Me and the Internet go way back. When I came to TCD as an undergraduate in 1994 one of the first things we Maths students had to do was sign up for a computer account that gave you an email address and access to the web and newsgroups. At the time the web was only just starting to flourish and you could easily keep up with every new Irish website. Compare that to now where the IEDR (the people who manage .ie addresses) registered over 10,000 new Irish domains in the first quarter of 2011. The web was also a fairly tame place at the time due to bandwidth constraints, the entire TCD internet connection was a 64Kbps line, so filesharing and movie downloads were not even on the agenda.
Over the last 8 years or so, Ireland has moved from a mainly dial-up environment to a broadband one where most consumer products have at least 3Mbps download speed. In recent times we have seen the music industry attempt to impose filtering, QoSing and disconnection as alternative solutions to the copyright infringement issue. I have posted last October on the result of the UPC case where the Judge said that if there were legislation in place he would have no problem in enforcing a three-strikes policy.
So it is with some interest I noticed last week that an advocate from the EU court of justice said that blanket blocking of websites would be a breach of the charter of fundamental rights. Just as well we signed up to that in Lisbon then! While the statement isn't a final judgment on the case between the Belgian entertainment industry and an ISP, it does carry substantial weight as it shows the line of appeals that could be successfully followed if the case goes against Scarlet (the ISP).
As I have said (more than once) in this blog, I am not a legal expert, but I am fairly well versed in the technical issues surrounding internet access. The biggest problem with any solution imposed by a court on an ISP is that within hours, a workaround will have been found by those that are serious about circumventing the block, leaving those that are casual users caught in the crossfire. Beyond the technical though, it is vital that the presumption of innocence is maintained at all times. If an organisation believes I am infringing their rights, then there is a perfectly good legal system in place for them to use to pursue me for damages. It should not be the role of any other entity to act as judge of my actions.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Video killed the radio star
Last night I had my first ever appearance on live TV, if you exclude being in the crowd at a Leinster rugby match. After a bit of emailing back and forth I was invited to appear on Tonight with Vincent Browne on TV3 along with other Seanad candidates Marc Coleman (DU) and Eoin O'Broin (NUI) along with Noirin Hegarty recently of the Sunday Tribune and now with the Independent Online.
As a very regular viewer and tweeter of #vinb I knew pretty much what to expect with the show but I had a bit of a wardrobe moment around 6ish when the producer texted me reminding me that the show is shot using chroma compositing. Unfortunately I had brought a blue-white striped shirt and my navy jacket to wear and TV3 use blue as their chroma colour rather than green-screening like I thought they did. I had plans in Rathmines over teatime and had not planned on heading home until after the show. However, not wanting to appear as a floating head, I dashed home to change to the suit and a non-blue shirt, and found myself in Ballymount ready to go at 10:30.
Once on air, we spent the opening 20 minutes or so discussing the Seanad and why the various candidates felt they should be elected. Of course Vincent and Noirin were having none of it. At one point I may have gotten stuck into Donie Cassidy a bit too much but that was only because I couldn't bring myself to say Ivor Callely's name on air. However, at this stage of the campaign most viewers will have heard most of the debate on the future of the Seanad and how it should be either reformed or abolished and so sensibly Vincent went to an early break.
During the break the front pages of the newspapers along with some of the opinion pages were brought in to the studio. I was immediately drawn to Fintan O'Toole's article on how the negative equity generation should take to the streets. Eoin and Noirin started discussing welfare cuts and the poverty trap and mention was made of protests. I tried to get involved bringing in O'Toole's article but the moment passed before there was a convenient pause.
During the second half, I got into a bit of a fight with Marc over academics and their 10 hour work week and then followed up with a bit about the liquidation of the University pension schemes at the bottom of the market by Brian Lenihan. This morning in work, those are the bits that got me the most praise - quelle surprise, academics stand together on these sorts of things! After a brief discussion of campaign financing Vincent suddenly called time and we were done.
All in all I'm pretty happy with how things went. Would have liked to have gotten in a bit more on science and technology but that probably wouldn't have made for great TV. Also, and for this I am grateful, I think Noirin and Vincent both went a bit easier on me than on Eoin and Marc. While I have done plenty of radio in the past, live TV is a whole other ball game. But having one show under my belt I'm pretty sure I could handle it being kicked up a notch or two if I end up in front of the camera again.
For those that want to watch it again have a look here.
As a very regular viewer and tweeter of #vinb I knew pretty much what to expect with the show but I had a bit of a wardrobe moment around 6ish when the producer texted me reminding me that the show is shot using chroma compositing. Unfortunately I had brought a blue-white striped shirt and my navy jacket to wear and TV3 use blue as their chroma colour rather than green-screening like I thought they did. I had plans in Rathmines over teatime and had not planned on heading home until after the show. However, not wanting to appear as a floating head, I dashed home to change to the suit and a non-blue shirt, and found myself in Ballymount ready to go at 10:30.
Once on air, we spent the opening 20 minutes or so discussing the Seanad and why the various candidates felt they should be elected. Of course Vincent and Noirin were having none of it. At one point I may have gotten stuck into Donie Cassidy a bit too much but that was only because I couldn't bring myself to say Ivor Callely's name on air. However, at this stage of the campaign most viewers will have heard most of the debate on the future of the Seanad and how it should be either reformed or abolished and so sensibly Vincent went to an early break.
During the break the front pages of the newspapers along with some of the opinion pages were brought in to the studio. I was immediately drawn to Fintan O'Toole's article on how the negative equity generation should take to the streets. Eoin and Noirin started discussing welfare cuts and the poverty trap and mention was made of protests. I tried to get involved bringing in O'Toole's article but the moment passed before there was a convenient pause.
During the second half, I got into a bit of a fight with Marc over academics and their 10 hour work week and then followed up with a bit about the liquidation of the University pension schemes at the bottom of the market by Brian Lenihan. This morning in work, those are the bits that got me the most praise - quelle surprise, academics stand together on these sorts of things! After a brief discussion of campaign financing Vincent suddenly called time and we were done.
All in all I'm pretty happy with how things went. Would have liked to have gotten in a bit more on science and technology but that probably wouldn't have made for great TV. Also, and for this I am grateful, I think Noirin and Vincent both went a bit easier on me than on Eoin and Marc. While I have done plenty of radio in the past, live TV is a whole other ball game. But having one show under my belt I'm pretty sure I could handle it being kicked up a notch or two if I end up in front of the camera again.
For those that want to watch it again have a look here.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Transport Blues
It was only a matter of time I suppose, but it is disappointing to read in today's Irish Times that only one of the three big public transport initiatives in Dublin will now proceed in the medium term. Each of the three projects brings different benefits to the city but only through their combination would we end up with a truly integrated public transport system in Dublin.
From the noises that are being made it seems like Metro North will be the most likely to proceed. I have previously blogged on MN and still believe that it is fundamental to the proper future development of the city. Just to reiterate there though, it is NOT just a link to the airport. It is a corridor connecting Swords (40,000), the Airport (20 million passengers), Ballymun (25,000), DCU (15,000 students and staff), Mater Hospital (site of Children's Hospital) with the City Centre and interchanges with Luas and Dart.
The second option is the Interconnector, or Dart Underground as it is being marketed. This line which would join Heuston station with the northern Dart line through a tunnel via Christchurch, Stephen's Green and Docklands, bypassing Connolly, is actually the most important project in my opinion. The current bottleneck at Connolly cannot be remedied by signalling or other incremental improvements. The only way to improve services is to bypass the station and end up with one line running Malahide to Sallins and the other from Greystones to Maynooth with a crossover at Pearse.
The third option is the LUAS BX-D project from Stephen's Green, via O'Connell Street and Grangegorman to join the Maynooth trainline at Broombridge. While it makes sense to finally join the two existing LUAS lines, this should not be done until the central section of MN has been built as that construction will most likely result in tearing up the BX section of LUAS along Westmoreland and O'Connell Streets.
Of course, the really galling thing about all this is that none of these are new projects. All have been mooted in some form or another since the mid 70s in the DRRTS in the case of MN and the Interconnector or the mid 90s plan for LUAS. Successive governments have tinkered around with the plans, sat on reports, commissioned new studies and all other possible time wasting activities rather than just going ahead and building the infrastructure. Now when we need to throw all our spare cash into the banks, it comes as no surprise that worthwhile infrastructural investments are the first to be sacrificed on the altar of the EU/IMF.
From the noises that are being made it seems like Metro North will be the most likely to proceed. I have previously blogged on MN and still believe that it is fundamental to the proper future development of the city. Just to reiterate there though, it is NOT just a link to the airport. It is a corridor connecting Swords (40,000), the Airport (20 million passengers), Ballymun (25,000), DCU (15,000 students and staff), Mater Hospital (site of Children's Hospital) with the City Centre and interchanges with Luas and Dart.
The second option is the Interconnector, or Dart Underground as it is being marketed. This line which would join Heuston station with the northern Dart line through a tunnel via Christchurch, Stephen's Green and Docklands, bypassing Connolly, is actually the most important project in my opinion. The current bottleneck at Connolly cannot be remedied by signalling or other incremental improvements. The only way to improve services is to bypass the station and end up with one line running Malahide to Sallins and the other from Greystones to Maynooth with a crossover at Pearse.
The third option is the LUAS BX-D project from Stephen's Green, via O'Connell Street and Grangegorman to join the Maynooth trainline at Broombridge. While it makes sense to finally join the two existing LUAS lines, this should not be done until the central section of MN has been built as that construction will most likely result in tearing up the BX section of LUAS along Westmoreland and O'Connell Streets.
Of course, the really galling thing about all this is that none of these are new projects. All have been mooted in some form or another since the mid 70s in the DRRTS in the case of MN and the Interconnector or the mid 90s plan for LUAS. Successive governments have tinkered around with the plans, sat on reports, commissioned new studies and all other possible time wasting activities rather than just going ahead and building the infrastructure. Now when we need to throw all our spare cash into the banks, it comes as no surprise that worthwhile infrastructural investments are the first to be sacrificed on the altar of the EU/IMF.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Health Priorities
Briefing notes posted on the Dept of Health website at the end of last week make for depressing reading.
They state that Ireland must submit an action plan to the Committee of Ministers before mid June with respect to the ECHR judgement in the ABC case. It also notes that the ECHR decision is binding on the state and that action must be taken to avoid further violations of the Convention on Human Rights. Slightly further on in the 56 page document is a section on Assisted Human Reproduction where the issues on fertility treatments brought up by the frozen embryos case is discussed. So far so good. At least these two important issues are on the Department's agenda
But then at the bottom of the page there is a footnote that says "in light of current resources, a
decision will then have to be made as to which of these issues will be prioritised for
the development of regulation/legislation." This is an outrageous position for the Department to take. No matter what your views on the morals and ethics of either of these two issues, kicking one of them to touch due to cutbacks is not acceptable. You can be sure that plenty of other legislation will be prepared by the Dept of Health in the next period, much of it nowhere near as urgent or requiring the same level of scrutiny and sensitivity. It is this sort of carry on that gets the public service a bad name.
Hat tip to theCork Irish Examiner for the story.
They state that Ireland must submit an action plan to the Committee of Ministers before mid June with respect to the ECHR judgement in the ABC case. It also notes that the ECHR decision is binding on the state and that action must be taken to avoid further violations of the Convention on Human Rights. Slightly further on in the 56 page document is a section on Assisted Human Reproduction where the issues on fertility treatments brought up by the frozen embryos case is discussed. So far so good. At least these two important issues are on the Department's agenda
But then at the bottom of the page there is a footnote that says "in light of current resources, a
decision will then have to be made as to which of these issues will be prioritised for
the development of regulation/legislation." This is an outrageous position for the Department to take. No matter what your views on the morals and ethics of either of these two issues, kicking one of them to touch due to cutbacks is not acceptable. You can be sure that plenty of other legislation will be prepared by the Dept of Health in the next period, much of it nowhere near as urgent or requiring the same level of scrutiny and sensitivity. It is this sort of carry on that gets the public service a bad name.
Hat tip to the
Monday, April 4, 2011
New Gaffer
As and from 1st August I have a new boss. He was elected by his peers on Saturday in a ritual that would rival the Papal election in Rome. At least the TCD one doesn't rely on smoke signals to inform the plebs and this year I found out via Twitter about 10 minutes after the final ballots were counted.
So what to make of the results? Well firstly it shows again how difficult it is for an outsider to make headway with the electorate. While Des Fitzgerald's stint as VP for Research in UCD may not be looked on kindly with TCD academics, he is the sort of person you could see leading a top class university but I guess not one with whom he forged an innovation alliance for 4th level activity.
Secondly, it shows that you have to put in the hard slog to win voters. John Boland's low key campaign didn't connect beyond those who already knew him. On the other hand Colm Kearney's high profile campaign with posters around campus, ads in the college newspapers and lots of public meetings didn't click either. So is there such a thing as over-exposure in a closed ballot where it is possible to meet almost all the electorate?
Thirdly, the results show a pretty clear divide between the East End and West End of campus. With increased pressure on teaching and research funding, and the Arts feeling the squeeze already, will having another Provost from the back of College accelerate the move away from the ideals of liberal education? Or will Paddy Prendergast be able to harness Jane Ohlmeyer's team of supporters across the Arts and deliver the revival that Ohlmeyer was promising?
Finally, on a personal note, it was disappointing to not be eligible to participate in the process. Despite being academic enough to teach, supervise students and vote in the academic constituency for Board, I am not deemed sufficiently academic to elect the Provost. During the recent restatement of the Statutes, there was a lot of debate over extending the franchise further but the Fellows refused to agree. In the election campaign, the candidates all made similar noises on the issue so it will be interesting to see if anything comes of it. If in 10 years I am still disenfranchised then I won't be a happy camper.
So what to make of the results? Well firstly it shows again how difficult it is for an outsider to make headway with the electorate. While Des Fitzgerald's stint as VP for Research in UCD may not be looked on kindly with TCD academics, he is the sort of person you could see leading a top class university but I guess not one with whom he forged an innovation alliance for 4th level activity.
Secondly, it shows that you have to put in the hard slog to win voters. John Boland's low key campaign didn't connect beyond those who already knew him. On the other hand Colm Kearney's high profile campaign with posters around campus, ads in the college newspapers and lots of public meetings didn't click either. So is there such a thing as over-exposure in a closed ballot where it is possible to meet almost all the electorate?
Thirdly, the results show a pretty clear divide between the East End and West End of campus. With increased pressure on teaching and research funding, and the Arts feeling the squeeze already, will having another Provost from the back of College accelerate the move away from the ideals of liberal education? Or will Paddy Prendergast be able to harness Jane Ohlmeyer's team of supporters across the Arts and deliver the revival that Ohlmeyer was promising?
Finally, on a personal note, it was disappointing to not be eligible to participate in the process. Despite being academic enough to teach, supervise students and vote in the academic constituency for Board, I am not deemed sufficiently academic to elect the Provost. During the recent restatement of the Statutes, there was a lot of debate over extending the franchise further but the Fellows refused to agree. In the election campaign, the candidates all made similar noises on the issue so it will be interesting to see if anything comes of it. If in 10 years I am still disenfranchised then I won't be a happy camper.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Radio Ga Ga
This morning Pat Kenny hosted a full two hour hustings with as many of the University Senate candidates as he could squeeze into a small room in Buswells Hotel. About 35 candidates attended so we were arranged into six sub-panels of between five and seven people and each group was given about 10-15 minutes. I ended up being placed on the 4th panel that was on just after 11AM with the rest of the "young" candidates.
Apart from being flattered by still being considered young, I ended up not being overly happy with the outcome of the panel. Pat decided to take me to task on being a member of the Labour party rather than focus on what I stand for or might bring to the Seanad in terms of expertise and knowledge. While I can see why this might be of interest, it seems odd that other candidates who are also declared members of parties just had the issue noted and then asked their opinions on issues.
I guess the easiest way out would have been for me to ignore Pat's line of questioning and just go into the zone about the platform on which I am standing. But that just isn't my style. If asked a question I'll give a straight answer even if it doesn't necessarily do me any favours. But that's something that I'm actually proud of - I have principles and I'm happy to stick by them rather than fudge around any issue.
Still it was worth doing if for no other reason than to meet up with many of the other candidates. Some of them I had never met before, others I haven't seen in several years. I guess we'll all meet up in the Exam Hall just after Easter to watch the votes being counted.
Later this evening I ended up back on the airwaves again, this time in my old haunt of Raidio na Life, filling in for Muiris on Scrios agus Ár. That was a far more satisfactory event where I got to blast some of my favourite tunes across the city interspersed with the odd cúpla focal. Its a lot easier to enjoy being on the radio when you're the person in charge of the agenda.
Apart from being flattered by still being considered young, I ended up not being overly happy with the outcome of the panel. Pat decided to take me to task on being a member of the Labour party rather than focus on what I stand for or might bring to the Seanad in terms of expertise and knowledge. While I can see why this might be of interest, it seems odd that other candidates who are also declared members of parties just had the issue noted and then asked their opinions on issues.
I guess the easiest way out would have been for me to ignore Pat's line of questioning and just go into the zone about the platform on which I am standing. But that just isn't my style. If asked a question I'll give a straight answer even if it doesn't necessarily do me any favours. But that's something that I'm actually proud of - I have principles and I'm happy to stick by them rather than fudge around any issue.
Still it was worth doing if for no other reason than to meet up with many of the other candidates. Some of them I had never met before, others I haven't seen in several years. I guess we'll all meet up in the Exam Hall just after Easter to watch the votes being counted.
Later this evening I ended up back on the airwaves again, this time in my old haunt of Raidio na Life, filling in for Muiris on Scrios agus Ár. That was a far more satisfactory event where I got to blast some of my favourite tunes across the city interspersed with the odd cúpla focal. Its a lot easier to enjoy being on the radio when you're the person in charge of the agenda.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
ECF - the Minister responds
At the outset I have to declare an interest here. As a member of Dublin South East Labour for many years, I know Ruairi Quinn personally. I have campaigned on his behalf on many issues and argued with him on all sorts of topics at constituency meetings. We have shared more than one pint over the years but you would never call us best friends or anything like that.
So when the Employment Control Framework was announced I sent him an email pointing out my concerns, a few links to blog posts from Stephen Kinsella, Ferdinand Von Prondzynski and Eoin O'Dell and suggested to him that it might be an issue to get on top of sooner rather than later. Now obviously he had only been appointed Minister for Education and Skills a few days before so I was not expecting a reply in any great hurry so I was pleasantly surprised to receive a letter from him on the issue.
Stretching to three pages, the letter is far too long to reproduce here, but it is fair to say that Minister Quinn is aware of the problems that the newly drawn up ECF may cause in the sector. He acknowledges that the sector delivered the required savings under the original ECF despite increasing student numbers and that there are now additional requirements on employing non-core staff. This he attributes to the rules set down by the EU/IMF deal. He finished off by saying that he is open to constructive suggestions as to how the ECF can be improved while staying within the financial constraints imposed upon the sector by the current financial situation.
So what's next for the ECF? The HEA released a "clarification" document last week that not only contradicted the new ECF document but contradicted itself in places. If the brains trust of the 3rd level sector can get its act together there is an opportunity to make changes to the ECF that benefit both the state and higher education in Ireland. But we have to act quick - damage is already being done to our international reputation and the longer this drags on the further our status will diminish.
One issue that I would like to see resolved it the issue of contract staff, especially in research. The ECF states that these staff are subject to it because they create a potential deferred pension cost to the state. But it is hard to see how this is the case - they already make a pension contribution, pay PRSI A1 stamp and pay the pension levy as well as the employer paying additional PRSI and pension contributions. This totals to at least 20% if not closer to 25% of their pensionable salary to get a pension of maybe 4/80ths of their salary less the state pension they would get due to their PRSI anyway. That means the net reward from their non-PRSI contributions is zero. Hardly seems like a fair system but then again, is any pension scheme really fair or are they all just Ponzis?
So when the Employment Control Framework was announced I sent him an email pointing out my concerns, a few links to blog posts from Stephen Kinsella, Ferdinand Von Prondzynski and Eoin O'Dell and suggested to him that it might be an issue to get on top of sooner rather than later. Now obviously he had only been appointed Minister for Education and Skills a few days before so I was not expecting a reply in any great hurry so I was pleasantly surprised to receive a letter from him on the issue.
Stretching to three pages, the letter is far too long to reproduce here, but it is fair to say that Minister Quinn is aware of the problems that the newly drawn up ECF may cause in the sector. He acknowledges that the sector delivered the required savings under the original ECF despite increasing student numbers and that there are now additional requirements on employing non-core staff. This he attributes to the rules set down by the EU/IMF deal. He finished off by saying that he is open to constructive suggestions as to how the ECF can be improved while staying within the financial constraints imposed upon the sector by the current financial situation.
So what's next for the ECF? The HEA released a "clarification" document last week that not only contradicted the new ECF document but contradicted itself in places. If the brains trust of the 3rd level sector can get its act together there is an opportunity to make changes to the ECF that benefit both the state and higher education in Ireland. But we have to act quick - damage is already being done to our international reputation and the longer this drags on the further our status will diminish.
One issue that I would like to see resolved it the issue of contract staff, especially in research. The ECF states that these staff are subject to it because they create a potential deferred pension cost to the state. But it is hard to see how this is the case - they already make a pension contribution, pay PRSI A1 stamp and pay the pension levy as well as the employer paying additional PRSI and pension contributions. This totals to at least 20% if not closer to 25% of their pensionable salary to get a pension of maybe 4/80ths of their salary less the state pension they would get due to their PRSI anyway. That means the net reward from their non-PRSI contributions is zero. Hardly seems like a fair system but then again, is any pension scheme really fair or are they all just Ponzis?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)