Irish government fails to break the connection between sport and alcohol sponsorship

Two weeks ago the Fine Gael and Labour government published a new bill to regulate the marketing and advertising of alcohol. The Public Health (Alcohol) Bill was also supposed to tackle the important issue of alcohol sponsorship of sporting events.

While many of the elements contained in the Bill are important and welcome the government was rightly criticized for failing to tackle the key issue of drinks sponsorship of sporting events. Instead of clear legislation to end drink sponsorship of sport we got waffle.

The Dáil was told that the question of sports sponsorship and the associated marketing and advertising of alcohol will be dealt with in a way that does not allow for the deliberate targeting of children.

While the problem of drink linked to children is a matter of concern it is a fact that the greatest number of citizens affected by drink sponsorship of sports are adolescents, young men and women, and older citizens.

A report three weeks from University College Cork on hazardous alcohol consumption involving students – not children - concluded that we need a ban on alcohol sponsorship of sports events. The lead researcher of the study warned that ‘without support at the highest levels for evidence based policy attempts to tackle Ireland’s hazardous relationship with alcohol may prove futile.’

The human and financial cost of alcohol abuse within society is also well established. It has long been recognised that sponsorship of sport by alcohol companies encourages a culture of alcohol misuse. Consequently, there is widespread public support for the proposition that the government should break the connection between alcohol and sport sponsorship.

Professor Joe Barry of Alcohol Action Ireland has said that: “Comprehensive studies have shown that children and young people are not only exposed to a large amount of alcohol advertising through sports sponsorship, but that their behaviour and beliefs are influenced by these positive messages about alcohol and its use, increasing the likelihood that they will start to drink and drink more if already using alcohol.

Simply put, alcohol sponsorship of sport works in terms of increasing sales and, as a result, alcohol consumption. If it didn’t, the alcohol industry simply would not be spending so much money on it.”

The reality is that the linking of a healthy activity, such as a sport, with an unhealthy product, such as alcohol, diminishes the concern that some may have that alcohol is unhealthy and unacceptable.

Some 60,000 teenagers start drinking every year. These young people are most at risk. They are susceptible to the belief – encouraged by alcohol advertising – that drinking alcohol is sophisticated and acceptable.

Sport is hugely important in the lives of citizens. Many take part but most participate through attending GAA matches; or soccer; or rugby; or the many other sports activities that take place every week. Sport is hugely important in providing for a healthy lifestyle but it also plays a significant role in encouraging values like fairness and teamwork. This is undermined and devalued through sports connections with alcohol – just as it was when tobacco companies used to sponsor sporting events.

The misuse of alcohol leads to domestic violence, abuse, premature deaths, road crashes and deaths and injuries, rapes and suicides. A recent report from the Health Research Board   said that the role of alcohol in accidental deaths is not fully appreciated. It found that for the years 2008-2009 there were 388 deaths, not including suicide, due to alcohol poisoning and deaths due to trauma, eg drowning, falls, road accidents.

The connection between alcohol use and suicide has been highlighted in numerous reports, both Irish and international. One study of people from three counties who died as a result of suicide found that more than half had alcohol in their blood; those aged less than 30 were more likely to have had alcohol in their blood at the time of death.

All of us know individuals or families blighted by the effect of alcoholism. The human cost to each is huge – the financial cost to the state in terms of our health service - is enormous.

Two weeks ago Leo Varadkar the Minister for Health published his 25 'health priorities'.One of these is to reduce alcohol consumption. However the failure of the government to ban the sponsorship of sporting events by alcohol companies, undermines much of the good that may come out of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill or the related Sale of Alcohol Bill.

The government’s failure to step up to the mark and ban alcohol sponsorship of sporting events is a disgraceful response to a very serious issue. It is a decision that flies in the face of all of the available medical evidence and smacks of a government acquiescing to pressure from the drinks industry. It also ignores clear evidence that the drinks industry deliberately exploits sport to promote alcohol.

A study of 6,600 adolescents in four European countries, published in December 2012 by Amphora, an initiative of the European Commission, found that ‘Alcohol-branded sport sponsorship influences alcohol consumption among adolescents. Exposure to sport sponsoring can predict future drinking’.

Recently, Mick Loftus a former GAA President pointed out that; “Sponsorship of sport creates this culture that you cannot enjoy life without a drink, which is wrong and leads to problems like binge drinking. As a doctor and a former coroner, I know first-hand the damage alcohol does. Eighty-eight people a month die in this country due to alcohol related reasons. If that number of people were dying any other way they would be taking all sorts of action to try and stop it, but instead they are promoting it. If money comes before people, then it’s a sad day.”

The government has abdicated its responsibility to protect our young people and to tackle the serious problem of alcohol misuse.

Moreover it appears to have done it because, as the Minister for Health said last week, the sports organisations need the €30 million that such deals bring in.

It would appear that the Cabinet chose to ignore all of the available medical advice, scrapped the proposal to break the connection between sport and alcohol, and all to save money.

The government’s lack of action on this also raises the spectre for many citizens that the alcohol companies lobby of government was successful and that the drinks industry is exercising an undue and disproportionate influence on government to prevent any ban from going ahead.

Of course, this isn’t the end of the matter. It is possible to amend the Bill in the Dáil. But given its overwhelming majority and its obvious refusal to deal with the issue of drinks sponsorship and alcohol in writing the Bill it is unlikely that the government will agree to any substantial amendment on this issue.

Reclaiming the Vision of 1916: Sinn Féin's Programme for 2016

 

 

Bobby Ballagh and mise

 

Wynn’s Hotel in Lower Abbey Street in the centre of Dublin played a pivotal role in the formation of two of the key groups that shaped the 1916 Easter Rising; Oglaigh na hÉireann – the Irish Volunteers, and the Cumann na mBán.

On November 11th 1913 a small group of republican activists met at Wynn’s Hotel. Present were Bulmer Hobson, Eoin Mac Neill, Padraig Mac Piarais, Sean Mac Diarmada, W.J. Ryan, Eamonn Ceannt, The O'Rahilly, and several more. It was agreed to hold a public recruiting meeting for a body called the Irish Volunteers whose aim was ‘to secure and maintain the common rights and liberties of Irish men’.

Three of those in attendance; Pádraig Mac Piarais, Sean Mac Diarmada, and Eamonn Ceannt were among the signatories of the 1916 Proclamation. They were subsequently executed by the British.

Two weeks after that first inaugural meeting - on November 25th- over seven thousand joined the Volunteers at a meeting in the Rotunda Rink in the grounds of the Rotunda Hospital. On the same night a special section set aside for women was also full.

On April 2nd 1914 the first official meeting of the Cumann na mBán took place in Wynn’s Hotel.

Relatives of 1916 leaders

Last Friday morning Wynn’s Hotel was crowded for the launch of Sinn Féin National Launch 1916 Commemorative Events. Mary Lou MacDonald chaired the event; Martin McGuinness spoke about the importance of 1916, and in particular about the National Monument in Moore Street where the 1916 Leaders met for the last time and which the government has failed to protect or develop properly. James Connolly Heron, the great grandson of James Connolly also spoke. So did I.

The centenary programme is first class. It is our intention to launch it in Belfast in the near future.

The programme includes a re-enactment of the funeral of veteran Fenian Jeremiah O Donovan Rossa on August 1st this year.

Under the title ‘Revolution 1916’ a visitor exhibition will run for 33 weeks in the Ambassador Theatre (part of the Rotunda complex) in O Connell Street commencing on February 27th 2016. This will feature a day-by-day account and legacy of the 1916 Rising through different mediums and artefacts.

Outside the GPO on March 8th 2016 a rally will be held to celebrate the role of women in the Revolutionary period.

A parade of the Irish Citizen Army will take place from Liberty Hall to St. Stephen’s Green with a special emphasis on the Diaspora.

Nationwide Easter Commemoration Parades will take place. Dawn Vigils
will be held outside Kilmainham Gaol on the dates our leaders were executed and in Cork on 9th May and Pentonville on August 3rd 2016.

Over April 24th – 29th 2016 (the actual dates of the Rising) a light show will use the portico of the GPO to depict the story of the Rising.

On Sunday 24th 2016 the Citizens’ Initiative will be holding a national march and rally to ‘Reclaim the Vision of 2016’.

In Belfast there will be events to mark the life of James Connolly and on May 15th 2016 at Arbour Hill there will be an oration and ceremony.

I have no doubt other events local and national will be organised between now and next year.

Tim Pat Coogan and Martin McGuinness

This programme is Sinn Féin’s contribution to the centenary celebration of the 1916 Rising – a seminal event which shaped the history of this island for the following 100 years. Other organisations and individuals will also organise and hold their own events.

There has been widespread criticism of the government’s failure to produce a programme of any substance and public reaction to its promotional video – Ireland Inspires 2016 – was so angry that it had to be withdrawn. The 80 second promotional video failed to mention the Rising or the Proclamation or the executed leaders. It did however include images of David Cameron, Queen Elizabeth, Bono, and Bob Geldof.

In stark contrast the video presented at Friday mornings launch of our centenary programme of events is an excellent production which captures the essence of the period and its impact.

This shambolic approach by the Irish government is an accurate reflection of the Fine Gael and Labours leadership’s attitude to 1916, and in particular the Proclamation. Little wonder they don’t want to celebrate the Proclamation.

They don’t believe in it. They are embarrassed by its content.

The government’s failure to protect and properly develop the National Monument in Moore Street, as well as the laneways of history – those adjacent streets and lanes where the men and women of 1916 valiantly fought the British Army – has been shameful.

The Easter Rising saw an alliance of organisations come together, including the Irish Volunteers, the Irish Citizen Army, Sinn Féin, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the woman's movement, and Irish language activists.

They rose up against British rule in Ireland and declared a Republic. For Ireland and for the British Empire this was a point from which all changed utterly. It was a hugely courageous act. A few hundreds of Irish men and women taking on the might of what was then the largest empire in history, and the foremost global power.

For the British the Easter Rising, and struggle for self-determination and sovereignty, set an example that was to be imitated successfully in the following decades in its countless colonies around the globe.

The British hoped by the speed and scale of the executions that followed that they could extinguish the flame of freedom. They were wrong. At his court martial Pádraig Pearse got it exactly right:

'Believe that we, too, love freedom and desire it. To us it is more desirable than anything in the world. If you strike us down now, we shall rise again to renew the fight. You cannot conquer Ireland. You cannot extinguish the Irish passion for freedom.'

That is absolutely true.

The revolutionary period was followed by a counter revolution. The counter revolutionaries won. Partition and small minded narrow, mean and conservative states were forced upon us. But though the counter revolutionaries won they did not defeat us.

So the centenary celebration of the Easter Rising is a time to build. It is a time to rededicate ourselves to the achievement of the politics of Wolfe Tone, of Padraig Pearse and James Connolly, of Maire Drumm and Mairead Farrell, and of Bobby Sands.

The Proclamation summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom. We are those children. I invite you to join in that great historic enterprise.

Asylum seekers treated shamefully

The United Nations estimates that there are currently over 50 million people around the world who are displaced persons. In 2013 there were 16.7 million refugees worldwide. 50% of refugees are under 18 years old.

The escalating conflict in Syria has displaced an estimated five million persons. Like the Irish who fled the great hunger in the 1840s and died in their thousands in the coffin ships crossing the Atlantic, thousands of Syrian and north African people have died trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea for Europe.

Some refugees have made it as far as the south of Ireland. In November 1999, a decision by the Fianna Fáil government established a system “to deal with matters relating to the dispersal of asylum seekers throughout the country and preparation of plans for a system of direct provision of housing, health needs etc.“

Direct provision centres have been described as “a holding pen where people are kept for efficient deportation” and conditions have been consistently criticised by human rights and civil society agencies and some politicians.

When I raised this issue with the Taoiseach in the Dáil last week he confirmed that a working group is looking at all of the issues and will report in March. It couldn’t come soon enough for those trapped in this horrendous process. But of course the key to progress is what the government does with the report. It needs to move beyond the rhetoric of concern. It needs to introduce legislation that urgently addresses the many concerns about direct provision centres that have been consistently raised, including ending the secrecy that often surrounds them.

A first step would be to extend the Ombudsman’s remit to the Direct Provision Centres and include the administration of the centres within the Freedom of Information rules.

The Direct Provision system was originally intended to accommodate asylum seekers for six months. Today almost half of the 4,324 people living in the system have been there for five years. Twenty five per cent have been there for more than six years and at least one person has been there for 14 years. 61 asylum seekers have died in direct provision since 2002. This is unacceptable.

Residents in these centres are not allowed to work. They get 19 euro per week from the state. Conditions in the centres are also unacceptable. They are overcrowded with families often sharing one room. Basic essentials like soap, toilet rolls and other items are rationed. There are limited recreational or living areas and the stress on those in the centres, especially from the fear of deportation is a constant worry.

To the government’s shame around one third (1529) of those in the 34 DP centres are children. This creates its own difficulties. In the last five years the social services have been alerted to over 1500 child protection or welfare concerns. Sixteen children under five have died in Direct Provision Centres. This is a disgrace.

Asylum seekers come from all across the world. They come from war torn societies or states where their lives are at risk. They come in search of a new life in the same way that Irish people have travelled over the centuries throughout the world. They arrived in this state only to be treated in a most deplorable way.

Sinn Féin has long campaigned in support for those thousands of Irish citizens who are living and working in the USA and who have no legal status. This campaign has also been supported by the Taoiseach and all of the parties in the Dáil.

It’s only fair that we treat people who come to our country the way we want our people to be treated when they travel to other states.

The direct provision centres and system is a blight on the reputation of the Irish state. It reflects an attitude which in previous years created the dreadful Magdalen laundries and the industrial schools. It should be dismantled and a new, more humane and transparent and accountable system, based on internationally accepted protocols, should be put in place which provides dignity for those who are fleeing torture and hardship and want to build a new life in a new place.

Taoiseach sees north as foreign country

The Stormont House Agreement was for Sinn Féin a defensive negotiation. It was about defending what had been gained previously and was being diluted as a result of the ongoing process. In large measure the outcome, while not comprehensive was positive.

However, following on from that agreement, one aspect of the negotiation that bears closer scrutiny is the role of the Fine Gael/Labour coalition government.

It is important to recall that for much of the twentieth century successive Irish government’s, mainly led by Fianna Fáil, ignored what as happening in the north. So too did successive British governments. The result was the civil rights movement of the 1960s, a violent response by the Unionst government and loyalist mobs, and the militarisation by the British of the north.

Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s former Chief of Staff for much of the peace process, recently acknowledged the contribution British government inattention made to the failure of politics and the emergence of conflict in the north in an interview with the magazine Civil Service World.

Powell says; “In the 1960s and for decades before, the British government paid absolutely no attention to what was happening in Northern Ireland,” he says: Catholic complainants were referred back to the Protestant authorities in Stormont. “We just pushed it to one side. If we’d been sensible, we would have insisted on fair [access to] housing – which was what caused the civil rights movement – and on fair employment laws, and we would have insisted on power sharing rather than allowing unionist gerrymandering to squeeze the Catholics out altogether.”

Since both coalition governments in London and Dublin came to power they have repeated this mistake. They ignored a deteriorating situation which had reached the point of crisis.

In addition, as so often in the past, the Fine Gael/Labour government was acting as a junior partner to the British.

20 years ago another coalition government led by Fine Gael had just recently come into power in Dublin. It was led by John Bruton. The period that followed was particularly difficult. In the view of many republicans Bruton fractured the effort to build a consensus approach to the peace process. He often took up positions identical to the British and occasionally, he was even more British than the British! At one point he refused to meet Sinn Féin and urged the electorate, north and south, not to vote for us. Little wonder the late Albert Reynolds referred to him as ‘johnny unionist’.

However, and I do not say this lightly, this Fine Gael led government is the worst I have ever had to deal with. And I have dealt with every Government since Charlie Haughey's time. But the current administration led by Enda Kenny and Joan Burton is the most deficient, inefficient and incompetent of all of them in dealing with the North.

Evidence for this is clear in any comparison of the first paper the Irish and British governments presented to the Executive parties on December 11 and the final paper agreed on December 23^rd.

The first paper sought to nationalise austerity, with the Irish Government supporting British Tory efforts to hurt the most vulnerable citizens in the North. The Irish Government also acquiesced to the British Government's use of "national security" to deny information to victims and to the British demand to end the rights of families of victims to an inquest in the Coroner's Court. If this proposal had been accepted - it was rejected forthrightly by Sinn Féin - this would have left victim's families, including the Ballymurphy families - whom the Taoiseach has met and who have campaigned for decades for the right to Article 2-compliant inquests - with no access to the crucial inquest system.

It was only after Enda Kenny and Joan Burton had left and Martin McGuinness I had warned the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Charlie Flanagan, and Minister of State, Sean Sherlock that the government’s proposals were not sustainable, that progress was made.

In a deliberate effort to try and damage Sinn Féin in the south the Taoiseach has since then sought to create the illusion that there was a difference in approach and substance between myself and Martin McGuinness. He described my approach to the negotiations as ‘outrageous’ and claimed that Martin McGuinness was prepared to accept a lesser deal than I was.

While I could take that assertion as a back-handed compliment, I do not do so because it is totally untruthful. Martin McGuinness, who is as committed to all these issues as I am, described the Taoiseach's remark as "stupid".

Why therefore would a Taoiseach say such a thing? If he put any thought into his remark, it was obviously to distract attention from the Government's refusal to develop any strategy for engagement with the British as a co-equal guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement and other agreements.

But perhaps the greatest problem is that the Taoiseach, and others in his Cabinet, view the North as a foreign country. Rather than facing across the Border and extending a hand of friendship to all the people of the North, he faces away and turns his back on people here.

Instead of developing a coherent strategy to fully implement the Good Friday Agreement and other agreements, as it is obliged to do, the Irish government submissively follows the lead of the British. If it has a strategy it is to use the north in a futile attempt to attack Sinn Féin. This is evident most clearly in the Dáil where the north is generally only raised by other parties to score political points against Sinn Féin.

Consequently, the most outrageous claims are often made and repeated as if true. This is particularly the case with the Labour Party which is under serious electoral pressure at this time. For example, it has been claimed that the agreement will result in mass redundancies in the public sector. While this may have been the intention of the initial proposals put forward by the Governments, there will be no compulsory redundancies.

Sinn Féin wants to reconfigure the economy in the north so that it serves all of the people. This also requires co-operation across the border. A single island economy makes economic sense. Sinn Féin is pro-enterprise but we are also pro-worker and pro-trade union.

The Stormont House Agreement provides for a voluntary redundancy scheme for public sector workers who wish to avail of it. The scale of the take-up will be driven by public sector workers and balanced with the need to maintain public services. Sinn Féin will not repeat the mistakes of the Fine Gael and Labour Government by allowing a scheme to undermine public services in pursuit of savings. Any scheme will be agreed in consultation with the trade unions and Executive Ministers.

The peace process is the most important political project on this island at this time. It needs to be nurtured, protected and enhanced. It should be at the top of the Government's agenda alongside other priorities. It isn’t. For my part I will continue to urge the Labour and Fine Gael Government to accept that the success and stability of the peace and political process in the north and the all-Ireland institutions are bigger and more important than any shortsighted, selfish electoral political agenda.

 

Irish government acted as junior partner in negotiation

Sinn Féin’s objectives throughout the recent negotiations, which led to the Stormont House Agreement were very clear. These were to agree a comprehensive deal to protect the most vulnerable in society, to safeguard the rights and entitlements of citizens, to deliver on outstanding agreements, to grow the economy and to enhance the working of the institutions.

It wasn’t an easy negotiation. The ability of the five Executive parties to defend front-line public services, including health and education, to defend the poor, people with disabilities, the elderly and disadvantaged, and to create jobs, was being significantly undermined by British Tory demands for welfare cuts, as well as by the £1.5 billion cut to the block grant since 2011.This Austerity policy is similar to Dublin’s and was actively endorsed by the Taoiseach and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Sinn Féin was steadfast in our opposition to this agenda.

The British government’s failure to honour its commitments made in the Good Friday and other agreements, such as an inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane was another important factor in why the political process was in such a mess.

There is little incentive for political unionism to move forward in a consistent and progressive way if a British government is not giving clear and unambiguous leadership and implementing commitments.

The British government’s refusal to back the Haass proposals to deal with the vexed issues of identity, parading and the legacy of past had succeeded only in emboldening unionist hostility to the power sharing institutions.

The position of the Irish government on all of this was especially frustrating; driven I believe by a short-sighted selfish electoral political agenda. They took on the role of junior partner and allowed the British government to set the agenda and the pace of negotiations and sat passively as the British tried to dictate the outcome.

By the time the Taoiseach and British Prime Minister arrived in Belfast on December 11th there was no great optimism that progress could be achieved. Their departure 24 hours later led many to believe that the negotiations were over and that the political institutions were at real risk of collapsing. This intervention amounted to little more than a charade.

It was not a serious endeavour. The presentation of a deeply flawed joint paper by the Irish and British governments and the approach of both during those talks was amateurish and ham fisted. It effectively sought to nationalise austerity with Irish government support for the British Tory efforts to hurt the most vulnerable in the north.

The Irish government’s preparedness to sign up for a joint government paper that failed to mention Acht na Gaeilge and talked only of ‘language strategies’ was equally disgraceful.

It also acquiesced to the British government’s use of ‘national security’ to deny information to victims and to the British demand to end the right of families of victims to an inquest in the coroners’ courts.

Nor was there any guarantee that the Dublin and Monaghan bombings would be considered under the proposed new ‘civil Inquisitorial’ process under the new Historical Investigations Unit.

So, on December 12th David Cameron returned to London and the Taoiseach to Dublin leaving the process in a worse state than when they came.

Despite the negative approach of the two governments the Sinn Féin leadership remained determined to find solutions. A consensus was reached, at the initiative of Martin McGuinness and under the leadership of Martin and Peter Robinson, among the Executive parties to push for a real and meaningful negotiation.

Six days later and following lengthy discussions, many of them into the wee hours of the morning, and at least one all-night session, an Agreement was achieved.

The total value of the British government’s revised financial proposals amount to almost £2 billion –double what was originally offered.

This includes £650 million of new and additional funding, including up to £500 million over 10 years of new capital to support shared and integrated education.

Crucially, there will be no reductions in welfare payments under the control of the Executive. The new welfare protections are unique to the north and are in sharp contrast to the austerity-driven welfare system being rolled out in Britain. Anti-poverty measures will be retained.

The Irish government also made financial commitments, including €25 million annually for the A5 project; as well as some additional funding for reconciliation and for EU Peace and Interreg programmes.

I welcome these and the renewed commitment by the government to the Narrow Water and the Ulster Canal projects.

On the wider political issues significant progress was achieved:

The effort to close off access to inquests to the families of victims of the conflict failed.

The two governments will endorse the respect for and recognition of the Irish language consistent with the Council of Europe Charter on Regional or Minority Languages.

Work will commence on considering whether the devolution additional fiscal powers needed to grow the economy can be progressed.

A detailed proposal on a Commission on Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition was agreed, including its make-up and remit.

Legislation on parades will be prepared with proper regard for fundamental rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights.

The agreement, like all previous agreements, is only as good as the determination on the part of the participants to implement it.

I would urge the Irish government to accept that the success and stability of the peace and political process in the north and the all-island institutions are bigger and more important than any short-sighted selfish electoral political agenda.

The peace process is the most important political project on this island at this time. It needs to be nurtured and protected and enhanced. Notwithstanding the other political priorities of the moment it must remain at the top of the government’s agenda.

As we approach the centenary of the 1916 Rising and later of the Tan War there is an historic opportunity to resolve the real ‘national question’; end the partition of this island; end sectarianism, and create a new republic. These should be the goals of all progressive political forces on this island.

The Rise and Rise of Negative Politics

As regular readers of this column will know I have been known to ‘tweet’ – occasionally. It’s an enjoyable and relaxing process made all the more pleasurable because I can escape the Sinn Féin thought police – those esteemed colleagues who want to scrutinise every word, mull over every nuance and ensure that anything written falls within party policy.

I understand and appreciate their concerns. My tweets have been the subject of hilarious and occasionally bizarre reflection by newspaper and broadcasting columnists, commentators and serious political analysts. Some believe my tweets are the work of a special committee; others are less kind.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs in Dublin was on the receiving end of this type of scrutiny on New Year’s Day when he seemed to suggest that he favoured the use of the ‘c’ word in describing Sinn Féin politics. He felt it necessary to issue a public apology and to express regret if he had caused offence. As someone who recently apologised for the inappropriate use of language in criticising bigots I can empathise with Charlie.

However, the episode was much more revealing and significant than the implied use of a swear word. The Minister was consciously attempting to use his twitter remarks as part of the government’s strategy of demonising Sinn Féin. Along with other conservative elements of southern society – most especially the Sindo and Indo and their coterie of columnists and hacks - Sinn Féin has been regularly accused of being a ‘cult,’ not a democratic party.

Hence the deliberate use of the word in the Minister’s tweet – “2015 offers Ireland the choice of Constitutional politics or Cult politics.”

My very observant and quick thinking colleague Donegal TD Pádraig MacLochlainn responded with; “Hopefully cult politics doesn’t make a comeback.” And he attached a 1930s photograph of the Blueshirts – a Fine Gael dominated organisation - giving a fascist salute.

One twitter commented that; “think that was a spelling mistake”.

To which the Minister replied with; “yep left out the ‘n’”.

Minister Flanagan’s implied use of the 4 letter ‘c’ word sparked controversy and he issued his apology.

But in the short lived furore around his use of language no one should lose sight of the bigger picture.

The opinion polls suggest that the next general election to the Oireachtas could be the most significant in generations. With Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fail trailing Sinn Féin and the Independents in most of the polls there is a very real concern among conservative elements that the two and a half party system that has dominated Irish politics could be about to radically change.

Sinn Féin in particular has become the bête noire of the conservative class. They believe the independents are too fractured to pose a real concern to the governmental ambitions of Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fáil, but Sinn Féin is a radical, growing, visionary political party with cogent alternative policies. Sinn Féin is the real threat to the cozy consensus of the established parties. Consequently there is a concerted effort underway to demonise the party, blunt our potential to grow, and force us to spend valuable time responding to a negative agenda set by our opponents rather than promoting our own sensible alternative policies.

Political scientists have written volumes on the use of negative politics in election campaigns. It is a fixture of U.S. Presidential elections and a regular feature of the Irish electoral cycle. Labour used it effectively against Fine Gael in the 2011 campaign with their now infamous Tesco ad which warned of cuts to essential services and benefits if Fine Gael was elected. (It got them a place in a coalition government implementing the very policies they were warning of). Michael McDowell used it in 2002 to scare voters into backing the Progressive Democrats when he raised the possibility of a majority Fianna Fáil government.

As Sinn Féin’s poll numbers stay high the established parties and their conservative allies will increasingly use negative politics to attack the party, our policies and to scare their own voters – many of whom are politically apathetic at this time – back to the fold.

At the end of November Enda Kenny asserted that the choice at the next election would be between a government led by Fine Gael or one led by Sinn Féin. His Minister for Finance jumped in on the same day and told RTE that the choice facing the electorate was either a Sinn Féin-led left-wing government or the present coalition.

Afraid of being left out of the debate Micheál Martin joined in just before Christmas with his absurd claim that the IRA still runs Sinn Féin. As a senior government Minister in past Fianna Fáil governments he knows this to be untrue. He was also part of the government which accepted reports from the Independent Monitoring Commission and the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning that the IRA had effectively left the stage after its momentous and courageous decision in July 2005 to end the armed struggle.

Now, as he tries to rebuild his shattered party and improve its consistently poor poll results he sets aside the needs of the peace process and indulges in negative politics against republicans.

The Labour leadership whether under Eamonn Gilmore or Joan Burton has also made increasingly hysterical criticisms of Sinn Féin as the polls predict a meltdown in that party’s support.

We can expect more of the same vitriol in the year ahead. As the tenor and tempo of the political discourse increases so too will the snide, offensive, malicious and provocative attacks on Sinn Féin.

I have no idea when the general election to the Oireachtas will be held. Charlie Flanagan obviously thinks it will be this year. Some political pundits speculate that Enda will go to the polls after a give-away budget in October. Maybe – maybe not.

We do know there will be a British general election in May. It is shaping up to be particularly significant given unionist efforts to agree unity candidates and try to take seats currently held by Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance parties.

All of this means for republicans that there is an imperative on us to organise and strategise and prepare as never before. We have to think long term. We have to work locally while thinking nationally.

The next 18 months will be a defining point in politics on this island. As well as celebrating the centenary of the 1916 Rising there will be two general elections and an Assembly election. The potential to advance Sinn Féin politics, to defend the interests of working people, to achieve a realignment of Irish politics, and to win new supporters to Irish republicanism has never been greater.

There is a hunger, a desire for real change among citizens across the island. They don’t want the tired, old, recycled politics of the conservative parties north and south. The rhetoric of change but the delivery of the same-old, same-old.

 Citizens want a new start, a fresh start; a positive and a real alternative to the negative and corrupt politics of the conservative parties.

Our goal as Irish republicans is to achieve maximum change; to advance Irish unity, to build a fair economy, and a just and equitable society in which equality and citizen’s rights are the foundation stones. The next year and a half are crucial to building the republic that those who wrote the 1916 Proclamation dreamed of. A republic in which there is no place for partition, or sectarianism or elitism or inequality, or poverty. It’s a big ask but one I am confident 2015 will see Sinn Féin make significant strides toward creating.

PS Thanks to Hugh O Connell from Journal whose recollection of election campaigns is excellent.

 

Supporting dialogue to resolve conflicts

With President Abbas

 

For those who doubt the imperative of dialogue in advancing negotiations the two historic international decisions in respect of Cuba and Palestine just before Christmas are clear evidence of its importance.

At the beginning of December I met President Abbas of the Palestinian government in Ramallah. He and others in the Palestinian leadership explained the importance of their strategy to achieve international recognition of Palestinian statehood and its potential to stimulate renewed momentum into the stalled peace process in that region.

Some of their key negotiators and senior Ambassadors have been travelling in recent months to European capitals and lobbying European political parties and Parliaments to pass motions of support and solidarity in favour of a Palestinian state.

The Palestinian focus has been on securing two key votes. The first was in the European Parliament – which they achieved on December 17^th. 

The second was in the United Nations security council. Jordan brought forward a motion to the United Nations on behalf of the Palestinians which would set a one year timeline for concluding peace negotiations, and a late 2017 deadline for an Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian lands.

The Jordanian draft sought a resolution based on the 1967 borders and "Jerusalem as the shared capital of the two States which fulfils the legitimate aspirations of both parties and protects freedom of worship."

The draft also "calls upon both parties to abstain from any unilateral and illegal actions, including settlement activities that could undermine the viability of a two-state solution."

The vote on this took place at the end of December. Although the Palestinian motion was backed by a majority of eight in the 15 strong Council it did not secure the necessary ninth vote for it to pass. Speaking later President Abbas said: “We didn't fail, the UN Security Council failed us. We will go again to the Security Council, why not? Perhaps after a week ...We are studying it, and we will study this with our allies and especially Jordan ... to submit the resolution again, a third time or even a fourth time."

At the same time President Abbas signed onto 20 international conventions, including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which gives the court jurisdiction over crimes committed on Palestinian lands. It opens up the potential for Israel to be held accountable for war crimes against the Palestinian people.

Israel retaliated within days by withholding taxes from the Palestinian Authority that it collects on its behalf.

As part of Sinn Féin’s contribution to the Palestinian strategy we introduced a motion into the Dáil before Christmas which was passed unopposed.

This vote and the unprecedented motion passed at the European Parliament wasn’t the only success for the Palestinians. At their request, and on the same day as the EU Parliament vote, 126 of the signatories to the Geneva conventions met in Switzerland for a one day conference. Israel had sought to have the conference cancelled.

These conventions are supposed to govern the rules of war and military occupation. A declaration adopted by consensus among the participating nations concluded that “all serious violations of international humanitarian law must be investigated and that all those responsible should be brought to justice.”

The Israeli government rejected the conclusion arguing that it doesn’t apply to the West Bank and Gaza. It claims that Jordan and Egypt no longer claim sovereignty over the occupied territories and, according to the Israeli government, as the Palestinians don’t have a state the declaration can’t apply to it.

This highlights the importance of the need for a Palestinian state and for Palestinian sovereignty to be recognised and it should be remembered that the UN General Assembly upgraded Palestine to a “non-member observer state” of the United Nations in 2012.

The Geneva Declaration also makes clear that Israel should “fully and effectively” respect the Fourth Geneva Convention. This is intended to protect civilians during times of war including in the occupied territories and East Jerusalem.

So clearly there is a lot of dialogue going on – much of it driven by the Palestinian leadership – to secure progress toward full recognition of the Palestinian state. The UN security council vote shows how much work still has to be done. The Palestinian people need our continuing support and solidarity in their endeavours.

Dialogue too was the driver for progress in improving relations between the United States and Cuba.

On the same day as the Palestinian vote in the European Parliament the United States and Cuba unexpectedly announced that they are commencing a new relationship between the two countries after more than 50 years of hostility. This included the release of prisoners by both governments.

President Obama and President Raul Castro, and all of those who have worked to achieve this historic agreement, are to be congratulated.

Sinn Féin played a small part in this rapprochement between the two nations.

In September two years ago Roelf Meyer, who was the senior negotiator for the Apartheid South African government in the negotiations with the African National Congress, organised a conference in Miami. The conference brought together leading conservative Cuban American citizens to discuss the need for reconciliation and dialogue between Washington and the Cuban government. Others included senior figures in the Catholic Church.

Among those who participated in the conference was Sinn Féin’s senior negotiator Pat Doherty MP who stressed the importance of dialogue and the need for a dialogue between the two governments.

I visited Cuba in 2001. On that occasion President Fidel Castro, and senior government representatives, discussed  issues of human rights, civil and religious liberties, democratic values, social justice, equality and other matters of concern to people wherever they live. It was also very obvious that the Cuban government was closely watching developments in Washington.

To mark 20 years since the 1981 hunger strike the Sinn Féin delegation also led wreaths at the memorial in Havana to the ten Republican hunger strikers. The memorial event was a full state occasion, with full honours being accorded to the memory of Bobby Sands and his comrades. Whatever one thinks about Cuba, it is true that people there, like people worldwide, were moved and remember the sacrifice of the Irish republican prisoners.

The people of Ireland have a long record of solidarity with Cuba. Despite the enormous problems faced by the Cuban people over the last five decades, Cuba has remained steadfast to the goals of eradicating poverty, ending privilege and corruption and of promoting social justice.  

As evidence of this commitment Cuban doctors and teachers have travelled widely to help those in need around the world. This is a great act of generosity that deserves our thanks and our praise 

We also visited medical centres and saw for ourselves the amazing work Cuban doctors do around the world. But it was also very obvious that the United States embargo has caused long term difficulties for the Cuban economy and people.

I hope the new and more positive relationship between both countries can lead to the speedy lifting of the blockade.