Welcome for 'brave Galway Corporation decision'

Galway for a Safe Environment welcomed the unanimous decision on July 24 by Galway Corporation to exclude thermal treatment from the waste managment plan, and to confine the plan to dealing with the waste of Galway City and County.

Spokesperson, Dr Conchúr Ó Brádaigh, said that "the decision was an extremely brave one, and the councillors deserve every credit for rejecting the thermal treatment proposal. We are calling on Galway Corporation to immediately implement a programme of home and central com-posting, to be followed as soon as possible with a city-wide source separation and kerbside collection of recyclables.

"We are also calling on the people of Galway to get fully behind their councillors in the recycling efforts, and to prove that incineration is not needed to achieve the Government targets of 50% diversion from landfill. It is vital also that the people of County Galway, in particular in rural areas, are given the same opportunity to participate in recycling as people living in the cities. Everyone will be needed to reach the ambitious recycling targets that have been set out.

"We would also like to refute the statement made by MC O'Sullivan consultant, Mr. PJ Rudden, on local and national media this morning, that the Corporation vote will mean a trebling of landfill in County Galway.

The facts are that this plan envisaged a total landfill requirement in Co. Galway which is greater than that currently being landfilled in the County, if you take the incinerator ash into consid-eration.

The Corporation vote, if it is echoed by the County Council in September will actually lead to less landfill in Co. Galway, not more landfill. As the recycling increases, the amount going to landfill will decrease, beacause we will not be importing waste from other counties.

"The type of material going to landfill once this new approach swings into action will also be much more benign that was planned in the Connacht Plan. There will be now no toxic incinerator ash going to landfill in the County, and if all organic and food materials are excluded, then the type of 'dry' landfill that will result will be very far removed from the regional super-dump proposed in the Connacht Plan."

The Galway Safe Waste Alliance have accused Cllr Pat O'Sullivan of scaremongering when he stated on June 25 that the Corporation decision will mean a second landfill for East Galway. Alliance spokesperson, Tom Finn, said that provided Galway County Council followed the Corporation lead, excluding both thermal treatment and waste from other counties, that the need for landfill would actually be cut to half the present levels, and not doubled as Cllr O'Sullivan has stated.

"Galway is currently landfilling approximately 90,000 tonnes per annum in Ballinasloe dump. If Galway City and County reach the recycling targets of 50% now planned by the Corporation, this will drop to only 45,000 tonnes each year.", said Tom Finn. The Connacht plan would have resulted in landfill amounts of more than the present amount being sent to Ballinasloe.

"Furthermore, the proposal to remove all organic materials from landfill through home and central composting, will result in a "dry" landfill, rather than the regional superdump proposed in the Connacht plan. There will also be no toxic ash in the landfill, because the incinerator will not now go ahead"

"The truth is that the Corporation decision cuts the need for landfill in East Galway in half, and should be welcomed by all the people of Galway County and City", said Tom Finn.

The Galway Safe Waste Alliance is an alliance of all the groups opposing the Connacht Draft Waste Management Plan, namely: Ballinasloe Against the Super Dump, the Ballinahistle/Kilrickle Anti-Dump Committee, the Clontuskert Anti-Incineration Group, the Cross/New Inn Anti-Dump Committee, Galway for a Safe Environment and the Newbridge Action Committee.
Contents

	Type or paste text or Web address (beginning with http://) here: Translate from: English to FrenchEnglish to GermanEnglish to ItalianEnglish to PortugueseEnglish to SpanishFrench to EnglishGerman to EnglishItalian to EnglishSpanish to EnglishPortuguese to English
	Powered by Systran

Comdt-Gen Tom Maguire remembered

Several dozen people gathered at Cross Cemetery, Co Mayo on July 5 for a simple wreath-laying ceremony on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of the death of Comdt-Gen Tom Maguire.

In addition to members of Tom Maguire's family, the attendance included people from Mayo, Galway and Roscommon.

This reflected his representation of South Mayo-South Roscommon in the All-Ireland Dáil in 1921-22 and his command of the Second Western Division IRA which covered South Mayo, North Galway and South Roscommon in the Black-and-Tan War.

Dan Hoban, Westport, presided at the graveside and said that Tom Maguire's ideal of national independence for the 32 Counties of Ireland with just and inclusive treatment for all sections had not been achieved.

He reminded those present that General Maguire had been Patron of Republican Sinn Féin from 1987 to his death in 1993.

Seán Mac an Iomaire, Gaillimh led the attendance in the recitation of a decade of the Rosary in Irish.

Three wreaths of fresh Easter lilies and laurel leaves were then laid on the graves of Tom Maguire and his wife Christina (neé Feeney) on behalf of the Maguire family and on behalf of the Republican Movement in Mayo and Galway.

The attendance included Ruairí Ó Brádaigh, President of Republican Sinn Féin.
Contents

Extensive use of male ' kickers' on women's wing of jail

SAOIRSE interviewed Josephine Hayden at her home in Tallaght, Co Dublin:

SAOIRSE: What were the conditions like when you arrived in 1996? Did the conditions in the women's wing improve over the course of your incarceration?

Josephine Hayden: When I walked into that wing -- 'C' Wing -- in 1996 it was like stepping back in time! The building was and is cold, damp and musty. Very small, narrow corridors, peeling cell walls and a musty smell that never went away.

The cells are five metres square and four or five of them are almost always doubled up. No in-cell sanitation, only chamber pots. The sluice (for the pots) was and is constantly blocking up, it regularly overflows and the stench is awful. There are two showers and one toilet (all in one 'room') on one landing beside the sluice – the toilet has a half-door. The other toilet is at the end of a corridor on the next floor, that toilet has a mesh glass on the top half and the door does not go up to the ceiling, there is approximately an 18 inch gap.

There was a toilet in one of the recreation rooms (the pool-room) but that was removed some time ago as we had complained for a long time over it and had been asking for it to be removed. It had only a half door so it really couldn't be used as there was always prison staff (male and female) in the rec room. Also food was being served in the pool-room at that time but that too has been moved to the ground floor, thankfully.

The biggest 'improvement' (if one could call it that!) was the installation of sockets in the cells and the subsequent arrival of the TV sets! TV sets were put into every cell -- even I had one -- over the Christmas period. The 'honeymoon' didn't last long with me, I returned mine after two weeks when it became apparent the TV sets were bribes to keep us quiet and facilitate longer lock-down. That we were longer in our cells over the Christmas and New Year really annoyed me and that was why I took the action I did in the New Year.

Overall the conditions are still dreadful. Anyone who complained about conditions, ie people who wrote in to the Department of Justice or anyone who called into the prison, CPT, Visiting Committee, Joe Harrington etc, were told that "The place is being knocked down shortly". That effectively shut up all argument as the authorities were seen to be agreeing that the place was awful and was going to be shut down. However, no one could tell exactly when it was going to be knocked and it is of course still standing and in use.

I was once given the date July 1998 but that came and went! I was also told, of course, that there was no discrimination against the women -- the prison did not accept discrimination! Nice one that, seeing as how there is about 14 females and 140 males, some democracy.

Example: No structured pre-release programme for the women as there is for the men, no women allowed work in the grounds/landing/kitchen like the men are.

A serious omission in my opinion is the lack of female medical staff. The doctor, dentist, psychiatrist, psychologist, medical orderlies are all male, same as when I went in, no change there. The food could be improved on too -- it was reported in some daily papers that the food was top-class hotel food -- no way. Looked good on paper but it was different on the plate.

SAOIRSE: The general public are unaware of the extent of the use of male prison staff in the Limerick women's wing. Could you give me an outline of their use?

JH: There is always male prison staff on duty in C Wing. They worked the wing like the women did. Limerick is really a male prison so the vast majority of the staff are male — actually the Governor, Deputy-Governor, Chief officers, Assistant Chief officers (with one exception) are all male. So there is a very strong male culture there. I found the vast majority of the male POs very contemptuous of the women prisoners.

If any trouble broke out in C Wing the men were sent for. They arrived in numbers (10 to 12 of them) to put manners on the women. "A pack of bitches" one of the men was heard to say out loud when describing the women.

Though the prison denies they exist there is a core of male POs there who 'respond' to a call to quell trouble in the wing -- the prisoners call them "the kickers". They think of themselves as Rambos! They are a rough bunch and have no problem with manhandling the women into their cells and have a good laugh while doing so. (I often wondered if they behaved the same way at home). I have to say in the interest of fairness that not all the male officers were so uncivilised. There were, as always, exceptions to the rule (few, but they were there).

The male officers could lock us in or unlock us, check us through the spy-hole when we were locked up, serve us our meals. Supervise our visits etc, just like the women prison officers.

SAOIRSE: What was the attitude of prison authorities towards women prisoners generally and towards yourself as a Republican prisoner in particular?

JH: I really believe that the authorities didn't give the women too much thought! There was no consistency or logic applied or there seemed to be none anyway.

For myself as a Republican prisoner they applied much more consistency -- they were consistent in their refusal to grant me full political status. I was told on a few occasions by the deputy governor that I was the same as every other prisoner. My answer to that was "I am when it suits ye" but remember when I was in hospital I was not treated the same. I had three prison officers and two plainclothes police on duty round the clock and I never got parole to visit my father in hospital or to attend Mick's mother's funeral. Every time I visited the hospital I had a police escort and I was made to serve every day of my sentence (less remission).

SAOIRSE: The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture visited the jail while you were there. What access did you have to them and did their intervention result in any real changes.

JH: The CPT visited in 1993 before I went to Limerick. They made certain recommendations, ie, no doubling up of prisoners, in-cell sanitation, to name but two, but these recommendations were never implemented.

The CPT came in while I was there and their report is just out now. All of the prisoners spoke to them and the prisoners were happy with the way the CPT treated them. I found them very receptive but really how much 'clout' have they? It was the intervention of the CPT that got extra toilets in one of the male wings but in C Wing their intervention really produced no real improvements. They were told, as I said, that the wing is to be knocked.

SAOIRSE: The struggle for political status continues. What would you urge people to do to help the campaign in Maghaberry/Portlaoise?

JH: Every chance people get to protest against British rule in Ireland they should make the most of. By doing this they can highlight the fact that people are still in prison for their political beliefs but are being denied political status.

SAOIRSE: What would your message be to the Republican prisoners in Maghaberry and Portlaoise?

JH: I send solidarity greetings to the Republican prisoners. My message to them would be to stay strong. They are not forgotten and will not be forgotten. They have support out here both personally and politically. A just and lasting peace is some thing we all want to see but is yet to be achieved.

An Phoblacht Abú!

Josephine Hayden (third from left) with family and Republican comrades after her release from Limerick jail on July 19. During her imprisonment the promise of ‘C’ Wing closure was used to answer criticisms.
Contents

Dire conditions unchanged since 1998

Josephine Hayden wrote an open letter to SAOIRSE in September 1998 on the appalling conditions in 'C' Wing of Limerick jail. It was used by campaigners for political status for the Republican prisoner and to call for the complete closure of the women's wing.

SAOIRSE asked Josephine to update her open letter after her release on July 19 last. The list of dire conditions remains almost unchanged nearly two years later and the CPT recommendations have also been ignored.

The last CPT (European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment) report stated that "a cell of five square metres is scarcely adequate as a living area for one person and it is entirely inappropriate to use such a cell to accommodate two people", a view with which the governor agreed.

"The CPT recommends that a high priority be given to the plan and that in the meantime steps be taken immediately to ensure that women prisoners are not held two to a cell in Division C."

1. All bottom landing cells have bunk beds and are usually doubled up depending on the number of prisoners.
2. Political, remand and sentenced prisoners are kept together.
3. Extremely damp conditions, nearly all walls and ceilings are peeling and in some cells the wall plaster has come off the walls from dampness.
4. Most cell windows are broken and prisoners use a lot of toilet rolls to block the window holes.
5. Natural light is not adequate in cells. Artificial lights need to be on all day, even in the summer time.
6. Only two showers.
7. Prisoners have to slop out. This use of chamber pots is most inhumane and degrading, especially for prisoners sharing cells.
8. Only one sluice for up to 13 chamber pots with the effect of the over-burdened sluice flooding every couple of days and often not being freed up or attended to for a couple of days. This gives the bottom landing the look and odour and health risks of an open sewer.
9. No running water or lavatory in any cells.
10. C Wing library consists of a wardrobe full of books. The male prisoners have access to thousands of books in the main prison library.
11. Prisoners have to continuously ask for cleaning agents and equipment ie mops, floor brushes, bleach, washing up liquid etc.
12. Recreational activities consist of a pool table and two damaged pool cues, three tennis rackets (no tennis balls, only hand balls), one game of monopoly, two games of scrabble and the videos.
13. Mattresses are filthy and ancient, dirty duvets and dirty cells are given to incoming prisoners.
14. Appointments with the dentist can take several weeks, even months.
15. Availability of exercise yard limited due to lack or "shortage" of staff.
16. In general visitors to C Wing have to wait longer than visitors to male wings. I often complained about this to the Governor.
17. Post is very often days late. Prisoners are told that the reason for this is because of staff shortage.
18. Some prisoners clearly need proper psychiatric care. They are not getting it. All they get is heavy medication.
19. Courts often recommend that persons going to prison are allowed and encouraged to continue their treatment for addictions whilst in prison. Recovery is not encouraged, in so far as there is:
    1. No detox unit
    2. Very little encouragement or support for recovering addicts/alcoholics/abuse victims etc
    3. Very little counselling
    4. No female doctor or medic -- there is still no female doctor or medic and I think this is very important, especially where very young prisoners are concerned who get embarrassed speaking to male doctors etc.
    5. No Narcotics Anonymous meeting. There is a Drugs Awareness course now but no NA in the female wing like there is in the male wings.
    6. No support or programme for mentally unstable prisoners
    7. No pre-release programme for the women like there is for the men.

-- Josephine Hayden
Contents