Irish-border businesses worry over Brexit no-deal

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/british-pm-may-seeks-a-border-compromise-in-northern-ireland-195606">Ireland's deputy prime minister</a> expressed annoyance on Monday at Britain's continued <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/new-brexit-talks-in-brussels-next-week-197609">failure to ratify a deal</a> on its orderly withdrawal from the European Union.

"Of course there's frustration," Simon Coveney, who is also Dublin's foreign minister, told reporters after more talks in Brussels with EU colleagues.

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May thinks she might be able to get a deal signed with EU leaders in November past the British parliament if it is reworded.

But EU leaders, as Coveney noted, insist this is a non-starter and that, in particular, a guarantee of no hard border between Ireland and the UK must stay.

"My job is to try to protect Irish interests and the Irish people through Brexit, which is not an Irish policy," he said after the ministerial meeting.

"We are spending hundreds of millions of euros in Ireland preparing for a no-deal Brexit to try to protect Irish citizens," he added.&nbsp;

"We don't want to have to do that. Of course, we want a solution here. And yes, there's frustration," he said.

"We have less than 40 days to go until the United Kingdom formally leaves the European Union and we still don't know what the British government is actually asking for to actually get this deal ratified."

Earlier, Coveney had met chief EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier for an update on the talks.

Later, Barnier met Britain's latest minister for Brexit, Stephen Barclay, who is preparing in Brussels with British attorney general Geoffrey Cox to prepare the ground for May to return.

"Productive conversations with @MichelBarnier, with a commitment to work together to solve the backstop. I'll update my colleagues in Cabinet tomorrow," Barclay tweeted.

London wants the "backstop", the clause binding Northern Ireland into the EU customs union if a new deal to keep the border open is not found, to be time-limited or to be allowed to unilaterally end it.

May hopes that if the text of the deal is modified or clarified in such a way that Cox is able to advise sceptical lawmakers that the backstop is not binding, a majority would back it. &nbsp;&nbsp;

British foreign minister Jeremy Hunt had insisted upon arriving at the meeting that Britain's support for the Northern Ireland peace deal was "unconditional".

Both London and Brussels would have to show flexibility to find a reworked Brexit deal that could get past the House of Commons, he said.

"But what we need is trust and vision on both sides, because what's at stake here is Britain's relationship with its European neighbours for the next 25 years."

Ireland's deputy prime minister expressed annoyance on Monday at Britain's continued failure to ratify a deal on its orderly withdrawal from the European Union. "Of course there's frustration," Simon Coveney, who is also Dublin's foreign minister, told reporters after more talks in Brussels with EU colleagues.

Ireland's deputy prime minister expressed annoyance on Monday at Britain's continued failure to ratify a deal on its orderly withdrawal from the European Union. "Of course there's frustration," Simon Coveney, who is also Dublin's foreign minister, told reporters after more talks in Brussels with EU colleagues. Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May thinks she might be able to get a deal signed with EU leaders in November past the British parliament if it is reworded. But EU leaders, as Coveney noted, insist this is a non-starter and that, in particular, a guarantee of no hard border between Ireland and the UK must stay. "My job is to try to protect Irish interests and the Irish people through Brexit, which is not an Irish policy," he said after the ministerial meeting. "We are spending hundreds of millions of euros in Ireland preparing for a no-deal Brexit to try to protect Irish citizens," he added. "We don't want to have to do that. Of course, we want a solution here. And yes, there's frustration," he said. "We have less than 40 days to go until the United Kingdom formally leaves the European Union and we still don't know what the British government is actually asking for to actually get this deal ratified." Earlier, Coveney had met chief EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier for an update on the talks. Later, Barnier met Britain's latest minister for Brexit, Stephen Barclay, who is preparing in Brussels with British attorney general Geoffrey Cox to prepare the ground for May to return. "Productive conversations with @MichelBarnier, with a commitment to work together to solve the backstop. I'll update my colleagues in Cabinet tomorrow," Barclay tweeted. London wants the "backstop", the clause binding Northern Ireland into the EU customs union if a new deal to keep the border open is not found, to be time-limited or to be allowed to unilaterally end it. May hopes that if the text of the deal is modified or clarified in such a way that Cox is able to advise sceptical lawmakers that the backstop is not binding, a majority would back it. British foreign minister Jeremy Hunt had insisted upon arriving at the meeting that Britain's support for the Northern Ireland peace deal was "unconditional". Both London and Brussels would have to show flexibility to find a reworked Brexit deal that could get past the House of Commons, he said. "But what we need is trust and vision on both sides, because what's at stake here is Britain's relationship with its European neighbours for the next 25 years."

Ireland expresses 'frustration' at Brexit deal delay

Ever since the Brexit vote, Ireland has had the rest of the European Union behind it in insisting there can be no hard border with Northern Ireland when Britain leaves.

But with a draft UK-EU deal that would guarantee an open border looking increasingly frail, and the growing risk that Britain could withdraw from the union with no agreement at all, cracks are starting to emerge.

Over months of talks, both Dublin and Brussels have been loath to spell out the implications of having to carry out EU customs and regulations checks on what would become the bloc's new frontier.

A comment from the European Commission's chief spokesman Margaritis Schinas earlier this week shattered the taboo.

"In a no-deal scenario in Ireland, I think it's pretty obvious, you will have a hard border," he said.

The remark caught Dublin off-guard and the government pointed to EU promises to keep the border open.

The Irish Independent branded Schinas's comments a "Brexit backstab", suggesting they were intended "to prepare Dublin for some difficult discussions in the weeks ahead".

Schinas softened his remark the following day, saying the EU would do "all it can" to avoid a hard border.

But Ireland, which considers itself an unwilling bystander to Britain's decision to leave the EU after 46 years, is feeling under pressure to compromise over its demands.

"Why is it the country being victimised that's always being asked to give?" Prime Minister Leo Varadkar asked in an interview with Bloomberg TV on Friday.

Cooling comments

Varadkar has come under some domestic criticism for failing to prepare for the possibility of a hard border.

But Federico Fabbrini, director of Dublin City University's Brexit Institute, said the government's position was "reasonable".

"It doesn't want to take action on the border for as long as reimposing a border is avoidable," he said.

EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier sought to de-dramatise the concerns, but only raised more questions.

"We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border," he said.

The EU-UK deal includes a "backstop" plan to keep the border open by keeping Britain tied to EU trade rules, but Brexit supporters in London hate it.

They seized on Barnier's comments, saying they proved the backstop was not needed to prevent a hard border.

The backstop is a major block in getting the Brexit deal agreed by the British parliament, and London is pressing the EU to modify the plan.

After months of seeming like the consistent and mature voice in Brexit negotiations, Ireland now risks appearing the stubborn obstacle to a smooth Brexit.

'A period of chaos'

Varadkar this week also warned that a no-deal would lead to a "period of chaos" and that ultimately the EU, Britain and Ireland would have to "agree on full alignment" between Northern Ireland and the Republic to avoid a hard border.

What that chaos might look like and how the EU-brokered accord would function on the 310-mile (500-kilometre) border traversed by more than 200 roads is hard to say.

Brexiteers in London say checks on the border could simply be replaced by trusted trader schemes and as-yet-untested technology.

Speaking in Davos on Friday, Varadkar said it could "involve people in uniform" -- as well as "cameras, physical infrastructure, possibly a police presence, or an army presence to back it up".

That would be a concerning development on a border where the last military checkpoints were dismantled 20 years ago after a peace accord ended three decades of conflict.

Given Ireland's refusal to prepare for a hard border, there could also be days or even weeks when the frontier is effectively ungoverned by international law.

"You could have hundreds of lorries parking up at the border awaiting some kind of clearance," said Seamus Leheny, policy manager of the Freight Transport Association in Northern Ireland.

"We could be left in a situation where some hauliers will have to take the decision to turn away any freight going across the border. The concern they have is they technically could be seen as smuggling."

Ever since the Brexit vote, Ireland has had the rest of the European Union behind it in insisting there can be no hard border with Northern Ireland when Britain leaves.

Ever since the Brexit vote, Ireland has had the rest of the European Union behind it in insisting there can be no hard border with Northern Ireland when Britain leaves. But with a draft UK-EU deal that would guarantee an open border looking increasingly frail, and the growing risk that Britain could withdraw from the union with no agreement at all, cracks are starting to emerge. Over months of talks, both Dublin and Brussels have been loath to spell out the implications of having to carry out EU customs and regulations checks on what would become the bloc's new frontier. A comment from the European Commission's chief spokesman Margaritis Schinas earlier this week shattered the taboo. "In a no-deal scenario in Ireland, I think it's pretty obvious, you will have a hard border," he said. The remark caught Dublin off-guard and the government pointed to EU promises to keep the border open. The Irish Independent branded Schinas's comments a "Brexit backstab", suggesting they were intended "to prepare Dublin for some difficult discussions in the weeks ahead". Schinas softened his remark the following day, saying the EU would do "all it can" to avoid a hard border. But Ireland, which considers itself an unwilling bystander to Britain's decision to leave the EU after 46 years, is feeling under pressure to compromise over its demands. "Why is it the country being victimised that's always being asked to give?" Prime Minister Leo Varadkar asked in an interview with Bloomberg TV on Friday. Cooling comments Varadkar has come under some domestic criticism for failing to prepare for the possibility of a hard border. But Federico Fabbrini, director of Dublin City University's Brexit Institute, said the government's position was "reasonable". "It doesn't want to take action on the border for as long as reimposing a border is avoidable," he said. EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier sought to de-dramatise the concerns, but only raised more questions. "We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border," he said. The EU-UK deal includes a "backstop" plan to keep the border open by keeping Britain tied to EU trade rules, but Brexit supporters in London hate it. They seized on Barnier's comments, saying they proved the backstop was not needed to prevent a hard border. The backstop is a major block in getting the Brexit deal agreed by the British parliament, and London is pressing the EU to modify the plan. After months of seeming like the consistent and mature voice in Brexit negotiations, Ireland now risks appearing the stubborn obstacle to a smooth Brexit. 'A period of chaos' Varadkar this week also warned that a no-deal would lead to a "period of chaos" and that ultimately the EU, Britain and Ireland would have to "agree on full alignment" between Northern Ireland and the Republic to avoid a hard border. What that chaos might look like and how the EU-brokered accord would function on the 310-mile (500-kilometre) border traversed by more than 200 roads is hard to say. Brexiteers in London say checks on the border could simply be replaced by trusted trader schemes and as-yet-untested technology. Speaking in Davos on Friday, Varadkar said it could "involve people in uniform" -- as well as "cameras, physical infrastructure, possibly a police presence, or an army presence to back it up". That would be a concerning development on a border where the last military checkpoints were dismantled 20 years ago after a peace accord ended three decades of conflict. Given Ireland's refusal to prepare for a hard border, there could also be days or even weeks when the frontier is effectively ungoverned by international law. "You could have hundreds of lorries parking up at the border awaiting some kind of clearance," said Seamus Leheny, policy manager of the Freight Transport Association in Northern Ireland. "We could be left in a situation where some hauliers will have to take the decision to turn away any freight going across the border. The concern they have is they technically could be seen as smuggling."

With two months to Brexit, cracks form on Irish border

By John Bruton

It puzzles many people in Britain that something known as an “Irish backstop” should be at the heart of an increasingly bitter dispute. This is over the deal the UK government has made with the European Union on the terms for Brexit.

Most people understand that when the UK leaves the EU on March 29, the only land boundary between the United Kingdom and the European Union will be the 300-mile-long border in Ireland. Some do understand that if the UK leaves the EU, there will have to be border controls. After all, leaving the union was supposed to be about taking back “control,” and given that countries can only exercise control in their own territory, there is a logical necessity to have controls at the border of a country’s territory.

This is not something made up by the EU to annoy Brits but is a logical consequence of Brexit, which is, as we all know, something Britons have chosen for themselves and not something imposed on them by the European Union.

The proposed backstop in British Prime Minister Theresa May’s deal with the EU involves the whole of the UK staying in a close customs arrangement with the union. The original idea was that the backstop would be confined to Northern Ireland, but the British government preferred a backstop arrangement that would cover the whole UK, so as to minimize the controls that would otherwise have to be imposed between Britain and Northern Ireland. The object of the entire exercise is to avoid having controls at the 300 crossing points between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

Some in Britain think the UK should be free to leave the EU, and that the British and Irish governments should then just decide, between themselves, that they were simply not going to have controls on the Irish border. That would not work because Ireland would still be in the European Union and would be breaking EU rules if it failed to control its portion of the EU land border.

Apart from being illegal, it would be impractical. The UK, once outside the European Union, would immediately go off and try to make trade deals with non-EU countries. These would inevitably involve agreeing to different standards and tariffs on goods coming from these non-EU countries to the ones that the European Union (including Ireland) would be applying to these nations. So, if there were no controls on the Irish border, goods from these non-EU states with which the UK had made its own trade deals could enter the European Union via Northern Ireland, without complying with EU standards or paying EU tariffs.

That would destroy the single market, which is based on common rules and tariffs, made, enforced and interpreted in the same way for all 27 EU members, including the Republic of Ireland.

Outside of the EU, under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, the United Kingdom would also have to impose tariffs on its side of the Irish border — unless it wanted to collect no tariffs at all — on goods coming into the UK from any country in the world. This is because of a WTO rule that says in the absence of a broad trade agreement, a country cannot discriminate between WTO member countries in the rate of tariffs it charges on goods coming from those countries (the most favoured nation rule).

So, in the absence of a trade deal with the EU, the UK must charge the same tariffs on Irish goods as it would charge on goods coming from any WTO members, with whom it has no trade deal — which, if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, would be every WTO country. If it attempted to discriminate unilaterally, the UK would be taken to the WTO court by some or all of the WTO countries who would not be getting the same concessions.

The UK is a trading nation. As such, it benefits from a rules-based world trading system. So, it would not be in the UK’s interest to start breaking WTO rules on the day it left the EU, just to solve a problem that is of its own making.

The two allegiances in Ireland

The other big reason for having an Irish backstop and for avoiding a hard border is about human beings, rather than just about commerce. For the past four centuries, two communities with different allegiances have lived together, geographically intermingled, in the Irish province of Ulster.

One community feels a sense of allegiance to Britain, its monarch, its historic narrative and its flag. The other feels an allegiance to Ireland and identifies itself with different historic narrative and different symbols. The two communities have different religious allegiances too, but the disagreements between them are not primarily about religious matters — they are all about national identity.

For centuries, the contest between these two identities was a zero-sum game. Either the British identity had to win or the Irish identity had to win. That zero-sum approach led to wars, threats of wars or uprisings from the 17th century all the way up until the late 20th century. These conflicts caused many casualties in Ireland and in Britain, too.

British and Irish political leaders have, for the last 40 years, been trying to find a different way forward. Rather than a zero-sum game where if one identity won, the other had to lose, these leaders sought to create conditions in which both identities could coexist comfortably together within Northern Ireland, without either of them winning or losing. The aim was to ensure that neither would feel cut off from the focus of their emotional allegiance. The nationalists would not feel cut off from Dublin, and Unionists would not feel cut off from London or the “mainland” as they would call it.

The Belfast Agreement of 1998 achieved this. Crafted between Ireland and the United Kingdom, when both were members of the barrier-free EU, it created structures to have a comfort zone for both communities. This was done through establishing three interlocking structures of cooperation, incorporated in an overarching international treaty, namely: power-sharing within Northern Ireland; cooperation between north and south; and cooperation between Dublin and London. On the strength of this agreement, Ireland changed its constitution to remove a territorial claim it had on Northern Ireland.

Now, 20 years later, the UK’s decision to leave the European Union puts these structures at risk because Brexit requires barriers to go up between the UK and Ireland, where previously there was free exchange. This is why, at a meeting in London, long before the referendum in 2016, I described Brexit as an “unfriendly act” by the UK vis-à-vis my country.

The backstop is simply an effort to mitigate the damage. It is a second-best option — and a bad second best at that. The only option that will not damage the structure of peace we have so painstakingly built between Ireland and Britain, and within the island of Ireland, would be for the UK to decide to stay in the EU after all.

(John Bruton is a former Irish prime minister and an international business leader)

(This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/europe/what-is-irish-backstop-european-union-brexit-deal-no-deal-world-news-today-29083/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By John Bruton It puzzles many people in Britain that something known as an “Irish backstop” should be at the heart of an increasingly bitter dispute. This is over the deal the UK government has made with the European Union on the terms for Brexit.

By John Bruton It puzzles many people in Britain that something known as an “Irish backstop” should be at the heart of an increasingly bitter dispute. This is over the deal the UK government has made with the European Union on the terms for Brexit. Most people understand that when the UK leaves the EU on March 29, the only land boundary between the United Kingdom and the European Union will be the 300-mile-long border in Ireland. Some do understand that if the UK leaves the EU, there will have to be border controls. After all, leaving the union was supposed to be about taking back “control,” and given that countries can only exercise control in their own territory, there is a logical necessity to have controls at the border of a country’s territory. This is not something made up by the EU to annoy Brits but is a logical consequence of Brexit, which is, as we all know, something Britons have chosen for themselves and not something imposed on them by the European Union. The proposed backstop in British Prime Minister Theresa May’s deal with the EU involves the whole of the UK staying in a close customs arrangement with the union. The original idea was that the backstop would be confined to Northern Ireland, but the British government preferred a backstop arrangement that would cover the whole UK, so as to minimize the controls that would otherwise have to be imposed between Britain and Northern Ireland. The object of the entire exercise is to avoid having controls at the 300 crossing points between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Some in Britain think the UK should be free to leave the EU, and that the British and Irish governments should then just decide, between themselves, that they were simply not going to have controls on the Irish border. That would not work because Ireland would still be in the European Union and would be breaking EU rules if it failed to control its portion of the EU land border. Apart from being illegal, it would be impractical. The UK, once outside the European Union, would immediately go off and try to make trade deals with non-EU countries. These would inevitably involve agreeing to different standards and tariffs on goods coming from these non-EU countries to the ones that the European Union (including Ireland) would be applying to these nations. So, if there were no controls on the Irish border, goods from these non-EU states with which the UK had made its own trade deals could enter the European Union via Northern Ireland, without complying with EU standards or paying EU tariffs. That would destroy the single market, which is based on common rules and tariffs, made, enforced and interpreted in the same way for all 27 EU members, including the Republic of Ireland. Outside of the EU, under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, the United Kingdom would also have to impose tariffs on its side of the Irish border — unless it wanted to collect no tariffs at all — on goods coming into the UK from any country in the world. This is because of a WTO rule that says in the absence of a broad trade agreement, a country cannot discriminate between WTO member countries in the rate of tariffs it charges on goods coming from those countries (the most favoured nation rule). So, in the absence of a trade deal with the EU, the UK must charge the same tariffs on Irish goods as it would charge on goods coming from any WTO members, with whom it has no trade deal — which, if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, would be every WTO country. If it attempted to discriminate unilaterally, the UK would be taken to the WTO court by some or all of the WTO countries who would not be getting the same concessions. The UK is a trading nation. As such, it benefits from a rules-based world trading system. So, it would not be in the UK’s interest to start breaking WTO rules on the day it left the EU, just to solve a problem that is of its own making. The two allegiances in Ireland The other big reason for having an Irish backstop and for avoiding a hard border is about human beings, rather than just about commerce. For the past four centuries, two communities with different allegiances have lived together, geographically intermingled, in the Irish province of Ulster. One community feels a sense of allegiance to Britain, its monarch, its historic narrative and its flag. The other feels an allegiance to Ireland and identifies itself with different historic narrative and different symbols. The two communities have different religious allegiances too, but the disagreements between them are not primarily about religious matters — they are all about national identity. For centuries, the contest between these two identities was a zero-sum game. Either the British identity had to win or the Irish identity had to win. That zero-sum approach led to wars, threats of wars or uprisings from the 17th century all the way up until the late 20th century. These conflicts caused many casualties in Ireland and in Britain, too. British and Irish political leaders have, for the last 40 years, been trying to find a different way forward. Rather than a zero-sum game where if one identity won, the other had to lose, these leaders sought to create conditions in which both identities could coexist comfortably together within Northern Ireland, without either of them winning or losing. The aim was to ensure that neither would feel cut off from the focus of their emotional allegiance. The nationalists would not feel cut off from Dublin, and Unionists would not feel cut off from London or the “mainland” as they would call it. The Belfast Agreement of 1998 achieved this. Crafted between Ireland and the United Kingdom, when both were members of the barrier-free EU, it created structures to have a comfort zone for both communities. This was done through establishing three interlocking structures of cooperation, incorporated in an overarching international treaty, namely: power-sharing within Northern Ireland; cooperation between north and south; and cooperation between Dublin and London. On the strength of this agreement, Ireland changed its constitution to remove a territorial claim it had on Northern Ireland. Now, 20 years later, the UK’s decision to leave the European Union puts these structures at risk because Brexit requires barriers to go up between the UK and Ireland, where previously there was free exchange. This is why, at a meeting in London, long before the referendum in 2016, I described Brexit as an “unfriendly act” by the UK vis-à-vis my country. The backstop is simply an effort to mitigate the damage. It is a second-best option — and a bad second best at that. The only option that will not damage the structure of peace we have so painstakingly built between Ireland and Britain, and within the island of Ireland, would be for the UK to decide to stay in the EU after all. (John Bruton is a former Irish prime minister and an international business leader) (This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Brexit row: Why is there an Irish backstop?

Ireland will ramp up its plans for a no-deal Brexit including accelerating the recruitment of 1,000 customs officials and veterinary inspectors to work at ports and airports, Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said on Tuesday.

Coveney will bring a detailed paper to cabinet on Tuesday on preparations for various Brexit scenarios, including the possibility that Britain will crash out of the European Union without a deal that he said the government must now gear up for.

"We are now actively, not only preparing for that, but taking actions to ensure that if necessary we will be ready on March 29 for Britain to leave the EU without a deal," Simon Coveney told Irish national broadcaster RTE, adding that he still thought a no deal Brexit was unlikely.

Dublin has begun the process of hiring enough veterinary inspectors and customs officials to prepare for the likely changes to trade between Ireland and Britain that would result even in the case of an orderly exit from the EU.

However, Coveney said that rather than having to have those officials in place in two years time, the recruitment would have to be significantly accelerated while senior civil servants would also gear up to put other preparations in place.

With close, intertwined trading links to the United Kingdom and a shared land border, Ireland's fast growing economy is widely considered the most at risk in the rest of the EU when its neighbour leaves the bloc.

The gap between 10-year bond yields in Ireland and those in Germany - considered the safest in the euro zone - hit its widest level in six months at 68 basis points on the Brexit uncertainty.

Ireland has insisted that it will make no such contingency plans along the land border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, the future of which is central to British Prime Minister Theresa May`s problems in winning parliamentary support for her Brexit deal.

After she postponed a vote on the deal on Monday, Coveney said he did not believe the wording of the withdrawal agreement would change "at all", echoing a view shared throughout the EU.

Coveney noted that May strongly defended the so-called Irish "backstop", the problematic insurance policy to ensure no return to a hard border on the island of Ireland, and said he expected EU leaders could provide an additional declaration that the mechanism is just a temporary, fall back option.

"I hope we can provide her with the reassurance she needs now to be able to go back convincingly to Westminster to show that the backstop is not something to be feared by the British parliament but actually something that is very much consistent with the responsibilities of both the British government and Irish government to the people of the island," he said.

Ireland will ramp up its plans for a no-deal Brexit including accelerating the recruitment of 1,000 customs officials and veterinary inspectors to work at ports and airports, Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said on Tuesday.

Ireland will ramp up its plans for a no-deal Brexit including accelerating the recruitment of 1,000 customs officials and veterinary inspectors to work at ports and airports, Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said on Tuesday. Coveney will bring a detailed paper to cabinet on Tuesday on preparations for various Brexit scenarios, including the possibility that Britain will crash out of the European Union without a deal that he said the government must now gear up for. "We are now actively, not only preparing for that, but taking actions to ensure that if necessary we will be ready on March 29 for Britain to leave the EU without a deal," Simon Coveney told Irish national broadcaster RTE, adding that he still thought a no deal Brexit was unlikely. Dublin has begun the process of hiring enough veterinary inspectors and customs officials to prepare for the likely changes to trade between Ireland and Britain that would result even in the case of an orderly exit from the EU. However, Coveney said that rather than having to have those officials in place in two years time, the recruitment would have to be significantly accelerated while senior civil servants would also gear up to put other preparations in place. With close, intertwined trading links to the United Kingdom and a shared land border, Ireland's fast growing economy is widely considered the most at risk in the rest of the EU when its neighbour leaves the bloc. The gap between 10-year bond yields in Ireland and those in Germany - considered the safest in the euro zone - hit its widest level in six months at 68 basis points on the Brexit uncertainty. Ireland has insisted that it will make no such contingency plans along the land border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, the future of which is central to British Prime Minister Theresa May`s problems in winning parliamentary support for her Brexit deal. After she postponed a vote on the deal on Monday, Coveney said he did not believe the wording of the withdrawal agreement would change "at all", echoing a view shared throughout the EU. Coveney noted that May strongly defended the so-called Irish "backstop", the problematic insurance policy to ensure no return to a hard border on the island of Ireland, and said he expected EU leaders could provide an additional declaration that the mechanism is just a temporary, fall back option. "I hope we can provide her with the reassurance she needs now to be able to go back convincingly to Westminster to show that the backstop is not something to be feared by the British parliament but actually something that is very much consistent with the responsibilities of both the British government and Irish government to the people of the island," he said.

Ireland to ramp up preparations for 'no deal' Brexit: Minister

Brothers Mark and Paul Gleghorne are to hockey what Ed and Dom Joyce are to cricket, with a common Ireland and England connection.

The Gleghorne brothers are the epitome of hockey's sibling rivalry.&nbsp;

While Ed is a more famous name having played cricket for both Ireland and England, Dom represented Ireland in only three One-Day Internationals.&nbsp;

Similarly, in hockey, the more ambitious Mark shifted allegiance to England in 2008 and had to serve a cooling-off period for three years before being eligible to represent his adopted country. Paul, on the other hand, stayed loyal to his native country.&nbsp;

On Friday, one of the brothers - Paul - was left heartbroken after his elder brother Mark scored late for England to sent Ireland packing from the ongoing men's hockey World Cup with a 4-2 result in a must-win final Pool B match.&nbsp;

For Mark, it was business as usual and emotions hardly had any place on the turf.&nbsp;

"It was a bloody tough match. It was an excellent game from both sides. It was end-to-end stuff. A draw would have been fine for both teams but it's very dangerous and so we went for the kill," Mark told PTI when asked about the match.&nbsp;

A draw between England and Ireland would have secured both the teams' place in the cross-overs, leaving China out of the tournament.&nbsp;

Mark is also disappointed that his younger brother is going home early.&nbsp;

"Yeah (I'm disappointed for Paul). Ireland is a very good team but World Cup throws up funny results. I am really disappointed for him," said the 33-year-old striker, who made his debut for England in 2011 after having served a three-year cooling-off period.&nbsp;

"He (Paul) is obviously going to be pretty disappointed. But I want to achieve something here just for myself and my teammates. I have got a responsibility just to play for my team and myself," Mark added.&nbsp;

While Mark has 233 international caps in total (105 with England, 80 for Ireland and rest with Great Britain), Paul's 218 caps are with Ireland.&nbsp;

Hailing from Antrim in Nothern Ireland, the Gleghorne brothers lived hockey from childhood and played the game together for their native club back home. 
But Mark felt Great Britain would give him better opportunities to succeed at Olympics and world level.&nbsp;

Mark was in the scheme of things for the 2012 London Olympics but, as luck would have it, he failed to make the cut because of an injury.

Paul saw his dream come true when Ireland qualified for the 2016 Rio Games for the first time in Olympics' 108-year-old history.&nbsp;

"I came from Northern Ireland so I had the option of changing sides easily. I don't regret my decision (of shifting loyalty)," Mark said.&nbsp;

"We used to play for the same club but now I live in England and he lives in Ireland. We grew up in Antrim and played for Antrim. We are only two years apart so we are pretty close. We share a lot of experiences," he added.

Brothers Mark and Paul Gleghorne are to hockey what Ed and Dom Joyce are to cricket, with a common Ireland and England connection. The Gleghorne brothers are the epitome of hockey's sibling rivalry.

Brothers Mark and Paul Gleghorne are to hockey what Ed and Dom Joyce are to cricket, with a common Ireland and England connection. The Gleghorne brothers are the epitome of hockey's sibling rivalry. While Ed is a more famous name having played cricket for both Ireland and England, Dom represented Ireland in only three One-Day Internationals. Similarly, in hockey, the more ambitious Mark shifted allegiance to England in 2008 and had to serve a cooling-off period for three years before being eligible to represent his adopted country. Paul, on the other hand, stayed loyal to his native country. On Friday, one of the brothers - Paul - was left heartbroken after his elder brother Mark scored late for England to sent Ireland packing from the ongoing men's hockey World Cup with a 4-2 result in a must-win final Pool B match. For Mark, it was business as usual and emotions hardly had any place on the turf. "It was a bloody tough match. It was an excellent game from both sides. It was end-to-end stuff. A draw would have been fine for both teams but it's very dangerous and so we went for the kill," Mark told PTI when asked about the match. A draw between England and Ireland would have secured both the teams' place in the cross-overs, leaving China out of the tournament. Mark is also disappointed that his younger brother is going home early. "Yeah (I'm disappointed for Paul). Ireland is a very good team but World Cup throws up funny results. I am really disappointed for him," said the 33-year-old striker, who made his debut for England in 2011 after having served a three-year cooling-off period. "He (Paul) is obviously going to be pretty disappointed. But I want to achieve something here just for myself and my teammates. I have got a responsibility just to play for my team and myself," Mark added. While Mark has 233 international caps in total (105 with England, 80 for Ireland and rest with Great Britain), Paul's 218 caps are with Ireland. Hailing from Antrim in Nothern Ireland, the Gleghorne brothers lived hockey from childhood and played the game together for their native club back home. But Mark felt Great Britain would give him better opportunities to succeed at Olympics and world level. Mark was in the scheme of things for the 2012 London Olympics but, as luck would have it, he failed to make the cut because of an injury. Paul saw his dream come true when Ireland qualified for the 2016 Rio Games for the first time in Olympics' 108-year-old history. "I came from Northern Ireland so I had the option of changing sides easily. I don't regret my decision (of shifting loyalty)," Mark said. "We used to play for the same club but now I live in England and he lives in Ireland. We grew up in Antrim and played for Antrim. We are only two years apart so we are pretty close. We share a lot of experiences," he added.

If cricket has Joyce brothers, hockey owns Gleghornes

England defeated Ireland 4-2 in a nail-biting game to reach the crossover stage and eliminate their opponents from the ongoing Hockey World Cup in Bhubaneshwar on Friday. 
&nbsp; 
By virtue of this win, the English side finished second in Pool B and will next play New Zealand, fondly known as Black Sticks, in order to set a clash up with Argentina in the quarter-finals.

A draw today would have sent Ireland through, and they twice managed to come from behind to level at 2-2 in the third quarter.

But James Gall restored England's lead and they held on in the final quarter before Mark Gleghorne scored a penalty corner with the last play of the game.

"It's always a tight game against Ireland and they caused us quite a lot of problems," said man-of-the-match Liam Ansell.

"But we knew that if we could take our chances then we would win the game and we did that here.

"We never wanted to draw the game - in these tournaments it's about building momentum from game to game and that's what we're trying to do."

Ireland finished bottom of Pool B, one point behind third-placed China, who drew with England and Ireland in their first two games.

England defeated Ireland 4-2 in a nail-biting game to reach the crossover stage and eliminate their opponents from the ongoing Hockey World Cup in Bhubaneshwar on Friday.

England defeated Ireland 4-2 in a nail-biting game to reach the crossover stage and eliminate their opponents from the ongoing Hockey World Cup in Bhubaneshwar on Friday. By virtue of this win, the English side finished second in Pool B and will next play New Zealand, fondly known as Black Sticks, in order to set a clash up with Argentina in the quarter-finals. A draw today would have sent Ireland through, and they twice managed to come from behind to level at 2-2 in the third quarter. But James Gall restored England's lead and they held on in the final quarter before Mark Gleghorne scored a penalty corner with the last play of the game. "It's always a tight game against Ireland and they caused us quite a lot of problems," said man-of-the-match Liam Ansell. "But we knew that if we could take our chances then we would win the game and we did that here. "We never wanted to draw the game - in these tournaments it's about building momentum from game to game and that's what we're trying to do." Ireland finished bottom of Pool B, one point behind third-placed China, who drew with England and Ireland in their first two games.

Hockey World Cup 2018: England knock out Ireland with 4-2 win

Debutants China displayed an impressive game of hockey to hold Ireland in their second pool game in the ongoing Men's Hockey World cup on Tuesday &nbsp;

The green machine missed a series of chances as they dominated the first half.

But Guo Jin's penalty corner gave China a 43th-minute lead and while Alan Sothern immediately levelled, the Irish could not force a winner.

The Irish must avoid defeat against England in their final pool game in Bhubaneswar to make the knockout stage.

Both the teams are on one point after two games but the Irish have the better goal difference.

Chinese keeper Guo Xiaoping saved a Shane O'Donoghue penalty corner early in the second quarter before Sothern flicked just wide as the dominant Irish had 62% of the first-half possession.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
🏑 | POTM | <a href="https://twitter.com/alansothern23?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@alansothern23</a> | <a href="https://twitter.com/irishhockey?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@irishhockey</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HWC2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HWC2018</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Odisha2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Odisha2018</a> 
🇮🇪 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IRLvCHN?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IRLvCHN</a> 🇨🇳 <a href="https://t.co/R9UstAP220">pic.twitter.com/R9UstAP220</a>
— Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) <a href="https://twitter.com/sports_odisha/status/1069971078338891776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
🏆 | The group is still open to some competition...except for the pole position that is firmly in grip of the <a href="https://twitter.com/Kookaburras?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Kookaburras</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HWC2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HWC2018</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Odisha2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Odisha2018</a> <a href="https://t.co/2qYXYFKnoD">pic.twitter.com/2qYXYFKnoD</a>
— Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) <a href="https://twitter.com/sports_odisha/status/1069972780010004480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

China, especially in the first two quarters, were overprotective of their penalty circle; only thrice they ventured into the Irish circle.

The fourth quarter witnessed a repeat of the first half, wherein Ireland sought a goal in desperation and China retreating to their half, denying them. 
&nbsp;

Debutants China displayed an impressive game of hockey to hold Ireland in their second pool game in the ongoing Men's Hockey World cup on Tuesday The green machine missed a series of chances as they dominated the first half.

Debutants China displayed an impressive game of hockey to hold Ireland in their second pool game in the ongoing Men's Hockey World cup on Tuesday The green machine missed a series of chances as they dominated the first half. But Guo Jin's penalty corner gave China a 43th-minute lead and while Alan Sothern immediately levelled, the Irish could not force a winner. The Irish must avoid defeat against England in their final pool game in Bhubaneswar to make the knockout stage. Both the teams are on one point after two games but the Irish have the better goal difference. Chinese keeper Guo Xiaoping saved a Shane O'Donoghue penalty corner early in the second quarter before Sothern flicked just wide as the dominant Irish had 62% of the first-half possession. 🏑 | POTM | @alansothern23 | @irishhockey #HWC2018 #Odisha2018 🇮🇪 #IRLvCHN 🇨🇳 pic.twitter.com/R9UstAP220 — Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) December 4, 2018 × 🏆 | The group is still open to some competition...except for the pole position that is firmly in grip of the @Kookaburras #HWC2018 #Odisha2018 pic.twitter.com/2qYXYFKnoD — Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) December 4, 2018 × China, especially in the first two quarters, were overprotective of their penalty circle; only thrice they ventured into the Irish circle. The fourth quarter witnessed a repeat of the first half, wherein Ireland sought a goal in desperation and China retreating to their half, denying them.

Hockey World Cup 2018: Debutants China hold Ireland to 1-1 draw

Australia's quest for a record hat-trick of titles started with a hard-fought 2-1 win over Ireland in the opening Pool B match of the men's hockey World Cup here on Friday.&nbsp;

Having won the back-to-back World Cups in 2010 and 2014, world no.1 Australia came into the ongoing tournament as a firm favourite but they were far from impressive and were made to toil hard by Ireland in their opener.

World no. 10 Ireland gave Australia a run for their money with impressive display in both attack and defence. The Kookaburras were dismal with penalty corners, converting just one out of five.

Blake Govers (11th minute) and Tim Brand scored for the winners, while Ireland's lone goal came from the sticks of Shane O'Donoghue.

Ten places might separate the two teams, but the Irish fought valiantly and matched the title holders stick-for-stick in the first two quarters.

In fact, it was Ireland who had the first shot at the goal and Australia goalie Andrew Charter had to come up with a double save to deny Sean Murray and then Matthew Nelson from the rebound in the fourth minute.

Also Read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/sports/live-hockey-world-cup-2018-australia-vs-ireland-180454">As it happened | Australia 2-1 Ireland</a>

Australia grew in confidence as time passed by and earned a penalty stroke in the 11th minute but the umpire's decision was changed to penalty corner after Ireland asked for video referral.

From the resultant penalty corner, Australia secured another and this time Govers' flick found the back of the Irish net.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
📸 | If you missed out on the match, here are some amazing moments from the game.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HWC2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HWC2018</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Odisha2018?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Odisha2018</a> 
🇦🇺 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AUSvIRL?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AUSvIRL</a> 🇮🇪 <a href="https://t.co/LfJiLREAwr">pic.twitter.com/LfJiLREAwr</a>
— Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) <a href="https://twitter.com/sports_odisha/status/1068495222730936321?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

But Australia's lead lasted just two minutes as Ireland drew level when O'Donoghue scored after he was set up by Murray, who dribbled past two defenders to pass the ball on to the goal scorer.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/sports/mens-hockey-world-cup-2018-schedule-squad-time-and-venue-177870">Men's Hockey World Cup 2018: Schedule, Squad, Time and Venue</a>

The second quarter too produced exciting hockey as both the teams went on the offensive and it was Australia who came close to scoring, but Ireland captain David Harte made a fine save in front of the post to deny Dylan Wotherspoon.

Five minutes into the quarter, Ireland secured their first penalty corner and Charter came to Australia's rescue and kept out O'Donoghue's attempt.

Towards the end of the second quarter, Australia secured back-to-back penalty corners but wasted both as the two teams went into the halfway break locked at 1-1.

Australia restored their lead four minutes after the breather through Brand. Corey Weyer's workmanship in the midfield finally helped Australia when his inch-perfect through ball found Brand unmarked inside the box and the striker scored from his second attempt.

Australia's quest for a record hat-trick of titles started with a hard-fought 2-1 win over Ireland in the opening Pool B match of the men's hockey World Cup here on Friday.

Australia's quest for a record hat-trick of titles started with a hard-fought 2-1 win over Ireland in the opening Pool B match of the men's hockey World Cup here on Friday. Having won the back-to-back World Cups in 2010 and 2014, world no.1 Australia came into the ongoing tournament as a firm favourite but they were far from impressive and were made to toil hard by Ireland in their opener. World no. 10 Ireland gave Australia a run for their money with impressive display in both attack and defence. The Kookaburras were dismal with penalty corners, converting just one out of five. Blake Govers (11th minute) and Tim Brand scored for the winners, while Ireland's lone goal came from the sticks of Shane O'Donoghue. Ten places might separate the two teams, but the Irish fought valiantly and matched the title holders stick-for-stick in the first two quarters. In fact, it was Ireland who had the first shot at the goal and Australia goalie Andrew Charter had to come up with a double save to deny Sean Murray and then Matthew Nelson from the rebound in the fourth minute. Also Read: As it happened | Australia 2-1 Ireland Australia grew in confidence as time passed by and earned a penalty stroke in the 11th minute but the umpire's decision was changed to penalty corner after Ireland asked for video referral. From the resultant penalty corner, Australia secured another and this time Govers' flick found the back of the Irish net. 📸 | If you missed out on the match, here are some amazing moments from the game.#HWC2018 #Odisha2018 🇦🇺 #AUSvIRL 🇮🇪 pic.twitter.com/LfJiLREAwr — Hockey World Cup 2018 - Host Partner (@sports_odisha) November 30, 2018 × But Australia's lead lasted just two minutes as Ireland drew level when O'Donoghue scored after he was set up by Murray, who dribbled past two defenders to pass the ball on to the goal scorer. Also Read | Men's Hockey World Cup 2018: Schedule, Squad, Time and Venue The second quarter too produced exciting hockey as both the teams went on the offensive and it was Australia who came close to scoring, but Ireland captain David Harte made a fine save in front of the post to deny Dylan Wotherspoon. Five minutes into the quarter, Ireland secured their first penalty corner and Charter came to Australia's rescue and kept out O'Donoghue's attempt. Towards the end of the second quarter, Australia secured back-to-back penalty corners but wasted both as the two teams went into the halfway break locked at 1-1. Australia restored their lead four minutes after the breather through Brand. Corey Weyer's workmanship in the midfield finally helped Australia when his inch-perfect through ball found Brand unmarked inside the box and the striker scored from his second attempt.

Defending champions Australia struggle past Ireland 2-1 in World Cup opener

The Brexit deal marks a clear victory for Ireland -- one no-one in Britain saw coming and one which has raised the Irish government's standing at home and abroad.

Ireland is tethered to Britain through a common history, enmeshed economies and a border with the British province of Northern Ireland that held up negotiations for months.

Some British hardliners had argued that Ireland would simply follow along in any exit deal -- a sentiment that caused outrage among many Irish and helped harden resolve.

At the centre of the dispute was a legal guarantee to keep the Irish border open, known as the "backstop", which Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar and his EU allies insisted on and Britain eventually and very reluctantly agreed to.

Ireland was opposed to Brexit and is fearful both of the impact on trade with biggest economic partner Britain and any destabilising influence on the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which ended three decades of sectarian conflict.

Bi-partisan support

When the draft accord was published earlier this month, Irish politicians across the spectrum lauded it as the best possible outcome for the Republic in contrast to the deep divisions in the British parliament over its merits.

"The Irish government's key preferences were all reflected in the divorce settlement," said Etain Tannam, a senior lecturer at Trinity College Dublin.

"Bi-partisan party support in the Irish parliament for the government's Brexit policy has been noteworthy since the withdrawal process began," she said.

In the tug of war of international interests, Ireland's government now has greater traction and is earning a reputation as a shrewd bargainer -- at the same time as Britain's prestige is on the wane.

"The places have changed. Britain, not Ireland, is the relatively small and isolated country," Irish columnist Fintan O'Toole wrote in a column for the Guardian newspaper.

"Ireland, not the British Empire, has on its side the power of a huge multinational bloc," he said, referring to Britain's previous dominant influence over Ireland.

'Dangerous instability'

Whilst Britain has been plunged into political turmoil ever since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Irish politics has been imbued with a sense of unity in the national interest.

Varadkar's centre-right Fine Gael minority government is theoretically vulnerable with its reliance on the centre-left opposition party Fianna Fail through a confidence and supply agreement.

But the two age-old rivals agreed to extend their pact through until the end of Brexit negotiations.

"An election during this critical time would create a dangerous instability," Fianna Fail leader Micheál Martin wrote in an October letter to the prime minister.

In polls, Varadkar's party holds a firm lead -- making him one of the few clear-cut winners in the Brexit morass.

When the draft withdrawal deal was announced last week Varadkar abstained from a victory lap, issuing the staid remark that it was "one of the better days in politics".

Ireland 'at the heart of the EU'

Ireland had four priorities in negotiations -- to preserve the peace process, maintain common travel rights with the UK and minimise the economic impact of Brexit.

The final one was to reaffirm the Republic's "place at the heart of the European Union".

Mindful that it will soon be isolated at the edge of the trading bloc, the Irish government has doubled down on its membership of the union with statements of solidarity.

And opinion polls suggest that calls by Brexiteers for Ireland to follow Britain in leaving the EU have fallen on deaf ears.

A survey by pollsters Red C earlier this year found that 92 per cent of the Irish population now support staying in the EU -- up from 88 per cent last year.

The Brexit deal marks a clear victory for Ireland -- one no-one in Britain saw coming and one which has raised the Irish government's standing at home and abroad.

The Brexit deal marks a clear victory for Ireland -- one no-one in Britain saw coming and one which has raised the Irish government's standing at home and abroad. Ireland is tethered to Britain through a common history, enmeshed economies and a border with the British province of Northern Ireland that held up negotiations for months. Some British hardliners had argued that Ireland would simply follow along in any exit deal -- a sentiment that caused outrage among many Irish and helped harden resolve. At the centre of the dispute was a legal guarantee to keep the Irish border open, known as the "backstop", which Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar and his EU allies insisted on and Britain eventually and very reluctantly agreed to. Ireland was opposed to Brexit and is fearful both of the impact on trade with biggest economic partner Britain and any destabilising influence on the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which ended three decades of sectarian conflict. Bi-partisan support When the draft accord was published earlier this month, Irish politicians across the spectrum lauded it as the best possible outcome for the Republic in contrast to the deep divisions in the British parliament over its merits. "The Irish government's key preferences were all reflected in the divorce settlement," said Etain Tannam, a senior lecturer at Trinity College Dublin. "Bi-partisan party support in the Irish parliament for the government's Brexit policy has been noteworthy since the withdrawal process began," she said. In the tug of war of international interests, Ireland's government now has greater traction and is earning a reputation as a shrewd bargainer -- at the same time as Britain's prestige is on the wane. "The places have changed. Britain, not Ireland, is the relatively small and isolated country," Irish columnist Fintan O'Toole wrote in a column for the Guardian newspaper. "Ireland, not the British Empire, has on its side the power of a huge multinational bloc," he said, referring to Britain's previous dominant influence over Ireland. 'Dangerous instability' Whilst Britain has been plunged into political turmoil ever since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Irish politics has been imbued with a sense of unity in the national interest. Varadkar's centre-right Fine Gael minority government is theoretically vulnerable with its reliance on the centre-left opposition party Fianna Fail through a confidence and supply agreement. But the two age-old rivals agreed to extend their pact through until the end of Brexit negotiations. "An election during this critical time would create a dangerous instability," Fianna Fail leader Micheál Martin wrote in an October letter to the prime minister. In polls, Varadkar's party holds a firm lead -- making him one of the few clear-cut winners in the Brexit morass. When the draft withdrawal deal was announced last week Varadkar abstained from a victory lap, issuing the staid remark that it was "one of the better days in politics". Ireland 'at the heart of the EU' Ireland had four priorities in negotiations -- to preserve the peace process, maintain common travel rights with the UK and minimise the economic impact of Brexit. The final one was to reaffirm the Republic's "place at the heart of the European Union". Mindful that it will soon be isolated at the edge of the trading bloc, the Irish government has doubled down on its membership of the union with statements of solidarity. And opinion polls suggest that calls by Brexiteers for Ireland to follow Britain in leaving the EU have fallen on deaf ears. A survey by pollsters Red C earlier this year found that 92 per cent of the Irish population now support staying in the EU -- up from 88 per cent last year.

How Ireland beat Britain in the Brexit divorce battle

Men's Hockey World Cup 2018: All teams and their squad list

Two airline pilots have reported spotted an unidentified flying object (UFO) off the coast of Ireland. News reports Tuesday said the sighting is being investigated by the Irish Aviation Authority.&nbsp;

The alleged UFO was spotted by the pilots of British Airways flight BA94 on November 9.&nbsp;

The pilots called air traffic control in Shannon and reported seeing an object moving past their aircraft; they then asked if there were any military exercises taking place off the west coast of Ireland.

The news reports said the pilots was told there were no military exercises being conducted in the area.&nbsp;

The news reports said the pilots described the alleged UFO as a very bright light travelling at very high speed.

The reports added that&nbsp;a Virgin Airlines pilot had mentioned a possible meteor in the area, and described several objects travelling along the same path.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Two airline pilots have reported spotted an unidentified flying object (UFO) off the coast of Ireland. News reports Tuesday said the sighting is being investigated by the Irish Aviation Authority.

Two airline pilots have reported spotted an unidentified flying object (UFO) off the coast of Ireland. News reports Tuesday said the sighting is being investigated by the Irish Aviation Authority. The alleged UFO was spotted by the pilots of British Airways flight BA94 on November 9. The pilots called air traffic control in Shannon and reported seeing an object moving past their aircraft; they then asked if there were any military exercises taking place off the west coast of Ireland. The news reports said the pilots was told there were no military exercises being conducted in the area. The news reports said the pilots described the alleged UFO as a very bright light travelling at very high speed. The reports added that a Virgin Airlines pilot had mentioned a possible meteor in the area, and described several objects travelling along the same path.

British Airways pilots report seeing UFO off west coast of Ireland

By Steve Pinkerton

The citizens of Ireland voted recently, in a nationwide referendum, to remove a clause from their constitution that had made blasphemy a criminal offence.

Ireland’s now-defunct Defamation Act of 2009 prohibited the “publication or utterance of blasphemous matter.” Just last year, in fact, Irish police opened a brief investigation into whether comedian Stephen Fry had broken the law when he described God as “capricious, mean-minded, stupid” and “an utter maniac” during a televised interview. The case was closed, however, as the police said they had been “unable to find a substantial number of outraged people.”

The overturning of Ireland’s blasphemy law stands in stark contrast to recent news out of Pakistan – where the release from prison of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman, accused of blasphemy, has led to widespread protests. In Indonesia, too, many people have been jailed for speaking irreverently against Islam.

Despite its recent defeat, Ireland’s 2009 blasphemy law is an important reminder that laws against blasphemy have hardly been unique to the Muslim world – even in the 21st century.

Understanding the Muslim world

As of 2014, according to the Pew Research Center, nearly one-fifth of European countries and a third of countries in the Americas, notably Canada, have laws against blasphemy.

In my research for a literary study of blasphemy, I found that these laws may differ in many respects from their more well-known counterparts in Muslim nations, but they also share some common features with them.

In particular, they’re all united in regarding blasphemy as a form of “injury” – even as they disagree about what, exactly, blasphemy injures.

In the Muslim world, such injured parties are often a lot easier to find. Cultural anthropologist Saba Mahmood said that many devout Muslims perceive blasphemy as an almost physical injury: an intolerable offence that hurts both God himself and the whole community of the faithful.

For Mahmood that perception was brought powerfully home in 2005, when a Danish newspaper published cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. Interviewing a number of Muslims at the time, Mahmood was “struck,” she wrote, “by the sense of personal loss” they conveyed. People she interviewed were very clear on this point:

“The idea that we should just get over this hurt makes me so mad.”

“I would have felt less wounded if the object of ridicule were my own parents.”

The intensity of this “hurt,” “wounding” and “ridicule” helps to explain how blasphemy can remain a capital offence in a theocratic state like Pakistan. The punishment is tailored to the enormity of the perceived crime.

Blasphemy and Christians

That may sound like a foreign concept to secular ears. The reality, though, is that most Western blasphemy laws are rooted in a similar logic of religious offence.

As historians like Leonard Levy and David Nash have documented, these laws – dating, mostly, from the 1200s to the early 1800s – were designed to protect Christian beliefs and practices from the sort of “hurt” and “ridicule” that animates Islamic blasphemy laws today. But as the West became increasingly secular, religious injury gradually lost much of its power to provoke. By the mid-20th century, most Western blasphemy laws had become virtually dead letters.

That’s certainly true of the US, where such laws remain “on the books” in six states but haven’t been invoked since at least the early 1970s. They’re now widely held to be nullified by the First Amendment.

Yet looking beyond the American context, one will find that blasphemy laws are hardly obsolete throughout the West. Instead, they’re acquiring new uses for the 21st century.

Religious offence in a secular world

Consider the case of a Danish man who was charged with blasphemy, in February 2017, for burning a Quran and for posting a video of the act online.

In the past, Denmark’s blasphemy law had only ever been enforced to punish anti-Christian expression. (It was last used in 1946.) Today it serves to highlight an ongoing trend: In an increasingly pluralist, multicultural West, blasphemy laws find fresh purpose in policing intolerance between religious communities.

In other words, the real question for the 21st century has not been whether blasphemy counts as a crime. Instead, it’s been about who, or what – God or the state, religion or pluralism – is the injured party. Instead of preventing injury to God, these laws now seek to prevent injury to the social fabric of avowedly secular states.

That’s true not only of the West’s centuries-old blasphemy laws but also of more recent ones. Ireland’s Defamation Act, for instance, targeted any person who “utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion.”

With its emphasis on the “outrage” blasphemy may cause among “any religion,” the measure was clearly aimed less at protecting the sacred than at preventing intolerance among diverse religious groups.

The law itself caused outrage of a different sort, however. Advocacy organisations, such as Atheist Ireland, mounted fierce opposition to the law and to the example it set internationally. In late 2009, for instance, Pakistan borrowed the exact language of the Irish law in its own proposed statement on blasphemy to the United Nations’ Human Rights Council.

Thus, Atheist Ireland warned on its website that “The Islamic States can now point to a modern pluralist Western State passing a new blasphemy law in the 21st century.”

Blasphemy in modernity

That warning resonates with the common Western view of blasphemy as an antiquated concept, a medieval throwback with no relevance to “modern,” “developed” societies. Atheist Ireland’s chairperson, Michael Nugent, drew on this tradition when he touted the significance of the recent referendum victory:

“It means that we’ve got rid of a medieval crime from our constitution that should never have been there.”

As Columbia University professor Gauri Viswanathan puts it, blasphemy is often used “to separate cultures of modernity from those of premodernity.” Starting from the assumption that blasphemy can exist only in a backward society, critics point to blasphemy as evidence of the backwardness of entire religious cultures.

I would argue, however, that this Eurocentric view is growing increasingly difficult to sustain. If anything, blasphemy has in recent years enjoyed a resurgence in many corners of the supposedly secular West – including prosecutions in Austria, Finland, Germany, Greece, Switzerland and Turkey. Perhaps the fate of Ireland’s Defamation Act forecasts a broader reversal of that trend.

(Steve Pinkerton is Lecturer in English, Case Western Reserve University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/blasphemy-law-is-repealed-in-ireland-enforced-in-pakistan-and-a-problem-in-many-christian-and-muslim-countries-106487">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

 
&nbsp;

By Steve Pinkerton The citizens of Ireland voted recently, in a nationwide referendum, to remove a clause from their constitution that had made blasphemy a criminal offence.

By Steve Pinkerton The citizens of Ireland voted recently, in a nationwide referendum, to remove a clause from their constitution that had made blasphemy a criminal offence. Ireland’s now-defunct Defamation Act of 2009 prohibited the “publication or utterance of blasphemous matter.” Just last year, in fact, Irish police opened a brief investigation into whether comedian Stephen Fry had broken the law when he described God as “capricious, mean-minded, stupid” and “an utter maniac” during a televised interview. The case was closed, however, as the police said they had been “unable to find a substantial number of outraged people.” The overturning of Ireland’s blasphemy law stands in stark contrast to recent news out of Pakistan – where the release from prison of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman, accused of blasphemy, has led to widespread protests. In Indonesia, too, many people have been jailed for speaking irreverently against Islam. Despite its recent defeat, Ireland’s 2009 blasphemy law is an important reminder that laws against blasphemy have hardly been unique to the Muslim world – even in the 21st century. Understanding the Muslim world As of 2014, according to the Pew Research Center, nearly one-fifth of European countries and a third of countries in the Americas, notably Canada, have laws against blasphemy. In my research for a literary study of blasphemy, I found that these laws may differ in many respects from their more well-known counterparts in Muslim nations, but they also share some common features with them. In particular, they’re all united in regarding blasphemy as a form of “injury” – even as they disagree about what, exactly, blasphemy injures. In the Muslim world, such injured parties are often a lot easier to find. Cultural anthropologist Saba Mahmood said that many devout Muslims perceive blasphemy as an almost physical injury: an intolerable offence that hurts both God himself and the whole community of the faithful. For Mahmood that perception was brought powerfully home in 2005, when a Danish newspaper published cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. Interviewing a number of Muslims at the time, Mahmood was “struck,” she wrote, “by the sense of personal loss” they conveyed. People she interviewed were very clear on this point: “The idea that we should just get over this hurt makes me so mad.” “I would have felt less wounded if the object of ridicule were my own parents.” The intensity of this “hurt,” “wounding” and “ridicule” helps to explain how blasphemy can remain a capital offence in a theocratic state like Pakistan. The punishment is tailored to the enormity of the perceived crime. Blasphemy and Christians That may sound like a foreign concept to secular ears. The reality, though, is that most Western blasphemy laws are rooted in a similar logic of religious offence. As historians like Leonard Levy and David Nash have documented, these laws – dating, mostly, from the 1200s to the early 1800s – were designed to protect Christian beliefs and practices from the sort of “hurt” and “ridicule” that animates Islamic blasphemy laws today. But as the West became increasingly secular, religious injury gradually lost much of its power to provoke. By the mid-20th century, most Western blasphemy laws had become virtually dead letters. That’s certainly true of the US, where such laws remain “on the books” in six states but haven’t been invoked since at least the early 1970s. They’re now widely held to be nullified by the First Amendment. Yet looking beyond the American context, one will find that blasphemy laws are hardly obsolete throughout the West. Instead, they’re acquiring new uses for the 21st century. Religious offence in a secular world Consider the case of a Danish man who was charged with blasphemy, in February 2017, for burning a Quran and for posting a video of the act online. In the past, Denmark’s blasphemy law had only ever been enforced to punish anti-Christian expression. (It was last used in 1946.) Today it serves to highlight an ongoing trend: In an increasingly pluralist, multicultural West, blasphemy laws find fresh purpose in policing intolerance between religious communities. In other words, the real question for the 21st century has not been whether blasphemy counts as a crime. Instead, it’s been about who, or what – God or the state, religion or pluralism – is the injured party. Instead of preventing injury to God, these laws now seek to prevent injury to the social fabric of avowedly secular states. That’s true not only of the West’s centuries-old blasphemy laws but also of more recent ones. Ireland’s Defamation Act, for instance, targeted any person who “utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion.” With its emphasis on the “outrage” blasphemy may cause among “any religion,” the measure was clearly aimed less at protecting the sacred than at preventing intolerance among diverse religious groups. The law itself caused outrage of a different sort, however. Advocacy organisations, such as Atheist Ireland, mounted fierce opposition to the law and to the example it set internationally. In late 2009, for instance, Pakistan borrowed the exact language of the Irish law in its own proposed statement on blasphemy to the United Nations’ Human Rights Council. Thus, Atheist Ireland warned on its website that “The Islamic States can now point to a modern pluralist Western State passing a new blasphemy law in the 21st century.” Blasphemy in modernity That warning resonates with the common Western view of blasphemy as an antiquated concept, a medieval throwback with no relevance to “modern,” “developed” societies. Atheist Ireland’s chairperson, Michael Nugent, drew on this tradition when he touted the significance of the recent referendum victory: “It means that we’ve got rid of a medieval crime from our constitution that should never have been there.” As Columbia University professor Gauri Viswanathan puts it, blasphemy is often used “to separate cultures of modernity from those of premodernity.” Starting from the assumption that blasphemy can exist only in a backward society, critics point to blasphemy as evidence of the backwardness of entire religious cultures. I would argue, however, that this Eurocentric view is growing increasingly difficult to sustain. If anything, blasphemy has in recent years enjoyed a resurgence in many corners of the supposedly secular West – including prosecutions in Austria, Finland, Germany, Greece, Switzerland and Turkey. Perhaps the fate of Ireland’s Defamation Act forecasts a broader reversal of that trend. (Steve Pinkerton is Lecturer in English, Case Western Reserve University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Blasphemy law is repealed in Ireland, enforced in Pakistan - and a problem in many other countries

Emma Watson has penned an open letter to Dr&nbsp;Savita Halappanavar, who died after being denied an abortion in Ireland six years ago. Savita's death proved a catalyst for Ireland's historic move in the legalization of abortion in May 2018.&nbsp; 
 
Watson who gained stardom for her role in the 'Harry Potter' series is an activist and a feminist.&nbsp; 
 
Watson wrote an emotional letter to Savita in the latest issue of Net-a-Porter magazine thanking her and her family for bringing the much-needed change in Ireland. "Your family and friends were gracious and galvanizing in their sharing of your memory," and added, "Sharing their mourning and hope with the world, your family publicly supported the Together for Yes campaign. Celebrating repeal, your father expressed his “gratitude to the people of Ireland”. In reciprocity, I heard Ireland’s ‘repealers’ say that they owe your family a great debt."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
It was a great honour to be asked by <a href="https://twitter.com/PORTERmagazine?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PORTERmagazine</a> to pay the deepest respect to the legacy of Dr Savita Halappanavar, whose death powered the determination of activists to change Irish abortion laws &amp; fight for reproductive justice all over the world. <a href="https://t.co/KZWRpp7btO">https://t.co/KZWRpp7btO</a> <a href="https://t.co/yLDXgcHKyh">pic.twitter.com/yLDXgcHKyh</a>
— Emma Watson (@EmmaWatson) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmaWatson/status/1046039357038243841?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 29, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Sunita was 17 weeks pregnant when she died at University Hospital Galway on October 28, 2012. She suffered from a septic miscarriage that took seven days to fully develop. She and her&nbsp;husband had requested an abortion early on but doctors denied her request. Her death led to massive protests across Ireland and opened up the debate of the need to legalising abortion. The movement led to the passing of Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013. 
 
"A note on your memorial in Dublin read, “Because you slept, many of us woke.” That the eighth amendment enabled valuing the life of an unborn fetus over a living woman was a wake-up call to a nation. For you, and those forced to travel to the UK to access safe, legal abortion, justice was hard-won. From Argentina to Poland, restrictive abortion laws punish and endanger girls, women and pregnant people," Watson further wrote in the letter. Read<a href="https://www.net-a-porter.com/in/en/porter/article-37c38cba6b8816cc"> the full letter here.&nbsp;</a>

Emma Watson has penned an open letter to Dr Savita Halappanavar, who died after being denied an abortion in Ireland six years ago. Savita's death proved a catalyst for Ireland's historic move in the legalization of abortion in May 2018.

Emma Watson has penned an open letter to Dr Savita Halappanavar, who died after being denied an abortion in Ireland six years ago. Savita's death proved a catalyst for Ireland's historic move in the legalization of abortion in May 2018. Watson who gained stardom for her role in the 'Harry Potter' series is an activist and a feminist. Watson wrote an emotional letter to Savita in the latest issue of Net-a-Porter magazine thanking her and her family for bringing the much-needed change in Ireland. "Your family and friends were gracious and galvanizing in their sharing of your memory," and added, "Sharing their mourning and hope with the world, your family publicly supported the Together for Yes campaign. Celebrating repeal, your father expressed his “gratitude to the people of Ireland”. In reciprocity, I heard Ireland’s ‘repealers’ say that they owe your family a great debt." It was a great honour to be asked by @PORTERmagazine to pay the deepest respect to the legacy of Dr Savita Halappanavar, whose death powered the determination of activists to change Irish abortion laws & fight for reproductive justice all over the world. https://t.co/KZWRpp7btO pic.twitter.com/yLDXgcHKyh — Emma Watson (@EmmaWatson) September 29, 2018 × Sunita was 17 weeks pregnant when she died at University Hospital Galway on October 28, 2012. She suffered from a septic miscarriage that took seven days to fully develop. She and her husband had requested an abortion early on but doctors denied her request. Her death led to massive protests across Ireland and opened up the debate of the need to legalising abortion. The movement led to the passing of Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013. "A note on your memorial in Dublin read, “Because you slept, many of us woke.” That the eighth amendment enabled valuing the life of an unborn fetus over a living woman was a wake-up call to a nation. For you, and those forced to travel to the UK to access safe, legal abortion, justice was hard-won. From Argentina to Poland, restrictive abortion laws punish and endanger girls, women and pregnant people," Watson further wrote in the letter. Read the full letter here.

Emma Watson pens an open letter to the Indian woman who died after Irish laws denied her abortion

Knight fever! Irish village transformed into medieval battlefield

Scotland's shock one-day international win over England has boosted their chances of securing test-playing status, the country's cricket board has said.

Scotland registered their first victory over their neighbours at Edinburgh on Sunday, bowling England out for 365 after posting their highest score of 371 for five.

"I can see us getting there in the next couple of years," Tony Brian, chairman of Cricket Scotland, told the BBC.

"We're so close to our goal of full member status now"

The International Cricket Council (ICC) has 12 full members, with Ireland and Afghanistan promoted in June last year.

The ICC has reduced the number of teams at the 2019 World Cup to 10 from 14, making it far more difficult for associate nations to qualify.

"The ICC set strict criteria for us to meet for full member status and we're only two away," Brian added. "We probably need one more win against a top nation and our women's team, who are also rapidly improving, need to do well at a World Cup qualifier."

Scotland registered their first victory over their neighbours at Edinburgh on Sunday, bowling England out for 365 after posting their highest score of 371 for five

Scotland's shock one-day international win over England has boosted their chances of securing test-playing status, the country's cricket board has said. Scotland registered their first victory over their neighbours at Edinburgh on Sunday, bowling England out for 365 after posting their highest score of 371 for five. "I can see us getting there in the next couple of years," Tony Brian, chairman of Cricket Scotland, told the BBC. "We're so close to our goal of full member status now" The International Cricket Council (ICC) has 12 full members, with Ireland and Afghanistan promoted in June last year. The ICC has reduced the number of teams at the 2019 World Cup to 10 from 14, making it far more difficult for associate nations to qualify. "The ICC set strict criteria for us to meet for full member status and we're only two away," Brian added. "We probably need one more win against a top nation and our women's team, who are also rapidly improving, need to do well at a World Cup qualifier."

Scotland hope ODI win over England boosts test status hopes

By:&nbsp;Fiona de Londras*

I write this sitting in a small cafe in Ranelagh, a prosperous part of Dublin. It is early on Saturday morning and, although you wouldn’t think it just by walking down the street, I may have woken in a new Ireland.

If exit polls are to be believed, an overwhelming majority of Irish people have voted to repeal the 8th amendment of the national constitution. The Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll suggested 68 per cent of voters chose to repeal the amendment against 32 per cent who were opposed. Another, by RTE, put the repeal vote at 69.4 per cent. The result is due to become clear around mid-morning.

This insidious, cruel and harmful provision was inserted in 1983 as a preemptive strike against women’s liberation. It has reduced women in pregnancy to a constitutional being with the right only not to die and the obligation to sacrifice all else to bring the foetus to term.

The sanitised story of the 8th amendment is that it recognises the right to life of the foetus with due regard to the equal right to life of the pregnant woman. The lived reality of this constitutional story is more than 170,000 journeys across the Irish Sea to access abortion, thousands of illegal abortions through self-administration of the abortion pill, and countless women "caught out" and becoming mothers when they did not want to.

It is part of a long, difficult and deliberate construction of Irish womanhood as linked inextricably to motherhood, of sex as stigma, and of establishment attempts to use the force of the law to keep us in our nation-building, post-colonial place.

No freedom without the freedom of women

Now men and women, the young and the old, parents and those without children, politicians (including those considered conservative), and generations of activists who always believed we would finally unshackle ourselves from this constitutional confinement have cast votes to usher in a country of free women and girls.

The path ahead will be bumpy and hard. As in every other country, the forces that oppose sexual freedom, bodily autonomy and women's ethical agency will continue to do so. And they remain powerful. But they can no longer rely on a constitutional text to fuel their mission.

Under the next 36th amendment to the constitution "provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy". That legislation will, should the count back up the exit polling, go through the political process and hopefully be completed by the end of the year.

Until then we will continue to rely with gratitude on the kindness and care of doctors and nurses in the UK and elsewhere to provide the healthcare Irish women need. Today, as I watch the votes being counted, nine women will get on planes and go to London, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester for their abortions. But they will go knowing they are among the last.

Ni&nbsp;saoirse go saoirse na mban (There is no freedom until the freedom of women).

Professor of Global Legal Studies, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The path ahead will be bumpy and hard. As in every other country, the forces that oppose sexual freedom, bodily autonomy and women's ethical agency will continue to do so

By: Fiona de Londras* I write this sitting in a small cafe in Ranelagh, a prosperous part of Dublin. It is early on Saturday morning and, although you wouldn’t think it just by walking down the street, I may have woken in a new Ireland. If exit polls are to be believed, an overwhelming majority of Irish people have voted to repeal the 8th amendment of the national constitution. The Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll suggested 68 per cent of voters chose to repeal the amendment against 32 per cent who were opposed. Another, by RTE, put the repeal vote at 69.4 per cent. The result is due to become clear around mid-morning. This insidious, cruel and harmful provision was inserted in 1983 as a preemptive strike against women’s liberation. It has reduced women in pregnancy to a constitutional being with the right only not to die and the obligation to sacrifice all else to bring the foetus to term. The sanitised story of the 8th amendment is that it recognises the right to life of the foetus with due regard to the equal right to life of the pregnant woman. The lived reality of this constitutional story is more than 170,000 journeys across the Irish Sea to access abortion, thousands of illegal abortions through self-administration of the abortion pill, and countless women "caught out" and becoming mothers when they did not want to. It is part of a long, difficult and deliberate construction of Irish womanhood as linked inextricably to motherhood, of sex as stigma, and of establishment attempts to use the force of the law to keep us in our nation-building, post-colonial place. No freedom without the freedom of women Now men and women, the young and the old, parents and those without children, politicians (including those considered conservative), and generations of activists who always believed we would finally unshackle ourselves from this constitutional confinement have cast votes to usher in a country of free women and girls. The path ahead will be bumpy and hard. As in every other country, the forces that oppose sexual freedom, bodily autonomy and women's ethical agency will continue to do so. And they remain powerful. But they can no longer rely on a constitutional text to fuel their mission. Under the next 36th amendment to the constitution "provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy". That legislation will, should the count back up the exit polling, go through the political process and hopefully be completed by the end of the year. Until then we will continue to rely with gratitude on the kindness and care of doctors and nurses in the UK and elsewhere to provide the healthcare Irish women need. Today, as I watch the votes being counted, nine women will get on planes and go to London, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester for their abortions. But they will go knowing they are among the last. Ni saoirse go saoirse na mban (There is no freedom until the freedom of women). Professor of Global Legal Studies, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Ireland abortion referendum - voters have freed women from this insidious law

By Fiona de Londras*

I write this sitting in a small cafe in Ranelagh, a prosperous part of Dublin. It is early on Saturday morning and, although you wouldn't think it just by walking down the street, I may have woken in a new Ireland.

If exit polls are to be believed, an overwhelming majority of Irish people have voted to repeal the 8th amendment of the national constitution. The Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll suggested 68 per cent of voters chose to repeal the amendment against 32 per cent who were opposed. Another, by RTE put the repeal vote at 69.4 per cent. The result is due to become clear around mid-morning.

This insidious, cruel and harmful provision was inserted in 1983 as a preemptive strike against women's liberation. It has reduced women in pregnancy to a constitutional being with the right only not to die and the obligation to sacrifice all else to bring the foetus to term.

The sanitised story of the 8th amendment is that it recognises the right to life of the foetus with due regard to the equal right to life of the pregnant woman. The lived reality of this constitutional story is more than 170,000 journeys across the Irish Sea to access abortion, thousands of illegal abortions through self administration of the abortion pill, and countless women "caught out" and becoming mothers when they did not want to. It is part of a long, difficult and deliberate construction of Irish womanhood as linked inextricably to motherhood, of sex as stigma, and of establishment attempts to use the force of the law to keep us in our nation-building, post-colonial place.

No freedom without the freedom of women

Now men and women, the young and the old, parents and those without children, politicians (including those considered conservative), and generations of activists who always believed we would finally unshackle ourselves from this constitutional confinement have cast votes to usher in a country of free women and girls.

The path ahead will be bumpy and hard. As in every other country, the forces that oppose sexual freedom, bodily autonomy and women’s ethical agency will continue to do so. And they remain powerful. But they can no longer rely on a constitutional text to fuel their mission.

Under the next 36th amendment to the constitution "provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy". That legislation will, should the count back up the exit polling, go through the political process and hopefully be completed by the end of the year. Until then we will continue to rely with gratitude on the kindness and care of doctors and nurses in the UK and elsewhere to provide the healthcare Irish women need. Today, as I watch the votes being counted, nine women will get on planes and go to London, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester for their abortions. But they will go knowing they are among the last.

Ni saoirse go saoirse na mban (There is no freedom until the freedom of women).

*(Fiona de Londras is a professor of Global Legal Studies, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

This insidious, cruel and harmful provision was inserted in 1983 as a preemptive strike against women's liberation.

By Fiona de Londras* I write this sitting in a small cafe in Ranelagh, a prosperous part of Dublin. It is early on Saturday morning and, although you wouldn't think it just by walking down the street, I may have woken in a new Ireland. If exit polls are to be believed, an overwhelming majority of Irish people have voted to repeal the 8th amendment of the national constitution. The Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll suggested 68 per cent of voters chose to repeal the amendment against 32 per cent who were opposed. Another, by RTE put the repeal vote at 69.4 per cent. The result is due to become clear around mid-morning. This insidious, cruel and harmful provision was inserted in 1983 as a preemptive strike against women's liberation. It has reduced women in pregnancy to a constitutional being with the right only not to die and the obligation to sacrifice all else to bring the foetus to term. The sanitised story of the 8th amendment is that it recognises the right to life of the foetus with due regard to the equal right to life of the pregnant woman. The lived reality of this constitutional story is more than 170,000 journeys across the Irish Sea to access abortion, thousands of illegal abortions through self administration of the abortion pill, and countless women "caught out" and becoming mothers when they did not want to. It is part of a long, difficult and deliberate construction of Irish womanhood as linked inextricably to motherhood, of sex as stigma, and of establishment attempts to use the force of the law to keep us in our nation-building, post-colonial place. No freedom without the freedom of women Now men and women, the young and the old, parents and those without children, politicians (including those considered conservative), and generations of activists who always believed we would finally unshackle ourselves from this constitutional confinement have cast votes to usher in a country of free women and girls. The path ahead will be bumpy and hard. As in every other country, the forces that oppose sexual freedom, bodily autonomy and women’s ethical agency will continue to do so. And they remain powerful. But they can no longer rely on a constitutional text to fuel their mission. Under the next 36th amendment to the constitution "provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy". That legislation will, should the count back up the exit polling, go through the political process and hopefully be completed by the end of the year. Until then we will continue to rely with gratitude on the kindness and care of doctors and nurses in the UK and elsewhere to provide the healthcare Irish women need. Today, as I watch the votes being counted, nine women will get on planes and go to London, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester for their abortions. But they will go knowing they are among the last. Ni saoirse go saoirse na mban (There is no freedom until the freedom of women). *(Fiona de Londras is a professor of Global Legal Studies, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Irish abortion vote has freed women from this insidious law

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/90000-foreigners-rescued-by-india-in-4-years-proof-of-our-humane-foreign-policy-sushma-swaraj-140366">When people are dying on the border, </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/90000-foreigners-rescued-by-india-in-4-years-proof-of-our-humane-foreign-policy-sushma-swaraj-140366">dialogue</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/90000-foreigners-rescued-by-india-in-4-years-proof-of-our-humane-foreign-policy-sushma-swaraj-140366"> is not appropriate: Sushma Swaraj on Pakistan</a>

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj addressed an annual press conference on Monday in which she highlighted the achievements made by the Modi government over the past 4 years.&nbsp

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/this-retired-english-teacher-made-corrections-to-a-letter-sent-by-trump-and-mailed-it-back--140397">This retired English teacher made corrections to a letter sent by Trump and mailed it back</a>

A retired English teacher from the United States did not give any consideration to the fact that the letter she had received, had come from the White House and after being astounded by the grammatical mistakes made the rightful changes and sent it back.&nbsp

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ireland-abortion-law-may-be-termed-as-the-savitas-law-140367">Ireland abortion law may be termed as 'Savita's law'</a>

After Ireland welcomed the abortion vote, campaigners have said that they will be in full support if the new law will be named after the woman who died after miscarriage - Savita Halappanavar.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/iran-foreign-minister-urges-on-strengthening-relations-with-india-140375">Iran Foreign Minister urges on strengthening relations with India</a>

Iranian Foreign Minister Dr Mohammad Javad Zarif, who arrived here on Monday on a one-day visit, stressed upon the idea of strengthening relations shared by the two countries.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-military-says-ex-spy-chief-will-not-be-allowed-to-leave-country-140413">Pakistan military says ex-spy chief will not be allowed to leave </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-military-says-ex-spy-chief-will-not-be-allowed-to-leave-country-140413">country</a>

Pakistan's military Monday took the unprecedented step of preventing a former spy chief from leaving the country, after he ignited a storm by co-authoring a book that touches on Pakistan's alleged roles in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

When people are dying on the border, dialogue is not appropriate: Sushma Swaraj on Pakistan External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj addressed an annual press conference on Monday in which she highlighted the achievements made by the Modi government over the past 4 years. This retired English teacher made corrections to a letter sent by Trump and mailed it back A retired English teacher from the United States did not give any consideration to the fact that the letter she had received, had come from the White House and after being astounded by the grammatical mistakes made the rightful changes and sent it back. Ireland abortion law may be termed as 'Savita's law' After Ireland welcomed the abortion vote, campaigners have said that they will be in full support if the new law will be named after the woman who died after miscarriage - Savita Halappanavar. Iran Foreign Minister urges on strengthening relations with India Iranian Foreign Minister Dr Mohammad Javad Zarif, who arrived here on Monday on a one-day visit, stressed upon the idea of strengthening relations shared by the two countries. Pakistan military says ex-spy chief will not be allowed to leave country Pakistan's military Monday took the unprecedented step of preventing a former spy chief from leaving the country, after he ignited a storm by co-authoring a book that touches on Pakistan's alleged roles in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

News brief: Big stories of the day

Ireland's historic decision to vote against its regressive abortion law has been welcomed by Savita Halappanavar's parents. Savita lost her life due to septic miscarriage five days later she was denied an abortion at University Hospital Galway, Ireland in 2012.

"Our daughter's soul is now consoled," the parents expressed.&nbsp;

"It is a landslide opinion in favour of repeal of the abortion laws that have supported our cause," Savita's father Andanappa Yalagi told media.

31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five days after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community.&nbsp;

A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited.&nbsp;

On May 25, Ireland voted 'Yes' and in favour of repealing the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution.&nbsp;

Ireland's Catholic church had strongly opposed repealing the law.

(With inputs from PTI)&nbsp;

31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland in 2012

Ireland's historic decision to vote against its regressive abortion law has been welcomed by Savita Halappanavar's parents. Savita lost her life due to septic miscarriage five days later she was denied an abortion at University Hospital Galway, Ireland in 2012. "Our daughter's soul is now consoled," the parents expressed. "It is a landslide opinion in favour of repeal of the abortion laws that have supported our cause," Savita's father Andanappa Yalagi told media. 31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five days after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community. A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited. On May 25, Ireland voted 'Yes' and in favour of repealing the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution. Ireland's Catholic church had strongly opposed repealing the law. (With inputs from PTI)

Her soul is consoled: Savita Halappanavar's parents welcome Ireland abortion vote

After Ireland welcomed the abortion vote, campaigners have said that they will be in full support if the new law will be named after the woman who died after miscarriage - Savita Halappanavar.

Halappanavar’s father has called for the legislation that will follow the historic referendum result to be referred to as “Savita’s law”.

After the successful campaign, the 'Together for Yes' group - &nbsp; an umbrella group representing pro-repeal organisations - said it would support the decision and called on the government to start the formalities as soon as possible.

The Irish health minister is said to get the draft approved by the cabinet on Tuesday which would permit abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy and in some cases, the 23rd week.&nbsp;

The new law will be in place by the end of the year, Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said on Sunday.&nbsp;

This move will make Northern Ireland to be the only part of the UK and Ireland with a blanket ban on termination.&nbsp;

Ireland voted by an overwhelming majority to overturn a constitutional ban on abortion in a historic referendum in this traditionally Catholic country, final results showed on Saturday.

Also read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/how-tragic-death-of-a-young-indian-woman-sparked-history-making-vote-in-ireland-139846">How tragic death of a young Indian woman sparked history-making vote in Ireland</a>

The pro-choice campaign won Friday's referendum with 66 per cent of the 2.1 million votes cast, the returning officer said at the central counting center in Dublin Castle.

31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five days after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community.&nbsp;

A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited.&nbsp;

The pro-choice campaign won Friday's referendum with 66 per cent of the 2.1 million votes cast, the returning officer said at the central counting center in Dublin Castle

After Ireland welcomed the abortion vote, campaigners have said that they will be in full support if the new law will be named after the woman who died after miscarriage - Savita Halappanavar. Halappanavar’s father has called for the legislation that will follow the historic referendum result to be referred to as “Savita’s law”. After the successful campaign, the 'Together for Yes' group - an umbrella group representing pro-repeal organisations - said it would support the decision and called on the government to start the formalities as soon as possible. The Irish health minister is said to get the draft approved by the cabinet on Tuesday which would permit abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy and in some cases, the 23rd week. The new law will be in place by the end of the year, Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said on Sunday. This move will make Northern Ireland to be the only part of the UK and Ireland with a blanket ban on termination. Ireland voted by an overwhelming majority to overturn a constitutional ban on abortion in a historic referendum in this traditionally Catholic country, final results showed on Saturday. Also read: How tragic death of a young Indian woman sparked history-making vote in Ireland The pro-choice campaign won Friday's referendum with 66 per cent of the 2.1 million votes cast, the returning officer said at the central counting center in Dublin Castle. 31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five days after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community. A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited.

Ireland abortion law may be termed as 'Savita's law'

The people of Ireland are set to liberalise some of the world`s most restrictive abortion laws by a landslide, two exit polls from a referendum showed on Friday, as voters demanded change in what two decades ago was one of Europe`s most socially conservative countries.

An Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI exit poll suggested that voters in the once deeply Catholic nation had backed change by 68 percent to 32 percent. An RTE/Behaviour & Attitudes survey put the margin at 69 percent to 31 percent.

If confirmed, the outcome will be the latest milestone on a path of change for a country which only legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority in 1995 before becoming the first in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote three years ago.

"It's looking like we will make history tomorrow," Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, who was in favour of the change, said on Twitter.

Vote-counting begins at 0800 GMT on Saturday, with the first indication of results expected mid-morning.

Voters were asked if they wish to scrap a 1983 amendment to the constitution that gives an unborn child and its mother equal rights to life. The consequent prohibition on abortion was partly lifted in 2013 for cases where the mother's life is in danger.

Photographs on Twitter showed campaigners hugging and in tears at the Together4yes umbrella group's headquarters shortly after the first exit poll was published.

Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan called it "another big step out of our dark past." Minister for Children Katherine Zappone, an early advocate for holding the referendum, said an "emotional, historic day" lay ahead.

Varadkar called the vote a once-in-a-generation chance and voters responded with national broadcaster RTE reporting that turnout could be one of the highest for a referendum, potentially topping the 61 percent who backed gay marriage by a large margin.

No social issue has divided Ireland`s 4.8 million people as sharply as abortion, which was pushed up the political agenda by the death in 2012 of a 31-year-old Indian immigrant from a septic miscarriage after she was refused a termination.

Yet the Irish Times exit poll showed overwhelming majorities in all age groups under 65 voted for change, including almost nine in every 10 voters under the age of 24.

The RTE poll suggested the highest "Yes" vote was in Dublin, where 80 percent were in favour, but there was no sharp urban/rural divide as in previous referendums on the subject, with 63 percent of people living in areas with a population under 1,500 backing the proposals.

"So many women have travelled across to England to take care of their family and healthcare needs and I think it`s a disgrace and it needs to change," said "Yes" voter Sophie O`Gara, 28, referring to women who travel to Britain for abortions.

<img alt="Abortion.PNG" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" height="596" src="http://images.wionews.com/iniline-images/Abortion.PNG" width="1177" />

FIERCE CAMPAIGN

The fiercely contested vote divided political parties, saw the once-mighty church take a back seat, and became a test case for how global internet giants deal with social media advertising in political campaigns.

Unlike in 1983, when religion was front and centre and abortion was a taboo subject for most, the campaign was defined by women on both sides publicly describing their personal experiences of terminations.

"Yes," campaigners argued that with over 3,000 women travelling to Britain each year for terminations -- a right enshrined in a 1992 referendum -- and others ordering pills illegally online, abortion is already a reality in Ireland.

Although not on the ballot paper, the "No" camp sought to seize on government plans to allow abortions with no restriction up to 12 weeks into a pregnancy if the referendum is carried, calling it a step too far for most voters.

Some "Yes" politicians were already calling on the government to pass the legislation without delay following the publication of the exit polls. 
The Irish government`s push to liberalise the laws is in contrast to the United States, where abortion has long been legal, but President Donald Trump backs stripping federal funding from women`s health care clinics that offer abortions.

HOME TO VOTE

Videos shared on social media showed scores of voters arriving home at Irish airports from abroad. Ireland does not allow expatriates to vote via post or in embassies but those away for less than 18 months remain on the electoral roll.

As with the gay marriage referendum, those using the #hometovote hashtag on Twitter appeared overwhelmingly to back change. Many posted photos of themselves wearing sweatshirts bearing the "Repeal" slogan.

"Women and girls should not be made into healthcare refugees when they are in a time of crisis," said Niamh Kelly, 27, who paid 800 euros and travelled 20 hours to return home from Hanoi where she works as an English teacher.

"This is a once in a lifetime generation chance to lift the culture of shame that surrounds this issue so it was really important to me to be part of that."

Exit polls published after Ireland's referendum on abortion suggest a large vote in favour of liberalising the law.

The people of Ireland are set to liberalise some of the world`s most restrictive abortion laws by a landslide, two exit polls from a referendum showed on Friday, as voters demanded change in what two decades ago was one of Europe`s most socially conservative countries. An Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI exit poll suggested that voters in the once deeply Catholic nation had backed change by 68 percent to 32 percent. An RTE/Behaviour & Attitudes survey put the margin at 69 percent to 31 percent. If confirmed, the outcome will be the latest milestone on a path of change for a country which only legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority in 1995 before becoming the first in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote three years ago. "It's looking like we will make history tomorrow," Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, who was in favour of the change, said on Twitter. Vote-counting begins at 0800 GMT on Saturday, with the first indication of results expected mid-morning. Voters were asked if they wish to scrap a 1983 amendment to the constitution that gives an unborn child and its mother equal rights to life. The consequent prohibition on abortion was partly lifted in 2013 for cases where the mother's life is in danger. Photographs on Twitter showed campaigners hugging and in tears at the Together4yes umbrella group's headquarters shortly after the first exit poll was published. Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan called it "another big step out of our dark past." Minister for Children Katherine Zappone, an early advocate for holding the referendum, said an "emotional, historic day" lay ahead. Varadkar called the vote a once-in-a-generation chance and voters responded with national broadcaster RTE reporting that turnout could be one of the highest for a referendum, potentially topping the 61 percent who backed gay marriage by a large margin. No social issue has divided Ireland`s 4.8 million people as sharply as abortion, which was pushed up the political agenda by the death in 2012 of a 31-year-old Indian immigrant from a septic miscarriage after she was refused a termination. Yet the Irish Times exit poll showed overwhelming majorities in all age groups under 65 voted for change, including almost nine in every 10 voters under the age of 24. The RTE poll suggested the highest "Yes" vote was in Dublin, where 80 percent were in favour, but there was no sharp urban/rural divide as in previous referendums on the subject, with 63 percent of people living in areas with a population under 1,500 backing the proposals. "So many women have travelled across to England to take care of their family and healthcare needs and I think it`s a disgrace and it needs to change," said "Yes" voter Sophie O`Gara, 28, referring to women who travel to Britain for abortions. FIERCE CAMPAIGN The fiercely contested vote divided political parties, saw the once-mighty church take a back seat, and became a test case for how global internet giants deal with social media advertising in political campaigns. Unlike in 1983, when religion was front and centre and abortion was a taboo subject for most, the campaign was defined by women on both sides publicly describing their personal experiences of terminations. "Yes," campaigners argued that with over 3,000 women travelling to Britain each year for terminations -- a right enshrined in a 1992 referendum -- and others ordering pills illegally online, abortion is already a reality in Ireland. Although not on the ballot paper, the "No" camp sought to seize on government plans to allow abortions with no restriction up to 12 weeks into a pregnancy if the referendum is carried, calling it a step too far for most voters. Some "Yes" politicians were already calling on the government to pass the legislation without delay following the publication of the exit polls. The Irish government`s push to liberalise the laws is in contrast to the United States, where abortion has long been legal, but President Donald Trump backs stripping federal funding from women`s health care clinics that offer abortions. HOME TO VOTE Videos shared on social media showed scores of voters arriving home at Irish airports from abroad. Ireland does not allow expatriates to vote via post or in embassies but those away for less than 18 months remain on the electoral roll. As with the gay marriage referendum, those using the #hometovote hashtag on Twitter appeared overwhelmingly to back change. Many posted photos of themselves wearing sweatshirts bearing the "Repeal" slogan. "Women and girls should not be made into healthcare refugees when they are in a time of crisis," said Niamh Kelly, 27, who paid 800 euros and travelled 20 hours to return home from Hanoi where she works as an English teacher. "This is a once in a lifetime generation chance to lift the culture of shame that surrounds this issue so it was really important to me to be part of that."

Exit polls predict landslide win for Ireland referendum that could lift strict ban on abortion

Ireland`s resounding vote to overturn a constitutional ban on abortion represents the culmination of a "quiet revolution" in the country, Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said on Saturday.

"The public have spoken. The result appears to be resounding ... in favour of repealing the 8th amendment" constitutional ban on abortion, Varadkar told journalists in Dublin.&nbsp

"What we see is the culmination of a quiet revolution that has been taking place in Ireland over the last couple of decades," he added.&nbsp

The people of Ireland are set to liberalise some of the world`s most restrictive abortion laws by a landslide, two exit polls from a referendum showed on Friday, as voters demanded change in what two decades ago was one of Europe`s most socially conservative countries.

An Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI exit poll suggested that voters in the once deeply Catholic nation had backed change by 68 percent to 32 percent. An RTE/Behaviour & Attitudes survey put the margin at 69 percent to 31 percent.

If confirmed, the outcome will be the latest milestone on a path of change for a country which only legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority in 1995 before becoming the first in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote three years ago.

Opinion polls have suggested the result could be close, with large numbers of undecided voters hanging in the balance.

Ireland was traditionally one of the most staunchly Roman Catholic countries in Europe. However, the church's influence has waned in recent years following a series of child sex abuse scandals.

The referendum comes three years after Ireland voted to legalise same-sex marriage, in a seismic change for the EU nation.

Voters have from 7:00 am (0600 GMT) until 10:00 pm on Friday to cast their ballots.

The count is to begin at 9:00 am on Saturday, with the result expected to be announced at Dublin Castle later in the day.

The referendum comes three years after Ireland voted to legalise same-sex marriage, in a seismic change for the EU nation

Ireland`s resounding vote to overturn a constitutional ban on abortion represents the culmination of a "quiet revolution" in the country, Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said on Saturday. "The public have spoken. The result appears to be resounding ... in favour of repealing the 8th amendment" constitutional ban on abortion, Varadkar told journalists in Dublin. "What we see is the culmination of a quiet revolution that has been taking place in Ireland over the last couple of decades," he added. The people of Ireland are set to liberalise some of the world`s most restrictive abortion laws by a landslide, two exit polls from a referendum showed on Friday, as voters demanded change in what two decades ago was one of Europe`s most socially conservative countries. An Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI exit poll suggested that voters in the once deeply Catholic nation had backed change by 68 percent to 32 percent. An RTE/Behaviour & Attitudes survey put the margin at 69 percent to 31 percent. If confirmed, the outcome will be the latest milestone on a path of change for a country which only legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority in 1995 before becoming the first in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote three years ago. Opinion polls have suggested the result could be close, with large numbers of undecided voters hanging in the balance. Ireland was traditionally one of the most staunchly Roman Catholic countries in Europe. However, the church's influence has waned in recent years following a series of child sex abuse scandals. The referendum comes three years after Ireland voted to legalise same-sex marriage, in a seismic change for the EU nation. Voters have from 7:00 am (0600 GMT) until 10:00 pm on Friday to cast their ballots. The count is to begin at 9:00 am on Saturday, with the result expected to be announced at Dublin Castle later in the day.

Irish PM hails 'quiet revolution' as vote overturns abortion ban

By: Claire Pierson*

The Republic of Ireland is holding a referendum on May 25 that could dramatically change its stance on abortion. Here’s a rundown of what is happening, when and why.

What is Ireland voting on?

The referendum is about taking action that would result in the repeal of article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution (commonly referred to as the 8th amendment), allowing the Irish government to change the law on abortion, which is currently illegal unless a woman’s life is at substantial risk. Voting yes would repeal the amendment, while voting no would keep it in place.

What is the 8th amendment?

The eighth amendment was passed by referendum in 1983. It says that "the state acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

It is commonly viewed to equate the life of a pregnant woman with the fetus, making abortion unavailable in almost all circumstances. It is also seen as affecting maternal healthcare because a woman loses her right to refuse consent to medical treatment in pregnancy.

Why does Ireland have this clause in its constitution?

When contraception was legalised in Ireland in 1974, there was a widespread belief that liberal abortion laws would inevitably follow. An amendment campaign emerged in 1981, brought together various "pro-life" groups to lobby for constitutional protection of the "unborn". Their campaign was helped by the fact that in the political instability of the early 1980s, successive Taoisigh (prime ministers) were conscious of alienating the dominant conservative vote.

Ireland’s attorney general warned at the time that the wording of the amendment was too ambiguous and could have potentially negative consequences for women’s healthcare. But momentum had gathered and the referendum resulted in a two-to-one majority in favour of the amendment.

Is Ireland unusual in having an amendment of this kind?

Yes. Regulation of abortion through a constitution is rare (because constitutions are difficult to change). It has left Ireland with some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, which have been regularly criticised by a number of international human rights bodies.

Why is this vote happening now?

There have been a number of high profile, distressing cases in the recent past which have highlighted the inadequacy of the current law. Just two examples (there are many more) are the death of Savita Halappanavar in 2012 from sepsis after being refused an abortion during miscarriage and the case of Amanda Mellet, who was forced to travel to England to terminate a pregnancy with a fatal fetal anomaly.

Mellet's case reached the UN Human Rights Committee, which concluded that Ireland's near-total abortion ban was discriminatory and amounted to "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment."

In 2017 the Irish government convened a Citizens Assembly to consider evidence on abortion law reform. The 99 randomly selected citizens, after hearing extensive evidence, voted 64 per cent to 36 per cent in favour of having no restrictions on termination in early pregnancy.

What is the Irish government’s official position on the vote?

The government is split on the vote, with many undeclared. However, it appears that more support "yes."&nbsp;Party leaders are supportive – Leo Varadkar (the Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael) is openly pro-repeal, however, his party is allowing a free vote. Micheal Martin, leader of the opposition party Fianna Fail, has also backed repeal, although many in his party think differently.

Sinn Fein supports repeal but not abortion without restriction. Members of parliament for Labour, the Green party, Social Democrats and Solidarity-People Before Profit support both repeal and access to abortion up until 12 weeks into a pregnancy. Independents are mixed.

What happens if the 8th amendment is repealed?

Repeal of the 8th amendment would allow the government to legislate on abortion. The proposed legislation will bring Ireland into line with the majority of European countries, allowing for abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy (subject to medical regulation). After 12 weeks abortion would only be available in cases of a fatal foetal anomaly, if the pregnant woman’s life was at risk or if her health was at risk of serious harm. Cases after 12 weeks would have to be approved by two doctors.

What happens if Ireland votes to keep the 8th amendment?

Nothing would change. The constitution, in conjunction with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, only allows for abortion where there is real and substantial risk to the life - as distinct from the health - of the pregnant woman. She can only access abortion when doctors deem that her life is at risk due to medical complications, or she is at risk of taking her life.

Women in their thousands would continue to travel to England and further afield to access abortion or procure abortion pills online illegally, risking criminality. The impact of Brexit on women's ability to travel freely remains unknown.

Who is opposed to repealing the 8th amendment and why?

Groups who describe themselves as "pro-life" say they are protecting the foetus through their opposition to any change to Irish abortion law. Many of these groups are supported from abroad, in particular from America, and often align themselves with religious views, in particular, the Catholic Church.

What is the main argument for repealing the 8th amendment?

The main argument is that criminalising abortion does not prevent abortion. In fact countries with liberal abortion laws usually have lower rates of abortion. Women living in Ireland have abortions, either abroad and at their own cost, or illegally in Ireland with the abortion pill. All a "yes" vote will do is allow the government to legislate for women to access healthcare legally in Ireland.

Is it likely that the vote will result in repeal?

Polls have indicated that marginally more people support a "yes" vote. There has been concern over voter manipulation, in particular foreign interference with both Google and Facebook changing the rules on political advertising in Ireland in advance of the referendum.

*Claire Pierson is a&nbsp;Lecturer in Politics, University of Liverpool

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The Republic of Ireland is holding a referendum on May 25 that could dramatically change its stance on abortion

By: Claire Pierson* The Republic of Ireland is holding a referendum on May 25 that could dramatically change its stance on abortion. Here’s a rundown of what is happening, when and why. What is Ireland voting on? The referendum is about taking action that would result in the repeal of article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution (commonly referred to as the 8th amendment), allowing the Irish government to change the law on abortion, which is currently illegal unless a woman’s life is at substantial risk. Voting yes would repeal the amendment, while voting no would keep it in place. What is the 8th amendment? The eighth amendment was passed by referendum in 1983. It says that "the state acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right." It is commonly viewed to equate the life of a pregnant woman with the fetus, making abortion unavailable in almost all circumstances. It is also seen as affecting maternal healthcare because a woman loses her right to refuse consent to medical treatment in pregnancy. Why does Ireland have this clause in its constitution? When contraception was legalised in Ireland in 1974, there was a widespread belief that liberal abortion laws would inevitably follow. An amendment campaign emerged in 1981, brought together various "pro-life" groups to lobby for constitutional protection of the "unborn". Their campaign was helped by the fact that in the political instability of the early 1980s, successive Taoisigh (prime ministers) were conscious of alienating the dominant conservative vote. Ireland’s attorney general warned at the time that the wording of the amendment was too ambiguous and could have potentially negative consequences for women’s healthcare. But momentum had gathered and the referendum resulted in a two-to-one majority in favour of the amendment. Is Ireland unusual in having an amendment of this kind? Yes. Regulation of abortion through a constitution is rare (because constitutions are difficult to change). It has left Ireland with some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, which have been regularly criticised by a number of international human rights bodies. Why is this vote happening now? There have been a number of high profile, distressing cases in the recent past which have highlighted the inadequacy of the current law. Just two examples (there are many more) are the death of Savita Halappanavar in 2012 from sepsis after being refused an abortion during miscarriage and the case of Amanda Mellet, who was forced to travel to England to terminate a pregnancy with a fatal fetal anomaly. Mellet's case reached the UN Human Rights Committee, which concluded that Ireland's near-total abortion ban was discriminatory and amounted to "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment." In 2017 the Irish government convened a Citizens Assembly to consider evidence on abortion law reform. The 99 randomly selected citizens, after hearing extensive evidence, voted 64 per cent to 36 per cent in favour of having no restrictions on termination in early pregnancy. What is the Irish government’s official position on the vote? The government is split on the vote, with many undeclared. However, it appears that more support "yes." Party leaders are supportive – Leo Varadkar (the Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael) is openly pro-repeal, however, his party is allowing a free vote. Micheal Martin, leader of the opposition party Fianna Fail, has also backed repeal, although many in his party think differently. Sinn Fein supports repeal but not abortion without restriction. Members of parliament for Labour, the Green party, Social Democrats and Solidarity-People Before Profit support both repeal and access to abortion up until 12 weeks into a pregnancy. Independents are mixed. What happens if the 8th amendment is repealed? Repeal of the 8th amendment would allow the government to legislate on abortion. The proposed legislation will bring Ireland into line with the majority of European countries, allowing for abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy (subject to medical regulation). After 12 weeks abortion would only be available in cases of a fatal foetal anomaly, if the pregnant woman’s life was at risk or if her health was at risk of serious harm. Cases after 12 weeks would have to be approved by two doctors. What happens if Ireland votes to keep the 8th amendment? Nothing would change. The constitution, in conjunction with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, only allows for abortion where there is real and substantial risk to the life - as distinct from the health - of the pregnant woman. She can only access abortion when doctors deem that her life is at risk due to medical complications, or she is at risk of taking her life. Women in their thousands would continue to travel to England and further afield to access abortion or procure abortion pills online illegally, risking criminality. The impact of Brexit on women's ability to travel freely remains unknown. Who is opposed to repealing the 8th amendment and why? Groups who describe themselves as "pro-life" say they are protecting the foetus through their opposition to any change to Irish abortion law. Many of these groups are supported from abroad, in particular from America, and often align themselves with religious views, in particular, the Catholic Church. What is the main argument for repealing the 8th amendment? The main argument is that criminalising abortion does not prevent abortion. In fact countries with liberal abortion laws usually have lower rates of abortion. Women living in Ireland have abortions, either abroad and at their own cost, or illegally in Ireland with the abortion pill. All a "yes" vote will do is allow the government to legislate for women to access healthcare legally in Ireland. Is it likely that the vote will result in repeal? Polls have indicated that marginally more people support a "yes" vote. There has been concern over voter manipulation, in particular foreign interference with both Google and Facebook changing the rules on political advertising in Ireland in advance of the referendum. *Claire Pierson is a Lecturer in Politics, University of Liverpool (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Here's what you need to know about Ireland's abortion referendum

By: Claire Pierson*

The Republic of Ireland is holding a referendum on May 25 that could dramatically change its stance on abortion. Here’s a rundown of what is happening, when and why.

What is Ireland voting on?

The referendum is about taking action that would result in the repeal of article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution (commonly referred to as the 8th amendment), allowing the Irish government to change the law on abortion, which is currently illegal unless a woman’s life is at substantial risk. Voting yes would repeal the amendment, while voting no would keep it in place.

What is the 8th amendment?

The eighth amendment was passed by referendum in 1983. It says that “the state acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right”.

It is commonly viewed to equate the life of a pregnant woman with the foetus, making abortion unavailable in almost all circumstances. It is also seen as affecting maternal healthcare because a woman loses her right to refuse consent to medical treatment in pregnancy.

Why does Ireland have this clause in its constitution?

When contraception was legalised in Ireland in 1974, there was a widespread belief that liberal abortion laws would inevitably follow. An amendment campaign emerged in 1981, brought together various “pro-life” groups to lobby for constitutional protection of the “unborn”. Their campaign was helped by the fact that in the political instability of the early 1980s, successive Taoisigh (prime ministers) were conscious of alienating the dominant conservative vote.

Ireland’s attorney general warned at the time that the wording of the amendment was too ambiguous and could have potentially negative consequences for women’s healthcare. But momentum had gathered and the referendum resulted in a two-to-one majority in favour of the amendment.

Is Ireland unusual in having an amendment of this kind?

Yes. Regulation of abortion through a constitution is rare (because constitutions are difficult to change). It has left Ireland with some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, which have been regularly criticised by a number of international human rights bodies.

Why is this vote happening now?

There have been a number of high profile, distressing cases in the recent past which have highlighted the inadequacy of the current law. Just two examples (there are many more) are the death of Savita Halappanavar in 2012 from sepsis after being refused an abortion during miscarriage and the case of Amanda Mellet, who was forced to travel to England to terminate a pregnancy with fatal foetal anomaly. Mellet’s case reached the UN Human Rights Committee, which concluded that Ireland’s near total abortion ban was discriminatory and amounted to “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.

In 2017 the Irish government convened a Citizens Assembly to consider evidence on abortion law reform. The 99 randomly selected citizens, after hearing extensive evidence, voted voted 64% to 36% in favour of having no restrictions on termination in early pregnancy.

What is the Irish government’s official position on the vote?

The government is split on the vote, with many undeclared. However, it appears that more support “yes”. Party leaders are supportive – Leo Varadkar (the Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael) is openly pro-repeal, however his party is allowing a free vote. Micheál Martin, leader of the opposition party Fianna Fáil, has also backed repeal, although many in his party think differently. Sinn Féin supports repeal but not abortion without restriction. Members of parliament for Labour, the Green party, Social Democrats and Solidarity-People Before Profit support both repeal and access to abortion up until 12 weeks into a pregnancy. Independents are mixed.

What happens if the 8th amendment is repealed?

Repeal of the 8th amendment would allow the government to legislate on abortion. The proposed legislation will bring Ireland into line with the majority of European countries, allowing for abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy (subject to medical regulation). After 12 weeks abortion would only be available in cases of fatal foetal anomaly, if the pregnant woman’s life was at risk or if her health was at risk of serious harm. Cases after 12 weeks would have to be approved by two doctors.

What happens if Ireland votes to keep the 8th amendment?

Nothing would change. The constitution, in conjunction with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, only allows for abortion where there is real and substantial risk to the life – as distinct from the health – of the pregnant woman. She can only access abortion when doctors deem that her life is at risk due to medical complications, or she is at risk of taking her life.

Women in their thousands would continue to travel to England and further afield to access abortion or procure abortion pills online illegally, risking criminality. The impact of Brexit on women’s ability to travel freely remains unknown.

Who is opposed to repealing the 8th amendment and why?

Groups who describe themselves as “pro-life” say they are protecting the foetus through their opposition to any change to Irish abortion law. Many of these groups are supported from abroad, in particular from America, and often align themselves with religious views, in particular the Catholic Church.

What is the main argument for repealing the 8th amendment?

The main argument is that criminalising abortion does not prevent abortion. In fact countries with liberal abortion laws usually have lower rates of abortion. Women living in Ireland have abortions, either abroad and at their own cost, or illegally in Ireland with the abortion pill. All a “yes” vote will do is allow the government to legislate for women to access healthcare legally in Ireland.

Is it likely that the vote will result in repeal?

Polls have indicated that marginally more people support a “yes” vote. There has been concern over voter manipulation, in particular foreign interference with both Google and Facebook changing the rules on political advertising in Ireland in advance of the referendum.

*Claire Pierson is a&nbsp;Lecturer in Politics, University of Liverpool

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By: Claire Pierson* The Republic of Ireland is holding a referendum on May 25 that could dramatically change its stance on abortion. Here’s a rundown of what is happening, when and why. What is Ireland voting on? The referendum is about taking action that would result in the repeal of article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution (commonly referred to as the 8th amendment), allowing the Irish government to change the law on abortion, which is currently illegal unless a woman’s life is at substantial risk. Voting yes would repeal the amendment, while voting no would keep it in place. What is the 8th amendment? The eighth amendment was passed by referendum in 1983. It says that “the state acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right”. It is commonly viewed to equate the life of a pregnant woman with the foetus, making abortion unavailable in almost all circumstances. It is also seen as affecting maternal healthcare because a woman loses her right to refuse consent to medical treatment in pregnancy. Why does Ireland have this clause in its constitution? When contraception was legalised in Ireland in 1974, there was a widespread belief that liberal abortion laws would inevitably follow. An amendment campaign emerged in 1981, brought together various “pro-life” groups to lobby for constitutional protection of the “unborn”. Their campaign was helped by the fact that in the political instability of the early 1980s, successive Taoisigh (prime ministers) were conscious of alienating the dominant conservative vote. Ireland’s attorney general warned at the time that the wording of the amendment was too ambiguous and could have potentially negative consequences for women’s healthcare. But momentum had gathered and the referendum resulted in a two-to-one majority in favour of the amendment. Is Ireland unusual in having an amendment of this kind? Yes. Regulation of abortion through a constitution is rare (because constitutions are difficult to change). It has left Ireland with some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, which have been regularly criticised by a number of international human rights bodies. Why is this vote happening now? There have been a number of high profile, distressing cases in the recent past which have highlighted the inadequacy of the current law. Just two examples (there are many more) are the death of Savita Halappanavar in 2012 from sepsis after being refused an abortion during miscarriage and the case of Amanda Mellet, who was forced to travel to England to terminate a pregnancy with fatal foetal anomaly. Mellet’s case reached the UN Human Rights Committee, which concluded that Ireland’s near total abortion ban was discriminatory and amounted to “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”. In 2017 the Irish government convened a Citizens Assembly to consider evidence on abortion law reform. The 99 randomly selected citizens, after hearing extensive evidence, voted voted 64% to 36% in favour of having no restrictions on termination in early pregnancy. What is the Irish government’s official position on the vote? The government is split on the vote, with many undeclared. However, it appears that more support “yes”. Party leaders are supportive – Leo Varadkar (the Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael) is openly pro-repeal, however his party is allowing a free vote. Micheál Martin, leader of the opposition party Fianna Fáil, has also backed repeal, although many in his party think differently. Sinn Féin supports repeal but not abortion without restriction. Members of parliament for Labour, the Green party, Social Democrats and Solidarity-People Before Profit support both repeal and access to abortion up until 12 weeks into a pregnancy. Independents are mixed. What happens if the 8th amendment is repealed? Repeal of the 8th amendment would allow the government to legislate on abortion. The proposed legislation will bring Ireland into line with the majority of European countries, allowing for abortion on request up to the 12th week of pregnancy (subject to medical regulation). After 12 weeks abortion would only be available in cases of fatal foetal anomaly, if the pregnant woman’s life was at risk or if her health was at risk of serious harm. Cases after 12 weeks would have to be approved by two doctors. What happens if Ireland votes to keep the 8th amendment? Nothing would change. The constitution, in conjunction with the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, only allows for abortion where there is real and substantial risk to the life – as distinct from the health – of the pregnant woman. She can only access abortion when doctors deem that her life is at risk due to medical complications, or she is at risk of taking her life. Women in their thousands would continue to travel to England and further afield to access abortion or procure abortion pills online illegally, risking criminality. The impact of Brexit on women’s ability to travel freely remains unknown. Who is opposed to repealing the 8th amendment and why? Groups who describe themselves as “pro-life” say they are protecting the foetus through their opposition to any change to Irish abortion law. Many of these groups are supported from abroad, in particular from America, and often align themselves with religious views, in particular the Catholic Church. What is the main argument for repealing the 8th amendment? The main argument is that criminalising abortion does not prevent abortion. In fact countries with liberal abortion laws usually have lower rates of abortion. Women living in Ireland have abortions, either abroad and at their own cost, or illegally in Ireland with the abortion pill. All a “yes” vote will do is allow the government to legislate for women to access healthcare legally in Ireland. Is it likely that the vote will result in repeal? Polls have indicated that marginally more people support a “yes” vote. There has been concern over voter manipulation, in particular foreign interference with both Google and Facebook changing the rules on political advertising in Ireland in advance of the referendum. *Claire Pierson is a Lecturer in Politics, University of Liverpool (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Ireland votes on Friday in an abortion referendum that could be a milestone on a path of change in a country that, only a few decades ago, was one of Europe's most socially conservative.

Polls suggest Irish voters are set to overturn one of the world's strictest bans on terminations. Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, in favour of change, has called the referendum a "once-in-a-generation" chance.

Voters in the once deeply Catholic nation will be asked if they wish to scrap a prohibition that was enshrined in the constitution by referendum 35 year ago, and partly lifted in 2013 only for cases where the mother's life is in danger.

Ireland has been changing fast. It legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority only in 1995, but three years ago became the first country in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote.

A decades-old battle over abortion has played out in a fiercely contested debate that divided political parties, saw the once mighty church take a back seat and became a test case for how global internet giants deal with social media advertising in political campaigns.

Unlike in 1983, when religion was front and centre and abortion was a taboo subject for most people, the campaign was instead defined by women on both sides publicly describing their personal experiences of terminations.

"The conversation that has resulted in me going to the ballot box to vote 'Yes' with certainty hasn't been a straightforward one," Deputy Prime Minister Simon Coveney wrote in the Irish Independent newspaper on Thursday.

"I have found it difficult, I have stumbled but I have met extraordinary women and men along the way who have changed my perspectives on this deeply emotive issue."

"Yes" campaigners like Coveney have argued that with over 3,000 women travelling to Britain each year for terminations and others ordering pills illegally online, abortion is already a reality in Ireland.

Government plans ''extreme''

Although not on the ballot paper, the "No" camp has seized on government plans to allow terminations with no restriction up to 12 weeks into a pregnancy if the referendum is carried, calling it a step too far for most voters.

"More and more people are realising that this government has planned to introduce an extreme abortion law, the only way to stop this is to vote 'No'," said Mary Butler, an anti-abortion lawmaker from the main opposition party, Fianna Fail.

Opinion polls have put those who favour changing the law in a clear lead. The two most recent surveys showed the "Yes" side pulling further ahead.

Polling stations close at 2100 GMT and national broadcaster RTE plans to publish an exit poll at 2230 GMT. The first indications of the result are expected mid-morning on Saturday, after the count begins at 0800 GMT.

Many expatriate Irish have travelled home to vote in one of the few European Union countries that does not allow those abroad to vote via post or in embassies.

Those away for less than 18 months remain eligible to vote at their former local polling station, and a majority appeared to back change.

Analysts said a high turnout, particularly in urban areas, would likely favour the "Yes" side.

"If anything, I'm sitting a little bit more comfortably after the last week having viewed the debates and the general moods and commentary of the 'No' camp," said Richard Colwell, chief executive of Red C, whose latest poll on Sunday showed 56 per cent for, 27 per cent against and 14 per cent still undecided.

"But that's what everybody thought when Brexit happened. We can't be complacent about it but it does appear that it's going to be a 'Yes' vote at this stage."

Polls suggest Irish voters are set to overturn one of the world's strictest bans on terminations

Ireland votes on Friday in an abortion referendum that could be a milestone on a path of change in a country that, only a few decades ago, was one of Europe's most socially conservative. Polls suggest Irish voters are set to overturn one of the world's strictest bans on terminations. Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, in favour of change, has called the referendum a "once-in-a-generation" chance. Voters in the once deeply Catholic nation will be asked if they wish to scrap a prohibition that was enshrined in the constitution by referendum 35 year ago, and partly lifted in 2013 only for cases where the mother's life is in danger. Ireland has been changing fast. It legalised divorce by a razor-thin majority only in 1995, but three years ago became the first country in the world to adopt gay marriage by popular vote. A decades-old battle over abortion has played out in a fiercely contested debate that divided political parties, saw the once mighty church take a back seat and became a test case for how global internet giants deal with social media advertising in political campaigns. Unlike in 1983, when religion was front and centre and abortion was a taboo subject for most people, the campaign was instead defined by women on both sides publicly describing their personal experiences of terminations. "The conversation that has resulted in me going to the ballot box to vote 'Yes' with certainty hasn't been a straightforward one," Deputy Prime Minister Simon Coveney wrote in the Irish Independent newspaper on Thursday. "I have found it difficult, I have stumbled but I have met extraordinary women and men along the way who have changed my perspectives on this deeply emotive issue." "Yes" campaigners like Coveney have argued that with over 3,000 women travelling to Britain each year for terminations and others ordering pills illegally online, abortion is already a reality in Ireland. Government plans ''extreme'' Although not on the ballot paper, the "No" camp has seized on government plans to allow terminations with no restriction up to 12 weeks into a pregnancy if the referendum is carried, calling it a step too far for most voters. "More and more people are realising that this government has planned to introduce an extreme abortion law, the only way to stop this is to vote 'No'," said Mary Butler, an anti-abortion lawmaker from the main opposition party, Fianna Fail. Opinion polls have put those who favour changing the law in a clear lead. The two most recent surveys showed the "Yes" side pulling further ahead. Polling stations close at 2100 GMT and national broadcaster RTE plans to publish an exit poll at 2230 GMT. The first indications of the result are expected mid-morning on Saturday, after the count begins at 0800 GMT. Many expatriate Irish have travelled home to vote in one of the few European Union countries that does not allow those abroad to vote via post or in embassies. Those away for less than 18 months remain eligible to vote at their former local polling station, and a majority appeared to back change. Analysts said a high turnout, particularly in urban areas, would likely favour the "Yes" side. "If anything, I'm sitting a little bit more comfortably after the last week having viewed the debates and the general moods and commentary of the 'No' camp," said Richard Colwell, chief executive of Red C, whose latest poll on Sunday showed 56 per cent for, 27 per cent against and 14 per cent still undecided. "But that's what everybody thought when Brexit happened. We can't be complacent about it but it does appear that it's going to be a 'Yes' vote at this stage."

Ireland votes in 'once-in-a-generation' abortion referendum

As Ireland gets ready for a landmark referendum on Friday against anti-abortion laws, the parents of Savita Halappanavar hope that the country goes for 'yes' vote and facilitate scrapping of the law that killed their daughter.

Ireland's fight against its strict abortion laws got more impetus in 2012 when an Indian woman Savita Halappanavar died after she was refused an abortion during a miscarriage. According to reports, Halappanavar repeatedly asked for a termination but was refused because there was a foetal heartbeat.

31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community.&nbsp;

A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to the mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited.&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ahead-of-anti-abortion-referendum-yes-campaigners-take-lead-in-ireland-138623">Ahead of anti-abortion referendum, yes campaigners take lead in Ireland</a>

This Friday, Ireland will decide whether it would repeal the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution which identifies the life of the baby and mother as equal.&nbsp;

If repealed, the people of Ireland will succeed at overturning one of the strictest abortion laws in Europe. Women, who now have to go all the way to London, UK will then enjoy the right to demand an abortion.

Halappanavar's parents, as quoted in various media reports, bat for 'yes' vote and urge the people of Ireland to render the subversive law as redundant, ineffective. Her parents feel that Savita had a long life which was cut short mercilessly and that the same should not happen to other women.

Halappanavar's father, Andanappa Yalagi, told a UK-based newspaper that voting against the anti-abortion on Friday will ensure that women in Ireland will not be subjected to what his daughter went through and that by voting in favour of free abortion policies will do a great service to her "departed soul".

Ireland's fight against its strict abortion laws got more impetus in 2012 when an Indian woman Savita Halappanavar died after she was refused an abortion during a miscarriage

As Ireland gets ready for a landmark referendum on Friday against anti-abortion laws, the parents of Savita Halappanavar hope that the country goes for 'yes' vote and facilitate scrapping of the law that killed their daughter. Ireland's fight against its strict abortion laws got more impetus in 2012 when an Indian woman Savita Halappanavar died after she was refused an abortion during a miscarriage. According to reports, Halappanavar repeatedly asked for a termination but was refused because there was a foetal heartbeat. 31-year-old Halappanavar was 17 weeks pregnant when she was admitted to University Hospital Galway in Ireland due to septic miscarriage. She died five after she was refused a termination. The incident outraged people all across, especially those who belonged to the Indian community. A widespread public debate eventually mounted pressure on the Irish government forcing it to change the abortion legislation and allowing the procedure in cases where there is a threat to the mother's life. However, termination of pregnancy in cases of foetal abnormalities, pregnancy complications, miscarriage, rape was still prohibited. Also Read: Ahead of anti-abortion referendum, yes campaigners take lead in Ireland This Friday, Ireland will decide whether it would repeal the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution which identifies the life of the baby and mother as equal. If repealed, the people of Ireland will succeed at overturning one of the strictest abortion laws in Europe. Women, who now have to go all the way to London, UK will then enjoy the right to demand an abortion. Halappanavar's parents, as quoted in various media reports, bat for 'yes' vote and urge the people of Ireland to render the subversive law as redundant, ineffective. Her parents feel that Savita had a long life which was cut short mercilessly and that the same should not happen to other women. Halappanavar's father, Andanappa Yalagi, told a UK-based newspaper that voting against the anti-abortion on Friday will ensure that women in Ireland will not be subjected to what his daughter went through and that by voting in favour of free abortion policies will do a great service to her "departed soul".

Savita Halappanavar's parents want Ireland to vote out anti-abortion law that led to her death

Popular singer Ed Sheeran has expressed his displeasure towards Irish anti-abortion campaigners for using one his songs- Small Bump- without his consent.&nbsp; 
 
The campaigners are allegedly using the song to promote their cause.&nbsp; 
 
The 27-year-old singer-songwriter said the song was used by the group without seeking his approval and its lyrics do not reflect the ideology espoused by the group. 
 
"I've been informed that my song 'Small Bump' is being used to promote the Pro-Life campaign, and I feel it's important to let you know I have not given approval for this use, and it does not reflect what the song is about," Sheeran wrote in his Instagram story. 
 
The lyrics of the song from his 2011 album '+' are: "You're just a small bump unborn / In four months you're brought to life.&nbsp; 
 
"You might be left with my hair /But you'll have your mother's eyes / I'll hold your body in my hands, be as gentle as I can / But for now you're a scan of my unmade plans." 
 
On May 25, Ireland will vote in a referendum to repeal its Constitution's eighth amendment and legalise abortion up to 12 weeks. 
 
The current law prohibits a woman to end an unwanted pregnancy in virtually all circumstances.&nbsp;

The campaign to liberalise abortion laws got more impetus in 2012 when an Indian woman Savita Halappanavar died in a Galway hospital after she was refused an abortion during a miscarriage. Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar, stated she repeatedly asked for a termination but was refused because there was a foetal heartbeat, reported a news portal.

The 27-year-old singer-songwriter said the song was used by the group without seeking his approval

Popular singer Ed Sheeran has expressed his displeasure towards Irish anti-abortion campaigners for using one his songs- Small Bump- without his consent. The campaigners are allegedly using the song to promote their cause. The 27-year-old singer-songwriter said the song was used by the group without seeking his approval and its lyrics do not reflect the ideology espoused by the group. "I've been informed that my song 'Small Bump' is being used to promote the Pro-Life campaign, and I feel it's important to let you know I have not given approval for this use, and it does not reflect what the song is about," Sheeran wrote in his Instagram story. The lyrics of the song from his 2011 album '+' are: "You're just a small bump unborn / In four months you're brought to life. "You might be left with my hair /But you'll have your mother's eyes / I'll hold your body in my hands, be as gentle as I can / But for now you're a scan of my unmade plans." On May 25, Ireland will vote in a referendum to repeal its Constitution's eighth amendment and legalise abortion up to 12 weeks. The current law prohibits a woman to end an unwanted pregnancy in virtually all circumstances. The campaign to liberalise abortion laws got more impetus in 2012 when an Indian woman Savita Halappanavar died in a Galway hospital after she was refused an abortion during a miscarriage. Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar, stated she repeatedly asked for a termination but was refused because there was a foetal heartbeat, reported a news portal.

Ed Sheeran unhappy with campaigners for using 'Small Bump' for anti-abortion promotion in Ireland

Mohammad Amir took two wickets in quick succession to give Pakistan a boost as he returned to the fray against Ireland despite a troublesome knee injury.

The Pakistan spearhead went off just 3.2 overs into his spell during the second innings of Ireland's inaugural Test on Sunday with a recurrence of a chronic left knee problem.

It was a worrying sign for Pakistan, who next play a warm-up match against Leicestershire (May 19-20) before facing England in a two-Test series, with back-to-back fixtures at Lord's (May 24-28) and Headingley (June 1-5), leaving little time for rest and recovery.

Following-on, Ireland started the fourth day on 64 without loss. Amir did not come into the attack until Monday's ninth over, with the hosts 81 for two after Ed Joyce was lbw by Andrew Balbirnie for his second nought of the match to Mohammad Abbas.

Amir struck on Monday when he clean bowled Niall O'Brien (18) - a wicket greeted with his usual arms-outstretched celebration. And 94 for three became 95 for four when Amir had Ireland captain William Porterfield (32) edging to wicket-keeper and Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed.&nbsp

At that stage, Amir had taken two wickets for no runs in six balls.&nbsp

After a spell of two wickets for 10 runs in seven overs, including three maidens, Amir left the field some 25 minutes before the scheduled lunch break.

He was back on the field before the interval but did not bowl again in Monday's first session. 
&nbsp

The Pakistan spearhead went off just 3.2 overs into his spell

Mohammad Amir took two wickets in quick succession to give Pakistan a boost as he returned to the fray against Ireland despite a troublesome knee injury. The Pakistan spearhead went off just 3.2 overs into his spell during the second innings of Ireland's inaugural Test on Sunday with a recurrence of a chronic left knee problem. It was a worrying sign for Pakistan, who next play a warm-up match against Leicestershire (May 19-20) before facing England in a two-Test series, with back-to-back fixtures at Lord's (May 24-28) and Headingley (June 1-5), leaving little time for rest and recovery. Following-on, Ireland started the fourth day on 64 without loss. Amir did not come into the attack until Monday's ninth over, with the hosts 81 for two after Ed Joyce was lbw by Andrew Balbirnie for his second nought of the match to Mohammad Abbas. Amir struck on Monday when he clean bowled Niall O'Brien (18) - a wicket greeted with his usual arms-outstretched celebration. And 94 for three became 95 for four when Amir had Ireland captain William Porterfield (32) edging to wicket-keeper and Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed. At that stage, Amir had taken two wickets for no runs in six balls. After a spell of two wickets for 10 runs in seven overs, including three maidens, Amir left the field some 25 minutes before the scheduled lunch break. He was back on the field before the interval but did not bowl again in Monday's first session.

Pakistan's Mohammad Amir strikes on return against Ireland

Ireland collapsed to five for three at lunch on the third day of their inaugural men's Test at Malahide on Sunday in reply to Pakistan's first innings' 310 for nine declared.

Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed's well-timed declaration left Ireland with a tricky 30 minutes to bat before lunch and that was long enough for the hosts to suffer a top-order slump.

Veteran batsman Ed Joyce was lbw to Mohammad Abbas for four before fellow opener Andrew Balbirnie was lbw to the paceman for nought.

Then, with what became the last ball before lunch, Ireland captain William Porterfield fell for one when left-arm quick Mohammad Amir uprooted his off-stump.

Abbas had lunch figures of two for four in three overs and Amir one for one in 3.1 overs.

Earlier, Pakistan went past 300 after resuming on their overnight 268 for six in a match where Friday's scheduled opening day was washed out completely.

Test debutant Faheem Ashraf top scored with 83 and together with Shadab Khan (55) put on 117 for the seventh wicket.

Middlesex paceman Tim Murtagh led Ireland's attack with four wickets for 55 runs from 25 overs.

Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed's well-timed declaration left Ireland with a tricky 30 minutes to bat before lunch

Ireland collapsed to five for three at lunch on the third day of their inaugural men's Test at Malahide on Sunday in reply to Pakistan's first innings' 310 for nine declared. Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed's well-timed declaration left Ireland with a tricky 30 minutes to bat before lunch and that was long enough for the hosts to suffer a top-order slump. Veteran batsman Ed Joyce was lbw to Mohammad Abbas for four before fellow opener Andrew Balbirnie was lbw to the paceman for nought. Then, with what became the last ball before lunch, Ireland captain William Porterfield fell for one when left-arm quick Mohammad Amir uprooted his off-stump. Abbas had lunch figures of two for four in three overs and Amir one for one in 3.1 overs. Earlier, Pakistan went past 300 after resuming on their overnight 268 for six in a match where Friday's scheduled opening day was washed out completely. Test debutant Faheem Ashraf top scored with 83 and together with Shadab Khan (55) put on 117 for the seventh wicket. Middlesex paceman Tim Murtagh led Ireland's attack with four wickets for 55 runs from 25 overs.

Ireland collapse to 5 for 3 at lunch against Pakistan

The national selection committee's decision to name India skipper Virat Kohli for the two-match T20 series against Ireland has created confusion as it's clashing with his county commitments for Surrey.

There were rumours in the BCCI corridors that the section which wasn't happy with Kohli skipping the one-off Test match against Afghanistan has played a role in cutting short his county stint in favour of the T20 Internationals against the minnows.

India are set to play two T20's against Ireland in Dublin's Malahide on June 27 and 29 while Kohli is scheduled to play his last county match for Surrey against Yorkshire at Scarborough from June 25 to 28.

According to an announcement made by the county: "India captain Virat Kohli will play for Surrey during the entire month of June."

Despite the county matches schedule being announced much in advance before the team selection, it was surprising to find Kohli's name for the two-match series against Ireland.

When the chairman of selectors MSK Prasad was contacted by PTI for a clarification whether it was a clerical error, he said: "Kindly talk to the BCCI secretary on this issue."

When BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary was asked, he replied.

"Be rest assured, everything is fine," was all he said.

However, there has been no clarity as to what will be Kohli's choice as he gets to play only three four-day matches during his stint.

"If the selectors have picked him for the Ireland T20s despite the county dates being available, it means that he will not play the game against Yorkshire. This cannot be a unilateral decision as the county contracts has been inked after much deliberation. Playing against Ireland means that he will get only two county games.

"It will be very interesting to know why has there been a change in Virat's schedule if England Tests are paramount," wondered a senior BCCI official when apprised of the situation.

Whether Surrey would agree to the new arrangement is another question because the contract was signed after a lot of deliberations regarding Kohli's image rights.&nbsp;

India are set to play two T20's against Ireland in Dublin's Malahide on June 27 and 29

The national selection committee's decision to name India skipper Virat Kohli for the two-match T20 series against Ireland has created confusion as it's clashing with his county commitments for Surrey. There were rumours in the BCCI corridors that the section which wasn't happy with Kohli skipping the one-off Test match against Afghanistan has played a role in cutting short his county stint in favour of the T20 Internationals against the minnows. India are set to play two T20's against Ireland in Dublin's Malahide on June 27 and 29 while Kohli is scheduled to play his last county match for Surrey against Yorkshire at Scarborough from June 25 to 28. According to an announcement made by the county: "India captain Virat Kohli will play for Surrey during the entire month of June." Despite the county matches schedule being announced much in advance before the team selection, it was surprising to find Kohli's name for the two-match series against Ireland. When the chairman of selectors MSK Prasad was contacted by PTI for a clarification whether it was a clerical error, he said: "Kindly talk to the BCCI secretary on this issue." When BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary was asked, he replied. "Be rest assured, everything is fine," was all he said. However, there has been no clarity as to what will be Kohli's choice as he gets to play only three four-day matches during his stint. "If the selectors have picked him for the Ireland T20s despite the county dates being available, it means that he will not play the game against Yorkshire. This cannot be a unilateral decision as the county contracts has been inked after much deliberation. Playing against Ireland means that he will get only two county games. "It will be very interesting to know why has there been a change in Virat's schedule if England Tests are paramount," wondered a senior BCCI official when apprised of the situation. Whether Surrey would agree to the new arrangement is another question because the contract was signed after a lot of deliberations regarding Kohli's image rights.

Kohli confusion: BCCI names skipper for Ireland T20s despite county commitments

ireland

Ireland, News on Ireland, stories on Ireland, articles on Ireland, Ireland stories at Wion, Ireland news, Ireland latest news