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

Niall talks to Cork Councillor Albert Deasy about Ireland’s new Health Referral Scheme, which came into effect on 1 September.

Under the new system, Gardaí can refer eligible adults caught for a first drug possession offence to the HSE instead of prosecuting them or issuing an adult caution. Supporters say it could prevent people from being dragged into the criminal justice system over personal drug use and instead direct them towards health services.

But the rollout has already raised serious questions. Some frontline Gardaí say they only learned about the scheme through media reports, with official guidelines arriving on the day it was introduced and little or no training provided beforehand.

Niall asks how such a significant change in drug policy could be introduced without properly preparing the Gardaí expected to implement it.

Possession of illegal drugs remains a criminal offence, so technically this is not decriminalisation. But is Ireland now moving towards decriminalisation in practice?

Is treating personal drug possession primarily as a health issue a sensible and compassionate approach, or does avoiding prosecution remove an important deterrent and send the message that illegal drug use carries few consequences?

Niall discusses the controversy with Cork Councillor Albert Deasy and asks: should someone caught with illegal drugs for personal use still face prosecution?

Should Parents Feel Guilty About Going On Holiday Without The Kids?

Niall talks to journalist Laura Perrins about a listener’s holiday dilemma that has caused quite a row at home.

The listener says she was furious when her husband suggested they escape together on a surprise two week holiday to the Maldives, leaving their three young children at home. He thought he was planning the ultimate romantic getaway for just the two of them, but luckily he had not booked or paid for anything because his wife has flatly refused to go.

She says she could never relax on a beach thousands of miles away while her children were at home, but her husband believes couples need time together and that two weeks away without the kids would be good for their marriage.

So, is she being unreasonable? Should parents be able to enjoy a proper holiday without their children, or once you have young kids are two week romantic getaways simply off the table?

Niall discusses the dilemma with journalist Laura Perrins and asks whether parents should feel guilty about leaving the children behind.

Should Overtime Be Tax Free?

Niall talks to Independent Ireland TD Michael Collins about whether workers should be allowed to keep more of the money they earn from putting in extra hours.

Independent Kerry TD Michael Healy-Rae has proposed taxing qualifying overtime earnings at a flat rate of 20% as part of Budget 2027, arguing that people who work longer hours should not see so much of the additional income swallowed up by tax. Although INdependent ireland was the fist party to propose the idea

Niall asks whether the Government should go even further and abolish income tax altogether on overtime worked beyond 40 hours a week, as well as removing tax on tips.

Critics argue that such a move could reduce the money available to fund public services and create complications within the tax system. Supporters say it would reward hard work, encourage people to take on extra hours and put more disposable income into workers’ pockets, much of which would ultimately flow back into the economy through spending and VAT.

Would tax free overtime give working people a badly needed break, or is the idea simply too expensive and unrealistic?

Niall discusses the proposal with Independent Ireland TD Michael Collins.

The Lindsay Clancy murder trial has gripped millions around the world, and the case is now in the hands of a Massachusetts jury.

Niall Boylan is joined by journalist and commentator Laura Perrins to discuss the latest developments in the extraordinary case involving Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts mother who killed her three young children, Cora, Dawson and Callan, at their family home in January 2023.

Clancy has pleaded not guilty to three counts of first degree murder on the basis that she was not criminally responsible. Her defence argues that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis, was severely mentally unwell and had been prescribed numerous psychiatric medications before the killings. Prosecutors accept that she had significant mental health problems, but argue that she still understood what she was doing and deliberately planned the deaths. After 22 days of testimony and closing arguments, jurors are now deciding whether she should be convicted of murder, found guilty of a lesser offence, or found not criminally responsible because of her mental state.

At the heart of the case is an extraordinarily difficult question.

There is no dispute that Lindsay Clancy killed her children, but if she was experiencing severe psychosis at the time, should she be held fully criminally responsible?

Should a mother who kills her children while suffering from a profound psychiatric illness spend the rest of her life in prison without parole, or should the emphasis instead be on psychiatric treatment and compassion?

And how much responsibility, if any, should be placed on a medical system that was treating a woman whose mental health had been deteriorating before the tragedy?

Niall talks to Laura Perrins about the evidence heard during the trial, the prosecution and defence arguments, the debate surrounding postpartum psychosis and the verdict that could determine whether Lindsay Clancy spends her life in prison or in psychiatric care.

Public sector workers are warning that patience is running out over pay, and the threat of industrial action is becoming increasingly serious.

Niall Boylan talks to callers about whether Ireland could be heading towards a major wave of strikes across essential public services, and whether workers in areas such as healthcare, education, public transport and social protection should have the same right to withdraw their labour as anyone else.

The previous public service pay agreement expired on 30 June 2026 after delivering increases of up to 10.25% over two and a half years. Unions argue that rising prices have continued to erode living standards and that any new agreement must properly reflect inflation. Fórsa has been balloting more than 90,000 public sector members on industrial action, while SIPTU, the INMO and other unions are also moving towards ballots. Prison officers have already backed industrial action, and Unite has warned that Ireland could face a “winter of strikes” unless the Government makes what it considers a meaningful pay offer.

Teachers are also becoming increasingly involved. The Teachers’ Union of Ireland has announced a ballot for industrial action in a separate dispute over a 1% salary increase which it says has not been paid as agreed, potentially affecting cooperation with elements of Senior Cycle assessment reform.

But where should the line be drawn? If nurses, teachers, transport workers or other essential public servants strike, it is ordinary members of the public who can ultimately suffer. Gardaí are prohibited from striking because of the essential nature of their work, so should similar restrictions apply to other vital services?

And then there is the question of pay. Do public servants deserve another substantial increase because of the cost of living, or after receiving increases of up to 10.25% under the previous agreement, is it unreasonable to expect private sector taxpayers to fund another large rise?

Niall hears from callers on both sides of a debate that could become one of the biggest industrial relations battles facing the Government this winter.

In this episode, Niall Boylan speaks to Independent Ireland TD Ken O’Flynn about Ireland’s continuing financial and political support for Ukraine.

O’Flynn has criticised Taoiseach Micheál Martin’s participation in the Coalition of the Willing, warning that “standing with Ukraine cannot mean a blank cheque with no questions asked.”

With the EU proposing a new €90 billion loan for Ukraine, questions are being raised about what Ireland’s eventual share could be. Ireland accounted for roughly 2.2% of the EU budget in 2025, and while the final liability cannot simply be calculated on that basis, a proportional comparison would put Ireland’s potential exposure at close to €2 billion.

That comes on top of hundreds of millions already provided directly to Ukraine, billions spent accommodating Ukrainians in Ireland, and more than €4 billion recorded in official development assistance across 2024 and 2025, although those figures also include some refugee-related expenditure within Ireland.

Niall asks Ken O’Flynn whether the Government is right to continue committing Irish taxpayers’ money to Ukraine, whether there should be greater scrutiny of future funding, and whether Ireland’s generosity abroad is coming at the expense of problems at home.

Are we mugs handing out blank cheques, or are we simply a generous and good-natured nation doing our duty?

In this episode, Niall Boylan speaks to economic journalist with The Sunday Times Ireland, Cormac Lucey, about Ireland’s continuing cost of living crisis and whether Government policy is actually making inflation worse.

Prices rose by 3.4% in the year to July, with some household costs increasing far more sharply. Education costs were up 8.9%, clothing and footwear increased by 8.5%, while housing, water, electricity and gas rose by 7.7%.

Cormac Lucey argues that the Government is not simply failing to control inflation, but is actively fuelling it through its own spending and economic policies.

Niall asks whether politicians have become detached from the reality facing ordinary households, and whether part of the reason there is not greater public anger is that a significant section of society can still comfortably absorb the increases.

Is Ireland becoming divided between those who can shrug off higher prices and the so called “I’m alright, Jack” brigade, and those who are quietly being pushed closer to the financial edge every month?

Are you still coping comfortably, or is the cost of living finally becoming impossible to ignore?

Why are men’s mental health struggles so often dismissed until they reach crisis point?

In this episode, Niall Boylan talks to callers about a difficult listener dilemma involving marriage, depression, money and the limits of emotional responsibility.

A woman has written to the show about her husband, who is in his 40s and says he is depressed. He is self employed, but has stopped looking for work, spends most of his time at home and appears to have lost interest in almost everything, including himself. His wife says she has supported him for months, attended the doctor with him and encouraged him to seek further help, but she feels he is making little effort to change his situation.

Their relationship has now deteriorated badly. They have not slept in the same bed or had any intimacy for a year, they are struggling financially and the household is surviving entirely on her income. She says constantly dealing with his depression is now affecting her own mental health and she is beginning to wonder whether she needs to leave the marriage while she still has a chance to rebuild her life.

But where does compassion end and personal responsibility begin?

Is she being selfish for considering leaving a husband who is clearly struggling, or is it unreasonable to expect one person to carry the emotional and financial burden of a relationship indefinitely?

Niall hears from callers on both sides and asks a difficult question: When somebody you love is depressed but appears unwilling to help themselves, how long are you expected to sacrifice your own happiness to save them?

Should Ireland follow Portugal and ban full face coverings in public?

Niall Boylan is joined by journalist John McGuirk to debate whether Ireland should introduce a nationwide ban on clothing that conceals a person’s face in public, including the burqa and niqab.

Portugal has now introduced one of Europe’s newest face covering laws. Under Law No. 58/2026, published on 24 August, clothing designed to conceal the face or prevent identification will be prohibited in public streets, public services, businesses, sporting events and demonstrations. The law comes into force on 23 September 2026. Anyone who breaches it can face a fine of €150 to €750 for a negligent offence, or €400 to €3,000 where the breach is deliberate. There are exemptions for health, work, artistic and entertainment purposes, security, weather conditions, places of worship, diplomatic premises and aircraft. The legislation also makes it a criminal offence to force somebody to cover their face because of their sex, with a possible prison sentence of up to two years, increased where the victim is a minor.

Portugal is far from alone. France, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Bulgaria and Switzerland have introduced broad restrictions on concealing the face in public. The Netherlands has a more limited ban covering places such as schools, hospitals and public transport, while Germany and Norway have restrictions in particular settings. Italy already has long standing legislation restricting the concealment of a person’s identity in public, while the issue has also been debated in countries including Spain. Across Europe the argument remains deeply divided between religious freedom and individual choice on one side, and security, identification, integration and women’s rights on the other.

Supporters of a ban argue that nobody should be permitted to completely conceal their identity while walking through public spaces, entering shops, using public services or dealing with authorities. They also argue that some women may be pressured by husbands, fathers or communities into covering their faces. Opponents say governments should not dictate how people dress and that banning the burqa or niqab disproportionately targets Muslim women and interferes with freedom of religion and cultural expression.

Niall asks John McGuirk where the balance should lie. Should Ireland follow Portugal and other European countries and ban full face coverings in public, or would such a law represent an unacceptable intrusion into religious freedom and personal choice?

In this episode, Niall Boylan is joined by journalist Laura Perrins to debate whether the law is tough enough on young drivers who deliberately put innocent lives at risk.

The discussion comes after a horrifying series of wrong way crashes in Ireland and Britain. Two weeks ago, eight teenagers travelling in a stolen car drove the wrong way onto the M50 before crashing head on into another vehicle, leaving an innocent motorist seriously injured.

Days later, tragedy struck again on the M9 when five teenagers were killed after their car was driven the wrong way down the motorway and collided head on with a family travelling to Dublin Airport. Three women and a seven year old boy were seriously injured.

Then, on Saturday in Britain, five young men travelling the wrong way on the A66 crashed into a police vehicle. All five occupants of the car were killed, along with two police officers.

Niall argues that deliberately driving the wrong way on a motorway is not simply reckless driving. When someone knowingly sends a vehicle towards oncoming traffic at motorway speeds, innocent motorists have nowhere to go and no way of knowing what is coming towards them.

He has called for emergency legislation that could see anyone who deliberately drives in this manner, putting innocent lives at extreme risk, facing a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, regardless of their age.

Critics say 20 years would be completely disproportionate, particularly when young offenders are involved, and argue that sentencing must still take account of age, maturity, intent and the circumstances of each individual case.

But Niall asks where society should draw the line. If somebody deliberately turns a car into what is effectively a lethal weapon and plays Russian roulette with the lives of innocent families, should being 15, 16 or 17 substantially protect them from the consequences?

Laura Perrins joins Niall to discuss punishment, personal responsibility, youth justice and whether the threat of much tougher sentences would actually deter this kind of behaviour.

How many more innocent people have to be killed or seriously injured before the law gets tougher? Is 20 years an appropriate punishment for deliberately putting motorists' lives at risk, or would it be an excessive response to an appalling problem?