In truth, I had enough of Dublin, having spent four years there, long before the Celtic Tiger was even a kitten.

I agreed to go.

My housemates in our rented house in Tallaght said they would bring me into the city centre for a valedictory party. A party that was in fact a simple Wimpy burger meal. Stomach lining for a pub crawl throughout the city. As midnight approached, I being the only one of the group teetotal, suggested we go back to the house. Shaun, the playboy, the lothario from Leitrim had another plan. Despite my protestations we ended up in Abraxas nite club in Sackville Place. This was really a glorified disco bar that jumped on the MT-USA bandwagon with the place saturated with video screens with only a tiny dance floor. In the eighties, late night entertainment clubs had to serve hot food, any type of hot food, to get a late night alcohol licence. Most circumvented the legislation by serving soup and a bread roll or basic chicken and chips on disposable plates. The food cost had to be included in the admission ticket price.

This Abraxas nite club was different. Upstairs in the lounge it offered a new concept dish. A kebab, the brainchild of its owner a Turkish immigrant. He roasted a giant slab of compressed lamb on a spit in full view of the customers serving it in a thing called a pitta pocket, which was unleavened bread split open like a ladies purse, layered with sliced iceberg lettuce, adorned with complementary tomatoes dressed in garlic sauce.

When he served it up I hesitated.

I had never seen or heard of a kebab before.

Any type of kebab including this variety, a doner kebab.

Another thing I had never seen before was a lesbian.

I had heard of them.

I stared at it like it just emerged from John Hurt’s stomach in the movie Alien.

The kebab, not the lesbian.

There were two of them kissing at the bar.

Lesbians that is.

They only gave you one kebab.

I’m looking for cutlery or even chopsticks. One lesbian, with a swarthy complexion in a break from her oral exercise observes this she shouts at me.

               Yah use ur han’s mister!

               Stuffa inta ur mou

               Yah don’t nayd cuttlewee!

I’m all embarrassed but I think she would know because she’s very well nourished but her ghoulish pallid partner doesn’t get any, as she’s thinner than the chopstick that I can’t find.

She kept looking at me, arms folded like an Italian materfamilias, the kebab trembling in my hand urging me to bite into it. I was afraid she’d ask the elephantine bouncer, with his oversized radio and ostentatious earpiece, to defenestrate me should I not obey her. She might even be strong enough to do it herself. I asked her if the kebabs were nice, to be informed she was a vegetarian, rendering me utterly conflicted. I bit into it, showering both of us in thick garlic sauce, destroying my white jacket, with a white wriggling worm moving down her cheeks onto her leather jacket.

Ah Jaysuuus ya poisoned me, ya poisoned me.

As she pounded her way to the ladies’ room the band ABC was on the video screen above her singing shoot that poison arrow through my heart. We disappeared from the lounge quicker than Norway from the Eurovision Song Contest to hail a taxi back to Tallaght.

The next morning the lads made me breakfast. Well of sorts; it was supermarket own brand cornflakes in lukewarm milk but it’s the thought that counts. They also bought me a luggage case with wheels that held all my vinyl records along with the few clothes outfits I possessed. Later on I caught the 49a into the city to get the Belfast Express. On the bus, the radio announced that nine RUC officers were killed in a mortar attack in Newry. The highest death toll ever suffered by that police force.

I stared out the window.

Numb.

Wondering what the hell have I done?

That is the question voters were asked by LucidTalk in their latest poll for the Belfast Telegraph.

The BT is holding over the results on voting intentions for another day or two.  There can be little doubt that, after reading today’s responses, the DUP leadership’s anxiety levels will be twisted up another few notches as they are forced to wait.

Amongst those respondents who, as the paper phrased it, “say they will still vote” for the DUP the results were:

Yes – Fully truthful: 57%

No – Only partially truthful: 24%

No – Completely untruthful: 14%

Don’t know: 5%

I suppose the party can take some comfort, in that the majority of its voters believe it has been fully truthful. And in this context a Don’t Know response is almost as good – since it is likely to include those who intend to give the party the benefit of the doubt or who still feel such loyalty to the party that they do not wish to criticise it. Together that would represent nearly two thirds of their voters.

Of course, what we don’t yet know is how many still remain their voters. But, again looking on the positive for the party, there does seem to be a solid core they can count on.

Obviously, the fact that a quarter of their voters judge the party to be only partly truthful, represents a weakness which the TUV and UUP can seek to exploit. But that has to be set against the fact that a significant proportion of voters are already cynical towards politicians and parties, even those that they support. That appears to be especially true of the larger parties. In answer to a separate question on trust in their own party the DUP score was 64%, but Sinn Féin supporters only rated their party 73% and Alliance voters gave theirs 70%. Frankly, given the smaller sample sizes for individual parties meaning that the margin of error is higher, all three scores might as well be thought of as much the same.

The most worrying figure for the DUP is that 14% of their voters said their party was completely untruthful. Those voters are ripe for the picking if either the TUV or UUP chose the correct pitch.

Currently Jim Allister is going with a conspiracy theory that Donaldson was blackmailed into taking his party back into Stormont on the back of the Windsor Agreement. Jon Burrows is going with the more visceral lock-him-up-and-throw-away-the-key approach.

It’s a classic case of the appeal to the mind versus the appeal to the gut. Which will prove more effective?

Although the TUV has in recent years proved itself more capable of attracting voters away from the DUP, when it comes to transfers DUP voters are more likely to opt for the UUP. For every 2 DUP voters who transferred to the TUV, 3 went for the UUP in the last Assembly and Council elections. This may give the UUP an advantage in the competition for disillusioned DUP voters on this occasion.

We won’t have long now to wait for the first post-Donaldson poll.

Now, I know no one thinks they’re ‘middle-aged’ but if your choice of tipple comes with a shot of Rennes and you pack Ibuprofen before your passport then this means you. Pull up a seat.

There’s been a bizarre trend among us in the Repeat Prescription Frequent Flyers Club – and I’m looking at greying men in the group here – to describe young people as lazy and uncommunicative.

Why is it bizarre? Well, let’s spend a day in the horrifically uncushioned and fashionable shoes of a young whan in their early 20s…

• What’s in their wallet? Very little, we took away their hopes of owning a home any time soon then added a twist of about three recent recessions, soaring prices for everything, the job market in a mess (go and look at the salaries if you don’t believe me) plus rental prices through the roof due to short supply. That’s not a double-whammy, more of a quadruple-whammy. Or more. And if you’re thinking ‘oh it isn’t that bad’ then I bet the mortgage you bought for twice your income years ago, in an era when one person’s income could support a home, is either paid off or covered by two late-career incomes.

• How’s their health? If you read the last paragraph you can already guess. Oh, and we left their health services groaning under the weight of demand as a wee extra twist of the knife.

• What do they do for work? Much MUCH more than you did at their age. We had the time to find our way and possibly even arse around for a while after school or studies. Our youngsters? If they can, they’re hitting their career hard and fast to try to get out of low pay, high rent hell some very distant day.

• Are they going to tell me off for using hateful language? Probably. And so they should. A generation so horrendously shafted by us older folk will tend to have a sense of empathy with other ill-treated groups. Also, language moves on and always will. It’s theirs now.

• Why all the different words for their sexuality? Well, the digital world makes it easier for people to be themselves and to classify exactly what that is. A good thing. Plus it creates safety for young people. Keep in mind that your ma’s generation thought the world would end because Elvis waved his hips yet we all turned out fine. Resisting people being themselves because you can’t be bothered with new words is a similarly ridiculous look.

• And what about their communication? Yes, young people grew up with ‘their screens’. We grew up with those new-fangled gaming consoles and our parents grew up gallivanting at dances when they should’ve been at their book learnin’. And so it continues.

• What are their politics? Better than ours. They’ve looked on in horror as we’ve cast our votes for the parties who continue to make the mess I’ve described worse and worse, year after year. If anything, being very prone to manipulation in the shape of corporate self-interest sold as rage-bait and individualism by some media outlets, us old folk have gone from falling for the ‘free Parker pen’ trick to cheering on the type of politics currently taking a wrecking ball to young people’s futures. To add insult to injury, we’re like a guy poking a sore tooth in that many of us keep doubling down on this stuff somehow expecting a different result.

• How’s their social life? Ah, good question. Remember the after work pub culture we had as young’uns? Nights out for food? Unaffordable to many as a regular treat now. And all those cheap social clubs we had are disappearing. Yet still we complain about over-use of screens.

But – back to us – here’s something we haven’t covered yet: our old age.

We generally haven’t done a particularly good job of looking after our older people so it might be a good idea to show more respect to the generation who’ll be figuring this out when we need it most.

Because, ultimately, the old stereotype of an ageing guy grumbling about young folk these days isn’t just intellectually lazy, it’s an incredibly boring cliché.

Woody Harrelson’s character in True Detective said it best: “Throughout history, I bet every old man said the same thing”.

That was in 2014.

So, bearing in mind what we’ve put them through, we’ll be lucky if young people don’t have us all arrested or reduce the voting age at the very least.

After all, the problem with young people these days is simple. It’s us.

Our apology should be getting out of way, listening to how we’re impacting their lives and – best of all – handing them the wheel. They might even keep us supplied with Rennes and Ibuprofen in our old age if we do.

(Public domain image by Don Wright for the Miami Herald)

Hi Andy,

I’m sure you must feel that “I am out to get you” with the number of OP’s and comments I have written which directly respond to yours. But blogging for me is primarily about starting or facilitating a conversation and you should take it as a compliment that I consider your contributions so important that they demand engagement on my part. Very few unionist commentators articulate unionist concerns as well as you do, and I know you are no unionist.

And as you know, I am no nationalist either and we share family histories of exposure to the dangers that extreme nationalism has visited on the European continent over the past few centuries. Where perhaps we differ is that even though I trained as a sociologist, I am much more cognisant of the economic underpinnings of statecraft. I would oppose any change to the current constitutional status quo unless I was convinced any proposed new arrangement would be to the economic benefit of the vast majority on this island.

With NI currently running at a net loss variously estimated at £10 to £15 billion per annum, there is no way Ireland could simply “take over” NI as is without severe financial and public service provision repercussions for everyone on this island. The longer unionists can continue to fool English taxpayers to underwrite their statelet, the better from this perspective, and I suspect this concern informs Irish governmental policy as well.

As you know, the central thesis of Sovereignty 2040 is that a British government, under severe budgetary pressure, will one day wake up to the reality that it can no longer afford to support NI to anything like the current degree. Cutting the NI Barnett subvention dramatically is the one saving they can make without severe political repercussions for a British government, as neither the Tories, Reform nor Labour have any votes to lose there.

With NI public health and education budgets exceeding £12 billion, you can imagine the devastation a major Barnett subvention cut would cause. No UK government would be so irresponsible as to cut these services, you might argue, and, in the past no Labour or Tory government has done so. But would a radical English nationalist led government in severe economic difficulty baulk at so radical a measure? I would put nothing past Nigel Farage.

This would create an existential problem for NI, but also for any Irish government. NI is uniquely dependent on public service expenditure and the problems created by mass redundancy, unemployment and social unrest and violence would likely spill over into the Republic.

Faced with the reality of inheriting all these problems, plus the likelihood of loyalist inspired violence, a majority in the south might very well turn down any proposal for a United Ireland that did not explicitly include a credible plan for the economic regeneration of the whole island that could absorb the loss of the Barnett subvention.

That would require massive investment, infrastructural development, and public service integration, harmonisation, overhead reduction, service productivity enhancements and efficiency improvements. Change on such a scale is difficult at the best of times – most of my work in Guinness was precisely on such an endeavour – but in a fraught social and political environment it could be lethal. Resistance would be just as fierce in the south as in the north, if not as violent.

If you combined that with an attempt to appease unionism by making the whole island feel much more British you would face an absolute revolt by all who are much more comfortable with the current status quo, as well as all the more usual radical elements. It would become a growing catastrophe that would make Brexit feel like a pleasant picnic at a country retreat.

Imagine if the North voted for re-unification and the south ended up saying no to whatever terms were on offer! Asking people in the south to take on a potential liability of £10 to £15 billion p.a., the threat of loyalist violence, and accepting changed flags, emblems, anthems, commonwealth membership and God knows what else, could well be a bridge too far.

All your posts seem to assume unionists will be in a strong bargaining position in the lead up to a border poll. That nationalist Ireland will have to make all sorts of concessions to obtain unionist support or at least tolerance of Dublin rule. But what if the boot is on the other foot? What if Ireland decides it has enough on its plate without taking on a potential £10 to £15 Billion liability, making all sorts of controversial changes to the symbols of its national identity, and is rewarded for its efforts by widespread Loyalist violence?

Nothing is more destructive of economic progress than widespread unrest and violence. That £10 to £15 Billion deficit could balloon to a much large figurer if there is severe social and economic disruption.

Don’t get me wrong, I am the perennial optimist, and I know from my experience in Guinness that such a level of change is manageable at least at a corporate level. It’s just that I doubt the imagination and capacity of the Irish and unionist political elites to achieve the required level of consensus, cohesion, and structural change. Far more likely is a collapse of political leadership, a reversion to political violence, and everyone retreating into their political bunkers.

So please forgive me if I am not a cheer leader for attempts at reconciliation which focus on flags and emblems and ignore underlying economic and political realities. There is no point in trying to cod anyone, north or south, that reunification wouldn’t come with considerable costs and challenges and that change wouldn’t be required of everyone. But that change isn’t about saluting a different flag – it is about working harder, smarter, more efficiently and more collaboratively with people you don’t necessarily like.

I think most people in the south have been incredibly tolerant and resilient and have embraced a level of change I don’t see in many other countries. I don’t think most in the north have even considered the possibility of an English financial withdrawal and what this would mean for their political aspirations. We can meet that challenge when it comes, but right now I don’t blame people for focusing on the challenges we already have.

Heather Humphries had little to contribute to those challenges and will now go to a well deserved retirement as a much loved local representative. Making her a martyr for Protestantism when she achieved a remarkable 30% of the vote and almost 60% in Cavan Monaghan serves no one except those who want to whip up sectarian tensions. I doubt she would have made it past the local council or perhaps back bench TD had she been a Catholic.

Protestants have nothing to fear and have generally done very well in the Republic. Some have retained a sense of entitlement that is not necessarily justified by their capabilities or work but that is not something to be encouraged. Some unionists may harbour an insecurity that they may not be able to hold their own in a society that doesn’t buttress and advantage their community and sense of identity. But unionists who emigrate abroad have generally done as well as their southern counterparts.

When I joined Guinness in 1979, it operated a caste system. English Oxbridge graduates became Brewers and were immediately inducted into senior management. Protestant school leavers joined the No.1 staff and could aspire to promotion anywhere. Catholic school leavers joined the No. 2 staff and could aspire to work just in the lab. All craft and manual workers were catholic and could rarely aspire to rise above shop floor foreman or supervisor. Each group had its own separate dining facilities, reward packages and medical benefits.

I was part of a very small intake of three protestants with Irish degrees. (John Robbie was subsequently let go when he joined a British and Lion’s rugby tour to Apartheid South Africa which embarrassed Guinness as it had several Breweries in black African countries.) Later on, quite a few other professionally qualified people were recruited in marketing, finance and engineering without regard to religion and many are now in senior positions.

But when I joined only two Catholics had risen from the shop floor to become Senior Managers. I was privileged to work for both, and they did everything they could to further my career. One, Finbarr Flood, became Managing Director and led the planning, organisational change and investment which ultimately saved the Dublin Brewery from closure. The London Brewery in Park Royal was closed instead.

He was ousted only when Irish management rebelled against heavy handed bullying by British HQ management (remember Ernest Saunders?) who sought to impose their incompetent decision making on Dublin. He went on to become Chairman of the Labour Court, Head of the Government Decentralisation Programme, Chairman of Shelbourne Football club and numerous community regeneration and voluntary associations.

Not bad for a boy without secondary education who joined Guiness as a 14 year old and whose first job was to wear a military style tunic turning the pages while the head Brewer read the brewing reports. I became his chief speech writer, video producer, policy advisor and research assistant and moved into IT only when he was ousted, and British global management gained more direct control.

But my larger point is that he completely transformed Guinness in Dublin, saving it from closure, and ensuring all the management, unions and staff association bought into the process. Individual staff members who lost their jobs in the reorganisation were properly compensated and looked after. Reward systems were harmonised between all the afore mentioned groups and all the separate dining rooms were replaced by one “single status” self-service dining complex. Early retirees retained access to the medical centre, swimming pool, gym, and dining facilities. They didn’t have to lose their social support networks as well as their jobs.

Yes, it all cost a lot of money, but that was more than compensated for by the huge savings in overheads and increased productivity levels. From being one of the most expensive and inefficient Breweries in the world, it became a leading edge, modern and efficient plant without losing the human touch which had always made it a unique place to work.

The strikes which had resulted in disastrous loss of market share when all the social status divisions were in place became a thing of the past. The brand has since gone from strength to strength, requiring the building of a new brewery in County Kildare to meet the increased worldwide demand mainly due to the successful rollout of the “Irish Pub” concept worldwide.

Running a country is a lot more complex than running a global multi-national business, but you might be surprised at the intensity of the conflicts between Irish and global managements, and within Irish management itself – while presenting a unified face to the world. But those conflicts were recognised and managed by ensuring there were evidence based conflict resolution processes in place.

A collaborative “Brewery Council” was developed so that all the internal stakeholders felt they had a positive contribution to make and a stake in the success of the business going forward. New technology was embraced even though some people had to retrain or lose their jobs after the implementation process was completed. Computerisation and automation which had previously impacted mainly manual jobs began to reach further and further upwards into professional and managerial roles as well.

Now the entire island economy faces the challenges of digitisation, robotisation and AI transforming lives and workplaces. Many are being left behind and feel increasingly resentful – blaming immigrants or whoever else represents a handy or vulnerable target. It is not hard to imagine all those societal challenges feeding into sectarian and political conflicts as well. People are more loyal to their brands and local communities than to their countries sometimes. As a small open economy, Ireland is more exposed to those winds of change than many other countries.

Most of these challenges have little enough to do with whether you identify as British or Irish or neither, Protestant, Catholic or other. But resource and opportunity conflicts have a way of being refracted through existing cleavages in society. Those who oppose any change, constitutional or other, will have little difficulty finding opportunities to cause havoc. Social media enhance the reach of those who foment conflicts rather than the boring work of bridging divides and building consensus and communities.

You have a distinguished track record in helping to build the latter. Your advocacy on behalf of your mother’s people is indispensable even when it is not appreciated by either” side”. Your main charge against the Irish people is that they are not ready for the challenges that re-unification might bring. I actually think you underestimate some of those challenges. changing flags, emblems or anthems is the least of our problems. Changing attitudes and behaviours is harder, especially when people feel threatened and are looking for somebody else to blame.

But at the moment, Ireland faces different challenges – changes to the global world order, the decline of “the West”, war in Europe, chronic infrastructural deficits in the face of a rapidly rising population, and global warming and climate instability. The old certainties – support from the British or American empires – are increasingly uncertain. We have to look for new allies, but most of all, we have to look to ourselves for solutions to the problems we face.

The first step is to stop blaming each other and learn to work collaboratively with people who might have been seen as our traditional enemies. Thankfully, that is happening more and more at all levels of our society and economy. As is often the case, our political classes and structures are lagging behind. Leadership is in short supply. Your continued willingness to stand above the parapet is much appreciated even by those who differ from you in small ways. Please let our dialogue continue.

In a country where we used literally to murder each other over differing political attitudes, we have learned to tolerate those with different opinions to ours, so why do issues like this generate such black and white thinking.

When I was a young student in QUB back in 1980, student debates could be heated affairs, but even though people were being murdered on a weekly basis, there seemed to be an agreement that it was possible to disagree without necessarily being motivated by evil intent; there was enough complexity in the situation for different interpretations to be permissible.  Yet when I spoke in favour of gay rights, or in favour of a woman’s right to choose abortion, there was no such tolerance. Having spoken in favour of a woman’s right to make that difficult choice one evening, I was literally surrounded by angry students accusing me of supporting the murder of babies.

Competing Rights

To an extent, I could understand the anger that evening. The right of the foetus to survive and the right of the woman to have control over her own body clash; they are completely incompatible and if the woman’s right triumphs, then the foetus cannot survive. If you genuinely believe that a foetus is a human being, then killing it must seem like murder.

As with the abortion issue, the rights of women to ‘women-only spaces’ or women-only sport seems to conflict directly with what trans women see as their right to be treated as women. To some this issue is so black and white that even to describes someone as a trans woman, rather than just a woman will be seen as an act of bigotry.

When the human rights of two groups clash, it is too easy to react with anger and outrage.  We need to try to be proportional and ensure that both groups are listened to, that their fears are acknowledged and that solutions are proportional.

When I was teaching in secondary school, we focused on practical solutions for toilet access rather than debating trans rights.  We had disabled toilets available with a key and any pupil who was trans, was able to ask for one of those keys and conflict was avoided. To some this lack of clarity may seem a cop-out, but female pupils had their access to female only spaces, while trans pupils had access to suitable toilets. This allowed our trans pupils to avoid being the focus of attention – if only life could be so simple outside schools.

Cancelling Debate

A statement from Féile includes the following: “Féile an Phobail was unaware from the initial submission that this event would promote campaigns against rights for the transgender community.

“Féile an Phobail takes pride in standing up for those who are marginalised and attacked.”

There seems to be a suggestion that Féile was not fully informed of who would be on the panel and they may be concerned that the panel is unbalanced and that the debate will encourage unwanted focus on trans people.

Such concerns may be valid, but to ban this event entirely smacks of censorship of reasonable political discussion – could a rebalancing of the panel have been considered?  And does every panel have to be ‘balanced’?

Nobody can argue that everything is how it should be – the broken promises around Tribeca are a particular point of contention. I would also acknowledge social challenges in relation to street based substance abuse, which is often a symptom of complex social problems. These problems have been escalating in cities across Europe, with the exception of Scandinavia. Until we learn the lessons of Scandinavia, with its housing first policy, and social services delivered at home rather than on the street, then these issues within Belfast City Centre are unlikely to subside. The recent announcement from the incoming Prime Minister does perhaps give some hope in this regard.

In 2023-2024 Linen Quarter BID, with the support of the City Council and Department for Communities, led the “Great Expectations” project – a £500,000 investment along Great Victoria Street and Dublin Road. Pavements and walls, black with grime, were power-washed, graffiti removed, and planting installed – including a new pocket park at Bankmore Square. A host of colourful murals were commissioned. Media commentators may criticize the erection of murals to mask decayed streets, but they are impactful and they make a difference. Examples on Great Victoria Street include the “Big Time Punk” tribute to Terri Hooly, “Flying High”, using African and Irish birds to celebrate the diversity of the International Church on which it sits, “Swift Corner” reflecting urban ecology, and “Connections” – the largest mural on the island by square footage, highlighting Linen Quarter’s role as a hub for transport and tourism.

But these temporary fixes are part of a deeper long-term vision. We called our project “Great Expectations” for a reason. The once Golden Mile had been in decline for 25 years and was in terrible condition when we extended our place-making role to the area. Our project was about changing the narrative, halting the decline, and setting a new direction for the future. And what a success that has been. LQ BID provided a critical signal to the market, and the investment flooded in.

The £24m investment in Vita Student Accommodation opened on Bruce Street in September 2023. A new connected health hub has been established on Great Victoria Street, with façade and building refurbishment due soon. The £35m QUB student investment in Weaver’s Hall on Dublin Road is scheduled to open later this year, followed in 2027 with a £40m investment in the new Kainos HQ. One of the most successful companies in N Ireland will now anchor the long-term rejuvenation of the Golden Mile. Hardly an example of dereliction and decline.

And the success continues. An 84-unit aparthotel will open on Dublin Road this summer, representing a £9m investment. Dorchester House on Great Victoria Street is also being converted into an aparthotel, and a new £17m Yotel is planned for Shaftesbury Square. Fanum House – long cited as Belfast’s ugliest building – has been demolished with future regeneration in mind. From an area that has lain derelict for a quarter of a century, we now have £100m of investment in the Golden Mile to date, with spades already in the ground and cranes in the air.

Investment has also been driven by the £340m Grand Central Station, which opened in Sept 2024. New public realm laid as part of this project includes a fantastic public plaza at Saltwater Square, remodelled pedestrian crossings on Great Victoria Street, and beautifully repaved walkways at Glengall Street and down to Sandy Row. The area around the station used to be a dark and grimy part of town. Now it is gleaming, with the intention to invest a further £600m in the immediate area via a 1.3m square foot mixed-use development called Weaver’s Cross. And adjacent to Great Victoria Street and Dublin Road is Bedford Street. A stunning £303m has been invested, or been announced, for this single street since LQ BID first came into being in 2018. This includes the five-star Grand Central Hotel, the Ewart Building, the Bedford Hotel, and a £48m investment into the BBC. In less than a decade, visible decay and dereliction has been replaced with delivery. Is that not worth celebrating?

A critical problem for Belfast remains unresolved, and that is – with the exception of the station – the investment in pavements and public realm has not kept pace with building-based regeneration. In fact, the public sector is barely out of the starting blocks while the private sector is half-way round the track. For the much-vaunted Streets Ahead project to only refurbish one significant street – Donegall Place – in over 20 years, is utterly shameful. Delays in the Gasworks Bridge – part of a feasibility study from 2004 – and the North-South Glider – specifically referenced in the 2012 BRT masterplan – are equally unforgiveable. Unfortunately, until the public sector significantly raises its game, a feeling of dereliction and decay will be allowed to persist, despite the impressive investments underway.

Fortunately, this flaw rarely impacts the positive impression Belfast leaves with its visitors. Yes, it can be gritty in places but, like the Crown Bar’s oysters, it provides a unique experience. It is a city that is vibrant, welcoming, chaotic, and impactful. It has food, pubs, and culture that create an enriching experience that people never forget. As a Unesco City of Music, with a deep musical tradition, it is the perfect home for the Fleadh. With unforgettable characters, glittering venues, and refreshed hotels, it is a city that wraps guests in its warm embrace. This is not a clone town following trends. This is Belfast.

Fresh from failing spectacularly over their stance on Brexit and saddled with a trade border in the Irish Sea they briefly pretended to have abolished, the last thing the DUP wanted to do was further roil their already furious base.

The ministries they opted for have allowed them to wage a subtle culture war on behalf of that base in an attempt to mollify them. The subtlety is the point of course, being open about what I believe they are doing would destabilise the institutions. Whilst there are some who may argue that the DUP would love nothing more than for the institutions to collapse, implicit in that hope is that Sinn Féin does the collapsing whilst appearing unreasonable about it. Repeatedly poking them in the eye whilst boasting about it might just lead the wider public to conclude that any collapse caused by such provocations is YOUR fault.

I have listed the cumulative actions of the two DUP ministers as recently as last May when I wrote a piece on Lyons withdrawing funding for the 40-year-old NI place name project and I feel there is no need to list them all again. But I believe a pattern from all those past events can be inferred that supports my theory. Unsurprisingly yet perhaps inevitably, here’s the latest data point from the Irish News…

A decision by DUP Education minister Paul Givan to spend most of the money previously earmarked specifically for Irish medium school facilities on other projects has been criticised. The minister’s department submitted a bid to Finance minister John O’Dowd for £6 million in the December monitoring round for Iontaobhas na Gaelscolaíochta, a trust fund which helps Irish medium schools to develop their buildings and facilities. Monitoring rounds are generally held three times a year in the Executive for Stormont departments to review spending and redirect money to where it is needed. While the bid was approved in December by the Department of Finance, just £1 million of the initial award was given to the group, with the other £5 million spent on other active school construction projects.

My theory holds that Givan and Lyons will only act in the culture war if they believe they can justify their actions in some fashion that gives them cover. Getting £6 million on the understanding that you are going to fund Irish Medium Education and spending 80% of it elsewhere made me quite keen to see just how Givan would justify it given the sheer gall that seemed involved, and he provided a written statement on the matter…

“…capital funding received through the December monitoring process was not in practice provided by the Department of Finance as earmarked funding. Such allocations are not separately monitored, reported upon or returned if unspent. That has been the long-established practice across government. To suggest otherwise is inconsistent with how in-year capital monitoring allocations have always operated”

Reading the entirety of the statement, it seems his argument is that there were no Irish Language medium projects ready to absorb the bulk of the funding, the funding would otherwise be lost, and he used the discretion afforded to him to redirect the monies towards other projects.

Paul Givan concluded his written statement by saying the complaint was an attempt to ‘manufacture grievance’ and he lists all the other actions he has taken in support of the Irish language, but this was still an effective £5 million cut to the sector taken by the Minister when it seems he received the money on the understanding it would go to that sector.

The fact that the chair of the Ionaobhas flat out disputes Givan’s reasoning must be considered and weighed against Givan’s words, as quoted in the Irish News article…

Pilib Ó Ruanaí…said he first became aware of £5million in funding having been redirected from the group in January of this year. He said pupils in the Irish medium sector are suffering due to a lack of suitable infrastructure in schools. “The minister was the one who submitted the original funding bid, which was later approved by the Finance minister, so the question is, if that’s not ring fenced, what is?” Mr Ó Ruanaí said.

“It’s deflection and obfuscation really, and what it’s saying is that we had other more immediate needs.”

There is also the fact that I simply don’t believe him. Givan’s role in the Líofa bursary controversy has never been forgotten, and the pattern of incidents that he and Lyons have generated in the past two years (many of which, but not all, touched upon the use of the Irish Language in the public sphere) in my opinion does tend to point one way.

Any single incident that provokes a row with the Department of Communities or the Department of Education seems to have a reasonable explanation that the Ministers can deploy to argue WHY they took the actions they did. But that is only if you take each incident in isolation. Take them all together, one after the other, controversy after controversy, row after row, strident defence after strident defence and that pattern emerges.

Either everyone else at Stormont has it in for the DUP ministers or they are picking fights they feel they can win to appease their base and regularly at that.

Why, it is almost as if they are fighting a battle a day. Now who coined that term?

Anna Burns’ Milkman is a remarkable book. Based on her experiences growing up in Belfast during the Troubles, it conveys a claustrophobic sense of oppression and suspicion, gossip and control. Words and actions, even objects, are burdened with an oblique symbolism that draws meaning from its sectarian context – the “us” and “them” against which the book’s disconcertingly mundane plot plays out.

Given this weight of symbolism, maybe the most remarkable feature of Milkman’s prose comes from Burns’ decision to strip the most basic symbols of all – proper names – from the text almost entirely. Characters are denoted with phrases such as “middle-sister”, the narrator and main character. For groups and places, “the other side of the street” and “over the water”, stand in for “them” (the Protestant community) and Great Britain respectively.

I won’t dwell on the literary effects of this choice here – Roger Gathmann has provided an excellent analysis of this already. Instead I’ll focus on one particular list of proper names that does make it into the book: the “banned names list”.

This is a list of 69 first names, all male, starting with Nigel and Jason (also the nicknames given to the couple who maintained the list), which were understood to be too British and therefore not allowed within the narrator’s own community:

The names not allowed were not allowed for the reason they were too much of the country ‘over the water’, with it no matter that some of those names hadn’t originated in that country but instead had been appropriated and put to use by the people of that land.

This artefact of imagined folklore relates to a real phenomenon – the uncanny ability of anyone who has grown up in Northern Ireland to discern whether someone is from the Catholic or Protestant community just by their name. As someone who didn’t grow up in this place (another denoting phrase), I am still amazed to see my wife and her friends (who did) demonstrate this ability with some confidence. Could they really be right every time?

A faithful encoding

I decided to investigate the basis for this claimed skill, using Milkman’s banned names list as a starting point and historical editions of the Irish census as my investigative tool. This census is exceptionally rare amongst its global counterparts in exposing detailed records for the entire population at individual level. In particular, names and religious affiliation are recorded for virtually everyone who lived in Ireland at the time of the surveys.

This suggested a clear experimental design: If the relative popularity of some names was starkly different for one community (proxied by religion) compared to the other, this could explain the collective societal knowledge that allocated the appropriate label to each name.

My investigation into the religious encoding of these names led to further onomastical discoveries, including the first inklings of the Gaelic revival in baby naming and the surprisingly low literacy of people with the surname Joyce.

The Irish census – an exceptional resource

A systematic government census of the whole island of Ireland was taken every 10 years between 1821 and 1911. Of these, the 1901 and 1911 editions are the only surviving full censuses. Following partition, in 1926 two separate censuses were conducted north and south of the new border. However only the records from the Southern 26 counties have survived from this year. Incredibly, it appears that the records for the six Northern counties were pulped during WW2 in an effort to alleviate a wartime paper shortage.

Privacy laws in Ireland allow the full individual-level census records to be made available 100 years after the survey. As of April 2026, the 1926 edition, as well as those for 1901 and 1911, is now available. However, because only these earlier censuses contain records for all 32 counties of Ireland, North and South, the 1911 survey forms the basis for most of the analysis here.

NB: the census office only allows downloads of 1,000 records at a time via its public API, so I designed a scraper to collect the ~13 million records in total that I wanted from the three censuses. More details of this including the code to generate the data and analysis behind the charts in the article can be found on github.

Census returns contain details about the population in varying degrees of fidelity and completeness. Names themselves are virtually complete. The other fields I will be making extensive use of are religion, education (which in practice encodes literacy) and county of residence. These are well populated. Other fields such as occupation are not considered here, mainly due to their sparseness.

Does census evidence tally with Nigel and Jason’s list?

My first question concerned the names on the banned list. As Burns described in the quote above, it was not the origin of names that led to their ban, but rather their popularity and usage amongst members of the “other” community.

This is something the census can measure precisely, and although Milkman was set in the 1970s, I reckoned that the 1911 census would still provide a useful tool to investigate the relative historical prevalence of these names.

Some of the names on the list are not really names (“Duke Of”, “Sir Mary”), and others are vanishingly rare. Ten of the 69 don’t appear in the census returns at all, four appear once, and a further 14 (including Nigel, a pointed reference perhaps) appear fewer than ten times.

But 23 of the names do appear at least 100 times – frequently enough to indicate their relative popularity in each community compared to the other. Statistics for these names are plotted below:

This number-line displays two attributes for each of the 23 names that occur 100 times or more: the size of the circles represents the overall popularity of the name, whilst the position along the line shows the percentage of people with that name that identified as Protestant. An interactive version of this chart is available here which can be hovered over or clicked to bring up more information.

I have also plotted a vertical red line which displays the overall religious mix of the all-island Irish population at that time. From this we can infer that names to the right of the red line were relatively more popular among Protestants. Names to the left were relatively more popular among Catholics.

For these 23 names, there is a clear division: 15 of the names were not only more popular amongst Protestants, this was true to such an extent that there was an absolute majority of Protestants amongst people called them, even in a country where nearly three-quarters (74%) of the population was Catholic. The most popular of these names was George, accounting for 25,944 Irish people in 1911, 15,487 of whom were Protestant.

In contrast, 8 of the banned names were actually significantly more popular amongst Catholics in 1911, including Simon, Felix and both variations of Laurence. So why are they on the banned list? Maybe they had shifted in their relative popularity by the 1970s, possibly after being popularised by a British celebrity. More likely, Burns was just exercising her creative licence by including them. They certainly didn’t strike me as out of place as I was enjoying the book.

One thing we can say is that these names, more popular in the Catholic community, are hard to disentangle on the number-line above, as they are bunched towards the left-hand side. Our analysis could also be made more intuitive if the red line of equal popularity was placed in the middle of the chart.

The chart below addresses these issues. It displays the same information, but this time the horizontal axis shows relative popularity (as inferred by relative prevalence) of each name:

This transformation yields easier interpretation – names to the left of the red line at x=1 (indicating equal popularity) are more popular in the Catholic community, whilst names on the right are more popular amongst Protestants. The circles can be hovered over or clicked in an interactive version of the chart here to bring up more information.

Extending the analysis to all names

We now have a tool to gauge the relative popularity of names by community, which we can use to examine the full set of names, including female names and surnames. But it’s obvious from the charts above that fitting even 23 names on a one-dimensional line leads to significant clutter.

One way to overcome this problem and accommodate more names is to introduce a second dimension, which has the further benefit of allowing us to examine another characteristic. After some brief experiments with other options, I decided to use the responses to the “education” question for this purpose.

This question asked respondents whether they could read, read & write, or neither. It was asked independently of a second question on language ability (with responses English, Irish or both). I decided that the responses to the first question could be used as a good proxy for literacy in either language, and that this measure could give some insight into social class.

Overall adult literacy in Ireland in 1911 was fairly high at 88.8%, but there was significant variation between names. In an economy that was still dominated by agriculture, this variation likely correlated with families’ ability and desire to educate their children for more middle-class professions, as well as to participate in Ireland’s rich literary culture.

Filtering out respondents below the age of 15, I computed the adult literacy rate (combining the “read” and “read & write” categories) for each name. The chart below shows the 20 most popular names of each sex for each community:

The horizontal axis on the chart above stays the same – it shows the relative popularity of first names by community, with the vertical axis at x=1 (now grey) indicating the threshold of equal popularity. Adult literacy rate is indicated by vertical position in the chart, with the average rate for Ireland (88.8%) indicated by the vertical position of the horizontal axis, dashed in grey.

The axes therefore split the names into four quadrants: those that are more popular amongst Catholics (left) vs Protestants (right); and those that have a higher-than-average adult literacy rate (top) vs a lower-than-average rate (bottom). An interactive version of this chart is here.

The first thing to note is that the size of the circles has changed. George is still present as one of the most popular names, but it is dwarfed by Mary and John which each numbered around 300,000 people in 1911, together representing 15% of the total population.

Perhaps unsurprisingly given the wealth divide at the time, there is also a fairly clear correlation between the variables, with the names more popular amongst Protestants having higher adult literacy rates on average. Indeed Hugh is the only one of these popular names that was more popular amongst Protestants but less literate than average.

There are some features that did surprise me though. I had expected the name William to be much more clearly Protestant, given its association with “King Billy” and the battle of the Boyne. In fact, the name was only twice as popular amongst Protestants, meaning there were actually more Catholics named William in 1911, owing to the greater overall size of the Catholic population.

I was also surprised that Bridget, Michael and Patrick, very common names in 1911, were almost exclusively Catholic, showing a greater degree of polarisation than any popular Protestant name of the time.

As for literacy rates, it is interesting to note the differences between Anne and Annie, and between Catherine, Kate, Katie and Kathleen. These are significant differences between names that we might otherwise suspect were interchangeable – in fact today’s prejudices might even lean the other way, with a Catherine as the current Princess of Wales possibly marking this name out as the poshest (most likely to be literate?) variant. Nevertheless, in 1911, Catherines were significantly less literate than Kates, Katies and Kathleens.

First name frequencies as evidence of the Gaelic revival

Aside from the two dimensions plotted in the chart, a striking feature of the names it contains is that all their spellings look British to the modern eye. There are no distinctively Irish names, as you might expect if we were using the latest census data.

In fact, even now-common names such as Aoife and Sean (or Seán spelled with a fada to lengthen the “a”) were very rare in 1911. This name – the Irish version of John – only appears 124 times in that year’s census (97 with the fada, 27 without). Adding three further Gaelic variants of the name – Seaghan, Seághan and Seaghán – brings the total to 911, but this is still 300 times less frequent than the Anglicised “John”, the most common male name in 1911, which appeared 288,954 times.

Those 911 Seáns represent significant growth since the 1901 census however, when the name appeared just 10 times in any guise. And by 1926, in the 26 Southern counties alone, it had multiplied in popularity yet further, appearing 3,113 times in total. This growth rate is clear evidence of the Gaelic revival – a national revival of interest in the Irish language and Irish Gaelic culture that had begun in the late-nineteenth-century.

By using a “regular expression” – a pattern matcher – we can match many more Gaelic names to build a more statistically robust measure of the growth in Gaelic naming over this period. To do this I used a regular expression that matched any name containing a fada, as well as the common Gaelic digraphs “bh”, “dh”, “mh”, “fh” and the trigraph “aoi”, which are rarely found in English names.

This revealed strong evidence of the revival. In 1901, a total of 265 names in the whole of Ireland (0.006%) contained a fada or one of these substrings. By 1911, that number had risen to 12,071 (0.3%), and by 1926 it had risen to 24,149 in the Southern 26 counties alone, representing nearly 1% of the population at the time.

This growth, the first shoots of which we have detected here, has only accelerated since – apply this filter to the latest baby name data from Ireland’s Central Statistics Office today (for babies born in 2025) and over 15% of names match.

This is a fascinating finding, and the distribution of first names yields many other avenues to explore, some of which I pursued briefly in the research for this article. However, a full exposition of those avenues will have to be reserved for a follow-up article, as we have still to apply the tools developed here to surnames. If you want to explore the first name data in more detail yourself, please see the tables and further resources at the end of the original article.

Surname analysis – some surprising discoveries

Turning our attention to the storied family names of Ireland then, we can ask some interesting questions. Which clans were more insular in their own religious community, and which mixed more? Which were more literate, and how were they geographically distributed?

The chart below plots the 150 surnames that were most common across the island of Ireland in 1911, on the same set of axes we used for first names:

The correlation we noted before is still present, albeit less obvious – of the 37 surnames in the top 150 that were more prevalent amongst Protestants in 1911, only 3 (in the lower-right quadrant) had lower literacy than average, compared to 68 of the 113 that were more prevalent amongst Catholics.

Intriguingly, these statistically more-Protestant but less-literate names included Burns, now a Booker prize-winning name thanks to Milkman, and McBride, one of the most recognisable names amongst Northern Irish writers today.

Yet more surprising is the revelation that, of the top 150 surnames in Ireland in 1911, the one with the lowest adult literacy rate of all (and the only one to have a rate below 75%) is none other than Joyce, possibly the most lauded name in Irish literature at the time. Even James Joyce’s absence from the census records due to his residence in Paris at the time can’t explain that.

There are likely many more stories hidden in the chart above that could be unlocked with the relevant context, and I plan to revisit this data for further articles. For now though, I’ll leave it to you to interact with the chart to explore the other 147 names. As with the first name data, I’ve also included a comprehensive table containing surname data at the end of the original article – please explore them and get in touch with your observations and thoughts.

The data behind the tea towel

The final part of my investigation uses another field that is reliably captured by census surveys – the county where people lived. Here I use this data in two ways: firstly, I apply the approach used above to counties, displaying their relative religious mix and adult literacy rates; secondly, I combine this field with surnames to map out the dominant clans in each county, a bit like those souvenir tea-towels you might have seen but with better data. I’ve chosen to use the 1911 census for this analysis too, as it allows us to render all 32 counties.

Plotting these data against our two now-familiar axes gives us the following plot:

Looking at the horizontal axis, the rationale for splitting Ulster in pursuit of a reliably Protestant-majority Northern Ireland can be discerned. While Fermanagh and Tyrone had narrow Catholic majorities, the new province needed to retain their populations (and land area) to be a viable entity. Retaining Monaghan, Cavan and Donegal would have kept a further 330,000 people, but 78% of them were Catholic – too many to ensure a stable majority. As we now know, Northern Ireland’s Protestant majority would not last anyway, despite this gerrymandering.

Away from Ulster, there was significant variation in the size of the Protestant population. Cosmopolitan Dublin and neighbouring Wicklow and Kildare had relatively large Protestant populations, whereas the smallest were found on or near the Atlantic Coast in Mayo, Roscommon, Galway, Kerry and Clare.

As for the vertical axis, Dublin, Antrim and Down had the highest adult literacy rates, likely driven by Dublin city and Belfast, the economic and cultural centres of their day. At the other end of the scale, Donegal sat stranded from most of the other counties, an outlier in both a literal and literate (not to mention religious) sense. The other counties can be explored interactively here.

Mapping Ireland’s ancestral dynasties

Our last chart combines the census returns for surname and county to map the most common family names for each county:

This map (interactive version here) highlights the regional dominance of certain names. Kelly is on top throughout Ireland’s central belt from Kildare to Galway, whereas Byrne has a stronghold in Dublin and the counties to its south. A full 7% of the population of Tipperary was named Ryan in 1911.

Other names are more spread out, such as Murphy, the most common name in Cork, Wexford, Louth and Armagh, as well as in Ireland as a whole, with the 55,796 Murphys recorded in the 1911 census representing 1.3% of the entire island’s population at that point.

What’s in a name? More than first meets the eye

What started as an investigation into the curious ability of the Northern Irish to categorise each other by name led me to several further discoveries, and an appreciation that there is often more to a name than first meets the eye. I hope you found some of these discoveries as interesting as I did.

If you would like to explore the data further, you can either access it directly on github, or explore the tables at the end of the original article which contain more information on first names, surnames and counties that I couldn’t fit into the charts here.

Finally, if you have any questions or suggestions for further analysis, please do get in touch or add a comment below. Thanks for reading!

The evidence for an association between aggression and testosterone levels exists but it is weak according a 2019 study (a meta analysis) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31785281/.   This weak association only exists in men, and has a greater link to stressful situations that result in more aggressive outcome.    Secretary Pete might not have considered the impact of his policy on domestic violence and bar room brawls when his warriors are not fighting “bad people” but trying to live civilian lives.

So if you think that this is about soldiers “growing a pair” and improving battlefield effectiveness, think again.  Rather it is a blatant marketing exercise on behalf of Big Pharma who have been for years trying to normalise TRT as an essential life-long therapy for all men and with some success.  It is part of a broader push by the Trump administration to make it easier for medical professionals to prescribe testosterone.  Its all about business Donald.

I first came across TRT marketing about 15 years ago. I met Debbie, a young trendy GP from Dublin at a professional meeting who told me that the big new thing in the Republic of Ireland was TRT; a sure-fire therapy for the flagging middle-aged male. She was being encouraged by her medical partners (males) to discuss with male patients the possibility that their; tiredness, low mood, general difficulties with life may not be just symptoms of a mid-life crisis; but may be symptoms of the male menopause. “If testosterone levels are sub-normal each man is a candidate for TRT” she cynically confided.

Feeling not just on top form that evening and looking pretty washed out, was I a potential candidate?  I saw a lot of myself in her description; the train-crash that is the male middle-age but I could not agree with a clinical “male menopause”.  “Your right, its bollocks”, she replied with forthright clarity “and a shame on my profession” she continued. “the male menopause is merely a symptom of the financial down-turn since 2008 affecting Irish GPs bottom-line”.

Bollocks it is according to the learned New England Journal of Medicine.  A study into the safety and efficacy of TRT was stopped in 2009 on grounds of safety; a small matter of a four-fold increase in cardiac events and the appearance of that appalling phenomenon “man-boobs” plus increases in prostate cancer prevalence and breathing problems during sleep.

The male menopause is a myth confirms the British Medical Journal as only 0.1% of men over 40 years have low testosterone and this goes up to only 5% of men in their 70s.  Yet the marketing men persist as we now live in a “Your-Only-Think-Your-Fine” culture so when you start gaining weight, have a noticeable reduction in energy and start to lose interest in (or performance during) sex then sensibly something is wrong and seeking a medical solution seems only rational.

Yet according to BMJ the link to an age related reduction in testosterone levels and specific clinical symptoms remains weak.   Notwithstanding this there is a section of the medical profession committed to making all age-related phenomenon into diseases.  And 13 million Americans cannot be wrong which is the number that have been converted to monthly TRT.

Small testicles

I was remined of my evening with Dr Debbie while sitting outside a Belfast bar recently. A friend of old with her new partner happened along. They joined us and John, in his early 50s, was introduced. As we finished the second cocktail John, getting more relaxed, asked me if I had ever considered TRT telling me it had done wonders for him.

He stood up from his chair, placed his palms on his flat stomach and slid them up to his shapely pectorals.  “See that” he said, “that’s the benefit of TRT.

After he turned fifty, he awoke regularly without an erection and therefore had a sense something was seriously wrong. Having sold a successful business in England he is now retired and lives in Spain. When he presented his “serious erectile problem”, to his Spanish doctor, the physician suggested blood samples and surprise, surprise, found his testosterone to be sub-normal; he needed TRT.

On questioning what a “normal” testosterone level is, he confirmed it ranged from 225 to 1100 unsure if the units were; milli, micro, nano or pico grams (they are ng/dL). Anyway he was 229 ng/dL and as a result he now spends over £150 a month on a testosterone gel which he applies (to his arm).

Side effects?  None other than the fact that his testicles have reduced in size from “peach-stone size” to “pea size” and not even the marrow fat variety – we are talking sweet garden pea here.  This is to be expected as the testes are the main glands for production of testosterone and, since it’s on a negative feedback systems; when you inject synthetic testosterone, testicular production stops; thus the change in size.  It had no impact on his hair which he claimed to be as bushy as it was when he was 18.  He claimed to have read extensively on the topic and for this reason he also takes an anti-oestrogen to stop him developing “man-boobs”.  He has never felt or been better and yes, each morning he awakes, his is impressed.

The Science Bit

Males with clinically low testosterone benefit from TRT and this is a well-defined field of clinical practice.   The marketing men are seeking to change the definition of low to include a much wider cohort of the male population.   This risks medicalisation of the aging male but given that the supply of TRT is already occurring in a gym near you without any clinical supervision its already a serious public health concern.  TRT is widely used in N. Ireland and used illegal, but it would not appear so.

This is clearly a complex clinical area. Accepting that TRT has an important clinical benefit, wider use of TRT is not a risk free panacea for the ills of the aging baby-boomers or the battlefield performance of American Marines.

After being appointed by King Charles, Andy Burnham becomes the 7th UK Prime Minister in a decade and the 5th PM in 4 years, which shows the difficulty in governing the country since the division Brexit vote and the rise of the far right.

Andy Burnham has a likeability factor, which must be an advantage compared to the robotic Keir Starmer.

But you do wonder about the limitations of political leadership these days as all over the world democracies are struggling to implement practical reforms that improve the lives of ordinary citizens. Instead they are being buffeted on the waves of neoliberalism and global capitalism.

What you need to know

The police interviewed my neighbour who was obviously distraught. The evidence was clear from the start they were not at fault and had no chance to avoid the collision. Nonetheless the biker’s friends, with support of his family, erected a shrine not on the spot where he died but where the motorbike had struct and dented the street sign and across from my neighbour’s house. This became a meeting point for fellow bikers who revved engines and spun wheels nightly in a sinister show of harassment. This continued for two years.

A growing menace

Motorbikes and e-bikes now frequently are driven at speed on main roads and pavements. Riders, mostly young and male, wear facemasks but not helmets. It seems the risk of injury is too great so they cannot be pursed by police. Some may be doing this for fun but there is also a role for these bikes in the illegal drug trade. They are drug mules moving gear across the city.

BBC has been highlighting this problem recently. The cost to insurance companies is estimated to be £110 million a year E-bike injury payouts top £110m and push up insurance premiums – BBC News and Emergency Departments are treating significant injuries. E-scooters: More than 120 children in Belfast injured in last year – BBC News

It is hard to appreciate that every e-scooter driving on the roads or pavement are doing so illegally. Many motorbikes too are not registered for road use, are not insured and riders are doing so illegally as they don’t wear helmets. So why am I getting exercised by this petty law breaking? Why don’t I, like the rest of the population, just accept it and mind my own business. I suppose I’ve got some skin in the game and was very lucky I too didn’t have a fatality on my conscience.

My e-scooter incident.

At an empty junction where there is a mural of a distinctly angry tiger, at 5 p.m. on a week day, I stopped on red. When the lights changed I proceeded straight ahead and then, from my right, a blur of a boy on a e-scooter. We both braked hard just before we collided, he got thrown off the e-scooter by the momentum, as if caught by a violent breeze that discarded him and his e-scooter against the left side kerb.

I got out and was joined by a woman to assist the boy who kept apologising for not stopping as blood oozed down onto his T Shirt from a cut above his right ear. A trainee nurse and her boyfriend joined and she did an assessment. I rang for an ambulance and the call handler took over my phone to assess the patient. She also asked me to scan the scene to ensure it was safe for an ambulance crew. The scan showed a gathering crowd of young men in dark track suits and a middle-aged man with a iPhone who had just arrived. He instructed the youths, who were observing not assisting, to get rid of the e-scooter. This I caught on camera.

The middle-aged man knew the eleven-year-old-boy and was contacting his father. The handler on the emergency call had all she needed and told me the police were on their way. I could hear, in the distance, their reassuring siren coming towards us as the crowd got bigger still.

I was returning home from my business after calling in to give an Indian employee a lift home. She arrived in N. Ireland on a valid visa nine months ago having got married. Her husband works in the care sector and she is studying part-time for a post-graduate degree at UU. She was finding the racist disturbance of the last days deeply frightening so I agreed to get her home early. Thankfully she was not in the car but delivered home when this incident occurred.

The police arrived and one officer took me aside while the other spoke with the injured child. As I recounted what happened, I explained the middle-aged man had instructed the e-scooter be taken way. At this time he was walking around my car giving particular attention to the dashboard. Moving back towards the crowd he asked if the vehicle had dashcam. I confirmed it didn’t and he stated that in that case he was now a witness and saw me break a red-light at speed as I crossed the junction. You can tell your lie I said but I will challenge you. I was a witness he goaded. The police officer handed me a card with incident details and told me to get into my car and leave the scene. They would await the ambulance.

I followed up with the police the next day and was told the child was fine, was released from hospital after an assessment that showed no issues. They would be in touch if anything else happened but have not, to date, contacted. My car was repaired and covered by my insurance but my solicitor assures me a personal injury claim will eventually come.

Just two rules. Keep it civil and no man/woman playing.

Comments will close at 12 pm on Monday.

So discuss what you like here, but no politics.

Comments will close at 12 pm on Monday.

But all good governments act in the interests of their people. The notion that a British government would favour the interests of 2% of the population over the interests of the other 98% is fanciful, to say the least. (Unless, of course, that 2% happen to be billionaires funding their party!).

When the UK decided to leave the EU, the over-riding national interest was to secure a Withdrawal Agreement and future trade deal that protected British industry as much as possible by retaining access to the Single Market. Northern Ireland was at best incidental, and at worse irrelevant to that imperative. Any unionist who believed otherwise was being unconscionably naïve.

As a continuing EU member in good standing, Ireland had a potential veto over any proposed arrangement effecting its national interests. Some unionists appeared to believe it was wrong for the Irish government to act in the interests of the Irish people, as they saw them. Similarly, the case for a United Ireland must rest on whether the interests of a majority in NI are more aligned with Dublin rather than Westminster. All else is sectarian waffle.

The notion that you should base your view of a United Ireland on what a few loud mouths say on the internet is also borderline drivel. Have we learned nothing from the amount of noise and trouble a few online racist activists have been able to create, assisted by social media algorithms that promote incendiary comment?

Heather Humphreys was a terrible candidate, drafted in by Fine Gael as an emergency substitute when Mairead McGuinness pulled out due to illness. She had occupied several senior cabinet ministries without any major achievements to her name. Her communication skills and performance on the stump during the campaign were poor, to put it mildly.

And yet she received almost 30% of the vote, over four times that of the Fianna Fáil Candidate, Jim Gavin, who had run an even worse campaign and withdrew his candidacy, although remaining as an option on the ballot paper. This compares to less than 21% received by her party, Fine Gael, at the general election 11 months previously and Fine Gael’s standing at 18% in the opinion polls at the time of the Presidential election.

In other words, she outperformed her party’s vote by a huge margin despite her poor track record in government and performance during the election campaign. Any objective analysis would conclude that the negative comments about her husband’s Orange Order background helped her campaign rather than hindered it. Irish people overwhelmingly reject that sort of sectarian commentary.

Fine Gael have never won a Presidential election and didn’t even contest the 2018 election. Their candidate at the previous election in 2011, Gay Mitchel, came fourth with 6% of the vote at a time when Fine Gael was in government with 36% of the vote. Even the popular May Banotti polled marginally less than Heather Humphreys in 1997, and before that, in 1990, Austin Curry, a northern nationalist and Fine Gael TD managed only 17%.

Leading potential Fine Gael candidates including former Taoisigh Enda Kenny and Leo Varadkar, former Tánaiste Frances Fitzgerald, and the party’s former deputy leader Heather Humphreys, had refused to stand. Humphreys had stood down at the 2024 general election saying she was burnt out after many years in politics. Fair enough, but Áras an Uachtaráin is not a retirement home.

Humphreys changed her mind when the successful nominee, Mairead McGuinness pulled out due to illness. But Fine Gael is now a marginal conservative party representing primarily the propertied and professional classes and struggling to get 20% of the vote. The people chose an active and progressive politician, Catherine Connolly, very much in the tradition of the previous and popular incumbent, Michael D. Higgins.

All the candidates suffered on-line abuse, unfortunately a growing trend in all democracies. Northern Ireland was not an issue front and centre during the campaign, and if anything, Heather Humphreys’ religious background was a positive for most voters as she had few other distinguishing characteristics. But whatever about Northern Ireland, you don’t get to win elections in Ireland just because of your religion.

Why not just celebrate the outcome of a popular democratic election? Why not celebrate Fine Gael’s best performance in a Presidential election in over 50 years? The successive elections of Mary Robinson, Mary McAleese, Michael D. Higgins and now Catherine Connolly demonstrate that Irish people overwhelmingly want to be represented by progressive candidates who seek to bridge the divide between rich and poor, owners and renters, businessmen and employees, men and women’s rights, multiple minorities, old and young.

Why drag an obsession with religious identity into it when that is simply not relevant to the vast majority? And why must the activities of a few on-line trolls be allowed to set the agenda for an entire country in order to facilitate the rewriting of history? Why must the vast majority in Ireland be tarred with a sectarian or racist brush because of the activities of a few on-line trolls, often not even Irish or based in Ireland and funded from abroad?

There are many potential reasons to criticise Ireland, but if you are desperate to find a stick to beat Ireland with, you must try harder. In the meantime, the vast majority are happy to be represented by a Head of state and a Government that, however imperfectly, represent the interests of the vast majority of people living on this island, and can be unelected if they perform poorly. Would that be so for all the people on this island!

Well alas for our ‘nearest and dearest’ neighbours once again the World Cup isn’t coming home, that’s this year just as it didn’t every year since ’66 and ’62, ’58, 54 & ’50 before that. You really do have to wonder at the mentality of all the little Englanders who have a sense of  entitlement that they seriously believe that their team really have a chance to lift the Jules Rimet? Of course for the rest of us in Ireland and the Scots it’s brilliant viewing every 4 years as we embrace our long lost ‘cousins’ in Panama, Croatia, Ghana, Mexico and Norway as they tangle with the tournament favourites according to SKY and BBC pundits who should have more cop on?

That they managed to overcome these opponents wasn’t through sheer brilliance a la Messi or youthful dynamic from Yamal, powerful leadership from Mbappe or intricate classic play from Vinicius Jnr, no it was just dogged English football, Bournemouth v Brentford, hardly PSG, Real Madrid, AC Milan or Boca Juniors? They survived to the last four with a combination of luck and strange referring and while they mightn’t have needed Trump to bend Infantino’s ear as he did to give the US a dubious decision, Engerland made it to Wednesday night against old adversaries Argentina. Now while my football experience might have been confined to the realms of junior football I think I know enough to understand that England would never defeat Argentina? Why would anyone with a rational thought pattern think otherwise? To win the World Cup you need to be extra special a bit like the Champions League? The great teams have gold stars on their jerseys to signify that; Brazil have 5, Germany 4, Italy 4, Argentina 3; England have one solitary star won in ’66 after a dodgy Russian linesman awarded them a goal which didn’t cross the line! We have never heard the end of it since with repeat viewings shown on BBC every xmas for 60 years.

The past 40+ years the football dynamic between England and Argentina has been compounded by the war in the Falklands/Malvinas in the early 80’s when the mad witch Thatcher sent an Armada half way around the world to claim British sovereignty on a group of islands which house more sheep than people. 900 were killed during the short conflict including 300 Argentine naval cadets who went to a watery death after their ship was torpedoed by a British warship in Argentine waters. This was the period when Thatcher let the hunger strikers die and destroyed Mining villages all over England, Scotland and Wales, so the Malvinas fitted into the colonial pattern and she was a lady not for turning. That young Irishmen and Argentine sailors, Miners and their families, British police and soldiers, all working class and used by a Tory Govt. to suffer and die, it was a horrendous time.

The Islas Malvinas was colonised by Europeans as far back as the 1700’s, France and Spain had control for a period but they eventually came under British rule. Argentina took control in 1830’s but Britain regained control in 1840’s, colonialism was in its heyday, they had taken Malta in 1800 after removing Napoleon from the little island. Britain has held control of the Malvinas ever since but it has always been disputed by Argentina thus the war which broke out in the 80’s. Ironically the first inhabitants were Scottish planters just as we witnessed in Ireland before that? The population has never been above 3,500 with 40% born there and the rest immigrants, interestingly many Irish workers went out there after the war to help rebuild destroyed buildings. The islands are known as the Falklands in Europe but Islas Malvinas in Latin America, the Spanish speaking world and in Ireland. During the Falklands/Malvinas war Ireland were the only European country who refused to back the British armada travelling 7000 miles to lay claim to islands so obviously belonging to Argentina.

So when Argentina and one Diego Maradona faced up to England in the ’86 World Cup in Mexico it was much more than a football game and indeed it has been remembered ever since as the crowning of Maradona as the best player in the world just as Messi has confirmed that accolade during the present tournament. Maradona scored two goals, one remembered as the ‘Hand of God’ and the other the greatest goal of all time as he beat half the English team to score. In this year’s semi final little genius Messi provided inspiration and ball delivery to win the game for Argentina which led to amazing scenes on the terraces and streets après match and Argentine players holding a banner in the middle of the field saying that the Malvinas belonged to Argentina. They say we should keep politics and sport separate but when it comes to England and Argentina that’s not possible?

For Irish people the similarities are apparent, and we understand that just as they hold the Malvinas, so they hold the 6 counties as a colonial project. So, when Argentina played England all Irish people were supporting Argentina and celebrated wildly as the Latin Americans won through.

Many Leinster fans are convinced that David Humphreys, the IRFU Director of Performance, is intent on destroying the Leinster rugby brand, identity, and level of performance. Under his watch eight senior professionals, including six experienced test players are leaving the province. This includes James Lowe, who played as often for Ireland and the Lions as he did for Leinster – and yet Leinster were expected to fund his recruitment, training, development and salary almost entirely.

Despite being an Irish first team regular for the past six seasons – playing 45 times for Ireland and 3 times for the lions while playing 50 times for Leinster – he has never been on a central contract and the IRFU refused to top up his Leinster contract as they have done for other senior players like Conor Murray and Peter O’Mahony after their central contracts came to an end. Ulster Fans often point to the IRFU preventing Ulster from extending Ruan Pienaar’s contract. But Pienaar never played for Ireland and thus never contributed to the IRFU’s coffers. Lowe was box office.

An example of how this works is contained in the accounts just published for the British and Irish Lions tour to Australia last year (the IRFU don’t publish separate accounts for Leinster). The Lions made a profit of £13 Million on revenues (sales) of £50 million and paid a dividend of £15 million to the participating national unions – England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. None of this profit goes back to Leinster, despite contributing 14 players to the 38 man squad – over a third of the total. That tour also rescued the previously loss making Australian Rugby Union and helped it make a profit of £43 million last year.

Leinster also regularly provide up to ten other players not on central contracts to the Ireland team. All trained, developed and paid at Leinster expense with no recompense from the IRFU for their unavailability for Leinster for up to half the season. As a result, Leinster are forced to recruit and pay for extra players and play with a weakened squad for much of the season – including crunch away fixtures in South Africa at the start of next season.

Last season these fixtures were fulfilled with a much weakened team and resulted in comprehensive defeats from which Leinster took a long time to recover. Effectively Leinster start the season with one hand tied behind their backs because of the unavailability of c. 20 test players. Expecting 20 year old academy players to scrum against world class South African props is both unfair and dangerous.

To add insult to injury, Leinster are now also required to make an increased contribution to the salaries of those few players who do have central contracts – at a time when Leinster rugby has the additional expenses associated with the redevelopment of the RDS and the hiring of the Aviva and Croke park stadia for home matches. No wonder Leinster have not been able to renew James Lowe’s contract at an attractive level or recruit quality replacements for all the players who are leaving.

It is estimated that 85% of the IRFU’s income comes from the men’s senior international team made up of a majority of players recruited, trained, developed, and paid by Leinster, and yet little of this money trickles back to the province. I have no difficulty with the IRFU supporting the other provinces, the women’s game, the amateur club game, and the elite player development pathways throughout the country, but the IRFU are in danger of killing the golden goose which generates much of this revenue.

No wonder that the Leinster head coach, Leo Cullen, has decided that enough is enough. He is expected to compete with French clubs with far larger budgets and who are not expected to shoulder most of the burden of providing the players who generate virtually all the funds for their national union and who are free to recruit world class players from all over the world to replace those on international duty.

This season Leinster have been able to recruit only two senior professionals, Joey Carbery and Peter Dooley, both ex-Leinster players, neither of whom improved after they left Leinster. Carbery never established himself as first choice elsewhere and Dooley never rose above third choice loose head at Connacht, having been fourth choice at Leinster. He became surplus to requirements at Connacht with the rise of Billy Bohan and the recruitment of Jerry Cahir (from Leinster) and Francois van Wyk (from Bath).

In the past the famed Leinster academy has often made up for the lack of top level recruitment by Leinster, but even that source seems to be drying up. This year only three players have been promoted from the academy: Stephen Smyth (hooker), Conor O’Tighearnaigh (lock) and Josh Kenny (wing) compared to 8 last season.

In addition, three players have left the academy before the end of their contracts, (Mahon Ronan joining the Ulster Academy) and unlike the other provinces, Leinster have announced no new academy intake. All that is known is that the pacy Ireland u.20 full back, Noah Byrne, has turned down the offer of an academy contract in favour of playing Aussie Rules football in Australia. Clearly the allure of playing for Leinster, at a salary Leinster can afford, is diminishing.

The malaise seems to have already spread to the Irish u.20s rugby team. Since 2007, the Irish u.20’s have won 6 nations five times, including four grand slams and won the Triple Crown on seven occasions. They were runners up in the World Championship in 2016 and 2023. Last year they came 11^th., and this year they are in a play-off to come, at best, 9^th.

And now David Humphreys is suggesting Ronan O’Gara as a suitable replacement for Leo Cullen.

Irish rugby is based on the keen rivalries between the provinces with rival supporters belonging to distinct tribes. The Leinster Munster rivalry is particularly fierce and has attracted over 80,000 spectators to Croke Park. Nothing will undermine the Leinster brand and sense of identity more than the imposition of O’Gara – the Leinster supporters’ favourite bête noire. O’Gara is a fine coach and could do a great job for Munster. But he is of the wrong tribe. Even Munsterman Declan Kidney – a fine coach and much less abrasive personality – had little success with Leinster.

If Leinster rugby declines Irish rugby will lose its main player production line and financial engine. Welsh rugby is a salutary lesson of what happens when administrators forget the local loyalties and rivalries that drive support and standards in the country as a whole. David Humphries should mind his own business and let Leinster recruit their own head coach and recruit the players they need to replace those so often away on international duty.

Crowds at home matches have declined as many supporters don’t come to watch weakened teams losing matches that could and should have been won and this appears to have further weakened Leinster’s finances. Things have come to a sorry pass when Leinster can’t even afford to attract and keep players in their own academy.

Rather than down grading the Leinster Academy David Humphreys would be far better employed focusing on improving the academies and elite player development pathways at the other provinces. Irish rugby would be in a far better state if it was firing on all four cylinders, with all four provinces competing at the highest levels in all competitions.

Some commendable progress has already been made at Ulster and Connacht under the excellent leadership of Rory Best, Richie Murphy and Stuart Lancaster. The World Champions, South Africa, have four very competitive franchises plus a lot of test class players plying their trade abroad. We need to generate similar strength in depth in all the provinces if we are to do better in World Cups and win European cups again.

Meanwhile Munster continue to squander the enormous talent that is currently and has recently passed through their academy – preferring to buy in journeyman pros who add nothing to the player development of their own talent pool. Expending considerable resources on a management consultant report that will likely only tell people what they already know won’t help matters. It is the classic “kick for touch” strategy of managers buying time and seeking to evade responsibility. The consultant knows who has commissioned his report and what they want from it.

If players and coaches are accountable and sackable based on their performances, the same should apply to management.

It is many years since Munster have developed any props of note and they have now signed 36 year old England prop Kieran Brookes. They have sacked academy graduate Tony Butler and recruited Australian journeyman 10, Will Harrison, while having two incredibly talented young 10s, Charlie O’Shea and Tom Wood (son of Keith) in their academy. In France, those players would be getting exposure to senior rugby by now.

No Munster player started in the recent test match against Australia. If management accountability is to mean anything, the IRFU needed to see more of a return on the considerable investment they have put into Munster rugby in recent years. The time for “consultants reports” is long past. Dragging Leinster down to the level of Munster helps no one, least of all the standard of the Irish team and the finances the IRFU need to fund rugby throughout the rest of Ireland.

Supporters of other provinces may be delighted if Leinster can no longer lead the Irish rugby scene. Some Schadenfreude is understandable given the degree of Leinster dominance in the past. But they should be careful what they wish for. If Leinster are no longer competitive at European Cup level and provide less and less quality players to the Irish team, the whole financial edifice of  Irish rugby could come tumbling down. Ask Welsh or Australia rugby supporters. A decline in standards can quickly lead to a collapse from which it can take many years to recover.

What Andy homes in on is a conspiracy worthy of Sinn Fein which he heard from Alex Kane who I think of as the voice of sane unionism. The incendiary claim coming of course from Jim Allister is the alleged real reason why Donaldson performed his about turn on the Windsor Framework and forced a return to the Assembly. The British government must have blackmailed him suspects Jim. There can be no rational explanation in Jim’s universe.

We can accept that the grossness of the scandal  touches perhaps the most sensitive nerve of right wing evangelical Protestant sensibility, the one that triggers hypocrisy in the  presence of outrageous behaviour perpetrated by the self-selected God’s Elect. Among the mass ranks of the betrayed  is a kind of baleful innocence that can degenerate into a self destructive Wrath when they see that the world they  created for themselves is shrinking.  It is even tempting some of them to pull down the temple at Stormont.  Lile the deeply shocked people everywhere the many decent souls among them deserve some sympathy at having to confront grossly abusive behaviour inside their own ranks even though it extends in one form or another through the Christian churches to the Magdalen laundries and the corridors of Muckamore hospital.

But translating shock into politics, the unfortunate instinct is to dig in and circle the wagons. It is such a delusion to believe that the historic implacability of unionism they indulge as existential principle that achieved partition a century ago works today. It finally ceased with direct rule in 1972. Everybody knew it in the hearts if not their voices.  With a demographic balance of even 60:40 single party rule failed in the most basic duty of government to keep basic law and order even before the guns came out. It lacked basic consent beyond the ranks of government supporters, the key requirement of any democratic government

Back in 1973 a year after the Fall, there was never the ghost of a chance that majority unionist government would be restored.  The funny thing is, most of them including Paisley knew it but they couldn’t find a new  position to stand on. You could almost see the struggle going on inside the minds  of Bill Craig and Glen Barr, UWC strike champions, who changed their tune too late.

Unionists could have won support over the Anglo Irish Agreement in 1985  which wrongly disenfranchised them, as the future Irish President Mary Robinson, a strong human rights supporter argued. But they chose to resign their seats and fight by elections, (losing one,) without political impact. (Pay attention Nigel Farage).

The confidence and supply deal  to keep Theresa May in power for a while may have seemed a big deal but it ended up with a hard line  Brexit and a fig leaf  for Assembly consent they despise in the Windsor Framework.

The fact is, basic political nous may never have deserted Donaldson.  It is a far, far  more likely  explanation than blackmail for  him overegging the Framework to get MLA s off their boycott hook. The most uncharitable explanation is that the concealment and deviousness of his appalling private life applied to his politics. And that of course will  provide the perfect excuse for his implacable  critics to discredit  his-  in my view  obviously correct-  judgement to return to the Assembly, which for unionists especially, is the only show in town.

Unionists believe they have a point when they  say the  Union is being gradually undermined. They’re  fed up being given little lectures on civics.  They resented being criticised when Arlene Foster had enough power  to force a U turn on Theresa May when she was actually  in  Brussels  to make the deal.  The border in the Irish Sea happened anyway after May departed . However it was glossed,  it weakened the concept of an integrated  Union. And it happened without the consent of all Northern Ireland voters  as happeneed  with  Anglo Irish Agreement of 1985. But it was also part of the bigger story of Brexit. It wasn’t designed specifically to do the dirty on unionists.

Unionists should try to remember that consent is the big essential and always has been. It depends neither on Great Britain nor the  Republic. The NI Union is politically  different because  its MPs not being members of the main UK party structures cannot affect the balance of power inside them and the influence that goes with it.

The terms for the Union are at least transparent. They are enshrined in GFA structures. I  commend the British -Irish, North-South and NI internal power sharing  structures  for expressing  the natural relationships of the people of these islands. All unionists have to do is to work them and make the Union as attractive as nationalists are making Unity attractive. In that enterprise the status quo has a head start. The two can even be reconciled in attractiveness for everybody – the best of both worlds   Instead perhaps, stand by  a new conspiracy theory  in which Lou Haigh, Colum Eastwood’s partner is working on new plan for Irish Unity when she is given an influential role in Andy Burham’s cabinet. There is  not the slightest evidence of it. But we may expect the likes of Jim Allister to keep sniffing outside her door.

Meanwhile….an intriguing field of exploration so far surprisingly neglected is the impact of the Hillsborough Law finally not exempting MI5 and MI6 from the duty of candour for all public bodies, although with “safeguards for national security” still be closely examined.

The Law’s (at least moral) relevance to the Kenova report on Stakeknife, the Chinook helicopter crash and a whole range of legacy cases is obvious.