Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SO, A PETITION to have ‘My Lovely Horse’, Father Ted’s famed (fictional) Eurosong entry, was considered by TDs this week.
[Father Ted screengrab]
Not for very long, mind.
Briefly discussing it in public session with TDs and senators at the Oireachtas public petitions committee on Wednesday, chairman Pádraig Mac Lochlainn observed — tongue-in-cheek, do we need to add? — that perhaps the panel didn’t have the requisite “musical expertise” to deal with the issue.
Labour senator Susan O’Keeffe chipped in to thank the petitioner for the ”entertainment value” of his entreaty, and McLochlainn (of Sinn Féin) replied that it was a “great song” before dismissing the issue.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn
The whole exchange didn’t take longer than a few seconds, and it was one of a range of petitions considered by the committee this week — a point McLochlainn was keen to stress when we called him to talk about it.
“Basically that’s a vexatious petition,” he says, before correcting himself…
Frivilous, rather than vexatious. Vexatious would mean it contains an unfair allegation against somebody.
So how much of the committee’s time is spent on ‘frivilous’ issues?
There’s very little consideration that would go into a decision like that. Standing orders are pretty clear…
All petitions submitted are examined by Oireachtas staff to ensure they comply with the standing orders, he says.
The secretariat* would look at it and say ‘we believe this is not serious’.
Gif: Portals of Discovery
If staff believe a petition is borderline, it’s brought to a working group of four committee members before being put to the whole panel “to speed up the process”.
So what are those standing orders? The full list is available here — but it’s all pretty reasonable stuff: the petition can’t request the Dáil to act outside its power, it can’t relate to a matter before the courts, it can’t contain offensive language etc. etc.
“You have to demonstrate that you have gone through a particular appeals process” before taking a petition, McLochlainn says.
Once it’s considered by the committee, members have a range of options on how to proceed.
“We would often correspond with the relevant Minister, bring in the Minister of the day to answer questions, the Secretary General of the relevant department…”
“There’s always going to be people — a tiny minority — who submit frivilous petitions or who are acting the maggot,” he says, adding that the broad majority are on serious topics.
Once you don’t happen to be a TD or senator, any citizen can submit one for consideration, and there’s no set number of signatories required.
So… that’s the petitions issue dealt with… If ‘My Lovely Horse’ had, by some freak of luck, managed to jump the ‘frivilous’ fence, no doubt it would also have failed to clear many of the other standing orders.
But it’s a moot point anyway…
Not willing to let the issue drop, TheJournal.ie put in a call to a Eurovision expert to get confirmation of some half-remembered facts.
“Sure you haven’t a hope. Sure the song’s more than 18 years old or so to start with,” says Paul G Sheridan — Song Contest afficionado, former Eurosong selector and provider of fun facts for those Marty Whelan commentaries.
The song has to be an original, and it cannot have been aired publicly before a given date set down each year by the European Broadcasting Union, Sheridan says.
Even if that weren’t the case, novelty songs tend not to do well in the contest anyway, Sheridan says.
“Remember the year we sent the Turkey?”
*No pun intended (we imagine).
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Is it just me or does this article just waffle on for for its entirety without actually making any concrete solutions to increasing forestry or suggesting alternative forestry to the current destructive sitka spruce plantations seen all over the country?
@jl: The article skirted around the fact that there is one lad in the whole country objecting to every single application for a felling license. You know yourself, one of those anti “one-off housing” nutjobs who wants everyone to live a life of misery
@jl: ah you don’t want to use concrete, that stuff is useless for forests. Topsoil would be much better
@Quiet Goer: One-off housing is a scourge on the Irish landscape and is holding back proper rural development. I disagree with the current model where someone who wants a new house has only two real choices: Buy a shabby estate box or build a McMansion down some bohreen three miles away from services. People should be able to build their McMansion in rural villages and become a part of that community. There is very little other option.
For every acre of spruce planted 4 acres of native hardwood should be planted stop the destruction of our countryside.
@Seanboy: so, who should plant unwanted crops at the expense of commercial timber that is needed for construction? And who should pay for that?
And how does the importation of construction timber from less sustainable forests do anything for the environment, not to mention the economy?
@Seanboy: check out catchmycarbon.ie they are only planting permanent woodlands
@Seanboy: Your idea is good but the scale wrong. How about for every commercial forest planted the surrounding perimeter should be planted with native hardwood. So when it is felled the native stays. So you don’t get those horrible bleak inhospitable forests taking over the landscape.
@Fred the Muss…: that’s what happens now.
Serial objectors destroying an industry, unfortunately all too common in various sectors in Ireland, with no legislation in place to keep it in check.
@sean de paore: @sean de paore: serial planters who plant everywhere swamping peoples homes without anything to keep it in check. There’s 2 sides to this.
@Clodagh Nic L: nowadays, planting schemes have significantly setbacks, and people can also input into planting schemes at planning stage.
Forestry enclosing homes doesn’t happen nowadays.
If the minister wants to fix the existing debacle, and wants any hope of meeting forestry targets, she can do a couple of things. First, get the appeals heard in a couple of weeks, not in a year. Then update the whole process so that the felling license is issued along with the planting permit.
The criticism of monoculture in tree farming is more emotive than logical. We grow other essentials like wheat or potatoes as monoculture, to try to impose diversity in these crops is equally daft.
Ideally, the two or so people who seem to delight in stopping farmers from harvesting their crops should be liable for the costs of any delay, and the small handful of anti-everything politicians who encourage them should likewise be liable, but that won’t happen.
@John Mulligan: as the article made mention of a public consultation process in advance of the bill, may I ask, did you provide a submission?
I don’t know if you did or didn’t, if the former fair play, but when presented with a method to directly influence policy, it’s amazing how quiet social media and news article commenters become.
Most farmland outside of grassland is not mono-culture, no farmer worth his salt abandons cop rotation.
A mix of forestry should be encouraged to hamper the spread of diseases amongst trees.
@D Mems: it’s also amazing that many people were unaware of a consultation process taking place on this toppic
@Daniel Dunne: it’s mostly mono culture. Wheat, barley, potatoes, cabbage, they’re all monoculture crops with nothing growing in their shade.
@D Mems: I provided a submission. However, the bill has backed down on the very issue which is the nub of the problem, that is, the right of someone who has no connection to the area to interfere. I agree that the sector needs regulation, blanket sitka spruce is a plague. But regulated mixed plantations are good for the environment, the economy, and the owner. So please Minister…..get it sorted… ASAP.
All very unless you live in the country and end up living in the middle of other people’s forests that take away your light and view
@Thomas Sheridan: or if you’re somebody who bought a cheap house surrounded by tiny trees, and now can’t understand why you’re now living in the middle of a forest.
@John Mulligan: or if you’ve lived in your family home and had beautiful views only to be wrecked by forestry…
@Clodagh Nic L: I don’t think you have a right to a view under Irish law , how far would a right to a view extend ? What about a neighbour ( or yourself ) growing a hedge ? Should that be banned ? Should you have to go through a lengthy planning and appeals process to plant A tree in your garden , because you could interfere with someone’s view of somewhere .. it’s only a small tree now. . but in 30 years it could block my view …
@Mark Hosford: and this is where discussion loses all respectability! We’re not talking about a tree or a hedge.. we’re talking about 100s/1000s of trees being planted, growing high possibly on all sides of your home. Lorries and felling taking place and seriously disrupting your life for periods at a time. It doesn’t just block the view. It’s causing a sense of isolation and darkness. There is a balance to be struck. It’s not black and white nor is it bush vs. Forest. Rural communities are losing swathes of farmland to this with foreign investors buying up incredible amounts of Irish land with the sole purpose of profit rather than any interest in sustainable development or the communities in which it’s based.
@Mark Hosford: people plant leylandi hedges all the time, right up to neighbouring boundaries.
In the case of forest planting, it must be set back significantly and the closer trees will ususlly be broadleaved.
@Clodagh Nic L: Unless you’re farming then you shouldn’t really be living outside a hamlet/village at a minimum. And, no I dont think you shoukld be forced to live in an estate either. The councils should be actively promoting build your own home sites in designated areas infilling villages/hamlets and small rural towns.
@John Mulligan: correction – ignorant, selfish people plant Leyland and block light and view from neighbouring houses. It shouldn’t be allowed under local authority by laws as is the case in other countries
@Daniel Dunne: interested you know why you think this?
The minister didn’t bring up the fact that builders merchants are running out of timber fast. On the one had we have a govt saying we have to build more homes. On the other we are not allowing Coilte to harvest timber for these houses meaning the price of timber is going to go up and the price per house is going to go up. Now we have to import Timber from abroad. This is bad because we could be bring in pests and diseases. This is going to be a real problem real soon
@great gael of Eire: the anti-everything brigade don’t care in the least about that, or about the replacement of sustainable Irish timber with imported timber from non sustainable forests.
For them, this is all a game, a tilt at the establishment, biting the hand that feeds them and hiding behind a very dubious environmental shroud.
@great gael of Eire: the trick is there needs to be a balance of planting and felling. Trees act as a natural carbon sink, but if a large area is felled in one go the carbon gets released, if done on a phased basis it remains captured. If all the trees are felled to supply a supposedly sustainable building method you end up countering the benefits of the construction method, to the extend you may as well have used concrete
@D Mems: you have to look at the bigger picture though. If a farmer in Leitrim fells thirty or forty acres in one go, there will be lots of other thirty acre plots at various stages of growth around the country.
There is no question of the entire national crop being felled at once — there will be a lot of farms with trees at various stages, and the felled area is usually quickly replanted to add to the mix.
Farming of trees is a long-term project that requires a lot of patience, but when the crop is ready, it’s ready. It’s unfair of one or two protestors to block an often older farmer from cashing in his crop; it’s no use to him if he’s dead.
@John Mulligan: very few farmers doing it.. mainly foreign investment from Scandinavia..
@Clodagh Nic L: not true.
@Clodagh Nic L: Loads of farmers doing it, particularly on land not economically viable. Unfortunately – although it was originally a scheme for farmers only, who planted their own land, it was later opened up to investors who couldn’t care less about locals’ concerns, and who bought up huge tracts of poor land cheaply. And that is what opened the can of worms which led to rural devastation and serial objectors.
Its a crop, farmers dont need permission to cut barley why do they need it to cut plantation trees?
@Paul Kelly: if the whingers had their way, nothing could be done without their permission.
Except paying out the dole of course.
Another simpler way of doing it would be to automatically dismiss or disqualify all objections from professional serial objectors. Other people DO HAVE RIGHTS AS WELL!
How is Pippa a minister when she failed to get elected in Laois-Offaly?
@Daniel Dunne: she’s a senator. The constitution allows for a member of the Seanad to be given ministerial responsibility.
@Daniel Dunne: She’s one of them super junior ministers they made up recently. Pointless cabinet position (no vote) but pay and pension to match the title I’ll bet.
I think it would be lovely if the stopped putting down evergreens all over the place and planted a few indigenous trees.
@Davis Payne: nothing stopping you.
@Davis Payne: indigenous trees are a good idea and can grow fast too. Problem is that, traditionally, most farmers do not know much about trees and follow what their forestry planner tells them. Forestry planners often just follow the same rote script they’ve done for all other plots, especially if the farmer shows little interest. This is not the farmer nor planners fault as such, they are following the beast/easiest route as plotted by the current scheme.
Look out the window and you can see the current generation of farmers idea of laying a hedge is to flatten it with a JCB…
Or the CoCos or CIE that flail mow hedges into extinction.Proper hedgerow planting and management, with policies to support, inform and motivate such would be a good supplementary approach to improving our state regarding knowledge, environment and options
@Toby ‘ole: so many typos, so little edit button
Not much substance in the article. It would be nice to have an article voicing the dismay in Leitrim over the damage wrought by the alien monoculture of sitka spruce. I don’t believe the figures bandied about re the 12000 jobs and 2.3bn for the economy. Each year we’re planting pitiful amounts of new trees and I’d say storms are blowing over a bigger quantity. As a farmer, I’d like to see encouragement to plant 2% plus of every farm in trees/carbon sinks and leave them indefinitely.
A good and easy solution to the monocultural forest is agroforestry. Basically planting trees at a distance eg 10m apart all over a field machinery can get in and out if planned properly. Wire can be hammered into trunk leaves a permanent strip grazing. Long rooted trees can drain wet soil. Deciduous trees lose leaves giving bit of fertilizer. Can make Irish farms carbon negative with carbon stored in trees and soils which would outweigh ghg. Another income stream for farmer. Less invasive monocultres and steady supply of timber. There is a grant but normal forestry
is preferred
Buy houses of Land and hav a wilderness area it would be good fo tourism also and well Needed
have your say