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

Niall Boylan is joined by former journalist Larissa Nolan to ask a question that always sparks strong memories and strong opinions: what was the best time in Ireland to grow up?
Was it the Ireland of the 60s, 70s or 80s, where children played on the streets, neighbours looked out for each other and family and community seemed stronger? Or was that Ireland far tougher than we sometimes remember, with less money, fewer opportunities, harsher schools and a society where many people had little freedom or choice?
Niall and Larissa look back at the Ireland of the past and compare it with the Ireland of today. We may now have more wealth, better education, more technology and greater opportunity, but have we lost something important along the way? Has modern Ireland become more disconnected, more anxious, less safe and less rooted in family and community?
They also discuss politics then and now. Ireland’s politicians of the past were far from perfect. Figures like Charlie Haughey became associated with corruption, while Bertie Ahern faced questions over truth and trust. But many people still feel that, flawed as they were, politicians of that era had a stronger sense of national identity and a greater connection to ordinary people. Is that fair, or is it just nostalgia?
Was Ireland better when we had less but expected less? Were people happier when life was simpler? Or do we look back through rose-tinted glasses and forget the poverty, silence, emigration and lack of opportunity?
Niall and Larissa invite listeners to share their own memories of growing up in Ireland. What era would you choose, taking into account lifestyle, happiness, family, community, crime, safety, education and life in general?
Was Ireland better when you were young, or is the best time to grow up actually now?
And if you have never been on air before but would like to join the conversation, send a WhatsApp saying, “Let me on.”

Niall Boylan is joined by Laura Perrins, journalist with Gript Media, to discuss the growing controversy around e-scooters and calls for tougher regulation.
Green Party leader Roderic O’Gorman has called for the law to clamp down on retailers selling e-scooters, following reports that six children were admitted to Temple Street Hospital ICU in recent days after e-scooter related accidents. Minister of State for Road Safety Sean Canney is also reported to be considering stricter rules, including mandatory registration, tax and insurance obligations similar to those placed on cars.
But is this common sense regulation, or another example of politicians encouraging a trend and then punishing the public when things go wrong?
There is an obvious irony in the Green Party, long associated with promoting electric transport and alternatives to cars, now calling for tougher restrictions on e-scooters. Supporters of regulation say these machines are not toys and that children are being seriously injured, with pedestrians and road users also put at risk. They argue that if e-scooters are being used on public roads, riders should face proper rules, enforcement and accountability.
Others say making e-scooters subject to tax, insurance and registration could destroy the very purpose of them: affordable, convenient and environmentally friendly transport. Would tougher laws protect children and pedestrians, or would they simply punish responsible users?
Should e-scooters and certain e-bikes be over-18s only? Should riders be licensed, taxed and insured like drivers? Or is this a heavy-handed response that will make cheap electric transport impossible for ordinary people?
Niall and Laura discuss safety, personal responsibility, political hypocrisy and whether Ireland needs tougher laws before more children are seriously injured.

In this episode, Niall talks to Aontú leader Peadar Tóibín about Aontú’s Private Members’ Bill aimed at stopping planned fuel tax increases due on August 1st.
Aontú says the bill is designed to block Government plans that could see petrol rise by 27 cent per litre and diesel by 32 cent per litre when temporary excise cuts expire. The party is also calling for a halt to further carbon tax increases, arguing that ordinary families, workers, farmers, hauliers and small businesses are already being crushed by the cost of living.
Peadar Tóibín says Ireland has become one of the most expensive countries in the EU for essentials such as housing, health, alcohol and electricity, and argues that Government policy is making daily life even harder for people who need their cars for work, school, shopping and family life. Aontú’s “Reduce the Cost of Living” motion also takes aim at rising prices across fuel, electricity, groceries and public charging points, warning that families cannot keep absorbing extra costs while wages fail to keep pace.
Niall asks the bigger question. What is the real solution to Ireland’s cost of living crisis? Retailers, restaurants, hotels, fuel suppliers and service providers are charging prices many people simply cannot afford, but they are unlikely to cut those prices voluntarily. Should Government intervene more directly? Should taxes be cut? Should wages rise, or would that simply push prices even higher again?
As more people ask whether Ireland is becoming unaffordable for ordinary workers and families, Niall and Peadar discuss fuel taxes, carbon taxes, wages, business costs, Government policy and whether Ireland is reaching a point where people simply cannot afford to live here anymore.

In this episode, Niall talks to Sandra Adams, advocate for women’s sex-based rights, child safeguarding and fact-based education, about the reported plan to classify both miscarriage and abortion under the same heading of “pregnancy loss” for the purposes of paid leave.
The proposal has opened up a difficult and deeply sensitive debate. Supporters say this is about compassion, privacy and dignity in the workplace. They argue that women should not be forced to explain to an employer whether a pregnancy ended through miscarriage or abortion in order to access time off. Both can involve physical recovery, emotional distress and a need for privacy.
But Sandra Adams strongly objects to the classification. She argues that miscarriage and abortion are not the same thing and should not be treated as though they are. A miscarriage is the involuntary loss of a pregnancy, while abortion, in elective cases, is the intentional ending of one. Sandra believes placing both under the same neutral administrative term blurs an important moral, emotional and factual distinction.
Niall asks whether this is a compassionate workplace policy or whether language is being used to deliberately soften and sanitise abortion. Should paid leave be available in both cases without asking women to disclose deeply private medical details? Or does calling both miscarriage and abortion “pregnancy loss” ignore the very real difference between losing a baby and choosing to end a pregnancy?
This is a conversation about language, truth, women’s rights, workplace compassion, abortion, miscarriage and whether the State should treat both situations the same when it comes to paid leave.

In this episode, Niall is joined by Senator Sharon Keogan to discuss a new Women for Election report which claims women in Irish politics are facing widespread online abuse, sexualised harassment and threats of violence.
The report, titled Recognize, Resist, Rise Up, was part of a five country European study on gender based violence against women in politics. It found that 96% of female TDs and Senators surveyed said they had experienced online violence, 88% reported psychological violence, 71% said they had received threats targeting themselves or people close to them, 63% reported sexualised violence and 42% reported physical violence or threats involving specific weapons. The research also found that many women had changed how they use social media, with some avoiding comment sections, delegating accounts to staff or reducing their online presence altogether.
Niall asks whether these figures reflect a serious and growing threat to democracy, or whether the definition of online violence has become too broad. All threats of violence should be condemned without hesitation, but do people believe that 96% of women in politics have genuinely been threatened, or is there a difference between abuse, insults, harassment and credible threats?
Some will argue that online abuse has become an ugly part of modern politics, and that anyone who enters public life needs to develop a thick skin. Others will say that threats, sexualised abuse and intimidation are not part of the job, and that no politician, male or female, should be expected to tolerate it.
Niall and Senator Keogan discuss whether public representatives are now expected to absorb abuse as the price of speaking out, whether social media has made politics more hostile, and whether the problem is especially severe for women in public life.
If you were a politician, would you accept verbal abuse as part of the job, or has public debate crossed a dangerous line?