Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FINE GAEL TD Jennifer Carroll MacNeill pushed back against questioning in a radio interview this morning over whether she would insist on the next Cabinet having an equal number of men and women, saying that is “not how government works”.
She also said that women politicians should be allowed to be successful politicians rather than being made to “be responsible for everything” related to women.
Carroll MacNeill, who was the Minister of State for European Affairs in the last government, was speaking on RTÉ Radio One’s Morning Ireland about government formation talks.
Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the Regional Independents group have developed a Programme for Government, paving the way for them to form a coalition.
As well as agreeing on policies, the government formation talks involve the groups negotiating how ministerial positions in Cabinet will be shared out.
Presenter Gavin Jennings asked Carroll MacNeill whether women would be equally represented in the next Cabinet.
Carroll MacNeill said that would be a matter for the Taoiseach and Tánaiste, adding: “There’s no bigger champion for women in politics than myself and my female colleagues. But the reality is that our the numbers are very low in the Dáil.”
She said: “Unfortunately, we’re still 95th in the world, I believe, in relation to gender representation in the Dáil. That’s not my fault. I do my best to try to advance women everywhere, as does Fine Gael, but the composition of the Cabinet is a matter for the Taoiseach and Tánaiste.”
Jennings asked Carroll MacNeill whether if she was made a minister she would insist on equal representation.
MacNeill said that is “not how government works in this country” and “not how party politics works on it”.
“How would that work exactly? How?” she asked.
“Well, you could insist on equal representation,” Jennings said.
“I think that’s a bit frivolous,” MacNeill replied.
“It’s my job to do my job to represent my constituents. If I have the opportunity to work in any government, then I will work on behalf of the state in my policy areas,” she said.
“At some point, women politicians might, in fact, be allowed to be successful women politicians rather than also be responsible for everything else about women. So why don’t you make that charge to other people and allow me to continue to do my job on behalf of my constituents,” she said.
“Gender equality is so important in Ireland. The reality is that we do not have enough women in our Dáil, in my view, that it is a representative chamber, and that we should have more,” she said, adding that she hopes the next government can introduce more gender equality policies, that more women are brought into politics and that we “try to achieve a better balance for society”.
In the outgoing Dáil, women made up 23% of the total number of TDs, holding 37 seats.
246 women ran in the 2024 general election and 44 were elected, making up 25% of the next Dáil.
Earlier in the interview, Carroll MacNeill said that this Programme for Government will “emphasise infrastructure spend, capital delivery, disability as a social issue, supports for small businesses and real focus on housing”.
On reducing Ireland’s emissions, she said that Ireland has the opportunity to be a leader in clean energy in Europe but that it will “take a major infrastructure spend and major investment, both from the state and from people”, and that she believes that will be a “huge focus”.
Details are starting to emerge about the policies within the programme and the formation of the next Cabinet.
The Journal understands that Fine Gael leader Simon Harris will take on an expanded foreign affairs minister role within the next government.
The next government is set to include a Healy-Rae, with Michael Healy-Rae confirming that he will be a minister of state.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I wonder how much of this could be attributed to the unintended consequence of the green parties introduction of CO2 based motor tax in 2008. Hundreds of thousands of people encouraged to buy diesel cars when petrol would have suited them far better.
@John K: you do understand that these policies were set based on the best available evidence at the time and before the dieselgate scandal? But of course everyone loves being Captain Hindsight to score some troll points.
@Name: and when the evidence changed the gov’t position didn’t. They ignored the empirical & statistical data which IS a major contributing factor to the current situation.
It’s a bit like when the Climate Cult ignore over 1,000 peer reviewed studies that state there is no climate emergency, because it doesn’t advance their cause (a cause that a small group are making hundreds of billions out of). Climate extremeists are Zealots who cannot bear to consider that they have been conned & are useful idiots to make even more money for those few, because it would bring into question their whole existence & the place they take up in this world.
Of course some love being a defender of the indefensible to score some troll points.
@Jim: There is greater than 99% consensus on human-caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
@Name: that’s why I specified “unintended consequence”. I find it interesting that a policy designed to help the environment could have actually damaged air quality and I’d like to know how much could be attributed to that. Would you not like to know that? We should judge policy on the results not on the good intentions used to bring it into effect. Nothing to do with trolling or points as you suggest.
@Jim: wow, the only one showing zealotry is you with an unhinged rant like that.
You “forget” that the greens were no longer in power once the data came out that diesel was more polluting. Once back in power they entirely removed the gap. They also openly expressed regret that they relied on the data from the car industry to introduce the rule in the first place. IMO, that is chapter closed. But clearly not for some who love digging up 16-year old bodies to score troll points.
@John K: fair is fair, but it’s a dead horse that is still being brought to life, mostly for other reasons than you state. A perhaps more useful and interesting question is how Dublin’s air fairs compared to other cities that introduced policies to reduce polluting vehicles and increase modal alternatives. Policies that Dublin still is waiting on.
@John K: The CO2 based motor tax is COMPLETELY unrelated to the switch to diesel cars. That was based on data at the time concerning suspended particulate matter in the air.
@John K: I believe, if I recall correctly, that the promotion of diesel was based on data falsified by the car industry.
This was discovered when testing, of Volkswagen diesel cars, uncovered the car computer would enter a secret low emissions mode when detected it was user test, the so called “defeat device”.
Outside of testing, in the real world, the engine tuned itself for higher performance, resulting in higher emissions. Volkswagen were fined billions over this.
“It’s been dubbed the “diesel dupe”. In September, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found, external that many VW cars being sold in America had a “defeat device” – or software – in diesel engines that could detect when they were being tested, changing the performance accordingly to improve results. The German car giant has since admitted cheating emissions tests in the US.”
@David Jordan: that is correct but the CO2 motor tax made it cheaper for people to own diesel when petrol would have been more suitable for them
@Me Me: it was done to raise money no other reason.
@John K: There wouldn’t be that much pollution if Dublin had a metro network like other European cities, they can afford to impose a congestion or vehicle restriction charge because you can take the train metro and tram everywhere, and periodically. Dublin can’t have the luxury of imposing a congestion or vehicle ban because how will people get there if we stop driving?
@Name: so when they asked farmers to expand in 2009 teagasc and the government thought water quality would improve your so nieve god bless u
@J Ven: agreed on the metro, would love to see additional viable public transport options for the city.
@John K: Like maybe the LUAS on the northside.
@Brendan O’Brien: seriously, how can there be ’99%’ “consensus” when there are (at least) 1,000+ studies that disagree. That is the position a bigot or zealot would adopt.
Yiu.may also want to research your reference material (properly research it & see who is paying for the studies).
Have to laugh, throw out a stats like you did with a bullshit website to ‘back up” your outlamdish claim.
As said, people like you will never admit you are being manipulated because it would mean you are insignificant & your whole world view is a lie which affects the position you take up in this world. Same as you will never admit social distancing, €9 meals, 5km restrictions were all bullshyt – why because it would mean you were duped & your ego won’t allow an admission which would make you look foolish.
@Brendan O’Brien: seriously, how can there be 99% “consensus” when there are (at least) 1,000+ studies that disagree.
Yiu.may also want to research your reference material (properly research it & see who is paying for the studies).
Have to laugh, throw out a stats like you did with a bullshit website to ‘back up” your outlamdish claim.
As said, people like you will never admit you are being manipulated because it would mean you are insignificant & your whole world view is a lie which affects the position you take up in this world. Same as you will never admit social distancing, €9 meals, 5km restrictions were all bullshyt – why because it would mean you were duped & your ego won’t allow an admission which would make you look foolish.
I know some of those black (red) spots. Traffic has gotten worse since the council introduced their signal changes at the junctions, doubling and sometimes tripling the length of ques of idling cars.
@Royce Coolidge: evidence please? I’ve seen this “signal change” argument before. In fact, the council has only made these changes for very few junctions. Where they have, it is often to accommodate flow and accommodate pedestrians (I remember stressed grannies trying to cross before the yellow man ended).
People have short memories and the increase in traffic is more likely linked to an increase in motor vehicles on our roads, esp after COVID.
@Name: @Name: yeah hang on, Cambridge University and I are still getting our results peer tested.
It’s plain for anybody to see with their own two eyes. It’s a great many more junctions than “just a few” as you say. It used to be the case that ebery morning at 08:00 I reach road A that has a que of ten to fifteen cars, queing at junction x. The light turns green and ten cars get through.
Now I reach the same spot at the same time, and the que is twenty five to thirty cars long. The light turns green, for the bus lane only. Then after this the light turns green for cars. The light turns red for cars very quickly again, only three or four cars get through, (not helped by how slow Irish people are to put their phone Dow /get into first and get off the line) and two or three more break the lights, and the light for buses remains green, even though there may be none. The que of idling cars continues to grow.
Ahort memories indeed
Bring on the ultra-low emission zones and congestion charges. I live near one of those hot spots.
@Name: No. Put up with it or move into the wilderness.
@Marvin Dollery: no thanks. I’ve a disability that prevents me from driving. Living in the city means I can actually have a life instead of staring out of the window all day in loneliness. But thank you for your concerns about where I live.
@Marvin Dollery: You’re in favour of dangerous pollutants, no doubt.
@Marvin Dollery: This will really freak you out: five-minute cities!
@Name: I suggest you move then rather than taxing everyone
@Name: I think you just made up your disability to bolster your argument. Disgusting.
@Name: Ban the burning of fossil fuels for heat also.
@Name: you’re full of shyte
Diesel engines are generally the largest contributors to NO2 pollution, particularly heavy-duty diesel vehicles like buses & trucks.
As a motorcyclist, I’ve often received a face-full of dirty black fumes belched from a Dublin Bus exhaust.
Electrification of our bus fleet would do wonders for the city’s pollution.
@Ciarán Harris: and move the problem elsewhere. But Hey Smoke and Mirrors all in the name of sustainable vehicles..
If only google would build more data centres to fix this problem.
Electric vehicles will fix this.
@Ronan Mc: yes and no. They will fix the NO2 pollution. However, their brakes and tires emit quite a bit of particulate matter into the air. Then there is also noise pollution, which EVs will only partially fix. The true fixes are modal alternatives (PT, walking, cycling) and reducing speeds, but these reasonable suggestions have some commenters on this forum frothing at the mouth with rage.
@Name: Dublin Bus have circa 100 double deck EVs on the road at the moment, with more to be rolled out next year. This will make a huge difference!
@Michael O’Callaghan: not saying it won’t. Just saying that EVs of the private motor vehicle kind are not the panacea for a healthy city.
@Name: EV cars hardly ever use their brakes, it’s called regenerative breaking, which also means that there is less ware on the tires when slowing down.
@Ronan Mc: More tax will
Probably by the Dail is the worst ministers and tds arriving in their limos
The who?
@P. V. Aglue: the what?
@P. V. Aglue: the where?
@P. V. Aglue: the why .. !
Why bother suggesting anything. We’re incapable of logical solutions. Ban it sher… offset the problem, cook the numbers like you always do! ya useless shower,
Wow, so the main routes into and through the city have the heaviest levels of pollution from traffic…….and it took a “study” 18 months to “discover” this. Money well spent.
Kildare Street number 1
@Thesaltyurchin: It was 5%, not 50%. Bit of a difference!
@FlipBip: Chat GBT says (from the study) that it’s “50% of kids have 5% reduced lung capacity” so my numbers are off. Apologies.
So, proposed equivalents to the ULEZ silliness from London were floated for over here only last week, and now GOOGLE are running about in their weird cars not only photographing every damned thing, but they’re taking air samples for the government . . . and I’m the weirdo for seeing this as nuts???
have your say