On a serious note, the Ploughing Championships and its associated carnival of commerce also function as a different kind of showcase, putting a serious — and seriously influential — demographic in the public eye.

The thousands of people who attend the championships are farmers, business people, entrepreneurs, and workers of all kinds; they represent a stratum of Irish society which is making a significant contribution to that society in terms of finance, employment, and social capital.

Because the Ploughing Championships exert such a gravitational pull on the nation at large, politicians will be making their presence seen and most definitely heard. They can expect to hear plenty about the nitrates issue, a matter close to the heart of many attendees, as they circulate; Minister for Agriculture Charlie McConalogue certainly did on his rounds.

That kind of organic encounter, between those enacting and enforcing laws and directives and those directly affected by those rulings, is another reason to celebrate one of the country’s most significant secular feasts.

President's speech

One politician who was in Ratheniska was President Michael D Higgins, who shared some blunt opinions on the UN, describing it as “losing credibility ... it is unable to stop war”.

He was equally forthright on the EU’s agricultural policies, saying it has been “been promoting a United States-style of agriculture for a very long time and it is hard to break away from what is often being imposed on you ... I think it is important that farm families have to be supported and secured ... by direct payments”.

The President’s directness brought back memories of the controversy last summer, when he commented pointedly on Ireland’s traditional policy of neutrality the week the Government opened its Consultative Forum on International Security.

There was close examination then of the President’s comments to see if he had overstepped his constitutional role, and a similar level of scrutiny can be expected for his remarks in Laois, though the latter comments focused on outside organisations. 

The fact that the Taoiseach and Tánaiste are among the Cabinet ministers at the UN headquarters in New York at present makes the President’s comments all the more significant.

Taoisigh and ministers tend not to clash with the President in public — the shadow cast by Paddy Donegan’s infamous run-in with Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh back in 1976 is a long one — and the President is traditionally viewed as above the day-to-day political squabbling. Experienced politicians view a public argument with the occupant of the Áras as a losing game.

However, criticising the UN while the Taoiseach is attending that institution means the President has created an undeniably embarrassing situation for the former.

A clarification of his remarks would be no surprise. Nor would some strong words exchanged between Merrion St and Phoenix Park.

Climate crisis

Every week brings a fresh reminder of the challenges of the climate crisis, and of the urgent need to change our behaviour to protect the environment.

In recent days, however, changes to a proposed greenway in Cork illustrate the essential conflict in making those alterations. As reported here, Cork City Council confirmed that the proposed 1.4km Maglin greenway in Ballincollig, the first phase of a proposed 10km greenway, will not proceed as planned, with potential amendments including an alternative route now up for discussion over the coming months.

This news came just days after a survey revealed that almost two thirds (64%) of those living in Cork City strongly agree that Cork must transform into a more sustainable, climate-neutral, and resilient place to live and work.

On that basis, it is disheartening to see a proposal for a greenway, with all the concomitant environmental benefits associated with such initiatives, not even get off the ground. It was also dismaying to read comments from a local politician about the route of the greenway, saying if it could be rerouted through nearby fields “and that only upsets a few cows, rather than residents, then we have to look at that”.

This is an extraordinary admission for an elected representative to make, confirming as it does a profound misunderstanding of the seriousness of the situation.

Adopting more sustainable options means making significant differences in how we live our lives, and by definition that is a matter of making hard decisions. Yet if this politician’s comments are taken at face value, discommoding some residents — or voters — is too high a price to pay.

Clearly sustainable options are not a serious possibility when plans for positive change can be killed so swiftly. When opinions such as that above are aired, however, they show that we are further away from positive change than we thought.