Interview with Eoghan Murphy, Fine Gael TD… April 27, 2013
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Economy, Irish Politics.trackback
…in the Mail, conducted by Jason O’Toole. It’s an interesting piece. Murphy, 31, is TD for Dublin South East and appears to have a number of opinions that puts him, well, let’s say, just a little at odds with some of his contemporaries in the party…
SINCE first being elected to the Dáil only two years ago, Eoghan Murphy has received more correspondence from the public on the X Case in the wake of the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar than any other issue. But out of hundreds of phone calls and thousands of emails sent to his office, what has had the most profound impact on him is several heartrending conversations with worried foreign nationals who ask him, ‘Is it safe for me to still be in this country? Is it safe for my wife to get pregnant in this country?’ The Dublin South East TD feels that the tragic death of the expecting Indian mother and her unborn child has damaged Ireland’s reputation because it ‘shocked international opinion’ — to such an extent that he’s now hearing about businesses based here saying it is having a ‘negative impact on the perception of those thinking of moving here to work’.
And:
‘You can use the word shame; I guess it a hard word to use,’ he says. ‘I think the country felt that way. I felt bad. I think the country felt that we had been remiss in our responsibility to a person living in our country. ‘We have to make sure that the husband feels that the response by the State has been the best possible response that one could get given the circumstances. And that’s important; it’s important not just for him but for everybody.’
He says:
Despite the conclusion of the Savita inquiry coming to its conclusion, Murphy believes that there are still unanswered questions. ‘There’s another question there about what we’re doing with the HSE and the provision of care in our medical centres. People are claiming that, had she been living in Dublin, that perhaps she wouldn’t have died. So there’s questions there for the HSE to look at.’
He:
…believes the government is ‘right to be taking the time’ on legislating following the X Case to ensure that it doesn’t ‘enact the wrong legislation’. But he admits that the legislation is flawed because it won’t ‘provide for termination in certain cases’. He explains: ‘There’s going to be further problems down the line even if the legislation does come through because we’re not addressing problems like fetal abnormality, ectopic pregnancy, cases of rape or incest. ‘And I think we’ve got legitimate ground to look at that. Now, of course, that requires a referendum. Do we need a referendum on this in the future? Yes, I think we probably do. I don’t think the government would have any support to go further at this point in time. It’s not kicking the can down the road, it’s trying to do what it thinks it needs to do with the support it thinks it can get.’
Tellingly…
While he would not describe himself as pro-choice, Mr Murphy concedes: ‘No one favours abortion, but does a State have the right to tell a woman who has to put up with everything around this issue herself — physically and personally and emotionally and mentally? Do we have a right to tell her what she can or cannot do in certain circumstances? No, I do not think we do. ‘A woman’s body is her own. I see myself as a liberal guy on this. I would be closer to the Left position on this.’
Interesting how he phrases that last. And it’s not his only divergence from what appears to be the ruling orthodoxy in FG.
As someone who describes himself as a liberal, it’s unsurprising that Murphy is in favour of same sex marriages. Enda Kenny has repeatedly refused to divulge his on position on the contentious issue since becoming Taoiseach — but he did tell me in 2007 that he was ‘not in favour of same sex marriage’.
Here’s an entertaining view of our beloved leader…
Murphy says: ‘The Taoiseach is entitled to his views. People do change their minds over time, as well. As I know Enda, I know him as a modern guy and a liberal guy. I guess there’s different degrees of liberalism, but I would have always thought that he’s a pretty cool guy.
Meanwhile he’s regarded as being part of the awkward squad in FG, though which one?
Murphy has been described as the ringleader of the so – called Five-a-Side Club of young Fine Gael TDs who regular meet up to discuss policies. He insists that he is not the so-called ringleader and also denies the group play football. ‘This is something of that myth that’s developed in the media. A number of new backbenchers elected in the last election meet and discuss policy. We’re trying to make it more fluid. It’s not trying to be some sort of exclusive club,’ he says.
Though, dependably (upper?) middle class…
For a politician so young, Murphy speaks with great confidence and knowledge — and looking at his family background and privileged upbringing, that is not surprising. He was raised in leafy D4, the son of Mahon Tribunal lawyer Henry Murphy — the barrister who famously cross-examined Celia Larkin and reportedly made more than €1million from working on two tribunals.
‘I saw something similar and I asked him about it and I think that, yes, whatever figure was reported would be the factual figure,’ Murphy concedes. ‘That would have maybe been over the course of six or seven years.’
One brother is the actor Killian Scott from Love/Hate, the other is critic and playwright Colin Murphy. And the conversation takes a fascinating turn here:
But for all their ambition and achievements, the family has had to grow up with the shadow of a more infamous relative; their grandfather, Russell Murphy, was the accountant who ripped off Gay Byrne and Hugh Leonard. It was only after the accountant’s death in 1984 that the RTÉ broadcaster discovered his life savings had been embezzled.
Murphy is clearly taken aback when I mention that one of my granduncles was actually one of his grandfather’s clients who unfortunately lost some savings, too. ‘You’re the first person I’ve met to have a chat like this,’ Murphy tells me, explaining that he’s never talked to either his father or any friends about it. ‘It’s not something we discuss in the family. I didn’t know a whole lot about it. I probably know exactly as much about this as you know. He died when I was one-and-ahalf. I never knew the man. He did things that I’m not fully aware of, which has cast a shadow on the family, which has made it difficult for us to talk about. ‘When my older brothers speak about our granddad they speak with a lot of affection about a very loving grandfather … It is difficult to take questions on it. This is as much as I have spoken about this with anyone.’
Apparently he completed an MA in International Relations in London… and then:
Murphy decided to pursue his own career in politics after a year of travelling during which he found himself repeatedly discussing international issues.
He’s anti-hard drugs but, on marijuana…
‘Yes, I inhaled [as a student in UCD]— that’s the whole point, isn’t it, as Obama said? I did marijuana and that was kind of part of the college scene,’ he says.
After college, however, he threw himself into his career — working for the UN before pursuing politics in Ireland, when he eventually got some practical advice from former Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald. ‘When I first met Garret FitzGerald I wasn’t yet a candidate; I was what we call an area rep, which is they test people out to see if they could be candidates,’ he says. ‘I was in jeans and a shirt that wasn’t tucked in and he got out of his car and I went to introduce myself, proud as punch. And he looked me up and down and he said, “You’re not smart enough to be a candidate!” — in a nice way. In the next week I was suited and booted. “Right, okay, I can’t just rock up as Eoghan Murphy twenty-six-year-old, I’m Eoghan Murphy representing Fine Gael.”’
For a TD he seems to be buzzing with ideas, but to what purpose in the context of a party with a massive majority when in coalition with the LP?
And the current Eoghan Murphy of Fine Gael certainly has no qualms representing his own views to the party. Murphy openly admits that he finds himself ‘frustrated’ as a backbencher in government — and has written a pamphlet on reforming the Dáil which he distributed to every member of the Fine Gael parliamentary party. Murphy says he was inspired to write the memo, which outlines 30 proposed changes to how business is conducted in the Dáil, because he feels that the government is not fulfilling its potential at all’ and that the current system is ‘archaic’. ‘In Fine Gael, we don’t blame the regulator, we don’t blame the bankers, we don’t blame the developers, part of the whole situation, but we say categorically that political failure lies at the heart of Ireland’s economic woes and social woes now as a result.
And he makes a fair point:
‘We’re two years in and, if we were to be removed from government tomorrow, we would have almost the exact same political system that allowed the country to collapse.’ His paper calls for relaxing the whip system because he argues ‘for what is a vote worth if it’s not free?’
And:
His paper also proposes a radical overhaul of how committees work and advocates the introduction of a special budgetary oversight committee to change how the budget is delivered — akin to the US system where changes can be introduced at any time rather than solely on a budget day. ‘No one likes this idea of a guy standing out on almost the last day of the year revealing all the financial secrets for the next year — it’s archaic,’ he says. ‘We should have a special committee constantly reviewing how much we’re taking in and how much is going out. ‘I’d like to see people also debating a detail of the ramifications of what’s actually going to be in the budget — not after but before it’s passed. We had last year in the parliamentary party a great debate on what might be in the budget or what shouldn’t be in the budget; the only problem was it was behind closed doors.’ He is clearly deflated by the response the paper has received so far from within the party hierarchy. ‘There are certainly people who would receive a document like that and look at it as a criticism, who wouldn’t value it as positive contribution. Certain feedback that I would have expected has not been forthcoming. ‘My pamphlet isn’t radical at all — that’s the sad thing. The sad thing is these reforms are viewed as radical, but the proposal I’m talking about, some of them go back to as far as the early 1980s and they still haven’t been brought in.’
No fan of the property tax, in its current form at least, he:
He certainly won’t be popular amongst the party’s hierarchy with his ideas about the controversial property tax. ‘I think it’s wrong to tax people on the notion of value of what the house might be worth put on the market at any given time. ‘I would like a Local Services Charge that reflected the actual services that you get. I don’t think it’s fair to tax people on the perceived market value of their house. I don’t think it’s fair to tax people on assets they have bought with their aftertax income because it’s double taxation. I think we’re penalizing people then.’
And check this out:
Surprisingly, Murphy is the first Fine Gael TD to publicly state that he feels that the so-called Michael Lowry Tape — a recorded conversation with property agent Kevin Phelan about a €250,000 payment to the disgraced TD — ‘damages the Dáil and politics’. When I ask if Lowry should resign, Murphy answers: ‘I don’t think it’s the place of an elected member of the Dáil to call on another elected member to resign. To answer your question I think it’s obvious but I don’t think it’s right. It would not be proper for one TD to call on another TD to resign as a TD.’
But how does he feel about seeing Lowry sitting in the same chamber? Well, Lowry is rarely there, he claims. ‘I feel it damages my own position, I feel it undermines it, that I share a parliament with someone who has certain findings made against him by a tribunal set up by the Oireachtas. It undermines my own position.’
And the future?
Regarding his own political future, Murphy is probably the first backbencher I’ve met who is reluctant to eagerly profess a dream of one day becoming Taoiseach. ‘I don’t now,’ he says. ‘The reason I’m in politics, when I walk away — and I intend to walk away one day — (is so) I can be confident that I’ve made some difference. ‘Would I like to be the leader of a political party? Absolutely, if I felt that was the political party that represented my views. I don’t want to be a leader of a political party just for getting there or for the sake of it. Nor do I want to be the leader of a political party in a Dáil that hasn’t been reformed.’
To me Murphy is a very recognisable sort of Fine Gael member and TD, one from the 1980s and 1990s, the reference to FitzGerald is a give-away, liberal inclined on social issues, perhaps mildly centrist (tentatively right social democratic) on economic issues. What’s remarkable is how thin they appear to be on the ground in that party. In that way Murphy appears strangely adrift in the new model FG.
The Cedar Lounge Revolution 
Its certainly reassuring to know that Ireland’s social and economic problems can be solved by altering committee procedures in the Dail.
LikeLike
Timely with his Party and constituency colleague’s input during the week. I was doing the math last night between both Clare Daly Bills and the X case motion last year. When the vote comes it’s difficult to see opposition to legislation coming to more then thirty TDs and five of them may just as easily end up in the other column. Seanad could be a bit tighter though I reckon 99% of the bluster will fall away when the time comes.
Is anyone really thinking about internal FG dynamics that will be in play as much as personal inclination and eye on the seat? Likewise is it possible Toibin could continue dissent. He’s already been removed from his Committee position but Government is a while away yet and he would surely find enough support within the membership until then?
In other news. Jim Dowson (BNP/Life League) is heading up a new ‘anti-politics’ Unionist Party.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-22279352
LikeLike
I don’t know that Murphy appears ‘strangely adrift in the new model FG’. He appears to be a bog standard neoliberal in a bog standrad neoliberal party. The comments on abortion are a giveaway here. He is not liberally inclined because of pro choice arguments or the idea that it is a woman’s right to choose but because Ireland’s current abortion laws might scare away business and bring ‘shame’ to Ireland. The business argument and the (Modernisation) morality argument is bog standard neliberal thinking.
If anything, he just appears to be slightly more in tune with the kids of today than others in FG who appear too much attached to US style reactionary politics.
The whole ‘progressive Fitzgerald era’ is just a myth. The Modernisation discourse that underpinned was only ever in the service of neoliberalism. Leftists would do well to point this out rather than hanker after some soft ‘social deomratic’ FG that never was.
LikeLike
Erm… projection much? Who is hankering after anything? I’ve no more time for the supposed great liberal Fitzgerald – whose practice never matched his pretty wishy washy rhetoric on social issues, and let’s not even discuss the economic approaches taken.
But, that said it seems to me that there is a fairly clear distinction between Murphy’s line on abortion and that of say Creighton and Varadker. Motivation isn’t the issue here, whether he’s liberal on that issue because of a or b reason but the fact that he is whereas Creighton clearly isn’t.
BTW, it’s worth reading what I actually write in between the quotes rather than making stuff up about what you think I write – no?
LikeLike
On reflection if I’m taking you up the wrong way and being overly harsh my apologies. But I saw the sort of self-deluding stuff about FG you describe at first hand in DL in the 1992-1994 period before I left and it sickened me then and still does.
LikeLike
Look, I’m pretty much going on what you wrote in your final paragraph. If there is a clear distinction between Murphy and Creighton/Varadkar, it is not one necessarily of ideology, but one of tact. The old Catholic hegemony of abortion as ‘sin’ has been completely wiped away; there will be some legislation for abortion in the very near future.
Murphy is pitching his arguments fully within a neoliberal discourse that allows for some abortion rights. Creighton/Varadkar have a weird attachment to US style reactionary politics. One, that I would argue, has no real traction in Irish society today, outside of an ever-dwindling traditional Catholicism.
If this was a hundred or so years ago Creighton/Varadkar might be called ‘west Brits’. Today, they *might* be called ‘east Americans’. The motivation is the same: to pander – in a rather brain dead, anti-intellectual way – after what is considered the hegemonic power. The upside is that the US is not really the hegemonic power, at least, not in the way Creighton/Varadkar would have it.
What is, unfortunately, hegemonic is the idea that Ireland is ‘backward’, therefore ‘bad’, and that instances such as the Halappanavar case ‘shame’ us in front of the ‘world’ (read Anglo-American internet sites. I would also argue that some of the young people who have been radicalised by this case, are radicalised on a racist basis, as in, how dare those brown skinned Indians ,with their third world country, lecture *us* the ‘poster child of economic development’…insert other Celtic Tiger Myths). This hegemony can be used by the Left, in the short term, to push for Abortion rights but, more importantly, will also be used by neoliberals, in the longer term, to push for far more reactionary policies and cement their ideological hegemony.
The problem that I see with the inferences you are drawing in the final paragraph is that Leftists should take heart with the Murphy’s of the world. On the contrary, they are the real enemy.
I fully appreciate your experiences with DL. What I would say is that, rather than trying to build a ‘progressive’ bridge to the Murphy’s of the World, we, as Leftists, should be trying to break the chains that bind the Worker’sParty/DL/Labour to the Murphy’s of the world and neoliberalism.
For me, part of that is recognising the ‘Modernisation trap’. That is: the idea that there is an ‘old Ireland’ that has given way to a ‘Modern Ireland’. A ‘Modern Ireland’ that is somehow more ‘progressive’ than the ‘old Ireland’. This is nonsense. What has happened is that one reactionary paradigm has given way to a newer reactionary paradigm. As a young person, I have never experienced the older reactionary paradigm, but, I can tell you, I am suffering from the new reactionary paradigm far more than my parents every suffered under the ‘old, traditional, Catholic’ paradigm. I think that is something that all you ‘lefty’s too stubborn to quit’ should really consider more.
LikeLike
‘but, I can tell you, I am suffering from the new reactionary paradigm far more than my parents every suffered under the ‘old, traditional, Catholic’ paradigm. I think that is something that all you ‘lefty’s too stubborn to quit’ should really consider more.’
You may think you are, but I’m not so sure. Have you ever seen a full congregation being TOLD who not to vote for? Seen people bow and scrape in front of a bog-standard local priest?
Opponents of abortion would tend to argue that the ‘west Brits’ are the ones intent on bringing abortion to Ireland by the way.
LikeLike
“What I would say is that, rather than trying to build a ‘progressive’ bridge to the Murphy’s of the World, we, as Leftists, should be trying to break the chains that bind the Worker’sParty/DL/Labour to the Murphy’s of the world and neoliberalism.”
Except nobody suggested building bridges with the likes of Murphy.
LikeLike
Branno, get up the yard with your auld antediluvian thinking: you have failed to understand my point and you have no idea of my personal circumstances. Read the newspapers and you will see the ”economists” and opeds pontificating about who not to vote for. The ideological hegemony that the priests upheld is no different thant that of the economists. the ‘people’ are still cowed and a reactionary hegemony still holds sway. It just happens to be less Catholic than before. You – seem to me atleast – to be a lot of what is wrong with the modern left in Ireland.
Smiffy: I know no one has outright said it, but it is the inference, as far as I am concerned, that is being drawn by this piece.
An inference that somehow, the Left, should be heartened by Murphy or, at least, that there is some kind of rupture between him and the more reactionary elements of FG.
My argument would be that they are perfectly capable of coalescing under the neoliberal banner together. There is no rupture, just a different tact.
LikeLike
“Smiffy: I know no one has outright said it, but it is the inference, as far as I am concerned, that is being drawn by this piece.
An inference that somehow, the Left, should be heartened by Murphy or, at least, that there is some kind of rupture between him and the more reactionary elements of FG.”
It’s a pretty daft inference to draw from a fairly straightforward observation on WBS’ part that Murphy is – on this point – somewhat out of step with many others in Fine Gael. Which is true. It doesn’t make that much difference, but it’s still true.
What’s also true is that someone who holds a very mildly pro-choice stance, regardless of their motivation, is more positive than someone who holds an anti-choice stance. It would be better to have legislation in line with the X case (for example) in place than the current situation, although it would be far from ideal. But that doesn’t mean that anyone is talking about building alliances with right-wing politicians. You may wish to hold back somewhat when it comes to drawing inferences, and look at what people actually say, rather than just what you imagine they mean.
Finally, it’s nonsensical to say that “the ideological hegemony that the priests upheld is no different thant that of the economists”. It’s completely different, on any number of fronts: economic, political, social etc.
LikeLike
‘You – seem to me atleast – to be a lot of what is wrong with the modern left in Ireland.’
And you- seem to me at least- to be the type of left-wing nationalist who rationalizes that the ‘bad old days’ can’t really have been that bad, and that since these horrible D4 types don’t like the Catholic Church then maybe the Church was not that bad to begin with, and isn’t the SINDO’s collection of ego-driven polemic just as bad in its own way as a 16 year unmarried mother being consigned to a laundry for a decade or a boy in an industrial school being raped and everyone turning a blind eye because you simply did not question the Church.
Freedom: when the last bishop is strangled with the entrails of the last apologist.
LikeLike
What Branno said.
LikeLike
It’s not daft, it’s pretty much in line with some of the left’s thinking in Ireland. WBS likes to cleave to a certain tight rope sometimes when it somes to things like this,saying something, but not really saying something, as it were.
The last paragraph of the piece is – to put it crudely – bullshit. Murphy is a bogstandard neoliberal in a bogstandard neoliberal party. It would be nice for that to be pointed out with a bit of elaboration of why these, seemingly, two disparate positions can coalesce together.
As for the priests: they are gone, they are not coming back. Now, I understand that for a leftist of a certain vintage, this is too hard to believe, as the priests are a kind of bogeyman figure and that their ‘defeat’ serves as a kind of comfort blanket for a (political) life on the left not wasted.
However, as a young person who has had their future stolen, who has – along with their friends – been forced to become part of the global precariat, who has seen his generation made the scapegoat for the neoliberal gluttony of the oligarchy and who has seen how his – and future generations – will be foreced to pay for this through permanent austerity, I would beg to differ.
But, yeah, I’m sure not being able to buy condoms in Tesco and having to go to mass on a Sunday is the far worse fate.
LikeLike
rexio, who are you responding to, because you’re not responding to anything I’ve said? Or Branno, from what I can see.
BTW, there’s no point playing the ‘I’m a young person’ card, then whinging that people don’t know your personal circumstances when it’s raised by someone else.
LikeLike
Ah Smiffy for such a particular pedant like yourself that’s not much of a response. Branno is trying to tell me I have it better than my parents. That, quite simply, as any half decent Marxist could tell you, is bullshit.
Look, just too reiterate: Murphy is a bogstandard neoliberal in a bogstandrad neoliberal party. His rhetoric around abortion is bogstandrad neoliberalism. If there is a difference between him and Creighton/Varadkar it is not one of ideology but, one of tact. Creaighton/Varadkar have an attachment to reactionary US politics. Murphy is more likely sniffing the wind with regrad to a younger generation and tailoring his neoliberal ideology accordingly. This is not ot be celebrated by the left, unless you have fallen for the ‘modernisation trap’ as Branno evidently has.
My only response to that is simply follow the logic of ithe ‘modernisation’ discourse and join the Labour Party.
LikeLike
rexio, read again what I wrote. In no sense did I suggest, propose, theorise or in any shape or form make any hint that somehow Murphy was in some way or manner anything the left should be dealing with.
To argue that his stance is different from Creighton’s is simply a matter of fact. It’s not an endorsement.
You’ve quite deliberately now built a castle in the air on your own projection onto what was written – or as I put it in my first response, are making stuff up about what I write and what I think.
And then to add to that you say the following…
“WBS likes to cleave to a certain tight rope sometimes when it somes to things like this,saying something, but not really saying something, as it were.”
What does this even mean? Are you seriously suggesting I think the Murphy’s of the world constitute progress? Do you have evidence of any FG inclinations on my part, or FF inclinations, or feck it LP inclinations? Give me a break.
I’ve consistently been upfront that my deepest political antipathy in this state is towards FG, even more so than my dislike of FF.
And on foot of commenting on a interview which I thought was interesting for general political reasons, but again was in no way an endorsement.
So stop making stuff up (oh yeah, and stop gratuitously insulting people here).
LikeLike
You said the above: ‘liberal inclined on social issues, perhaps mildly centrist (tentatively right social democratic) on economic issues’.
This is bullshit (and a perfect example of the tightrope ‘I’m saying but I’m not really saying’ style that you have, which is fair enough). Murphy is a neoliberal. Fitzgerald was a neoliberal. There is nothing social democratic ‘tentatively’ or otherwise about FG past or present. It wasn’t so ‘Catholic’ compared with other parties but that is different from being social democratic. Indeed, I know there was a post somewhere on here about how the much fabled ‘Just Society’ document wasn’t up to much.
LikeLike
What a crock rexio, and what an aggressive crock too. I love it when people ascribe to me attitudes they know I don’t hold.
There’s nothing two faced or trying to suggest some good in something by a mere statement of fact.
Some in FG were tentatively social democrat. So what? It’s not an endorsement. Quite the opposite.
By the way, be my guest about contradicting yourself re social democracy, which most of us would believe is functionally neoliberal in its present incarnation and tending that way for a very very long time indeed.
LikeLike
Branno, Branno, Branno, what to do with you a leanbh mo chroí. The ‘bad old days’ are gone, they are not coming back. I won’t go into this but, ironically, you are far more closer to the ‘nationalists’ than I am in the fact that you are trying to hold on to some past injustices to bolster your present politics.
Don’t try to misrepresent me. I am against the priests and their religions as I am against the economic preists and their religion. I just understand the old one is gone now.
Imagine it like this: it’s an association football match between the ‘progressive’ team and the ‘reactionary’ team. The progressive team is winning, perhaps 5,6 nil, yet there is still 30 minutes or so left. The reactionary team is not coming back, however, the progressive team still has to wait out it’s victory.
Everything else you say is just some ill-considered rant. Back to your educational classes and read some Gramsci, comrade!
LikeLike
My future was stolen as well, ages ago. But I did actually have it better than my parents I think, in part due to the actions and activities of progressives in the 1960s. And you do have it better than your parents and its because of us you ungrateful little bollix! ; )
LikeLike
You could argue that it is not surprising he is taking a liberal stance. His party and constituency colleague (and front-bencher) does seem to have carved out the right-wing niche. It also makes him far more transfer friendly for the Labour party voter in the new Dublin Bay South constituency.
LikeLike
In a way, though in fairness I’ve met one of his brothers through work and as far as one can judge I don’t think the social liberalism is a put on. What’s fascinating to me is how said front bencher doesn’t cleave more to a more liberal line given that constituency.
LikeLike
‘But, yeah, I’m sure not being able to buy condoms in Tesco and having to go to mass on a Sunday is the far worse fate.’
Try being forced to emigrate AND having to go to mass- or everyone would know you didn’t, to work for low wages AND have no access to information about contraception (not actual contraception) try independent Ireland 1920s-1980s. The 80s were particularly good, believe me. Recession, unemployment, austerity, health cuts, hypocritical political elites AND abortion and divorce referendums, Ann Lovett dead in a grotto, Joanne Hayes framed, Fr. Cleary and SPUC. Good times.
Forgive me for being happy that some blows have been inflicted on what was a key pillar of conservative stability in Ireland.
LikeLike
Does his other brother recover from his coma in the next series of Love/Hate?
LikeLike
Was their da Gay Byrne’s accountant? Family a microcosm of the FG pox in this country, like the Andrews the FF one.
LikeLike
Surely ripping off Gay Byrne for everything he had was a good thing, no?
LikeLike
🙂
LikeLike
The prehaps unintended consequences is the old codger is still on our screens, so no.
LikeLike
Good point. Boo!
LikeLike
God and His Chuch will be there for you all when austerity has bitten so hard and brought you to the brink of despair. Thankfully, God is not an arrogant young so-and-so like some commenters on this thread. He won’t leave people to lie permanently in the beds they’ve made for themselves but he will allow the corners be knocked off them, for their own good. Listen up, young Ireland, cop on and use the brains and educations you clearly have to work out that God and His Church can ever die. Reformed and renewed? Absolutely, but in obedience to what He wants us to do, not what we want for ourselves – that’s pure arrogance.
LikeLike
Isn’t there just the slightest danger that you’re falling into the trap of arrogance in assuming your understanding of God is the last word on the matter. By the way that’s awful nice of you to describe people on the thread as young… I figure the median age would be late thirties with one or two people in their twenties and a few others like myself in their forties or older.
LikeLike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1siktyfFxY 😉
LikeLike
staffing and recruitment thailand
Interview with Eoghan Murphy, Fine Gael TD… | The Cedar Lounge Revolution
LikeLike