Background: Dana Rosemary Scallon became a US citizen shortly before running for president of Ireland in 1997.

The red herrings: Dana’s sister claimed during court proceedings in 2008 that Dana had actively decided not to bring that fact to the attention of the electorate. Dana claims that dual citizenship is possible, and points to De Valera, who was a US citizen by birth.

The real issue: While US courts have recognized dual citizenship in certain situations for some time, the process of becoming a naturalized citizen of the United States involves an oath renouncing one’s other citizenships:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

There’s a legal question here: adopting US citizenship through naturalization is understood in US law, at least, to require the surrendering of other citizenships (whether or not the other countries recognize that act as taking place.

There’s also a moral question: this is a formal oath, sworn by someone who proclaims herself to be a devout Christian, which includes the phrase “without any mental reservation.” Either Dana perjured herself, or… actually, I’m not sure there’s an ‘or’ here.

Dana’s not going to be president (she’s currently 100/1 on Paddy Power) in large part because so much of what she claims to stand for – an insular and shallow version of Irishness, dog-whistling to Irish conservatives still smarting over equal pay for women and the decriminalization of homosexuality – is unpopular and increasingly a marginal perspective. However, she has wrapped this up inside a constitution-toting package, proclaiming the defense of the Irish constitution as her primary platform, and it turns out she’s already sworn to defend that of another country, and she claims not to even remember that oath? Really? Irish law – where citizenship is automatic for those, such as Dana, who are born abroad to parents born on the island of Ireland – may not recognize the renunciation of Irish citizenship, but surely Dana feels a shiver when she contemplates the oath she swore before god.

Anglo alleges that Drumm devised the “loan” from his wife “as a ruse” to qualify for an “E-2 Treaty Investor Visa” to live in the US and to use the cash in his business accounts as his “personal piggyback to spend on personal expenses.”

If true, Drumm could have more serious problems than a failed bankruptcy scam (both Anglo and the bankruptcy trustee are opposing his attempt to be discharged from bankruptcy, on the basis that he lied repeatedly, claiming that “Drumm “testified falsely” and engaged in a pattern of conduct to conceal from and defraud Anglo, Dwyer and other interested parties, the bank claimed.

In her complaint, Dwyer claimed that Drumm failed to disclose transfers of property, materially understated the value of assets and concealed property.”).

I’ve been listening to some of the station’s documentaries recently – now that the Documentary on One is consistently available online – and reminded of some of the great colour pieces regularly produced, such as a touching portrait of the situation on Arranmore in light of changes in fishing regulations. This content doesn’t attract the attention – or audience – of the big name stars, but is at the center of the public service remit of the station.

In more sombre news, the station is launching a redundancy plan, with plans to lay off at least 70 staff. That’s not an incredible surprise, in light of a recent opinion piece by DG Noel Curran in which he blamed a projected budget shortfall of €17m for this year (after remedial action to cut it from a possible €34m) on a range of factors, including (State) budget decisions, unexpected expenses associated with the two major recent State visits (by Queen Elizabeth II and President Obama), and a number of other unspecified items. The redundancy will actually increase the shortfall in the near term, by an estimated €10m, but result in savings of €5m a year thereafter. The original €34m projected overrun for this year was split between €20m in annual costs (the Budget issues and “other recent cost impositions on the public side”) and €14m in once-off expenses, so after the €17 in savings made this year (if those are sustainable on an ongoing basis, rather than once-off efforts such as maintenance deferral), the station’s finances should be stable in the medium term – provided there are no other State visits, funerals, or other unexpected events! In other words, the numbers add up, but the station’s still looking rather vulnerable to outside pressures.

If we look beyond the short-term budgetary pressures, though, what might we ask of a world class public service broadcaster, as it looks to the future. I’ve got three items on my list:

1. The broadcaster recently announced it would make its TV news available for free to members of the National Newspapers of Ireland (NNI). This is part of a strategy to defuse pressure from the major newspaper groups, who claim that RTÉ is (and should not be) subsidizing its online operations from license fee (public service fund) revenue. A clever move (though it will be seen whether these commercial operations are able to both take the free service and continue to push for restrictions on RTÉ’s operations). Inspired by Simon McGarr’s attempt to be covered under the offer I would suggest that much RTÉ content should be made available for use, in non-commercial contexts, by outside users – and that in particular content produced with public funds should be made available to non-profit and non-commercial users on at least as favorable terms as they are made available to commercial users, such as the members of the NNI.
2. RTÉ should build new platforms and tools to provide improved services to the diaspora, drawing on the potential of digital (and internet) distribution technologies, including the ‘new’ emigrants of the post-Tiger age.
3. There’s a lot of attention paid to the ‘top 10′ presenters, focusing in part on their high pay (sometimes in contrast to their perceived, or actual, workload, though sometimes noting the tendency to find a talented person and place them in every possible part of the TV and radio schedule, in part on the varied quality of their output (with subjective readings of this element lending itself to a multitude of criticisms and critiques). There’s a more significant, and long-standing, issue – one that dates from the days of Sit Down and Be Counted – and which takes on a new significance and shape given the participatory potential of digital tools. RTÉ should take it upon itself to investigate how to facilitate a more multi-vocal, inclusive, and decentralized rendering of our national conversations. Public service broadcasting not just from D4, but threading more directions through and around our country. Documentaries such as that from Arranmore show what can be – and is – done, but there’s potential for far more ambitious undertakings here.

I believe that the extraordinary literary tradition of this country should be marked by an annual public holiday around which a major festival of literature would be developed.

A public holiday to celebrate our literary heritage could also be extended to Northern Ireland because of its rich literary tradition too and could become an all island festival of literature and culture.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin pushes in another (though not incompatible direction, in noting the high level of problems with literacy in many parts of Dublin, and calling for a ‘culture of literacy’:

“Dublin has a rich literary tradition and is recognised the world over because of the brilliant writers we have produced. In addition, Dublin is also a Unesco City of Literature and we are home to the prestigious International IMPAC Dublin Literary Award. It is now incumbent on this Government to ensure that we build on these traditions by greatly enhancing our children’s capacity for literacy.

“I believe that fostering a culture of literacy in this city would the most fitting tribute to our great literary giants. It is my hope therefore, that when we celebrate Bloomsday in years to come everyone on this island can truly appreciate the literary genius of Joyce and just maybe inspire a child to create a masterpiece of their own.”

Today’s Galway Advertiser also has an interesting piece from John Morley, providing a sketch of Joyce’s connections with Galway, via Nora.

The BAI, of course, replaced the BCI (formerly the IRTC) and BCC in 2009.

So what is the UPR? The Universal Periodic Review is a process whereby the UNHRC reviews the record of each member state once every four years, with Ireland’s October 2011 review to be one of the last of the first cycle. The process provides an opportunity – both in development of the country report and in the review in Geneva – for Civil Society actors to provide feedback and input.

So, what issues do you think should be brought to the attention of the UPR process? Limitations in union recognition? The recent eviscerating of oversight bodies such as Combat Poverty and the Equality Authority? Defamation and Blasphemy laws?

Now the Irish government is engaging in another form of treason. The government is signing off on an agreement with the IMF and others, in which they commit the state to changing the retirement age, introducing water charges, and to cut social welfare rates, among other things. These changes are to take place at set times – many of them after the next election will take place. As a parliamentary democracy (and in line with the Irish constitution) international agreements, particularly those which involve charges on the public purse, must be approved by the Oireachtas.

The government, however, is refusing to get parliamentary approval for the MOU – though it has deigned to publish (most of) the text of the agreement. The role of the government is govern, within the legislative bounds set by the legislature. In this case we have a government which is seeking to tie the hands of the legislature and future governments, and which is refusing to submit the agreement for parliamentary approval. Why is that? Joan Burton may have the answer, noting that:

Distinguished economist, Professor Barry Eichengreen, wrote in Germany’s financial daily, Handelsblatt, today that: “Ireland will be transferring nearly 10 per cent of its national income as reparations to the bondholders, year after painful year.”

Traitors. And perhaps a lower form of scum.

There are fears of (more) deaths, particularly of pensioners and the homeless, as Ireland undergoes below-freezing conditions. (That’s not a metaphor for the economy!) Local authorities are struggling to keep roads gritted, with limited budgets available for this purpose (and effect still being felt from repair costs after last year’s record freeze):

Concerns have been expressed about the fate of homeless people in the sub-zero conditions. The Homeless Agency said rough sleeping was being strictly monitoring on a daily basis to ensure there was sufficient bed capacity in emergency homeless accommodation.

At the same time, the manager of Ireland’s soccer team has agreed to take a 5% cut in pay, reflecting the stresses faced by the FAI:

Giovanni Trapattoni said yesterday he had agreed to take the cut, believed to be in the region of €100,000 per annum, after speaking with FAI general secretary John Delaney in Milan last month. … When the reduction is applied to the pay of Tardelli and Fausto Rossi as well as Irish members of the coaching and scouting staff like Mick Martin and Don Givens, the saving should amount to something in the region of €160,000. It is estimated a third of that saving would accrue to businessman Denis O’Brien, who currently pays half of the management team’s major salaries

Not coincidentally, “The Irish Sports Council has contributed €17 million to the FAI since 2004″ – that’s about €3m a year. The ISC is the state body charged with distributing funds to individual governing bodies in sport. The funds provided were earmarked for projects on increasing participation in soccer, and we’re promised that the funds were matched 2:1 by the FAI, but really these things are a matter of shuffling around funds – O’Brien might not have provided his funding for programs aimed at serving previously under-reached groups, but even without that €1.6m, it’s interesting to think about what quality of coaching you could get for €200,000 a year. Would it really be so deficient that it’s worth it for the FAI to continue to increase its €50 debt?

This week the Irish government got that wrong. They lied when asked if there were any discussions with the IMF or the EU – or at least finessed their answers to mislead (rather than merely obfuscate or avoid).These developments can be seen as sensitive – because they are. Any information provided might influence short-term economic developments, affecting the availability of funds for Irish businesses, or whether a business will decide to proceed with an investment in the country. However, providing false information also has an impact – and arguably a longer-term negative impact on the reputation of the government and the state.

At a time when statements/leaks were flowing freely from other governments, the EU, and elsewhere – and when the development (while gut-wrenching for those of us watching from afar) was not farfetched, I cannot understand what it was thought might be gained by having the news dragged out like this.

And now, of course, government ministers are claiming that the only two things that can’t happen are that corporation taxes should rise from their current level [1] and that the government cannot fall. An election, or a change in personnel within the government, would signal uncertainty, which would make this process more expensive (as markets treat uncertainty as risk) and damage whatever authority the government still retains in its negotiations.

[1] The issue of corporate tax levels is an important one, and more nuanced in Ireland than elsewhere. As an island nation (with accordingly higher distribution costs), which built much of its growth (before the property bubble) on inbound foreign investment, having a tax rate lower than the rest of Europe has been cited by multiple observers as one of the keys to the country’s economic success. Beyond the palaver about English-speaking, well-educated populations (both true, but of diminishing significance/value), corporate taxes (and, until recently, high levels of European structural investment) were key elements in the country’s economic growth. However, whether this is the one issue of government policy that should be retained, untouched, beyond the reach of the bureaucrats who are about to take over running the country, is less clear.