In today’s episode, Niall follows up on a tweet that struck a nerve online.

Last week, he spoke to a man who says his life and education were destroyed by teachers in the 1960s and 1970s. He recalls being beaten, caned, and slapped at school, describing an atmosphere of fear that made learning impossible. He left school at just 14 years of age, traumatised and with no formal education — consequences he says have followed him throughout his life.

Corporal punishment was once legal and widely accepted in Irish schools. But does that make it right? And more importantly, does the state now have a responsibility to those who say they were permanently damaged by it?

The man believes the state owes a formal apology — and financial compensation — to victims of corporal punishment in schools.

So we ask the question:

Is he right? Or should today’s taxpayer not be financially burdened for mistakes made decades ago under a different social and legal system?

This episode explores trauma, accountability, historical injustice, and where — if anywhere — responsibility ends.

In this episode, Niall speaks with Councillor Gavin Pepper about the devastating death of Grace Lynch (16), who died in hospital after suffering catastrophic injuries when she was struck by a scrambler bike while crossing a road in Finglas, on her way to meet her boyfriend.

Grace’s death has sent shockwaves through the community and has reignited urgent questions about the unchecked spread of scrambler and scooter bikes across estates in Finglas and throughout the country. These bikes—often sold on the black market—are being driven by children as young as 12 up to 18, frequently without insurance, licences, or regard for safety, putting themselves, pedestrians, and local residents at constant risk.

While a young man has been arrested by An Garda Síochána in relation to this incident—meaning there are clear limits on what can be said about the specifics—we can talk about the wider and growing crisis. This was not the first serious injury or death linked to scrambler bikes, and without decisive action, it will not be the last.

Niall and Councillor Pepper discuss parental responsibility, community breakdown, and whether some parents have lost control—or abdicated responsibility—for their teenagers’ behaviour. The episode asks a difficult but necessary question:

Should parents be fined or held legally accountable for children involved in antisocial and dangerous behaviour?

This is a raw, necessary conversation about public safety, accountability, and how we prevent more families from suffering the same unimaginable loss.

In this episode, Niall is joined by social commentator Karl Deeter to take a hard look at the cost, scale, and alleged abuse of Ireland’s free legal aid system — and whether reform is long overdue.

They discuss recent comments from Aontú TD Paul Lawless, who has argued that:

“Repeat offenders who repeatedly receive free legal aid should have part of the cost recovered from their social welfare payments or assets. Some individuals appear before the courts 10, 20, even hundreds of times, each time availing of free legal aid at the taxpayer’s expense.”

The conversation is set against the backdrop of the Legal Aid Board’s Annual Report 2024, which highlights the growing demand on the system:

28,050 applications for civil legal aid and advice in 2024

58% of applications related to private family law

11,689 applications were linked to international protection services, up 18% on the previous year

7,423 legal aid certificates issued for court representation through the District Court private practitioner scheme

2,294 family mediation cases, showing rising demand for alternatives to court

Supporters of Lawless’s proposal say this is common sense — arguing that a small cohort of repeat offenders should not have unlimited access to taxpayer-funded legal services.

Critics counter that justice must remain equal before the law, warning that introducing financial recovery risks creating a two-tier justice system — especially when those who can afford top solicitors and barristers already enjoy a significant advantage.

A timely and challenging discussion about fairness, accountability, and the future of legal aid in Ireland.

👉 Is free legal aid in criminal and family law being abused?

👉 Should some of the cost be recouped from welfare payments or assets?

This episode, Niall opens the phone lines to hear directly from listeners on a question that cuts across privacy, public trust, and workplace safety:

Should all jobs include random drug and alcohol testing?

The debate comes as long-delayed plans to introduce drug testing for An Garda Síochána move closer to reality. Back in 2021, the Department of Justice announced Gardaí would be subject to drug testing, similar to the Defence Forces — yet nearly five years on, the regulations remain unpublished.

Former Garda Sergeant Christy Galligan says the delay is unacceptable and argues that if Gardaí are to be tested, elected officials should be too.

“An Garda Síochána can’t be enforcing the law if they’re breaking it themselves,” he says. “That’s not being glib — that’s a fact.”

Galligan points out that:

The PSNI has had substance misuse testing since 2008

The Irish Defence Forces randomly test around 10% of personnel

Any Garda testing system must carefully address the risk of false positives, particularly given contamination risks in stations and during searches

While acknowledging these challenges, Galligan believes random testing should go much further — extending across the public service, civil service, and even TDs, arguing that if testing is introduced, it should be applied fairly and across the board.

But critics raise serious concerns. They argue that what someone does in their private life — whether that’s smoking cannabis or taking cocaine — is not the business of their employer, and that random testing could be overreach, intrusive, or unnecessary outside of safety-critical roles.

So Niall puts it to you, the listeners:

👉 Should Gardaí, TDs, and public servants all be subject to random drug testing?

👉 Should alcohol testing be included as well?

👉 Do privacy rights outweigh public trust — or vice versa?

👉 Should jobs involving major decisions come with stricter scrutiny?

On today’s programme, Niall opens the phone lines to hear directly from listeners about their experiences with high-cost lending institutions and loan sharks — a reality for thousands of households across Ireland.

Are legal high-interest lenders preying on the vulnerable, trapping people in cycles of debt?

Or are they providing a vital last-resort service for people locked out of mainstream banking and credit?

💬 We ask callers:

• Have you ever relied on high-cost credit to get through a tough period?

• Do strict banking rules leave some people with no alternative?

• Where does personal responsibility end — and exploitation begin?

🔍 The show explores the pros and cons of:

✅ Legal high-cost lenders

Pros:

• Regulated and licensed by the Central Bank

• Transparent terms and repayment schedules

• Access to credit for people with poor or no credit history

• Safer than turning to illegal moneylenders

Cons:

• Extremely high interest rates

• Risk of repeat borrowing and debt spirals

• Targeting of low-income and financially stressed communities

⚠️ Unregulated loan sharks

Pros:

• Fast access to cash with no paperwork (often cited by borrowers)

Cons:

• Illegal and unaccountable

• Intimidation, threats and violence

• No consumer protections

• Can destroy families and communities

This is a raw, honest and necessary conversation about money, power and survival — and whether Ireland’s current credit system leaves too many people with impossible choices.

📻 Listen in. Call in. Have your say.

Niall sits down with veteran journalist David Quinn to unpack a Business Post poll that’s shaking up the social media debate in Ireland — one that suggests an overwhelming majority of people want Twitter/X banned in Ireland.

We dig into what the poll really says, what it doesn’t say, and what it would mean for freedom of speech, public safety, politics and everyday digital life. Is the call to ban X a genuine reflection of public concern over harmful content — like the recent controversy around AI-generated nudity and child safety issues — or simply a reaction to bad headlines?

📊 We’ll explore:

• How popular X actually is in Ireland — including that it reaches roughly 35–42 % of the population (about 1.8 million people), even if other platforms like Facebook and Instagram dominate the market.

• What demographics use it most, and whether usage is dropping or shifting.

• Pros of the platform — real-time news, public conversation and emergency info sharing.

• Cons — lax moderation, polarized debate, misinformation and wellbeing concerns linked to passive use.

💬 Should Ireland really ban Twitter/X?

Niall and David go beyond the headlines, weighing free speech values against digital harm, and asking: would banning a platform solve the problems people are upset about — or just push them somewhere else?

Tune in for stats, sharp debate, and a verdict you might not expect.

On today’s podcast, Niall is joined by journalist Fatima Gunning from Gript Media to discuss a deeply sensitive and divisive situation sent in by a listener.

A mother has contacted the show after discovering that her 15-year-old daughter is pregnant by her 17-year-old boyfriend. While the young couple have reportedly been together for two years, the parents are now sharply divided on what to do next. The father believes the only responsible course of action is to go to the Gardaí and report the boyfriend. The mother strongly disagrees, fearing that involving the authorities could alienate their daughter, fracture the family, and ultimately do more harm than good. She believes the boyfriend intends to stand by their daughter and that the family must now face the reality of the situation together.

With legal, moral, and emotional questions colliding, Niall and Fatima examine the complexities of consent, age of responsibility, parental duty, and the unintended consequences of involving the criminal justice system in a family crisis.

Listeners then join the conversation live, offering mixed and often conflicting views on what the father should do — from those who say the law must be followed regardless, to others who argue that compassion, trust, and keeping the family together should come first.

What would you do?

Would you report the boyfriend — or handle it within the family?

A difficult conversation, with no easy answers.

On today’s show, Niall begins with the latest on the Mercosur trade deal, getting an update directly from Brussels with TD Paul Lawless as concerns continue to grow about its potential impact on Irish farming and food standards.

Then we turn to today’s main topic — and it’s one that’s igniting fierce debate across Europe. Following developments in the UK, where MPs have voted in favour of tighter restrictions that could effectively ban under-16s from accessing social media platforms, many are now asking whether Ireland is next.

The move comes after months of warnings about the harm social media can cause to children’s mental health, exposure to adult content, and online exploitation. But it also raises uncomfortable questions. Why are governments now stepping in to ban children from private platforms in order to keep them safe? Is this really about protecting young people — or about filling a gap left by parents?

Have we reached a point where parenting has been outsourced to legislation? Has this generation of parents been too permissive, allowing children unchecked access to adult conversations and content, only to demand state intervention when the consequences become clear?

And ultimately, are children today suffering from a lack of good parenting — or is this simply a new challenge that society is still learning how to handle?

We’ll be discussing it all, live from 12pm.