Dublin's largest illegal landfill dump is cleared
The Israeli military said that it fired near a diplomatic delegation which had "deviated" from an approved route in the occupied West Bank. Video: Reuters
Israeli attacks on Jabalia overnight have resulted in multiple fatalities and numerous injuries, mainly to children, according to reports.
Caoimhe Ní Ghormáin, an expert in medieval Irish manuscripts, and John Gillis, who led the conservation, talk about the Book of Leinster. Video: Ronan McGreevy
Gordon Manning speaks to members of the Dublin Senior Camogie squad ahead of this week's Camogie Association vote on the wearing of shorts. Video: Bryan O'Brien
Conor Gallagher reports on Pravfond, set up by Putin, that intelligence agencies say does more than its stated goal of protecting the rights of Russians abroad
14-year-old Cara Darmody started a 50-hour disability rights protest outside Leinster House to highlight delays in children getting an assessment of needs.
CCTV footage of a tractor being driven by 16 year old completely crushing a car in Graiguenamanagh.
Amateur video footage captures the moment a sailing tallship crashed into New York's Brooklyn Bridge on Saturday, killing two people and injuring 17 others.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Donohoe delayed approving sale of State's final shares in AIB
Minister for Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe asked for a three-week postponement on the final sale of the State's stake in AIB so he could consult government about the bank's exit from 'crisis relationships'. Senior officials had sought permission to carry out a 'clean-up share disposal' on May 23rd to finally end state ownership in the bank after the financial crash. However, the Minister looked for extra time as officials said the sale would 'inevitably refocus the discussion around the topic of remuneration' and the salary cap for bankers. In a note on the submission, Mr Donohoe wrote: 'I am absolutely committed to the return of AIB to private ownership. However, I want to exit from crisis relationships with [the] bank at same time. READ MORE 'I will need to engage with government on this and will not have this complete by end of this week. Ask department to consider execution of same plan but in second half of June.' [ How AIB went from boom to bust and back again Opens in new window ] In mid-June, officials submitted a second submission on the sale saying it would 'trigger an opportunity re: salary cap.' It said the State was looking to offload nearly 44 million shares and hoped to bring in around €310 million through the sale. The submission said: 'The implication of this trade is that it will trigger an expectation to begin unwinding the crisis-era remuneration restrictions that remain in place (in particular the removal of the salary cap).' Officials wrote that AIB was one of the best performing banks in Europe and that strong momentum had continued since the last time the State sold some of its shareholding. It said the final sale would represent a 'natural point' to normalise the relationship between AIB and the State. The submission also cautioned that if pay restrictions from AIB were removed, it should also apply to PTSB . 'Absent of that happening, it would put PTSB at a severe disadvantage,' said the document. 'Such a scenario is not in taxpayers' interests.' In a note, Mr Donohoe wrote: 'I agreed to this process via phone yesterday. This is to indicate that approval was given and to conclude official documentation.' A separate presentation on the State's post-crash investment in banks said the taxpayer had invested €29.4 billion in AIB, Bank of Ireland, and PTSB. From that, around €28.7 billion had been recovered although this was over an extended period of a decade and a half. The presentation said as well as implications for the salary cap, other restrictions on how AIB operates would change. One slide said: 'These restrictions include monthly meetings with senior management, access to board papers, [and] various reporting/consent/consultation requirements. 'Since the State's exit from BOI ( Bank of Ireland ), that bank is no longer subject to these conditions. We recommend putting AIB on an equal footing with BOI in this context.' On pay caps, another slide said all restrictions were eliminated for Bank of Ireland apart from bonus payments exceeding €20,000 per year. 'While restrictions around variable pay up to €20,000 and fringe benefits were also removed for AIB and PTSB, both banks continue to abide by the total compensation cap of €500,000 per annum that is currently in place,' it said. This additional restriction relative to Bank of Ireland was 'anti-competitive and unsustainable'.
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Couple fails to stop demolition of Co Meath home built in ‘wilful' breach of planning laws almost 20 years ago
A couple have lost a last ditch legal bid at preventing the demolition of their large Co Meath home built in 'wilful breach' of planning laws almost 20 years ago. There was 'no merit' to the appeals by Chris Murray and his wife Rose, Mr Justice Senan Allen said, when giving the three judge Court of Appeal 's judgment dismissing them. The appeals concerned an action that, while initiated in September 2022, was 'the latest battle' in a 20-year war about the fate of the unauthorised development at Faughan Hill, Bohermeen, Navan . It was, he believed, obvious to Meath County Council from the outset that the action and appeal were 'artifices calculated to postpone the evil day'. READ MORE After Mr Murray's 2006 application for permission to build a house on the lands was refused, the couple, 'undaunted, and in wilful breach of the planning laws', built a house anyway of about 588 sq m (6,220 sq ft), twice the size of the house for which permission was refused, the judge said. The council took proceedings in 2007 under the Planning Act and in 2017 the Supreme Court upheld High Court orders for the couple to remove any unauthorised development from their land. They were given one year to vacate the property. When that was not complied with, the council issued contempt proceedings in 2019 that settled in 2020 on terms involving the Murrays agreeing to vacate the property within two years to facilitate the council demolishing it. The council issued contempt proceedings in 2019 that settled in 2020 on terms involving the Murrays agreeing to vacate the property within two years to facilitate the council demolishing it Three days before they were to vacate, the Murrays issued a case against the council, claiming there was new evidence relating to land sterilisation agreements made by the previous owners of the land that invalidated the council's planning refusals. Last year the High Court granted a council application to strike out that case as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. In the Court of Appeal judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Allen said the couple built a 6,220 sq ft house without planning permission, 'well knew' they would need permission 'but hoped they would get away with it'. The Murrays claimed, as a result of actions, inactions and misrepresentations by the council, they had acquired a 'pig in a poke' title to the lands, he said. While a planning condition for a nearby residence stated an agreement sterilising (preventing) the lands from any other housing or non-agricultural development should be entered into – and the council relied on that in refusing permission to the Murrays – it was accepted no sterilisation agreement was ever entered. There was 'no justification' for contending the council misrepresented the case to the court, he said. The Murrays had not appealed the original permission refusal to An Bord Pleanála or sought to judicially review it, he said. They had had 'every opportunity' to make whatever case they thought they had; the courts had considered all they had to say but the Supreme Court had, in 2017, decided the house 'had to come down'. While they argued in this appeal that adequate account was not taken of their new evidence, there was no appeal against the High Court conclusion it would not have affected the original outcome. At the heart of their opposition to the council's enforcement procedures was a grievance with the refusal of their original planning application but, as a matter of law, that grievance was 'not justiciable'. Any infirmity in the original refusal could not conceivably have provided any justification for unauthorised construction of a house, still less one twice the size, he said. It was 'perverse' that the Murrays, having 'driven a coach and four' through the planning Act, were complaining the council failed 'to strictly comply with the prescribed procedures'. A 'so-called constitutional challenge' concerning the council's use of section 160 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in its proceedings was unrelated to the new evidence, he said. The couple's fresh permission retention applications were not relevant to whether their proceedings raised a fair issue to be tried, he held. The couple had not identified any error in the decision under appeal, the court concluded.
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
Lobby other EU countries to allow Irish Central Bank to drop Israeli war bonds, TDs recommend
An Oireachtas committee has recommended the Government lobby other EU states to change rules that stop the Irish Central Bank from refusing to act as a competent authority in Europe for Israeli war bonds. Third-country issuers, such as Israel, can choose any EU state as their home member state and competent authority. That authority reviews its bond prospectus and, in this case, authorises Israel to sell bonds in the EU market. Before 2021, the UK was the EU home member state under the regulation for the state of Israel. Ireland was chosen as the new home member state following the UK's departure from the EU after Brexit in 2016. Politicians from all parties have expressed concern that Ireland is the competent authority that gives authority to Israel to sell bonds in the EU market, including what Israel markets as 'war bonds'. However, the committee has been told by the Central Bank that it is powerless to refuse to act as the competent authority under current rules. The rules and criteria that determine approval of the prospectus do not cover Israel's continuing military activities in Gaza , but rather include risk rules based on financial and fiscal criteria. The governor of the Central Bank, Gabriel Makhlouf, told the Oireachtas Committee on Finance in June that Ireland had no power to unilaterally remove itself from being the competent authority. Any decision to change that situation, he said, would be made by the third country, in this case Israel, and by that third country alone. The committee, chaired by Sinn Féin TD Mairéad Farrell , published a report on Tuesday, the main recommendation of which was that the Government engage at EU level with a 'view to amending the EU Prospectus regulations to permit each individual European Central Bank to refuse to act as a Competent Authority'. It has also recommended that the Central Bank conduct an immediate internal review in advance of any renewal in September of the Israeli bond prospectus. It said that review should determine whether it is in compliance with the levels of disclosure, accuracy and transparency required by the EU Prospectus. At the meeting in June, committee members expressed concern that the continuing destruction and deaths in Gaza were not being taken into consideration in determining the right of Israel to sell bonds, which several committee members pointed out were being openly marketed as 'war bonds'. The report states: 'In response to questions around whether enhanced scrutiny is applied to sovereign bond issuers involved in armed conflict or under international investigation, representatives of the Central Bank told the Committee that a judgement is made as to whether a prospectus is particularly complex and if there are issues that are challenging to articulate. 'Ultimately, however, the judgement rests on whether the disclosure is appropriate to the financial risk.' At the meeting, members expressed concern with regard to both the exposure of the EU financially to Israel and the current situation in Israel. 'Members further described the prospectus regulatory regime as 'narrow and arguably amoral ... Jesuitical in the way that it is interpreted and applied, which is mindful of only its basic, legalistic obligations in satisfying the regulatory framework in place', the report stated. Amid cross-party opposition to the Central Bank continuing in that role, the committee has also recommended that any future review of its role as the competent authority by the regulator should take into account the nature of the case taken by South Africa against Israel under the Genocide Convention and the interim findings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in that regard. It also said the illegal situation created by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territories should also be taken into account.
