January 8th 2016

The Catholic Church is the most accomplished and probably the most corrupt body in history. The word catholic is derived from the Greek word katholikos, which means "universal". I believe there is another well-known entity which peddles fantasy but is not nearly as capable or successful as Mother Church. This other organisation is called ‘Universal Studios’. The Catholic Church is funded in the main by the pennies and penances of the common people.

Another entity which is similarly funded is the Legal Aid Board.

The Board's Mission Statement, set out in its Corporate Plan

2015 – 2017, is;

"Our Mission is to facilitate the effective resolution of civil disputes through the delivery of efficient and accessible legal aid and mediation services and to effectively manage and administer the State’s criminal legal aid schemes".

The Corporate Plan sets out a number of steps that the Board has adopted in order to achieve the objective set out in its Mission Statement.

The second leg of ‘Legal Aid’ is the criminal variety. This is some load of horseshit. The constitutional right of people to a fair trial means that every day district court judges have to decide whether a person of limited means should be given free access to a solicitor and up to two barristers. The judges will invariably err on the side of caution and grant the legal aid certificate because it is better to protect the trial, and avoid a costly appeal, than it is to be too frugal only to create a weak link in the chain. This policy has seen gangsters in control of multi-million euro drugs operations granted legal aid to fight criminal charges or the Criminal Assets Bureau’s efforts to seize their properties.

 “The Criminal Legal Aid Scheme must operate with due regard to these rights and that any unreasonable block on legal aid could give a convicted defendant an avenue for appeal or prohibition of the prosecution,” and, “The overriding concern is to ensure that no risk arises in relation to the prosecution of persons charged with criminal offences before the courts,” said former Justice Minister Alan Shatter.

The courts have been regularly faced with appeals that are based not on the merits of the evidence but on the belief that a person did not have proper legal cover. This has meant that efforts to whittle down the costs of legal aid, through reduced fees, face an uncertain future.

The drive suffered a blow in 2011 with a Supreme Court judgment which allowed an appeal on the basis that an accused man was not given free legal aid so he did not have a fair trial. Imagine the poor burglar, Mr Joyce,

Not receiving a fair trial. For fuck’s sake!

In civil actions a person has to apply to the Legal Aid Board and face a waiting list in order to be assessed. Civil legal aid is mostly sought in family law matters. To get civil legal aid a person must have an annual disposable income of less than €18,000. This allows for deductions for taxes, up to €8,000 in accommodation bills and the costs of dependent children or a spouse. In civil actions a person has to apply to the Legal Aid Board and face a waiting list in order to be assessed. Even those who get approved have to make a minimum contribution of €130.

The total burden on the taxpayer to operate these two systems totals almost €100million. Ironically, the amount spent defending criminals is twice as much as that spent on Civil Legal Aid. In other words, more than €60million is spent annually defending the indefensible. The Legal Aid Board has its headquarters at 48-49 North Brunswick St. Dublin. From what I can ascertain the Criminal Legal Aid Section is a very small adjunct of the main office.

The Legal Aid Board proper has one Muriel Walls of Walls and Toomey Solrs. Fitzwilliam Sq. as chairperson ably assisted by 12 other professionals. The Criminal Legal Aid Section has no governing body or board. This is unbelievable. Since the lion’s share of the taxpayer’s money is spent on the latter surely it should control the Board with the Civil Aid section as a sub-division. Of course that might remove the ultimate power in such matters from the legal profession and the judiciary. That would be a shame.

My own experience with the Legal Aid Board has been less than encouraging. When Tormey & co. Solrs. Confirmed that the firm would not take my case of the paedophile priest I applied to the Legal Aid Board as was my ‘constitutional right’ a la Mister Shatter.

The ‘Information Gathering’ application form is 4 pages long and has numerous sections to be filled out. Compare this to the applicant for Criminal Aid who merely has to tell the judge that he requires ‘Taxpayer’ Legal Aid and it is granted automatically. No means test, no proof of income, no €18,000 earnings threshold and no research into details which of course don’t have to be provided. In a great many of these cases, usually starring non-Irish nationals or members of the mobile fraternity the solicitor in question informs the judge that the applicant is in receipt of social welfare benefit of some kind. There it is; taxpayer robbed again.

The Prodigal filled out the appropriate forms and collected the proofs of the written content. Then I rocked up to the Law Centre, Athlone to have my case considered.

On March 22^nd I received notification that my application had been successful and that I satisfied all the financial criteria for Legal Aid Services. Bingo! My arse.

I followed all protocols and procedures correctly and submitted my schéal to the Personal Injuries Unit at Smithfield as advised. I spoke with the Solicitor who apparently screens and evaluates such cases and outlined the genesis of my situation to her. She seemed concerned and sympathised with my plight. I had previously forwarded the correspondence of Tormey & Co. and the opinion contained therein. In tandem with this I had supplied a very comprehensive compendium of information on the background to the case including the famous Bishop’s ‘file’.

On 8 April I received a very voluminous correspondence from the same Catherine Martin.

This letter was entitled ‘Letter of Engagement’, contained six pages and sixteen paragraphs of ‘Terms and Conditions’. Oh to be a common criminal!

On the same day I received another correspondence from Ms Martin.

Personal Injuries Unit Law Centre (Smithfield) 48-49 North Brunswick Street George's Lane Dublin 7 DX 1085 Four Courts

08 April 2015

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL Mr PJ Walsh 6 Sli Na Mona Ballymahon Re: Application for Legal Aid

Dear Mr Walsh,

I refer to previous correspondence herein and in particular to my telephone conversation with you on the 1st of April, 2015. (All Fool’s Day)

I advised you in relation to this matter and I requested that perhaps you would write out a short history of your case stating what action was taken by you as a result of the abuse suffered. You should forward this to me and when I receive same I will contact you further.

I am enclosing herewith the Letter of Engagement which sets out the terms and conditions for the granting of legal aid.

I would point out at this stage that while you have been assessed financially eligible to apply for legal aid this does not mean that legal aid will be granted. The granting of legal aid is based on a merits test and before legal aid is granted the Legal Aid Board must be satisfied that there is a reasonable prospect of your claim succeeding. I advised you as to the statute of limitations in taking a claim for compensation and from the information you have given me so far I am not sure whether you would still be within time to make a claim. However, once I received the written instructions from you I will contact you further.

Yours sincerely,

Solicitor Law Centre (Smithfield) (Personal lnjuries Unit)

Aturnaetha Bainistiochta/ Managing Solicitor: Catherine Martin

After this correspondence The Prodigal supplied a precise but comprehensive account of the history of the case and very solid reasons for not initiating proceedings sooner. (These are contained elsewhere in this diary). Since the Bishop had confirmed in writing that the actions of which Fr. Brendan Hynds stood accused had occurred I could foresee no difficulty in progressing this case as it was not anticipated that any defence would be mounted. Wrong again; Catherine Martin sent me the following in July.

                                                                            

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL

Mr PJ Walsh

6 Sli Na Mona Ballymahon

Personal Injuries Unit Law Centre (Smithfield) 48-49 North Brunswick Street George's Lane Dublin 7 DX 1085 Four Courts

Our Ref: 1880902/OM

29 July 2015

Re: Application for Legal Aid

“Dear Mr Walsh,

I refer to previous correspondence herein. I acknowledge receipt of the file you sent me in relation to your application. I have read through the file and in particular the legal advice already received by you from Tormey Solicitors. Having dealt with these unfortunate cases down through the years I concur with the advice given by Tormey Solicitors in relation to the delay factor. It also appears, that while you did suffer from the abuse that was perpetuated unfortunately you have no supporting medical evidence setting out the injury and the damage suffered.

As advised previously it is extremely difficult to get legal aid in these cases and I do not believe that legal aid would be granted to enable you to bring proceedings against the diocese given the late factor in this case. As pointed out by Tormey Solicitors you initially made a complaint in this case in 2005 which is 10 years ago. I believe that there would be huge difficulty in you succeeding in a case given the delay involved.

If you wish for me to make a submission to the Legal Aid Board for them to view your application I will of course do so. However, I cannot recommend that legal aid be granted in this case”.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Catherine Martin Solicitor Law Centre (Personal lnjuries Unit)

Aturnaetha Bainistiochta/ Managing Solicitor:

 

 

 

January 7th 2016

Having in yesterday’s entry considered the lunatic behaviour of the disappointed aspirants to the nomination as candidate for the Fianna Fáil Party in the upcoming general election I try to understand what prompts these people. Most folk who use logic as their yardstick would have you believe that a life in politics is no life at all. Family considerations go out the window as does a social life. For every one constituent you satisfy there are another ten who are disappointed. When you go to the doors of the common people you can expect the general salutation, regardless of which party you purport to represent,

“A plague on both your houses”.

So why do these people hunger for a life in an occupation that is despised, derided and universally mistrusted? It must be greed; greed for power! And is greed not defined as one of the Seven Deadly Sins? Let us consider if this human trait is really a sin or just normal behaviour. The word to describe ‘greed’ when I was interested in such matters was ‘covetousness’. This word featured prominently in the ‘Ten Commandments’.

Covetousness is defined as a;

 “Feeling of grudging admiration and desire to have something that is possessed by another”.

On the other hand ‘greed’ is defined as;

“Excessive consumption of or desire for food, gluttony, excessive desire, as for wealth or power”.

How do we fare when we compare the two definitions?

While it could be construed that ‘covetousness’ and ‘greed’ are essentially the same there would appear to be some subtle differences. While greed is manifest as senseless, immediate and uncontrolled its brother covetousness would appear to be more rational, calculating and desirous of a more long term ambition. The ninth and tenth Commandments decree that thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods or wife and yet to aspire to and indeed achieve these dubious ends is often regarded as success in human terms. Yet there is a certain premeditated cunning inherent in these objectives. Does this render covetousness sinful? As they say in “who wants to be a millionaire”, ask the audience!

In the case of the Prodigal the ongoing demonstration of greed worldwide is a curse and one of the most destructive forces on the planet. ‘Much wants more’ is a very old saying and still rings true. People globally believe that the accumulation and display of material wealth somehow gives them an advantage over those who have less and therefore become inferior or subservient. It says in the bible or somewhere that

“what does it benefit a man to gain the whole world and lose his immortal soul”?

This statement presupposes the existence of an entity called the soul and gives the soul an enormous value that in terms of real significance outweighs every other entity of calculable consequence. The essential question is; does greed as we understand it cause damage and distress to ordinary mortals and can it therefore be rightly defined as a deadly sin?

The answer is yes.

When our other friends in the animal world get enough for sustenance they don’t hanker after an excess of what might be available. To desire and aspire to gain what is totally superfluous to one’s requirements is damaging to the aspirant and the rest of society. If the bounty of this world is distributed unevenly because of man’s greed then his fellow man is inevitably the victim. If the excess of one leads to the shortage of another then greed becomes the real pariah in society.

The so-called developed nations of the world have a suicide rate that is ten times greater that the ‘third world’. How can we justify or explain this phenomenon? The explanation to the Prodigal is simple. It is my absolute belief that the vast majority of unhappiness in this world is caused by extravagant and unattainable expectations. In our affluent society we believe that we are ‘entitled’ to realize wealth and human comforts which we have never achieved for ourselves as individuals but feel totally entitled to inherit. When the situation comes to pass where these self-assumed privileges do not materialise then we feel cheated. Insufficiency in those advantages, leading to self-doubt and the deeming of ourselves to be somehow denied of what is rightfully ours, often causes relegation into frustration and despair wherein the outlet of suicide becomes a real alternative. In the so-called third world such expectations do not exist.

It must be construed therefore that if the only expectation a man has is to get enough food to keep him alive for this day then the level of disappointment is greatly diminished. My old pal Mahatma Gandhi decreed that;

 “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need but not every man’s greed.”

I think that the father of India had it right.

The Prodigal is convinced that perceived greed leads to perceived inequality which in turn leads to dissent and social upheaval. The haves look down on the have-nots and the perception of the powerful depriving the less well-off has led to every revolution in history. The legacy of subjugation of our own nation should be sufficient to demonstrate how the greed of our nearest neighbour has caused a millennium of resentment and an eternal desire to realize the realignment of what is no longer possible. In truth, it must be conceded that greed is without doubt not alone a deadly sin but must be recorded as the deadliest of the “Seven Deadly Sins”.

If this state is the bedrock of political activity, to hell with them all!

 

 

 

January 6th 2016

The fall and fall of Fianna Fáil.

It was with a tinge of bemused nostalgia that I read of Benny Reid’s retirement as Honorary President of the Fianna Fáil Longford branch in the Longford Leader of January 8^th 2015. He remarked to Leader reporter Aisling Kiernan that “Micheál Martin has made a hames of the whole thing”. A grain of truth in this perhaps in the context of the overall fortunes of the once great army of the ‘Soldiers of Destiny’. Fianna Fail currently holds less than 14% of the entirety of seats in the compositions of Dail, Seanad and European Parliament. A long way since the halcyon days of 1977 when the party garnered more than 50%of the General Election vote.

As a Fianna Fáil activist in South Westmeath for over two decades I have some views on the decline of the party of which I was so proud a member for so long. Foremost among these has been the marked reluctance of successive senior members of the party to encourage youth and new ideas within the organisation. Entrenched FF members of Dail Eireann have routinely discouraged new talent and new ideas in the mistaken belief that this route of progress and development would somehow undermine their own sacrosanct positions. Now they are paying the price for this myopia. Fianna Fáil has faded into a pale simulacrum of what it was and could still be. There is no indication of either Phoenix or Phoenix Park on the horizon. In the last decade the membership of the party has declined from 55,000 to 15000 approx. This figure speaks volumes about the attractiveness of the party as it stands and the only way, sadly, is down.

As to the local situation, Mount Street has obviously embarked on a strategy of damage limitation. Party Headquarters obviously believes that the portrayal of young TD’s has some appeal and accounts for the wheeling out of Robert Troy as a young dynamic example of the Party.

At 34 he certainly is young but only one of two under the age of 40 while five FF Dail members are in their sixties. Allied with the gender quota factor this would explain the inclusion of Connie Gerety Quinn as the candidate for the Party in Longford. She is obviously very much younger than the other brace of aspirational ones. It is also certain that in her capacity as Manager of Co. Longford Citizens Information Service she is suitably qualified to give appropriate advice on most subjects to her prospective constituents. It would be the ultimate irony if Connie Gerety were to succeed in her ambition to join that merry band that makes up the membership of the 32^nd Dail.

As Asquith repeatedly said, when he had nothing to say, ‘wait and see'.

 

 

 

 

January 5th 2016

Time to renew correspondence with the clergy; this time to a lesser minion. On a previous occasion I found it necessary to correspond with our previous Parish Priest, Fr. Padraig MacGowan as follows;

 

Dear Father Padraig,

I refer you to content of Parish Newsletter copied hereunder.

Parish Newsletter November 17^th 2013.

“In response to those who may not know how the proceeds of the offertory collection are spent I wish to state that these funds are used to meet the running costs of the parish e.g. insurance, general maintenance, heating oil, altar supplies.  “Parish accounts are audited annually by an accountant employed by the diocese, and an annual parish financial statement is available to parishioners on request”.

Could I please be supplied with copies of the parish financial statements for the years 2009-2010-2011-2012 and 2013”.

P.J.Walsh.

This epistle was sent to Fr. Padraig in October 2014. Fr Mac Gowan replied on Dec 5^th 2014 confirming that the time frame was too close to Christmas, nonetheless agreed to my perusing the Parish Financial Statements for the years requested after Christmas.

This was of course after being mandated by Bishop Francis to do so in writing. The Bishop wrote to me confirming this position before Father Padraig called the meeting of the Parish Finance Committee which until that night did not exist.

Mr Albert Fallon was appointed Supreme Wizard of the finance committee for the purpose of this meeting and started off by asking why we wanted this meeting in the first place. Father Padraig stated that he was responding to our request for a meeting and didn’t know why the meeting was called by us. Pure lies! I was able to show to his two recently enlisted members of the ecclesiastical elect a letter from Fr. Padraig confirming that in fact he called the meeting on the directive of the two men who accompanied him even though they knew nothing about it.

Poor man; not even an accomplished liar.

This is the letter to the new Parish Priest whom I have met on a couple of occasions and seems like a regular sort of fellow devoid of pomp or self-importance.

6 Sli Na Móna  

5 January 2016.

 

Dear Father Murray,

In a Parish Newsletter of 17 November 2013 it was stated;

“In response to those who may not know how the proceeds of the offertory collection are spent I wish to state that these funds are used to meet the running costs of the parish e.g. insurance, general maintenance, heating oil, altar supplies.  Parish accounts are audited annually by an accountant employed by the diocese, and an annual parish financial statement is available to parishioners on request”.

In response to this noble and genuine gesture of decreeing the finances of the parish to be transparent and in order, I requested from your predecessor Fr. MacGowan copies of the Parish Financial Statements from 2009 to 2013 inclusive. Despite offering the service himself, Father Padraig completely ignored my legitimate request. After a number of requests had failed I was left with no alternative but to refer the matter to Bishop Francis which I duly did.

Following the Bishop’s intervention Father Padraig wrote to me on December 5, 2014 confirming that he would indeed make the afore-mentioned accounts available to me for inspection at the parochial house.

Whenever I attempted to fulfil this engagement it was found to be ‘inconvenient’. Father MacGowan was further advised to introduce the Parish Finance Committee to members of the SafePark committee. This was an organisation which was set up to explore the possibilities of securing safe long-term car and bus parking to accommodate the requirements of Ballymahon’s 1100 schoolgoers. The meeting took place with newly recruited members of the finance committee and was nothing short of a farce.

Following the sudden demise of the late Father Padraig, it appears that custody of the details of parish finances was entrusted to Mr Albert Fallon. For twelve months now, despite several verbal and written requests, Mr Fallon has failed, refused and neglected to carry out the specific wish of the former Parish Priest and indeed the Bishop himself.

If the accounts are as they should be what’s his reluctance? If there is a question mark over the said accounts is it Mr Fallon’s function to take responsibility over a function that is essentially within the remit of Canon Law? Is he empowered to act contra the stated position of the parish as enunciated by Fr. Padraig in the newsletter as previously mentioned?

I am requesting once again copies of the financial statements of the Ballymahon, Shrule Parish. I would be reluctant to revert to Bishop Francis on this matter again, but I will do whatever is necessary to achieve my entitlement as a local parishioner.

In conclusion, Fr. Liam, may I apologise if the tone of this correspondence seems somewhat aggressive. I ought to have considered that you might not be au fait with the background detail of any of this. This is not meant as any reflection on yourself who are already held in the highest esteem locally. If you wish to discuss the matter before any further investigation I am always available to you.

Kindest Regards and best wishes in the New Year.

P.J.Walsh.

On the entire range of issues with the late Parish Priest of Ballymahon the one item that no parishioner or other layman could question was the issue of parish finances. This was understandable since in 2006 he had sold part of the National School grounds to a local professional for a fee undisclosed and against the wishes of the Parish Council. What happened the proceeds has never been divulged. The net result was that the Parish Council and the Parish Finance Committee were dissolved and stayed that way for almost a decade.

There was also the matter of the said PP leasing out school lands to a local farmer while the priest sat on the Board of Management of the school. Was this ethical and legal. I checked the Constitution of the Boards of Management of National Schools and lo and behold!

BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL SCHOOLS 

CONSTITUTION OF BOARDS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE 2011.

4 (b) Except in special circumstances with the approval in writing of the Minister, or in the case of teacher members of the Board so far as their remuneration as teachers is concerned, no member of the Board shall take or hold any beneficial interest in any property held or used for the purposes of the school or receive any remuneration for his/her services as a member of the Board.  Father Padraig didn’t understand the law!

Lest it be construed that I had some sort of vendetta against the late pastor I continued my quest to examine the parish finances as this was my primary interest and not any individual. To this end I wrote to the afore mentioned Mr Fallon as follows;

 6 Sli na Móna

Ballymahon

Co. Longford

 

Mr Albert Fallon

Shrule Parish Finance Committee

Ballymahon.

Copy to Mr Brendan Murtagh; Parish Finance Committee.

Dear Mr Fallon,

It is now two months since the sad demise of Father Padraig MacGowan former PP of Shrule Parish. I believe that this represents a sufficient time lap of respect and now is the opportune time to resume unfinished business.

I first wrote to Fr. Padraig on October 2^nd 2014 requesting copies of the parish financial statements for the years 2009 to 2013 inclusive. Father Padraig responded in the positive on foot of a decision by yourself and other members of the Parish Finance Committee. (Correspondence enclosed). Since the Committee endorsed my request and same was confirmed by Bishop Francis (correspondence enclosed) I am once again requesting copies or sight of the Parish Accounts for the years 2009 to 2013 inclusive. You will note that after many attempts to elicit the aforementioned accounts I again had to correspond to Fr. Padraig on Feb 6^th 2015. (Correspondence included) To date I have not received these accounts.

As the public face of the Parish Accounts Committee I expect yourself and Mr Brendan Murtagh to make the necessary arrangements to provide these accounts which I am entitled to as a parishioner of Shrule Parish.

I look forward to your expedient response.

Kindest Regards,

P.J.Walsh.

 

January 4th 2016

No fair play; no justice; we don’t live in a meritocracy! There it is!

Over the Christmas period I received my income from Coillte and the accompanying Pay-Advice slip. For those who are not familiar with Coillte let me explain that ‘Coillte’ is the Irish word for forests. Coillte was established under the Forestry Act 1988 and commenced trading in 1989 when it was handed ownership of the State's forests. 

Coillte is a private limited company registered under and subject to the Companies Acts 1963-86. All of the shares in the company are held by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform on behalf of the Irish State. The entire Board of Directors are appointed by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine. In other words the hue of the directors is ‘green’ or ‘blue’ depending on what politics are in power at any given time. It owns over 445,000 hectares or 1,100,000 acres of land, about 7% of the land cover of Ireland. This land is ostensibly held in ‘trust’ for the plain people of Ireland.

Every year Coillte forests are visited by almost 20million people. There are 12 forest parks and 150 of what they call ‘recreation sites’ all over the Republic. Coillte owns the longest trail network in Ireland and activities vary from canoeing to walking and hiking, mountain biking and fishing, nature watching and just having a picnic. As Caretaker of Newcastle Forest I could list a few other commonplace activities which won’t appear in any Coillte catalogue or information website.

As my Dad used to say “you never miss the water till the well runs dry”. Isn’t it ironic that since the news of the major Center Parcs plans becoming public people that have never visited the forest are now bemoaning the imminent loss of over half of it to the holiday industry. There are numerous objections lodged with the Local Authority against the proposed project. The calibre and logic of all of these objections are jocose at best. The Prodigal, Patience and the Chinaman have long been devotees of the attractions of the forest. I would estimate that I spend at least 20 hours a week in that sacred place and never has it become commonplace or predictable.

I have such respect for that wondrous cross section of nature that I have decreed in my will (the compilation of which cost more than the non-contents specified) that my inglorious ashes be spread in the forest, in the air, tossed to permit the breeze to carry my remains to wherever it will. Don’t be surprised if I take root and enjoy reincarnation, preferably as a mink, so that I can see things from another perspective. In addition I will have no enemies, cannot be eaten, and spread apprehension far and wide. Won’t that make a wondrous change for the Prodigal?

But to get back to the serious inequity I have encountered . I read an article in the Irish Times from 2015 which detailed the legal battle between former CEO of Coillte, Mr. David Gunning of Fitzwilliam Place (serious address) where the bottom line in guide price is €2million. But I digress. Mr. Gunning sued the Minister for Agriculture for non-payment of bonuses to him which he claimed were outstanding for a couple of years before he retired. His own staff in Coillte had paid him some of his bonus package against the directive of the Minister. In the High Court the nice man with the curls decreed that the former CEO was entitled to his little bonuses with interest plus all legal costs. The bonuses alone amounted to €300,000. Nice one except that the taxpayer was once again levied with the bill.

It emerged during the court case that Mr. Gunning’s salary amounted to another €300,000 plus expenses. His pension wasn’t disclosed but based on earnings it would have to be serious. So we have a situation where this man was worth somewhere in excess of 10,000 per week in income on an ongoing basis. What had he to do for this? Chair meetings. If a public pronouncement had to be made the PR Company compiled the statement. Similarly should a legal comment be required from him it was prepared by Arthur Cox & Co. All work that he might have had to do was spoon-fed to him. His duties were never specified.

The Prodigal, on the other hand, has very specific duties which are outlined very specifically in the terms of my Memorandum of Agreement as duly signed in 2012. An MOA serves as a legal document and describes the terms and details of the partnership agreement. An MOA is more formal than a verbal agreement, but less formal than a contract. At any rate this agreement has legal effect as a legal document. This document contains the following list of my specified duties.

Caretaker’s responsibilities include recording and reporting on security issues which they become aware of locally, particularly;

1.      Fires in or near Coillte lands.

2.    Cases of theft or attempted theft, vandalism, damage or suspicious happenings.

3.    General security related issues observed.

4.    Incidents of unauthorised use of the forest and where possible, the identity of suspected offenders.

5.     Cases of dumping in the forest and the identity of suspected offenders.

6.    Cases of trespass, boundary incursions and the identity of suspected offenders.

7.     Other duties as specified from time to time by Forest Manager.

 

Now, I ask you; what does the Prodigal get paid for this massive workload?

Above is a pay slip in respect of my 20hours plus working for Coillte every week. A net income of €229.50 for my efforts. Per week? God no!

This income is per annum. The weekly income for staff member number 800229y amounts to €4.41 per week which is a little short of the €10,000 per week earned by the former CEO.

As I stated; no fair play; no justice; we don’t live in a meritocracy!

  

January 3rd 2016

Having had a little poke at the present day ‘shinners’ it must be conceded that 1916 did have a very serious side to it. I believe its lasting appeal will be the utter hopelessness of what was attempted by the unprepared and totally inadequate against the might of the British Empire. Nobody knew this better than the insurgents be they the Irish Citizens Army, The Volunteers or any other brand of martyr. It is impossible in retrospect to get a balanced picture of the Rising and the reaction it got at the time from the general public. My opinion is that one has to be informed from a source that was neither black nor white but contained the two sides of the same biscuit. Very few balanced opinions exist. The nearest I have come to this balance is in two novels of fiction set in that timeframe.

In 1965, “The Red and the Green” was published by Iris Murdoch. The principal characters are Pat, an Irish revolutionary, and his first cousin Andrew, an officer in the British Army. There are a number of interesting side characters but the cousins occupy centre stage. I believe the book is very well written and as unbiased as you might expect from an Irish author. I have chosen some passages to demonstrate what I mean. In describing why the Rising took place Murdoch uses one of the minor characters to explain;

‘It was a reminder that people can’t be enslaved forever. Tyrannies end because sooner or later people begin automatically to hit back. That’s the only thing which really impresses the tyrant and makes him give way. Freedom belongs to human nature and it can’t vanish from the earth. Even though we forgot the details of the fight, the fight goes on, and men have to be ready to go down among the details that are forgotten. And whenever it’s the turn of a country, however small, to rise against its tyrants, it represents the oppressed peoples of the whole world’.

George Bernard Shaw was an outspoken critic of all warfare. Uniquely Shaw remains the only recipient of both The Nobel Prize for Literature and an Academy Award. In his opinion of the 1916 Rising Shaw was as critical as in any other conflict of war despite the fact that he was a Dubliner. Shaw likened the conflict to an encounter ‘between a pram and a Pickford’s van’. Shaw wrote an article in the New York Times which was totally derisive of Irish nationalism.  “Irish nonsense about Ireland” was the heading of the article and in it Shaw commented;

‘I invite America to contemplate the spectacle of a few manifesto-writing stalwarts from the decimated population of a tiny green island at the back of Godspeed, claiming its national right to confront the world with its own army, its own fleet, its own tariff, and its own language which not five per cent of its population could speak or read or write even if they wanted to’.  At least he was consistent!

Murdoch relates in her novel;

“The history of Ireland was such a tale of misery and wretchedness, enough to make the angels howl and stamp their golden feet. England had destroyed Ireland slowly and casually, without malice, practically without thought, like someone who treads upon an insect, forgets it, then sees it quivering and treads upon it again. Was there under Heaven no tribunal where such a wrong could be set to right and where the voices of the starved dead could mount into a mighty tempest at last? Were the young men wrong to imagine that an Ireland set free by its own righteous anger would be an unimaginably different place”?

To the vast Majority of Irish people the supreme hero of 1916 was undoubtedly Padraig Pearse. The fact that Pearse was the signatory who actually read out the Proclamation probably added to his reputation.

In 1913 he was sworn into the Irish Republican Brotherhood and joined the supreme council at the invitation of Thomas Clarke who was destined to become another signatory of the ‘Proclamation’. Ironically, Clarke was an Englishman from Hampshire whose father was a sergeant in the British Army.

Murdoch in ‘The Red and the Green’ uses Pat Dumay, one of the novel’s principals, to give an opinion of Pearse that is not totally laudatory. On reflecting on Pearse Pat gives his opinion;

“Pearse troubled Pat, attracted, annoyed and disturbed him. He had first met Pearse in connection with the Wolfe Tone Memorial Committee, and he had heard him speak at the funeral of O’Donovan Rossa. He recognised there the power of a pure spirit the sheer selfless strength which was in the end the only that Pat bowed to. Hundreds of things about Pearse irritated him. The man was given to all kinds of infantile nonsense. He romanticized Ireland’s heroic past, which he peopled not only with Red Branch Knights, but also with ghosts and fairies and leprechauns in which he himself seemed to believe. He was a blatant admirer of Napoleon, an alleged lock of whose hair he fatuously displayed to his friends. He also romanticized war in a way which Pat found alien and undignified, babbling about the ‘red wine of the battlefields warming the heart of the earth’ and other rubbish of this sort. But nevertheless he was something of a great man and Pat was emotionally troubled by him in a way he could not entirely understand and would often have been glad to be rid of”.

Iris Murdoch

So we see that Iris Murdoch tried to maintain balance in her various descriptions of her fictional characters and events around the time of the insurrection. Much of her stance probably stems from the fact that her father was a Presbyterian and an officer in the British Army while her mother was middle class Church of Ireland. Iris was born in Dublin but spent all of her life in England which also inevitably accounts for the standpoint of her views about Ireland and matters Irish.

 

 

 

January 2nd 2016

Today’s papers are full of fillers. Big glossy adverts extending the New Year wishes to all their customers and suchlike. Predictable rubbish. An unexpected quantity of column inches devoted to the fact that this New Year is unlike any other in one particular respect. This is of course the 100^th Anniversary of the Rising. Another occasion when platforms all over the country will be adorned by people pretending to be politicians extolling the virtues of our great leaders and founders of the ‘Free State’ where nothing is free. The spouting will be as widespread and pointless as the spray from a recycling fountain.

I had occasion within the last five years to ramble to a local hostelry close to closing time. I happened to come upon an assemblage of patrons who made up the membership of the local Sinn Fein Cumann who had held a party meeting earlier. The warbler of this merry troupe was belting out the ballad of James Connolly ‘The Irish Rebel’. When the song was thankfully finished one of the company remarked “Ah lads, sure isn’t it for certain that Connolly and De Valera were the two greatest Irish Catholic freedom fighters since Wolf Tone. A telling statement, and none of his audience disagreed with him, indeed there was a ‘hear, hear’ all round. The fact that de Valera was an American, born in New York and Connolly was a Scotsman who had served seven years in the British Army was of no import. Wolf Tone was as much Catholic as any of that assembly was Republican in the true sense of the word.

I joined the merry troupe as I knew them all and provoked a discussion on the plans of the ‘party’ predicting that the future of Ireland was in good hands as long as men such as themselves were prepared to stand by the cause. Backslapping and yahooing and “sure you’re one of our own”. My political sympathies would certainly be of a republican persuasion but there seemed to be a distinct lack of leadership in this crew and the ‘cause’ seemed to be the entity that gave these chaps a place in common bondage. The cause was supporting them in terms of identity instead of the other way round. I have no reason to believe that they would be any worse at running the country than the collection of imposters we have in power at the moment. Still, we deserve the politicians we vote for.

Just for the crack I asked one the most loquacious of these gentlemen to tell me about the founder of Sinn Fein and some of its history. One gent informed me that the Party was founded by Michael Collins, another suggested Eamon de Valera while a third informed me that it was James Larkin himself who established Sinn Fein. The fact that they disagreed on such a basic point didn’t seem to faze them at all. I suppose it’s reasonable to suggest that the one who suggested de Valera wasn’t that far off the mark. Poor auld Arthur Griffith wouldn’t be too pleased.