18 January 2015
RC: And next in our New Year's series of
Leader Interviews this week the Sinn Féin President and TD for Louth, Gerry
Adams. Gerry Adams, welcome to the studio. Thank you for coming in.
GA:
Thank you, Richard.
GA: The North obviously is a key issue. The government here is remiss in terms of its stewardship of the Good Friday Agreement. It's a disastrous no-strategy-at-all in relation to the implementation of that. This is the worst government – and I've dealt with governments – I didn't deal with Charlie Haughey but I've dealt with governments since Charlie Haughey's time - and this is government is the worst government in terms of standing up to the British government as co-equal guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement.
RC:
You said this week: “We're here to campaign for government. We're here to seek a mandate for government.”
I presume Sinn Féin, being in the position that you want them to be, you want
to be Taoiseach. That's your ambition, is it?
GA:
No, I don't have any personal ambition to be Taoiseach. First of all I think that we have to be
humble. We can't presume we're going to be into government. So what we have to
do in the first instance is to persuade people that the largest mandate that
they can give Sinn Féin will both determine if we will be in government, will
determine the role that we would play in government, will strengthen our hand
in negotiating out a progressive programme for government and will also influence what other parties
might be in government. So I'm asking people – and this is the difference in
this election from any previous election – I'm asking people to consider making
the change and to put in a party which will come forward with policies to
repair the disastrous social damage that has been done by this government and
its predecessor and to bring core Republican values into the daily lives of
citizens.
RC:
But let's suppose for a minute that Sinn Féin were the larger - or
indeed the largest party in a coalition – why the doubt over you being
Taoiseach? Is that your own doubt or is it because Sinn Féin has to discuss or
vote on that issue?
GA:
It's just that I haven't given it any consideration.
RC:
Really?
GA: I
could have been the Deputy First Minister in The North – I could have held any
of those ministerial positions - I decided not to. I decided that Martin
McGuinness was a better choice for that. I decided – because you can't judge
Sinn Féin just in terms of The North or The South – we're an all-Ireland party,
Richard.
RC: In
this instance would it be your decision?
GA: I presume so but I mean again I haven't
given it any thought.
RC:
And you have no ambition to be Taoiseach at the moment?
GA:
No. I want to be the best Republican that I can be. I want to be the
best Sinn Féin party member, the best activist, the best citizen ...
RC:
... But not the best Taoiseach?
GA: Well, if that opportunity arises we will
look at that but well out from the election. And all the speculation about what
parties may or may not form the government - a vote hasn't even been cast.
So ...
RC:
... Sure. But we're in a campaign as you've said yourself so we have to
discuss what might happen - what the possibilities are. You criticise
Labour - you have a regular go at Labour for having sold out. But isn't it true
that if Sinn Féin were the smaller party in a coalition government you
would be in exactly the same position where have you'd have to compromise on
some of your key issues?
GA:
Well, I'm not against compromising but what I am against is what Labour
did. And you know the famous Pat Rabbitte admission that these are the types of
things that you say during an election campaign - we won't get into that type
of nonsense.
RC:
But you're already saying them, aren't you?
GA:
No, no, we're not.
RC:
You'll saying you'll do things that you may not be in a position to
deliver on.
GA:
Well then, we won't go into government. Because you see there are two
things that will distinguish us from the other parties. One is, apart from
the Tesco ads, all the things that Fine Gael have said on backs of lorries and
advertisements about ending trolley waits, about opening hospitals, about not
closing hospitals, about putting it up to the Troika and so on and so forth as
well as the “list” of won't cut child benefits, won't cut
disability (crosstalk) ...
RC:
... But you have your own Tesco List. You're going to abolish the property tax. You're going to abolish the
water charges. You're going to introduce new tax rate, a third tax rate, at
forty-eight percent. You're going to
change USC - this is your shopping list. You've put this out.
GA:
But here's the second point I want to make: Labour and Fine Gael moved
seamlessly into government – do you have any recollection of the negotiations
for the programme for government? Did any of these issues feature? They just moved
seamlessly into government so what we have to do - and there are two phases to
this, Richard: 1) is to be fit ourselves in terms of standing candidates and
all the rest of the type of capacity that's required to fight an election – and
I think we're well on stream for doing that and 2) to persuade most importantly
- to appeal to the voters - to vote for change – and to vote for Sinn Féin –
and then to negotiate a programme for government.
RC:
It's all a bit general when you say: Vote for change. Vote for
improvement. Everybody says that. Are these your red line issues? When you say you won't compromise. Are you saying
that you won't go into government with anybody in any formation unless
or until you have a commitment from that other party or parties that they will
abolish property tax and scrap water charges?
GA:
Yes. They are two issues that we have put forward because we stood in
the last election – we did very, very well – on a commitment that we would not
follow the lead of this government in putting a second water charge upon
people. So it follows through morally and politically that we should get rid of
that. And not only is that because it's the commitment that we made but it's
also because it makes sense economically - because that will put money back
into people's pockets, it will stimulate the economy - so to with the stealth
tax on the family home - and then just to remind you – we stood against water
charges in The North. We succeeded in preventing the Tories from imposing them
and we stopped them from privatising ...
RC:
... Any other red line issues?
GA: The North obviously is a key issue. The government here is remiss in terms of its stewardship of the Good Friday Agreement. It's a disastrous no-strategy-at-all in relation to the implementation of that. This is the worst government – and I've dealt with governments – I didn't deal with Charlie Haughey but I've dealt with governments since Charlie Haughey's time - and this is government is the worst government in terms of standing up to the British government as co-equal guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement.
RC: Can we just go back to Irish Water and you say you'll get rid of the
charges - you've even put a price on that – which is three hundred million –
and you're going to levy that from this new tax rate. But what will you do with
the Irish Water company? Are you going
to abolish that?
GA:
Well, we're open to the idea of having a single utility but we don't
think that Irish Water itself is fit for purpose so there needs to be a
different mode of governance. And certainly the way it has been used – you
know, the seventy or eighty million that was given of taxpayers' money over to
consultants and so on and so forth – it's just (crosstalk) ...
RC:
...But are you talking about reverting to the original system of letting
local authorities do it? Are you talking about keeping and changing Irish
Water? Are you setting up a new company with a different method of governance?
GA:
It's probably too late to go back to – it would cost the people too much
- to go back to local Council – that was our preference. And as I said we're
not against a single utility - that's what's working in The North...
RC:
... So you'd keep Irish Water, would you?
GA:
Well, not in its current form.
RC:
Okay. And you've some changes as to how that could be governed. You laid out a document, a policy document,
towards the end of last year in which you say - and in relation to funding - I
wanted to ask you about this – funding should be generated through mixed income
of which the majority is through public subsidy from the government in addition
to non-domestic charges, commercial borrowing and equity investment. From where
would the equity investment come?
GA: From the Strategic Investment Fund. We
have argued these points consistently at the time of the boom. We wanted the
wealth – the surplus - invested into services. That didn't happen. At the time
of the bust we said you can't cut your way – I couldn't repeat often enough the
social damage which this government has done - so we argue for opportunity –
for stimulus - for growing the economy - so whether it's in terms of broadband,
whether it's in terms of social and affordable housing, whether it's in terms
of schools or hospitals, but particularly in this issue of, of ...
RC: …
So that's state investment by another name – when you say “equity investment”
it's a mix.
GA: Yeah, but it's a mix, it's a mix because
Sinn Féin...
RC: ...But
it's state money.
GA: Yes.
RC:
Alright. So it's effectively it'll be completely state...
GA:
...Well some of the money - the EU have provided in the Strategic
Investment Fund – money which is there for structural investment and if the
government got its act in order I'm sure that we could avail of that money.
RC: But at all times Irish Water – or
whatever you would call it under this
new system - would be a hundred percent owned by the Irish State?
GA: Well, yes. I think so. I think that ...
RC: ...You don't sound sure.
GA:
Sorry, no, well I'm just reflecting on your question because the fact is
that water services need to remain in public ownership. They should not be
handed over for privatisation. And what form the governance takes is a matter
for the experts but I ...
RC:
...Are you saying then that there's room for private investment, private
equity investment, in the Irish Water company?
GA:
No, I'm not. I'm saying very, very, very clearly wherever we draw the
sources of revenue from that – because there are a lot of people who have their
own wells or a lot of people who are in group schemes and so on and so forth
and that should be encouraged - and people in rural Ireland by the way have
always had to pay for their own water - so that's a mixed bag for the
household. But what we're saying very, very clearly is that water is a human
right and it should remain a human right.
RC: What about Allied Irish Bank? This week Michael Noonan was talking about
the government engaging Goldman Sachs to look at the possibilities of sale
partly – perhaps part of it and then all of it - or then indeed all of it
further down the line - what's Sinn Féin's line on this? Do you support selling
off AIB?
GA: No, we don't.
RC:
You want to keep it in national ownership then?
GA:
Yes, because you see the people had private banking debt foisted upon
them – that should never have happened. There's sovereign debt, which of course
we're obliged and we're very honourable about the need to pay for that, but to
amalgamate private banking debt caused by the greed of speculators and
financiers and bankers and some politicians (crosstalk) let me finish - let me finish.
RC:
Alright. But that ground is well-trod, in fairness.
GA: I
know but when we argued these points they was rubbished by the government
parties and others - now that's EU policy. They have separated out sovereign
debt from private banking debt. So if the Minister gets rid of the limited
ownership that we have or whatever shares we have in that then the public have
no say in what goes forward. And secondly, it's
an acknowledgment by him that the government have given up on the retrospective
recapitalisation – in other words the money that should be given back to us for
a debt which wasn't ours – the government have given up. The government haven't
asked for that, Richard, the government haven't even asked the ...
RC:
...Well, I think they say that they have – they say it's still a “live
issue”.
GA:
No, they haven't.
RC:
But let's stay with AIB for the moment. So you would oppose the selling
off of even part but certainly all of AIB at any stage. You want to keep
it in state ownership in perpetuity. Is
that correct?
GA:
Not necessarily in perpetuity but certainly while we have the need to
have a negotiating lever and one that benefits the taxpayer. This is ...
RC:
... So what are you saying - maybe in ten years' time or what?
GA:
Well, I don't know. The fact is we also need to have Strategic State
Bank – I mean this is one of the great promises of the government, certainly
the Labour component of it, in the last election campaign but what we need to
have is to ensure that what happened in the banking sector previously doesn't
happen again. And it strikes me the way this government's going about its
business that it hasn't learnt any of those lessons.
RC: Is AIB a red line issue for you by the
way in the terms of any coalition
negotiations?
GA:
Well, I'm not going to come in here, if you don't mind, and do the ...
RC:
... And what? Lay out policy?
GA: No, I'm laying out policy but those are
matters for negotiation.
RC:
But what's your position going into the negotiation? – that's my
question.
GA: Well, the position going into the negotiation is that we should retain whatever ...
RC:
... Or you might be prepared to let that one slide?
GA: Well, you can't...you can't negotiate out in the public airways and as
someone who has some experience in negotiating ...
RC:
...Well, you did on other issues – you said that the other issues in
terms of property taxes and water charges were red line issues - so that's
clear. I just wanted to ask if that was on the same list.
GA: Fair enough.
RC:
We'll move on. It's now three months since Maíría Cahill with her
allegations of rape and since then there have been other claims, too, of IRA
sexual predators (if you like) being exiled to one part of the country or
another or indeed outside of the country to avoid justice. Can you tell us
what form of internal investigation has Sinn Féin carried out into these
allegations? In general terms, what did you find out and what information was
gathered? And what did you do with that information?
GA: Well, first of all it isn't the business of Sinn Féin to have an
internal investigation into any of these matters - that's a matter for the
PSNI, for the Garda Siochána. I've appealed to anyone who has any of this
information whatsoever to come forward with it. I have spoken to the Gardaí – I
have brought other issues in terms of criminality and allegations of abuse
forward and talked to the Gardaí and with other agencies about these
matters. And in dealing with
the Máiría Cahill case, I was trying to be very, very sensitive to Máiría
Cahill because clearly the woman was a victim of abuse. But what made this
different was the way that issue was seized upon by our political opponents and
by elements of the media to make really untruthful, deeply-wounding, malicious
allegations against me and against the Sinn Féin party – which I (crosstalk) ...
RC:
... There was also untrue and vile things said about Maíría Cahill at
that same time ...
GA:
Not by me or anybody representing Sinn Féin.
RC: By
people who support Sinn Féin?
GA:
Well I don't know but not by me or by anybody representing Sinn Féin.
RC:
Are you seriously saying that Sinn Féin ...there's no obligation in Sinn
Féin to carry out an internal investigation into these allegations to see what
was known by people who were in the IRA and who now are in Sinn Féin or who are
connected with the wider Republican movement that there's no onus or
responsibility to you to carry out an internal investigation?
GA:
There's an onus on everybody who has any information whatsoever
within Sinn Féin or outside of Sinn Féin - within the broad Republican family -
to bring that information forward, (crosstalk) to bring that information
forward, Richard, to the PSNI, to An Garda Siochána - to any of the agencies
which are equipped to deal with these matters.
RC: So
you're operating purely on a voluntary system. You don't believe that there's
any onus on Sinn Féin to take responsibility and to ask these people the direct
question ...
GA: ... Sorry, no (crosstalk)
RC:
That is the question.
GA:
No, no no. In fairness – in fairness – I'm NOT saying we don't
have a responsibility - of course we have a responsibility...
RC:
But have you done it?
GA:
Bear with me – Sinn Féin have signed up to child protection protocols -
for some long years now - put together by the HSE, by the PSNI, which are the
very, very best protocols for dealing with these issues. And that - by the
way – if someone comes forward to you now and says that they were the victim of
abuse - the last thing you should do, Richard, is to try to investigate it. The
first thing you should do is believe the person and then bring that
information, that there's a child at risk, to the appropriate authorities. So Sinn Féin
doesn't dodge our responsibilities. Our Deputy First Minister, Martin
McGuinness, put forward a totally non-partisan approach to this issue. One in
four people on this island suffer from abuse - we know that as a fact.
Obviously, the period of conflict in The North added to all of that – that some
people dealt with these issues who shouldn't have - they were dealt with in an
inappropriate way - many people who were victims may not have come forward. So
Martin has proposed, under the tutelage of the North South Ministerial Council,
that a victim-centred process should be put in place to deal with all of these
matters.
The Taoiseach at
the time – the Taoiseach at the time said he welcomed that. When the debate was
on in the Dáil I said the judgment on us would be how we deal with these issues
in the future as opposed to the disgraceful way it was dealt with on the floor of
the Dáil. Let the Taoiseach now take up Martin on his proposition and bring
that forward.
RC:
Gerry Adams, thank you very much indeed.
Did you notice (impossible to have missed it) the I in that bastards responses to RC,s questions about becoming Teapot the party,s Ard Comhairle never got a mention ,the quisling $inn £eind president for life has still the same attitude that he had when he allowed six brave men to die on hunger strike needlessly and how many others who knows,all to advance his political ambitions.the Engilish have the royal "We" now the Irish have the royal "I" its really always been that way with this bastard.
ReplyDeleteMarty,
ReplyDeleteI suppose it illustrates just how wrong the war was, when it was directed for the purposes of enhancing political ambition and career. Volunteers and others died so that some Caesar could be great. What a sorrowful waste of life.
Anthony a cara at least Caesar never denied being a megalomaniac or indeed that he was a god...
ReplyDeleteSomething is going on behind the scenes
ReplyDeleteMarty,
ReplyDeletethat is one of the problems with god - he tries to boss people around as if he is Gerry
LOL Anthony if the bearded one gets control can we expect to see a rise in Gerrymandering
ReplyDeleteExcellent, and only sixty two shopping day's left to April Fool's day.
ReplyDeleteBig Ken just on raising the possibility of we ourselves taking their seats in the brit Dáil to potentially support a minority BLP gov.
If the electorate in the south vote SF into government, a party that has at its head, a Coward in the shape of gerry adams, then they deserve the shafting due them. More fool them.
ReplyDeleteThis man set up a secret army within the irish republican army, an army drawn from the people for the people, and he used this secret army to subvert and overthrow the peoples army. He has betrayed Irish people before and given the chance will not pause for thought before doing so again.
Things in the south are bad but to even contemplate this egotistical yellow cunt as a legitimate alternative is tantamount to a national suicide.
That complete and utter twat ballbag maskey is ralleying students against the closure of st marys, while at the same time signing up to its closure. I say shut it down to fuck, if those that marched to stormont with maskey are that thick, then I say I dont want stupid cunts like that teaching my grandkids.
Feel te love be iontach chúramach be very careful of your condemnation of the prof Stanley Unwin standin ie quisling $inn £einds Paulbroy Maskey that bastard is a very dangerous man he broke a window during the troubles ...
ReplyDeleteFeel the love
ReplyDeleteyou seem a bit agitated there. But your points are all 100% bang n. I for the life of me cannot figure out why anyone with such a family background as Adams can be legally entitled to stand for political office. As for the South, again bang on...they will deserve all they get. FF/FG look like forming an anti nordy alliance though. That is quite alarming to think FF would be so anti nordy as to run into the arms of the blue-shirts.
Larry spot on. It sounded like agitation, but it was just me making some points, that most people are already aware of.
ReplyDeleteOne of the very frustrating things about this place, is the amount of murders perpatrated by loyalists and reformed republicans. The PSNI seem to have a good record of bringing murderers to book, unless of course there is a paramititary connection. The amount of muders that go unpunnished speaks for itself. If anybody suspects that there might be paramititary involvement in one of thier relatives murder,they should give up on finding justice, the cops just seem to be byballing these crimes.
If people want justice in cases were paramititaries have been involved. The message seems to be deal with it yourself. Of the killings in the north since Christmas, many people have been charged, bar one. Things have been like this since the surrender proccess got underway.
A study in this area would likely throw up some serious questions for the police.
Larry spot on. It sounded like agitation, but it was just me making some points, that most people are already aware of.
ReplyDeleteOne of the very frustrating things about this place, is the amount of murders perpatrated by loyalists and reformed republicans. The PSNI seem to have a good record of bringing murderers to book, unless of course there is a paramititary connection. The amount of muders that go unpunnished speaks for itself. If anybody suspects that there might be paramititary involvement in one of thier relatives murder,they should give up on finding justice, the cops just seem to be byballing these crimes.
If people want justice in cases were paramititaries have been involved. The message seems to be deal with it yourself. Of the killings in the north since Christmas, many people have been charged, bar one. Things have been like this since the surrender proccess got underway.
A study in this area would likely throw up some serious questions for the police.
Lorenzo, don't discount the possibility too much, despite the Republican rethoric of the Fianna Fáil Party, they would sooner get into bed with the Irish fascist party than their former comrades, and their leadership would do anything to increase their ministerial pensions. Their only delay maybe getting it past the ordinary membership who have shown an unwillingness to be led by the nose by the political science graduates of the College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Queen Elizabeth and other trough sniffers.
ReplyDeleteThe crowd choose Barabbas.
ReplyDeleteAnd now some of the crowd wants to crucify Barabbas!
GA: "No. I want to be the best Republican that I can be".
ReplyDeleteToo late for that now!
ReplyDeleteRC: ... Are you talking about keeping and changing Irish Water? Are you setting up a new company with a different method of governance?
GA: It's probably too late to go back to – it would cost the people too much - to go back to local Council – that was our preference.
No Mr.Adams, I have faith the Irish people would see past such a transparent gimmick like a simple name change to the unwanted and alien entity.
Mcclafferty32
ReplyDeleteGerry wanted everyone else to be the best republican they could be in dying and doing jail time... to give his wee political buggy a push up the road.
Menace
It is probably just reality kicking in where FF are going. Hardly likely the grass roots of that or any other party can change it from within. Kiss ass mentality seems to reign within the structures. The people are moving ahead without the gombeen cute hoors. I think any wishful thinking may be long past its sell by date for the usual suspects FF/FG/Lab a good clear out next time out. SF may get a run, but people will find out they have nothing new to offer and will ape what went before. Hopefully there's a tsunami coming to sweep the pigs away from the trough. On the bright side, the pain of all those deaths and destruction over 30 years will eased somewhat by SF being exposed as the same as the rest after one stint in office. Like in the north. Shame on them. But we must remember, Adams and co. are surfing on an SDLP and anti republican vote. That's what they traded in their chips for.