We have come a long way in this country in tackling cruelty to animals but, sad to say, it seems we still have a journey to go.

I spoke recently about how an NGO, namely the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, which in 2024 received about 96% of its funding from abroad, published a widely promoted know-your-rights guide on trans rights. It emerged that a major claim in its guide, regarding schools' obligation to use preferred pronouns, was transparently false. Indeed, its guidance on accessing toilets and changing facilities was also potentially misleading. I noted that the guide was funded by an €18,500 grant from the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which is a totally State-funded independent human rights and equality body. At best, the guide that was produced is really a particular group of people using public money and pushing their own interpretation of Irish law as though their claims have been tested in the courts. Ironically, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties was part of the initial national counter-disinformation strategy group established by the Government.

The ICCL had a representative on the strategy group and IHREC currently has a representative on the strategy group. That strategy defines disinformation as "false or misleading content that is spread with an intention to deceive or secure economic or political gain and which may cause public harm". It seems that the ICCL, which was a member of the original strategy group, was itself guilty of disinformation in that it sought to intentionally mislead people about the scope of their rights and, indeed, about the scope of their obligations. Has the ICCL apologised? Not at all. Laughably, the council clarified by saying it never claimed that such schools were under an absolute legal obligation. I do not know if it is a mental reservation but it sounds more like direct disinformation. It is the equivalent of Father Ted saying that the money was only resting in his account. IHREC has not apologised. The guide has not been changed. The guide is on the public record, funded by the public, and not corrected. None of the four NGOs involved in the guide's production have sought to distance themselves from the contents. Unsurprisingly, the fact-checking section of The Journal, which was involved in the original counter-disinformation strategy group, could not find time in the last few weeks to seek to fact-check the offending guide. There has not been a peep from any Government representatives despite this misuse of public money.

In conclusion, the sad experience of the last referendums and the most recent ones is being repeated, namely, that disinformation can never be admitted when it comes from those on the inside track. Of course it is the taxpayer who foots the bill for this information. Why should the taxpayer be required to fund political advocacy dressed up falsely as truth? Why should we stand for that? Is it not time for Government-led measures to make sure there is accountability when such direct misleading of people takes place and to make sure it does not happen again?