A politician with financial interests endorsing a sexist attack
In the Irish parliament, a small act — a single click of approval on a social media post — opened a window onto something larger: the way policy disputes can curdle into personal contempt, and how the digital age makes visible what might once have stayed private. Joe Carey, a Fine Gael TD with declared interests in greyhound racing, liked a tweet dismissing his colleague Holly Cairns as an 'ignorant little girl' for her campaign to defund the industry — and then, when the weekend's quiet became Monday's reckoning, he apologized. The incident asks an old question in a new setting: when those who hold power disagree, what forms of dismissal do they reach for, and what do those forms reveal?
- A single 'like' on a contemptuous tweet transformed a policy disagreement into a public reckoning about gender, power, and professional conduct in parliament.
- Holly Cairns had already stirred significant tension by leading a push to block €2.4 million in state funding for greyhound racing and phase out all public support for the industry by 2025 — a motion the government defeated.
- Carey's endorsement of the post was not incidental: he has declared financial interests in greyhound racing and has publicly defended the industry against what he calls an 'anti-coursing lobby.'
- By Monday morning, the pressure was sufficient that Carey posted a public apology, acknowledging the tweet was 'disrespectful' and 'wrong' — though the speed of the apology raised its own questions about sincerity versus damage control.
- Cairns and the Social Democrats have signaled they will continue pressing the issue, leaving the greyhound funding debate unresolved and the question of parliamentary conduct still hanging in the air.
When the weekend ended, Joe Carey — a Fine Gael TD for Clare with declared interests in greyhound racing — found himself facing the consequences of a single click. He had liked a tweet attacking his colleague Holly Cairns, a Social Democrats TD, calling her an 'ignorant little girl' for her campaign against state funding for greyhound racing. By Monday, an apology was unavoidable. 'It was wrong,' he wrote, 'and I offer my sincere apologies to Holly Cairns.'
The backdrop to the incident is a genuine and substantive policy fight. Cairns has been pushing to wind down public support for the greyhound industry, which she describes as both cruel and economically indefensible — a 'financial basket case' whose attendance figures have collapsed. In 2021, the industry was set to receive €19.2 million in state funding, including a €2.4 million increase. Last week, the Social Democrats tabled a motion to block that increase, redirect the funds toward dogs rescued from the industry, and phase out all state support by 2025. The government blocked it.
What made Carey's 'like' more than a casual misstep was context. He is not a neutral observer: he has publicly defended the greyhound industry and disclosed a personal stake in it going back generations. Endorsing a post that dismissed a female colleague not on policy grounds but in language laced with condescension raised a harder question — about what kind of disagreement is considered acceptable, and whether the same words would have been used against a male politician making identical arguments.
Cairns has said her party will keep pushing. The motion failed, but the debate continues. Whether Carey's apology closes the matter or merely marks a pause depends, in the end, on what one believes an apology is actually for.
Joe Carey, a Fine Gael member of parliament representing Clare, woke up to a problem on Monday morning. Over the weekend, it had emerged that he had liked a tweet attacking Holly Cairns, a Social Democrats TD, for her campaign against state funding for greyhound racing. The tweet had called her an "ignorant little girl" and dismissed her as someone from "a minority party that scraped through on the 55th count." By Monday, Carey had no choice but to post an apology. "I liked a tweet that was disrespectful to one of my fellow TDs," he wrote. "I should not have done so. It was wrong and I offer my sincere apologies to Holly Cairns."
The incident sits at the intersection of two things: a policy dispute over animal welfare and a question about how elected officials conduct themselves online. Cairns has been pushing to wind down state support for the greyhound industry, which she describes as cruel. The numbers are substantial. In 2021, the industry was set to receive €19.2 million in public funding—an increase of €2.4 million from the previous year. Last week, the Social Democrats tabled a motion to block that increase and redirect the money toward supporting dogs rescued from the industry. They also proposed phasing out all state funding for greyhound racing by 2025. The government blocked the motion.
Cairnss argument rests on economics as much as ethics. She has called greyhound racing a "financial basket case" and a "loss making industry," pointing to a dramatic collapse in attendance and public interest. The case for continued state support, in her view, simply does not hold up. Yet the tweet Carey liked suggested something else was at stake—not just policy disagreement, but something more personal and gendered. The language used to dismiss her was not the language typically deployed against male politicians making similar arguments.
Carey himself has skin in this game. He has previously disclosed what he calls "an interest" in greyhound racing and coursing, and told parliament in 2016 that his family has been deeply involved in the sport. He has defended the industry publicly and claimed that an "anti-coursing lobby" has been spreading misinformation. This is not a neutral observer offering a casual like. This is a politician with declared interests in the industry, endorsing a post that attacked a colleague not just on policy grounds but in terms that carried a whiff of contempt.
The apology came quickly, which suggests Carey understood the stakes. Liking a post is a small gesture—a single click—but it is also a form of endorsement. It signals agreement, or at minimum, approval. When that post describes a female colleague as an "ignorant little girl," the like becomes something more than a minor social media slip. It becomes a question about what kind of workplace parliament is, and what kind of conduct elected officials think is acceptable when they disagree.
Cairns has indicated that her party will continue pushing to defund greyhound racing. The motion failed last week, but the debate is not over. What remains to be seen is whether this incident—a male politician with financial interests in the industry endorsing a sexist attack on a female politician opposing those interests—will shift how other lawmakers think about the issue, or whether it will be absorbed and forgotten. For now, Carey has apologized. Whether that is enough depends on what one thinks an apology should accomplish.
Notable Quotes
I liked a tweet that was disrespectful to one of my fellow TDs. I should not have done so. It was wrong and I offer my sincere apologies to Holly Cairns.— Joe Carey, Fine Gael TD
Greyhound racing is a financial basket case and a loss making industry which has suffered a dramatic fall in attendance and public support.— Holly Cairns, Social Democrats TD
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does it matter that Carey has a personal interest in greyhound racing? Couldn't he just disagree with Cairns on the merits?
He could, and he probably does. But when you have money or family involvement tied to an industry, and you endorse a personal attack on someone trying to defund it, the disagreement stops looking like principle and starts looking like self-interest dressed up as something else.
The tweet called her an "ignorant little girl." Do you think that language would have been used if Cairns were a man?
Almost certainly not. You might see "naive" or "misguided" applied to a male politician. But "little girl" carries a specific weight—it's diminishing, it's gendered, it suggests she shouldn't be taken seriously because of who she is, not what she's arguing.
Carey apologized. Does that resolve it?
An apology is a start, but it doesn't erase the fact that he saw that tweet and thought it was worth endorsing. It raises a question about judgment that an apology alone can't fully answer.
What's the actual policy disagreement here?
Cairns says the greyhound industry is cruel and a financial drain on the state. Carey and others say it's a legitimate sport with cultural roots. But the policy argument got buried under the personal attack, which is probably the point.
Will this change anything about greyhound funding?
Not immediately. The government already blocked the Social Democrats' motion. But incidents like this can shift how other lawmakers think about an issue, or make them less willing to publicly defend something that's become associated with this kind of conduct.