Niall tackles a major and increasingly heated global debate: our role as consumers and whether we should stop buying ultra-cheap products to help protect the environment and human rights.

From the massive environmental damage caused by single-use plastics to the explosion of ultra-fast fashion and rock-bottom goods from online marketplaces, this episode digs into whether cheap really is too costly. Governments around Europe are already proposing taxes and new laws to curb fast fashion and make companies account for their environmental harm. France’s parliament has moved to regulate and even ban certain ultra-fast fashion marketing and impose eco-scores and fees on low-sustainability products.

At the centre of this debate are brands like Shein and Temu, Chinese-linked online retailers that have reshaped the global market by offering unbelievably low-priced clothes and products. Independent assessments have shown these platforms score extremely low on sustainability and worker protections — in one case, Temu scored zero points on environmental and human-rights performance in an industry ranking.

Critics argue these business models fuel massive waste and environmental harm, with tiny percentages of clothing recycled and huge amounts of polyester and synthetic garments ending up in landfills, shedding microplastic pollution into oceans and ecosystems. Beyond environmental concerns, workforce conditions in supply chains are deeply troubling, with reports pointing to long hours, very low pay, unsafe workplaces and opaque labour practices — issues that make human-rights groups question whether such products should be sold at all.

So here’s the question Niall wants to put to listeners:

👉 Do you care enough about the environment and workers’ rights to stop buying cheap fast fashion and cut out ultra-low-cost Chinese goods like those from Shein and Temu?

Are you willing to pay more and choose ethical brands to support human rights and reduce pollution?

Or will you admit you’re a self-confessed hypocrite — saying it’s awful that we are polluting the world and supporting cheap labour, but still buying cheap products because of the price?

Niall sits down with social commentator Paul Treyvaud to unpack one of the most talked-about political debates in Ireland right now: Should President Donald Trump be given a full Irish welcome — including official engagements with the Oireachtas — when he visits later this year?

The talk began when former Ceann Comhairle Seán Ó Fearghaíl warned the Taoiseach that inviting Trump to address a joint sitting of the Dáil and Seanad would disrespect both Houses of the Oireachtas — a deeply symbolic institution in Irish democracy. That warning has sparked furious debate across the political spectrum.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Ambassador to Ireland has confirmed that President Trump may visit Ireland in September 2026 during the Amgen Irish Open, which will for the first time be hosted at Trump International Golf Links & Hotel in Doonbeg, Co. Clare — a resort owned by Trump’s family trust.

The potential visit is already controversial. Some argue that every American president deserves a traditional Irish welcome, pointing to the long history of close Ireland-U.S. ties and diplomatic goodwill. Others see Trump as a uniquely divisive figure whose record on issues such as immigration, international diplomacy and human rights makes him undeserving of official honours — especially when those honours would involve the Houses of the Oireachtas or state endorsement.

Adding fuel to the fire, sections of the opposition have criticised the Government’s broader stance toward the U.S., accusing the Taoiseach of being too cautious — even “soft-pedalling” criticism of American policy on global conflicts — out of fear of jeopardising relations ahead of high-level meetings.

So we’ll be asking:

Should President Trump receive the same full Irish welcome that previous U.S. presidents have enjoyed?

Or should Ireland draw a line and refuse official honours due to his politics and policies?

Is canceling or downgrading any invitation a legitimate protest, or bad for diplomatic ties?

Hear contrasting viewpoints, historical context, and what this debate says about Irish values, sovereignty and our place on the world stage. Niall and Paul Treyvaud will weigh up the arguments — and then we want you to call in and voice your opinion.

Join Niall as he delves into a thought-provoking conversation with social commentator Karl Deeter in this week’s episode of "The Open Mic." They tackle a pressing issue: the recent research revealing that it would cost approximately €60,112 annually to hire someone to perform the myriad tasks of a stay-at-home parent.Years ago, Bertie Ahern proposed a salary for stay-at-home parents—primarily mothers—but the idea faded into obscurity. While many argue that children benefit from having a parent at home, the rising cost of living makes this increasingly difficult for families.Niall invites listeners to weigh in on this contentious topic. Would you support using tax revenue to compensate stay-at-home parents, or do you believe it’s unfair for taxpayers to fund another person's child-rearing? Call in and share your views—let’s hear your thoughts on this mixed bag of opinions!