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

In this episode, Niall Boylan speaks to Aontú leader Peadar Tóibín about the rising cost of fuel and the Government’s plans to unwind reductions in excise duty from September.
Tóibín says the Government is on course to collect around €1.7 billion in VAT on fuel this year, approximately €238 million more than last year, while motorists are still struggling with the cost of living. He also warns that drivers could face a series of fuel price increases across September, October and November as tax measures change. Niall asks whether motorists are once again being treated as an easy source of revenue, whether the Government should postpone the increases, and how much more families and commuters can realistically absorb.
Later, Niall opens the phone lines on a very different and difficult question.
Ukrainians living in accommodation centres across Limerick and Clare have reportedly been given notice to leave, with some expected to find and pay for their own accommodation or fund their journey home. Those with exceptional circumstances may still qualify for additional support.
The discussion turns to younger Ukrainian men who may fear returning home because of the war and the possibility of being expected to fight. Niall asks listeners to put themselves in their shoes. If staying meant risking your life on the front line, would you remain and defend your country, or would you take your partner and children somewhere safe?
And if Ireland found itself at war tomorrow, and you had the choice between staying to fight or boarding a plane with your family and escaping to safety, what would you do?

On today’s show, Niall Boylan talks to podcaster Elaine Mullally about a family dilemma sent in by a listener who fears she and her husband are being taken advantage of by their own son.
Their 25-year-old son, his girlfriend and their two-year-old child moved into the family home so they could save for a place of their own. They pay no rent, and the grandparents regularly babysit while the young couple go out. But despite saying they are saving, the couple still enjoy regular takeaways, weekends away and nights out with friends, and they are now planning a week in Portugal this September.
When the listener’s husband suggested they needed to make more sacrifices if they were serious about buying a home, the couple became annoyed and told him it was none of his business how they spent their money.
Now he wants to give them three months’ notice to leave. His wife, however, is terrified that doing so could destroy their relationship with their son and, even worse, mean losing contact with the grandson she adores.
Niall and Elaine ask: Are these parents helping their son get on his feet, or are they simply funding his lifestyle? If you live rent-free with your parents to save for a home, do they have the right to question how you spend your money? And should the grandparents finally tell them to leave, even if it risks tearing the family apart?

If you woke in the middle of the night and discovered a burglar inside your home, with your family asleep upstairs, how far should you be legally allowed to go to protect them?
In this episode, Niall talks to Councillor Gavin Pepper about the rights of homeowners to defend themselves, their families and their property when an intruder enters their home.
Last year, Ireland recorded 8,469 burglary and related offences, but behind every statistic is the frightening possibility of somebody finding a stranger inside their home in the middle of the night.
Irish law allows householders to use reasonable force to protect themselves, other people and their property, and there is no legal requirement to retreat from your own home. In some circumstances, the use of force can even result in the death of an intruder without automatically making the homeowner criminally liable.
But what exactly does reasonable force mean when you have only seconds to react and no idea whether the person who has broken into your home is armed or intends to hurt your family?
Niall and Gavin debate whether Irish homeowners already have sufficient protection under the law or whether Ireland should introduce stronger protections similar to the Castle Doctrine found in parts of the United States.
If somebody deliberately breaks into an occupied home in the middle of the night, should the homeowner be legally entitled to use whatever force they genuinely believe is necessary to protect themselves and their family? Or would giving householders greater protection risk allowing excessive or unnecessary violence?
Where would you draw the line between legitimate self defence and excessive force?

Where should Ireland draw the line between free speech and hate speech?
In this episode, Niall talks to callers and Tomas O’Reilly, a Brussels based policy adviser and journalist whose work has previously appeared in Euronews and The European Conservative. Tomas currently works as a policy adviser in the European Parliament.
The discussion comes as a new official report highlighting racism and discrimination in Ireland reignites calls for tougher hate speech laws. The Irish Government previously dropped controversial proposed hate speech provisions following significant public and political opposition, but the debate is far from over.
Should freedom of speech protect opinions that many people consider deeply offensive, racist or discriminatory? Can words themselves cause enough harm to justify criminal prosecution? Is simply saying something offensive ever something that should make you a criminal? And, perhaps most importantly, who gets to decide what crosses the line?
Niall hears from callers with very different views on whether Ireland needs stronger protections against hate speech or whether expanding these laws could have a chilling effect on political debate, controversial opinions and freedom of expression.
Tomas also discusses his latest article for Gript, which examines a renewed push within the European Union to establish broader EU level rules covering online hate speech and hate crime.
Summary of Tomas O’Reilly’s Gript Article
Tomas reports that the European Commission is considering a new attempt to introduce EU wide minimum criminal rules covering online hate speech, after an earlier 2021 proposal stalled because it required unanimous agreement from member states. According to the article, Brussels is examining whether certain online hate offences could instead be dealt with under existing EU powers relating to crimes such as computer crime, potentially allowing measures to proceed through qualified majority voting rather than unanimity. The article also says Irish Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan has expressed opposition to expanding the EU definition of hate crimes, while Ireland is separately facing infringement proceedings from the European Commission over whether its existing hate speech legislation sufficiently complies with EU requirements. The dispute could ultimately end up before the European Court of Justice.
Full piece available on gript media:

Blood Is Thicker Than Water: But Should Family Loyalty Have Limits?
We all know the saying, “Blood is thicker than water”, the idea that family comes first and that, no matter what happens, you stand by your own. But should that loyalty ever have limits?
In this episode, Niall is joined by Karl Deeter to debate just how far family loyalty should go, especially when someone you love has done something seriously wrong.
If your brother committed a violent assault, would you still stand beside him, defend him and support him through the consequences? Or would you tell him that what he did was unacceptable and that he now has to face the consequences alone?
What if your son or daughter was caught dealing drugs? Would your instinct as a parent be to bail them out, pay for a solicitor and do everything possible to protect them, or could constantly rescuing them actually make the situation worse?
There is also a difference between supporting somebody and defending their behaviour. Can you love a family member while still condemning what they have done? Can refusing to protect them sometimes be the most responsible thing a parent, sibling or relative can do?
The conversation also looks at families where the problem is not one dramatic incident, but years of lying, stealing, manipulation, addiction, broken promises or treating other people badly. How many chances should somebody receive simply because they are related to you? And at what point does loyalty stop being compassion and become enabling?
For some people, family represents unconditional love, security and the people who will still be there when everyone else has disappeared. For others, the deepest betrayals, longest grudges and most damaging relationships they have ever experienced have come from within their own family.
Niall and Karl ask whether relatives sometimes receive a free pass for behaviour we would never tolerate from a friend, colleague or partner, and whether walking away from a toxic family relationship can ever be justified.
So, is blood really thicker than water? Should family always come first, regardless of what somebody has done, or are there some actions that even family loyalty cannot excuse?
Niall Boylan discusses it with Karl Deeter.