If it wasn’t enough that the Irish Times printed what amounted to a Tom Humphries eulogy yesterday, today they included a colour piece on what life behind bars is like for a̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶r̶y̶ ̶s̶q̶u̶i̶r̶e̶ ̶w̶r̶o̶n̶g̶f̶u̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶u̶, oh, hang on, that’s a man who groomed and sexually abused an underage child. Sure, they also printed an editorial about his betrayal of trust (they even titled it “A betrayal of trust”) but away from the editorial page, they’ve printed somewhat sympathetic articles two days in a row now.

Then there’s the length of his sentence. On this one, the judge’s hands are a little tied, as she has to pay attention both to the maximum sentence under the charge (5 years, as it happens) and similar sentences passed by other judges. I personally think the 2.5 year sentence for stealing a child’s innocence is rather short, especially as a woman was sentenced to four years today for stealing a million euros from her employer.

The judge stated that she gave some weight to the two character references she received (which personally I find rather odd when the subject of those references had been convicted of defiling a minor) and to the difficulty faced by a man who falls from a height of being a respected coach and journalist to being known as a child abuser. I have serious issues with that and here’s why:

If you are in a position of trust and you abuse that trust, you don’t get special treatment for losing the honour and respect you had because of attaining that trust. If anything, your betrayal of that trust, especially when it involves a child, is all the more monstrous because you took that trust and turned it into something that made it easier for you to abuse. Abuse, in this case, which was of a child. Child abuse. The man took the trust he had as a respected national sports journalist and then as a coach and used that as a tool for child abuse. In what universe does anyone turn around and say “well, you’ve suffered yourself because now those positions that you’ve had (which you used to further your child abuse) are closed to you”?

Oh, yeah, and on that… half the country is pretty damn sure that Tom Humphries has been ghost-writing Donal Óg Cusack’s newspaper column for the past few years (you’ll be aware, no doubt, that one of the two character references at the Humphries trial came from Cusack). It’s the sentences. The short sentences. Ever so short. Those sentences that say something, and then something else. It’s a style. That Tom Humphries style. The style that got him into coaching. Coaching children. Before he abused one of them. For which he got a short sentence.

We don’t eulogise child abusers. At least we certainly shouldn’t. I’m assuming – or at least hoping – that the paper that still claims to be our national paper of record will stop printing these soft feature pieces about its former sports colour writer who we all now know to be a groomer and child abuser. At least it fucking should.


There aren’t that many simple rules when it comes to interacting with other people in a civilised society but in the aftermath of Nazis openly marching on the streets of Charlottesville, here’s another one to toss on to the list:

If you want to live in a tolerant society, it is your personal duty to be intolerant of intolerance.

That doesn’t affect your duty to treat people justly or fairly or with honour. But it is not your job to tolerate the actions of a group of sodding Nazis marching around with burning torches while chanting “blood and soil”. We know where that goes, we know how it ends and we know what it costs. We have zero duty as a society to appease racial supremacists who preach fascist philosophies. The most recent time we had to battle these pricks it cost millions of lives. It is not a world we want to revisit.

Sure, it isn’t always easy to stand up to racist morons and we don’t always have the energy to do it. That’s unfortunate but it’s fine. And I can presumably guarantee that all of you know at least one person who is a different colour to you whom you don’t like, not because their skin is a different colour but because they’re an asshole. That’s fine too.

But if you’re the sort of person who treats or regards people in a different way automatically because they’re a different colour to you or they have a different religion or because they fuck in a different way to you, odds are very high that they’re not the problem – you are. And when people complain that you’re not acting like a reasonable human being for doing that – when they’re being intolerant of your intolerance – they’re right and you’re wrong.

Don’t worry. You still get to tell jokes about people who live one town over from you. They’re telling jokes about you too and none of you take it seriously. Just don’t be a sodding douchebag.

Kevin Myers was on RTE Radio 1’s Today With Sean O’Rourke this morning to talk about his article in the Sunday Times last Sunday. The one that caused people outside Ireland to finally notice that Kevin Myers is a racist anti-Semitic misogynist. Myers insisted that he’s not anti-Semitic or misogynistic (despite having a long and documented history of both), adding that he is “very, very sorry”.

Apologies are funny things and I’ve been taken to task by people in the past for objecting to some of these apologies on the basis that saying “I apologise for any offence caused” is a mealy-mouthed statement which puts some of the blame on the people to whom offence was caused. Perhaps I’m being too particular. I don’t think I am but you can make that case. So don’t be too surprised when I get even more particular here.

Anyhoo, here’s Kevin Myers – who’s long been the most dislikeable Myers since that bloke out of Halloween – apologising (“very, very sorry”, etc). Then he includes: “I am the author of that article, I am the author of my own misfortunes, I am the master of my soul”.

Woah. “I am the master of my soul”? Myers quoted Invictus in his apology? The poem written by William Ernest Henley when recovering from having one of his legs chopped off? The poem recited regularly by Nelson Mandela to fellow prisoners during his incarceration on Robben Island? A poem whose title literally translates as “Unconquered”?

Kevin Myers likes to read. He likes to let you know that he likes to read. He knows full-well where that quote comes from and what it means. It’s one of the world’s best-known poems and, through its association with Nelson Mandela, has become one of the world’s best-known poems about defiance. It has been quoted again and again by people who believe that they are victims of undue persecution, to demonstrate that they are unbowed, unafraid and possess an unconquerable soul.

The actual closing lines of the poem are “I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul”, but “I am the master of my soul” is one of the world’s better-known misquotes of poetry. He knows what he’s quoting.

You may, if you must, regard Kevin Myers’ appearance on the radio as an actual apology. But nobody on the face of the planet has ever quoted Invictus while making a genuine apology. He’s serving up a big apology cake with a piece of shit in the middle and asking you to eat it. Enjoy your shit cake, Ireland.

The folks of Contact Studios in Limerick are being kicked out of the studio space that they’ve occupied at the HSE Ireland St Joseph’s campus in Limerick for the past twenty years. They’ve been notified that they have to be out by this Friday.

I could write something about the importance of providing a community of artists in Limerick city with collaborative space that they can use to create work which can be enjoyed by the people of Limerick. I could write something about the vibrancy added to the city just by virtue of having artists working in an urban location. I could write about the worth to Limerick and its citizens of being able to see art conceived and made by artists who have chosen to live in Limerick and produce that art here.

All of that is true. But I’m not going to prattle on about that, because it should be self-evident to anyone with a working brain. I’m going to go on about something else.

Since 1997 the artists of Contact Studios have been working with mental health organisations in Limerick city, particularly Le Cheile on Sexton Street, and have provided thousands of hours of classes, workshops and social gatherings for people who use the services of those organisations. This is what they’ve done in exchange for being allowed to retain the studio space in St Joseph’s. They get to use part of a building which is not being used for anything else – and which the HSE has no plans to use for anything else – and they provide classes which are hugely beneficial to people. Essentially, they’ve been doing a chunk of the HSE’s work for them. It’s an arrangement that has perfect symbiosis and directly helps with the mental health of this city.

It’s a model that should be replicated in every city of Ireland. Instead, the HSE has decided that they want their building back, even though they have no plans to do anything else with it. So the artists lose out, Limerick city loses out, the mental health services in Limerick lose out, mental health service users in Limerick lose out… and the HSE gets a building back that they will then ignore completely.

For twenty years, Limerick has had an admirable and beneficial arrangement between the national body responsible for health in Ireland and a group of artists. The biggest winners over those twenty years have been the people of Limerick. Now that this arrangement has come to an abrupt end at the behest of the HSE, the biggest losers will be the people of Limerick – and among those, mental health service users, who are some of the most vulnerable people of Limerick.

Keeping the studio and retaining the arrangement should be an easy call to make, shouldn’t it? Don’t you think?

Limerick City & County Council asked for views on the O’Connell Street Limerick Revitalisation Plan. Town planning is boring but it affects lots of people, so it’s important. Here’s what I sent in:

This is a submission to the request for comments on the Limerick Urban Centre Revitalisation plan for O’Connell Street, currently at Feasibility Concept Phase. As I’ve been resident in the heart of Georgian Limerick for almost two decades, I’m making this submission as a local resident. It’s a little bit critical but I suppose that’s what happens when things are put out for public consultation. Thanks for the opportunity to submit it.

For nine million euros, the emerging preferred option seems rather safe. Not only does it not re-invent the wheel, it amounts to turning the wheel a few degrees and hoping that people perceive it as a little more round. That’s disappointing. It offers a spit and shine approach to O’Connell Street when what is needed is a much more radical plan to revitalise the street and, in turn, the city centre.

In recent years, Limerick has experimented with on-street open seating in the Urban Garden area outside Penney’s (though that facility appears to have vanished in recent weeks). It’s been a mixed success. Its worth has come from being the only area on O’Connell Street that offers what planners call a respite area but having two lanes of traffic plod through Limerick next to it has meant that it remains a relatively unattractive area to spend any time. At best this new plan offers a repetition of that facility up a few city blocks. The Urban Garden has been an interesting experiment rather than a failure, but the one thing that we should have been learned from it is that people don’t like sitting in an area where hundreds of cars spew carbon monoxide at them. If there aren’t any cars driving next to them, people will use the street for more than walking through. The purpose of the project is to “improve the O’Connell Street area for retail and commercial attractiveness through enhancement of public space, streetscape and sustainable travel modes”, after all.

Copenhagen converted its main thoroughfare (Strøget) into a pedestrian-only street in 1962. Initially, almost everyone was against it but it was the single greatest factor behind the restoration of Copenhagen as an attractive place to live, work and visit. It proved such a success that surrounding streets have since pedestrianised, with the pedestrian-only area increasing from Strøget’s 15,800 square metres to 100,000 square metres. Currently, 48,000 people use Strøget on a daily basis even in winter, climbing to 80,000 people per day in summer and 120,000 in the Christmas season. It’s not alone – cities like Bordeaux and Rotterdam pedestrianised their main shopping streets in the 50s and, in Ireland, similar plans were carried out in Dublin and Galway much more recently. Pedestrianisation works. It’s been proved by example to work. It has led to the revitalisation of city centres in pretty much every city where it’s been implemented.

I realise that business-owners in Limerick city centre may be against a plan that stops traffic driving past their shopfronts. But as much of the plan involves getting rid of parking spaces along O’Connell Street, nobody will be parking on those six blocks of the street and, thus, access is pretty much as easy via every street in the city that isn’t O’Connell Street. On that note, unattractive as bollards are, the plan has too few of them. While the recent redevelopment of Catherine Street between Roches Street and Thomas Street arguably has too many bollards (37 by my count), Ireland is notorious for the “just stopping for a minute” mentality. If you’re going to eliminate parking along six city centre blocks, you’ll need 150 bollards, which is significantly more than on the current plan.

The plan offered is better than what we have – we get one lane of traffic redesignated as a bus lane and wider footpaths due to street parking being eliminated along most of the project. But with all due respect, spending nine million euros on a bus lane and getting rid of street parking is a laughable waste of money and a hilarious waste of an opportunity. There isn’t a single person on the planet who’s prudent with cash who would regard that as value for money. People laugh at the concept of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic but this plan doesn’t even do that.

At the very least, the street needs to be pedestrianised between Denmark Street and William Street, between William Street and Roches Street, and between Roches Street and Mallow Street. That’s the initial move towards making Limerick city centre attractive to residents, workers and visitors. Retaining traffic along O’Connell Street keeps the street attractive for cars, but cars are merely devices that people use to get into, out of and through the city. It’s time that Limerick city planners and councillors realised that cities need to be designed for people, not their travel boxes.

The plan from Mallow Street to the Crescent is as good as we can possibly hope for at the moment. Nobody expects that traffic can be diverted from these areas in the near future so the limited improvements from Mallow Street to Hartstonge Street are understandable and the improvements at the Crescent are very welcome.

Shared spaces and shared surface junctions are recently beloved by town planners because they look nice. They’re dangerous to fully-abled people and lethal to disbled and blind people – hardly in line with the project design objective of “creation of a new public realm that … safeguards vulnerable users”. They’re a fudge, a lazy option that appears to offer a little to everyone but doesn’t offer all that much to anyone. “Courtesy” pedestrian crossings aren’t worth a damn – for the little my opinion is worth I suggest abandoning even the hint of them.

The contra-flow bike lanes on the plans end before the street corners and, thus, appear to force bike users into the path of oncoming traffic. They’re not linked with each other on the plans and disappear between Roches Street and Denmark Street. As the project seeks the “enhancement of … sustainable travel modes” and “to promote … cycling”, on a practical level one of two things is likely to happen – either cyclists will ignore the unlinked cycle lanes as impractical or will cycle along the footpath on the remainder of the development. The cycle lane proposal is a curate’s egg – good in parts but sifting through the egg to find the good bits isn’t going to happen on a daily basis. Link them or drop them. For what it’s worth, I have a strong preference for linking and expanding them.

Much as I admire the intention to install water features and grass areas, similar features installed in recent years on Thomas Street and Bedford Row haven’t been maintained. Limerick Council is great at maintaining parks and good at maintaining pavements but, for example, there are 56 LED lighting installations in a circle at the junction of O’Connell Street and Bedford Row/Thomas Street, five of which remain working. There are 36 single-person stone seats on Bedford Row and Thomas Street, some of which have been vandalised and moved since installation, without repair, and of the (presumably) 144 LED lights that were originally installed under those seats, 24 remain working. Street installations that require regular checking and maintenance tend not to be maintained – therefore the solution appears to be to avoid installing them in future. This isn’t a negative judgment of Limerick Council – it’s just practical reality.

Thus, with all due respect, I suggest taking a hard look at the plans between William Street and Mallow Street in particular. It’s not that Limerick deserves better (though it does) – it’s that Limerick needs better. Creating a nicer street for cars to drive through isn’t what the mandate of Limerick Council is about. “Promot[ing] a sense of place” is not achieved by retaining O’Connell Street primarily as a transit road. You can pedestrianise those streets now when there’s money to do so or you can look at those areas in twenty years and bemoan that you didn’t pedestrianise them when there was free money to do so. Being handed nine million euros is an opportunity to reshape Limerick’s main thoroughfare and make it significantly more attractive as a place to spend time for people who live in Limerick, work in Limerick and visit Limerick. This plan, shiny as it is, fails to do that.

Thanks for your time.


Just what is it about Limerick and erecting statues of people that look nothing like them?
anthony foley statue

Statue touted as resembling Anthony Foley, recently placed in Robert Byrne Park

Apparently the mayor of Limerick went on a solo run this week and didn’t tell the council that he was planning on installing the statue of Anthony Foley in Robert Byrne Park on the banks of the Shannon. In other words, we’ve got a rogue mayor who’s unilaterally erecting statues around the place, presumably because he gets to stick his name in the corner.
Now, this might not seem like a big deal to you. Even though the statue of Anthony Foley looks less like him than the statue of King Arthur / Burger King / King Limerick looks like Richard Harris. Having viewed it yesterday, it reminds me of those extra-large installations you sometimes see in Irish graveyards. You know, tacky central with an angel floating on top of a soccer ball and the like. While I was there two stray dogs peed against it but at least we can’t blame that on current mayor and rogue statue-erector Kieran O’Hanlon.
The interesting thing about mayors installing statues without telling people is that, if that’s reasonable practice, you’d want to be careful about who you elect as mayor. It’s one thing to give someone who’s vaguely racist a platform and a 50k salary for the year (Limerick has form here in the past decade), which we’re apparently going to do next Monday with Stephen Keary, but if they all get to plonk statues around the city without asking, the Fianna Fail lad has created a nice precedent for some of the more fringe parties so disliked by the main two. Using what we’ll call the O’Hanlon Precedent I’m sure they’ll take some pleasure in dropping down statues to some of their own fallen heroes when they eventually get to form a grand coalition and occupy the mayor’s office for five years.I will buy the biggest bag of popcorn possible on the day the Fine Gael lads lose their shit after a Sinn Fein mayor installs a statue of Sean South without asking.

Most cities have rules about statues, plaques and street-namings that the person who gets commemorated has to be dead for a reasonable period of time. Twenty years is pretty much standard and, generally speaking, that standard exists for good reasons. That should be the standard in Limerick, though Anthony Foley was beloved enough in Limerick that I’m sure the county council would have made an exception to such a hypothetical rule if they’d been asked.
None of this would matter so much if it wasn’t a really fucking ugly statue that resembles the person whom it’s supposed to commemorate only in that he’s wearing a headguard and carrying a ball. Oddly enough, the person it most resembles is probably current metropolitan mayor of Limerick, Michael Hourigan. I don’t think anybody ever compared Anthony Foley to mayor mumbler before this statue was erected but unfortunately this is where we find ourselves. It also resembles Donald Trump and Les Dennis. The one person it doesn’t look like at all is Anthony Foley.
Obviously I can’t wait for the upcoming Terry Wogan statue unveiling. It’s going in the middle of Poor Man’s Kilkee. Surely there’s no way that Limerick city would get three statues in a row that look nothing like the person they’re depicting. I mean, the odds have to be on our side this Saturday. They have to be, right?

Today, folks, is the most significant date in the Irish calendar: the feast of St Putty. Born in Wales, or England, or Scotland, assuming he existed, Putty was the son of a Roman landlord, kidnapped by heartless Irish brigands and sold into slavery. He spent many years minding pigs and eating rashers before going mad and escaping.

After returning to his homeland, wherever that was, the Irish people came to him in a dream (look, we’re doing nothing else at night) and beseeched him to return. And to bring some beer, which was unavailable at the time.

Potty became a priest (partly because, one assumes, he was the second son) and resolved to introduce the Irish to God. As dinner parties are excellent for introductions, he went to the Hill of Slane and started a big fire. Because King Laoire was organising his own dinner party that night about ten miles away at Tara, he went over with a few heavies to stop Potty’s fire. The resultant feast of shamrocks was so amazing that Laoire was happy for Ireland to convert to a new religion, thereby beginning Ireland’s transformation into an import economy.

It was a hard time for Pitty, but happily the Catholic Church had not yet insisted on priests being celibate. So he married St Brigid (she of the swastika-cross and the giant cloak) and because she was terrified of snakes, he sent them all to work in the growing financial district in east London, where they remain today.

As Petty grew old, he began to see the fruits of his labours. He confirmed the national colour as blue (no, really, it is, I’m not making this up – go check) and witnessed a country dotted with churches, dancing and people writing everywhere, even on tombstones, which annoyed him. Today, we commemorate Petty: snake-whacker, shamrock-eater and rasher-inventor. It’s a great day to wear blue. Or green, if you must.

Technically, it’s all true except for one paragraph. Brigid was too classy for him. And not yet born, which was probably a small factor.

The more sober among you (yes, I realise that it’s St Patrick’s Day, but being drunk isn’t actually compulsory) will have noticed that I didn’t call him Patty. American friends (& other overseas people who think getting drunk on March 17th is a desirable thing): It’s Saint Patrick’s Day. Or “Paddy’s Day”. You may not under any circumstances refer to it as “Patty’s Day”. Wish someone a “Happy Patty’s Day” and you will be beaten – & not in that naughty bottom spanking way. Call it “Patty’s Day” & none of us will rest until we see your headless body floating in a shallow lake.

Happy St Patrick’s Day, everyone. An entire nation will silently rejoice if you remember that it’s “Paddy”, not “Patty”. We could all do without the image of St Patrick’s Day being tarnished by being associated with an Irishman crying into a giant glass of beer before coming out fighting.