The Niall Boylan Podcast (They Told Me To Shut Up)

On today's podcast, Niall speaks to Niamh Uí Bhriain, Assistant Editor of Gript Media, and Clare Mills, pro-choice advocate, about one of the most contentious issues currently before the Dáil.
Government leaders, including Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste
Simon Harris, have indicated they will support a Sinn Féin bill to abolish the mandatory three-day waiting period for women seeking an abortion in early pregnancy. A free vote is being held in the Dáil today, with the legislation expected to pass to the next stage. The current law requires a woman seeking an abortion within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy to wait three days between her initial consultation and the procedure. Sinn Féin argues the delay is unnecessary, while supporters of the existing law say it was one of the safeguards presented to voters during the 2018 referendum.
During the debate, Taoiseach Micheál Martin said he intends to support the legislation progressing, acknowledging that there are arguments on both sides of the issue. Simon Harris has also confirmed he will vote in favour, saying his position reflects engagement with women and medical professionals.
Supporters of the change argue that the waiting period is "patronising and paternalistic" and places additional stress on women who have already made a difficult decision. Sinn Féin's David Cullinane has described the proposed legislation as a straightforward measure designed to remove a barrier to healthcare.
Opponents argue that the three-day pause serves an important purpose by giving women time to reflect on a life-changing decision. Pro-life organisations and campaigners maintain that some women have changed their minds during the waiting period and that its removal would weaken one of the few remaining safeguards in Irish abortion law.
Should the waiting period be abolished, or does it still serve an important purpose? Is it an unnecessary obstacle to healthcare, or a valuable safeguard that should remain?
Niall, Niamh Uí Bhriain and Clare Mills debate the issue and hear the views of callers from across the country.

On today's podcast, Niall discusses a message from a listener who says his wife's decision to become vegan has transformed their home life into a battleground. What began as a personal dietary choice has evolved into a major source of conflict, with the listener claiming his wife now refuses to buy animal products, wants their young children raised vegan and regularly criticises his own eating habits.
Joining Niall is Cathal Leahy from PAWS, who argues that concerns about animal welfare, factory farming and environmental damage are legitimate reasons for people to change their lifestyles and encourage others to do the same. The discussion also hears from an animal rights activist who believes society has become too comfortable with the treatment of animals and that more people should question where their food comes from.
But many callers strongly disagreed. Some argued that while adults are free to choose any diet they wish, imposing veganism on young children is unfair and potentially harmful if not carefully managed. Others said the real issue isn't veganism itself, but when any belief system becomes so dominant that it creates tension and division within a family.
Should parents have the right to raise their children vegan? Is encouraging a plant based lifestyle a responsible moral choice, or are some activists so passionate about their cause that they end up alienating friends and family?
The debate sparked passionate reactions from callers on both sides, making for a lively and thought provoking discussion.

On today's podcast, Niall Boylan is joined by Sunday Times economics columnist Cormac Lucey to discuss a growing crisis that goes far beyond politics and economics, the collapse of public trust in the media.
New figures published in the Digital News Report Ireland 2026 show that trust in "most news" has fallen sharply in Ireland, dropping from 51% to 42% in just one year. According to the report, Ireland recorded one of the steepest declines in news trust of any country surveyed. While confidence in individual news brands has remained relatively stable, trust in the wider media landscape continues to erode.
At the same time, a fierce debate has erupted over censorship and freedom of expression following the UK's proposed social media restrictions. Critics, including Elon Musk, have argued that measures presented as online safety protections could become tools for surveillance and control. Supporters insist stronger regulation is necessary to tackle harmful content, misinformation and online abuse.
Niall and Cormac discuss why so many people no longer trust traditional news organisations, whether journalists and media outlets have become too closely aligned with political and ideological agendas, and what role censorship, fact-checking and government regulation may be playing in the public's growing scepticism.
As public confidence continues to fall, the conversation asks a fundamental question: are people losing trust in the news because the media is failing the public, or because social media has fundamentally changed how we consume and judge information?
It's a thought-provoking discussion about trust, journalism, censorship, free speech and who gets to decide what information the public should be allowed to see.

On today's podcast, Niall Boylan opens the lines to callers to debate a controversial new pilot scheme being introduced in Irish prisons.
Under the initiative, prisoners in the Dóchas Centre and the Training Unit on the Mountjoy campus will, for the first time, be able to receive direct phone calls from approved family members and friends straight to telephones in their cells. The Irish Prison Service says the three month pilot is designed to strengthen family connections, improve prisoner stability and support rehabilitation. Calls will be limited, monitored and can be withdrawn as a privilege if prisoners misuse the system or breach prison rules. Prisoners will be restricted to two inbound calls per day, each lasting up to 10 minutes, and all calls will be recorded.
Supporters argue that maintaining contact with loved ones is one of the most effective ways to reduce reoffending and help prisoners successfully reintegrate into society after release. They say prison should not simply be about punishment but also about rehabilitation, and that stronger family ties can play a vital role in preventing future crime. The Irish Prison Service has said the scheme is specifically intended to enhance family support and improve rehabilitation outcomes.
Critics, however, have reacted angrily online. Many believe prison is supposed to be a punishment and that inmates already enjoy too many privileges. Some have questioned why offenders should receive direct phone access to their cells when many law-abiding citizens struggle with rising costs and long waits for public services. Others argue that victims and their families are too often forgotten in discussions about prisoner welfare.
So where do you stand?
Are direct calls to prison cells a sensible rehabilitation measure that could reduce reoffending and improve behaviour, or is this another example of prisoners being given comforts they simply don't deserve?
Should prison focus primarily on punishment, rehabilitation, or both?
And are we becoming too soft on crime?
Niall hears from callers on both sides of this increasingly heated debate

On today's podcast, Niall Boylan speaks to journalist Laura Perrins from Gript about one of the most disturbing child abuse and murder cases in recent years.
At Preston Crown Court, 37-year-old Jamie Varley was convicted of the murder of 13-month-old Preston Davey, along with child cruelty offences, sexual offences involving a child, the production of indecent images and the distribution of an indecent image. His partner, 32-year-old John McGowan-Fazakerley, was convicted of allowing the death of a child, child cruelty and sexual assault.
The case has shocked many people across Britain and Ireland, raising difficult questions about child protection, safeguarding failures and whether warning signs were missed before this tragedy unfolded. Niall and Laura discuss the details of the case, the public reaction, the role of social services and the wider debate about accountability when vulnerable children fall through the cracks of the system.
This is a difficult but important conversation about one of the most heartbreaking cases to come before the courts in recent years.