O'Donoghue defends his Expenses as Minister

John O'Donoghue (photo), the Ceann Comhairle (Speaker or Chairman of the Dáil, the lower House of Parliament) has made his first public comments on the expenses controversy surrounding his time as government minister.

O'Donoghue defends his record as the Minister for Arts, Sports & Tourism (in the cabinet of Taoiseach Bertie Ahern) and as Ceann Comhairle in a letter to all members of the Dáil, which was sent last Friday.

He says he had "stayed silent so far on the extensive media coverage of expenses" in order "to protect the impartiality" of his current position.
It would "not be proper" for him "to become involved in public debate" concerning his time spent as a minister, despite what he called "the natural desire to cross swords with critics" in his own defence.

This is a pretty lame excuse from a man who has wasted taxpayers' money on a grand scale, running up expenses of more than € 550,000 for a lavish lifestyle that was in no way justified by his position as one of the minor Irish cabinet ministers.

He acknowledged that some of the costs incurred "appeared high", and "sincerely regrets that they occurred".

But he pointed out that arrangements were made by civil servants, and as a minister he would not be informed of the details of such expenditure.

On the basis of this statement, one has to wonder who is actually in charge of our government departments. I am sure that any minister who would want to keep expenses low would easily be able to do so. And if a minister would ask his officials what things cost and how much is spent on his travels and engagements, no one would refuse to tell him.

But old-style Fianna Fáil spongers like John O'Donoghue would never care what Irish taxpayers have to pay for his grand ambitions and lavish lifestyle. As long as he has not to pay for it with his own money, only the best is good enough for him and other political parasites.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said that O'Donoghue's response did not go far enough and that he needed to apologise to the people. Well, that would of course be better than his lame excuses. But what the Ceann Comhairle should really do is to pay back at least some of the money he squandered while living like a king.

Roisin Shortall, the spokesperson on Social & Family Affairs for the Labour Party, said the Ceann Comhairle's statement did not appear to appreciate the extent to which the public has been shocked by the level of expenses incurred.

And she is quite right. John O'Donoghue only appreciates a life in luxury, but not where the money for it comes from. If he had any decency left, he would resign - as Ceann Comhairle and as TD - and free the nation from his unpleasant presence in politics.
But this would be too much to expect from a man like O'Donoghue, whose greed and ignorance are only matched by his selfishness and arrogance.

The Emerald Islander

Sharing a Bed is bad for your Health

I have always known it, and said it to many people for decades: Sharing a bed is bad for your health.

Now, after all those years when people looked at me strangely, laughed at me or even thought I had problems with my sex life, renowned British scientists and medical experts have confirmed my long-held opinion in full.

Couples should consider sleeping apart for the good of their health and relationship, say the experts.

Somnologist (sleep specialist) Dr. Neil Stanley told the British Science Festival how sharing a bed can cause rows over snoring and duvet-hogging, and how it robs precious sleep.

One of several studies into sleep patterns found that - on average - couples suffered 50% more sleep disturbances if they shared a bed.

Dr. Stanley points out that we were never meant to share our beds, and that historically human beings hardly ever did it until very recent times.
The modern practice of the shared marital bed only began with the industrial revolution (in the late 18th and early 19th century), when many people were moved from the land to overcrowded towns and cities, where they found themselves short of living space.

Before the Victorian era it was not common for married couples to sleep together. And in ancient Rome, for example, the marital bed was a place for sexual congress only, but never for sleeping.

Dr. Stanley, who set up one of Britain's leading sleep laboratories at the University of Surrey, says the people of today should consider returning to the old tradition of sleeping separately.

"It's about what makes you happy. If you've been sleeping together and you both sleep perfectly well, then don't change," he explains. "But don't be afraid to do something different. We all know what it's like to have a cuddle and then say 'I'm going to sleep now' and go to the opposite side of the bed. So why not just toddle off down the landing?"

Poor sleep is linked to depression, heart disease, strokes, lung disorders, traffic and industrial accidents, and divorce as well. Yet sleep is largely ignored as an important aspect of health.

"People actually feel that they sleep better when they are with a partner," says Dr. Robert Meadows, a sociologist at the University of Surrey. "But the evidence suggests otherwise."

Dr. Meadows carried out a study to compare how well couples slept when they shared a bed, versus sleeping separately.
He found that when couples share a bed and one of them moves in his or her sleep, there is a 50% chance that their slumbering partner will be disturbed as a result.

Despite this, couples are reluctant to sleep apart, with only 8% of those in their 40s and 50s sleeping in separate rooms.

Dr. Stanley, who is happily married for nine years, sleeps separately from his wife, who is happy with the arrangement as well.

Having served in the Navy for a long time and thus spent many years at sea, I have slept alone for most of my life. And as I am not married, this continues now in my civilian life. Even at times when I was in a relationship with a woman, I tried to sleep alone as often as possible. And most of the nights I shared a bed I was indeed disturbed by one thing or another, woke up several times and did get a lot less rest than I would have normally.

As a result of many years at sea, I never sleep very long. Between three and four hours of sleep is all I need within 24 hours, which means that I have more time for other things than most people (who on average sleep about eight hours each night).
One of the habits I developed over the years is to read and write during the hours of darkness, when it is quiet, no one disturbs me and no telephone calls interrupt my train of thought. So I hardly ever go to bed before 3 a.m., and by 7 a.m. at the latest I am up again.

In contrast to myself, my most recent partner needed a lot of sleep. By 10 p.m. - a time I am getting ready to write another couple of thousand words - she was totally worn out and tired and had to go to bed. Had I joined her there at 3 a.m., I would most likely have woken her up during her deep sleep. So separate beds are not only more healthy for most people, in our case they also helped to give both of us the sleep we need and protect domestic peace.

In fact, my long-standing criticism of modern sleeping habits goes even further than sleep itself. I think that our whole attitude to life, including the way we design and organise our houses, is in need of a drastic reform. Everywhere in the western world houses are rated by their number of bedrooms. Even the concept of a 'bedroom' is quite wrong in my opinion.

Why do we have one of the main rooms in the house (and several when it is a family home) designated for nothing but sleeping during the night? Unless one is an extreme long-sleeper, this means that a large space in the house is not used for anything for two thirds of every day. This is not only strange, but - more important - a terrible waste of good domestic space.

In my opinion we should re-design our houses, and instead of 'bedrooms' that stand empty all day and are thus pretty useless except for spending the night, we should have personal rooms that include a bed. Couples should have their separate personal living spheres, where they can do what they like best, follow their hobbies and keep things they are particularly fond of. These rooms should include a bed for sleeping alone.
Whenever romantic feelings occur, the partners can be intimate in whatever form and room they want. This would be a lot more interesting than limiting all sexual encounters to the marital bed in one designated and shared 'bedroom'.

As the sleep experts from the University of Surrey have established beyond any doubt, partners sleep better alone and will have more physical and mental energy after a good night's rest.
This should lead rather to more intimacy and happiness than to less. Not even to mention the many couples where one of the partners snores. This can not only ruin the other partner's sleep each night, it can - and does - also lead to disliking the snorer, to estrangement and eventually split-up and divorce.

So, as I have been saying for most of my life, sleeping apart makes happier and healthier people, and more couples stay together for life when they sleep separately at night.

Don't be shy, stubborn or inflexible! Discuss it with your partner and try it out. If you miss each other terribly, then - by all means - go back to a shared bed. But if you feel better and stronger in the morning, and are happier and more relaxed, then it would be the best to return to the long-established sleeping habits of our distant ancestors from before the industrial revolution.

The Emerald Islander


P.S. - When you sleep separately, you also do something good for our ailing economy. Buying two beds instead of one can stimulate business, and when you are happier and more relaxed, you are also more likely to do other things as well that will stimulate the economy. The only people who might see a decline of business would be psychiatrists, psychologists, marriage guidance counsellors and divorce lawyers. And this would not be a bad development at all.

We are living beyond our Means

Brian Lenihan (photo), our Minister for Finance, says that we are living beyond our means. And of course he is right.

In fact, we have been living well beyond our means for years now.
And we all were heavily encouraged to do so by his party, the government he is part of, and the whole orchestra of Irish banks, industry, retailers and media.

Only a few silly old-fashioned fools like me, for whom traditional values are still important, did not participate in the gigantic spending spree of the 'Celtic Tiger' years.

I was mocked for not going on two or three foreign holidays each year, and some people think I am 'dull' because I do not get drunk every weekend like many of my compatriots do.

I cannot remember how many times I was offered to buy a newly built apartment - "as an investment" - or to spend good money on some 'holiday home' in Bulgaria. There were offers to invest in a golf resort on the Algarve in Portugal, and when I told the man that I like Portugal, but hate golf, he looked at me like some child that has seen the real Santa Claus.

No, I did not fall for the bubble, as I could see for years that it would not last, the way Irish people were behaving and spending as if there was no tomorrow. Our banks encouraged us to do even more, offering ever more loans and credit cards, even to people with little or no regular income.

Until this summer I did receive at least one "pre-approved" offer of a new credit card in my e-mail each week. Sometimes there were more. Had I been a scoundrel, I could have taken them all, used them to their limit, and then just moved on. Some people have done that, and now they have no idea how to get on with their lives. They see debt counsellors and stress counsellors, and heaven knows how many other specialist counsellors for whom the taxpayers' foot the bill.
Some others simply emigrate and leave their financial millstones behind in Ireland. Well, in fact they put them around our necks, as we - those who remain here - will have to share the burden, no matter how large it is.

I like openness, and when a minister comes out and tells us the plain truth, straight to our face, I really appreciate it. So - thank you Brian Lenihan, thanks for telling us as it is.

The only little problem I have with it is that it was your predecessor (who is now the Taoiseach) and his great mentor Bertie - the 'cute fellow' - who told everyone to spend, spend, spend, as we "never had it so good".
It was your party Fianna Fáil that inherited the infant 'Celtic Tiger' in 1997 from the 'Rainbow coalition'. Instead of treating him well and feeding him carefully but modestly, you overfed him with greasy chips, bags of crisps and bags of sweets. Thus you created a monster that grew too fast and in the wrong way. And before you knew it, this monster devoured the economy, and then imploded.

So, Mr. Lenihan, I hope you don't mind me saying that you have quite some brass neck making such a statement. I presume you have heard the phrase about those sitting in glass houses, and what they should do - or better not do - with stones...

Yes, we are living beyond our means, at least most of us. And as a country we definitely do, thanks to eleven years of Fianna Fail in government. It is good that someone important has the guts to say it openly and in public. But now your government, Mr. Lenihan, and especially your department, should begin to give a good leading example we all can follow.

• Stop wasting any more taxpayers' money on projects and things nobody wants and needs.
• Cut the princely expenses accounts of ministers, TDs and senior civil servants.
• Stop the lavish lifestyle your government got used to during the boom times.
• Instruct the Revenue Commissioners to claw back the money that 'fat cats' like Rody Molloy took out of the taxpayers' coffer and used it on themselves while mixing with stars and millionaires in Florida.

This would be a start. And then you could cut all salaries of TDs, Senators, Ministers and that of the Taoiseach himself by 50%. That should give you a lot of extra money, plus a lot of popularity around the country.

You are right, we are living beyond our means as a nation, especially one with very few natural resources. But no-one in Ireland lives more beyond their means than our government.

By now you must know that we are a trusty lot, not too bright and not too critical. We followed you into the spending spree, and as you led the way, we even followed you into the recession.
Be sure we will follow you out of it again, if you know the way and go ahead as fine example.

You do know the way out of the crisis, I hope... If not, we can start thinking of eight songs, because then we are all doomed on a desert island.

The Emerald Islander