Nearly half of adults in Ireland say govt response to Palestine has been good, research shows
Over half (53 per cent) of males in Ireland think the response of the Irish government to the war in Palestine has been good, versus 40 per cent of females in Ireland.
Advertisement
60 per cent of respondents believe that Ireland should take a stronger public stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict.
This number is highest for adults aged 25-34, with 75 per cent thinking that Ireland should take a stronger public stance.
In terms of providing humanitarian support, 75 per cent of adults would like to see Ireland provide aid, 62 per cent feel they should provide diplomacy, and 38 per cent think they should provide refugee support.
83 per cent of adults aged 18-24 think Ireland should provide aid and 57 per cent think they should provide refugee support.
65 per cent of adults feel impacted by the ongoing war in Gaza and the West Bank, with 25 per cent of these feeling very impacted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
.png%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
Chris Blackhurst answers your questions on wealth tax – from millionaire exodus to Labour's silence
Calls to tax the super-rich are no longer confined to fringe rallies or left-wing think tanks – they're now firmly in the political mainstream. According to YouGov, two-thirds of the British public, including a majority of Conservative voters, support a wealth tax on individuals with more than £10 million in assets. It's not hard to see why: the country faces a funding crisis, services are under strain, and the public is being asked to swallow yet more fiscal pain. The question many are asking is simple: why shouldn't the very wealthiest shoulder more of the burden? But as I explained in The Independent 's latest Ask Me Anything, this isn't a straightforward issue. There are real risks: capital flight, investor nerves, and a government already struggling to convince the world that Britain is open for business. There are also deep flaws in our existing tax system, and a shocking lack of data on who actually holds wealth in this country. During the Q&A, I answered your questions on everything from Labour's silence and HMRC's blind spots to non-doms, offshore trusts and the fear that we'll end up punishing wealth creators rather than closing genuine loopholes. The answers may not please everyone, but this is a debate we need to have. Q: Isn't socialism the problem here? Margaret Thatcher once said that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money to spend. We are now well past that point. Since Blair was first elected, the political establishment has increased the overall tax burden to its highest ever level in history, and created an ever larger class of people living off welfare who do not want to do many of the jobs that need doing. The economy is now in chronic stagflation, the National Debt is escalating, and just like Stalin and the Kulaks, our political establishment is scapegoating the very people who are the wealth creators and major taxpayers. Mark A: It's hard not to agree with you. We built a welfare state and the NHS when our population was smaller. Now, they remain elephants in a crowded room that no politician dares touch. Their models are no longer suitable for their intended purpose. I'm not a fan of Thatcher, but she was right here, though I'd say Tory governments are also guilty of the same populism. Q: Wouldn't the wealthy just shield their money from a wealth tax? A wealth tax in the UK would likely trigger a wave of asset restructuring among the wealthy. Those who hadn't already done so would move quickly to shield their wealth. This could include shifting ownership of property, art, shares, and other taxable assets into foreign foundations, trusts, or offshore holding companies beyond HMRC's reach. EmiliaPortante A: I agree with your sentiment, but we should do far more to clamp down on tax avoidance and evasion. The UK turns a blind eye to offshore havens it's responsible for – the Isle of Man, Channel Islands, Cayman Islands, etc. There's a whole industry dedicated to avoiding, and sometimes evading, taxes. It makes a mockery of the government's claims to be collecting fairly. Q: Why complain about a 1 per cent tax rise if you're worth £500m? What the super-wealthy are doing is essentially making sure they have enough money to guarantee their children's and grandchildren's aggressively campaign against a 1 per cent tax rise when you have £500m in wealth or even £100m? You will live comfortably forever - the reason is they want their children to do the same. ChrisMatthews A: It's true the rich sit atop a mountain of wealth, but they can't be forced to distribute it — if we try, they'll leave. If we make them believe in the UK, they'll choose to spend, donate, and invest here. That may sound naive, but the alternative is worse. Q: Would you personally pay a wealth tax or leave the UK? CharlesMartel A: It's unlikely I'd qualify, but if I did, I'd stay – I love this country. But the concern isn't people like me. It's the globally mobile few that nations compete for. Other countries are falling over themselves to attract them. So should we. Q: What about the millionaires who want to be taxed more? Illearthstoner A: I'm all for millionaires paying more tax – if they want to. The trouble is, far more don't. Some are already abroad, deciding where to go next. And Britain slips down the list when they do. Q: How do you ensure redistribution if you're against a wealth tax? Illearthstoner A: We should aim to turn the trickle into something stronger – not a flood, but a solid flow. A previous Labour government said: 'We love the filthy rich, provided they pay the taxes they owe.' They recognised their worth and wanted more of them. Q: Which European countries still have a wealth tax? Do they work? CharlesMartel A: We should examine why so few countries have wealth taxes when, on paper, they're an easy win. Most democracies are similarly strapped for cash, but don't go there. Some, like Italy, are even offering incentives to attract the rich. Why? Q: Why doesn't HMRC know how many billionaires are in the UK? forum A: Yes, it's shocking HMRC knows so little. How can they apply serious analysis with such gaps? In the US, the IRS studies the Forbes rich list and works with its compilers. We have the Sunday Times Rich List, but HMRC pays it scant regard. That's an obvious place to start. Q: Who's going to value all the houses, the repositories of most people's wealth? GrymSdijk A: Property experts are predicting a crash, certainly in London, should there be a wealth tax. Values at the top end will fall, and that will cascade downwards. As to who will assess the worth of a property, should there be a mansion tax, say, those estimates are already made by councils for council tax Q: Is Labour's silence on wealth tax a sign they are considering it? BBenB A: Almost certainly, yes. If they weren't, they'd say so and end the speculation, which is already sending the wealthy abroad and discouraging investment. Their silence suggests they're weighing it carefully. Q: Why no action, despite the public's support? Jimmy A: Because they know it would damage business and wealth creation. The richest tend to be those who own businesses and invest. A wealth tax sends a negative message to potential investors about how Britain views them. Jase A: They can justify it because, while popular, it comes at a cost. It's a case of the head ruling the heart. Yes, taxing the rich sounds better than cutting services, but it's not that simple – the tax system could be made more efficient, something successive governments have failed to do.
The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
Germany closing small-boat loophole in new treaty with UK
& Elizabeth Piper Britain and Germany signed a wide-ranging friendship treaty, marking German chancellor Friedrich Merz 's first visit to London and aiming to deepen bilateral ties. The treaty builds on recent efforts to reset UK- EU relations, following French president Emmanuel Macron 's visit, and signals increased cooperation among Europe's leading powers. Key areas of cooperation include defence, with pledges for joint export campaigns of military equipment and a new German defence tech factory in Britain. The agreement also covers transport, including a new direct rail link, and joint efforts to combat irregular migration, with Germany committing to outlaw facilitation of illegal crossings. Germany pledged to outlaw the facilitation of illegal migration to Britain, with a law change that would give law enforcement the ability to investigate warehouses where small boats are stored.
Reuters
16 minutes ago
- Reuters
Ukraine appoints new prime minister in biggest wartime overhaul
KYIV, July 17 (Reuters) - Ukraine's parliament appointed the country's first new prime minister in five years on Thursday, part of a major cabinet overhaul aimed at revitalising wartime management as prospects for peace with Russia grow dim. Yulia Svyrydenko, 39, has been tasked by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy with boosting domestic weapons production and reviving Ukraine's loan-dependent economy. In a speech to parliament, Zelenskiy said he expected his new government to increase the share of domestic weapons on Ukraine's battlefield to 50% from 40% within six months. He also singled out deregulation and expanding economic co-operation with allies as other key aims of the biggest government reshuffle since Russia's February 2022 invasion. Svyrydenko, an experienced technocrat who had served as first deputy prime minister since 2021, pledged to move "swiftly and decisively". "War leaves no room for delay," she wrote on X. "Our priorities for the first six months are clear: reliable supply for the army, expansion of domestic weapons production, and boosting the technological strength of our defense forces." Svyrydenko is also well known to the Trump administration, having negotiated a deal giving the U.S. preferential access to Ukraine's mineral wealth. It was considered crucial to bolstering relations between Kyiv and Washington. Addressing lawmakers on Thursday, Zelenskiy said further deals with the U.S. would be forthcoming but did not offer any specific details. Parliament is also expected to appoint the outgoing prime minister, Denys Shmyhal, as defence minister after his nomination by Zelenskiy earlier this week. Svyrydenko takes over the government as Russian forces press a grinding offensive across the sprawling, more than 1,000-km (621 mile) front line and intensify air strikes on Ukrainian cities. Ukraine is betting on a budding defence industry, fuelled in part by foreign investment, to fend off Russia's bigger and better-armed war machine. With state revenues going to defence, Kyiv will also need to find money to finance its ballooning budget deficit as foreign aid diminishes. Officials have said they could face a shortfall of about $19 billion next year. Svyrydenko said her government would launch a full audit of public finances to achieve "real savings", as well as accelerate large-scale privatisations and help entrepreneurs. She received 262 votes, a comfortable majority in the 450-seat parliament, according to several lawmakers reporting from inside the chamber. Ukraine's parliament does not broadcast its sessions in wartime. The ministries of the economy, justice, energy and European integration will also receive new leaders. However, few are political outsiders. Some opposition lawmakers voiced scepticism about the new government's ability to remain independent of Zelenskiy's administration, which wields significant wartime powers under Ukraine's constitution. "They will be told by the president's office what they should really do," wrote Yaroslav Zheleznyak of the Holos party.
