
Growing political pressure for firm Govt action on Gaza
All day Wednesday and late into the evening on the street facing Leinster House, demonstrators sang a stinging song urging politicians to find their "backbone" and to enact the Occupied Territories Bill.
The same sentiment echoed through the Dáil chamber.
Some within the Government bristled over what they believe is a shocking failure to take into account its outspoken voice on Gaza.
Words that have been matched by deeds, including €87 million in funding for people in Palestine since 2023, recognising the State of Palestine, supporting South Africa's case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, and leading the way in requesting a review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.
The Taoiseach even claimed there is a battle under way domestically for moral superiority on what has become one of the most emotive issues in Irish politics.
The language denouncing Israel's actions has become sharper too with both Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris repeatedly using the word genocide this week.
All remaining ambiguity and lingering diplomatic niceties have now been cast aside.
The Taoiseach believes the single more effective next step is to try to persuade the EU and the US to "pull their support for the State of Israel".
But it is the requirement for further direct interventions by this State rather than words alone which is fueling immense political tension.
A significant political act was about to unfold
It was evident as the bells were clanging around Leinster House just after 6pm on Wednesday when the weekly votes were called.
A significant political act was about to unfold before the business concluded.
Reporters watched from the Dáil gallery as Dublin Bay-North TD Barry Heneghan took his seat to vote on a Sinn Féin Bill.
It was a piece of legislation that would prevent the Central Bank from retaining its technical role in approving the prospectus which allows Israel sell bonds in the EU.
Israel has made it clear that these bonds are used to fund its war in Gaza.
Sinn Féin's legal advice stated that a Member State is entitled as a matter of EU law to unilaterally restrict access to its financial services.
It can do so on public policy grounds that are rooted in Ireland's fundamental interest in pursuing its international law obligations, the legal opinion concluded.
The Government argued that the Bill did not provide a legal mechanism to allow the Central Bank of Ireland set aside its obligations under the EU Prospectus Regulation.
It argued this was an EU competence, and the Central Bank can only refuse the approval of a prospectus where it has a legal basis to do so.
The advice circulated to ministers added that it is legally required to issue prospectuses that are complete, legally sound, and comprehensible.
For Barry Heneghan, who had supported the Government in every vote up to this point, this was a matter of conscience, and he believed Ireland shouldn't facilitate the sale of bonds that help fund the devastation in Gaza.
He left Leinster House around 9pm on Wednesday, long after the bells had ceased ringing, certain in the knowledge that he had made the right decision.
Generally, there was little political alarm triggered by his vote within Government.
Some whispered that "Barry can be difficult to manage", and that it was simply a "flexing of muscles".
But it did unquestionably show that those Independents, who occupy a liminal position within the Coalition, are perhaps a more fragile bloc of votes than first suspected.
This was further illustrated by the actions of Meath-East TD Gillian Toole.
Before 9pm she was on a bus back home to Ratoath having also voted against the Government on the Bill.
Regarded as a deep-thinker and a conscientious politician, Gillian Toole cited the lack of detailed briefings from the Government as an influence on her decision.
The two TDs are still aligned to the Coalition, their jump overboard is a temporary one, and the Government's majority is not shattered.
'Call out the narrative for what it is'
It is emblematic though of the growing pressure on the Government to accompany its increasingly strident rhetoric on Gaza with firm actions.
The acerbic exchange between the Tánaiste and Independent TD Catherine Connolly in the Dáil on Thursday morning typified the fractiousness which has built around this issue.
The Galway West TD made an impassioned call on Government to do more, saying: "It's time we led. Call out the narrative for what it is. Israel is a rogue state; it is not a democratic state. Stand up, stand up and account for what you're going to do."
In a charged atmosphere, Simon Harris accused her of expressing "vitriol and dislike for Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil" and of refusing to acknowledge the major steps taken by the Government.
It all suggests that the Government will now be pursued relentlessly by protesters, the Opposition, and perhaps by some Independent TDs supporting the Coalition, to pass the Occupied Territories Bill quickly.
The Foreign Affairs Committee, chaired by Fianna Fáil TD John Lahart, has already singalled that it will sit throughout June to progress this legislation swiftly.
The speed of its passage through the Oireachtas after this committee work has concluded will be the measure of the Government's strong words on Gaza this week.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Elon Musk wanted to ‘move fast and break things' in Washington. The main thing he broke was his reputation
Elon Musk came to Washington with a chainsaw and left with a black eye . Shrinking government is hard, particularly when you do it callously and carelessly – and apparently on hallucinogens. As with US president Donald Trump's tariffs , the department of government efficiency (Doge) has created more volatility than value. A guy who went bankrupt six times doesn't really care about spending. And Trump certainly didn't want to see the headline 'Trump cuts social security'. READ MORE He just wanted to get revenge on 'the bureaucracy' by deputising Musk to force out a lot of federal employees and give the impression that they were cutting all the waste. As always with Trump, the former reality star, the impression matters more than the reality, especially the reality of his own sins. This past week, Trump tried to recast the very nature of crime. As the New York Times' Glenn Thrush wrote: 'President [Donald] Trump is employing the vast power of his office to redefine criminality to suit his needs – using pardons to inoculate criminals he happens to like, downplaying corruption and fraud as crimes, and seeking to stigmatise political opponents by labelling them criminals.' It is sickening that the US department of justice is considering settling a wrongful-death lawsuit by giving $5 million (€4.4 million) to the family of Ashli Babbitt – who was shot on January 6th, 2021 , by a Capitol police officer when she ignored his warnings and tried to climb through a smashed window into the Speaker's Lobby in the Capitol. If Babbitt was trying to help Trump claw back a 'stolen' election by breaking into the Capitol, then breaking into the Capitol must be a good thing to do, and any police officer who tried to stop her and protect lawmakers cowering under desks must be in the wrong. [ Elon Musk leaves Trump's club, yet he was never quite part of it Opens in new window ] To abet Trump's fake reality, the craven House Republicans refused to put up a plaque honouring the police officers and others who defended the Capitol that awful day. I take it personally because my dad spent 20 years as a police inspector in Washington in charge of Senate security. He would run to the House whenever there was trouble. So if on January 6th Mike Dowd had been preventing insurrectionists from assaulting lawmakers, he would now be, in Trump's eyes, not a hero deserving of a plaque, but a blackguard who was thwarting 'patriots', as Trump calls the rioters he pardoned. It is a disturbing bizarro world. Trump was rewriting reality again Friday afternoon as one of the most flamboyant, destructive bromances in government history petered out in the Oval Office. It had peaked last winter when Musk posted on social platform X, 'I love @realDonaldTrump as much as a straight man can love another man', and again when Trump tried to reciprocate by hawking Teslas in the White House driveway. But Friday, even these grandmaster salesmen couldn't sell the spin that Musk had 'delivered a colossal change'. Elon Musk with US president Donald Trump during a joint news conference after Musk announced his departure from his role as a special government employee. Photograph: Haiyun Jiang/New York Times Musk has acknowledged recently that his dream of cutting $1 trillion had been a fantasy. He said changing Washington was 'an uphill battle' and complained that Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill, which could add more than $3 trillion in debt, undercut his Doge attempts to save money. As Trump said, Musk got a lot of 'the slings and the arrows'. His approval rating cratered and violence has been directed toward Tesla, a brand once loved by liberals and in China, which is now tarnished. Musk cut off a reporter who tried to ask about a Times article asserting that he was a habitual user of ketamine and a dabbler in ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms even after Trump had given him enormous control over the government. That could explain the chainsaw-wielding, the jumping up and down onstage, the manic baby-making and crusading for more spreading of sperm by smart people, and the ominous Nazi-style salutes. When a reporter asked Musk why he had a black eye, he joked about the viral video of Brigitte Macron shoving her husband's face . Then he explained that while 'horsing around' with his five-year-old, X, he suggested the child punch him in the face, 'and he did'. The Trump and the Tony Stark prototype tried to convey the idea that they would remain tight, even though Musk would no longer be getting into angry altercations with Scott Bessent outside the Oval, sleeping on the floor of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and hanging around Mar-a-Lago. (Trump wants the $100 million Musk has pledged for his political operation.) Musk, wearing a black Doge cap and black 'Dogefather' T-shirt, looked around the Oval, which Trump has tarted up to look like a Vegas gift shop, and gushed that it 'finally has the majesty that it deserves, thanks to the president'. Trump gave Musk a golden ceremonial White House key, the kind of thing small-town mayors give out, and proclaimed: 'Elon's really not leaving. He's going to be back and forth, I think.' Trump said that the father of (at least) 14 would never desert Doge completely because 'It's his baby'. Musk brought the Silicon Valley mantra 'Move fast and break things' to Washington. But the main thing he broke was his own reputation. – This article originally appeared in the New York Times .

The Journal
an hour ago
- The Journal
Gerry Adams' comments about 'putting manners' on BBC described as 'chilling' by NUJ secretary
GERRY ADAMS' COMMENTS following his successful libel case against the BBC have been described as 'chilling' by Séamus Dooley, the Irish secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ). The former Sinn Féin president was awarded €100,000 in damages after winning his case at the High Court in Dublin on Friday. Adams said that a BBC Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Féin official Denis Donaldson, in which he denies any involvement. A jury found in his favour after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. It also found the BBC's actions were not in good faith and that it had not acted in a fair and reasonable way. Adams said from his perspective, the case was about 'putting manners' on the BBC. Adams also said: 'The British Broadcasting Corporation upholds the ethos of the British state in Ireland, and in my view it's out of sync in many, many fronts with the Good Friday Agreement.' The NUJ's Séamus Dooley told RTÉ Radio this afternoon that Friday was 'a day which gives us pause for reflection'. While stressing that Adams was entitled to take his case, 'it does have profound implications for the practice of journalism'. 'And I think it has implications both in terms of defamation law, but also for me, in terms of journalism in Northern Ireland, and the relationship between Sinn Féin and journalists in Northern Ireland.' Asked for his reaction to Adams saying he was 'putting manners' on the BBC, Dooley said: 'Well, I found that a chilling comment, actually. Putting manners on the BBC to me means putting them back in their box.' It was put to Dooley that the verdict could have a chilling effect in newsrooms in Ireland. 'That is precisely what Mr Adams meant when he said putting matters on the BBC,' Dooley replied. Advertisement 'That's extremely worrying. It doesn't matter whether Gerry Adams was in the IRA or not, as far as I'm concerned. 'He is a figure of huge significance to journalists, to historians, to academics, and there is no doubt that he had an influence on the shape of history of Northern Ireland. 'And on that basis, any journalist has a right, any academic, to question and probe. 'The issue here, I think under defamation is the issue of fair opinion and how you square that circle.' Given the length of the case and the huge costs associated with it, Dooley said it would be 'very dangerous if journalists who carry out an investigation and have open to them, under legislation, the defence of honest opinion, then were put in the position where they had to settle because of costs'. He said the case raises the need for a review of Ireland's defamation law. 'We need to look at the defence of honest opinion, and how you square that circle in the context of journalists' right to protect sources is a real difficulty.' Dooley said that the NUJ's position in the past had been in favour of juries in defamation cases, but that has since changed. 'I've now reached the conclusion that in defamation cases, that juries are not appropriate, and one of the reasons is we will never know why the jury reached this decision,' he said, adding that if the case had been taken in Northern Ireland, it would have been decided by judges and a written explanation would have been published. Dooley said that reforming defamation law 'has never been a priority' in Ireland. 'I also think we have to look at, both from Mr Adams' point of view and from the BBC point of view, the notion that this case has been running since 2016. 'Does anyone believe that that is fair or reasonable?' He also said asked if the costs involved in taking such a case can be seen as reasonable when it comes to ordinary citizens. The BBC is expected to be landed with legal costs from the case amounting to more than €4m. With reporting from Press Association Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal


Irish Independent
2 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Gerry Adams' ‘putting manners on BBC' remark ‘chilling'
Seamus Dooley, the Irish secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), also said the high profile case showed the need for reform of Ireland's defamation laws, saying the public would never know why the jury made its decision. Former Sinn Féin leader Mr Adams took the BBC to court over a 2016 episode of its Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, which he said defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Féin official Denis Donaldson, for which he denies any involvement. A jury at the High Court in Dublin awarded him €100,000 (£84,000) when it found in his favour on Friday, after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. It also found the BBC's actions were not in good faith and the corporation had not acted in a fair and reasonable way. Mr Adams' legal team said the verdict of the jury was a 'full vindication' for their client while the BBC said it was 'disappointed' with the outcome. Mr Donaldson was shot dead in Co Donegal in 2006, months after admitting his role as a police and MI5 agent over 20 years. Mr Dooley told RTÉ's This Week programme that it was a verdict which would make journalists 'pause for reflection'. He said: 'The first thing we should say is Gerry Adams was entitled to take his case. 'But it does have profound implications for the practise of journalism and I think it has implications both in terms of defamation law but also for me in terms of journalism in Northern Ireland and the relationship between Sinn Fein and journalists in Northern Ireland.' Speaking outside court on Friday, Mr Adams said taking the case was 'about putting manners on the British Broadcasting Corporation'. ADVERTISEMENT He added: 'The British Broadcasting Corporation upholds the ethos of the British state in Ireland, and in my view it's out of sync in many, many fronts with the Good Friday Agreement.' Mr Dooley said: 'I found that a chilling comment actually. He referred to putting manners on the BBC, to me that means putting them back in their box. 'The reality is that Spotlight has, for over 40 years, done some of the most amazing investigative journalism. 'Margaret Thatcher tried to ban Spotlight because of their coverage of Gibraltar Three, they exposed Kincora at the heart of the British establishment, recently they did work on Stakeknife, and in fact the Sinn Féin mayor of Derry led the campaign to save BBC Radio Foyle news service. 'I found the attitude quite chilling but also unfair and unreasonable in the circumstances.' Mr Dooley said that Mr Adams was a figure of 'huge significance' to journalists, historians and academics and had 'influenced the shape of history of Northern Ireland'. He added: 'On that basis, any journalist has a right, any academic, to question and probe.' He said the case underpinned the need for a review of defamation laws in Ireland He said: 'First of all we need to look at the defence of honest opinion and how you square that circle in the context of journalists' right to protect sources, it is a real difficulty. 'For many years the NUJ was in favour of retaining juries. I have now reached the conclusion in defamation cases that juries are not appropriate. 'One of the reasons is we will never know why the jury reached this decision. 'If, as in Northern Ireland, had Mr Adams taken his case in Northern Ireland, the case is heard before judges, you have the benefit of a written judgment, you have the benefit of a detailed explanation of the reason why a verdict is given. 'That provides an insight and a guide. 'Here we don't know.' Mr Dooley also pointed out that proceedings in the case had been running since 2016. Former Sinn Fein member Mr Donaldson was shot dead in Co Donegal in 2006, months after admitting his role as a police and MI5 agent over 20 years. In the Spotlight programme broadcast in September 2016, an anonymous source given the pseudonym Martin claimed the shooting was sanctioned by the political and military leadership of the IRA and that Mr Adams gave 'the final say'. In 2009, the dissident republican group the Real IRA claimed responsibility for the killing and a Garda investigation into the matter remains ongoing. Mr Adams had described the allegation as a 'grievous smear'. Mr Adams has at all times denied sanctioning the murder.