‘This war took my entire life from me': Thousands attend pro-Palestine march in Dublin
Central Bank of Ireland
to 'stop funding genocide' through the facilitation of the sale of Israeli bonds.
Social Democrats
TD
Gary Gannon
told protesters he would be
taking a legal case
against the Central Bank over the issue and would lodge papers next week.
The Dublin Central TD has
previously written to the bank's governor
, Gabriel Makhlouf, claiming that investors in Israeli bonds approved by the Irish Central Bank risk being legally complicit in genocide in
Gaza
.
The bank is the designated authority in relation to the sale of Israeli bonds in the EU, and has determined the securities meet the standards of the bloc's prospectus regulations.
READ MORE
Protesters leading the demonstration carried a giant sphere in the style of the logo of Ireland's Central Bank with the words 'stop funding genocide' painted on it.
Photograph: Ella Sloane
Saturday marked the sixteenth national demonstration of its kind since October 2023, with organisers estimating more than 70,000 in attendance.
Protesters draped in Palestinian flags and keffiyehs arrived in droves at the Garden of Remembrance before marching to Leinster House.
The demonstration was organised by the
Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign
(IPSC) and was backed by more than 170 organisations, according to the IPSC.
The group called for the Government to enact sanctions against Israel and to fully enact the
Occupied Territories Bill.
The Government has committed to implementing the Bill, which would ban trade in goods with the occupied Palestinian territories, and it is due before the Dáil in autumn. Protesters on Saturday called on the Government to include a ban on trade in services in the Bill.
Photograph: Ella Sloane
They also called for the cessation of use of Irish airspace for transporting weapons.
Traffic was brought to a standstill as the march travelled down O'Connell Street, through College Green and up Dawson Street.
At a rally outside the Dáil, which filled the length of Molesworth Street, Marah Nijim, a 23-year-old student from Gaza told how her brother had recently been hospitalised due to starvation.
'It's kind of heavy for me to talk now because I just got the news that my brother is in hospital because of a lack of food and because of the starvation,' she said.
'I'm here to speak about my home, the one that I was forced to leave without any clothes, without anything but what I was wearing.'
'This war took away from me my entire life,' she told the crowds who had gathered outside Leinster House.
Mr Gannon told the crowd about his legal case against the Central Bank of Ireland.
He said he would keep his speech brief because 'politicians have done too much talking and we haven't done enough in terms of acting, legislating and sanction'.
'The case is moral. A genocide is happening. We are obligated to prevent it. So I will take it as far as it needs to go. We are lodging papers on Tuesday,' he said.
IPSC chairperson Zoe Lawlor described it as 'shameful' that the Government 'lets the US military use Shannon Airport' to transport Israeli weapons.
'Israel does not commit this genocide alone. It does so with the weapons, the money and the political cover it gets from the US and the EU,' she told the crowd. .
Ms Lawlor condemned the Government, saying 'their actions do not match their words'.
She spoke about the
refusal of visas for 33 young GAA players
from Palestine who had planned to tour Ireland.
'They have delayed the visas of the Lajee dancers and football team. They are blocking the students in Gaza who already have been accepted to Irish universities,' she said.
During a break in the speeches, Galway singer Declan O'Rourke performed World on Fire, which he dedicated to 'the people of Palestine'.
Other speakers at the rally included: Mohamed Migdad, an economics lecturer from Gaza; Dunnes Stores striker Mary Manning; Bernard Joyce, director of the Irish Traveller Movement; and Conor O'Neill of the Pass the Occupied Territories Bill Campaign.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 minutes ago
- Irish Times
We need to face up to the fact that not all middle-earners are squeezed
While we have all been focusing endlessly on the latest Truth Social post from Donald Trump, the Coalition has been having backroom rows about its budget plans . Serious ones. A key document which sets the framework for the budget – the Summer Economic Statement – will be published next Tuesday. And alongside it will be the Government 's updated investment spending plans in the revised National Development Plan (NDP) . The game, in other words, is on. When you see the Independents who support the Government being filmed for the RTÉ News going to talk to senior ministers, you realise there is some good news coming and kudos to be sought for a new road or rail upgrade. But there will be tough calls, too. And it is no exaggeration to say that Tuesday will be a key moment for the Government as it signals a change of budgetary direction. The Coalition is going to go all in on State investment – energy, water and housing in particular. The catch is that to afford this, it is going to have to keep much tighter control on day-to-day spending and also end the once-off giveaways which have been a feature of the last few budgets. It will sell the message of restraint now allowing for investment for the future. Bread tomorrow is never an easy strategy to sell to voters – but that is what the Coalition is going to try to do. There will still be some extra cash in the budget for State services and welfare and – probably – a modest tax package. Talk of a 'tough budget' is nonsense – look at France where spending cuts, tax hikes and cutting two bank holidays were put on the table this week. But Irish voters have become accustomed to their budget day goodies – and there is going to be one heck of a political row when the penny drops that they are not going to feature this October. READ MORE Given the risks ahead and the State's reliance on tax payments from a few multinationals, the brakes do need to be put on. Spending has soared and Departmental targets set in the budget are regularly exceeded. Central Bank researchers estimated in June that permanent Government spending has risen by a hefty 37 per cent since 2021. Had the 'rule' to limit State spending growth to 5 per cent been adhered to, the increase would have been 16 per cent. There has simply been little culture of spending control and reinstating it is not going to be easy at a time when demands on public services are growing. Meanwhile, 'once-off payments' – repeated so often now that the term is an offence to the English language – have a serious budget price, costing more than €2 billion in the last package, which was a reduction on earlier years. The most expensive elements have been the universal payments to all households in areas like energy credits in the annual cost-of-living packages. Budget ministers Paschal Donohoe and Jack Chambers have been saying there will be no cost-of-living package this year ; for now, at least, it seems that the rest of the Cabinet are signed up to this. Ministers will spot the political dangers. Households have started to get used to the annual boost and will feel a bit less well-off. The Opposition will scream. But continuing to throw out the universal once-off payments would be a poor use of money, benefiting many for whom the cash is nice, but not necessary. Better to use what funds are available to build up permanent supports and improved services, focused on those who need them. The cost of living is high , for sure, but it is a farce to portray all households as 'hard-pressed', or everyone in the middle ground as 'squeezed'. Effective policy should help those who genuinely are – like many younger families – through better services in areas like childcare and health, rather than repeating the annual cash giveaways. [ Government 'feckless' with public money, Social Democrats claim in budget row Opens in new window ] Meanwhile, with the sums tightening considerably , the Coalition's 'solemn promise' – as Simon Harris put it – to cut the hospitality VAT rate back to 9 per cent is looking like a 'repent at leisure' moment. Even if this is restricted just to food businesses, it will cost €550 million a year. When other demands are being turned down and 'restraint' is the message , this is not going to be an easy sell for the Coalition. The all-in bet on State investment is driven by a view in Cabinet that housing, water and energy provision have all reached a crisis point – an argument being hammered home to them by big investors. Tariffs and Trump are the most discussed threat to future investment – and do indeed pose fundamental questions. But if Ireland does not put forward a plan to develop infrastructure, then investment is going to drift away, whatever happens in the White House. [ Focus in Budget 2026 has to be on transforming infrastructure, Martin says Opens in new window ] This will be mightily expensive. As well as controlling spending elsewhere, the Government will have to run down its annual budget surplus – and there are some risks here. However, it is still legally obliged – barring a downturn – to keep putting cash away in two funds designed to support future spending and investment. As well as finding the cash, the Coalition has to show it can actually deliver big projects – and more housing – an area where the previous administration performed poorly. And it needs to heed the warnings from the Central Bank and the Fiscal Council that if the State keeps pumping out cash across the board, then it will just add fuel to an economy already at full capacity, making it even harder to deliver on the infrastructure programme. Having had a stumbling and slow start, the Government is about to roll the dice for the rest of its term. Its more serious players will know that threats from across the Atlantic could damage the favourable economic position and budget outlook, and might require mid-flight adjustments in these plans. There will be some reassurance that there is €30 billion in cash and liquid assets down the back of the State couch, but also a realisation that if the trends change fundamentally this only goes so far. But sitting and doing nothing does not look like a clever strategy. Investment is the right direction for the Government to take. It will all come down to delivery. And to a bit of luck that Trump's policies, while inevitably damaging, do not upend things completely.
RTÉ News
2 minutes ago
- RTÉ News
CAP battle starts as EU plans to overhaul farmer payments
The European Commission this week outlined long-anticipated proposals to radically overhaul the system of financial supports for the agricultural sector across the European Union. The top-line changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) would see ringfenced funding for farming cut by more than a fifth, with supports for agriculture merged with those for rural areas into a single fund. In brass tax, this would mean a fall in guaranteed CAP funding from €387 billion down to €300 billion over the course of the EU budget cycle from 2028. Around 120,000 Irish farmers receive roughly €2bn annually in CAP payments, and much of this money essentially makes a huge cohort of Irish farms viable. Given this, it was no surprise to see farming organisations here quickly coming out of the blocks to condemn the proposals. The Irish Farmers' Association (IFA) warned the move would put food security at risk, while the group representing dairy farmers, the ICMSA, said there would be immediate upward pressure on food prices. A number of Irish MEPs also came out against the plans, which the Commission argues would allow for "stronger synergies between policies", and create a more flexible, crisis-responsive budget. Now the horse-trading really gets going as member states, through the Council of Ministers, start the long process of agreeing on an approach to the proposals, before painstaking talks with the parliament in Brussels and the Commission begin. Ultimately, it could take over two years before any agreement is in place for the start of the next EU budgetary cycle in 2028. Ireland will likely play a key role in this process, as we will hold the rolling six-month EU presidency for the second half of next year. This means that what the EU Commission is proposing and what eventually ends up happening might well be very different. Based on what I've written so far, it might seem the changes suggested are largely negative, but are there any positives in there for farmers across the bloc? Well, from what the Commission has outlined, it wants to make a strong play to encourage more young farmers into the profession. And this is in response to one of the major issues threatening the future of family farms both here in Ireland and across the EU. The average age of a farmer in Ireland is pushing 60, and with high income volatility and increased regulation farming isn't seen as an attractive career path in the way it would have to previous generations. A recent Teagasc report showed farm incomes were up across the board last year, but it also highlighted severe differences in farmer earnings from one year to the next. Paired with that, the level of environmental regulations farmers have to adhere to, and biodiversity and other targets that need to be met is only rising. These are welcome moves to protect our environment but they come at a price, and add layers of complexity to the job. In an attempt to address the challenge of generational renewal, the Commission has recommended that CAP funding "should be focused on active farmers", meaning supports would be "targeted towards farmers who exercise agriculture as a principal activity". This would mean that farmers who are of pension age would no longer receive supports under CAP. In addition, the proposals would hugely increase supports for young farmers starting out, with funding for the costs of establishing a new farm potentially rising from €100,000 to €300,000. The changes would also give individual member states more autonomy when it comes to doling out funds to farmers and rural areas, and can steer money in one direction of the other based on what is deemed more necessary. This could bring a shift in the well-worn path of supports going directly to farmers in less-well-off regions, as opposed to the areas themselves getting the money. So farmers could still benefit from rural EU funding, just not directly. However, the Commission's proposals are just proposals at this stage and will need approval at various stages of the EU decision-making process if they are to become part of the EU budget. The Irish Government hasn't wasted any time in putting domestic structures in place to decide on the country's stance on all this. On Thursday, the day after the EU proposals, Minister for Agriculture Martin Heydon held the first meeting of what he calls the "CAP Consultation Committee". He called the Commission's CAP recommendations a "starting point", adding "we have been through considerable reforms before and we've managed to negotiate through them in the past and we'll do the same again". The minister's positive take might given some of the stakeholders at that CAP committee some reassurance. Ireland's response to this will be pretty much an all-inclusive one. The stakeholders gathered together by the minister include five Government departments, a host of State agencies, farmer organisations, business groups, as well as academics. IFA President Francie Gorman was giving his reaction to the Commission's CAP proposals on Wednesday's RTÉ Six-One News, in which he summed up the complexities associated with finding the right funding model for farmers. He welcomed the EU's renewed focus on bringing along more young farmers but pointed out: "If you want the next generation of farmers coming home, along with all the measures that we bring in to support young farmers, we still have to have viable farms for them to come into." Essentially, however well-intentioned it is, the idea of giving newer farmers more financial support at the expense of older ones could prove to be a misguided one if it kills off the very farms its trying to protect. Like most budget-related considerations, it will come down to finding a balance. And with the next EU budget not kicking in until 2028, at least there is sufficient time to try and get this balance right. But there's no doubt that between now and 2028, many battles will be fought as competing interests vie for pieces of a potentially smaller pie of EU funding.
Irish Times
32 minutes ago
- Irish Times
As abortions triple, when will we admit that reluctant repealers were profoundly wrong?
Strange, isn't it, how often this pattern repeats? We are assured in stentorian tones that not only is something never going to happen, but it is scaremongering and manipulative even to suggest that it will. Then we are told that it has happened, and furthermore, it is unequivocally a good thing. Before the repeal of the Eighth Amendment, we were assured that all that would happen was that a similar number to the 2,879 women who travelled to England and Wales in 2018 would no longer have to do so. Then-tánaiste Simon Coveney believed the argument, though he said 'removing the equal right to life of the unborn from our Constitution [was] not something I easily or immediately supported'. In an oped, he said any woman choosing abortion after a three-day waiting period and other safeguards 'is very likely to have travelled to the UK or accessed a pill online in the absence of such a system being available in Ireland'. He and other reluctant repealers were promised that numbers of abortions would not rise rapidly and inexorably. The latest abortion figures show 10,852 abortions in Ireland in 2024 . There were 54,062 live births in 2024 . For every five babies born alive, one was aborted. READ MORE Is there no number of abortions that would be unacceptable? If one in two pregnancies was ending in abortion, would that be too many? UK Department of Health figures show the number of women giving Irish addresses for abortions halved between 2001 and 2018, with a 5 per cent drop from 2017. Numbers were dropping before Repeal, in other words. Even allowing for the tiny number in 2018 of Irish-based women having abortions in the Netherlands and those using illegal abortion pills, the rise in numbers of abortions is shocking. Some 55,000 of them have taken place in Ireland since Repeal. The reality is that restrictions on abortion reduce abortion numbers. US advocacy group Secular Pro-life has a useful summary of the evidence. Many studies claiming restrictive abortion laws don't lower rates overlook socio-economic factors. Most countries with strict laws have low economic development, and poorer nations tend to have higher abortion rates. This important confounding factor is often ignored. As a relatively wealthy liberal democracy that banned abortion, our abortion rates were much lower. Abortion numbers can triple, and still Ireland refuses to acknowledge that the reluctant repealers were wrong, wrong, wrong. The Eighth was saving lives in the thousands. We collect statistics on where abortions happen in Ireland and under what part of the legislation, and virtually nothing else. We seem to have zero interest in the reasons why women have abortions – whether it is poverty, lack of support, or housing. Is that because we don't want to look too closely at anything that might undermine the idea that abortion is just another healthcare procedure? At some level, people know well that abortion is unlike any healthcare procedure. English singer Lily Allen recently sang a flippant parody of My Way about not knowing exactly how many abortions she had. It was probably five. Many pro-choice people were shocked. The comments on the BBC video of the podcast she hosts with Miquita Oliver, who has also had 'about five' abortions, showed the conflict people felt. Some pro-choice people felt that by saying the only justification needed for abortion is 'I don't want a f**king baby', she had handed ammunition to the anti-abortion advocates. [ Breda O'Brien: Ableist legislation shows lives of those with Down syndrome are less valuable Opens in new window ] Others disagreed, with comments such as: 'It's important to support any abortions for any reason. If you start putting restrictions on who can have them, how many they're allowed, and how they must act when they've had them ... well, you're not pro-choice.' I am not interested in dumping on Allen or Oliver. Allen has spoken about losing her virginity at 12, about a 19-year-old friend of her father's who bought her drinks and 'had sex with me' when she was 14, and about living through her teens to her 30s in a haze of drugs, alcohol and mental ill-health. (By the way, we have no idea how many women are coerced into abortion, even though domestic violence campaigners tell us it happens in Ireland, including one under 18-year-old who was locked in a room and forced to take abortion pills.) Allen and Oliver are not alone in joking about abortion. Irish comedian Katie Boyle has a comedy show about her experience of having an abortion aged 34 in the US, which caused the presenters of the Morning Show on Ireland AM to laugh. Nonetheless, most people still react with shock when abortion is treated as contraception – or a joke. It reminds me of debating in the past with people who were adamantly pro-choice, who visibly flinched when the number of babies with Down syndrome who are aborted was mentioned . Their humanitarian, pro-disability rights instincts conflicted with their other deeply held beliefs about the right to choose to end early human lives. The problem is that while bans and restrictions on abortion did decrease rates, those of us who consider ourselves pro-life depended on the legal ban while underestimating how the culture was changing. To keep abortion figures low in a well-off democracy, we needed to persuade people to build a woman-friendly society where pitting women's rights against the next generation's right to life became an unthinkable and completely outdated dilemma. The failure to do so really is no laughing matter.
