The Niall Boylan Podcast (They Told Me To Shut Up)

In this episode, Niall looks into the question: Is it time for rank and file Gardaí on the street to be armed? Recent reports suggest an increase in violent crime, with gangs reportedly using high-powered weapons. Niall explores whether arming the rank and file Gardaí is the right response to this growing threat. Caller Perspectives: Some callers argue that it's time to arm the rank and file Gardaí on the street. They believe that with the rise in violent crime and reports of criminal gangs using high-powered weapons, police officers need to be adequately equipped to protect themselves and the public. Arming the Gardaí would help deter criminals and ensure public safety. However, other callers disagree with the proposal to arm the rank and file Gardaí on the street. They argue that while violent crime is a serious issue, arming police officers could escalate tensions and lead to more violence. Instead, they suggest exploring other solutions such as increased community policing and better intelligence-gathering. Niall reflects on the diverse perspectives shared by callers and the complex nature of responding to rising gang violence.need to address the root causes of crime rather than just responding with more force. They don't think arming the rank and file Garda is the right solution. While it's important to address the increase in violent crime, arming all police officers could have unintended consequences. It could escalate situations and increase the risk of unnecessary violence. Instead, we should focus on improving community relations and investing in measures to prevent crime before it happens.

In this episode, Niall tackles the question: Should manual laborers be paid the same as skilled workers? Some callers argue that manual laborers should be paid the same as skilled workers. They emphasize that manual laborers make significant contributions to projects and without their hard work, skilled workers wouldn't be able to do their jobs effectively. It's crucial to recognize the value of all workers and pay them fairly for their contributions. However, other callers disagree with the idea that manual laborers should be paid the same as skilled workers. They believe that skilled workers have invested time and effort into developing their expertise and should be compensated accordingly. Paying manual laborers the same as skilled workers could undermine the value of specialized skills and discourage people from pursuing careers in skilled trades. Niall reflects on the diverse perspectives shared by callers and the complexities of determining fair wages for different types of work.

In this episode, Niall addresses a pressing question: Would you allow your child to leave school for a trade? The topic arises from an email sent in by a listener, Pauline, who is torn between her son's passion for working with his hands and her concerns about his future without completing his Leaving Cert. Pauline's son, 16, has struggled academically but shows real talent and interest in working with his father in the family garage. While Pauline is worried about her son's future without a Leaving Cert qualification, her husband sees an opportunity for their son to start an apprenticeship and work full-time in the family business. Niall opens up the lines to callers to hear their opinions on this dilemma. Some callers completely understand Pauline's dilemma and believe her son's passion and talent lie in working with his hands. They argue that traditional education isn't the right path for everyone and suggest that Pauline should support her son's interest in pursuing a trade. However, other callers sympathize with Pauline's concerns about her son's future. They believe it's important for him to complete his Leaving Cert before making any decisions about his career. Niall reflects on the diverse perspectives shared by callers and the challenges faced by parents like Pauline in guiding their children's education and career choices.

In this episode, Niall covers the May Bank Holiday protest, asking participants why they are attending and what their concerns are. The protest comes in response to the emergence of a new migrant "tent city" along the banks of the Grand Canal in Dublin. Despite government assurances that such encampments would not be tolerated, the number of tents has risen, sparking frustration and calls for action. While the protest is primarily focused on the immigration crisis, many participants are also protesting against broader government failures, including housing, healthcare, and the cost of living. Some see the protest as an opportunity to demand better solutions and hold political leaders accountable. On the other hand, there are counter-protests organized by groups who believe that the national protest is primarily about immigration and label it as a far-right demonstration. Niall opens up the lines to callers to discuss their reasons for attending the protest or their concerns if they are not participating. Those involved in the counter-protest are also invited to share their perspective. Some callers express their solidarity with those affected by the immigration crisis and emphasize the need to demand better solutions from the government. They highlight that the protest is not just about immigration but also about holding leaders accountable for failures in housing, healthcare, and the cost of living. The protest highlights the public's concerns regarding the immigration crisis and broader issues of government accountability. It's a significant moment for citizens to voice their frustrations and demand meaningful change.

In this episode, Niall explores whether the right to complain starts at the polls. With the upcoming local and European elections in Ireland, voter turnout is a critical issue. Many people choose not to vote due to their disappointment with the political system and the failure of elected representatives to fulfill their promises. Some believe that voting won't make a difference, while others feel uninformed about the issues and candidates. However, there are those who emphasize the importance of voting. They argue that if we want change, we need to use our voice and cast our ballots. Low voter turnout only strengthens the status quo, and holding our representatives accountable through voting is essential for a functioning democracy. On the other hand, some callers suggest that while voting is important, it's not the only way to participate in democracy. They believe that voter apathy stems from a broader disillusionment with the political system and advocate for other forms of civic participation, such as community organizing and activism. The discussion highlights the complexities surrounding voter turnout and civic engagement. While some emphasize the importance of voting as a fundamental right in a democracy, others point to deeper issues that contribute to voter apathy. As the elections approach, it's essential to consider how to address these issues and encourage broader civic participation.

In this episode, Niall looks into the contentious issue of whether politicians should be prosecuted for lying. The discussion arises from a news story from Wales, where members of the Senedd, the Welsh parliament, are considering legislation to criminalize lying by politicians. Adam Price, former leader of Plaid Cymru and a leading proponent of the legislation, argues that in a world of post-truth politics, it's vital to hold politicians accountable for their lies. The proposed law would make it illegal for politicians to wilfully mislead the parliament or the public. Some callers believe it's about time we held politicians accountable for their lies. They argue that lying by politicians undermines trust in the political system and that criminalizing lying would help restore faith in democracy. However, others express concerns about the potential chilling effect on free speech and political debate. They worry that criminalizing lying could deter politicians from speaking out on important issues for fear of prosecution. While it's important for politicians to be honest and transparent, making lying a criminal offence could be difficult to enforce and could lead to a slippery slope of censorship. Instead of criminalizing lying, these callers suggest focusing on holding politicians accountable through other means, such as fact-checking and public scrutiny. The discussion on whether politicians should be prosecuted for lying revealed diverse perspectives on the complex issue. While some callers emphasized the importance of holding politicians accountable for their lies, others expressed concerns about the potential impact on free speech and political debate. As the debate continues, finding a balance between accountability and freedom of expression remains essential.

UK Immigration Barrister, Paul Turner Niall was told today that 'If we become a transit country for migrants... then the numbers I don't believe will go down.' UK Immigration Barrister, Paul Turner, on the whether the Prime Minister is celebrating Rwanda plan success too early or not. Paul went on to tell Niall Boylan that he has heard that legal representatives for illegal migrants in the UK are telling their clients to go to Ireland to avid deportation. This spells disaster for Ireland and controlling immigration.

In this episode, Niall looks into the potential impact of the Rwanda bill on Ireland. The controversial UK legislation aims to deter asylum seekers by sending them to Rwanda. Tánaiste Micheál Martin suggests that the policy is already driving asylum seekers across the Border from Northern Ireland to the Republic. Some callers think Ireland has become a dumping ground for immigrants, and the Rwanda bill will only exacerbate the problem. We've already taken in too many immigrants, and our country is struggling to cope. There's a real risk that crime rates will increase and tensions will rise if we continue to accept more immigrants. We need to put the needs of our own citizens first and focus on addressing the issues we're facing at home before we consider taking in more immigrants. Ireland is already struggling to accommodate the immigrants we have, and we simply don't have the resources or infrastructure to take in more. Our social services are overstretched, and there's a risk that our communities will suffer as a result. We need to prioritize the needs of our own citizens before considering taking in more immigrants. Others believe that the Rwanda bill is a necessary step to address illegal immigration. They argue that Ireland cannot continue to absorb large numbers of asylum seekers without facing serious social and economic consequences. The government needs to take action to protect our borders and ensure the safety and security of our citizens. While it's important to show compassion for those in need, we cannot ignore the impact that uncontrolled immigration is having on our country. The Rwanda bill may be controversial, but it's necessary to protect Ireland's interests and ensure that our immigration system is fair and effective. Niall wraps up the discussion, urging listeners to consider the implications of the Rwanda bill and the impact it may have on Ireland.

In this episode, Niall looks into Helen McEntee's proposed immigration legislation and discusses the alarming 50% drop in Irish staycations. The burning question of the day: Has the government lost control? Some callers are not convinced that Helen McEntee's proposed immigration legislation is the right approach. Instead of focusing on stricter enforcement, we should be looking for ways to improve our immigration system and make it more efficient and effective. This means investing in resources and infrastructure to process applications more quickly and fairly. We should also be exploring ways to integrate immigrants into our society and economy, rather than just keeping them out. Callers also believe the 50% drop in Irish staycations is a clear sign that the government needs to take action. People are clearly choosing to holiday abroad instead of staying in Ireland, and that's a problem. We need to make sure that our tourism industry is competitive and attractive to both domestic and international visitors. This means investing in infrastructure, promoting local attractions, and ensuring that prices are reasonable. The government needs to step up and support the tourism sector before it's too late. Niall wraps up the discussion, urging the government to address these pressing issues and regain control.

In this episode, Niall discusses the events that unfolded at the protest in Newtown Mount Kennedy, where journalist Fatima Gunning from Gript Media was pepper-sprayed, and members of the public were manhandled by the gardaí when the riot squad was called in. Minister of Justice Helen McEntee and Taoiseach Simon Harris back Garda handling of protests at the site intended for use as accommodation for IP applicants. The discussion delves into the responses from both the police and the protesters. Niall also explores the broader context of public dissatisfaction with Irish immigration policy, drawing attention to the significant social tensions surrounding the issue. The episode offers a critical look at the state of democracy in Ireland and the increasing divide between the government and the people. Niall concludes by highlighting the urgent need for dialogue and understanding between the government and the public. He emphasizes the importance of addressing public dissatisfaction with immigration policies and calls for a more transparent and accountable approach from authorities.

In this episode, Niall discusses the events that unfolded at the protest in Newtown Mount Kennedy, where journalist Fatima Gunning from Gript Media was pepper-sprayed, and members of the public were manhandled by the gardaí when the riot squad was called in. Minister of Justice Helen McEntee and Taoiseach Simon Harris back Garda handling of protests at the site intended for use as accommodation for IP applicants. The discussion delves into the responses from both the police and the protesters. Niall also explores the broader context of public dissatisfaction with Irish immigration policy, drawing attention to the significant social tensions surrounding the issue. The episode offers a critical look at the state of democracy in Ireland and the increasing divide between the government and the people. Niall concludes by highlighting the urgent need for dialogue and understanding between the government and the public. He emphasizes the importance of addressing public dissatisfaction with immigration policies and calls for a more transparent and accountable approach from authorities.

As you all know Niall Boylan is running for the EU lections in Dublin and today hes asking does voting for a change really work. In democracies globally, a growing number of voters are losing faith in electoral processes. Numerous individuals express frustration, feeling their voices go unheard. Some are gravitating towards political factions with radical populist agendas. This discontent among voters could stem from worsening living standards in Western nations, particularly the steady decline of manufacturing jobs and escalating inequality. These trends contribute to a diminishing trust in democratic institutions. Additionally, the proliferation of mobile internet has played a role, enabling the dissemination of misinformation and bolstering populist movements. Furthermore, it's plausible that elections fall short in delivering the economic improvements voters seek, leading many to question the true impact of electoral participation on their well-being.

In this episode, Niall delves into the question: Would You Allow A Homeless Stranger To Live In Your Home? The topic arises as homelessness continues to increase in Ireland, with many families currently experiencing homelessness. The Irish government has asked citizens to take in Ukrainian migrants into their homes but has not made the same request to help its own citizens who are homeless. Some callers believe that while they sympathize with the plight of homeless individuals, letting a homeless stranger live in their home is not the solution. While it's crucial to address homelessness through systemic changes and increased support services, inviting a stranger into their home poses potential risks to their safety and security. Other ways to support homeless individuals include donating to shelters, volunteering, or advocating for policy changes. Others express that they would indeed let a homeless stranger live in their home. As believers in compassion and helping those in need, they couldn't turn a blind eye to someone who is homeless and in need of shelter. Everyone deserves a safe place to call home, and if they have the means to provide that, they would do so without hesitation. By opening up their home to a homeless stranger, they can make a meaningful difference in someone's life and contribute to addressing the homelessness crisis in their community. The debate about whether to let a homeless stranger live in one's home reflects the complexity of the homelessness crisis. While some are hesitant due to safety concerns, others believe in the importance of compassion and helping those in need. As we continue to grapple with this issue, it's essential to explore various ways to address homelessness and support those who are most vulnerable in our society.

In this episode, Niall discusses the controversial topic of whether children should be allowed in pubs. The discussion was sparked by a UK pub landlord's decision to make his pub a child-free zone. The Lower Red Lion pub in St Albans gained attention after a sign advertising it as "dog-friendly, child-free" went viral. While the pub received messages of support from both the local community and internationally, the policy also sparked debate online. The pub's landlord, David Worcester, defended the policy, stating that he aims to create an environment where his customers can relax without disruption. However, the decision has divided opinions, with some arguing that pubs should be adult-oriented spaces, while others believe that children should be allowed to accompany their families. As Niall opens up the lines to callers, listeners share their views on whether children should be allowed in pubs and how pub owners can strike a balance between catering to adults and families. Some callers think children should not be allowed in pubs. Pubs are adult-oriented establishments where people go to relax, socialize, and enjoy alcoholic beverages. Allowing children in pubs can disrupt the atmosphere and make other patrons uncomfortable. Furthermore, pubs are not suitable environments for children, as they are often crowded, noisy, and may contain hazards such as hot drinks and alcohol. By maintaining a child-free policy, pub owners can ensure that their establishment remains a welcoming space for adults to enjoy without disruption. Others argue that children should be allowed in pubs. Pubs are community spaces where people of all ages should be able to gather and socialize. Banning children from pubs can be exclusionary and unfair to families who may want to enjoy a meal or drink together. Furthermore, children can learn valuable social skills by interacting with adults in a variety of settings, including pubs. Instead of excluding children, pub owners should strive to create a family-friendly atmosphere where everyone feels welcome. The discussion about whether children should be allowed in pubs is ongoing and reflects the diverse opinions within our communities. While some believe that pubs should remain adult-oriented spaces, others argue that families should be able to enjoy these establishments together. As pub owners navigate this issue, it's essential to consider the preferences of their customers and find a balance that works for everyone.

In this episode, Niall opens a controversial topic of welfare reform sparked by recent announcements from the Prime Minister. Rishi Sunak outlined plans to reform the welfare system, emphasizing that unemployment support should be a safety net, not a lifestyle choice. The proposed reforms include removing benefits for those who refuse job offers after 12 months, tightening the work capability assessment, and reviewing eligibility criteria for benefits such as Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The Prime Minister's announcement has ignited debate, with some arguing that living on welfare should not be a lifestyle choice. They believe that the proposed reforms will incentivize work and reduce long-term dependency on welfare, ultimately benefiting individuals and the economy. However, others argue that welfare benefits are essential for those facing circumstances beyond their control, such as illness, disability, or unemployment. They warn that the proposed reforms risk pushing vulnerable individuals further into poverty and hardship. As Niall opens up the lines to callers, listeners weigh in on whether living on welfare is a lifestyle choice and whether the proposed reforms are the right approach to tackling welfare dependency.

In this thought-provoking episode, Niall delves into the contentious issue of the EU Migration Pact and its implications for national sovereignty. As the European Union grapples with the complexities of migration, questions arise about the balance between collective responsibility and individual sovereignty. The EU Migration Pact, designed to streamline migration policies and address the challenges of asylum seekers, has sparked debate about the extent to which member states are willing to cede control over their borders and immigration procedures. Some callers express concerns that the pact represents a significant erosion of national sovereignty. They argue that by centralizing migration policies and imposing quotas on member states, the EU undermines their ability to make independent decisions about immigration. For these callers, preserving sovereignty is paramount, even in the face of shared migration challenges. Conversely, other callers highlight the benefits of collective action on migration within the EU. They argue that cooperation and solidarity among member states are essential for effectively managing migration flows and addressing humanitarian crises. While acknowledging the importance of sovereignty, these callers emphasize the need for a coordinated approach to migration that balances national interests with broader European values. In wrapping up the discussion, Niall reflects on the diverse perspectives shared by callers and the complex nature of sovereignty in the context of migration policy. As the EU continues to navigate these challenges, the balance between sovereignty and cooperation remains a central issue for member states to consider.

Niall spoke to Gary Kavanagh from Gript media about documents provided to Gript under FOI show that senior officials in the Department of Justice believed that amending Article 41 of the Constitution to include non-marital families, as proposed by the Government in a recent referendum, would undermine, or even outright destroy, the ability of the State to operate an effective immigration system. One email seen by Gript shows senior officials in the Department being told that “The State has been able to maintain an immigration system so far precisely because Article 41 is applied to a small, tightly-defined group of people. The State will not be able to regulate immigration if this protection is applied any more widely.” In the last referendum the Government attempted to expand the definition of family in Article 41 to include non-marital families which were based on “durable relationships.” Read the full story here: https://gript.ie/revealed-the-documents-the-state-didnt-want-you-to-see-before-the-referendums/

In this episode, Niall tackles the contentious issue of abortion legislation, specifically focusing on the debate surrounding the removal of the three-day wait period. The discussion was ignited by recent parliamentary discussions wherein the Taoiseach addressed concerns regarding abortion care in Ireland. Currently, individuals seeking abortion services in Ireland must adhere to a mandatory three-day wait period following their initial consultation. Proponents of removing this wait period argue that it creates unnecessary barriers for individuals seeking timely healthcare. They emphasize the importance of respecting autonomy and allowing informed decisions about reproductive health to be made without undue delay. Conversely, opponents of removing the wait period assert that it plays a crucial role in ensuring individuals have adequate time to consider their options and make well-informed choices. They argue that abortion is a significant medical procedure with ethical and moral dimensions, and rushing the decision-making process could have serious consequences. As Niall opens the lines to callers, a lively exchange of perspectives ensues. Some callers advocate strongly for the removal of the wait period, highlighting the importance of accessible and timely abortion care. Others express reservations, emphasizing the need for thoughtful consideration and informed decision-making. In concluding the discussion, Niall reflects on the diversity of opinions presented by callers, acknowledging the complexity of the issue and the necessity for careful deliberation in shaping abortion legislation. Join Niall as he navigates this challenging topic, exploring issues of reproductive rights, healthcare access, and ethical considerations surrounding abortion legislation.

In this episode, Niall explores the contentious topic of whether religious instruction, including communion and confirmation, should be completely removed from schools. Delving into the complexities of secularism versus religious influence in education, Niall navigates through contrasting perspectives on the matter. In the United States, the separation of church and state is upheld, prohibiting the teaching of religion in public schools to comply with the First Amendment. Meanwhile, in Ireland, Catholicism has traditionally played a significant role in education, sparking debates about the appropriateness of religious teachings in modern society. Some argue for the complete removal of religion from schools, advocating for a secular learning environment that promotes inclusivity and critical thinking. On the other hand, proponents of religious education highlight its cultural significance and moral teachings, emphasizing the value it brings to students' understanding of the world. As callers voice their opinions, passionate arguments emerge on both sides of the debate. Some believe that religious teachings have no place in a modern educational system, while others defend the importance of preserving religious traditions within schools. In wrapping up the discussion, Niall reflects on the diverse viewpoints shared by callers, underscoring the need for nuanced dialogue and consideration of the role of religion in shaping educational practices. Join Niall in this thought-provoking exploration of faith, tradition, and the evolving landscape of education.

In this episode, Niall explores the question of whether juvenile records should be automatically wiped clean at the age of 18. Drawing from the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions and Certain Disclosures) Act 2016 in Ireland, Niall delves into the complexities surrounding this issue. Niall opens the lines to callers, inviting listeners to share their perspectives. Some callers advocate for wiping juvenile records clean at 18, emphasizing the importance of giving young offenders a fresh start as they enter adulthood. They argue that retaining juvenile records could unfairly stigmatize individuals and hinder their opportunities for rehabilitation. On the other hand, some callers express reservations about automatically clearing juvenile records at 18. They raise concerns about accountability and the potential consequences of erasing records for serious offenses committed during adolescence. While acknowledging the need for rehabilitation, they suggest that certain offenses may warrant continued disclosure of juvenile records. Throughout the episode, Niall navigates the diverse viewpoints presented by callers. In wrapping up the discussion, he reflects on the insights shared and underscores the importance of finding a balanced approach to addressing juvenile records.