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.
WHAT DO PRODUCTS like Connemara Marble and Waterford Glass have in common with foodstuffs such as Connemara Hill Lamb or Waterford Blaa?
They are both Geographical Indications, or names linking a specific product with a specific origin.
What makes them different? Geographical Indications for foodstuffs are protected under a special European law, while geographical indications for non foodstuffs or industrial products are only protected under local Irish law.
The question of whether we should retain this distinction is not simply a legal one – it’s also about hard economics.
Cold, hard cash
Research shows that protection under EU rules is worth hard cash. A 2012 study for the European Commission examined the value of registration as a European GI in the foodstuffs sector. It found that GI-registered products had, on average, a premium rate of 2.23.
Put another way, EU-registered GIs sold at (on average) 2.23 times the price of comparable unregistered products.
Given that there are economic benefits in the food sector, should we not extend those benefits to the industrial sector? The argument advanced against this is that industrial production is different from food production, because industrial production can be moved anywhere whereas the qualities of foodstuffs – such as whiskey or cheese – are linked to the terrain and climate of the place of origin, and cannot be moved.
But this argument does not hold up.
People and tradition
For one thing, even in the food sector geographical indication is determined not so much by climate or terrain, but but the link to people and the traditional means by which those people make a product. Thus, the protection of Waterford Blaa is as much about protecting the traditional way of making Blaa in Waterford as about the terrain or climate in Waterford.
What is being protected is the reputation of a product traditionally made in Waterford.
Let’s take another example: Connemara marble is no less linked to the terrain than is Connemara Hill Lamb. The marble that is mined in Connemara is inherently linked to Connemara, not to any other geographical origin. It is essentially a terrain-based geographical indication.
The idea of geographical indications as applied to foodstuffs includes links between the product and the place of origin based on both reputation and terroir. The same can apply in relation to industrial products – although the likelihood is that, for many industrial products, the link will be primarily based on reputation. But that is also the case for foodstuffs, as illustrated by the Waterford Blaa example. And since both international and EU law recognise the importance of reputation, there seems no reason not to extend GI protection to industrial products.
The reputation of the community
Which brings us to the social aspect of geographical indications. The reputation linking a product to a place is often the result of the efforts of many people over long periods of time. In that sense, the reputation is a collective reputation belonging to the community in question – the community of workers, of investors, of consumers. GI laws allow that reputation to be captured and protected. GIs are not like trade marks owned by one individual or company – in fact, they are not owned at all in that sense. Rather, they are a legal recognition of a reputation that is worth protecting. Anyone who respects the traditions can use the name. It’s about community, not exclusivity.
Now, the question of whether to extend GI protection from foodstuffs to industrial products is on Brussels’ agenda. A study financed by the European Commission recommended extending GI protection, and now the Commission has opened a Public Consultation and invited interested parties to respond by Tuesday 28 October. The public is being invited to answer a series of questions on the issue.
If you want to ensure that Europe protects our manufacturing traditions and culture in exactly the same way it protects our agriculture and foodstuffs, take a moment to have your say here.
Based in Brussels, Irish lawyer Bernard O’Connor is a partner in the firm of NCTM O’Connor and is Visiting Professor at Bocconi University and the University of Milan. His areas of expertise include industrial and intellectual property law.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Hopefully they don’t make the question confusing on the ballet this time. Do you wish to repeal? Yes/no
Vs
Do you wish to approve not to not amend the 8th amendment not not not purple monkey dishwasher? Yes I don’t / no I do
It’s taken a long time to get to vote on the wretched 8th Amendment, introduced in 1983, and to get the opportunity to vote to undo the harm caused by it.
Having read all the comments here, many of them very hateful and insulting to others who hold a different view, I thought I would give my opinion for what it’s worth.
I would be in favor of repealing the 8th amendment but I am not in favor of the additional words giving the government of the day the power to make legal termination of a pregnancy up to 12 weeks without a medical reason (in other words, abortion on demand) as I believe this is a potentially dangerous dilution of human rights.
this referendum (in my opinion) should have had a two-part question of words such as (1) Do you wish to repeal the 8th amendment. (2) Do you want to allow the government to have the right to allow termination of pregnancy on request up to 12 weeks, I would have no problem saying yes to the first part but I have a major problem with the second part. As these are lumped together in one question I will be voting NO.
@John Hagin Meade:
Well said -I agree
@John Hagin Meade: Fair enough.
Can i ask what you would recommend as valid medical reasons?
Being raped is not a medical condition – so is that out then?
What about someone who becomes suicidal as a result of being forced to carry to term a child after being raped – also out?
And how many suicides would it take for you to reconsider your position?
@Gavin Conran: “Can i ask what you would recommend as valid medical reasons?” As I am not a medical person I cannot answer that question.
“Being raped is not a medical condition – so is that out then?” In my opinion, unfortunately yes, it’s out.
“What about someone who becomes suicidal as a result of being forced to carry to term a child after being raped – also out?” Yes, it’s also out.
“And how many suicides would it take for you to reconsider your position?” My opinion would not change due to a potential suicide attempt.
You must accept that these are my personal opinions. If you don’t agree that’s OK with me. We all have differing opinions on many matters. If we all thought the same there would be no need for General Elections or Referendums.
@John Hagin Meade: Well expressed and reasoned viewpoint. I think more people would vote in fa our of repealing the current wording if it were to be replaced by another amendment which allows but limits abortions to certain circumstances and would give priority to the life of the woman in those circumstances. The more I follow the debate the more inclined I am to vote NO. What is pushing me into the NO camp are the arguments of the repeal side. The fact that they are trying to dehumanize the unborn child by denying that it is a living human person and that abortion involves killing that human being is worrying. If we accept that argument and vote to repeal on that basis then there is no argument against allowing abortion on demand up until birth.
@John Hagin Meade: Your a selfish ass on what you answered. You have absolutely no respect for a woman.
@Ciaran Hughes: “Your a selfish ass on what you answered. You have absolutely no respect for a woman.”
As I said above everyone is entitled to their opinion however, I don’t feel the need for you to share it with me. Thank you anyway.
@John Hagin Meade: this is a very good synopsis of the situation. The point is can we trust our politicians to frame decent legislation. We already now we can’t. Unless of course people are in favour of abortion on demand from 12 weeks.
@John Hagin Meade: I agree completely with you. I fear that if passed it will be abused.
Had canvassers at my door for the first time last night. Nodded a No through the glass and went back to what I was doing. My vote is my business. Sick to death of both sides at this stage. The bs coming fro both sides has become tedious at this point.
@Séa Graham: what bull shit is there from the Repeal side?
@Séa Graham: you don’t have to listen to or acknowledge canvassers in any way. It is a voluntary process.
I’ve done my reading. I’m voting Yes. I will be polite to canvassers on both sides, if any call. Since I’m firmly decided, I won’t waste their time.
@Paul Fahey:that it is ok to end a human life although i wouldnt call it bulls#$t…. I call it sick.
@Ismise Máire: it is a termination of the further advance of a pregnancy, preventing a foetus from developing into a human being with legal personality.
@Ismise Máire: I call it sick that you would force a 12 year old rape victim to have a child (just like the Virgin Mary); I find it sick that you would force a woman through a 9 month pregnancy which cannot survive, risking both the mothers mental and physical health; I find it sick you would prefer a troubled teen committed suicide rather than allow her an abortion; I find it sick you are comfortable “with killing human life” so long as it requires a ferry or plane, because you never seem to campaign against the right to travel etc etc etc etc…..
Overall, I find it sick that you want to enforce your views on every fertile woman in Ireland.
@Paul Fahey: ripping down posters and bragging about it on social media. It being done by both sides and it’s petty. Someone with a clipboard at my door is not going to sway me to their way of thinking at this stage in my life. Both sides are out marching and screaming their demands on the subject. We’re voting, all the screaming and demanding doesn’t make a blind bit of difference, the tally does. I have strong views of the subject. Voting is going to ba a hastle as I’m Still registered at my old address in a different county. I’ll still be there to cast my ballot in the privacy of the booth and it’s no one’s business as to how I vote but mine.
@Séa Graham: so your biggest issue is the pulling down of posters? So the lies and deliberate attempts at misleading people are not an issue at all for you?
Seems you do not wish to engage in this democratic protest, perhaps a little “No canvassers” and a choice not to watch such social media bragging would help you avoid what you see as bullshit.
@Paul Fahey: No but it’s one of them. I’m not getting into an argument with you. Wouldn’t get into an argument with someone from the other side either on the 8th. You and everyone else except my wife knows how I’m going to vote and it’s staying that way.
@Séa Graham: *doesn’t know
@Paul Fahey: Well, I would say that it is bs to say there will not be abortion on demand up to 6 months of a pregnancy. The proposed legislation is similar to the UKs after the 12 week period. And we all know how that works in the UK.
@Johnny Bellew: there will not be, in fact there will be no abortion on demand, but you keep peddling those lies in your ecumenical echo chamber.
Did you ever come back with the name of all the non religious schools where children were raised and murdered in Ireland, or was that bullshit?
@Michael Lang: As a canvasser, that is appreciated. We absolutely respect anyone who has firmly made up their mind and move on. I have not had the “no” side canvass to my door as yet but if the do, I will be polite and say I have made up my mind. I see no reason for anyone to be nasty just because we disagree. It costs nothing to be nice and it has to be remembered that canvassers are all volunteers, giving time freely, away from families and often out in inclement weather. Nice to hear you were nice to them!
@Michael Lang: Just for my information At what point do you deem a foetus to be a human being?
@Frank McGlynn: Don’t ask him – tell him !.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUH9KHFoDHI
The gender of a human is determined at conception but can be tested directly at 7 weeks.
The dehumanizing of a boy or a girl in the womb at that age is another matter but you can’t budget for those who lack the humane balance of head and heart.
Pro-life people are humane and decent but this undemocratic referendum is being sold as though they were silly and can’t spot bias.
Nothing more to say.
@Gerald Kelleher: The only way to determine the gender of a foetus at 7 weeks is by an invasive, and risky, amniocentesis test in which a long cannula is passed into the placenta and some amniotic fluid drawn off. This test is not available to HSE patients and must be sought privately, the only way for everyone else to safely determine the sex of the foetus is by ultrasound, available to HSE patients, at about 20 weeks.
The distinction that Pro-Life people are humane is more than a little condescending, Pro-Choice people are just as humane, all, regardless of the choice they make, are perfectly decent people. A referendum by defination is democratic.
While I doubt it, can we be assured that was your last word?
@Jed I. Knight: It wouldn’t matter how many times I presented it, the non-invasive blood test shows the gender at 7 weeks but then again I am addressing someone who has a science fiction facade -
https://www.parents.com/health/parents-news-now/new-blood-test-can-tell-fetal-gender-at-7-weeks/
@Paul Fahey: I will probably be voting yes but frankly the yes side has utterly disgusted me in there total disregard for the views of the middle grounders. The yes side need to acknowledge that not everyone agrees with abortion on demand and that they might get some yes votes from people who only think abortion should be allowed in extreme circumstances. The lesser of two evils so to speak. These my body my choice posters are alienating us middle grounders completely. Anyone who raises any objection is immediately under attack on social media etc. I think the vote will be a lot closer than people think. Many afraid to voice their opinion publicly on this one.
“regulation of the termination of pregnancy…… legal position is that the termination of pregnancy…regulating the termination of pregnancy”
A barely concealed undemocratic swindle where a developing boy or girl can be distinguished at 7 weeks so they know what gender is being killed at 12 weeks.
@Gerald Kelleher: the voters will democratically vote. There is no swindle. Only your strange and highly solipsistic thought processes make you think that there is a swindle.
Of course, if you really think that it is a swindle, your best option is not to vote at all and not to participate in the supposed swindle.
Your comments on this topic are increasingly strange.
@Gerald Kelleher: what utter fear mongering waffle. If this is all you have left to argue your point I don’t know what to say
@Gerald Kelleher: there is no evidence that Irish pregnant women seek abortion on gender grounds. I doubt that Irish pregnant women in a crisis pregnancy are concerned with the gender of the foetus or that they are aware of it. They have far greater concerns to contend with.
I have previously asked you to show evidence of gender being a factor in the decision to have a termination. You always ignore the question.
@Rob Hunt: I have been through the good old-fashioned attempt to public shame over the last few weeks by the pro-choice men who use words like stalker, paedo , mob judgments or any other variation meant to distract that they cannot reason on their own. It shows that the pro-choice people in Irish society are every bit as intolerant as the old society they portray as the dark ages.
The more I learn about the development of a boy or girl in the womb the more sadistic the whole thing becomes and that includes those from the pro-life side who refuse to discuss the issue solely as a matter of willful intent to end the life of a boy or girl at 7 weeks -
https://www.parents.com/health/parents-news-now/new-blood-test-can-tell-fetal-gender-at-7-weeks/
Shame away, what matters is that modern medicine can physically discern the human boy or girl in the womb which would be enough to pause this undemocratic vote but the issue is polarizing legal entitlements that is behind it.
@Gerald Kelleher: it’s called democracy no swindle only in the inferiority complex of men who think they can control women
@Gerald Kelleher: rockets can now fly to Mars, but I don’t see you there! Once again, ignoring women, parents and doctors to make a (albeit, weird and clutching at straws) point.
@Mickey Fennessy: Inferior men more like it chanting slogans and stock phrases which is all they are capable of these days. The American politician knew his audience which is why they didn’t vote for another politician willing to cede more legal entitlements to one section of society but our politicians have just thrown a polarizing grenade into what will no longer be a reasonable society regardless of the outcome.
@Gulliver Foyle: “Once again, ignoring women, parents and doctors”
Just as many women, parents and doctors who know that the life of a boy or girl is being ended sometimes through miscarriage, sometimes through unavoidable medical difficulties but never willful intent to end the life of a healthy boy or girl.
A Government that tries to bundle two separate issues into one question is not acting in the best interests of their electorate. The law is humane when it remains impartial and especially where ending life is the central topic .
@Michael Lang: I’m currently 16 weeks pregnant and I couldn’t be told the gender at my 10 week or 14 week scans…. Keep your lies to yourself!
@Jenny Kelleher:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/10/health/10birth.html?_r=1
I could ask a question but sometimes being humane is the best course.
@Gerald Kelleher:
“The more I learn about the development of a boy or girl in the womb the more sadistic the whole thing becomes and that includes those from the pro-life side who refuse to discuss the issue solely as a matter of willful intent to end the life of a boy or girl at 7 weeks”
So can I once again ask –
You are ok with forcing a 14 year old rape victim to carry to term a child she never asked for nor wanted?
You are ok with such people going on to commit suicide?
You are ok with a woman being forced to carry to term a child that may very well kill her in the process?
Sorry, but you keep going on about life – people that currently actually exist should also come under the whole life umbrella you keep going on about, yet your primary concern is a foetus rather than the already existing life.
Can I also ask, how many suicides of young teenagers, or women in general, and how many deaths of women forced to give birth at the risk of their own life would it take before you would actually start considering existing life first?
10, 10, 1000, 10,000, 100,000, 1,000,000?
What’s your number as to acceptable loses?
Personally, mine is Zero.
If I had to choose between a foetus life and my girlfriend life, I would choose my girlfriend every time.
If I had a daughter who had to go through the horror of being raped, at any age, and she had no intention of giving birth to a child as a result of it – I would support her decision unconditionally.
Currently, that would mean a short hop to the UK though. (yes, i know its difficult for people to process this, but abortions do indeed currently happen, in the thousands, just requires a shot hop across the pond).
That foetus would be terminated regardless of this stupid campaign. You would have achieved nothing other than adding a little inconvenience in terms of travel.
The whole vote no to saves lives is a joke. The lives you are referring to are still aborted, be it by means of a short trip, or by a pill ordered in the post.
And that is the point time and time again you all seem to be missing. Abortion is not this new concept you are fighting to keep out of Ireland. Irish women have been aborting for many many years.
What is being asked is simply to allow it to be done in our own country near the support of family and friends.
Thankfully after this referendum I can at least know that should such a horrible day ever come, my family and I wold have options and I would take the option that works best for my family, regardless of some stupid poster on the street or the opinion of someone on the comments section of the journal thinks the whole thing is simply black and white and circumstance has no place.
You are happy in the above to kill my girlfriend off, and potentially the child along with her than allow us to made the decision to terminate to save her life.
You are happy to have my daughter dragged kicking and screaming through a pregnancy she never wanted nor asked for after such a horrific ordeal and risk her taking her own life.
When i think about protecting life – “prolife” is not what comes to mind.
@Gavin Conran: if the rape victim was his daughter he would be on the boat tomorrow…or would he force her to keep it. ?
@Gerald Kelleher: the aul rehearsed big word reply by a pro birther to hide his bull s
@Gerald Kelleher: and you believe absolutely everything you read off the internet? Even if it were true, no guarantee it would be available here and even if it were, so what? People find out the gender of their babies all the time. Do you think that if they knew earlier they would abort for that reason? How insulting! All anyone really wants of their wanted babies are healthy ones.
@Gavin Conran: couldn’t have put it better myself Gavin. Double thumbs up!
@Kiera: “Do you think that if they knew earlier they would abort for that reason? How insulting! All anyone really wants of their wanted babies are healthy ones.”
A boy or girl’s life in the womb at 7 weeks is not yours to end unless human sacrifice has made a return. The fact that the issue has made it this far is not your fault, it says more about the politicians who dumped this polarizing issue on society.
@Jenny Kelleher: that is an unkind remark when I have never asserted anything to the contrary.
Just because I’m pro choice and don’t consider gender an issue in abortion does not entitle you to call me a liar. I won’t report you this time but try to be civil in future. Otherwise, I will deal with you appropriately.
“The present legal position is therefore
that it is lawful for a pregnancy to be
terminated only where it poses a real
and substantial risk to the life of the
mother, including a risk of suicide. This is
determined in accordance with the 2013
Act. Otherwise, it is a criminal offence to
intentionally destroy unborn human life.”
https://refcom2018.refcom.ie/ref2018/refcom-guide-2018.pdf
Everyone and their dog will call it abortion but the referendum avoids the use of the word because there are two situations involved – humane medical difficulties is one and willful intent the other.
This is not an unbiased leaflet , there is no mention of 12 weeks and the fact that they can now identify gender weeks before that, why reach for the term ‘unborn human being’ when it is just as easy to say boy or girl.
Not enough people are talking in a fair minded way , law and order is the foundation of a stable society, law and exception is an entitlement vehicle.
@Gerald Kelleher: you need to focus on what is in the Referendum and to distinguish what is in the Referendum from the likely legislative regime afterwards.
Abortion is the termination of pregnancy. There is no confusion in your mind or in anyone else’s mind in this. This is not a cunning plan to mislead voters.
I note that you disrespect Representative democracy. You oppose direct democracy. You disrespect the neutral Referendum Commission. I consider you to be an anti-democrat.
You appear to be highly authoritarian and dogmatic in your overall disposition with views on many issues which are rather eccentric.
@Michael Lang: “Abortion is the termination of pregnancy ”
Abortion is the taking away or ending life of a 7 week old boy or girl in the womb however there is a distinction between ending the life for medical difficulties as opposed to willful intent for what otherwise is a developing healthy boy or girl. The referendum conceals the distinction in one question that evades gender and that is undemocratic.
“This is
determined in accordance with the 2013
Act. Otherwise, it is a criminal offence to
intentionally destroy unborn human life.”
Unborn human is as meaningless as undead human unless people want to fool themselves but medicine is developed enough in 2018 to prevent adults from dehumanizing a 7 week old boy or girl in the womb.
As for presenting information daily, people who know what is important at this juncture in our island’s history don’t sleepwalk into a disaster -
“The people who were trying to make this world worse are not taking the day off. Why should I?” Bob Marley
@Gerald Kelleher:
“The referendum conceals the distinction in one question that evades gender and that is undemocratic.”
You feel the general public is not up to par on the whole pregnancy’s results in a gender and if they are not told the end result is a boy or a girl then they wont know?
And this is vital information to determine if someone is going to vote to repeal the 8th to allow:
Abortion to a mother where there is a risk to her life?
Abortion in cases of rape?
Abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality?
I feel confident that Irish people are very much aware as to what they are voting on and everything you are posting has nothing to do with the question at hand.
Irish people are being asked if they want to repeal the 8th.
They are already aware that in doing so, abortion up to 12 weeks will be legislated for.
Telling people a foetus has a gender is hardly groundbreaking stuff – this is common knowledge/basic biology.
@Gavin Conran: “Telling people a foetus has a gender is hardly groundbreaking stuff – this is common knowledge/basic biology.”
There is no such thing as a foetus with a gender, there is simply a boy or girl present at 7 weeks.
This isn’t 1930′s Germany where everyone has to pretend that a subhuman exists so they can exterminate them but seeing Government policy on the leaflet and the determined attempt to not mention abortion directly, why should I fault you for not exercising your reasoning properly.
Hopefully, people will read this and base their decision on neutral facts rather than the awful heated #fakenews from both sides all over social media.
@SkylineSi: what is the fake news of the Repeal campaign?
@Paul Fahey: That we’ll have a 12 week limit. The RefCom says there is no guarantee of that.
@Andrew Eager: There is also no guarantee the government will not raise income tax 600% next year.
You make the posters and ill start organizing the crowds and lets March on Leinster house before the government manages to sneak this in next year.
By the way, there is no guarantee that after a no vote, women will stop travelling to other countries to abort, countries that allow for more than 12 weeks either.
But that doesn’t matter i guess. What’s important here is that we continue to punish Irish women and in cases put their very lives at risk because RefCom says there is no guarantee of that.
@Andrew Eager: Plus, the government is proposing legislation for abortion up to 6 months of a pregnancy with restrictions similar to that of the UKs, where abortions are routinely signed off without a care in the world. No reason to believe it won’t be similar here and any attempt to say otherwise is fake news.
@Johnny Bellew: We are not the UK. Regardless of how they enact their laws or keep on top of their regulations does not mean that will happen here. The sky could fall tomorrow you know! We could debate what if’s all day long.
@Paul Fahey: That abortion does not involve the deliberate killing of a living human being.
@Kiera: We’re being asked to vote on a ‘what if’, the RefCom people said so.
@Andrew Eager: we’re being asked if we agree to remove one wording and replace with another.
@Frank McGlynn: science disagrees with you. Sadly, for you, opinion does not surpass fact. Try again.
Here’s an angle on this story you won’t see on theJournal:
#Trustpoliticians
@Andrew Eager: Another fudge and blatantly fake news. Enough TD’s have made their, ahem, “journey” to the yes side to force their liberal abortion legislation through. Everybody knows that and to say otherwise would be claptrap.
@Johnny Bellew: but why should we trust the politicians on the No side? Why do you not question them? You know McGrath, Healy Rae (x2) etc etc. ultimately it is about trusting ourselves, the electorate, because if we are very unhappy with the introduction of a legislation we do not want, we can always vote in the likes of McGrath and Healy Rae minded politicians who will revoke such legislation.
You really don’t seem to understand how a democracy works, but then you are clearly one for a theocracy.
@Paul Fahey: I don’t recall many of the current lot campaigning for abortion legislation when they were seeking election. Yet, once elected, they bizarrely underwent on “personal journeys”. They were never elected with a mandate to legislate for abortion. Even if the 8th were repealed they would still have no mandate.
@Johnny Bellew: no no no, answer the question. Why should we trust the ‘vote no” politicians? Alternatively are you saying they are not trustworthy?
It seems you are not in favour of democracy Johnny.
@Paul Fahey: Yes, some of them are not trustworthy, as they have shown with their flip-flopping. All those who remained No from from the beginning are trustworthy insofar as they have not bowed to media (almost entirely on the Yes side) pressure or thought that the tide might be flowing in a particular direction and went along with it. Democracy is fine when politicians remain honest with themselves and with the electorate.
@Paul Fahey: Compare what Enda Kenny said in the Dail in 1994 about Property Tax with what he did while in power in recent years.
I absolutely don’t deny anyone their right and freedom to change their mind, but I do think it legitimate for people to protect a position they hold as important, from others who could affect that position, changing their own mind on it.
36th amendment eh??
The commission formed to inform the public what the different results mean cannot inform the public fully as legislation in not written up,which really is a complete con job.the public cannot trust these politicians,who have lied on live tv and radio on issues and continue to do so.
One big problem with the leaflet is that there is no guarantee of what legislation will be passed in the event of a Yes, it may go further or less far as the All Party Committee recommendations. Similarly what happens if it is a No, is it settled for a generation? Second Referendum on a new proposal? Second Referendum on the same proposal? Recall Citizens Assembly? Decide after the next general election?
The referendum should be taking place with the alternative legislation on the Presidents desk and a clear statement from the government about what happens if it is a No.
Website down what a joke…
@Conor O’Regan: try cheering it up.
have your say