presidency?  This brings me back to the question, on Constitution Day (if that’s what the 4^th October 2013 is supposed to be?) “Is the proposed amendment to our Constitution fundamental and comprehensive?”  Does removing one arm or our government system constitute radical reform, or more importantly does it improve our lot? 

Why do we have a Dail and a Seanad?  Where did they come from?  We have had a Dail and Seanad since 1922 (our first Government).  However in 1937 Eamon DeValera reformed the Seanad and the way in which it’s members were elected.  He chose certain methods in order to ensure that the Seanad would not oppose any measures his government (the Dail) wanted to implement.  Nevertheless the Seanad has survived since.  Over seventy five years, through successive Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Coalition governments (involving Fine Gael or Fianna Fail).  With the stroke of a pen (or pencil) we should sack or dismiss 60 of our 226 representatives, without knowing or considering why.  We should in fact, according the Fine Gael Manifesto be voting to sack or dismiss 80 of our 226 representatives. 

It is ironic that the pressure is being applied by our erstwhile benefactors, the EC (European Community) and in particular the powers that be, Germany, France, Italy for us to reduce expenditure.  Not that they have asked for the abolition of the Seanad.  Why would they?  All three have “bicameral” government, that is two houses or a two tier government.  Germany have the Bundestag (622 members) and Bundesrat (69 members); France the National Assembly (577 members) and the Senate (348 members); Italy the Chamber of Deputies (630 members) and the Italian Senate (315 members).  Why then do our leaders (Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore, remember them?) want to be different and dispose of one arm of our government?  Some say it doesn’t work or serve any purpose.  Although I don’t agree, even if the Seanad is flawed or broken surely it should be fixed rather than discarded.  I have two arms, if I break one I don’t cut it off, I have it fixed so that I can operate better as a whole.

Other governments that have a bicameral or two tier system are Britain (our nearest neighbours), Spain (one of our favourite holiday destinations),  Australia and Canada (popular destinations for Irish emigrants).

The United States of America (“land of the free and home of the brave”) with whom we the Irish enjoy a very special relationship have successfully operated a bicameral system (Congress and Senate) since 1789.  The difference is that since 1913 both the Congress and Senate are elected by the people.  And as Ireland modelled its Constitution on that of the U.S.A. and similarly guarantees the fundamental rights of the citizen (Article 40 to 44) then shouldn’t we continue to take example from them and change the way Senators are elected and make other “fundamental and comprehensive change” necessary to render it an effective arm of government and a true protector of the people and guardian of the law.  Don’t we as citizens have the right to have the most effective government possible and not the government that our politicians or political parties want?

The US Senate have instituted and brought into force some of the most influential and meaningful laws in the U.S.A.  Because Congressmen are so busy and engrossed in the day to day running of their great country they often don’t have the time to concentrate on the importance of the individual and their rights and privileges.  Remember the Constitution of the United States of America is predicated on the rights and freedom of the individual.  And then the Senate comes into it’s own.  Privacy, Autonomy, Association, Choice.  

Yes, that’s right as far as people go, the most basic of human rights is freedom of choice.  The right to choose how we are governed and by whom?  The right to choose reform.  But then reform is an issue the government don’t want to address or think about.  Isn’t it frustrating when you’re asked a question and only allowed to answer Yes or No when you’re just dying to explain your true opinion or thinking on the matter?  We are simply been asked for a knee-jerk reaction, heads or tails, black or white, Yes or No?  What’s our alternative?  None, nothing, nada.  We should be voting to abolish or reform.  Of course that would involve our Government in doing a little bit of work and putting on their thinking cap.  But why should they.  Once they have got rid of the Seanad they can do what they want.  What’s another broken promise?  After all there’s no danger in them losing office, they are guaranteed to be there for the full five years.  The people have no say in that just as the people have no say in what additional pain will be imposed in the forthcoming budget.   Notice how this Referendum is scheduled before and not after the budget.  Another clever move by Messrs Kenny, Gilmore and their overpaid advisers.  Give yourselves a pat on the back boys.

So how should we vote on October 4?  A Yes vote means on election day 2016 we will be putting all our eggs in one basket, the basket we call the Dail.  How many eggs will there be remains to be seen.  If Mr. Kenny is true to his promise there will be a maximum of one hundred and forty six (sadly the remainder will have to live on their pension, unless of course they find jobs as advisers to Leaders, Ministers, Junior Ministers or others).  Will there be any other reform of our Government? (I can’t answer that one).

A No vote means we will retain the Seanad and then maybe we will see some meaningful change to our system of Government.  Not before time.  There has been talk among policitans of a new Constitution.  A good idea, a really good idea.  Things have changed since 1937 and although we have had piecemeal amendments to the Constitution it’s rather like patching up holes in the roof when they appear rather than replacing the roof when it’s had it’s day.  Without the Seanad I don’t believe that we shall see any meaningful, fundamental or comprehensive reform especially if Mr Kenny and his party supported by the Labour party continue to tell us what to do and what we need, and don’t need.

Don’t be puppet of the politicians, demand more respect, demand to be better informed, demand to be given better options.  Demand that promises be kept, all promises.  Don’t abolish our Seanad.  Demand more reform.  Just say NO!

Sean McGlynn, Solicitor September 2013

#TwitterSilence Sunday 4th August 2013

I logged on to twitter this evening and noticed tweets in support and against the proposed #TwitterSilence bookmarked for tomorrow, Sunday the 4th of August 2013.

Of course curiosity got the better of me and I delved in further and was filled in by twitter friends on what was happening and did a little googling too.

It seems that Caroline Criado-Perez ( @CCriadoPerez ), a freelance journalist, was subject to the most vile abuse and threats on twitter following her successfully lobbying for Jane Austen to replace Charles Darwin on the UK £10 note (which will happen in 2017).

(AMENDMENT to above paragraph on Sunday 4th August): Just read a tweet from @CCriadoPerez telling all her followers: "By the way media: I DID NOT CAMPAIGN FOR AUSTEN ON A BANKNOTE. I campaigned for the principle of female representation & the Equality Act.")

Caroline was receiving up to 50 abusive tweets an hour according to THIS ARTICLE.  Thankfully the police in the UK responded quickly and it seems a man has been arrested.

All well and good.

However, I feel it is misguided that calls for a #TwitterSilence is now being supported by those who are outraged at the abuse Caroline suffered.

I, more than many, know exactly how painful internet abuse can be.  In my own case I have had NINE years of trolls and abuse simply because my husband and I did the right thing.  A result of what we have had to put up with from just a tiny handful of trolls, we have had to put up security cameras, double gates kept locked, sensor lights, and suffer a huge dash of paranoia and distrust too.

So I do know very well how horrible the effect of trolls can be.  And yes, I can fully understand how lovely it is for anyone being abused to have support shown to them.  But not appearing on twitter tomorrow is the wrong way to go about it.

The internet is both one of the most fabulous inventions ever but it is also the porthole to hell.

It draws out the best and the worst in society and oh boy, have the debris of society embraced the power of the internet.  They can sit behind their screens, using proxy IP addresses and spout their frustrated poison to anyone they have decided to target.  And many, if not all, of these poor excuses for human beings positively thrive on attention.

Can you just imagine the thought that tomorrow they are the full focus of attention on those who are taking part in the #TwitterSilence ?  And even, those like me, who will not be taking part in it.  We are all giving them the oxygen of publicity and attention they so badly crave to make up for the emotional void they clearly exist in.

Silence is communicating nothing to these vile specimens.

Forget #TwitterSilence and instead all focus our attention on stopping trolling and internet abuse.  Push for closing down proxy IP servers for a start!

And remember, tomorrow, whilst you might be taking part in #TwitterSilence I almost guarantee most taking part will be keeping an eye on twitter whilst the trolls sit back and languish in their sad moment in the spotlight.

In the words of Jane Austen:

"My idea of good company is the company of clever, well-informed people who have a great deal of conversation; that is what I call good company."

And THAT is what twitter is about to those of us who enjoy it.

VALENTINE'S DAY FRILLIES

I was reading an article by one of my favourite's, A. A. Gill.  Yes, I know he writes like a man who has swallowed the Oxford English Dictionary with a feast of thesauri for dessert, but that is part of his charm ~ along with his acerbic wit of course.

It was in last Sunday's Style magazine in The Times on Sunday, just in time for St. Valentine's Day, and entitled "Silly Frillies ~ Unsuitable Underwear is the Panic Buy that Marks Thursday's Gift-Giving Frenzy"  wherein he advises men against buying frillies for the woman in his life saying men only want to rip it off to get to the prize and women, upon receiving the frillies, think things such as "Do you imagine for one moment that I'm going to have sex with anyone who thinks women should wear that?"

The article reminded me of a time many years ago when I sold such frillies.  And A. A. Gill is right when he writes "Still, the first two weeks of February are the undergarment trade's big moment."

For the said two weeks leading up to St. Valentine's Day sales of lingerie would go through the roof and we would see many men coming into the shop masquerading as rabbits caught in very strong headlights.  Some would hover outside first, gathering up their courage.  Some would launch in and then just make like Mrs. Lot and turn into a pillar of salt (which given the subject of this article is probably the perfect analogy).

We (female) assistants would do our best to make them feel at ease and not at all out of their comfort zone, which they clearly were of course.  After letting them browse the rails of frillies some would try to grab anything regardless of size, colour, style, shove the cash in your hand and make a run for it but some coaxing got them to settle down and pick what they thought appropriate.  We would then gift wrap the chosen item or items tastefully in a glossy black bag filled with lots of gorgeous pink tissue (and the item) and all tied up with a pink satin ribbon.  And then stuffed into a plain white (and very boring) larger bag ~ most men DO NOT want to be seen carrying a beautiful bag tied up with a pink ribbon!

One man, or rather boy really, has stayed in my memory of those days.  He entered the shop looking absolutely terrified (think "entering the execution chamber on death row look") and stood alone not moving.  I went over and spoke to him and he told me he was looking for a gift for his girlfriend.  He was literally a bag of nerves and it was probably the first time he had bought frillies for anyone.  He eventually calmed down a little and finally chose a rather racy little number and after I gift wrapped it (my offer of the plain white bag in which to hide the gorgeous wrapping gratefully accepted) he beat a hasty retreat out of the shop.  I was happy with myself that he had come through the ordeal intact and having had the courage to come in and buy something.

The next afternoon I was at work and noticed the same young man come into the shop with the gift bag in his hand (the plain white paper bag no longer needed or evident).  He stood, despondent, and of course I knew exactly what had happened but approached him asking something like "oh, was the size wrong?".  He said no, it wasn't the size.  His girlfriend hated it and insisted he take it back immediately.  I felt SO sorry for him standing there with his heart and confidence crushed and with his obvious pain at having to come back in and admit this.

We chose a more suitable (and slightly boring) underwear set ~ a pretty vest and shorts and he said not to bother gift-wrapping it, just put it back in the bag from the day before.

He left, shoulders hunched.

And I thought to myself that is probably one of the last, if not the last, times he would ever try to buy frillies for the woman in his life.  All future girlfriends, who might be of a kinder nature, would be denied his buying them anything vaguely frilly or racy.

Why on earth could his girlfriend not have accepted his gift in good faith, had a bit of fun with him, and later discretely discarded the little negligee and knickers?  You might think but that would only open the door to future "unsuitable" purchases but it wouldn't ~ she had a whole year to guide him to the sort of lingerie she considered apt.

So, ladies, if the love of your life arrives home with something you consider tacky so bloody what?!  Would you rather he didn't find you attractive?  Didn't think of you as his fantasy for that one night?  Is that really what you would rather?

Think about it.  That and the amount of courage it probably took for him to enter the lingerie department he bought it from in the first place and laugh, embrace him and enjoy the moment!

DISABLED SPACES

We were in town earlier and parked in a retail units area to go into some of the shops there. Outside one of the shops there were five disabled parking spaces. In one was a Mercedes with number plates displaying the name of the company the owner of the car obviously owns. Clearly not a disabled person. The other three spaces were taken with cars, not one of which displayed a disabled sticker.

One space remained. As we went to our car, I saw a car pull up into the space and turned to watch out of curiosity.

The woman driver leapt out of her car followed by two children of about 10 years old. Not one of them vaguely disabled. And not a jot of shame at what she was doing in not only taking up a valuable disabled parking spot but also the example she was setting her children.

Driving to units further down the retail park to go into another shop, we parked and went into the shop. Coming out a woman pushed past us and got into a car parked directly in front of the door. In the diabled parking spot. Not a bother on her, no shame, nothing, and just drove off.

How on earth can these people just pull into these disabled bays and go off and do their shopping without a care for those who might actually need to park nearer the door of the shop/s?

There is no excuse for it. And further, in the retail park we were in, parking in the other spaces would only have involved a few meters walk to any of the stores.

But worst of all today was seeing a person, with a disabled sticker on her car window, and clearly disabled, having to park well away from the first shop I wrote of here and make her way, with difficulty, and through the rain, to the shop in question.

When did people become so selfish?

THIS IS JUST NUTS!

I love nuts.  But of all the nuts I love, I love pistachio nuts best of all.  It is impossible for me to open a bag of them and eat just a few.  Or at leat it was until yesterday.

Yesterday was Saturday and we decided that we would rent a couple of DVDs and have a movie night.  And for movie night as we all know, we need munchies.  In our house our favourite munchies are nuts and chocolate coated raisins.

So DVDs rented we prepared for movie night: roaring fire, drinks (freshly squeezed orange juice with sparkling water), chocolate coated raisins and nuts.  Squeezed the oranges, dropped in the ice cubes to the glasses and added orange juice and fizzy water, popped the chocolate coated raisins into a bowl and then ... disaster ... no nuts!  It seems someone (ahem) had devoured all the pistachios. 

So, being a Saturday evening the only supermarket open in our town was Tesco so husband was duly dispatched to fetch the pistachios.

And we settled in on the sofa, all munchies and drinks arranged beside us plus a spare bowl for the pistachio nuts shells.  Perfect.  Until ...

... I tasted the first pistachio nut which to say the least, was a disappointment.  But these things happen as any pistachio nut lover will confirm and so I persevered and tried another.  As with the first, it was a dried out, hard, tasteless ball of nothingness.

 I tried another.  Same.  And another.  And then gave up, furious that I would now have to watch the film minus my much loved pistachio nuts. 

The chocolate coated raisins somewhat made up for the disappointment and I made a mental note to return the dried out husks to Tesco first thing Monday morning.

Pistachoi nuts

Today, Sunday, my husband was out for the paper and returned clutching not only the newspapers but a bag of pistachios nuts too!  He had been in Lidl and saw them there and thought he would take them home to see how they compared with the Tesco pistachios.  I can report back that the Lidl ones not only look entirely different to the Tesco ones, they actually taste like pistachio nuts!  Imgine being delighted that something tastes like it should?

Lidl nut on left ~ Tesco nut on right

If you look at the photograph above you can clearly see the difference in the two nuts.  There is colour and vibrancy in the Lidl one whereas the Tesco one looks exactly as it tasted, dry and without any life at all.

And then to top it all, the Lidl pistachio nuts are much, much cheaper than the Tesco pistachio nuts ~ slightly over half the price in fact.  The Tesco bag had 200 grams costing €3.79 (.019 per gram) and the Lidl bag 250 grams costing €2.58 (.010 per gram).

You nut lovers have been warned!

NOTE: I have emailed a link to this post to Tesco Ireland asking them for a comment on both the price difference and the distinct lack of quality of their pistachios.  I will add their reply, should I receive one.

UPDATE: I did receive a reply from Tesco who offered to refund my money (provided I had a receipt).  They made no comment about the price or the lack of quality of their product.