Irish only or it burns’: How far right is targeting Dublin’s council houses

Conor Lally, Security and Crime Correspondent, Irish Times, May 30th, 2026

The far right is hijacking anger on working-class Dublin estates over shortage of council houses by vandalising vacant homes

The messages spray-painted across two boarded-up council houses in Finglas, north Dublin, leave no room for ambiguity: “Irish only or it burns” and “Muslims will be shot”.

In other Dublin suburbs – Coolock, Ballymun and Ballyfermot – similar graffiti is daubed on houses: “Irish familys [sic] first” and “house our own”.

This is the new frontline of hate crime in the Republic.

Anti-immigrant agitators are moving in marginalised communities to exploit rumours that vacant local authority houses have been allocated to families from ethnic minority backgrounds.

They attack houses, usually smash windows and paint racist and xenophobic graffiti, vandalising in the name of “Irish only” motives.

Some properties visited by The Irish Times had been extensively renovated, often at great cost, before the vandals struck. Many houses have been so badly damaged the council has boarded them up and they have been left vacant for months.

This issue has become worse since offers for accommodation centres run by the International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS) have been paused and arson attacks against these centres have declined, leading agitators to redirect their protests to local authority houses believed to be earmarked for ethnic minority families.

Dublin City Council started collecting data late last year on the number of vacant properties vandalised in suspected racist attacks as the trend became more pronounced. It is the first Irish council to compile such information.

Some 24 attacks have been recorded. The incidents appear in working-class suburbs where, in recent times, territory has been marked out by Tricolour flags, which also festoon some of the damaged houses.

Garda sources say council workers now often fear going into certain areas to perform routine tasks and, in the absence of a Garda escort, council workers or contractors are at times reluctant to repair the houses for fear of reprisals.

Deep frustration

Gavin Pepper, the Dublin councillor who represents the Ballymun-Finglas local electoral area, says the houses are being targeted at a time of deep frustration about how local authority properties are allocated and intense competition for homes amid the housing crisis.

At times labelled far right, Pepper insists he is not anti-immigration but is “anti-illegal immigration”.

He says he has close Nigerian friends who are neighbours in Finglas, coaches children from a local direct provision centre and has worked alongside Lithuanians who became friends when he was a plasterer.

Asked whether some of those behind the vandalism simply do not want ethnic minority neighbours, Pepper says he does not believe that is the case. He condemns the vandalism.

“When I see a house damaged or sprayed on, that is horrible to see. I don’t want to see that in my community. But I can understand why people are doing it,” he says.

The lack of transparency in house allocation, as he sees it, leads some to believe that ethnic minority families are “skipping” the housing waiting list, getting ahead of others waiting a decade or more.

“We have not got the supply to house people, to house our own people. So how can we house people from everywhere else? It’s just common sense,” says Pepper, a first-time councillor.

Though he condemns the attacks, he says he can see how anger could arise when residents see a local family, years on the housing list, missing out on a home to people with no roots locally who may be prioritised for council housing because they are classified as homeless.

“People are saying ‘well, she’s number three on the list, why is she still waiting?’ or ‘that [house] should go to a family like hers’. And they’ve every right to say that.”

In reply to queries, the Garda and Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan described the attacks as “hate crimes”.

O’Callaghan said he was “concerned” about the attacks, but welcomed that the council was now recording hate-based attacks on properties, saying it would aid the State’s response and Garda policing policies at local level.

Overcrowding

Rory Hearne, the Social Democrats TD for the Dublin North-West constituency where many incidents have occurred, says the attacks are “concerning”.

Hearne, his party’s housing spokesman, says in areas such as Finglas and Ballymun there is “massive overcrowding, people living with mould and damp” and communities feel abandoned.

There is clear evidence they are not getting the proper resources they need from Government, especially around housing, he says.

“This is the context in which people trying to foment an anti-immigration agenda can grow, and this is the problem,” he says.

“This is part of the far-right organising and it’s becoming a tactic to target these homes.”

Hearne expresses concern that the far right’s tactics might work: that houses might, in response, be allocated to white Irish families out of fear that ethnic minority families could be targeted in a property previously vandalised.

“Behind the organising of this is a white ethnonationalism that being Irish is white, but that’s not the case, it’s not the reality. We are an Ireland of different colours and backgrounds,” he says.

Gemma, a mother of four from north Dublin who didn’t want to give her real name, has been on the housing list 12 years. She met The Irish Times outside a house she hoped she would be allocated.

Her family still lives in the area and the property she longed for was recently renovated for new tenants. But then a rumour spread that a Romanian family had been allocated the property. It was soon vandalised and is now boarded up.

“It’s very frustrating, seeing other people getting a house before you,” she says, adding that her mother was born and raised nearby.

“Every single day I rang them ... eventually they told me to stop ringing the office,” she says of her repeated inquiries about the house.

She later heard the local rumour about a Romanian family viewing the property.

She believes people coming from abroad “are getting places handed to them left, right and centre”.

Gemma is living in private rented two-bed accommodation. One of her children, who has profound special needs, is in a bedroom on his own, with the rest of the family sleeping in the other room.

“I’m living in torture,” she says, adding the property is so damp and mouldy that her children have been repeatedly admitted to hospital, one dozens of times, with respiratory issues.

‘Disturbing’

Crosscare, which helps vulnerable people struggling to access accommodation, including migrants and IPAS residents, says the attacks on council properties are “very disturbing” for residents “and those hoping to join these communities”. Some of its recent clients have been affected.

“One family were waiting five years in homeless accommodation, were offered social housing only to have it daubed with graffiti, leaving them incredibly fearful. With a lot of support, they eventually moved in,” says Crosscare chief executive Conor Hickey.

To complicate matters, if families refuse the offer of a property, and another suitable house is not available, they could “fall down the housing list” and into years of homelessness because anyone who refuses two offers is removed from the list.

In another case, an ethnic minority family with four children, including two with special needs, were offered a property in Dublin 5. They were put under “significant pressure” to make a decision very quickly and were fearful of taking a house in the area.

“Before they moved in, anti-immigrant graffiti was sprayed on the front of this newly renovated home,” Hickey says.

“The local [council] office was quick to remove it. The family were even more fearful but took the house. They understood that it was a great house and they knew the repercussions of not taking this offer.”

Since then, their experience has been “very positive” and they say “their neighbours are very nice”. However, they regularly see “anti-immigrant posting on a local Facebook page and this is difficult for them”, he says.

Overall, Hickey says the attacks stem from “Ireland’s poor performance on housing and immigration” and many communities becoming “increasingly marginalised”.

“This has allowed a very small number of disenfranchised individuals, fuelled by misinformation and far-right propaganda, to take these types of criminal and racist actions,” he says.

The solution is for the Government to formulate “a fair and just immigration system” and “an urgent ramp-up” of local authority-built social and affordable housing, he says.

Dr James Carr, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Limerick, has been researching racism – much of it in the context of housing – against Muslims in Ireland for 16 years.

For his most recent study, with postdoctoral researcher Tiba Bonya, published last December, they spoke to 69 council workers and 193 members of the Muslim community in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway.

Carr found council staff trying to shield Muslim families from being housed where they would be more likely to face racist violence. While a prospective tenant would be invited to view a property, “there may be an intimation that they ‘might not fit in this area’”, his research found.

One council worker referenced deliberately housing “four or five Muslim families” in a scheme of 15 houses as it was near a mosque. Despite efforts to house them together, they were still targeted with “antisocial” behaviour.

Segregation

Carr’s research concludes that, however well-intentioned, these ad hoc efforts by council workers to protect ethnic minority tenants lead to segregation.

Some areas will be predominantly white Irish because the councils believe ethnic minorities cannot be housed there. And other areas will have an over-representation of ethnic minority tenants because the councils perceive them as safer.

“You have actors seeking to lay the blame for housing shortages ... at the feet of minority communities. And they are de facto directing who goes to live where,” he says.

A narrative around “who is getting what” has grown strong on social media, generated by a “small but very loud” Irish far right, feeding claims that foreign nationals are receiving significant help from the State that is not being extended to white Irish people, he says.

Even though unfounded, those tropes – which Carr described as “gutter politics, importing the Farage politics” – are so widely accepted in Ireland that, for some, targeting houses has “become legitimised”, he says.

This narrative is “also nudging the centre parties towards the right and then you’re in a downward spiral, lowest common-denominator stuff”, Carr says.

“And what we’re not doing is having a serious conversation about Government failures to deal with the housing crisis.”

It is no surprise to him that vandalism attacks on vacant local authority houses have taken place in areas where Tricolour flags have been set out to create “bordering” and convey a message about “who really belongs” there.

“That idea of who really belongs is a very narrow, reductive idea of Irishness as being white, and maybe being from that area as well,” says Carr.

“It’s an exclusionary use of the flag, it’s being used as a means to intimidate people.”

Some lessons on how not to promote our native tongue

Pat McArt, Irish  News, May 30th, 2026

PICTURE the scene…

It’s a beautiful day in August 1974 and I’m on one of my first jobs with the local paper, the Donegal News, sent off to Gweedore to gather what the editor told me were ‘local notes’ – literally births, marriages and deaths.

This really was journalism at the most basic level, but being a whipper-snapper, just in the door of the media, I thought it was on a par with a major assignment for the Washington Post.

Anyway, I got off the bus in Bunbeg, and this being an Irish-speaking area, the first person who came past me – a big, burly fisherman – uttered the words “Lá breá anois”.

After eight years at primary school and five years at secondary school learning Irish, including passing my Leaving Certificate, to my utter shame I offered the immortal response: “What?”

It would hardly have taken a genius to work it out… the sun was splitting the rocks, there wasn’t a cloud in the sky, and all he was saying was “lovely day”.

To digress a moment, on the way down on the Lough Swilly bus, a famed institution now sadly gone, myself and the photographer, Paddy Stevenson, were sitting behind a guy who kept sneezing every couple of minutes.

Eventually, he turned around to apologise, explaining “Tá touch of f*****g flu agam”, which I still to this day think is the most unique form of Donegal vernacular I have ever come across – English, Irish and a perfectly-placed swear word.

Just a couple of days ago an old friend sent me a YouTube video from RTÉ, made in 1970, entitled ‘Should Irish people speak the language?’ It was a real eye-opener. The first guy interviewed said: “If we do learn Irish, who else do we speak it to?”

The next one went on to say that if he emigrated to England, how would he get on if he could only speak Irish? He suggested if he could speak English, he could go around the world and get a job anywhere.

And then there was the young girl who thought Irish was useless, that the only benefit in being able to speak it was that you could get a government job or one in some semi-state body. She had a point. One story I recall was Terry Wogan telling of his time in RTÉ and working with a guy called Billy Murphy.

Wogan left and went to England to find fame and fortune, but one day whilst home on holidays, he turned on the telly and there was this guy fronting a programme… Billy Murphy had metamorphisised into Liam Ó Murchú.

The Irish language has survived despite, instead of thanks to, the state rules that aimed to preserve it

Wogan wryly suggested that the name change was a strategic move, and that it had done his career prospects no harm at all.

However, my favourite recall from the halcyon days of my youth was a story in the now defunct Evening Press, where it was revealed that a guy had got a job at the then Dublin County Council as a swimming pool supervisor.

It only became controversial when one of his disgruntled staff leaked it to a journalist that the guy couldn’t swim, but had got the top post because he could speak Irish.

Honestly, you couldn’t make that kind of stuff up.

Like most of the people quoted above, the resentment I felt against the language growing up, and how it was weaponised to advance the interests of a kind of cultural elite, or people who thought they were, was instrumental in building serious antagonism towards it.

A massive regret

“ I am in my vintage years now, and I would love to be able to speak Irish. It’s a massive regret I cannot speak our native tongue

The Irish government decreed that if you failed Irish in your Leaving Cert, you failed the entire examination, even if you got As in everything else.

And if you did your examination through Irish – that is, if you wrote your history, geography papers etc in Irish – you got double points.

This anomaly sometimes led to near morons getting into university whilst more intelligent English speakers were denied places.

So, let me quote just a couple of sentences from my friend about all this: “Honestly, when I think of it, how on earth did the language survive? I think the system did more damage than the Brits…”

I am in my vintage years now, the first flush of young long gone, and I would love to be able to speak Irish. It’s a massive regret I cannot speak our native tongue.

The aforementioned friend now says that every Saturday he’s back doing an Irish language class and that he loves it. Here’s what he told me: “I have watched with pride people with little or no Irish speak it now, certainly not fluently but definitely speaking it. It’s the most beautiful language in the world when you get into it.”

Padraig Pearse is the man who is said to have uttered the famous line “Tír gan teanga, tír gan anam” – a country without a language is a country without a soul – and while I’m not sure I buy that, what I do buy is that it’s lovely to see the growth in the number of Irish speakers now, people who are learning to love the language because of its rich heritage, its uniqueness, its cultural value, rather than having it rammed down their throats.

The one aim of my column today is an attempt to put in context how not to revive and promote the language in the years ahead.

Use honey, not vinegar.

‘Muslims not welcome’ sign appears at children’s play park in Co Tyrone

Connla Young, Irish News, May 30th, 2026

A “RACIST” display claiming ‘Muslims are not welcome’ has been put up at a children’s playpark in Co Ty- rone.

Police said they are treating the ffensive display in the loyalist vilage of Moygashel, near Dungannon, as a “hate incident”.

The large sign has been fixed to the fence of a play area owned by Mid Ulster District Council.

It includes an image of a group of white people and children playing in a bright and colourful play park.

A Union flag can be seen, along with what appears to be a British army veteran, with medals on his chest, standing beside a sign that reads “welcome to Moygashel play park”.

The image also includes several men, believed to represent Muslims, wearing headpieces and beards in a darkly coloured setting.

In front of them is a barrier and a stop sign, while a small white man can be seen holding up his hand in a ‘halt’ motion.

He is wearing a hi-Vis vest with the words ‘our community, our rules”.

The image also includes the words “not welcome, not wanted, not here”.

An accompanying message posted on a Moygashel Bonfire Association social media page reads: “Call us racist, call us ‘far right’. Your labels carry no weight here.

“Protecting our women and children is a fundamental duty that overrides any political label, insult or smear designed to silence honest concern.

“We will never apologise for putting our women and children’s lives and well-being ahead of your political correctness. “Our stance is non-negotiable.” Located near Dungannon, the village of Moygashel has become synonymous with race-hate signs and sectarian intolerance.

SDLP councillor Malachy Quinn described the latest signage as “one of the most disgraceful images I have seen displayed in a public space in Mid Ulster.

“It’s vile, racist and to put this kind of racist messaging on the fence of a children’s play park is absolutely shameful,” he said.

“The imagery and language used here is chilling — it is the sort of thing you would expect to see in 1930s Germany, not in Dungannon in 2026.

‘No community made stronger by hatred’

The SDLP councillor said the display should be removed.

“Our parks should be safe and welcoming spaces for every child and every family, regardless of their background, nationality, religion or skin colour,” he said.

“No community is made stronger by hatred, fear or scapegoating.

“This sign should be removed immediately, and those responsible should take a serious look at the message they are putting in front of children.”

PSNI Inspector Robert Jeffers said the matter is being treated by police as a hate incident.

“Enquiries are ongoing at this time, and we are engaging with local partners in relation to the banner,” he added.

Last year a shocking display placed on a loyalist ‘Eleventh Night’ bonfire mocked the plight of refugees and migrants.

It included a small boat with a number of dark-skinned mannequins dressed in lifejackets and hi-vis vests.

Other offensive signs have appeared in the village over recent years, including images glorifying the UVF and Killer Wesley Somerville.

The recent display appeared as Mid Ulster council launched Refugee Week 2026 in partnership with STEP, (South Tyrone Empowerment Programme), which aims to build a “rights-based” society that “embraces diversity and respects difference”.

Mid Ulster District Council was contacted.

Community group seeks judicial review over Belfast City Council funding cut

JOHN BRESLIN, Irish News, May 30th, 2026

“There was no attempt to take on board any of the queries that we raised, to reconsider the application or indeed to allow us to appeal this unjust decision” -Glen Parent/Youth Group co-ordinator Paul Niblock

A COMMUNITY group is seeking a judicial review over the decision by Belfast City Council to cut off funding after the merger of two previous funds into one.

The Glen Parent/Youth Group, which had previously received around £20,000 per year, runs various programmes and activities out of the Glen Community Complex in Lenadoon.

Its leaders were told its funding, which was used to cover expenses to allow disparate groups free use of facilities, was no longer available to it.

A detailed application outlining how the activities align with Belfast City Council’s stated outcomes was delivered, the group said.

“We have been successful in demonstrating in all our previous applications and detailed monitoring returns how we delivered,” said Glen co-ordinator Paul Niblock, adding the decision to deny “astounded and shocked” the team.

“We were met with the same response to virtually every question,” said Mr Niblock. The response was that community development was not the group’s primary objective, a view strongly disputed.

“There was no attempt to take on board any of the queries that we raised, to reconsider the application or indeed to allow us to appeal this unjust decision,” Mr Niblock said, This led to the decision to begin judicial review proceedings.

It is understood Glen Parent/ Youth do not have any issue with any other group given funding under this programme.

Sinn Fein

Meanwhile, a community group that employs a business associate of Sinn Féin’s leader in Belfast has been allocated £114,000 by the council.

St James’ Forum, also known as St James Community Forum and St James’s Forum in other documents, has been granted £38,000 a year by Belfast City Council for running the organisation.

Councillors voted on a proposal by Sinn Féin council leader Ciaran Beattie to allocate the £114,000, along with £30,000 to other unspecified similar projects across the city.

St James Community Forum, St James’ Forum or St James’s Forum are not registered with the Charity Commission or currently listed as operating by Companies House.

St James Community Forum does appear in business filings. It was incorporated in 2018 but dissolved a year later without filing any paperwork.

The group was also awarded £70,000 for alleyway regeneration in the mid Falls area, The Irish News reported on Monday.

Mark Skillen, a community development officer with ‘St James’s Forum’, wrote a letter to the council requesting the alleyway funding.

Mr Beattie is a business associate of Mr Skillen after they took over a bar on the Glen Road previously owned by a company that went into liquidation.

A new company, Gleann Na Habhann, was formed in late 2024 to take over the Glenowen Bar and Kitchen following the collapse of L&D Inns.

Mr Beattie listed himself as non-executive director of the Glenowen in the council register of interests.

He resigned as a director of the registered company earlier this year but continues to be a shareholder with significant control, according to company records.

At the time of the formation, the other directors were Mr Skillen and Peter Lynch, now the chief executive of the West Belfast Partnership Board and recently appointed to the board of Invest NI.

Mr Lynch was previously an employee of Blackie River Community Groups. He resigned as director and terminated his position of significant control in May last year.

Mr Beattie is the chief executive of Blackie River Community Groups. He has previously said that St James Community Forum and its community development officer, Mr Skillen, use the Blackie River centre in Beechmount for some administrative tasks.

The £114,000 award is part of a £5.4m large grant scheme, an amalgam of two previous ones, designed to provide financial help for the day to day running costs of community organisations.

Blackie River was allocated £60,000 a year under the large grant programme.

Groups applying for funding had to submit details on their current board, trustees and officers along with annual accounts. Information sessions were held last September.

“We encouraged all applicants to attend these sessions, even if they had received community funding from us on previous occasions, as it was a new process,” a council spokesperson said.

“Ultimately it was for organisations to ensure that they met the essential criteria and provide the relevant supporting criteria as part of their application.”

Mr Beattie and Mr Skillen were contacted for comment.

West Belfast's Féile handed 13% funding boost for this year's festival

CLAUDIA SAVAGE, Belfast Telegraph, May 30th, 2026

The Féile an Phobail festival in west Belfast is to receive a 13% funding boost.

Tourism Northern Ireland will support the uplift to the 2026 event, which runs from July 24 to August 9 and will feature more than 600 events including concerts, debates, art exhibitions, sports activities and comedy nights.

This year the festival will cross over with the Fleadh, an Irish traditional music festival set to be held in Belfast for the first time, which is expected to attract 800,000 visitors.

The Féile is one of 16 events which have been offered funding under the International Tourism Events Fund 2026-27.

Siobhan McGuigan, head of events at Tourism Northern Ireland, said the Féile is “part of an impressive programme of festivals and events taking place this summer”. “The festival continues to evolve in scale and ambition, playing an important role in showcasing Belfast and Northern Ireland as a vibrant and varied cultural destination which attracts international visitors,” she said.

Economy Minister Caoimhe Archibald described Féile as “a key driver of tourism and economic activity”. “It offers visitors an authentic experience of our music, arts, and community spirit, while also encouraging them to explore everything our region has to offer,” she said.

“With thousands of visitors expected to come to the city, the exciting Féile programme will encourage visitors to extend their stay and explore more and will build the excitement for us hosting the Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann.”

Ms Archibald added: “Many of those attending the August Féile and Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann are expected to explore beyond Belfast, enjoying our stunning landscapes, rich heritage, renowned food and drink, high-quality accommodation, and visitor attractions.”

Kevin Gamble, director of Féile an Phobail, said the investment will help the festival “continue to grow as one of Ireland's leading community arts and cultural festivals, attracting even more visitors from across Ireland, Britain and further afield to Belfast and the Gaeltacht Quarter”.

He added: “Each year Féile offers a fantastic and diverse programme of events — from world-class music and entertainment, debates and discussions, traditional sessions, family activities and cultural experiences — showcasing the very best of Belfast's creativity, culture and community spirit.”

Parades Commission allows Palestinian march through Scarva

Conor Coyle, Irish News, May 30th, 2026

THE Parades Commission has approved a Palestine solidarity march to go through the village of Scarva next week, despite concern from some local residents and unionist politicians.

The commission has attached a number of conditions to both the Great March for Gaza organised by the Lurgan branch of the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and a counter-protest organised by a group known as Scarva Concerned Residents.

Both the march and the counter-protest will take place next Saturday, 6 June.

DUP MLAs and councillors had met with the Parades Commission earlier this week to express opposition to the Gaza march, where four people were arrested in Scarva last year as trouble flared following an unnotified counter-protest.

In its determination published on Friday, the Parades Commission said the Gaza march must remain entirely on the towpath of the Newry Canal on its way between Lurgan and Omeath as scheduled, and not to enter the village of Scarva.

It added that “no persons shall join the parade as it passes along the part of the notified route along the Newry Canal Towpath at Scarva”.

Another condition imposed on the march states: “While the parade passes along the part of the notified route along the Newry Canal Towpath at Scarva, no flags or emblems of any type shall be displayed and no chanting or signing shall take place.”

The commission also determined that participants shall not engage in any behaviour or display any items which could “reasonably be perceived as being provocative, threatening, insulting or abusive to any per-son or group”.

Conditions on Scarva residents

A number of conditions were also imposed on the counter-protest to be held by the Scarva Concerned Residents.

The determination noted: “All participants of this parade-related protest must behave with due regard for the rights, traditions and feelings of others in the vicinity; refrain from using words or behaviour which could reasonably be perceived as intentionally sectarian, provocative, threatening, abusive, insulting or lewd; obey the lawful directions of protest organisers and stewards at all times, from assembly to dispersal; abide by the conditions of the Code of Conduct; and comply with police directions and in accordance with legislation.”

The group says it is protesting against the Gaza march “to highlight concerns relating to community relations, perceived provocation, and the potential impact on local residents, while asserting the right of the local community to engage in peaceful protest.”

Opponents of the Palestine march have referred to it as a ‘Republican’ rally, which has been denied by the Lurgan IPSC.

A joint statement from a number of DUP representatives accused the Parades Commission of “bottling” the decision and claimed residents have been ignored.

“Once again the Parades Commission has completely bottled a decision and refused to listen to the legitimate concerns of residents living along this route,” the statement said.

“It is astonishing that after the disruption, tensions and disorder witnessed last year, so few lessons appear to have been learned.”

IPSC Newry joint-chair Marc Mac Seáin, one of the organisers of the Great March for Gaza, said: “Despite sickening attempts to sectarianise our solidarity march, we’ll continue undeterred. Those of all backgrounds are welcome and solidarity against genocide.

“We would urge any counter-protesters to consider what they are opposing with our march, and by effect what cause they are supporting in opposition to us,” Mr Mac Seáin said.

Daphne Hamilton-Fairley helped many after her husband was killed in Troubles

Gail Walker, Belfast Telegraph, May 30th, 2026

Once in a while you chance upon a news item that exposes how insular we can be when it comes to Troubles victims and how casual we can be about the grace others grievously impacted by our sectarian conflict have shown us.

Daphne Hamilton-Fairley died a fortnight ago. Her name won't register with many here. Her death didn't make local headlines or prompt a few words from our politicians.

Yet this place certainly left its grim mark on Daphne.

In October 1975, her husband, Gordon, went out to walk their dog near their home in Kensington, London. He never came back. He was killed by an IRA bomb seemingly intended for a neighbour, the MP Hugh Fraser.

In seconds, Daphne had gone from loving wife, supporting the career of a husband she had met at 17, to a widow with three daughters and a son to bring up by herself.

Gordon Hamilton-Fairley was a leading British cancer specialist, at the forefront of new research. The first university professor of medical oncology in the UK, he made a significant contribution to chemotherapy and was a pioneer in immunotherapy.

He was only 45 when he was killed and his loss to oncology is widely recognised as substantial.

“How many hundreds, or how many thousands, or more, would have been saved had he been free to live?” asked John Crown, a consultant oncologist and former Irish senator, who was determined the 50th anniversary of the murder would not pass unrecorded.

In an article for this newspaper, Mr Crown found it “unfair that the man who oversaw the London bombings was feted and is annually commemorated and memorialised in parts of Ireland, while Gordon Hamilton-Fairley is forgotten here”.

I could write much more about Prof Hamilton-Fairley and the circumstances of his death. Terrorism is reckless. The myth of “targeting” is just that — a fiction. Prof Hamilton-Fairley saw something suspicious under a neighbour's car and the device exploded as he approached it.

“His inquisitive nature, one of the most valuable attributes for a scientist, may have contributed to this tragedy,” observed Mr Crown.

This murder led directly to another. Prof Hamilton-Fairley's friend, Ross McWhirter, co-founder of the Guinness Book of Records, headed a campaign to reward anyone who could provide information about the London bombing campaign. In November, two IRA men lay in wait in the garden of McWhirter's home on Village Road, Enfield. When his wife, Rosemary, arrived home, she was held at gunpoint and forced to ring the doorbell.

When her husband opened the door, they shot him dead. The killers were eventually holed up in Balcombe Street in London, taking another innocent couple, John and Sheila Matthews, hostage for six days.

Ross McWhirter's twin brother Norris was on TV's Record Breakers when we were growing up.

Helping others

It is an era blighted by horrors. But it is Prof Hamilton-Fairley's widow, Daphne, and the remarkable way the rest of her life spooled out that I want to focus on. We have neglected and ignored far too many relatives of victims here at home and especially those elsewhere.

The murder of her husband was a catastrophic event which had the potential to destroy her own existence. We know this because we have often seen it happen to those we live among.

Daphne said that what made her bereavement so difficult was “its suddenness, its futility. One of the hardest things was that there was nobody for us to look at or to mourn, even to have seen a piece of him would have made it more real”.

But her husband's influence was to help her begin to put her life back together. Before their marriage he had encouraged her to train as a speech and language therapist and after his death a neighbour asked her to teach her three-year-old son, who had severe developmental and learning needs.

She began helping the little boy and in 1982 opened the first school in Britain for children with dyslexia and other learning difficulties. She named it Fairley House in memory of her husband. Today, it is a junior and secondary school with more than 200 pupils.

Daphne “gave back” in other ways too. No one would have blamed her if she had banned the words “Northern Ireland”, “the IRA”, “the terror campaign”, “loyalist killers” and “the Troubles” from being mentioned in front of her again.

No one would have blamed her if, when her husband's killers were released in 1999 under the Good Friday Agreement, she had spearheaded a campaign across the water demanding they remain in prison. Daphne was a formidable woman with plenty of contacts. She could have easily become a thorn in the government's side.

But she didn't do that. Her Daily Telegraph obituary noted how she had said she hoped the four men would “work tirelessly towards a lasting peace in the whole of Ireland and in the UK”.

She said this despite still desperately missing her husband. She was 95 when she died. By then, she had missed him for more than half a century.

For Daphne, a climbing trip in the Himalayas with her daughter had been a “sort of turning point”.

She said: “The combination of getting away, the hardness of the climb, the pushing oneself to extremes and of seeing local people so happy with so little, gave me the feeling that I was going forward, and that I was finished with looking back, and was now spiritually free.

“And yet the oddest thing is, if [Gordon] were to walk into this room today, I would still look at him and say: 'What took you so long?'”

Showing grace to others

Sectarians among us are often callous in attitudes towards our victims here. More generally, as a society, we are often thoughtless about how people in other places suffered because of our violence.

And when those victims show grace towards us, we seem to take it as our due — we have been through so much it's only right that others “feel our pain”.

We can even resent victims from elsewhere who focus on reconciliation, accusing them of not properly understanding what Northern Ireland is really about — even when they have understood well through violence and pain and loss. That amazing peace campaigner, Colin Parry, whose son Tim (12) was murdered in Warrington, comes to mind.

Even the late Gordon Wilson's breathtaking act of charity towards the murderers of his daughter Marie got some people's backs up.

Everyone is entitled to their own way of grief. The lack of justice, the empty chairs, their portion of neglect, their suffering, are all valid and human. People are suspended in hurt and our politics and society fail to help them find closure.

Daphne Hamilton-Fairley responded in her own way. But we haven't responded at all. To her. Or to the families of the many victims not from here who are among the approximately 3,600 who died in the Troubles. Not really.

Among all the information held by the State about us, you would think some department would have built a database of people like Daphne and Rosemary McWhirter and John and Sheila Matthews, and their families.

You also might think our Executive would reach out to assist with any projects those people might wish to begin to honour their dead loved ones. You might think there are people employed and elected to respond to such initiatives.

But you'd be wrong. While Daphne's school gets on quietly with its innovative work of repair and healing, an obvious inspiration for what we owe our society here after decades of fear, we stay hunkered down. We don't even recognise our duty to people like Daphne who wished us nothing but goodwill after being caught up in our atrocious conflict.

Former loyalist chief loses High Court challenge to scope of Finucane inquiry

Alan Erwin, Belfast Telegraph, May 30th, 2026

Former loyalist chief William 'Mo' Courtney has lost a High Court challenge to the scope of a public inquiry into the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane.

A judge rejected claims that the tribunal's terms of reference unlawfully seek to establish the identity of all those involved in the killing.

Mr Finucane (39) was shot dead by loyalist paramilitary gunmen in front of his wife and three children at their north Belfast home in February 1989.

Previous probes have found evidence of security force collusion in one of the most notorious murders carried out during the Troubles.

Following a campaign by the Finucane family, in 2024 the UK government announced an independent statutory inquiry would be set up to examine the full circumstances surrounding the solicitor's death.

Sir Gary Hickinbottom was later appointed to chair the tribunal which, under the Inquiries Act 2005, can compel the production of documents and summon witnesses to give evidence on oath.

Earlier this year Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn published the terms of reference, saying they would enable the State to discharge its obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In 2002, Courtney was reportedly arrested and questioned in connection with the murder of Mr Finucane, but released without any charge.

Judicial Review

The 62-year-old, from the Shankill area of Belfast, sought a judicial review into the scope of the public inquiry.

With the first hearing due to take place next month, he claimed terms of reference seeking to “establish the identity of all those involved in his murder and the nature of their involvement” breach the 2005 Act.

Under section 2(1) of the legislation an inquiry panel has no power to determine any individual's civil or criminal liability.

Courtney's barrister, John Larkin KC, insisted any attribution of culpability without the safeguards of a criminal trial breached that prohibition.

“The present terms of reference, by use of the word murder, and the objective of ascertaining who is responsible for (the) murder, are simply and unmistakably incompatible with Section 2(1),” he submitted.

Tony McGleenan KC, for the Secretary of State, responded that the terms of reference were part of a process to “fill in the gaps” and meet Article 2 obligations following seven previous forms of investigation into the killing.

Stressing there is no obligation to make findings of liability, he argued that any potential criminality uncovered at the inquiry would be referred to the Public Prosecution Service with all the accompanying safeguards.

“The terms of reference are legally inoffensive,” Mr McGleenan contended.

Backing those submissions, Mr Justice McAlinden identified the issue of state collusion as the primary focus of the Pat Finucane Inquiry.

“The identity of those involved in his killing needs to be investigated, and the nature of their involvement needs to be considered,” the judge noted.

“The issue of whether or not the murder could have been prevented has to be looked at, and other acts and omissions relevant to the murder have to be looked into.”

Dismissing the challenge, he held that the tribunal is not under any obligation in breach of the relevant legislation.

“There is no requirement to determine someone's civil or criminal liability,” Mr Justice McAlinden stated.

“In my view the terms of reference do not require the inquiry team to reach a conclusion that is incompatible with Section 2 (of the Act).”

Speaking later, Courtney's representative Jamie Bryson confirmed he plans to appeal the ruling.

“Mr Courtney welcomes the court setting out the clearly limited scope of the inquiry and to make clear there will be no civil or criminal liability for any person,” Mr Bryson said.

“That said, concerns remain about the use of the word 'murder' and an urgent appeal will now be progressed.”

Number of Catholics in PSNI has stalled and likely to fall further, MPs say

Threat from dissident republicans blamed, with officers unable to tell family or friends about job

Mark Hennessy, Irish Times, Wednesday May 27th, 2026

The number of Catholics in the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has stalled at less than a third of the force and is likely to fall further, a House of Commons inquiry says.

Fifty-fifty recruitment of Protestants and Catholics was a key plank of the Patten Commission reforms after the Belfast Agreement that led to the creation of the PSNI.

In 2001, as the force changed from being the RUC, just 8.2 per cent of officers were Catholic, but that number had risen to just under 30 per cent when the “fifty-fifty” policy was abandoned in 2011.

The House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has carried out lengthy hearings into the PSNI as the police force prepares to mark its 25th anniversary in November.

However, MPs warned that the number of Catholics, along with those from ethnic minority and working-class backgrounds, “must not be allowed to fall further”.

The number of applications from Catholics to join has fallen from 38 per cent in 2011 to 32 per cent today, with the number of successful applications from Catholics also below average.

“In its most recent student officer campaign in January 2026, 26.7 per cent of applications were from those of a Catholic background, compared with 65.6 per cent from a Protestant background,” the report noted.

Dissident threat

The threat posed by dissident republicans to Catholic PSNI officers is blamed for reducing the number of Catholic applicants, with a number of families having to be taken to new homes because of threats.

Too often, the report noted, officers and their families were unable to share details of their job even with family and friends, while “wanting to be a police officer is still whispered about” in communities.

Recruitment, however, was not just a matter for the PSNI, the MPs said, given that support for policing and civil society leaders across Northern Ireland society “is lacking”.

Budget cutbacks for nearly a decade have left the PSNI “under immense strain”, the committee said, with cutbacks in health services and elsewhere having brought added pressure on policing.

The committee cast doubt on a leaked but unpublished HM Treasury report suggesting that police spending in Northern Ireland still ran at 166 per cent of the average of English forces.

No methodology for the Treasury report has been published, while “the confusion” surrounding the ownership of, and responsibility for, the document is “frustrating”, it complained.

Meanwhile, the report supports PSNI Chief Constable Jon Boutcher’s repeated arguments that a lot of the force’s budget was being spent dealing with cases from the Troubles, not present-day ones.

“Too much of the PSNI’s already stretched budget is being diverted to resource legacy investigations and civil cases, which will only continue in the coming years,” it stated.

MPs said the costs of legacy to the PSNI were “exceptional” and should be treated as such by London, which should properly fund such investigations “as soon as possible”.

Legacy investigations

Legacy investigations are costing the PSNI £24 million (€28 million) a year, while the costs facing it from the Omagh Bombing Inquiry and the soon-to-begin inquiry into the 1989 killing of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane will run to £15 million and £20 million respectively.

However, the committee noted the warning from Boutcher in his evidence to their inquiry that dealing “with 1,000-plus Troubles cases is estimated to be £800 million over the next 10 years”.

London and Stormont fundamentally disagree on who should meet this bill, with London arguing it is up to the Northern Ireland Executive to decide how to spend the block grant it receives from the British government.

The committee strongly disagreed with London’s view, saying “the legacy of the Troubles is a UK-wide issue, and investigations should be funded accordingly, rather than constraining the day-to-day policing budget”.

Separately, dealing with movements by those seeking asylum, the committee said “irregular migration” into the UK from the Republic was not “as significant” as the numbers crossing the English Channel.

However, it highlighted the lack of statistics that would allow for proper decisions to be taken, urging the British government to publish the number of asylum applications that are first made in Northern Ireland.

Sinn Féin can’t keep changing label on tin

PATRICK MURPHY, Irish News, May 30th, 2026

A UNITED Ireland might have a border in it. That appears to be Sinn Féin’s position, as outlined by First Minister Michelle O’Neill in an interview with this paper last week.

She indicated she was “open” to the prospect of retaining Stormont in a united Ireland, among other possibilities, which would presumably mean that the Assembly, or something similar, could have legal, administrative and/or policy-making powers over the six counties.

So the governance of the north would differ in some respects from that in the rest of Ireland.

Marking the geographical extent of those powers would require a border, making Sinn Féin’s concept of a united Ireland remarkably elastic.

There are two possible responses to the First Minister’s revelation.

The first is that it offers a wonderful temptation for satire.

Secondly, it requires an analysis of where the party now stands, not only for its ambivalence on what a united Ireland means, but for its poor performance in last week’s by-elections in Dublin and Galway.

The satirical reaction would be to welcome the First Minister’s openness to a new border on the basis that this would be a genuine Irish-made version and not that rubbishy British-made model we have now.

The Irish-manufactured border would be a new slimline, high speed, digital model with signs proclaiming “Déanta in Éirinn” (Made in Ireland) along its length.

The old border would, of course, be lifted for display in a museum and the new border would be laid in its place to herald a united Ireland.

There is plenty more to be written in that vein, but the First Minister’s statement merits a more serious analysis.

If Sinn Féin is open to variations of a united Ireland, what would a border poll ask: “Would you like a united Ireland? If yes, what sort would you like?”

Inherent contradiction

There is an inherent contradiction in seeking a border poll without any definite idea of what a united Ireland means.

The First Minister says significant numbers of people are having a conversation about a united Ireland, but since no-one has yet explained what unity represents in real-world terms, what could they possibly be saying to each other?

The party’s northern attempt to be all things to all people was reflected on the same day in Dublin where, at an election count, Mary Lou McDonald tried to clarify whether Sinn Féin is left-wing or right-wing.

That she felt it necessary to do so illustrates the party’s identity problem.

Her claim to be left-wing was denounced by left-wing parties.

The Social Democrats were “taken aback” at Sinn Féin’s change of policy on abortion and were concerned about its stance on migration, climate, and animal welfare, including hare coursing and greyhound racing.

The Labour Party said voters do not believe Sinn Féin’s claim to be left wing, and People Before Profit said the party had “drifted to the right”.

Criticisms from other parties would normally matter little, but the voters in Galway and Dublin voiced those same views at the ballot box.

While by-elections do not represent a national trend (especially with a low turnout), Sinn Féin’s poor performance stemmed from voter confusion over what the party stands for.

In Dublin, for example, there were strong transfers from Labour to the Greens and from the Greens to the Social Democrats.

‘The Monks’ tranfers

Meanwhile, Sinn Féin received only a quarter of People Before Profit transfers, but more than one third of transfers from Gerry ‘The Monk’ Hutch, whose right-wing views on immigration were later condemned by Michelle O’Neill.

In Galway, the party came seventh with 6.7% of first preference votes, while both the government’s Fine Gael and the opposition’s Independent Ireland received over 20% each.

Sinn Féin was seen as being neither establishment nor opposition.

Its political ideology up to now has been not to have one.

It just followed the populist path of Fianna Fáil, which also calls itself the republican party – a catch-all title which can mean left, right or centre.

However, Fianna Fáil performed even worse than Sinn Féin last week.

Being “republican” guarantees votes in the north, but it now means little to a discerning southern electorate.

So where does Sinn Féin go from here? It might do two things.

The first is to listen to criticism, rather than dismissing it as just being “anti-Sinn Féin”. When they are talking, they are not listening.

The second is to remember that political parties should do what it says on the tin.

When the label on the tin keeps changing, the electorate have no idea what is inside. It is time for a consistent label.

Alternatively they could just get on with building a new Irish border.

Donaldson's wife’s listening device in his car over suspicions he was having affair

Allison Morris, Belfast Telegraph, May 30th, 2026

FORMER DUP LEADER HAS PLEADED NOT GUILTY TO 18 ALLEGED HISTORICAL SEX OFFENCE CHARGES DATING FROM 1985 TO 2008

The wife of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson planted a listening device in his car after becoming suspicious he was having an affair with a constituent, a court has heard.

Dressed in a grey suit and yellow tie, Donaldson sat between two custody officers in the dock of Newry Crown Court, where he took occasional notes and at other times sat with his arms folded.

The 63-year-old former MP has pleaded not guilty to 18 alleged historical sex offence charges dating from 1985 to 2008.

He is accused of rape and several counts of gross indecency and of indecent assault.

The charges span a time period between 1985 and 2008 and involve two alleged victims.

His wife, Eleanor Donaldson, of Dublinhill Road, Dromore, Co Down, is charged with aiding and abetting. She denies the charges.

Eleanor Donaldson will not be in court, and is instead facing a trial of the facts after trial judge Paul Ramsey ruled she was medically unfit to stand trial.

During day three of evidence in the trial of the former DUP leader, a defence barrister referenced allegations of an affair and the breakdown of Donaldson's marriage in June 2020.

The court heard that in 2020, Eleanor Donaldson, suspecting her husband of having an affair and wanting to get evidence of that, planted a recording device in his car.

As the cross-examination of one of the two alleged victims in the trial — a woman known as Witness A — entered day two, she called allegations that she was not being truthful in her recollection of events related to Jeffrey Donaldson's alleged abuse “insulting”.

For the second day, the woman — one of two female complainants — was cross-examined by defence barrister Kieran Vaughan KC on behalf of Jeffrey Donaldson.

During the previous day's evidence, the court was told the witness received a letter of apology from Donaldson.

In the letter, he asked for her forgiveness “for the hurt and pain I have caused”, saying: “It is my hope, that in time, you will find it in your heart to forgive me”.

The witness said she took this letter to be an apology for the alleged abuse.

However, Mr Vaughan KC said that this was not the case.

He also claimed that Witness A had not made the police aware of the context when she gave them the letter after they interviewed her in March 2024.

Mr Vaughan put it to her: “This has nothing to do with you and sexual assault.” He stated Jeffrey Donaldson was apologising for other behaviour.

Witness A said she believed the letter was “an apology for what he did to me”.

Witness A said there were “heavy connotations of guilt” in the letter, adding that Donaldson was a “very clever man” and that he would “never put in writing what he has done”.

On a number of occasions she became emotional and held back tears.

‘Conditioned’ to accept abuse

The woman also told the jury she was “conditioned” to accept abuse, later saying: “I am a Christian and I stand by my faith.”

Challenged by a barrister over “inconsistencies” between her evidence in court and what she had told a police officer, Witness A insisted: “The facts are the facts.”

Mr Vaughan referred to an allegation made by the woman that Donaldson had touched her breasts on a number of occasions when she was of primary school age. He asked about her claim that she had been touched “skin on skin”.

She said: “Mostly, one or two occasions when it was over the top of a bra, but mostly skin on skin.”

The barrister drew attention to a meeting Witness A had had with a police officer where she mentioned “touching over clothing”. She said: “If that is what she has written, that is what was said.”

Mr Vaughan said: “On the face of it, that is inconsistent with what you told the jury yesterday, about touching under clothes.”

She said: “The facts are the facts. I am sticking to that.”

The barrister said the complainant “would have known what he was doing to you was wrong”. She said: “Not necessarily. Abuse is a very complicated thing.”

The barrister asked her if she was suggesting she had not known until she was an adult that what she claimed had happened to her was wrong. She responded: “I began to piece together factually [that] there were things that happened as normal that I should not have accepted as normal practice.”

The barrister then referred to an incident where the woman had claimed Donaldson had “perched” over the top of her, using a light to look at her “private parts”.

When challenged about her account, she said: “The light was focused on my genital area.”

Mr Vaughan said: “I suggest that is not true.” The barrister added: “You were confused and you were not sure of what you had seen.”

‘Still confused’

She said: “To this day I am still confused… I am honest about that.”

Witness A was asked by Mr Vaughan why she hadn't reported the abuse when, in 2023, she met with police, along with the head of safeguarding from the Presbyterian Church and her own minister.

She said: “I wasn't ready to do this... It was something that was a huge decision. I knew it wouldn't be a normal case because of who he is.”

She denied she was being pressured into making a complaint, saying: “Absolutely not.” The court earlier heard of “friendly banter” between the witness and the two accused. Witness A argued that the messages required “context”.

She said reporting the abuse was a “huge decision”: “Of course I had doubts. I was extremely anxious about reporting this... I very nearly changed my mind, but I didn't.”

The defence for Mr Donaldson concluded their cross-examination, and the witness was told she will be required to return to court on Monday to be further cross-examined by Ian Turkington KC for Mrs Donaldson.

The trial continues.

Post-byelection bitterness ends the left’s Connolly coalition honeymoon period

Ellen Coyne, Irish Times, May 30th, 2026

Fianna Fáil’s dismal performance in the two byelections this month has been overshadowed by a bitter rift on the left

When the five beaming politicians arrived at Dublin Castle the day after the 2025 presidential election it looked like they could have been attending a wedding.

Each of the leaders of the five left-wing parties were there to bask in the reflected glory of the election of Catherine Connolly, their victorious unity candidate.

Politically, the most important union being celebrated that day was a pre-arranged one: their decision to back a single candidate to defeat the two main Government parties.

Sinn Féin president Mary Lou McDonald proclaimed it “a victory for the combined opposition over the jaded, worn-out politics of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael”.

For voters, this could be seen as beta testing for a future left-wing government, the first to feature neither of the two main political parties. The signal from the parties to voters was clear: if they could unite for Connolly, they could unite for a coalition government.

Seven months on, the honeymoon of that October union is over. The May 22nd byelections, in Dublin Central and to fill the Galway West seat vacated by Connolly’s election, exposed fractures in that tentative coalition of the left.

Long-standing concerns of both Labour and the Green Party – and more recent misgivings within People Before Profit and the Social Democrats – about Sinn Féin’s policies came into sharp relief in the aftermath of the byelections.

These public criticisms potentially present insurmountable problems in the formation of any programme for government that might unite the parties of the left in coalition.

Tensions

While the biggest Government party, Fianna Fáil, recorded an abysmal performance in the two byelections – failing to secure double-digit first preference vote percentages in either race – it was the internecine tensions on the left in the wake of the vote that have dominated political debate in the days since the results.

The recriminations stretched back to last autumn’s presidential campaign.

Labour leader Ivana Bacik, who said her party has “never accepted” that Sinn Féin is a left-wing party, this week hinted that she did not want McDonald’s party to be part of the Connolly campaign.

Asked if it was a mistake to allow a party that she didn’t believe was left-wing into the alliance, Bacik said: “It was the Social Democrats who brought in Sinn Féin at that point.”

She noted that it took Sinn Féin “some months – it was the end of the summer” before they finally came out to endorse Connolly, an Independent, in her bid for the presidency.

This dynamic continued this week, when Labour invited only the Social Democrats and the Greens to agree a left-wing candidate for the upcoming Seanad byelection to fill the seat left vacant by Fine Gael’s Seán Kyne after his victory in the Galway West byelection.

But the Social Democrats extended the invitation to Sinn Féin and People Before Profit.

While Independent Ireland was separately trying to blame Labour for electing Kyne on transfers in Galway West, Bacik took issue with Sinn Féin voters who transferred to Independent Ireland in the same constituency.

When Sinn Féin’s Mark Lohan was eliminated, more than 23 per cent of his available transfers went to Independent Ireland’s Noel Thomas.

Bacik said she was “concerned, frankly, about the Sinn Féin transfers” that did not benefit Labour’s Helen Ogbu.

Sinn Fein pivot

She noted there were more transfers to Thomas than to Ogbu, “the leading candidate on the left, and indeed the only black candidate, and we are concerned to see those transfers”.

Asked if she was suggesting that there was an anti-migrant sentiment among Sinn Féin voters, Bacik said: “I would never say that. What I would say is that Sinn Féin had clearly pivoted to the right on migration . . . clearly, their policies have pivoted right-wards.”

Much of the debate this week about Sinn Féin’s left-wing credentials has focused on what some argue are more newly conservative positions on issues such as migration and abortion.

Sinn Féin this month was critical of a proposal by the Social Democrats to decriminalise abortion and liberalise access to terminations for medical reasons, despite having supported a more liberal People Before Profit bill on the same issue last December.

But within both Labour and the Social Democrats, party sources said they were far more concerned about the parties’ differences in economic policy with Sinn Féin.

Sources in both parties cited Sinn Féin’s opposition to the universal social charge (USC), local property tax and the carbon tax. The parties also differ from McDonald’s party on the VAT cut for hospitality and the nitrates derogation for farmers.

Three Social Democrats TDs who spoke to The Irish Times shared anxieties about Sinn Féin’s ability to manage expectations of voters with the party’s promise to increase public services while reducing taxes. “That’s really dangerous,” one of the party’s TDs said. “People are really sick of voting for one thing and getting something else.”

Within Sinn Féin, some party figures are mystified about the fresh interrogation of their left-wing credentials.

Asked on Virgin Media this week if her party was left wing, Roscommon-Galway TD Claire Kerrane said she had never been asked that question before.

During the Dublin Central campaign, Sinn Féin distributed leaflets which promised the party would “manage migration”.

Some in the party are exasperated by what they see as soft-left parties, which are viewed as being inherently middle class, lecturing Sinn Féin about progressive politics.

Champagne socialism

Pat Fitzgerald, a Sinn Féin councillor based in Waterford, said the soft-left parties can be guilty of a kind of “champagne socialism” and that parties such as Labour and the Greens are “more prone to be lured into Government” by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. “We should keep on track as best we can and keep going doing our own thing,” he said.

Within the parliamentary party, Sinn Féin believes that as a working-class party it has a duty to respond to the genuine concerns of working-class people, including concerns about immigration.

McDonald previously told The Irish Times that she believed it was a “classic left-wing position” to subscribe to a rule-based immigration system because a “responsible party of the left” listens to working-class concerns.

Daniel Ennis, the newly elected Social Democrats TD in Dublin Central, rejected the premise of this argument.

Ennis, who entered politics in opposition to a rise in anti-immigration sentiment in Dublin’s inner city, said that it was “absolutely not” the duty of a party to adopt a harsher position on migration in response to working-class concerns about immigration.

“A big part of my entry [into politics] was listening to our community, putting the helmet on, going into certain conversations wasn’t the easiest. I’ve been doing that, walking into family members’ sittingrooms and kitchens, and speaking about it,” he said.

“It’s our job to educate and raise awareness around the lies that we’re seeing online about migration.”

The challenge for Sinn Féin, which argues that its position on migration is informed by working-class voters, is that it just lost an election in Dublin Central, a constituency with significant concentrations of working-class communities and the Sinn Féin leader’s own constituency.

One contributing factor to Sinn Féin’s loss was not just a decline in its vote share but also its inability to pick up significant transfers from other left-wing parties.

Green Party leader Roderic O’Gorman said it was “obvious that people who voted Green number one in this election looked at the other parties and they didn’t see a home for themselves in Sinn Féin early in their ballot”.

According to People Before Profit, the party saw a decrease in transfers from its party to Sinn Féin in Dublin Central compared to previous elections.

People Before Profit TD Paul Murphy said he would like to see parties agree to certain policy positions before a left alliance agrees a transfer pact in advance of the next general election.

No scapegoating

Murphy said this would include “not to engage in scapegoating of asylum seekers, not to backtrack on women’s rights” and to agree not to join a coalition with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.

McDonald has previously declined to rule out a coalition with Fianna Fáil.

“Of course there needs to be give and take in terms of what those principles are, but there are bottom-line points for us,” Murphy said.

“I think there was a relatively high transfer rate between what people would generally see as parties who were saying ‘vote left, transfer left’.

“But I think that can go even higher if you have a common pact, a common projection, and if you polarise the election to a choice: Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, or the chance to get rid of them and have a left-wing government.”

Poots refuses to explain a highly irregular decision which makes little sense 

Sam McBride, Northern Ireland Editor, Belfast Telegraph, May 30th, 2026

WHY DID SPEAKER STOP MLAS TALKING ABOUT COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS? HE WON'T EXPLAIN — AND DOESN'T THINK ANY OF US HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Last week, a decision taken in secrecy caused disquiet at Stormont — and hurt people who have already suffered horrifically.

The person who took that decision — Assembly Speaker Edwin Poots — is refusing to explain himself in circumstances where his actions are highly irregular.

This mystery has caused intense debate in Parliament Buildings, yet no one raised it in the Assembly chamber this week and all but one MLA who spoke to this newspaper about their concern over the decision did so on condition of anonymity because of the power the Speaker wields.

After two sources claimed the Speaker had gone against his own officials' advice in making this exceptionally unusual decision, I asked the Assembly if Poots disputed this. The answer did not dispute it, but said he would not comment on advice as a matter of principle.

The decision taken by the Speaker might save the Executive tens of millions of pounds and was backed by the DUP — which happens to be the party Poots is expected to stand for in the next Assembly election, now less than a year away. He denies that his decision was taken for any improper reason, but has steadfastly refused to give any reason whatsoever for what he did. The backdrop to this involves a highly sensitive issue. Last week, MLAs gathered to debate legislation impacting those who suffered in mother and baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. People from all backgrounds were mistreated in places where society didn't want to look.

The Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill is an inelegantly titled proposal to deliver some form of belated justice by establishing a public inquiry and paying compensation.

The payments would initially come from the public purse, but it is open to Stormont to go after churches and others who were directly responsible for the ill-treatment.

This hasn't been politically controversial. That's what makes last week's developments so jarring, and so baffling. This law has been undergoing Assembly scrutiny for almost a year. When first debated, not a single MLA voted against it.

Without precedent

The legislation, which has been tabled jointly by the first and deputy first ministers, was then sent to the Executive Office Committee for detailed scrutiny where the committee hears evidence from those personally impacted by the legislation and undertakes line by line scrutiny of the law.

As is common, the committee proposed amendments to the bill. One of these would have extended the time frame in which relatives of those who were in institutions could claim compensation after their death.

Two DUP MLAs on the committee — Phillip Brett and Pam Cameron — opposed this, but they were out-voted by every other MLA on the committee.

Then something highly unusual happened. Almost invariably, when a cross-party committee agrees to amendments, those will then be debated in the Assembly when the bill comes back for consideration stage. But last week, Poots personally prevented this.

Poots stepped in not just to block the committee amendment, but to prevent MLAs from even getting to discuss it. This is a situation almost without precedent.

Having spoken to several very senior serving and former MLAs from multiple parties, I have been unable to find anyone who is aware of any other Speaker acting in this fashion other than a few months ago when Poots blocked a proposal to change the law to allow girls to decide to wear trousers in school.

One senior MLA said the Speaker's decision had “raised eyebrows”.

A former veteran MLA said that where a committee has agreed an amendment, it should “definitely” be debated.

He said: “Otherwise, what's the point of committee stage? I can't think of the Speaker ever rejecting a legislative amendment agreed in committee.”

Poots gave no explanation at the start of last week's debate. One MLA — the SDLP's Sinéad McLaughlin — had the temerity to voice in the chamber what many other MLAs were thinking.

She said: “I will address the issue that has caused deep hurt and frustration among survivors and campaigners in the past 24 hours: the decision not to select an amendment…”

Immediately, Poots interjected to stop her talking, calling “order”. Poots kept calling “order”, forcing her to keep quiet and then telling her dismissively: “Those decisions are taken with the best advice. You know nothing about what goes on in the background, and it is not in order for you to challenge that.”

No right to transparency?

He was telling her, and us, simply to trust him. There is no transparency — and we've no right to transparency, he says. This is indefensible. What was his reasoning? We don't know. What was his motive? He won't say. What considerations did he take into account? We've no idea.

If this is a proper decision taken for proper reasons, then there should be no good reason for those reasons to be kept secret. The Executive Office estimated at the outset that the bill would cost £80m, but actual costs could be “significantly higher”.

Compensation was estimated to cost between £30m and £96m. An eligible person making a claim for their own experience would get £10,000, while an eligible family member making a posthumous claim on behalf of their relative would get £2,000.

It is possible for honourable people to disagree about this, arguing for instance that these payments should be increased to better match the suffering involved or cut entirely because this money would be better spent on saving lives in the health service. But that argument hasn't been made by Poots; instead, he's stopped anyone even discussing this.

Poots is on perilous ground. If the Opposition — or, more damagingly, a cross-party group — was to table a motion opposing what he has done, would he continue his dismissive stance? Would he throw MLAs out of the chamber for refusing to take no for an answer? For someone who is expected to stand as a DUP candidate next year, this is politically problematic territory. It could also be legally problematic.

The courts generally defer to the legislature. This is entirely right. The legislature is elected and judges are not. Therefore, there must be compelling evidence that something is unlawful for a judge to step in and overturn what our elected representatives have done.

But in certain extreme cases, it is proper for the courts to examine legislators' actions and even reverse them. This happened two years ago when Mr Justice Humphreys ruled in favour of the Belfast Telegraph when we challenged a Stormont law making it a criminal offence to write the words “Jimmy Savile was a paedophile”.

There was no political dispute about that judgment. By the point the judge struck down the relevant section of that law, even many of the MLAs who had voted for it regretted what they'd done, not realising its implications.

In one sense, this case is even more straightforward because it is not about a conflict between the courts and the legislature. Here, parties representing a clear majority of MLAs wanted to debate and pass this amendment. One person blocked that from happening.

Any judicial interference here would be to uphold the right of our elected representatives to debate and pass legislation in circumstances where no rational explanation has been proffered as to why they shouldn't do so.

Legal implications

One of Northern Ireland's most prominent solicitors, who for years has represented many victims of abuse, is already exploring the legal implications of this decision.

Claire McKeegan of Phoenix Law said: “The problem with what the Speaker has done is that it has significantly increased the chance that the resulting legislation will be the subject of time-consuming legal challenges due to the arbitrary way it currently divides families who shall and shall not be entitled to redress.”

She said that while the courts will generally defer to Parliament where legislation has been debated by MLAs, in this case there has been no such debate. She said that “a legal challenge on this issue is a novel area of law as it relates to a devolved assembly and not the UK Parliament” and “the first step is to make public the advice that the Speaker relied upon”.

I asked the Speaker's office if he had followed the advice of his officials. The response did not answer that question. Instead, the Assembly said the Speaker “takes the legislative process of the Assembly extremely seriously” and that had “a long history of being supportive of efforts to address the abuse which occurred in religious and state institutions”.

It said “the Speaker's focus is on taking a rigorous but cautious approach to his decisions to assist the Assembly in conducting effective scrutiny and producing robust legislation. It is the role of the Speaker to take the decision on which amendments are selected for debate; there is no automatic entitlement that any amendment will be selected. It is for the Speaker to consider these matters independently from a procedural perspective, rather than on the basis of the substantive objectives of a bill or amendment.”

It said that “parliamentary convention is that the Speaker does not give reasons for his procedural decisions”.

The statement referred me to comments Poots made to MLAs last month. But that only amplifies the confusion.

Last month, Poots told MLAs they had to learn from past bungled legislation. As such, he said he would be more interventionist with amendments to bills. He cited two areas, neither of which explain what he's done here.

Poots said that “amendments have to be relevant to the bill under discussion”. In this situation, that was demonstrably the case. The amendment was referring to one of the central elements of the bill — the payment of compensation.

Poots also said that it was problematic “if amendments seek to introduce complex new areas of law to any bill at the amending stages, particularly when committee scrutiny has already ended”.

That wasn't the case here either; this wasn't a complex new area of law but simply an alteration to the cohort of people the bill covers — and far from being done after committee scrutiny had ended, the committee's scrutiny led to the amendment.

Standing Orders

The Assembly's Standing Orders — its rule book — does not give the Speaker any explicit power to block amendments without explanation. Instead, it sets out that prior to consideration stage, “amendments shall be arranged in the order in which the bill is to be considered”.

The rules also say: “The committee may make such amendments as it thinks fit to the bill and report its opinion on the bill to the Assembly.”

In this instance, the committee was blocked from making an amendment it thought necessary. Poots would point to all of this being permitted under a catch-all: “The Speaker's ruling shall be final on all questions of procedure and order.”

But if that means the Speaker can do whatever he likes — no matter how irrational it might be or how much concern it might cause — then why have 70 pages of clear rules which MLAs (and Speakers) are expected to follow?

TUV MLA Timothy Gaston, who sits on the committee, said this area had been the “most significant point of contention” raised by victims and survivors. He said he “struggled to understand” why MLAs were prevented from being allowed to debate it, saying it “represents a missed opportunity to address a clear injustice within the bill”.

Victims and survivors were in the public gallery when MLAs debated this last week, and many were dismayed.

Further consideration stage of the bill is still to come and will be the final chance to amend the bill. Any MLA could seek to table a similar amendment. This episode is far from over. At some point, what now makes no sense is likely to become clearer — but the Speaker clearly has no intention of doing that himself.